Produced by Marius Masi, Don Kretz and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net









Transcriber's notes:

(1) Numbers following letters (without space) like C2 were originally
      printed in subscript. Letter subscripts are preceded by an
      underscore, like C_n.

(2) Characters following a carat (^) were printed in superscript.

(3) Side-notes were relocated to function as titles of their respective
      paragraphs.

(4) Macrons and breves above letters and dots below letters were not
      inserted.

(5) The following typographical errors have been corrected:

    ARTICLE ARMY: "The infantry brigade consists, in the British
      service, of the brigadier and his staff, four battalions of
      infantry, and administrative and medical units, the combatant
      strength being about 4000 men." 'administrative' amended from
      'adminstrative'.

    ARTICLE ARMY: "The question of the value of auxiliary forces, then,
      as between the continuous work of, say, English territorials, and
      the permanent though dwindling influence of an original period of
      active soldiering, is one of considerable importance." 'continuous'
      amended from 'continous'.

    ARTICLE ARMY: "Louvois, who was minister of Louis XIV., was the
      true creator of the French royal army." Added 'who' after
      'Louvois'.




          ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITANNICA

  A DICTIONARY OF ARTS, SCIENCES, LITERATURE
           AND GENERAL INFORMATION

              ELEVENTH EDITION


            VOLUME II, SLICE VI

     Armour Plates to Arundel, Earls of




ARTICLES IN THIS SLICE:



  ARMOUR PLATES                        ARRONDISSEMENT
  ARMS AND ARMOUR                      ARROWROOT
  ARMSTEAD, HENRY HUGH                 ARROWSMITH
  ARMSTRONG, ARCHIBALD                 ARROYO
  ARMSTRONG, JOHN (British physician)  ARSACES
  ARMSTRONG, JOHN (American diplomat)  ARS-AN-DER-MOSEL
  ARMSTRONG, SAMUEL CHAPMAN            ARSCHOT, PHILIPPE DE CROY, DUKE OF
  ARMSTRONG, WILLIAM GEORGE            ARSENAL
  ARMY                                 ARSENIC
  ARNAL, ÉTIENNE                       ARSENIUS
  ARNALDUS DE VILLA NOVA               ARSENIUS AUTORIANUS
  ARNAUD, HENRI                        ARSES
  ARNAULD                              ARSINOË
  ARNAULT, ANTOINE VINCENT             ARSINOITHERIUM
  ARNDT, ERNST MORITZ                  ARSON
  ARNDT, JOHANN                        ARSONVAL
  ARNE, THOMAS AUGUSTINE               ARSOT
  ARNETH, ALFRED                       ARSUF
  ARNHEM                               ARSURE
  ARNICA                               ARSURES
  ARNIM, ELISABETH                     ART
  ARNIM, HARRY KARL KURT EDUARD VON    ARTA
  ARNIM, LUDWIG ACHIM (JOACHIM) VON    ARTA, GULF OF
  ARNIM-BOYTZENBURG, HANS GEORG VON    ARTABANUS
  ARNO (bishop of Salzburg)            ART AND PART
  ARNO (river of Italy)                ARTAPHERNES
  ARNOBIUS (early Christian writer)    ARTAXERXES
  ARNOBIUS (Christian priest)          ARTEDI, PETER
  ARNOLD                               ARTEGA
  ARNOLD, BENEDICT                     ARTEL
  ARNOLD, SIR EDWIN                    ARTEMIDORUS
  ARNOLD, GOTTFRIED                    ARTEMIS
  ARNOLD, MATTHEW                      ARTEMISIA (daughter of Lygdamis)
  ARNOLD, SAMUEL                       ARTEMISIA (wife of Mausolus)
  ARNOLD, THOMAS                       ARTEMON
  ARNOTT, NEIL                         ARTENA
  ARNOULD-PLESSY, JEANNE SYLVANIE      ARTERIES
  ARNSBERG                             ARTERN
  ARNSTADT                             ARTESIAN WELLS
  ARNSWALDE                            ARTEVELDE, JACOB VAN
  ARNULF                               ARTEVELDE, PHILIP VAN
  AROIDEAE                             ART GALLERIES
  AROLSEN                              ARTHRITIS
  ARONA                                ARTHROPODA
  ARPEGGIO                             ARTHUR
  ARPI                                 ARTHUR I
  ARPINO                               ARTHUR III
  ARQUÀ PETRARCA                       ARTHUR, CHESTER ALAN
  ARQUEBUS                             ARTHURIAN LEGEND
  ARQUES-LA-BATAILLE                   ARTICHOKE
  ARRACK                               ARTICLE
  ARRAH                                ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION
  ARRAIGNMENT                          ARTICULATA
  ARRAN, EARLS OF                      ARTICULATION
  ARRAN                                ARTILLERY
  ARRANT                               ARTIODACTYLA
  ARRAS                                ARTISAN
  ARRAY                                ARTOIS
  ARRENOTOKOUS, ARRENOTOKY             ART SALES
  ARREST                               ARTS AND CRAFTS
  ARRESTMENT                           ART SOCIETIES
  ARRETIUM                             ART TEACHING
  ARRHENIUS, SVANTE AUGUST             ARTUSI, GIOVANNI MARIA
  ARRIA                                ARU ISLANDS
  ARRIAN                               ARUNDEL, EARLDOM OF
  ARRIS                                ARUNDEL, EARLS OF




ARMOUR PLATES.

  Defence for ships.

  History.

The earliest recorded proposal to employ armour for ships of war (for
body armour, &c., see ARMS AND ARMOUR) appears to have been made in
England by Sir William Congreve in 1805. In _The Times_ of the 20th of
February of that year reference is made to Congreve's designs for an
armoured, floating mortar battery which the inventor considered would be
proof against artillery fire. Among Congreve's unpublished papers there
is also a suggestion for armour-plating the embrasures of casemates.
Nothing, however, seems to have come of these proposals, and a similar
lack of appreciation befell the next advocate of armour, John Stevens of
New Jersey, U.S.A., who submitted the plans of an armoured vessel to
Congress in 1812. The Stevens family, however, continued to work at the
subject, and by 1841 had determined by actual experiment the thickness
of wrought-iron armour which was proof against the projectiles then in
use. The necessity for armouring ships as a protection against shell
fire was again pointed out by General Paixhans in 1841, and in 1845
Dupuy de Lôme had prepared the designs of an armoured frigate for the
French government. During the period between 1827 and 1854, experiments
in connexion with the proposed application of armour to both ships and
forts were carried out in England, the United States and France, but the
question did not get beyond the experimental stage until the latter
year, when armoured floating batteries were laid down in all three
countries, probably as the immediate outcome of the destruction of the
Turkish fleet by shell fire at Sinope on the 30th of November 1853.

Three of the French floating batteries were in action at the bombardment
of Kinburn in 1855, where they achieved a conspicuous success, silencing
the Russian forts after a four hours' engagement, during which they
themselves, although frequently struck, were practically uninjured,
their loss in personnel being but trifling. To quote Very: "This
comparatively insignificant action, which had little if any effect upon
the course of the Crimean War, changed the whole condition of armour for
naval use from one of speculation to one of actual and constant
necessity." The military application of armour for the protection of
guns mounted in permanent fortifications followed. Its development,
however, took rather a different course, and the question of armour
generally is of less importance for the military engineer than for the
naval constructor. For the employment of armour in ship construction and
in permanent works on land, see the articles SHIPBUILDING; FORTIFICATION
AND SIEGECRAFT; the present article is concerned solely with the actual
armour itself.


  Construction and testing.

The earliest armour, both for ships and forts, was made of wrought iron,
and was disposed either in a single thickness or in successive layers
sandwiched with wood or concrete. Such armour is now wholly obsolete,
though examples of it may still be found in a few forts of early date.
The chief application of armour in modern land defences is in the form
of shields for the protection of guns mounted _en barbette_. Examples of
such shields are shown in figs. 1 and 2. Fig. 1 shows a 4.5-in. steel
shield for the U.S.A. government, face-hardened by the Harvey process,
to which reference is made below. It was attacked by 5-in. and 6-in.
armour-piercing shot, and proved capable of keeping out the 5-in. up to
a striking velocity of nearly 1800 ft. per second, but was defeated by a
6-in. capped A.P. shot with a striking velocity of 1842 ft. per second.
The mounting was not seriously damaged by the firing, but could be
operated after the impact of one 3.2-in., five 5-in. and three 6-in.
projectiles. Fig. 2 shows a gun-shield, manufactured by Messrs Hadfield
of Sheffield, after attack by 4.1-in., 4.7-in. and 6-in. armour-piercing
and other projectiles. The limit of the shield's resistance was just
reached by an uncapped 4.7-in. A.P. shell with a striking velocity of
2128 ft. per second. The shield (the average maximum thickness of which
was 5.8 in.) showed great toughness, and although subjected to a severe
battering, and occasionally outmatched by the attacking projectiles,
developed no visible crack. It is chiefly remarkable for the fact that
it was cast and not forged. As is evident from the fringing around the
hole made by the 6-in. A.P. shell, the shield was not face-hardened. A
more highly developed form of the gun-shield is to be found in the
armoured cupola, which has been employed to a very considerable extent
in permanent fortifications, and whose use is still strongly advocated
by continental European military engineers. The majority of the cupolas
to be found in continental forts are not, however, of very recent date,
those erected in 1894 at Molsheim near Strassburg being comparatively
modern instances. Any cupolas constructed nowadays would be of steel,
either forged or cast, and would probably be face-hardened, but a large
number of those extant are of compound or even of iron armour. Many of
those on sea-fronts are made of chilled cast iron. Such armour, which
was introduced by Gruson of Magdeburg in 1868, is extremely hard, and
cannot be perforated, but must be destroyed by fracture. It is thus the
antithesis of wrought iron, which, when of good quality, does not break
up under the impact of the shot but yields by perforation. Armour of the
Gruson type is well adapted for curved surfaces such as cupolas, which
on account of their shape are scarcely liable to receive a direct hit,
except at distant ranges, and its extreme hardness would greatly assist
it to throw off shot striking obliquely, which have naturally a tendency
to glance. Chilled iron, on account of its liability to break up when
subjected to a continuous bombardment by the armour-piercing steel
projectiles of guns of even medium calibre, was usually considered
unsuitable for employment in inland forts, where wrought iron, mild
steel or compound armour was preferred. On the other hand, as pointed
out by the late Captain C. Orde Browne, R.A., it was admirably adapted
to resist the few rounds that the heavy guns of battleships might be
expected to deliver during an attack of comparatively limited duration.

Chilled iron was never employed for naval purposes, and warship armour
continued to be made exclusively of wrought iron until 1876 when steel
was introduced by Schneider. In an important trial at Spezzia in that
year the superiority in resisting power of steel to wrought iron was
conclusively proved, but, on the other hand, steel showed a great
tendency to through-cracking, a defect which led Messrs Cammell of
Sheffield in 1877 to introduce compound armour consisting of a steel
surface in intimate union with a wrought-iron foundation plate. In
Cammell plates, which were made by the Wilson process, the steel face
was formed by running molten steel on to a white-hot foundation plate of
iron, while in the compound plates, made by Messrs John Brown & Co.
according to the patent of J.D. Ellis, a thin steel surface plate was
cemented on to the wrought-iron foundation by running in molten steel
between. Compound armour possessed the advantages of a harder face than
was then possible in a homogeneous steel plate, while, on the other
hand, the back was softer and less liable to crack. Its weak point was
the liability of the surface plate to crack through under fire and
become detached from its iron backing. The manufacture of steel,
however, continued to improve, so that in 1890 we find steel plates
being made which were comparatively free from liability to
through-cracking, while their power to resist perforation was somewhat
greater than that of the best compound. The difference, however, was at
no time very marked, and between 1880 and 1890 the resistance to
perforation of either steel or compound as compared with wrought iron
may be taken as about 1.3 to 1.

Compound armour required to be well backed to bring out its best
qualities, and there is a case on record in 1883 when a 12-in. Cammell
plate weighing 10½ tons, backed by granite, stopped a 16-in. Palliser
shot with a striking energy of nearly 30,000 foot tons and a calculated
perforation of 25 inches of wrought iron. As steel improved, efforts
were made to impart an even greater hardness to the actual surface or
skin of compound armour, and, with this object in view, Captain T.J.
Tresidder, C.M.G., patented in 1887 a method of chilling the heated
surface of a plate by means of jets of water under pressure. By this
method it was found possible to obtain a degree of hardness which was
prevented in ordinary plunging by the formation of a layer of steam
between the water and the heated surface of the plate. Compound plates
face-hardened on this system gave excellent results, and forged-steel
armour-piercing projectiles were in some cases broken up on their
surfaces as if they had been merely chilled iron. Attempts were also
made to increase the toughness of the back by the substitution of mild
nickel steel for wrought iron. The inherent defect of compound armour,
however--its want of homogeneity,--remained, and in the year 1891 H.A.
Harvey of Newark, N.J., introduced a process whereby an all steel plate
could be face-hardened in such a way that the advantages of the compound
principle were obtained in a homogeneous plate. The process in question
consisted in carburizing or cementing the surface of a steel plate by
keeping it for a fortnight or so at a high temperature in contact with
finely divided charcoal, so that the heated surface absorbed a certain
amount of carbon, which penetrated to a considerable depth, thus causing
a difference in chemical composition between the front and back of the
plate. After it had been left a sufficient time in the cementation
furnace, the plate was withdrawn and allowed to cool slowly until it
reached a dull red heat, when it was suddenly chilled by the application
of water, but by a less perfect method than that employed by Tresidder.
Steel plates treated by the Harvey and Tresidder processes, which
shortly became combined, possessed about twice the resisting power of
wrought iron. The figure of merit, or resistance to penetration as
compared with wrought iron, varied with the thickness of the plate,
being rather more than 2 with plates from 6 to 8 in. thick and rather
less for the thicker plates. In 1889 Schneider introduced the use of
nickel in steel for armour plates, and in 1891 or 1892 the St Chamond
works employed a nickel steel to which was added a small percentage of
chromium.

All modern armour contains nickel in percentages varying from 3 to 5,
and from 1.0 to 2.0% of chromium is also employed as a general rule.
Nickel in the above quantities adds greatly to the toughness as well as
to the hardness of steel, while chromium enables it to absorb carbon to
a greater depth during cementation, and increases its susceptibility to
tempering, besides conducing to a tough fibrous condition in the body of
a plate. Alloy steels of this nature appear to be very susceptible to
thermal treatment, by suitable variation of which, with or without oil
quenching, the physical condition of the same steel may be made to vary
to an extraordinary extent, a peculiarity which is turned to good
account in the manufacture of the modern armour plate.

The principal modern process is that introduced by Krupp in 1893.
Although it is stated that a few firms both in Great Britain and in
other countries use special processes of their own, it is probable that
they differ only in detail from the Krupp process, which has been
adopted by the great majority of makers. Krupp plates are made of
nickel-chrome steel and undergo a special heat treatment during
manufacture which is briefly described below. They can either be
cemented or, as was usual in England until about 1902 in the case of the
thinner plates (4 in. and under) and those used for curved structures
such as casemates, non-cemented. They are in either case face-hardened
by chilling. Messrs Krupp have, however, cemented plates of 3 in. and
upward since 1895. Although the full process is now applied to plates of
as little as 2 in. in thickness, there is some difference of opinion
between manufacturers as to the value of cementing these very thin
plates. The simple Harvey process is still employed to some extent in
the case of plates between 5 and 3 in. in thickness, and excellent
results are also stated to have been obtained with plates from 2 to 4
in. in thickness, manufactured from a special steel by the process
patented by M. Charpy of the St Jacques steel works at Montluçon. A
Krupp cemented (K.C.) plate is not perhaps harder as regards surface
than a good Harveyed plate, but the depth of hard face is greater, and
the plate is very much tougher in the back, a quality which is of
particular importance in the thicker plates. The figure of merit varies,
as in Harveyed plates, with the thickness of the armour, being about 2.7
in the case of good 6-in. plates while for the thicker plates the value
gradually falls off to about 2.3 in the case of 12-in. armour. This
figure of merit is as against uncapped armour-piercing shot of
approximately the same calibre as the thickness of the plate. The
resisting power of the non-cemented Krupp plates is usually regarded as
being considerably less than that of the cemented plates, and may be
taken on an average to be 2.25 times that of wrought iron.

Figs. 3, 4 and 5 are illustrations of good cemented plates of the Krupp
type. Fig. 3 shows an 11.8-in. plate, tried by Messrs Krupp in 1895,
after attack by three 12-in. steel armour-piercing projectiles of from
712.7 to 716.1 lb. in weight. In the third round the striking velocity
of the projectile was 1993 ft. per second, the calculated perforation of
wrought iron by Tresidder's formula being 25.9 in. The attack was
successfully resisted, all the projectiles being broken up without
effecting perforation, while there were no serious cracks. The figure of
merit of the plate was thus well in excess of 2.2. The great toughness
of the plate is perhaps even more remarkable than its hardness; its
width was only 6.28 ft., so that each shot head formed a wedge of
approximately one-sixth of its width. The excellence of the metal which
is capable of withstanding such a strain is apparent.

Fig. 4 is of a 9-in. K.C. plate, made by Messrs Armstrong, Whitworth &
Co. for the Japanese government, after undergoing an unusually severe
official test. The fourth round was capable of perforating 22 in. of
wrought iron, so that the figure of merit of the plate must have been
considerably in excess of 2.45, as there were no through-cracks, and the
limit of resistance was far from being reached.

Fig. 5 shows the front of an excellent 6-in. cemented plate of Messrs
Beardmore's manufacture, tried at Eskmeals on the 11th of October 1901.
It withstood the attack of four armour-piercing 6-in. shot of 100 lb.
weight, with striking velocities varying from 1996 to 2177 ft. per
second. Its limit of resistance was just passed by the fifth round in
which the striking velocity was no less than 2261 ft. per second. The
projectile, which broke up in passing through the plate, did not get
through the skin plate behind the wood backing, and evidently had no
surplus energy left. The figure of merit of this plate was between 2.6
and 2.8, but was evidently much closer to the latter than to the former
figure. A sixth round fired with a Johnson capped shot weighing 105.9
lb. easily perforated both plate and backing with a striking velocity of
1945 ft. per second, thus reducing the figure of merit of the plate to
below 2.2 and illustrating very clearly the advantage given by capping
the point of an armour-piercing projectile. There were no through-cracks
in the plate after this severe trial, the back being evidently as tough
as the face was hard.

Fig. 6 shows a 3-in. K.N.C. plate of Messrs Vickers, Sons & Maxim's
manufacture, tested privately by the firm in November 1905. It proved to
be of unusual excellence, its limit of resistance being just reached by
a 12½-lb. armour-piercing shell of 3 in. calibre with a striking
velocity of 2558 ft. per second, a result which, even if the projectiles
used were not relatively of the same perforating power as those used in
the proof of 6-in. and thicker plates, shows that its resisting power
was very great. At a low estimate its figure of merit against 3-in. A.P.
_shot_ may be taken as about 2.6, which is exceptionally high for a
non-cemented, or indeed for any but the best K.C. plates.

The plate also withstood the attack of a 4.7-in. service pattern steel
armour-piercing shell of 45 lb. weight striking the unbacked portion
with a velocity of 1599 ft. per second, and was only just beaten by a
similar shell with a velocity of 1630 ft. per second. The effect of all
the above-mentioned rounds is shown in the photograph. The same plate
subsequently kept out two 6-in. common shell filled up to weight with
salt and plugged, with striking velocities of 1412 and 1739 ft. per
second respectively, the former being against the unbacked and the
latter against the backed half of the plate,--the only effect on the
plate being that round 6 caused a fragment of the right-hand top corner
of the plate to break off, and round 7 started a few surface cracks
between the points of impact of rounds 1, 2 and 3.

Within the limitations referred to below, the resisting power of all
hard-faced plates is very much reduced when the armour-piercing
projectiles used in the attack are capped, the average figure of merit
of Krupp cemented plates not being more than 2 against capped shot as
compared with about 2.5 against uncapped. So long ago as 1878 it was
suggested by Lt.-Col. (then Captain) T. English, R.E., that
armour-piercing projectiles would be assisted in attacking compound
plates if caps of wrought iron could be fitted to their points.
Experiments at Shoeburyness, however, did not show that any advantage
was gained by this device, and nothing further was heard of the cap
until 1894, when experiments carried out in Russia with so-called
"magnetic" shot against plates of Harveyed steel showed that the
perforating power of an armour-piercing projectile was considerably
augmented where hard-faced plates were concerned, if its point were
protected by a cap of wrought iron or mild steel. The conditions of the
Russian results (and of subsequent trials in various parts of the world
which have confirmed them) differed considerably from the earlier
English ones. The material of both projectiles and plates differed, as
did also the velocities employed--the low velocities in the earlier
trials probably contributing in large measure to the non-success of the
cap. The cap, as now used, consists of a thimble of comparatively soft
steel of from 3 to 5% of the weight of the projectile, attached to the
point of the latter either by solder or by being pressed hydraulically
or otherwise into grooves or indentations in the head. Its function
appears to be to support the point on impact, and so to enable it to get
unbroken through the hard face layers of the plate. Once through the
cemented portion with its point intact, a projectile which is strong
enough to remain undeformed, will usually perforate the plate by a true
boring action if its striking velocity be high enough. In the case of
the uncapped projectile, on the other hand, the point is almost
invariably crushed against the hard face and driven back as a wedge into
the body of the projectile, which is thus set up so that, instead of
boring, it acts as a punch and dislodges or tends to dislodge a coned
plug or disk of metal, the greatest diameter of which may be as much as
four times the calibre of the projectile. The disproportion between the
maximum diameter of the disk and that of the projectile is particularly
marked when the calibre of the latter is much in excess of the thickness
of the plate. When plate and projectile are equally matched, e.g. 6"
versus 6", the plug of metal dislodged may be roughly cylindrical in
shape, and its diameter not greatly in excess of that of the projectile.
In all cases the greatest width of the plug or disk is at the back of
the plate.

A stout and rigid backing evidently assists a plate very much more
against this class of attack than against the perforating attack of a
capped shot. Fig. 7 shows the back of a 6-in. plate attacked in 1898,
and affords an excellent illustration of the difference in action of
capped and uncapped projectiles. In round 7 the star-shaped opening made
by the point of a capped shot boring its way through is seen, while
rounds 2, 3, 4 and 5 show disks of plate partially dislodged by uncapped
projectiles. The perforating action of capped armour-piercing
projectiles is even better shown in fig. 8, which shows a 250-mm. (9.8
in.) Krupp plate after attack by 150-mm. (5.9 in.) capped A.P. shot. In
rounds 5 and 6 the projectiles, with striking velocities of 2302 and
2281 ft. per second, perforated. Round 7, with a striking velocity of
2244 ft. per second, just got its point through and rebounded, while
round 8, with a striking velocity of 2232, lodged in the plate. In many
cases a capped projectile punches out a plug, usually more or less
cylindrical in shape and of about the same diameter as the projectile,
from a plate, and does not defeat it by a true boring action. In such
cases it will probably be found that the projectile has been broken up,
and that only the head, set up and in a more or less crushed condition,
has got through the plate. This peculiarity of action can best be
accounted for by attributing either abnormal excellence to the plate or
to that portion of it concerned--for plates sometimes vary considerably
and are not of uniform hardness throughout,--or comparative inferiority
to the projectile. Whichever way it may be, what has happened appears to
be that after the cap has given the point sufficient support to get it
through the very hard surface layers, the point has been flattened in
the region of extreme hardness and toughness combined, which exists
immediately behind the deeply carburized surface. The action from this
point becomes a punching one, and the extra strain tends to break up the
projectile, so that the latter gets through wholly or partially, in a
broken condition, driving a plug of plate in front of it. At low
striking velocities, probably in the neighbourhood of 1700 ft. per
second, the cap fails to act, and no advantage is given by it to the
shot. This is probably because the velocity is sufficiently low to give
the cap time to expand and so fail to grip the point as the latter is
forced into it. The cap also fails as a rule to benefit the projectile
when the angle of incidence is more than 30° to the normal.

[Illustrstion: PLATE I.

  FIG. 1.--HARVEYIZED SHIELD, 4.5 INCHES THICK, ON 6-INCH PEDESTAL
  MOUNT, AFTER ATTACK BY 5-INCH AND 6-INCH CAPPED ARMOUR-PIERCING SHOT.

  FIG. 2.--GUN SHIELD, 6 INCHES THICK, AFTER ATTACK. (HADFIELD.)

  FIG. 3.--KRUPP-CEMENTED PLATE, 11.8 INCHES THICK, AFTER ATTACK.
  (KRUPP, MEPPEN.)

  FIG. 4.--KRUPP-CEMENTED PLATE, 9 INCHES THICK, AFTER ATTACK.
  (ARMSTRONG, WHITWORTH & CO.)]

[Illustrstion: PLATE II.

  FIG. 5.--BEARDMORE CEMENTED PLATE, 6-INCHES THICK, AFTER ATTACK BY
  6-INCH SHOT. (From Brassey's Naval Annual, 1902 by permission)

  FIG 6.--KRUPP-CEMENTED PLATE, 3 INCHES THICK, AFTER ATTACK. (VICKERS,
  SONS & MAXIM)

  FIG. 7.--BACK OF A 6-INCH PLATE SHOWING ACTION OF CAPPED AND UNCAPPED
  PROJECTILES.

  FIG. 8.--BACK OF KRUPP PLATE 9.8 INCHES THICK, AFTER ATTACK, WITH
  CAPPED PROJECTILE. (KRUPP, MEPPEN.)

  (From Brassey's Naval Annual, by permission.)]


  Laws of Resistance.

The laws governing the resistance of armour to perforation have been the
subject of investigation for many years, and a considerable number of
formulae have been put by means of which the thickness of armour
perforable by any given projectile at any given striking velocity may be
calculated. Although in some cases based on very different theoretical
considerations, there is a general agreement among them as far as
perforation proper is concerned, and Tresidder's formula for the
perforation of wrought iron, t² = wv³/dA, may be taken as typical.
Here t represents the thickness perforable in inches, w the weight of
the projectile in pounds, v its velocity in foot seconds, d its diameter
in inches and A the constant given by log A = 8.8410.

For the perforation of Harveyed or Krupp cemented armour by capped
armour-piercing shot, this formula may be employed in conjunction with a
suitable constant according to the nature of armour attacked. In the
case of K. C. armour the formula becomes t² = wv^(3)/4dA. A useful rough
rule is t/d = v/1900.

Hard armour, such as chilled cast iron, cannot be perforated but must be
destroyed by fracture, and its destruction is apparently dependent
solely upon the striking energy of the projectile and independent of its
diameter. The punching of hard-faced armour by uncapped projectiles is
intermediate in character between perforation and cracking, but
approaches the former more nearly than the latter. The formula most used
in England in this case is Krupp's formula for K.C., viz. t² =
wv²/dA¹, where t, w, v and d are the same as before, and log A¹ =
6.3532. This, if we assume the sectional density (w/d³) of projectiles
to be constant and equal to 0.46, reduces to the very handy rule of
thumb t/d = v/2200, which, within the limits of striking velocity
obtainable under service conditions, is sufficiently accurate for
practical purposes. For oblique attack up to an angle of 30° to the
normal, the same formula may be employed, t sec [theta] being
substituted for t, where [theta] is the angle of incidence and t the
normal thickness of the plate attacked. More exact results would be
obtained, however, by the use of Tresidder's W.I. formula, given above,
in conjunction with a suitable figure of merit, according to the nature
and thickness of the plate. It should be remembered in this connexion
that the figure of merit of a plate against a punching attack falls off
very much when the thickness of the plate is considerably less than the
calibre of the attacking projectile. For example, the F.M. of a 6-in.
plate may be 2.6 against 6-in. uncapped A.P. projectiles, but only 2.2
against 9.2-in. projectiles of the same character. In the case of the
perforating action of capped projectiles, on the other hand, the ratio
of d and t does not appear to affect the F.M. to any great extent,
though according to Tresidder, the latter is inclined to fall when d is
considerably less than t, which is the exact opposite of what happens
with punching.

Another method of measuring the quality of armour, which is largely
employed upon the continent of Europe, is by the ratio, r, between the
velocity requisite to perforate any given plate and that needed to
pierce a plate of mild steel of the same thickness, according to the
formula of Commandant Jacob de Marre, viz. v = Ae^(0.7)·a^(0.75)/p^(0.5)
where e = the thickness of the plate in centimetres, a = the calibre of
the projectile in centimetres, p = the weight of the projectile in
kilogrammes, v = the striking velocity of the projectile in metres per
second, and log A = 1.7347. Converted into the usual English units and
notation, this formula becomes v = A¹t^(0.7)·d^(0.75)/w^(0.5), in
which log A¹ = 3.0094; in this form it constitutes the basis of the
ballistic tests for the acceptance of armour plates for the U.S. navy.

Common shell, which are not strong enough to remain undeformed on
impact, derive little benefit from the cap and usually defeat a plate by
punching rather than by perforation. Their punching power may be taken
roughly as about 2/3 that of an uncapped armour-piercing shot. Shells
filled with high explosives, unless special arrangements are made to
deaden the bursting charge and so obviate detonation upon impact, are
only effective against the thinnest armour.


  Manufacture.

With regard to manufacture, a brief account of the Krupp process as
applied in one of the great English armour plate works (omitting
confidential details of temperature, &c.) will illustrate the great
complexity of treatment which the modern armour plate has to undergo
before its remarkable qualities of combined hardness and toughness can
be developed. The composition of the steel probably differs slightly
with the manufacturer, and also with the thickness of the armour, but it
will usually contain from 3 to 4% of nickel, from 1.0 to 2.0% of
chromium and about 0.25 to 0.35% of carbon, together with from 0.3 to
0.7% of manganese. After being cast, the ingot is first heated to a
uniform degree of temperature throughout its mass and then generally
forged under the hydraulic forging press. It is then reheated and passed
through the rolls. After rolling, the plate is allowed to cool, and is
then subjected to a thermal treatment preparatory to surfacing and
cutting. Its surface is then freed from scale and planed. After planing,
the plate is passed into the cementation furnace, where its face remains
for some weeks in contact with specially prepared carbon, the
temperature being gradually raised to that required for cementation and
as gradually lowered after that is effected. After cementation the plate
is heated to a certain temperature and is then plunged into an oil bath
in order to toughen it. After withdrawal from the oil bath, the plate is
cooled, reheated to a lower temperature, quenched again in water,
reheated and passed to the bending press, where it is bent to shape
while hot, proper allowance being made for the slight change of curve
which takes place on the final chilling. After bending it is again
heated and then allowed to get cold, when the final machining, drilling
and cutting are carried out. The plate is now placed in a furnace and
differentially heated so that the face is raised to a higher temperature
than the back. After being thus heated for a certain period the plate is
withdrawn, and both back and face are douched simultaneously with jets
of cold water under pressure, the result being that the face is left
glass-hard while the back is in the toughest condition possible for such
hard steel.

The cast-steel armour made by Hadfield has already been alluded to. That
made by Krupp (the only other maker at present of this class of armour)
is of face-hardened nickel steel. A 5.9-in. plate of this material tried
in 1902 had a figure of merit of more than 2.2 against uncapped 5.9-in.
armour-piercing projectiles of 112 lb. in weight. The main advantage of
cast armour is that it is well adapted to armoured structures of
complicated design and of varying thickness, which it would be difficult
or impossible to forge in one piece. It should also be cheaper than
forged armour, and, should time be a consideration, could probably be
turned out more quickly; on the other hand, it is improbable that heavy
castings such as would be required could be as regular in quality and as
free from flaws as is possible when forged material is used, and it is
unlikely that the average resistance to attack of cast-steel armour will
ever be equal to that of the best forged steel.


  Defence against small-arms.

Of recent years there has been a considerable demand for thin steel
plating proof against small-arm bullets at close ranges. This class of
steel is used for field-gun shields and for sap shields, to afford cover
for men in field-works, for armoured trains, motor-cars and ambulances,
and also very largely for armouring shallow-draught river-gunboats.
Holtzer made chrome steel breastplates in 1890, 0.158 in. of which was
proof against the 0.43-in. hard lead bullet of the Gras rifle at 10
metres range, while 0.236 in. was proof against the 0.32 in. 231-grain
Lebel bullet at the same distance, the striking velocities being
approximately 1490 and 2070 ft. per second respectively. The
bullet-proof steel made by Messrs Cammell, Laird & Co. in Great Britain
may be taken as typical of that produced by the best modern
manufacturers. It is proof against the 215-grain Lee-Enfield bullet of
0.303 in. calibre striking directly, as under:

   Range.      Thickness of Plate.     Striking Velocity.
   10 yards        0.187 inch              2050 f.s.
  100   "          0.167   "               1865  "
  560   "          0.080   "               1080  "

The weight of the 0.08 in. plating is only 3.2 lb. per sq. ft. The
material is stated to be readily adaptable to the ordinary operation of
bending, machining, drilling, &c., and is thus very suitable for the
purposes indicated above.     (W. E. E.)




ARMS AND ARMOUR (Lat. _arma_, from the Aryan root _ar_, to join or fit;
cf. Gr. [Greek: armos], joint; the form _armour_, from Lat. _armatura_,
should strictly be _armure_). Under this heading are included weapons of
offence (arms) and defensive equipment (armour). The history of the
development of arms and armour begins with that of the human race;
indeed, combined with domestic implements, the most primitive weapons
which have been found constitute the most important, if not the only,
tangible evidence on which the history of primitive man is based. It is
largely from the materials and characteristics of the weapons and
utensils found in caves, tombs and various strata of the earth's crust,
coupled with geological considerations, that the ethnological and
chronological classifications of prehistoric man have been deduced. For
a detailed account of this classification and the evidence see
ARCHAEOLOGY; BRONZE AGE; FLINT IMPLEMENTS, &c., and articles on special
weapons.


  Classification.

Offensive weapons may be classified roughly, according to their shape
(i.e. the kind of blow or wound which they are intended to inflict), and
the way in which they are used, as follows:--(1) Arms which are wielded
by hand at close quarters. These are subdivided into (a) _cleaving_
weapons, e.g. axes; (b) _crushing_, e.g. clubs, maces and all
hammer-like arms; (c) _thrusting_, e.g. pointed swords and daggers; (d)
_cutting_, e.g. sabres (such weapons frequently combine both the cut and
the thrust, e.g. swords with both edge and point); (e) those weapons
represented by the spear, lance, pike, &c., which deal a thrusting blow
but are distinguished from (c) by their greater length. (2) Purely
missile weapons, e.g. darts, javelins and spears. Frequently these
weapons are used also at close quarters as thrusting weapons; the
typical example of these is the medium-length spear of not more than
about 6 ft. in length. (3) Arms which discharge missiles, e.g. bows,
catapults and fire-arms generally. (See ARCHERY and section _Fire-arms_
below.) The weapons in (2) and (3) are designed to avoid hand-to-hand
fighting.

Weapons are also classified in a variety of other ways. Thus we have
_small-arms_, i.e. all weapons in classes (1) and (2) with those in (3)
which do not require carriages. _Side-arms_ are those which, when not in
use, are worn at the side, e.g. daggers, swords, bayonets. _Armes
blanches_ is a term used for offensive weapons of iron and steel which
are used at close quarters.

Defensive armour consists of body armour, protections for the head and
the limbs, and various types of shield.

[Illustration: FIG. 1.--Leaf-shaped Flint Dagger.]


  History.

1. _Stone Age._--One of the chief problems which have perplexed
archaeologists is that of finding a criterion which will enable them to
distinguish the most primitive products of human skill from similar
objects whose form is due to the forces of nature. It is often
impossible to say precisely whether a rough piece of flint is to be
regarded as a weapon (except so far as it could be used as a missile) or
merely as a fragment of rock. Passing over these doubtful cases, we come
first to indubitable examples of weapons deliberately fashioned in stone
for offensive purposes. The use of stone weapons appears to have been
universally characteristic of the earliest races of mankind, as it is
still distinctive of those savage races which are most nearly allied to
primitive man. These weapons were naturally simple in form and
structure. The earliest examples (Palaeolithic) found in river-drift
gravel in various parts of Europe are merely chipped flints, celts, &c.
Later on we find polished implements (Neolithic) progressively more
elaborate in design and workmanship, such as socketed stones with wooden
handles and knives or daggers of flaked flint with handles. Besides
flint the commonest materials are diorite, greenstone, serpentine and
indurated clay-slate; there are also weapons of horn and bone (daggers
and spear-heads). Spear-heads and arrow-points (leaf-shaped,
lozenge-shaped, tanged and triangular) were chipped in flint with such
skill as to be little inferior to their metal successors. They have
accurately flaked barbs and tangs, and in some cases their edges are
minutely chipped. The heads appear to have been fastened to the shafts
by vegetable fibre and bitumen. Knife-daggers of flint, though
practically of one single type, exhibit much variety of form. They vary
in size also, but seldom exceed 12 in. in length. They are sometimes
obtuse-edged like a scraping-tool, sometimes delicately chipped to a
straight edge, while the flakes are so regularly removed from the convex
part of the blade as to give a wavy surface, and the corners of the
handle are delicately crimped. The daggers attain their highest
perfection in the short, leaf-shaped form,--the precursor of the
leaf-shaped sword which is peculiarly characteristic of the Bronze
Age,--and the curved knives found especially in Great Britain and
Russia, and also in Egypt. The precise object of the sharpening of both
convex and concave edges in the curved variety is not clear. There have
also been found sling-stones, and, in Scotland and Ireland, balls of
stone with their "surfaces divided into a number of more or less
projecting circles with channels between them." These latter, Sir John
Evans suggests, were attached to a thong which passed through the
surface channels, and used like the _bolas_ of South America. The weapon
could thus deal a blow at close quarters, or could be thrown so as to
entangle the limbs of an enemy. Of defensive armour of stone there is
none. The only approximation is to be found in the small rectangular
plates of slate, &c., perforated with holes at the corners, which are
supposed to have been bound on to the arm to protect it from the recoil
of the bow-string. Similar wristlets or bracers are in use among the
Eskimos (of bone) and in India (of ivory). These plates measure
generally about 4 in. by 1½ in.

[Illustration: FIG. 2.--Leaf-shaped Bronze Sword.]

2. _Bronze Age._--It is impossible to assign any date as the beginning
of the Bronze Age; indeed, archaeology has shown that the adoption of
metal for weapons was very gradual. The stone weapon perseveres
alongside the bronze, and there exist stone axes which, by their shape,
suggest that they have been copied from metal axes. In the earliest
interments in which the weapons deposited with the dead are of other
materials than stone, a peculiar form of bronze dagger occurs. It
consists of a well-finished, thin, knife-like blade, usually about 6 in.
in length, broad at the hilt and tapering to the point, and attached to
the handle by massive rivets of bronze. It has been found associated
with stone celts; both of the roughly chipped and the highly polished
kind, showing that these had not been entirely disused when bronze
became available. A later type of bronze dagger is a broad, heavy,
curved weapon, usually from 9 to 15 in. in length, with massive rivets
for attachment to an equally massive handle. The leaf-shaped sword,
however, is the characteristic weapon of the Bronze Age. It is found all
over Europe, from Lapland to the Mediterranean. No warlike weapon of any
period is more graceful in form or more beautifully finished. The finish
seems to have been given in the mould without the aid of hammer or file,
the edge being formed by suddenly reducing the thickness of the metal,
so as to produce a narrow border of extreme thinness along both sides
of the blade from hilt to point. The handle-plate and blade were cast in
one piece, and the handle itself was formed by side plates of bone, horn
or wood, riveted through the handle-plates. There was no guard, and the
weapon, though short, was well balanced, but more fitted for stabbing
and thrusting than for cutting with the edge. The Scandinavian variety
is not so decidedly leaf-shaped, and is longer and heavier than the
common British form; and instead of a handle-plate, it was furnished
with a tang on which a round, flat-topped handle was fastened, like that
of the modern Highland dirk, sometimes surmounted by a crescent-like
ornament of bronze. A narrow, rapier-shaped variety, tapering from hilt
to point, was made without a handle-plate, and attached to the hilt by
rivets like the bronze daggers already mentioned. This form is more
common in the British Isles than in Scandinavia, and is most abundant in
Ireland. The spear-heads of the Bronze Age present a considerable
variety of form, though the leaf-shaped predominates, and barbed
examples are extremely rare. Some British weapons of this form
occasionally reach a length of 27 in. The larger varieties are often
beautifully designed, having segmental openings on both sides of the
central ridge of the blade, and elaborately ornamented with chevron
patterns of chased or inlaid work both on the socket and blade.
Arrow-points are much rarer in bronze than in flint. In all probability
the flint arrow-point (which was equally effective and much more easily
replaced when lost) continued to be used throughout the Bronze Age.
Shields of bronze, circular, with hammered-up bosses, concentric ridges
and rows of studs, were held in the hand by a central handle underneath
the boss. The transition period between the Bronze and Iron Ages in
central Europe is well defined by the occurrence of iron swords, which
are simple copies of the leaf-shaped weapon, sometimes with flat
handle-plate of bronze. These have been found associated with articles
assigned to the 3rd or 4th century B.C.

[Illustration: FIG. 3.--Bronze Spear-Head, length 19 inches.]


  Hallstatt Weapons.

An important distinction between the characteristic bronze swords
peculiar to southern peoples and the swords both of iron and of bronze
found together in the Hallstatt cemeteries (in the Salzkammergut,
Austria, ancient Noricum) is that whereas the former invariably have
short handles (2¼ to 2½ in.), the latter are provided with handles from
3 to 3½ in. long, terminating in a round or oval pommel; the grip of one
of the bronze swords even reaches a length of 4 in. The hilts are
decorated with ivory, amber, wood, bronze, horn, and the decoration of
blade and scabbard is often elaborate. The length of these swords is
sometimes as much as 30 to 33 in. Again at La Tène on Lake Neuchâtel
iron swords have been found to the number of one hundred, with handles
of 4 to 7½ in. long and a total length varying from 30 to 38 in. Similar
remains have been found in France at Bibracte and Alesia, and even in
Ireland (cf. Munro, _The Lake-dwellings of Europe_, pp. 282, 383).

The occurrence at Hallstatt of bronze swords together with iron, having
the characteristic long handle, has led to the hypothesis that the
graves are those of an immigrant (probably Celtic) people of northern
extraction which had conquered and overlaid a smaller-framed Bronze Age
people, and had introduced the use of iron while continuing to use the
bronze of their predecessors with the necessary modifications. This
theory derived from tangible remains is corroborated by literary
evidence. Thus Polybius (ii. 33, iii. 114) describes the Celtic peoples
as fighting with a long pointless iron sword, which easily bent and was
in any case too large to be used easily in a mêlée.

The graves at Hallstatt yielded in addition to these important swords a
much larger number of spears. Of these two only were of bronze, the head
of the larger being 7½ in. long. The much more numerous iron heads range
up to as much as 2 ft. in length, and are all fastened to the shaft by
rivets. All the arrow-heads found are of bronze, while of the axes the
great majority are of iron; a few have iron edges fitted in a bed of
bronze.

These examples are sufficient to show that the transition from bronze to
iron was very slow. The fact that they were found in a district which is
known to have been directly in the line of march pursued by invaders
from the north tends to confirm the theory that the introduction of iron
was the work of such invaders.

  See Sir John Evans, _Ancient Stone Implements_ (2nd. ed., 1897),
  _Bronze Implements_; W. Ridgeway, _Early Age of Greece_; and works
  quoted under ARCHAEOLOGY.


  Mycenaean and Homeric.

3. _Early Greek Weapons._--The character of the weapons used by the
early peoples of the Aegean in the periods known as Minoan, Mycenaean
and Homeric is a problem which has given rise of recent years to much
discussion. The controversy is an important part of the Homeric question
as a whole, and the various theories of the weapons used in the Trojan
War hinge on wider theories as to the date and authorship of the Homeric
poems. One widely accepted hypothesis, based on the important monograph
by Dr Wolfgang Reichel, _Über homerische Waffen. Archäologische
Untersuchungen_ (Vienna, 1894), is that the Homeric heroes, like those
who created the civilization known as Mycenaean, had no defensive armour
except the Mycenaean shield, and used weapons of bronze. This view is
derived to a great extent from the Homeric poems themselves, in which
the metal most frequently mentioned is [Greek: chalkos] (bronze), and
involves the assumption that all passages which describe the use of
corslets, breastplates, small shields and greaves are later
interpolations. It is maintained on the other hand (e.g. by Prof. W.
Ridgeway, _Early Age of Greece_, i. chap. 3), that the Homeric Achaeans
(whom he regards as the descendants of the central European peoples, the
makers of the Hallstatt iron swords) were far advanced into the Iron
Age, and that the use of bronze weapons is merely another instance of
the fact that the introduction of a new element does not necessarily
banish the older. This theory would separate the Homeric from the
Mycenaean altogether, and is part of a much more comprehensive
ethnological hypothesis. According to another hypothesis, the Homeric
poems are true descriptions of a single age, or, in other words, the
weapons of the Homeric age were far more diverse and elaborate than is
supposed by Reichel.

Very few traces of iron have been found in the Mycenaean settlements,
nor have any examples of body armour been found except the ceremonial
gold breastplates at Mycenae. The Mycenaean soldiers carried apparently
a bronze spear, a bronze sword and a bow and arrows. The arrow-heads are
first of obsidian and later of bronze. It would appear that only the
chief warriors used spear and shield, while the majority fought with
bows. The swords found at Mycenae are two-edged, of rigid bronze, and as
long as 3 ft. or even more; from representations of battles it would
seem that they were perhaps used for thrusting mainly. They are highly
ornamented and some have hilts of wood, bone or ivory, or even gold
mounting. Later swords became shorter and of a type like that of early
iron swords found in Greece. Moreover in a few cases there have been
found in pre-Mycenaean (late Minoan III.) tombs a few examples of short
iron swords together with bronze remains. All Mycenaean spears are of
bronze and, apparently, their shafts, unlike the Homeric, had no
butt-piece. In the absence of any metal helmets in the tombs we may
perhaps assume that the Mycenaean helmet was a leather cap, possibly
strengthened with tusks, such as appears in Homer (_Iliad_, x.) also.
The Mycenaean shield (generally, perhaps, made of leather) has given
rise to much controversy, which hinges largely on the interpretation of
the evidence provided by the representation on the Warrior Vase and the
Painted Stele from Mycenae and pottery found at Tiryns. Professor
Ridgeway regards these as describing post-Mycenaean conditions, and
maintains that the true Mycenaean shield was always long (from neck to
feet), and that it was either in the form of a figure-of-eight targe, or
rectangular and sometimes incurved like the section of a cylinder;
whereas the Homeric shield was round (e.g. [Greek: kukloteros,
eukuklos], &c.). Dr Reichel's followers believe that the Homeric shield
was long ("like a tower") and incurved in the centre like the
Mycenaean, that Homer knew nothing of the small round shield, and that
the epithets implying roundness used in the poems are to be explained as
meaning "well-balanced" or as late interpolations. On the whole we must
conclude that the Mycenaean age is by no means a single homogeneous
whole (see AEGEAN CIVILIZATION), and that the weapons are not
exclusively of bronze, nor of any single type.

The Homeric warrior in full armour, according to the Homeric poems,
wore: (1) shield ([Greek: aspis, sakos]), (2) greaves ([Greek:
knaemides]), (3) band ([Greek: zoma]), (4) belt ([Greek: zostaer])and
_mitre_, (5) tunic ([Greek: chiton]), (6) helmet ([Greek: korus]), (7)
breastplate ([Greek: thorex]), (8) sword ([Greek: xiphos]). The [Greek:
laisaeion] was a protection worn by the archers in place of a shield.
According to the usual view, the Homeric shield was, as we have seen,
bent in about half way up each side (in the form of a figure-of-eight)
to give freedom to the arms, and large enough to protect the whole body.
The two curves were held rigid by two Wooden (probably) staves inside.
It was composed of layers of ox-hide overlaid with bronze, forming a
boss in the centre, and sometimes had studs upon it. Reichel's view is
that it was the weight of these huge shields which led to the use of the
chariot as a means of going rapidly from one part of the field to
another (though Professor Ridgeway and others contest this, and Helbig
mentions more than one case of long journeys on foot under shield), and
further that the round shield is entirely unknown to Homer. This large
shield was clearly the natural protection against showers of missiles,
rather than against enemies fighting with the sword.

The greaves were, no doubt, generally of hide, protected the leg all
round, and were fastened at the knee with cords. On the other hand
Mycenaean bronze greaves have been found at Enkomi (Cyprus) and at
Glassinatz (Glasinac), and therefore it is not necessary, following
Reichel, to cut out Homer's references to the "bronze-greaved" Achaeans
(_Iliad_, vii. 41), a phrase which has been taken as evidence for
regarding the passage as spurious. The tin greaves of Achilles are
obviously exceptional.

The _thorex_ again is the subject of controversy. Reichel, arguing that
the great shield rendered any breastplate unnecessary, regarded the word
as a general term for body clothing, but Ridgeway strongly maintains the
older theory that it was a bronze breastplate, and Andrew Lang points
out that, on Reichel's theory, a word which originally meant the
"breast" was transferred to mean "loin-cloth" (which, to judge from the
artistic representations, was all that the Mycenaean warrior wore), and
subsequently in historic times returned to its natural use for the
breastplate--a most unlikely evolution. The passages in Homer which
describe it as a breastplate are regarded by Reichel's school as later
interpolations. Gilbert Murray thinks that the Homeric poems must be
regarded as belonging to different periods of development, and therefore
attributes the more elaborate armour to the "surface" (late Ionian)
stratum. The _zoma_ was probably a loin-cloth, and the _mitre_ a metal
band about a foot wide in front and narrow behind to protect the lower
part of the body. As a matter of fact, however, the big shield does not
exclude the use of body armour, and it is quite likely that the Homeric
warrior wore a bronze corslet, i.e. a somewhat improved form of the
[Greek: linothorex], or stiffened shirt. On the other hand, it is
probable, as we gather from the poems, that this corslet was not strong
enough to do more than stop a spent spear. The _chiton_ was worn over
the _mitre_, and reached the knees; it was held to the body by the
_zoster_, a metal-plated belt. Helmets were both of metal on leather,
and of leather throughout; the crests were of horsehair (not of metal
like the later Greek helmets) and there were no cheek-pieces.

The sword has already been mentioned. Ridgeway, in spite of the almost
invariable mention of bronze as the material of the Homeric weapons,
believes that it was generally of iron, but, while the presence of iron
in the Homeric age is admitted in the case of implements, it is
generally held that weapons were all of bronze. Except for one
arrow-head (_Iliad_, iv. 123), and the mace of Areithoüs, mentioned as a
unique example by Nestor (_Iliad_, vii. 141), no reference to an iron
weapon proper occurs in the Homeric poems. But the sword was used only
when the favourite spear or javelin had failed to decide the contest.

It must be admitted that the problem of pre-Homeric armour and Homeric
armour must always be largely a matter of inference, based on a
comparative study of the evidence literary and archaeological. Unless we
are prepared to adopt the theory that the Homeric poems consist of a
mosaic of interpolation informed by an archaizing editor, we must assume
that they describe a single period of transition intermediate between
the Mycenaean prime and the dawn of history proper. In this case we
shall believe that the Homeric warrior has so far adapted to changing
conditions the simple appliances of the Mycenaean that he has evolved a
feeble corslet with minor pieces of body armour, while retaining the big
double-bellied shield as a protection against the arrows which are still
the chief weapon of the rank and file and are even used on occasion by
the chiefs. If we further believe that the iron at his disposal was
similar to that used by the Celts of Polybius, it is natural to believe
also that he preferred the harder bronze for his weapons, though iron
was common for domestic and other implements.

  On early Greek arms in general see, besides Reichel and Ridgeway _op.
  cit._: A. Lang, _Homer and his Age_ (London, 1906; and criticisms in
  _Classical Review_, February 1907); G.G.A. Murray, _The Rise of the
  Greek Epic_ (Oxford, 1907), chap. vi; R.M. Burrows, _Discoveries in
  Crete_ (2nd ed., London, 1907); Leaf and Bayfield, _Iliad_, i.-xii.
  Appendix A (follows Reichel); W. Helbig, _Homerische Epos_ (1884 and
  1899), and _La Question mycénienne_ (1896); C. Robert, _Studien zur
  Ilias_ (Berlin, 1901); Chr. Tsountas and J.I. Manatt, _The Mycenaean
  Age_ (1897); V. Bérard, _Les Phéniciens et l'Odyssée_ (Paris, 1902);
  Cauer, _Grundfrager d. Homerkritik_ (Leipzig, 1895); much valuable
  discussion will be found in articles in _Journ. Hell, Stud., Classical
  Rev._ and _Journ. of Anthropol. Instit_.; see also editions of _Iliad_
  and _Odyssey_ (espec. D.B. Monro), and works quoted under AEGEAN
  CIVILIZATION; HOMER; MYCENAE.

4. _Greek, Historical._--The equipment does not differ generically from
that described in the Homeric poems, except when we come to the reforms
of the Macedonians. The hoplites, who formed the main army, wore helmet,
body armour, greaves and shield, and fought with pike and sword. The
helmets were (1) the Corinthian, which covered the face to the chin,
with slits for the eyes, and often had no plume or crest; (2) the
Athenian, which did not cover the face (though sometimes it had
cheek-plates which could be turned up if necessary), had crests,
sometimes triple, with plumes of feathers, horsehair or leather; (3) a
steel cap ([Greek: pilos]) without crest, plumes or cheek-plates. The
last seems to have been most common in the Spartan army. The body armour
consisted of breast and back plates fastened together by thongs or
straps and buckles; sometimes poverty compelled a man to be content with
a leather jerkin ([Greek: spolas]) partly strengthened by metal plates,
or even a quilted linen or stuffed shirt. Greaves were of pliant bronze
fastened at the back above the ankle and below the knee. Shields were of
the small round or oval type, adapted to the new conditions in which the
bow and arrow had given place to hand-to-hand fighting. They were held
by means of two handles ([Greek: ochana]), the left hand being thrust
through the first and grasping the second. In the 5th and 4th centuries
the shield bore a device or initial representing the state and also the
individual's own crest. The hoplite's pike, about 8 ft. long, unlike the
Homeric weapon, was hardly ever thrown. In the Macedonian phalanx a pike
([Greek: sarissa]), certainly 18 ft., and perhaps later in the 3rd and
and 2nd centuries even 24 ft. long, was introduced. The sword was
straight, sharp-pointed, short, sometimes less than 20 in., and rarely
more than 2 ft. long. It was double-edged and used for both cut and
thrust. A less common type was the [Greek: machaira] or curved sabre
used by the Spartans, with one sharp edge. The hoplite had no other
offensive weapons.

The cavalry were heavy-armed like the hoplites except that they carried
a smaller shield, or, more usually, none at all. They were armed with a
lance which they wielded freely (i.e. not "in rest") and occasionally
threw. The Macedonian cavalry had a [Greek: sarissa]. The light-armed
([Greek: gymnaetes, psiloi]) were (1) [Greek: akontistai], armed with a
javelin (3 to 5 ft. long) and a small shield; (2) [Greek: toxotai],
archers; and (3) [Greek: sphendonaetai], slingers, whose missiles were
balls of lead, stones and hardened clay pellets. Between the heavy and
the light armed were the peltasts. The _pelta_, from which they took the
name, was a light shield or target, made of skin or leather on a wooden
or wickerwork frame. The Athenian Iphicrates armed them with linen
corslet and a larger spear and sword than those of the hoplites; he also
invented a new footgear (called after him _iphicratides_) to replace the
older greaves.

5. _Roman._--The equipment of the Roman soldier, like the organization
of the army (see ROMAN ARMY), passed through a great number of changes,
and it is quite impossible to summarize it as a single subject. In the
period of the kings the legion was the old Greek phalanx with Greek
armour; the front ranks wore the Greek panoply and fought with long
spears and the circular Argolic shield. The early Roman sword, like that
of the Greeks, Egyptians and Etruscans, was of bronze. We have no direct
statement as to its form, but in all probability it was of the ordinary
leaf-shape. We gather from the monuments that, in the 1st century B.C.,
the Roman sword was short, worn on the right side (except by officers,
who carried no shield), suspended from a shoulder-belt (_balteus_) or a
waist-belt (_cingulum_), and reaching from the hollow of the back to the
middle of the thigh, thus representing a length of from 22 in. to 2 ft.
The blade was straight, double-edged, obtusely-pointed. On the Trajan
column (A.D. 114) it is considerably longer, and under the Flavian
emperors the long, single-edged _spatha_ appears frequently along with
the short sword.

The second period ending with the Punic wars witnessed a change. The
_hastati_ and the _principes_ are both heavily armed, but the round
shield has given way to the oblong (_scutum_), except for one-third of
the _hastati_ who bore only the spear and the light javelin (_gaesa_).
The third period--that described by Polybius--is characterized by
greater complexity of armour, due no doubt in part to the experience
gained in conflicts with a wider range of peoples, and in part to the
assimilation of the methods peculiar to the new Italian allies. Thus we
find the skirmishers (_velites_) armed with a light javelin 3 ft. long
and ¾ in. thick, with an iron point 9 in. long; this point was so
fragile that it was rendered useless by the first cast. For defence they
wore a hide-covered headpiece and a round buckler 3 ft. in diameter. The
heavy-armed carried a _scutum_ formed of two boards glued together,
covered with canvas and skin, and incurved into the shape of a
half-cylinder; its upper and lower edges were strengthened with iron
rims and its centre with a boss (_umbo_). A greave was worn on the right
leg, and the helmet was of bronze with a crest of three feathers. The
wealthier soldiers wore the full cuirass of chain armour (_lorica_), the
poorer a brass plate 9 in. square. For offence they carried a sword and
two javelins. The former was the Spanish weapon, straight, double-edged
and pointed, for both thrust and cut, in place of the old Greek sword.

The characteristic weapon, however, was the _pilum_ (Gr. [Greek:
ussos]). The form of this weapon and the mode of using it have been
minutely described by Polybius (vi. 23), but his description has been
much misunderstood in consequence of the rarity of representations or
remains of the _pilum_. It is shown on a monument of St Rémy in
Provence, assigned to the age of the first emperors, and in a bas-relief
at Mainz, on the grave-stone of Quintus Petilius Secundus, a soldier of
the 15th legion. A specimen of the actual weapon is in the museum at
Wiesbaden. It is a javelin with a stout iron head (7 in.), carried on an
iron rod, about 20 in. in length, which terminates in a tang for
insertion in the wooden shaft. As represented on the monuments, the iron
part of the weapon is about one-third of its entire length (6¾ ft.). It
was used primarily as a missile. When the point pierced the shield the
weight of the stave pulled the shield downwards and rendered it useless.
At close quarters it answered all the purposes, offensive and defensive,
of the modern bayonet when "fixed." Vegetius, in his _Rei militaris
instituta_, describes it in a modified form as used in the armies of the
lower empire, and in a still more modified form it reappears as the
"argon" of the Franks. This equipment was characteristic of _hastati,
principes_ and _triarii_ (save that the latter used the _hasta_ instead
of the _pilum_). We thus see how great is the change from the time when
the _hastati_ were the light-armed (from _hasta_) of the Greek phalanx.

The cavalry, which had originally been protected only by a light ox-hide
shield and the most fragile spears, adopted, about Polybius's time, the
full Greek equipment of buckler, strong spear and breastplate.

In the last period of the republic the _pilum_ became the universal
weapon of the heavy-armed, while the auxiliaries (all foreigners, the
_velites_ having disappeared) used the _hasta_ and the long single-edged
sword (_spatha_). Under the empire the heavy-armed, according to
Josephus, had helmet, cuirass, a long sword worn on the left side, and a
dagger on the right, _pilum_ and _scutum_. The special detachment
detailed to attend the commander had a round shield (_clipeus_) and a
long spear. The cavalry wore armour like that of the infantry, with a
broadsword, a buckler slung from the horse's side, a long pole for
thrusting, and several javelins, almost as large as spears, in a sheath
or quiver. Arrian, writing of a period some fifty years later, gives
further particulars from which we gather that of the cavalry some were
bowmen, some polemen, while others wielded lances and axes.

  For the arms and armour of other peoples of antiquity see e.g. PERSIA:
  _History, Ancient_, section v. "The Persian Empire of the
  Achaemenids"; BRITAIN, _Anglo-Saxon_, section v. "Warfare"; ETRURIA;
  EGYPT, &c.     (J. M. M.)

6. _English from the Norman Conquest._--It is unnecessary here to trace
in detail the history of European armour in the middle ages and after,
but its use and fashion in England may illustrate the broad lines of the
gradual perfection and the hurried abandonment of the ancient
war-harness. Each country gave its armour something of the national
character, the Spanish harness being touched with the Moorish taste, the
Italian with the classical note borrowed from the monuments of old time,
and the German with the Teutonic feeling for the grotesque.

[FIG. 4.--From the Bayeux Tapestry.]


  11th-century Bayeux tapestry.

To understand the development of English arms and armour it is well for
us to consider carefully the fashion of these things at the time of that
landmark of history, the Norman Conquest. Poets, chroniclers and
law-makers give us material for their description, and in the great
embroidery of Bayeux, with its more than six hundred lively figures, we
have pictured all the circumstances of war. We find that weapons and war
gear have advanced little or nothing beyond the age which saw the Dacian
warrior armed from crown to foot. A knight is reckoned fully armed if he
have helmet, hawberk and shield; his weapons are sword and lance,
although he sometimes carries axe or mace and, more rarely, a bow. The
coat of fence, which the Norman called _hawberk_ and the English
_byrnie_, hangs from neck to knee, the sleeves loose and covering the
elbow only, the skirt slit before and behind for ease in the saddle. The
Bayeux artists (see fig. 4) commonly show these skirts as though they
were short breeches, the hawberk taking the fashion at first sight of a
man's swimming dress, but other authorities set us right, and towards
the end of the tapestry we see men stripping hawberks from the slain by
pulling them over the head. Back and front are so much alike that he who
armed Duke William for the fight slipped on the armour hind side before,
an omen that he should change his state of a duke for that of a king.
The hawberk might be mail of woven rings, of rings sewn upon leather or
cotton, of overlapping scales of leather, horn or iron, of that jazerant
work which was formed of little plates sewn to canvas or linen, or of
thick cotton and old linen padded and quilted in lozenges, squares or
lines. There are indications that the hawberk was sometimes reinforced
at the breast probably by a small oblong plate fastened underneath. Its
weight is shown in the scene where William's men carry arms to the
ships, each hawberk being borne between two men upon a pole thrust
through the sleeves.

The helmet is a brimless and pointed cap, either all of metal or of
leather or even wood framed and strengthened with metal. Its
characteristic piece is the guard which protects the nose and brow from
swinging cuts, so disguising the knight that William must needs take off
his helmet to show his men that he had not fallen. Such a nasal appears
in a 10th-century illumination; at the time of the Conquest it was all
but universal. It grows rare and all but disappears in the 13th century,
although examples are found to the end of the middle ages. The helmet is
laced under the chin, and under it the knight often wore a hood of mail
or quilting which covered the top of the head, the ears and neck, but
left the chin free--in two or three cases he has this hood without the
helmet. A close coif was probably worn beneath it when it was of ringed
mail, to spare the fretting of the metal on the head.

The knights' legs are shown in most cases as unprotected save by stout
hose or leg-bands: only in two or three instances does the tapestry
picture a warrior with armed legs, and it is perhaps significant of the
rarity of this defence that the duke is so armed. The feet are covered
only by the leather boot, the heels having prick spurs.

Broad-bladed swords with cross-hilts of straight or drooping quills are
fastened with a strap and buckle girdle to the left side. They have a
short grip, and the blade would seem to be from 2½ to 3 ft. in length.
The chieftain unarmed in his house is often seen with unbuckled and
sheathed sword sceptre-wise in his hands, carrying it as an Indian raja
will nurse his sheathed tulwar. The ash spears brandished or couched by
the knights as they charge seem from 7 to 8 or 9 ft. in length. In a few
cases a three-forked pennon flutters at the end. The axe, a weapon which
the Normans, in spite of their Norse ancestry, do not carry in the
battle, is of the type called the Danish axe, long-shafted, the large
blade boldly curved out. Maces, such as that with which the bishop of
Bayeux rallies his young men, seem knotted clubs of simple form. Short
and strong bows are drawn to the breast by the Norman archers.

Of the shields in the fight, four or five borne by the English are of
the old English form--large, round bucklers of linden-wood, bossed and
ribbed with iron. For the rest the horsemen bear the Norman shield,
kite-shaped, with tapering foot, and long enough to carry a dead warrior
from the field. On the inner side are straps for the hand to grip and a
long strap allowed the knight to hang the shield from his neck. Let us
note that although wyvern-like monsters, crosses, roundels and other
devices appear on these shields, none of them has any indication of true
armory, whose origins must be placed in the next century.


  12th Century.

The 12th century, although an age of riding and warring, affects but
little the fashion of armour. The picture of a king on his seal may well
stand for the full-armed knight of his age, but Henry Beauclerc, Stephen
and Henry II. are shown in harness not much unlike that of the Bayeux
needlework. But the sleeve of the hawberk goes to the wrist, and the
kite shield grows less, Stephen's shield being 30 in. long at the most.
On Stephen's second seal the mail hood is drawn over the point of the
chin, and Henry II.'s seals show the chin covered to the lips. At least
one seal of this king has the legs and feet armed with hose of ringed
mail, probably secured by lacing at the back of the leg as a modern boot
is laced. The first seal of Richard Lionheart marks an important
movement. His hawberk, hood and hose clothe him, like his father, from
crown to toe, and to this equipment he adds gloves of mail. Under the
hawberk flows out to the heels the skirt of a long gown slit in front.
But helm and shield are the most remarkable points. The shield has
become flatter at the top, and at last the shield of an English king
bears those armorial devices whose beginnings are seen elsewhere a
generation before. The earlier seal has the shield with a rampant lion
ramping to the sinister side and closely resembling that on the shield
of Philip of Alsace, long believed to be the earliest example of true
armory. But the shield in the second seal bears the three leopards which
have been ever since the arms of the kings of England, and from this
time to the end of the middle ages armorial devices become the common
decorations of the knight's shield, coat, saddle and horse-trapper. The
helmet of the first seal is a high thimble-topped cap, without a nasal
guard, but the second has the king's head covered with the great helm,
barrel-shaped and reinforced in front with a flat ventaile pierced in
slits for the sight. This helm is crested with a semicircular ridge from
which spring two wings, or rows of feathers fan-wise. On its side the
ridge bears a single leopard, the forerunner of the coming crests.


  13th Century.

For 13th-century arms, although but poor scraps remain of original
material, we have authority in plenty--pictures, seals and carving, and,
above all, the effigies in stone or brass which give us each visible
link, strap and ornament. All these have for a commentary chronicles,
poems and account books, so that the history of armour may be followed
in detail.

[Illustration: FIG. 5.--Knights' Armour, c. 1250.

From _The Ancestor_, by permission of A Constable & Co. Ltd.]

The long, sleeveless surcoat seen over King John's mail on his broad
seal goes through the century and is often embroidered with arms. The
shield becomes flat-topped the better to receive armorial charges. The
great helm is common, although many knights on the day of battle like
better the freedom of the mail hood with a steel cap worn over or under
its crown, keeping for the tourney-yard the great helm which towards the
century-end begins to carry its towering crest. Great variety is seen in
the forms of the flat or round-topped helm, some being in one piece,
pierced for sight and air, others having hinged or movable ventailes. At
the end of the century a sugar-loaf type is the established form. The
knight's hawberk is worn over a gambeson of linen, quilted linen or
cotton, which lesser men wear with a steel cap for all defence. Breast
and back plates also are sometimes borne under the hawberk, and the
first plates in sight at last appear in those knee-cops which protect
the joining of the upper and lower hose, and in a few examples of
bainbergs or greaves of metal or leather. At the end of Henry III.'s
reign we have the admirable illustrations of a manuscript of Matthew
Paris's _Lives of the Offas_, with many pictures of knights. (See fig
5.) Here we see knights with knee-cop and greave and a plenty of curious
headpieces, the plain mail hood and mail hoods with a plate ventaile to
cover the face, barrel-helms and round-topped helms and even
round-topped helmets with the Norman nose-guard.

In the last half of the 13th century appears the curious defence known
as _alettes_. This name is given to a pair of leather plates generally
oblong in form and tagged to the back of the shoulder. As a rule they
are borne to display the wearer's arms, but being sometimes plain they
may have had some slight defensive value, covering a weak spot at the
armpit and turning a sweeping sword-cut at the neck. They disappear in
the earlier years of Edward III.

Surcoat, shield and trapper have the arms of their owner. The rowel-spur
makes a rare appearance. Weapons change little. although the sword is
often longer and heavier. Richard I. had favoured the cross-bow, in
spite of papal denunciations of that weapon hateful to God, and its use
is common through all the 13th century, after which it makes way for the
national weapon of the long-bow.


  14th century.

In the 14th century, the high-day of chivalry, the age of Creçy and
Poitiers, of the Black Prince and Chandos, the age which saw enrolled
the noble company of the Garter, the art of the armourer and
weapon-smith strides forward. At its beginning we see many knights still
clad in chain mail with no visible plate. At its end the knight is often
locked in plates from head to foot, no chainwork showing save the camail
edge under the helm and the fringe of the mail skirt or hawberk.

[Illustration: FIG. 6.--Brass of Sir John de Creke.

From Waller's _Monumental Brasses._]

Before the first quarter of the 14th century is past many of these
plates are in common use. Sir John de Creke's brass, about 1325-1330, is
a fair example (fig. 6). His helmet is a basinet, pointed at the top,
probably worn over a complete hood of mail flowing to the mid-breast.
This hood was soon to lose its crown, the later basinets having the
camail, a defence of mail covering neck, cheeks and chin and secured to
the basinet with eyelet holes and loops through which a lace was passed.
A rerebrace of plate defends the outer side of the upper arm, plain
elbow-cops the elbow, and round bosses in the form of leopard heads
guard the shoulder and the crook of the elbow. The fore-arm is covered
with the plates of a vambrace which appears from under the hawberk
sleeve. Large and decorated knee-cops cover the knees, ridged greaves
the shins, and the upper part of the foot from pointed toe to ankle is
fenced with those articulated and overlapping plates the perfection of
which in the next century enabled the full-harnessed knight to move his
body as freely as might an unarmed man. Under the plates the mail hose
show themselves and the heels have rowelled spurs. He has a hawberk of
mail whose front skirt ends in a point between the knees, the loose
sleeves between wrist and elbow. Under this is a haketon of some soft
material whose folds fall to a line above the height of the knee. Over
the hawberk is a garment, perhaps of leather with a dagged skirt-edge,
and over this again is a sleeveless gambeson or pourpoint of leather or
quilted work, studded and enriched. Over all is the sleeveless surcoat,
the skirt before cut squarely off at the height of the fork of the leg,
the skirt behind falling to below the knee. The loose folds of this
surcoat are gathered at the waist by a narrow belt, the sword hanging
from a broader belt carried across the hip. Before 1350 the long surcoat
of the 13th century was still further shortened, the tails being cut off
squarely with the front. The fate of Sir John Chandos, who in 1369
stumbled on a slippery road, his long coat "armed with his arms"
becoming tangled with his legs, points to the fact that an old soldier
might cling to an old fashion.

The desire for a better defence than a steel cap and camail and a less
cumbrous one than the great helm, in which the knight rode half stifled
and half blind, brought in as a fighting headpiece the basinet with a
movable viser. This is found throughout this century, disappearing in
the next when the salet and its varieties displaced it. But there were
many knights who still fought with the great helm covering basinet and
camail, a fact which speaks eloquently of the mighty blows given in this
warlike age. The many monumental brasses of the last half of the 14th
century show us for the most part knights in basinet and camail with the
face exposed, but their heads are commonly pillowed on the great helm
and in any case the viser would hinder the artist's desire to show the
knight's features.

[Illustration: FIG. 7.--Brass of Sir John de Foxley.

From Waller's _Monumental Brasses_.]

The fully-armed man of the latter half of the 14th century seems to have
worn a rounded breastplate and a back-plate over his chain hawberk.
Chaucer's Sir Thopas must always be cited for the defences of this age,
the hero wearing the quilted haketon next his shirt, and over that the
habergeon, a lesser hawberk of chain mail. His last defence is a fine
hawberk "full strong of plate" showing that "hawberk" sometimes served
as a word for the body plates. Over all this is the "cote-armure" or
surcoat. Many passages from the chroniclers show that the three coats of
fence one over the other were in common use in the field, and Froissart
tells a tale of a knight struck by a dart in such wise that the head
pierced through his plates, his coat of mail and his haketon stuffed
with twisted silk. The surcoat in the age of Edward III. became a scanty
garment sitting tightly to the body, laced up the back or sides, the
close skirts ending at the fork of the leg with a dagged or slittered
edge. The waistbelt is rarely in sight, but the broad belt across the
hips, on which the dagger comes to hang as a balance to the sword, grows
richer and heavier, the best work of the goldsmith or silversmith being
spent upon it. Arms and legs and feet become cased in plate of steel or
studded leather, and before the mid-century the shoulder-plates, like
the steel shoes, are of overlapping pieces and the elbow also moves
easily under the same defence. (See fig. 7.)


  15th century.

Such harness, ever growing more beautiful in its rich details, serves
our champions until the beginning of the 15th century, when the fashion
begins to turn. The scanty surcoat tends to disappear. It may be that
during the bitter feuds and fierce slaughters of the Wars of the Roses
men were unwilling to display on their breasts the bearings by which
their mortal foe might know them afar. The horseman's shield went with
the surcoat, its disuse hastened by the perfection of armour, and the
banners of leaders remained as the only armorial signs commonly seen in
war. But at jousts and tourneys, where personal distinction was eagerly
sought, the loose tabard, which, after the middle of the century, bore
the arms of the wearer on back, front and both sleeves, was still to be
seen, with the crest of parchment or leather towering above a helm whose
mantle, from the ribbon-like strip of the early 13th century, had grown
into a fluttering cloak with wildly slittered edge streaming out behind
the charging knight.

[Illustration: FIG. 8.--Brass of Sir John Lisle at Thruxton.]

When a score of years of this 15th century had run we find the knight
closed in with plates, no edge of chain mail remaining in sight. The
surcoat being gone we see him armed in breast and back plate, his loins
covered by a skirt of "tonlets," as the defence of overlapping
horizontal bands comes to be named (fig. 8). The chain camail has gone
out of fashion, the basinet continuing itself with a chin and cheek
plate which joins a gorget of plate covering the collar-bone, a movable
viser shutting in the whole head with steel. The gussets of chain mail
sewn into the leathern or fustian doublet worn below the body armour are
unseen even at the gap at the hollow of the arm where the plates must be
allowed to move freely, for a little plate, round, oval or oblong, is
tagged to each side to fence the weak point. These plates often differ
in size and shape one from the other, the sword-arm side carrying the
smaller one.

[Illustration: FIG. 9.--Gothic Style of Armour. Monument of Count Otto
IV. of Henneberg.]

Soon after this the six or eight "tonlets" grow fewer, being continued
on the lower edge by the so-called tuilles, small plates strapped to the
tonlets and swinging with the movement of the legs. A fine suit of
armour is shown in the monument of Count Otto IV. of Henneberg (fig. 9).
Knightly armour takes perhaps its last expression of perfection in such
a noble harness as that worn by Richard Beauchamp, earl of Warwick,
whose armed effigy was wrought between 1451 and 1454 (fig. 10). In this
we see the characteristic feature of the great elbow-cops, whose
channelled and fluted edges overlapping vambrace and rerebrace become
monstrous fan-like shapes in the brass of Richard Quartremayns, graven
about 1460. At this time the harness of the left shoulder is often
notably reinforced, as compared with that of the sword-arm shoulder.
Towards the latter part of the century chain mail reappears as a skirt
or breech of mail, showing itself under the diminished tonlets, and,
when helm and gorget are removed, as a high-standing collar. The
articulation by overlapping plates extends even to the breastplate,
whose front is thus in two or more pieces. Very long-necked rowel-spurs
are often found, and the toes of the sabbatons or steel shoes are
sharply pointed. The characteristic helmet of the latter half of the
century is the salet or salade, a large steel cap, whose edge is carried
out from the brows and still more boldly at the back of the neck.

[Illustration: FIG. 10.--Brass of Richard Beachamp, earl of Warwick.

From Stothard's _Monumental Effigies_.]

Knights abandon the great helm in war, but it is perfected for use in
the tilt-yard, taking for that purpose an enormous size, to enable two
good inches of stuffing to come between head or face and the steel
plate. Such a helm sits well down on the shoulders, to which it is
locked before and behind by strong buckles or rivets. The note of the
15th century in armour is that of fantastically elaborate forms boldly
outlined and a splendour of colour which gained much from the custom of
wearing over the full harness short cloaks or rich coats turned up with
furs, or from another fashion of covering the body plates or brigandines
with rich velvets studded with gold. The details of the harness take a
thousand curious shapes, and even amongst the simpler jacks and steel
caps of the archers the same glorious variety is seen.

[Illustration: FIG. 11.--Meeting of Henry VIII. and Maximilian.

From Hewitt's _Arms and Armour_.]


  16th century.

If the note of the 15th century be variety of form, that of the 16th
century, the last important chapter in the history of armour, is surface
decoration, the harness of great folk atoning in some measure for loss
of the beautiful medieval sense of line by elaborate enrichment. Plain
engraving, niello, russet work, golden inlay and beaten ornament are
common methods of enrichment. The great plume of ostrich feathers flows
from the helmet crown of leaders in war. As in the reign of Edward III.,
costume's fashion affects the forms of armour, the broad toe of the
Henry VIII. shoe being imitated in steel, as the wide fluted skirts of
the so-called Maximilian armour imitate the German fashion in civil
dress which the Imperial host popularized through northern Europe (fig.
11). These skirts have been called "lamboys" by modern writers on
military antiquities, but the word seems an antiquarianism of no value,
apparently a misreading of the word "jambeis" in some early document. So
many notable examples of the armour of this 16th century are accessible
in European collections, other illustrations occurring in great plenty,
that its details call for little discussion; a fine and characteristic
suit is that by the famous English armourer, Jacob Topf (fig. 12), which
belonged to Sir Christopher Hatton. Into this century the arquebusier
marches, demanding a chief place in the line of battle, although it is a
common error that the improvement in fire-arms drove out the fully armed
warrior, whose plates gave him no protection. Until the rifle came to
the soldier's hands, plate armour could easily be made shot-proof. It
was driven from the field by the new strategy which asked for long
marches and rapid movements of armies. This century's armour for the
tilt-yard gives such protection to the champion, with its many
reinforcing pieces, that unless the caged helm were used--the same which
cost Henry II. of France his life--the risks of the tilt-yard must have
fallen much below those of the polo-field. The horse with crinet,
chafron and bards of steel was as well covered from harm.

[Illustration: FIG. 12.--Suit by Jacob Topf, nearly complete, the gorget
does not belong to it. Below is the placcate.]

Before the end of the 16th century the full suit of war harness is an
antique survival. Long boots take the place of greaves and steel shoes,
and early in the 16th century the military pedants are heard to bewail
the common laying aside of other pieces. The mounted cavalier--cuirassier
or pistolier--might take the field, even as late as the Great Rebellion,
armed at all points save the backs of the thighs and the legs below the
knee; but a combed and brimmed cap, breast and back plate and tassets
equipped the pikeman, and the musketeer would march without any metal on
him save his headpiece, for it was soon found that heavily armed
musketeers, after a long trudge through summer dust or winter mud, were
readier to rest than to shoot. Everywhere there was revolt against the
burden of plates, and as early as 1593 Sir Richard Hawkins found that his
adventurers would not use even the light corslets provided by him,
"esteeming a pot of wine a better defence." Gervase Markham, in his
_Souldier's Accidence_ of 1645, asks that at least the captain of
cuirassiers should be armed "at all peeces, cap a pee," but he would have
found few such captains, and Markham is a great praiser of noble old
custom. The famous figure of a pikeman of 1668 (fig. 13) in Elton's _Art
Military_ has steel cap, corslet and tassets, but he stands for a fashion
dead or dying. The last noteworthy helmet was what is now termed the
lobster-tail helmet, a headpiece with round top, flat brim before, a
broad articulated brim behind, cheek-pieces hanging by straps and a grate
of upright bars to cover the face, some having in place of the grate a
movable nose-guard to be raised or lowered at will. The close resemblance
of this helmet to that worn by the Japanese, with whom the Dutch were
then trading, is worth remark, although each of the two pieces seems to
have had its separate origin. Thus, save for a steel cap here and a
corslet there, especially to be found amongst the guards of sovereigns
who must cling to something of antique tradition, armour departs out of
the civilized world.

[Illustration: FIG. 13.--Pikeman.

From _The Compleat Body of the Art Military_, by Lieut. Col. Elton
(1668).]


  Survival of armour.

When in the reign of Queen Victoria her mounted guardsmen were given
back their breast and back plates, the last piece of body armour had
been the tiny gilt crescent worn at the throat by officers of foot,
which crescent was the shrunken symbol of that great gorget of plate
that came in with the 13th century. The shining plates of the Guards are
parade pieces only, but a curious revival of an old defence was carried
by English cavalry in the field at the end of the 19th century, when
small gussets of chain mail were attached to the shoulders of certain
cavalrymen as a defence against sword cuts. Through all the age of
modern warfare inventors have pressed the claims of various bullet-proof
breastplates, but where they have been effective against rifle fire
their weight has made them too heavy an addition to the soldier's
burden. (See, however, ARMOUR PLATES, _ad fin_.) Last of all we may
reckon those secret coats of mail which are said to be worn on occasion
by modern rulers in dread of the assassin. The London detective
department has such coats of fence in its armoury; and on the other side
it may be remembered that the Kelly gang of bushrangers, driven to bay,
were found to have forged suits of plate for themselves out of sheets of
boiler-iron.


  Collections.

Ancient arms and armour are now eagerly sought by European and American
collectors, and high prices are paid down for every noteworthy piece.
The supply is assisted by the efforts of many forgers of false pieces,
the most cunning of whom bring all archaeological skill to their aid,
and few great national or private collections are free from some example
of this industry. For the genuine pieces competition runs high. Suits of
plate of the earliest period may be sought in vain, and the greatest
collectors may hardly hope for such a panoply of the late Gothic period
as that which is the ornament of the Wallace collection. Even this
famous harness is not wholly free from suspicion of restoration. Armour
of the latter half of the 16th century, however, often appears in the
sale-rooms and is found in many private collections, although the
"ancestral armour" which decorates so many ancient halls in England is
generally the plates and pots which served the pikemen of the
17th-century militia.

It is not hard to understand this scarcity of ancient pieces. In the
first place it must be remembered that the fully armed man was always a
rare figure in war, and only the rich could engage in the costly follies
of the later tournaments. The novelists have done much to encourage the
belief that most men of gentle rank rode to the wars lance in hand,
locked up in full harness of plate; but the country gentleman, serving
as light horseman or mounted archer, would hold himself well armed had
he a quilted jack or brigandine and a basinet or salet. Men armed _cap a
pee_ crowd the illuminations of chronicle books, the artists having the
same tastes as the boy who decorates his Latin grammar with battles
which are hand-to-hand conflicts of epauletted generals. Monuments and
brasses also show these fully armed men, but here again we must
recognize the tendency which made the last of the cheap miniaturists
endow their clients lavishly with heavy watch-chains and rings. As late
as the 18th century the portrait painters drew their military or naval
sitters in the breastplates and pauldrons, vambraces and rerebraces of
an earlier age. Ancient wills and inventories, save those of great folk
or military adventurers, have scanty reference to complete harnesses.
Ringed hawberks, in a damp northern climate, will not survive long
neglect, and many of them must have been cut in pieces for burnishers or
for the mail skirts and gussets attached to the later arming doublets.
As the fashion of plate armour changed, the smith might adapt an old
harness to the new taste, but more often it would be cast aside. Men to
whom the sight of a steel coat called up the business of their daily
life wasted no sentimentality over an obsolete piece. The early
antiquaries might have saved us many priceless things, but it was not
until a few _virtuosi_ of the 18th century were taken with the Gothic
fancy that popular archaeology dealt with aught but Greek statuary and
Roman inscriptions. The 19th century was well advanced before an
interest in medieval antiquities became common amongst educated men, and
for most contemporaries of Dr Johnson a medieval helm was a barbarous
curiosity exciting the same measure of mild interest as does the Zulu
knobkerry seen by us as we pass a pawnbroker's window. (O. Ba.)

7. _Fire-arms._ (For the development of cannon, see ARTILLERY and
ORDNANCE.)--Hand-cannons appear almost simultaneously with the larger
_bombards_. They were made by the Flemings in the 14th century. An early
instance of the use of hand fire-arms in England is the siege of
Huntercombe Manor in 1375. These were simply small cannon, provided with
a stock of wood, and fired by the application of a match to the
touch-hole. During the 15th century the hand-gun was steadily improved,
and its use became more general. Edward IV., landing in England in 1471
to reconquer his throne, brought with him a force of Burgundian hand-gun
men (mercenaries), and in 1476 the Swiss at Morat had no less than 6000
of their men thus armed. The prototype of the modern military weapon is
the _arquebus_ (q.v.), a form of which was afterwards called in England
the _caliver_. Various dates are given for the introduction of the
arquebus, which owed many of its details to the perfected crossbow which
it superseded. The Spanish army in the Italian wars at the beginning of
the 16th century was the first to make full and effective use of the new
weapon, and thus to make the fire action of infantry a serious factor in
the decision of battles. The Spaniards also took the next step in
advance. The _musket_ (q.v.) was heavier and more powerful than the
arquebus, and, in the hands of the duke of Alva's army in the
Netherlands, so conclusively proved its superiority that it at once
replaced its rival in the armies of Europe. Both the arquebus and the
musket had a touch-hole on the right side of the barrel, with a pan for
the priming, with which a lighted quick match was brought in contact by
pressing a trigger. The musket, on account of its weight, was provided
with a long rest, forked in the upper part and furnished with a spike to
stick in the ground. The _matchlock_ (long-barrelled matchlocks are
still used by various uncivilized peoples, notably in India) was the
typical weapon of the soldier for two centuries. The class of hand
fire-arms provided with an arrangement for striking a spark to ignite
the powder charge begins with the _wheel-lock_. This lock was invented
at Nuremberg in 1515, but was seldom applied to the arquebus and musket
on account of the costliness of its mechanism and the uncertainty of its
action. The early forms of flint-lock (_snaphance_) were open to the
same objections, and the _fire-lock_ (as the flint-lock was usually
called) remained for many years after its introduction the armament of
special troops only, till about the beginning of the 18th century it
finally superseded the old matchlock. Thenceforward the fire-lock
(called familiarly in England "Brown Bess") formed with the bayonet
(q.v.) the armament of all infantry, and the fire-arms carried by other
troops were constructed on the same principle. Flint-lock muskets were
supplanted about 1830-1840 by the percussion musket, in which a
fulminate cap was used. A Scottish clergyman, Alexander Forsyth,
invented this method of ignition in 1807, but it was not till 1820 that
it began to come into general use. (See GUN.) The system of firing the
charge by a fulminate was followed by the invention of the needle-gun
(q.v.). The muzzle-loading rifle, employed by special troops since about
1800, came into general use in the armies of Europe about 1854-1860. It
was superseded, as a result of the success of the needle-gun in the war
of 1866, by the breech-loading rifle, this in its turn giving way to the
magazine rifle about 1886-1890. (See RIFLE.) Neither breech-loaders nor
revolvers, however, are inventions of modern date. Both were known in
Germany as early as the close of the 15th century. There are in the
Musée d'Artillerie at Paris wheel-lock arquebuses of the 16th century
which are breech-loaders; and there is, in the Tower armoury, a revolver
with the old matchlock, the date of which is about 1550. A German
arquebus of the 16th century, in the museum of Sigmaringen, is a
revolver of seven barrels. Nor is rifling a new thing in fire-arms, for
there was a rifled arquebus of the 15th century, in which the balls were
driven home by a mallet, and a patent was taken out in England for
rifling in 1635. All these systems were thus known at an early period in
the history of fire-arms, but for want of the minutely accurate
workmanship required and, above all, of a satisfactory firing
arrangement, they were left in an undeveloped state until modern times.
The earliest pistols were merely shorter handguns, modified for mounted
men, and provided with a straight stock which was held against the
breastplate (poitrinal or petronel). The long-barrelled pistol was the
typical weapon of the cavalry of the 16th century. (See CAVALRY.) With
the revival of shock tactics initiated by Gustavus Adolphus the length
of the pistol barrel became less and less, and its stock was then shaped
for the hand alone. (See PISTOL.)     (C. F. A.)




ARMSTEAD, HENRY HUGH (1828-1905), English sculptor, was first trained as
a silversmith, and achieved the highest excellence with the "St George's
Vase" and the "Outram Shield." He rose to the front rank among
contemporary sculptors, his chief works being the external sculptural
decorations of the colonial office in Whitehall, the sculptures on the
southern and eastern sides of the podium of the Albert Memorial, the
large fountain at King's College, Cambridge, and numerous effigies, such
as "Bishop Wilberforce" at Winchester, and "Lord John Thynne" at
Westminster, with smaller portraiture and much ideal work. His sense of
style and nobility was remarkable; and he was besides gifted with a fine
power of design and draughtsmanship, which he put to good use in his
early years for book illustration. He was elected associate of the Royal
Academy in 1875 and a full member in 1880.




ARMSTRONG, ARCHIBALD (d. 1672), court jester, called "Archy," was a
native of Scotland or of Cumberland, and according to tradition first
distinguished himself as a sheep-stealer; afterwards he entered the
service of James VI., with whom he became a favourite. When the king
succeeded to the English throne, Archy was appointed court jester. In
1611 he was granted a pension of two shillings a day, and in 1617 he
accompanied James on his visit to Scotland. His influence was
considerable and he was greatly courted and flattered, but his success
appears to have turned his head. He became presumptuous, insolent and
mischievous, excited foolish jealousies between the king and Henry,
prince of Wales, and was much disliked by the members of the court. In
1623 he accompanied Prince Charles and Buckingham in their adventure
into Spain, where he was much caressed and favoured by the Spanish court
and, according to his own account, was granted a pension. His conduct
here became more intolerable than ever. He rallied the infanta on the
defeat of the Armada and censured the conduct of the expedition to
Buckingham's face. Buckingham declared he would have him hanged, to
which the jester replied that "dukes had often been hanged for insolence
but never fools for talking." On his return he gained some complimentary
allusions from Ben Jonson by his attacks upon the Spanish marriage. He
retained his post on the accession of Charles I., and accumulated a
considerable fortune, including the grant by the king of 1000 acres in
Ireland. After the death of Buckingham in 1628, whom he declared "the
greatest enemy of three kings," the principal object of his dislike and
rude jests was Laud, whom he openly vilified and ridiculed. He
pronounced the following grace at Whitehall in Laud's presence: "Great
praise be given to God and little _laud_ to the devil," and after the
news of the rebellion in Scotland in 1637 he greeted Laud on his way to
the council chamber at Whitehall with: "Who's fool now? Does not your
Grace hear the news from Stirling about the liturgy?" On Laud's
complaint to the council, Archy was sentenced the same day "to have his
coat pulled over his head and be discharged the king's service and
banished the king's court." He settled in London as a money-lender, and
many complaints were made to the privy council and House of Lords of his
sharp practices. In 1641 on the occasion of Laud's arrest, he enjoyed a
mean revenge by publishing _Archy's Dream; sometimes Jester to his
Majestie, but exiled the Court by Canterburie's malice_. Subsequently he
resided at Arthuret in Cumberland, according to some accounts his
birthplace, where he possessed an estate, and where he died in 1672, his
burial taking place on the 1st of April. He was twice married, his
second wife being Sybilla Bell. There is no record of any legal
offspring, but the baptism of a "base son" of Archibald Armstrong is
entered in the parish register of the 17th of December 1643. _A Banquet
of Jests: A change of Cheare_, published about 1630, a collection
chiefly of dull, stale jokes, is attributed to him, and with still less
reason probably _A choice Banquet of Witty Jests ... Being an addition
to Archee's Jests, taken out of his Closet but never published in his
Lifetime_ (1660).




ARMSTRONG, JOHN (1709-1779), British physician and writer, was born
about 1709 at Castletown, Roxburghshire, where his father was parish
minister. He graduated M.D. (1732) at Edinburgh University, and soon
afterwards settled in London, where he paid more attention to literature
than to medicine. He was, in 1746, appointed one of the physicians to
the military hospital behind Buckingham House; and, in 1760, physician
to the army in Germany, an appointment which he held till the peace of
1763, when he retired on half-pay. For many years he was closely
associated with John Wilkes, but quarrelled with him in 1763. He died on
the 7th of September 1779. Armstrong's first publication, an anonymous
one, entitled _An Essay for Abridging the Study of Physic_ (1735), was a
satire on the ignorance of the apothecaries and medical men of his day.
This was followed two years after by the _Economy of Love_, a poem the
indecency of which damaged his professional practice. In 1744 appeared
his _Art of Preserving Health_, a very successful didactic poem, and the
one production on which his literary reputation rests. His
_Miscellanies_ (1770) contains some shorter poems displaying
considerable humour.




ARMSTRONG, JOHN (1738-1843), American soldier, diplomatist and political
leader, born at Carlisle, Pennsylvania, on the 25th of November 1758.
His father, also named John Armstrong (1725-1795), a native of the north
of Ireland, who had emigrated to the Pennsylvania frontier between 1745
and 1748, served successively as a brigadier-general in the Continental
army (1776-77), as brigadier-general and then major-general of the
Pennsylvania militia (1777-83), during the War of Independence, and was
a member of the Continental Congress in 1779-1780 and again in
1787-1788. The son studied for a time at the College of New Jersey (now
Princeton University), and served as a major in the War of Independence.
In March 1783, while the Continental army was stationed at Newburgh
(q.v.), New York, he wrote and issued, anonymously, the famous "Newburgh
Addresses." In 1784 he led a force of Pennsylvania militia against the
Connecticut settlers in Wyoming Valley, and treated them in such a
high-handed manner as to incur the disapproval even of the Pennsylvania
legislature. In 1789 he married the sister of Chancellor Robert R.
Livingston of New York, and removed to New York city, where his own
ability and his family connexion gave him great political influence. In
1801-2 and again in 1803-4 he was a member of the United States Senate.
From 1804 to 1810 he was the United States minister to France, and in
March 1806 he was joined with James Bowdoin as a special minister to
treat through France with Spain concerning the acquisition of Florida,
Spanish spoliations of American commerce, and the "Louisiana" boundary.
During the War of 1812, he was a brigadier-general in the United States
army from July 1812 until January 1813, and from then until August 1814
secretary of war in the cabinet of President Madison, when his
unpopularity forced him to resign. "In spite of Armstrong's services,
abilities and experience," says Henry Adams, "something in his character
always created distrust. He had every advantage of education, social and
political connexion, ability and self-confidence; ... but he suffered
from the reputation of indolence and intrigue." Nevertheless, he
"introduced into the army an energy wholly new," an energy the results
of which were apparent "for half a century." After his resignation he
lived in retirement at Red Hook, New York, where he died on the 1st of
April 1843. He published _Notices of the War of 1812_ (2 vols., 1836;
new ed., 1840), the value of which is greatly impaired by its obvious
partiality.

  The best account of Armstrong's career as minister to France and as
  secretary of war may be found in Henry Adams's _History of the United
  States, 1801-1817_ (9 vols., New York, 1889-1890).




ARMSTRONG, SAMUEL CHAPMAN (1839-1893), American soldier, philanthropist
and educator, was born on Maui, one of the Hawaiian Islands, on the 30th
of January 1839, his parents Richard and Clarissa Armstrong, being
American missionaries. He was educated at the Punahou school in
Honolulu, at Oahu College, into which the Punahou school developed in
1852, and at Williams College, Williamstown, Massachusetts, where he
graduated in 1862. He served in the Civil War, on the Union side, from
1862 to 1865, rising in the volunteer service to the regular rank of
colonel and the brevet rank of brigadier-general, and, after December
1863, acted as one of the officers of the coloured troops commanded by
General William Birney. In November 1865 he was honourably mustered out
of the volunteer service. His experience as commander of negro troops
had added to his interest, always strong, in the negroes of the south,
and in March 1866 he became superintendent of the Ninth District of
Virginia, under the Freedman's Bureau, with headquarters near Fort
Monroe. While in this position he became convinced that the only
permanent solution of the manifold difficulties which the freedmen
encountered lay in their moral and industrial education. He remained in
the educational department of the Bureau until this work came to an end
in 1872; though five years earlier, at Hampton, Virginia, near Fort
Monroe, he had founded, with the aid principally of the American
Missionary Association, an industrial school for negroes, Hampton
Institute, which was formally opened in 1868, and at the head of which
he remained until his death, there, on the 11th of May 1893. After 1878
Indians were also admitted to the Institute, and during the last fifteen
years of his life Armstrong took a deep interest in the "Indian
question." Much of his time after 1868 was spent in the Northern and
Eastern states, whither he went to raise funds for the Institute. See
_Samuel Chapman Armstrong, a Biographical Study_ (New York, 1904), by
his daughter, Edith Armstrong Talbot.

His brother, WILLIAM N. ARMSTRONG, was attorney-general in the cabinet
of the Hawaiian king Kalakaua I. He accompanied that monarch on a
prolonged foreign tour in 1881, visiting Japan, China, Siam, India,
Europe and the United States, and in 1904 published an amusing account
of the journey, called _Round the World with a King_.




ARMSTRONG, WILLIAM GEORGE ARMSTRONG, BARON (1810-1900), British
inventor, founder of the Elswick manufacturing works, was born on the
26th of November 1810, at Newcastle-on-Tyne, and was educated at a
school in Bishop Auckland. The profession which he adopted was that of a
solicitor, and from 1833 to 1847 he was engaged in active practice in
Newcastle as a member of the firm of Donkin, Stable & Armstrong. His
sympathies, however, were always with mechanical and scientific
pursuits, and several of his inventions date from a time anterior to his
final abandonment of the law. In 1841-1843 he published several papers
on the electricity of effluent steam. This subject he was led to study
by the experience of a colliery engineman, who noticed that he received
a sharp shock on exposing one hand to a jet of steam issuing from a
boiler with which his other hand was in contact, and the inquiry was
followed by the invention of the "hydro-electric" machine, a powerful
generator of electricity, which was thought worthy of careful
investigation by Faraday. The question of the utilization of water-power
had engaged his attention even earlier, and in 1839 he invented an
improved rotary water motor. Soon afterwards he designed a hydraulic
crane, which contained the germ of all the hydraulic machinery for which
he and Elswick were subsequently to become famous. This machine depended
simply on the pressure of water acting directly in a cylinder on a
piston, which was connected with suitable multiplying gear. In the first
example, which was erected on the quay at Newcastle in 1846, the
necessary pressure was obtained from the ordinary water mains of the
town; but the merits and advantages of the device soon became widely
appreciated, and a demand arose for the erection of cranes in positions
where the pressure afforded by the mains was insufficient. Of course
pressure could always be obtained by the aid of special reservoirs, but
to build these was not always desirable, or even practicable. Hence,
when in 1850 a hydraulic installation was required for a new ferry
station at New Holland, on the Humber estuary, the absence of water
mains of any kind, coupled with the prohibitive cost of a special
reservoir owing to the character of the soil, impelled him to invent a
fresh piece of apparatus, the "accumulator," which consists of a large
cylinder containing a piston that can be loaded to give any desired
pressure, the water being pumped in below it by a steam-engine or other
prime mover. This simple device may be looked upon as the crown of the
hydraulic system, since by its various modifications the installation of
hydraulic power became possible in almost any situation. In particular,
it was rendered practicable on board ship, and its application to the
manipulation of heavy naval guns and other purposes on warships was not
the least important of Armstrong's achievements.

The Elswick works were originally founded for the manufacture of this
hydraulic machinery, but it was not long before they became the
birthplace of a revolution in gunmaking; indeed, could nothing more be
placed to Armstrong's credit than their establishment, his name would
still be worthy of remembrance. Modern artillery dates from about 1855,
when Armstrong's first gun made its appearance. This weapon embodied all
the essential features which distinguish the ordnance of to-day from the
cannon of the middle ages--it was built up of rings of metal shrunk upon
an inner steel barrel; it was loaded at the breech; it was rifled; and
it threw, not a round ball, but an elongated projectile with ogival
head. The guns constructed on this principle yielded such excellent
results, both in range and accuracy, that they were adopted by the
British government in 1859, Armstrong himself being appointed engineer
of rifled ordnance and receiving the honour of knighthood. At the same
time the Elswick Ordnance Company was formed to manufacture the guns
under the supervision of Armstrong, who, however, had no financial
interest in the concern; it was merged in the Elswick Engineering Works
four years later. Great Britain thus originated a principle of gun
construction which has since been universally followed, and obtained an
armament superior to that possessed by any other country at that time.
But while there was no doubt as to the shooting capacities of these
guns, defects in the breech mechanism soon became equally patent, and in
a few years caused a reversion to muzzle-loading. Armstrong resigned his
position in 1863, and for seventeen years the government adhered to the
older method of loading, in spite of the improvements which experiment
and research at Elswick and elsewhere had during that period produced in
the mechanism and performance of heavy guns. But at last Armstrong's
results could no longer be ignored; and wire-wound breech-loading guns
were received back into the service in 1880. The use of steel wire for
the construction of guns was one of Armstrong's early ideas. He
perceived that to coil many turns of thin wire round an inner barrel was
a logical extension of the large hooped method already mentioned, and in
conjunction with I.K. Brunel, was preparing to put the plan to practical
test when the discovery that it had already been patented caused him to
abandon his intention, until about 1877. This incident well illustrates
the ground of his objection to the British system of patent law, which
he looked upon as calculated to stifle invention and impede progress;
the patentees in this case did not manage to make a practical success of
their invention themselves, but the existence of prior patents was
sufficient to turn him aside from a path which conducted him to valuable
results when afterwards, owing to the expiry of those patents, he was
free to pursue it as he pleased.

Lord Armstrong, who was raised to the peerage in 1887, was the author of
_A Visit to Egypt_ (1873), and _Electric Movement in Air and Water_
(1897), besides many professional papers. He died on the 27th of
December 1900, at Rothbury, Northumberland. His title became extinct,
but his grand-nephew and heir, W.H.A.F. Watson-Armstrong (b. 1863), was
in 1903 created Baron Armstrong of Bamburgh and Cragside.




ARMY (from Fr. _armée_, Lat. _armata_), a considerable body of men armed
and organized for the purpose of warfare on land (Ger. _Armee_), or the
whole armed force at the disposal of a state or person for the same
purpose (Ger. _Heer_ = host). The application of the term is sometimes
restricted to the permanent, active or regular forces of a state. The
history of the development of the army systems of the world is dealt
with in this article in sections 1 to 38, being followed by sections 39
to 59 on the characteristics of present-day armies. The remainder of the
article is devoted to sections on the history of the principal armies of
Europe, and that of the United States. For the Japanese Army see JAPAN,
and for the existing condition of the army in each country see under the
country heading.


GENERAL HISTORY

1. _Early Armies._--It is only with the evolution of the specially
military function in a tribe or nation, expressed by the separation of a
warrior-class, that the history of armies (as now understood) commences.
Numerous savage tribes of the present day possess military organizations
based on this system, but it first appears in the history of
civilization amongst the Egyptians. By the earliest laws of Egypt,
provision was made for the support of the warriors. The exploits of her
armies under the legendary Sesostris cannot be regarded as historical,
but it appears certain that the country possessed an army, capable of
waging war in a regular fashion, and divided thus early into separate
arms, these being chariots, infantry and archers. The systems of the
Assyrians and Babylonians present no particular features of interest,
save that horsemen, as distinct from charioteers, appear on the scene.
The first historical instance of a military organization resembling
those of modern times is that of the Persian empire.

2. _Persia._--Drawn from a hardy and nomadic race, the armies of Persia
at first consisted mainly of cavalry, and owed much of their success to
the consequent ease and rapidity of their movements. The warlike
Persians constantly extended their power by fresh conquests, and for
some time remained a distinctly conquering and military race, attaining
their highest power under Cyrus and Cambyses. Cyrus seems to have been
the founder of a comprehensive military organization, of which we gather
details from Xenophon and other writers. To each province was allotted a
certain number of soldiers as standing army. These troops, formed
originally of native Persians only, were called the king's troops. They
comprised two classes, the one devoted exclusively to garrisoning towns
and castles, the other distributed throughout the country. To each
province was appointed a military commander, responsible for the number
and efficiency of the troops in his district, while the civil governor
was answerable for their subsistence and pay. Annual musters were held,
either by the king in person or by generals deputed for the purpose and
invested with full powers. This organization seems to have fully
answered its original purpose, that of holding a vast empire acquired by
conquest and promptly repelling inroads or putting down insurrections.
But when a great foreign war was contemplated, the standing army was
augmented by a levy throughout the empire. The extent of the empire made
such a levy a matter of time, and the heterogeneous and unorganized mass
of men of all nations so brought together was a source of weakness
rather than strength. Indeed, the vast hosts over which the Greeks
gained their victories comprised but a small proportion of the true
Persians. The cavalry alone seems to have retained its national
character, and with it something of its high reputation, even to the
days of Alexander.

3. _Greece._--The Homeric armies were tribal levies of foot, armed with
spear, sword, bow, &c., and commanded by the chiefs in their
war-chariots. In historic times all this is changed. Greece becomes a
congeries of city-states, each with its own citizen-militia. Federal
armies and permanent troops are rare, the former owing to the
centrifugal tendency of Greek politics, the latter because the
"tyrannies," which must have relied very largely on standing armies to
maintain themselves, had ultimately given way to democratic
institutions. But the citizen-militia of Athens or Sparta resembled
rather a modern "nation in arms" than an auxiliary force. Service was
compulsory in almost all states, and as the young men began their career
as soldiers with a continuous training of two or three years, Hellenic
armies, like those of modern Europe, consisted of men who had undergone
a thorough initial training and were subsequently called up as required.
Cavalry, as always in the broken country of the Peloponnesus, was not of
great importance, and it is only when the theatre of Greek history is
extended to the plains of Thessaly that the mounted men become numerous.
In the 4th century the mainstay of Greek armies was the _hoplite_
([Greek: hoplitaes]), the heavy-armed infantryman who fought in the
_corps de bataille_; the light troops were men who could not provide the
full equipment of the hoplite, rather than soldiers trained for certain
special duties such as skirmishing. The fighting formation was that of
the _phalanx_, a solid corps of hoplites armed with long spears. The
armies were recruited for each war by calling up one or more classes of
men in reserve according to age. It was the duty and privilege of the
free citizen to bear arms; the slaves were rarely trusted with weapons.

4. _Sparta._--So much is common to the various states. In Sparta the
idea of the nation in arms was more thoroughly carried out than in any
other state in the history of civilization. In other states the
individual citizen often lived the life of a soldier, here the nation
lived the life of a regiment. Private homes resembled the "married
quarters" of a modern army; the unmarried men lived entirely in
barracks. Military exercises were only interrupted by actual service in
the field, and the whole life of a man of military age was devoted to
them. Under these circumstances, the Spartans maintained a practically
unchallenged supremacy over the armies of other Greek states; sometimes
their superiority was so great that, like the Spanish regulars in the
early part of the Dutch War of Independence, they destroyed their
enemies with insignificant loss to themselves. The surrender of a
Spartan detachment, hopelessly cut off from all assistance, and the
victory of a body of well-trained and handy light infantry over a closed
battalion of Spartiates were events so unusual as seriously to affect
the course of Greek history.

5. _Greek Mercenaries._--The military system of the 4th century was not
called upon to provide armies for continuous service on distant
expeditions. When, after the earlier campaigns of the Peloponnesian War,
the necessity for such expeditions arose, the system was often strained
almost to breaking point, (e.g. in the case of the Athenian expedition
to Syracuse), and ultimately the states of Greece were driven to choose
between unprofitable expenditure of the lives of citizens and recruiting
from other sources. Mercenaries serving as light troops, and
particularly as _peltasts_ (a new form of disciplined "light infantry")
soon appeared. The _corps de bataille_ remained for long the old phalanx
of citizen hoplites. But the heavy losses of many years told severely on
the resources of every state, and ultimately non-national
recruits--adventurers and soldiers of fortune, broken men who had lost
their possessions in the wars, political refugees, runaway slaves,
&c.--found their way even into the ranks of the hoplites, and Athens at
one great crisis (407) enlisted slaves, with the promise of citizenship
as their reward. The Arcadians, like the Scots and the Swiss in modern
history, furnished the most numerous contingent to the new professional
armies. A truly national army was indeed to appear once more in the
history of the Peloponnesus, but in the meantime the professional
soldier held the field. The old bond of strict citizenship once broken,
the career of the soldier of fortune was open to the adventurous Greek.
Taenarum and Corinth became regular _entrepôts_ for mercenaries. The
younger Cyrus raised his army for the invasion of Persia precisely as
the emperors Maximilian and Charles V. raised regiments of
_Landsknechte_--by the issue of recruiting commissions to captains of
reputation. This army became the famous Ten Thousand. It was a marching
city-state, its members not desperate adventurers, but men with the calm
self-respect of Greek civilization. On the fall of its generals, it
chose the best officers of the army to command, and obeyed implicitly.
Cheirisophus the Spartan and Xenophon the Athenian, whom they chose,
were not plausible demagogues; they were line officers, who, suddenly
promoted to the chief command under circumstances of almost overwhelming
difficulty, proved capable of achieving the impossible. The merit of
choosing such leaders is not the least title to fame of the Ten Thousand
mercenary Greek hoplites. About the same time Iphicrates with a body of
mercenary _peltasts_ destroyed a _mora_ or corps of Spartan hoplites
(391 B.C.).

6. _Epaminondas._--Not many years after this, Spartan oppression roused
the Theban revolt, and the Theban revolt became the Theban hegemony. The
army which achieved this under the leadership of Epaminondas, one of the
great captains of history, had already given proofs of its valour
against Xenophon and the Cyreian veterans. Still earlier it had won the
great victory of Delium (424 B.C.).

It was organized, as were the professional armies, on the accepted model
of the old armies, viz. the phalangite order, but the addition of
peltasts now made a Theban army, unlike the Spartans, capable of
operating in broken country as well as in the plain. The new tactics of
the phalanx, introduced by Epaminondas, embodied, for the first time in
the history of war, the modern principle of local superiority of force,
and suggested to Frederick the Great the famous "oblique order of
battle." Further, the cavalry was more numerous and better led than that
of Peloponnesian states. The professional armies had well understood the
management of cavalry; Xenophon's handbook of the subject is not without
value in the 20th century. In Greek armies the dearth of horses and the
consequent numerical weakness of the cavalry prevented the bold use of
the arm on the battlefield (see CAVALRY). But Thebes had always to deal
with nations which possessed numerous horsemen. Jason of Pherae, for
instance, put into the field against Thebes many thousands of Thessalian
horse; and thus at the battle of Tegyra in 375 the Theban cavalry under
Pelopidas, aided by the _corps d'êlite_ of infantry called the Sacred
Band, carried all before them. At Leuctra Epaminondas won a glorious
victory by the use of his "oblique order" tactics; the same methods
achieved the second great victory of Mantineia (362 B.c.) at which
Epaminondas fell. Pelopidas had already been slain in a battle against
the Thessalians, and there was no leader to carry on their work. But the
new Greek system was yet to gain its greatest triumphs under Alexander
the Great.

7. _Alexander._--The reforms of Alexander's father, Philip of Macedon,
may most justly be compared to those of Frederick William I. in Prussia.
Philip had lived at Thebes as a hostage, and had known Iphicrates,
Epaminondas and Pelopidas. He grafted the Theban system of tactics on to
the Macedonian system of organization. That the latter--a complete
territorial system--was efficient was shown by the fact that Philip's
blow was always struck before his enemies were ready to meet it. That
the new Greek tactics, properly used, were superior to the old was once
more demonstrated at Chaeronea (338 B.C.), where the Macedonian infantry
militia fought in phalanx, and the cavalry, led by the young Alexander,
delivered the last crushing blow. On his accession, like Frederick the
Great, Alexander inherited a well-trained and numerous army, and was not
slow to use it. The invasion of Asia was carried out by an army of the
Greek pattern, formed both of Hellenes and of non-Hellenes on an
exceedingly strong Macedonian nucleus. Alexander's own guard was
composed of picked horse and foot. The infantry of the line comprised
Macedonian and Greek hoplites, the Macedonians being subdivided into
heavy and medium troops. These fought in a grand phalanx, which was
subdivided into units corresponding to the modern divisions, brigades
and regiments, the fighting formation being normally a line of battalion
masses. The arm of the infantry was the 18-foot pike (_sarissa_). The
peltasts, Macedonian and Greek, were numerous and well trained, and
there was the usual mass of irregular light troops, bowmen, slingers,
&c. The cavalry included the Guard ([Greek: agaema]), a body of heavy
cavalry composed of chosen Macedonians, the line cavalry of Macedonia
([Greek: hetairoi]) and Thessaly, the numerous small contingents of the
Greek states, mercenary corps and light lancers for outpost work. The
final blow and the gathering of the fruits of victory were now for the
first time the work of the mounted arm. The solid phalanx was almost
unbreakable in the earlier stages of the battle, but after a long
infantry fight the horsemen had their chance. In former wars they were
too few and too poorly mounted to avail themselves of it, and decisive
victories were in consequence rarely achieved in battles of Greek versus
Greek. Under Epaminondas, and still more under Philip and Alexander, the
cavalry was strong enough for its new work. Battles are now ended by the
shock action of mounted men, and in Alexander's time it is noted as a
novelty that the cavalry carried out the pursuit of a beaten army. There
were further, in Alexander's army, artillerymen with a battering train,
engineers and departmental troops, and also a medical service, an
improvement attributed to Jason of Pherae. The victories of this army,
in close order and in open, over every kind of enemy and on every sort
of terrain, produced the Hellenistic world, and in that achievement the
history of Greek armies closes, for after the return of the greater part
of the Europeans to their homes the armies of Alexander and his
successors, while preserving much of the old form, become more and more
orientalized.

The decisive step was taken in 323, when a picked contingent of
Persians, armed mainly with missile weapons, was drafted into the
phalanx, in which henceforward they formed the middle ranks of each file
of sixteen men. But, like the third rank of Prussian infantry up to
1888, they normally fought as skirmishers in advance, falling into their
place behind the pikes of the Macedonian file-leaders only if required
for the decisive assault. The new method, of course, depended for
success on the steadiness of the thin three-deep line of Macedonians
thus left as the line of battle. Alexander's veterans were indeed to be
trusted, but as time went on, and little by little the war-trained
Greeks left the service, it became less and less safe to array the
Hellenistic army in this shallow and articulated order of battle. The
purely formal organization of the phalanx sixteen deep became thus the
actual tactical formation, and around this solid mass of 16,384 men
gathered the heterogeneous levies of a typical oriental army. Pyrrhus,
king of Epirus, retained far more of the tradition of Alexander's system
than his contemporaries farther east, yet his phalanx, comparatively
light and mobile as it was, achieved victories over the Roman legion
only at the cost of self-destruction. Even elephants quickly became a
necessary adjunct to Hellenistic armies.

8. _Carthage._--The military systems of the Jews present few features of
unusual interest. The expedient of calling out successive contingents
from the different tribes, in order to ensure continuity in military
operations, should, however, be noticed. David and Solomon possessed
numerous permanent troops which served as guards and garrisons; in
principle this organization was identical with that of the Persians, and
that of Europe in the 16th and 17th centuries. Particular interest
attaches to the Carthaginian military forces of the 3rd century B.C.
Rarely has any army achieved such renown in the short space of sixty
years (264-202 B.C.). Carthage produced a series of great generals,
culminating in Hannibal, who is marked out, even by the little that is
known of him, as the equal of Napoleon. But Napoleon was supported by a
national army, Hannibal and his predecessors were condemned to work with
armies of mercenaries. For the first time in the world's history war is
a matter with which the civil population has no concern. The merchants
of Carthage fought only in the last extremity; the wars in which their
markets were extended were conducted by non-national forces and directed
by the few Carthaginian citizens who possessed military aptitudes. The
civil authorities displayed towards their instruments a spirit of hatred
for which it is difficult to find a parallel. Unsuccessful leaders were
crucified, the mercenary soldiers were cheated of their pay, and broke
out into a mutiny which shook the empire of Carthage to its foundations.
But the magnetism of a leader's personality infused a corporate military
spirit into these heterogeneous Punic armies, and history has never
witnessed so complete an illustration of the power of pure and unaided
_esprit de corps_ as in the case of Hannibal's army in Italy, which,
composed as it was of Spaniards, Africans, Gauls, Numidians, Italians
and soldiers of fortune of every country, was yet welded by him into
thorough efficiency. The army of Italy was as great in its last fight at
Zama as the army of Spain at Rocroi; its victories of the Trebia,
Trasimene and Cannae were so appalling that, two hundred years later,
the leader to whom these soldiers devoted their lives was still, to a
Roman, the "dire" Hannibal.

In their formal organization the Carthaginian armies resembled the new
Greek model, and indeed they were created in the first instance by
Xanthippus, a Spartan soldier in the service of Carthage, who was called
upon to raise and train an army when the Romans were actually at the
gates of Carthage, and justified his methods in the brilliant victory of
Tunis (255 B.C.). For the solid Macedonian phalanx of 16,000 spears
Xanthippus substituted a line of heavy battalions equal in its aggregate
power of resistance to the older form, and far more flexible. The
triumphs of the cavalry arm in Hannibal's battles far excelled those of
Alexander's horsemen. Hannibal chose his fighting ground whenever
possible with a view to using their full power, first to defeat the
hostile cavalry, then to ride down the shaken infantry masses, and
finally to pursue _au fond_. At Cannae, the greatest disaster ever
suffered by the Romans, the decisive blow and the slaughter were the
work of Hannibal's line cavalry, the relentless pursuit that of his
light horse. But a professional long-service army has always the
greatest difficulty in making good its losses, and in the present case
it was wholly unable to do so. Even Hannibal failed at last before the
sustained efforts of the citizen army of Rome.

9. _Roman Army under the Republic._--The earliest organization of the
Roman army is attributed to Romulus, who formed it on the tribal
principle, each of the three tribes contributing its contingent of horse
and foot. But it was to Servius Tullius that Rome owed, traditionally,
the complete classification of her citizen-soldiers. For the details of
the Roman military system, see ROMAN ARMY. During the earlier period of
Roman history the army was drawn entirely from the first classes of the
population, who served without pay and provided their own arms and
armour. The wealthiest men (_equites_) furnished the cavalry, the
remainder the infantry, while the poorer classes either fought as light
troops or escaped altogether the privilege and burden of military
service. Each "legion" of 3000 heavy foot was at first formed in a solid
phalanx. The introduction of the elastic and handy three-line formation
with intervals (similar in many respects to Alexander's) was brought
about by the Gallic wars, and is attributed to M. Furius Camillus, who
also, during the siege of Veii, introduced the practice of paying the
soldiers, and thus removed the chief obstacle to the employment of the
poorer classes. The new order of battle was fully developed in the
Pyrrhic Wars, and the typical army of the Republic may be taken as
dating from the latter part of the 3rd century B.C. The legionary was
still possessed of a property qualification, but it had become
relatively small. An annual levy was made at Rome to provide for the
campaign of the year. Discipline was severe, and the rewards appealed as
much to the soldier's honour as to his desire of gain. A legion now
consisted of three lines (_Hastati, Principes, Triarii_), each line
composed of men of similar age and experience, and was further
subdivided into thirty "maniples," each of two "centuries." The normal
establishment of 300 cavalry, 3000 heavy and 1200 light infantry was
still maintained, though in practice these figures were often exceeded.
In place of the old light-armed and somewhat inferior _rorarii_, the new
_velites_ performed light infantry duties (211 B.C.), at the same time
retaining their place in the maniples, of which they formed the last
ranks (compare the Macedonian phalanx as reorganized in 323, § 7 above).
The 300 cavalry of the legion were trained for shock action. But the
strength of the Roman army lay in the heavy legionary infantry of
citizens. The thirty maniples of each legion stood in three lines of
battle, but the most notable point of their formation was that each
maniple stood by itself on its own small manoeuvre-area, free to take
ground to front or flank. To the Roman legion was added a legion of
allies, somewhat differently organized and possessing more cavalry, and
the whole force was called a "double legion" or briefly a "legion." A
consul's army consisted nominally of two double legions, but in the
Punic wars military exigencies rather than custom dictated the numbers
of the army, and the two consuls at Cannae (216 B.C.) commanded two
double consular armies, or eight double legions.

10. _Characteristics of the Roman Army._--Such in outline was the Roman
military organization at the time when it was put to the severe test of
the Second Punic War. Its elements were good, its military skill
superior to that of any other army of ancient history, while its
organization was on the whole far better than any that had gone before.
The handy formation of maniples at open order was unique in the ancient
world, and it did not reappear in history up to the advent of Gustavus
Adolphus. In this formation, in which everything was entrusted to the
skill of subordinates and the individual courage of the rank and file,
the Romans met and withstood with success every type of impact, from the
ponderous shock of the Macedonian phalanx and the dangerous rush of
Celtic savages to the charge of elephants. Yet it was no particular
virtue in the actual form employed that carried the Roman arms to so
many victories. There would have been positive danger in thus
articulating the legion had it been composed of any but the most
trustworthy soldiers. To swiftness and precision of manoeuvre they added
a dogged obstinacy over which nothing but overwhelming disaster
prevailed. It is, therefore, not unnatural to ask wherein the system
which produced these soldiers failed, as it did within a century after
the battle of Zama. The greatest defect was the want of a single
military command. The civil magistrates of Rome were _ex officio_
leaders of her armies, and though no Roman officer lacked military
training, the views of a consul or praetor were almost invariably
influenced by the programme of his political party. When, as sometimes
happened, the men under their command sided in the political differences
of their leaders, all real control came to an end. The soldiers of the
Republic hardly ever forgot that they were citizens with voting powers;
they served as a rule only during a campaign; and, while there could be
little question as to their patriotism and stubbornness, they lacked
almost entirely that _esprit de corps_ which is found only amongst the
members of a body having a permanent corporate existence. Thus they had
the vices as well as the virtues of a nation in arms, and they fell
still further short of the ideal because of the dubious and precarious
tenure of their generals' commands. The great officers were usually sent
home at the end of a campaign, to be replaced by their elected
successors, and they showed all the hesitation and fear of
responsibility usually found in a temporary commander. Above all, when
two armies, each under its own consul or praetor, acted together, the
command was either divided or exercised on alternate days.

11. _Roman Empire._--The essential weaknesses of militia forces and the
accidental circumstances of that under consideration led, even in
earlier times, to the adoption of various expedients which for a time
obviated the evils to which allusion has been made. But a change of far
greater importance followed the final exploits of the armies of the old
system. The increasing dominions of the Republic, the spread of wealth
and luxury, the gradual decadence of the old Roman ideas, all tended to
produce an army more suited to the needs of the newer time than the
citizen militia of the 3rd century. Permanent troops were a necessity;
the rich, in their newly acquired dislike of personal effort, ceased to
bear their share in the routine life of the army, and thus the
proletariat began to join the legions with the express intention of
taking to a military career. The actual change from the old _régime_ to
the new was in the main the work of Gaius Marius. The urgent demand for
men at the time of the Teutonic invasions caused the service to be
thrown open to all Roman citizens irrespective of _census_. The new
territories furnished cavalry, better and more numerous than the old
_equites_, and light troops of various kinds to replace the _velites_.
Only the heavy foot remained a purely Italian force, and the spread of
the Roman citizenship gradually abolished the distinction between a
Roman and an allied legion. The higher classes had repeatedly shown
themselves unwilling to serve under plebeians (e.g. Varro and
Flaminius); Marius preferred to have as soldiers men who did not despise
him as an inferior. Under all these influences for good or for evil, the
standing army was developed in the first half of the 1st century B.C.
The tactical changes in the legion indicate its altered character. The
small maniples gave way to heavy "cohorts," ten cohorts forming the
legion; as in the Napoleonic wars, light and handy formations became
denser and more rigid with the progressive decadence in _moral_ of the
rank and file. It is more significant still that in the days of Marius
the annual oath of allegiance taken by the soldier came to be replaced
by a personal vow, taken once and for all, of loyalty to the general.
_Ubi bene, ibi patria_ was an expression of the new spirit of the army,
and Caesar had but to address his men as _quirites_ (civilians) to quell
a mutiny. _Hastati, principes_ and _triarii_ were now merely expressions
in drill and tactics. But perhaps the most important of all these
changes was the growth of regimental spirit and tradition. The legions
were now numbered throughout the army, and the Tenth Legion has remained
a classic instance of a "crack" corps. The _moral_ of the Roman army was
founded no longer on patriotism, but on professional pride and _esprit
de corps_.

With this military system Rome passed through the era of the Civil Wars,
at the end of which Augustus found himself with forty-five legions on
his hands. As soon as possible he carried through a great
reorganization, by which, after ruthlessly rejecting inferior elements,
he obtained a smaller picked force of twenty-five legions, with numerous
auxiliary forces. These were permanently stationed in the frontier
provinces of the Empire, while Italy was garrisoned by the Praetorian
cohorts, and thus was formed a regular long-service army, the strength
of which has been estimated at 300,000 men. But these measures,
temporarily successful, produced in the end an army which not only was
perpetually at variance with the civil populations it was supposed to
protect, but frequently murdered the emperors to whom it had sworn
allegiance when it raised them to the throne. The evil fame of the
Italian cohorts has survived in the phrase "praetorianism" used to imply
a venal military despotism. The citizens gradually ceased to bear arms,
and the practice of self-mutilation became common. The inevitable
_dénouement_ was delayed from time to time by the work of an energetic
prince. But the ever-increasing inefficiency and factiousness of the
legions, and the evanescence of all military spirit in the civil
population, made it easy for the barbarians, when once the frontier was
broken through, to overrun the decadent Empire. The end came when the
Gothic heavy horse annihilated the legions of Valens at Adrianople (A.D.
378).

There was now no resource but to take the barbarians into Roman pay.
Under the name of _foederati_, the Gothic mercenary cavalry played the
most conspicuous part in the succeeding wars of the Empire, and began
the reign of the heavy cavalry arm, which lasted for almost a thousand
years. Even so soon as within six years of the death of Valens twenty
thousand Gothic horse decided a great battle in the emperor's favour.
These men, however, became turbulent and factious, and it was not until
the emperor Leo I. had regenerated the native Roman soldier that the
balance was maintained between the national and the hired warrior. The
work of this emperor and of his successors found eventual expression in
the victories of Belisarius and Narses, in which the Romans, in the new
role of horse-archers, so well combined their efforts with those of the
_foederati_ that neither the heavy cavalry of the Goths nor the phalanx
of Frankish infantry proved to be capable of resisting the imperial
forces. At the battle of Casilinum (553) Roman foot-archers and infantry
bore no small part of the work. It was thus in the Eastern Empire that
the Roman military spirit revived, and the Byzantine army, as evolved
from the system of Justinian, became eventually the sole example of a
fully organized service to be found in medieval history.

12. _The "Dark Ages."_--In western Europe all traces of Roman military
institutions quickly died out, and the conquerors of the new kingdoms
developed fresh systems from the simple tribal levy. The men of the
plains were horsemen, those of marsh and moor were foot, and the four
greater peoples retained these original characteristics long after the
conquest had been completed. In organization the Lombards and Franks,
Visigoths and English scarcely differed. The whole military population
formed the mass of the army, the chiefs and their personal retainers the
_élite_. The Lombards and the Visigoths were naturally cavalry; the
Franks and the English were, equally naturally, infantry, and the armies
of the Merovingian kings differed but little from the English _fyrd_
with which Offa and Penda fought their battles. But in these nations the
use of horses and armour, at first confined to kings and great chiefs,
gradually spread downwards to the ever-growing classes of _thegns,
comites_, &c. Finally, under Charlemagne were developed the general
lines of the military organization which eventually became feudalism.
For his distant wars he required an efficient and mobile army. Hence
successive "capitularies" were issued dealing with matters of
recruiting, organization, discipline and field service work. Very
noticeable are his system of forts (_burgi_) with garrisons, his
military train of artillery and supplies, and the reappearance of the
ancient principle that three or four men should equip and maintain one
of themselves as a warrior. These and other measures taken by him tended
to produce a strong veteran army, very different in efficiency from the
tumultuary levy, to which recourse was had only in the last resort.
While war (as a whole) was not yet an art, fighting (from the
individual's point of view) had certainly become a special function;
after Charlemagne's time the typical feudal army, composed of
well-equipped cavalry and ill-armed peasantry serving on foot, rapidly
developed. Enemies such as Danes and Magyars could only be dealt with by
mounted men who could ride round them, compel them to fight, and
annihilate them by the shock of the charge; consequently the practice of
leaving the infantry in rear, and even at home, grew up almost as a part
of the feudal system of warfare. England, however, sought a different
remedy, and thus diverged from the continental methods. This remedy was
the creation of a fleet, and, the later Danish wars being there carried
out, not by bands of mounted raiders, but by large armies of military
settlers, infantry retained its premier position in England up to the
day of Hastings. Even the _thegns_, who there, as abroad, were the
mainstay of the army, were heavy-armed infantry. The only contribution
made by Canute to the military organization of England was the retention
of a picked force of _hus carles_ (household troops) when the rest of
the army with which he had conquered his realm was sent back to
Scandinavia. At Hastings, the forces of Harold consisted wholly of
infantry. The English array was composed of the king and his personal
friends, the _hus carles_, and the contingents of the _fyrd_ under the
local _thegns_; though better armed, they were organized after the
manner of their forefathers. On that field there perished the best
infantry in Europe, and henceforward for three centuries there was no
serious rival to challenge the predominance of the heavy cavalry.

13. _The Byzantines_ (cf. article ROMAN EMPIRE, LATER).--While the west
of Europe was evolving feudalism, the Byzantine empire was acquiring an
army and military system scarcely surpassed by any of those of antiquity
and not often equalled up to the most modern times. The _foederati_
disappeared after the time of Justinian, and by A.D. 600 the army had
become at once professional and national. For generations, regiments had
had a corporate existence. Now brigades and divisions also appeared in
war, and, somewhat later, in peace likewise. With the disappearance of
the barbarians, the army became one homogeneous service, minutely
systematized, and generally resembling an army in the modern sense of
the word. The militia of the frontier districts performed efficiently
the service of surveillance, and the field forces of disciplined
regulars were moved and employed in accordance with well-reasoned
principles of war; their maintenance was provided for by a scutage,
levied, in lieu of service, on the central provinces of the empire.
Later, a complete territorial system of recruiting and command was
introduced. Each "theme" (military district) had its own regular
garrison, and furnished a field division of some 5000 picked troopers
for a campaign in any theatre of war. Provision having been made in
peace for a depot system, all weakly men and horses could be left
behind, and local duties handed over to second line troops; thus the
field forces were practically always on a war footing. Beside the
"themes" under their generals, there were certain districts on the
frontiers, called "clissuras," placed under chosen officers, and
specially organized for emergency service. The corps of officers in the
Byzantine army was recruited from the highest classes, and there were
many families (e.g. that from which came the celebrated Nicephorus
Phocas) in which soldiering was the traditional career. The rank and
file were either military settlers or men of the yeoman class, and in
either case had a personal interest in the safety of the theme which
prevented friction between soldiers and civilians. The principal arm
was, of course, cavalry, and infantry was employed only in special
duties. Engineer, train and medical services were maintained in each
theme. Of the ensemble of the Byzantine army it has been said that "the
art of war as it was understood at Constantinople ... was the only
system of real merit existing. No western nation could have afforded
such a training to its officers till the 16th or ... 17th century." The
vitality of such an army remained intact long after the rest of the
empire had begun to decay, and though the old army practically ceased to
exist after the great disaster of Manzikert (1071), the barbarians and
other mercenaries who formed the new service were organized, drilled and
trained to the same pitch of military efficiency. Indeed the greatest
tactical triumph of the Byzantine system (Calavryta, 1079) was won by an
army already largely composed of foreigners. But mercenaries in the end
developed praetorianism, as usual, and at last they actually mutinied,
in the presence of the enemy, for higher pay (Constantinople, 1204).

14. _Feudalism._--From the military point of view the change under
feudalism was very remarkable. For the first time in the history of
western Europe there appears, in however rough a form, a systematized
obligation to serve in arms, regulated on a territorial basis. That army
organization in the modern sense--organization for tactics and
command--did not develop in any degree commensurate with the development
of military administration, was due to the peculiar characteristics of
the feudal system, and the virtues and weaknesses of medieval armies
were its natural outcome. Personal bravery, the primary virtue of the
soldier, could not be wanting in the members of a military class, the
_métier_ of which was war and manly exercises. Pride of caste, ambition
and knightly emulation, all helped to raise to a high standard the
individual efficiency of the feudal cavalier. But the gravest faults of
the system, considered as an army organization, were directly due to
this personal element. Indiscipline, impatience of superior control, and
dangerous knight-errantry, together with the absence of any chain of
command, prevented the feudal cavalry from achieving results at all
proportionate to the effort expended and the potentialities of a force
with so many soldierly qualities. If such defects were habitually found
in the best elements of the army--the feudal tenants and subtenants who
formed the heavy cavalry arm--little could be expected of the despised
and ill-armed foot-soldiery of the levy. The swift raids of the Danes
and others (see above) had created a precedent which in French and
German wars was almost invariably followed. The feudal levy rarely
appeared at all on the battlefield, and when it was thus employed it was
ridden down by the hostile knights, and even by those of its own party,
without offering more than the feeblest resistance. Above all, one
disadvantage, common to all classes of feudal soldiers, made an army so
composed quite untrustworthy. The service which a king was able to exact
from his feudatories was so slight (varying from one month to three in
the year) that no military operation which was at all likely to be
prolonged could be undertaken with any hope of success.

15. _Medieval Mercenaries._--It was natural, therefore, that a sovereign
who contemplated a great war should employ mercenaries. These were
usually foreigners, as practically all national forces served on feudal
terms. While the greater lords rode with him on all his expeditions, the
bulk of his army consisted of professional soldiers, paid by the levy of
_scutage_ imposed upon the feudal tenantry. There had always been
soldiers of fortune. William's host at Hastings contained many such men;
later, the Flemings who invaded England in the days of Henry I. sang to
each other--

  "Hop, hop, Willeken, hop! England is mine and thine,"--

and from all the evidence it is clear that in earlier days the hired
soldiers were adventurers seeking lands and homes. But these men usually
proved to be most undesirable subjects, and sovereigns soon began to pay
a money wage for the services of mercenaries properly so called. Such
were the troops which figured in English history under Stephen. Such
troops, moreover, formed the main part of the armies of the early
Plantagenets. They were, as a matter of course, armed and armoured like
the knights, with whom they formed the men-at-arms (_gendarmes_) of the
army. Indeed, in the 11th and 12th centuries, the typical army of France
or the Empire contains a relatively small percentage of "knights,"
evidence of which fact may be found even in so fanciful a romance as
_Aucassin and Nicolete_. It must be noted, however, that not all the
mercenaries were heavy cavalry; the Brabançon pikeman and the Italian
crossbowman (the value of whose weapon was universally recognized) often
formed part of a feudal army.

16. _Infantry in Feudal Times._--These mercenary foot soldiers came as a
rule from districts in which the infantry arm had maintained its ancient
predominance in unbroken continuity. The cities of Flanders and Brabant,
and those of the Lombard plain, had escaped feudal interference with
their methods of fighting, and their burgher militia had developed into
solid bodies of heavy-armed pikemen. These were very different from
those of the feudal levy, and individual knightly bravery usually failed
to make the slightest impression on a band of infantry held together by
the stringent corporate feeling of a trade-gild. The more adventurous of
the young men, like those of the Greek cities, took service abroad and
fought with credit in their customary manner. The reign of the
"Brabançon" as a mercenary was indeed short, but he continued, in his
own country, to fight in the old way, and his successor in the
profession of arms, the Genoese crossbowman, was always highly valued.
In England, moreover, the infantry of the old _fyrd_ was not suffered to
decay into a rabble of half-armed countrymen, and in France a burgher
infantry was established by Louis VI. under the name of the _milice des
communes_, with the idea of creating a counterpoise to the power of the
feudatories. Feudalism, therefore, as a military system, was
short-lived. Its limitations had always necessitated the employment of
mercenaries, and in several places a solid infantry was coming into
existence, which was drawn from the sturdy and self-respecting middle
classes, and in a few generations was to prove itself a worthy opponent
not only to the knight, but to the professional man-at-arms.

17. _The Crusades._--It is an undoubted fact that the long wars of the
Crusades produced, directly, but slight improvement in the feudal armies
of Europe. In the East large bodies of men were successfully kept under
arms for a considerable period, but the application of crusading methods
to European war was altogether impracticable. In the first place, much
of the permanent force of these armies was contributed by the military
orders, which had no place in European political activities. Secondly,
enthusiasm mitigated much of the evil of individualism. In the third
place, there was no custom to limit the period of service, since the
Crusaders had undertaken a definite task and would merely have
stultified their own purpose in leaving the work only half done. There
were, therefore, sharp contrasts between crusading and European armies.
In the latter, systematization was confined to details of recruiting; in
the armies of the Cross, men were from time to time obtained by the
accident of religious fervour, while at the same time continuous service
produced a relatively high system of tactical organization. Different
conditions, therefore, produced different methods, and crusading unity
and discipline could not have been imposed on an ordinary army, which
indeed with its paid auxiliaries was fairly adequate for the somewhat
desultory European wars of that time. The statement that the Crusaders
had a direct influence on the revival of infantry is hardly susceptible
of convincing demonstration, but it is at any rate beyond question that
the social and economic results of the Crusades materially contributed
to the downfall of the feudal knight, and in consequence to a rise in
the relative importance of the middle classes. Further, not only were
the Crusading knights compelled by their own want of numbers to rely on
the good qualities of the foot, but the foot themselves were the
"survivors of the fittest," for the weakly men died before they reached
the Holy Land, and with them there were always knights who had lost
their horses and could not obtain remounts. Moreover, when "simple" and
"gentle" both took the Cross there could be no question of treating
Crusaders as if they were the mere feudal levy. But the little direct
influence of the whole of these wars upon military progress in Europe is
shown clearly enough by the fact that at the very close of the Crusades
a great battle was lost through knight-errantry of the true feudal type
(Mansurah).

18. _The Period of Transition_ (1290-1490).--Besides the infantry
already mentioned, that of Scotland and that of the German cities fought
with credit on many fields. Their arm was the pike, and they were always
formed in solid masses (called in Scotland, _schiltrons_). The basis of
the medieval commune being the suppression of the individual in the
social unit, it was natural that the burgher infantry should fight "in
serried ranks and in better order" than a line of individual knights,
who, moreover, were almost powerless before walled cities. But these
forces lacked offensive power, and it was left for the English archers,
whose importance dates from the latter years of the 13th century, to
show afresh, at Creçy, Poitiers and Agincourt, the value of missile
action. When properly supported by other arms, they proved themselves
capable of meeting both the man-at-arms and the pikeman. The greatest
importance attaches to the evolution of this idea of mutual support and
combination. Once it was realized, war became an art, and armies became
specially organized bodies of troops of different arms. It cannot be
admitted, indeed, as has been claimed, that the 14th century had a
scientific system of tactics, or that the campaign of Poitiers was
arranged by the French "general staff." Nevertheless, during this
century armies were steadily coming to consist of expert soldiers, to
the exclusion of national levies and casual mercenaries. It is true
that, by his system of "indents," Edward III. of England raised national
armies of a professional type, but the English soldier thus enrolled,
when discharged by his own sovereign, naturally sought similar
employment elsewhere. This system produced, moreover, a class of
unemployed soldiers, and these, with others who became adventurers from
choice or necessity, and even with foreign troops, formed the armies
which fought in the Wars of the Roses--armies which differed but
slightly from others of the time. The natural result of these wars was
to implant a hatred of soldiery in the heart of a nation which had
formerly produced the best fighting men in Europe, a hatred which left a
deep imprint on the constitutional and social life of the people. In
France, where Joan of Arc passed like a meteor across the military
firmament, the idea of a national regular army took a practical form in
the middle of the 15th century. Still, the forces thus brought into
existence were not numerous, and the soldier of fortune, in spite of
such experiences of his methods as those of the Wars of the Roses, was
yet to attain the zenith of his career.

19. _The Condottieri._--The immediate result of this confused period of
destruction and reconstruction was the _condottiere_, who becomes
important about 1300. In Italy, where the _condottieri_ chiefly
flourished, they were in demand owing to the want of feudal cavalry, and
the inability of burgher infantry to undertake wars of aggression. The
"free companies" (who served in great numbers in France and Spain as
well as in Italy) were "military societies very much like trade-gilds,"
which (so to speak) were hawked from place to place by their managing
directors, and hired temporarily by princes who needed their services.
Unlike the older hirelings, they were permanently organized, and thus,
with their experience and discipline, became the best troops in
existence. But the carrying on of war "in the spirit of a handicraft"
led to bloodless battles, indecisive campaigns, and other unsatisfactory
results, and the reign of the _condottieri_ proper was over by 1400,
subsequent free companies being raised on a more strictly national
basis. With all their defects, however, they were the pioneers of modern
organization. In the inextricable tangle of old and new methods which
constitutes the military system of the 15th century, it is possible to
discern three marked tendencies. One is the result of a purely military
conception of the now special art of war, and its exposition as an art
by men who devote their whole career to it. The second is the idea of a
national army, resulting from many social, economical and political
causes. The third is the tendency towards minuter organization and
subdivision within the army. Whereas the individual feudatories had
disliked the close supervision of a minor commander, and their army had
in consequence remained always a loosely-knit unit, the men who made war
into an art belonged to small bands or corps, and naturally began their
organization from the lower units. Herein, therefore, was the germ of
the regimental system of the present day.

20. _The Swiss._--The best description of a typical European army at the
opening of the new period of development is that of the French army in
Italy in 1494, written by Paolo Giovio. He notes with surprise that the
various corps of infantry and cavalry are distinct, the usual practice
of the time being to combine one lancer, one archer, one groom, &c.,
into a small unit furnished and commanded by the lancer. There were
Swiss and German infantry, armed with pike and halbert, with a few
"shot," who marched in good order to music. There were the heavy
men-at-arms (_gendarmes_), accompanied as of old by mounted archers,
who, however, now fought independently. There were, further, Gascon
slingers and crossbowmen, who had probably acquired, from contact with
Spain, some of the lightness and dash of their neighbours. The artillery
train was composed of 140 heavy pieces and a great number of lighter
guns; these were then and for many generations thereafter a special arm
outside the military establishments (see ARTILLERY). In all this the
only relic of the days of Creçy is the administrative combination of the
men-at-arms and the horse archers, and even this is no longer practised
in action. The most important element in the army is the heavy infantry
of Swiss and Germans. The Swiss had for a century past gradually
developed into the most formidable troops of the day. The wars of Zizka
(q.v.) in Bohemia (1420) materially assisted in the downfall of the
heavy cavalry; and the victories of the Swiss, beginning with Sempach
(1382), had by 1480 proved that their solid battalions, armed with the
long pike and the halberd, were practically invulnerable to all but
missile and shock action combined. By fortune of war, they never met the
English, who had shown the way to deal with the _schiltron_ as early as
Falkirk. So great was their confidence against ordinary troops, that on
one occasion (1444) they detached 1600 men to engage 50,000. It was
natural that a series of victories such as Granson, Morat and Nancy
should place them in the forefront of the military nations of Europe.
The whole people devoted itself thereupon to professional soldiering,
particularly in the French service, and though their monopoly of
mercenary employment lasted a short time only, they continued to furnish
regiments to the armies of France, Spain and the Pope up to the most
modern times. But their efficiency was thoroughly sapped by the growth
of a mutinous and insubordinate spirit, the memory of which has survived
in the proverb _Point d'argent, point de Suisse_, and inspired
Machiavelli with the hatred of mercenaries which marks every page of his
work on the art of war. One of their devices for extorting money was to
appear at the muster with many more soldiers than had been contracted
for by their employers, who were forced to submit to this form of
blackmail. At last the French, tired of these caprices, inflicted on the
Swiss the crushing defeat of Marignan (q.v.), and their tactical system
received its death-blow from the Spaniards at Pavia (1525).

21. _The Landsknechts._--The modern army owes far more of its
organization and administrative methods to the Landsknechts ("men of the
country," as distinct from foreigners) than to the Swiss. As the latter
were traditionally the friends of France, so these Swabians were the
mainstay of the Imperial armies, though both were mercenaries. The
emperor Maximilian exerted himself to improve the new force, which soon
became the model for military Europe. A corps of Landsknechts was
usually raised by a system resembling that of "indents," commissions
being issued by the sovereign to leaders of repute to enlist men. A
"colour" (_Fähnlein_) numbered usually about 400 men, a corps consisted
of a varying number of colours, some corps having 12,000 men. From these
troops, with their intense pride, _esprit de corps_ and comradeship,
there has come down to modern times much of present-day etiquette,
interior economy and "regimental customs"--in other words, nearly all
that is comprised in the "regimental" system. Amongst the most notable
features of their system were the functions of the provost, who combined
the modern offices of provost-marshal, transport and supply officer, and
canteen manager; the disciplinary code, which admitted the right of the
rank and file to judge offences touching the honour of the regiment; and
the women who, lawfully or unlawfully attached to the soldiers, marched
with the regiment and had a definite place in its corporate life. The
conception of the regiment as the home of the soldier was thus realized
in fact.

22. _The Spanish Army._--The tendencies towards professional soldiering
and towards subdivision had now pronounced themselves. At the same time,
while national armies, as dreamed of by Machiavelli; were not yet in
existence, two at least of the powers were beginning to work towards an
ideal. This ideal was an army which was entirely at the disposal of its
own sovereign, trained to the due professional standard, and organized
in the best way found by experience to be applicable to military needs.
On these bases was formed the old Spanish army which, from Pavia (1525)
to Rocroi (1643), was held by common consent to be the finest service in
existence. Almost immediately after emerging from the period of internal
development, Spain found herself obliged to maintain an army for the
Italian wars. In the first instance this was raised from amongst
veterans of the war of Granada, who enlisted for an indefinite time.
Probably the oldest line regiments in Europe are those descended from
the famous _tercios_, whose formation marks the beginning of military
establishments, just as the Landsknechts were the founders of military
manners and customs. The great captains who led the new army soon
assimilated the best points of the Swiss system, and it was the Spanish
army which evolved the typical combination of pike and musket which
flourished up to 1700. Outside the domain the tactics, it must be
credited with an important contribution to the science of army
organization, in the depot system, whereby the _tercios_ in the field
were continually "fed" and kept up to strength. The social position of
the soldier was that of a gentleman, and the young nobles (who soon came
to prefer the _tercios_ to the cavalry service) thought it no shame,
when their commands were reduced, to "take a pike" in another regiment.
The provost and his gallows were as much in evidence in a Spanish camp
as in one of Landsknechts, but the comradeship and _esprit de corps_ of
a _tercio_ were the admiration of all contemporary soldiers. With all
its good qualities, however, this army was not truly national; men soon
came from all the various nations ruled by the Habsburgs, and the
soldier of fortune found employment in a _tercio_ as readily as
elsewhere. But it was a great gain that corps, as such, were fully
recognized as belonging to the government, however shifting the
_personnel_ might be. Permanence of regimental existence had now been
attained, though the universal acceptance and thorough application of
the principle were still far distant. During the 16th century, the
French regular army (originating in the _compagnies d'ordonnance_ of
1445), which was always in existence, even when the Swiss and
_gendarmes_ were the best part of the field forces, underwent a
considerable development, producing amongst other things the military
terminology of the present day. But the wars of religion effectually
checked all progress in the latter part of the century, and the European
reputation of the French army dates only from the latter part of the
Thirty Years' War.

23. _The Sixteenth Century._--The battle of St Quentin (1557) is usually
taken as the date from which the last type of a purely mercenary _arm_
(as distinct from _corps_) comes into prominence. "Brabançon" or "Swiss"
implied pikemen without further qualification, the new term "Reiter"
similarly implied mercenary cavalry fighting with the pistol. Heavy
cavalry could disperse arquebusiers and musketeers, but it was helpless
against solid masses of pikemen; the Reiters solved the difficulty by
the use of the pistol. They were well armoured and had little to fear
from musket-balls. Arrayed in deep squadrons, therefore, they rode up to
the pikes with impunity, and fired methodically _dans le tas_, each rank
when it had discharged its pistols filing to the rear to reload. These
Reiters were organized in squadrons of variable strength, and recruited
in the same manner as were the Landsknechts. They were much inferior,
however, to the latter in their discipline and general conduct, for
cavalry had many more individual opportunities of plunder than the foot,
and the rapacity and selfishness of the Reiters were consequently in
marked contrast to the good order and mutual helpfulness in the field
and in quarters which characterized the regimental system of the
Landsknechts.

24. _Dutch System._--The most interesting feature of the Dutch system,
which was gradually evolved by the patriots in the long War of
Independence, was its minute attention to detail. In the first years of
the war, William the Silent had to depend, for field operations, on
mutinous and inefficient mercenaries and on raw countrymen who had
nothing but devotion to oppose to the discipline and skill of the best
regular army in the world. Such troops were, from the point of view of
soldiers like Alva, mere _canaille_, and the ludicrous ease with which
their armies were destroyed (as at Jemmingen and Mookerheyde), at the
cost of the lives of perhaps a dozen Spanish veterans, went far to
justify this view. But, fortunately for the Dutch, their fortified towns
were exceedingly numerous, and the individual bravery of
citizen-militia, who were fighting for the lives of every soul within
their walls, baffled time after time all the efforts of Alva's men. In
the open, Spanish officers took incredible liberties with the enemy;
once, at any rate, they marched for hours together along submerged
embankments with hostile vessels firing into them from either side.
Behind walls the Dutch were practically a match for the most furious
valour of the assailants.

The insurgents' first important victory in the open field, that of
Rymenant near Malines (1577), was won by the skill of "Bras de Fer," de
la Noue, a veteran French general, and the stubbornness of the English
contingent of the Dutch army--for England, from 1572 onwards, sent out
an ever-increasing number of volunteers. This battle was soon followed
by the great defeat of Gembloux (1578), and William the Silent was not
destined to see the rise of the Dutch army. Maurice of Nassau was the
real organizer of victory. In the wreck of all feudal and burgher
military institutions, he turned to the old models of Xenophon,
Polybius, Aelian and the rest. Drill, as rigid and as complicated as
that of the Macedonian phalanx, came into vogue, the infantry was
organized more strictly into companies and regiments, the cavalry into
troops or cornets. The _Reiter_ tactics of the pistol were followed by
the latter, the former consisted of pikes, halberts and "shot." This
form was generally followed in central Europe, as usual, without the
spirit, but in Holland it was the greater trustworthiness of the rank
and file that allowed of more flexible formations, and here we no longer
see the foot of an army drawn up, as at Jemmingen, in one solid and
immovable "square." In their own country and with the system best suited
thereto, the Dutch, who moreover acquired greater skill and steadiness
day by day, maintained their ground against all the efforts of a Parma
and a Spinola. Indeed, it is the best tribute to the vitality of the
Spanish system that the inevitable _débâcle_ was so long delayed. The
campaigns of Spinola in Germany demonstrated that the "Dutch" system, as
a system for general use, was at any rate no better than the system over
which it had locally asserted its superiority, and the spirit, and not
the form, of Maurice's practice achieved the ultimate victory of the
Netherlanders. In the Thirty Years' War, the unsuccessful armies of
Mansfeld and many others were modelled on the Dutch system,--the forces
of Spinola, of Tilly and of Wallenstein, on the Spanish. In other words,
these systems as such meant little; the discipline and spirit behind
them, everything. Yet the contribution made by the Dutch system to the
armies of to-day was not small; to Maurice and his comrades we owe,
first the introduction of careful and accurate drill, and secondly the
beginnings of an acknowledged science of war, the groundwork of both
being the theory and practice of antiquity. The present method of
"forming fours" in the British infantry is ultimately derived from
Aelian, just as the first beats of the drums in a march represent the
regimental calls of the Landsknechts, and the depots and the drafts for
the service battalions date from the Italian wars of Spain.

25. _The Thirty Years' War._--Hitherto all armies had been raised or
reduced according to the military and political situation of the moment.
Spain had indeed maintained a relatively high effective in peace, but
elsewhere a few personal guards, small garrisons, and sometimes a small
regular army to serve as a nucleus, constituted the only permanent
forces kept under arms by sovereigns, though, in this era of perpetual
wars, armies were almost always on a war footing. The expense of
maintenance at that time practically forbade any other system than this,
called in German _Werbe-system_, a term for which in English there is no
nearer equivalent than "enlistment" or "levy" system. It is worth
noticing that this very system is identical in principle with that of
the United States at the present day, viz., a small permanent force,
inflated to any required size at the moment of need. The exceptional
conditions of the Dutch army, indeed, secured for its regiments a long
life; yet when danger was finally over, a large portion of the army was
at once reduced. The history of the British army from about 1740 to 1820
is a most striking, if belated, example of the _Werbe-system_ in
practice. But the Thirty Years' War naturally produced an unusual
continuity of service in corps raised about 1620-1630, and fifty years
later the principle of the standing army was universally accepted. It is
thus that the senior regiments of the Prussian and Austrian armies date
from about 1630. At this time an event took place which was destined to
have a profound influence on the military art. Gustavus Adolphus of
Sweden landed in Germany with an army better organized, trained and
equipped than any which had preceded it. This army, by its great victory
of Breitenfeld (1631), inaugurated the era of "modern" warfare, and it
is to the system of Gustavus that the student must turn for the initial
point of the progressive development which has produced the armies of
to-day. Spanish and Dutch methods at once became as obsolete as those of
the Landsknechts.

26. _The Swedish Army._--The Swedish army was raised by a carefully
regulated system of conscription, which was "preached in every pulpit in
Sweden." There were indeed enlisted regiments of the usual type, and it
would seem that Gustavus obtained the best even of the soldiers of
fortune. But the national regiments were raised on the _Indelta_ system.
Each officer and man, under this scheme, received a land grant within
the territorial district of his corps, and each of these districts
supplied recruits in numbers proportionate to its population. This
curious mixture of feudal and modern methods produced the best elements
of an army, which, aided by the tactical and technical improvements
introduced by Gustavus, proved itself incomparably superior to its
rivals. Of course the long and bloody campaigns of 1630-34 led to the
admission of great numbers of mercenaries even into the Swedish corps;
and German, Scottish and other regiments figured largely, not only in
the armies of Duke Bernhard and his successors, but in the army of
Gustavus' own lifetime. As early as 1632 one brigade of the army was
distinguished by the title "Swedish," as alone containing no foreigners.
Yet the framework was much the same as it had been in 1630. The
battle-organization of two lines and two wings, which was typical of the
later "linear" tactics, began to supplant the system of the _tercios_.
How cumbrous the latter had become by 1630 may be judged from any
battle-plan of the period, and notably from that of Lützen. Gustavus'
cavalry fought four or three deep only, and depended as little as
possible on the pistol. The work of riding down the pikes was indeed
rendered easier by the improved tactical handiness of the musketeers,
but it was fiery leading which alone compelled victory, for there were
relatively few Swedish horse and many squadrons of Germans and others,
who in themselves were far less likely to charge boldly than the
"Pappenheimers" and other crack corps of the enemy. The infantry was of
the highest class, and only on that condition could loose and supple
lines be trusted to oppose the solid _tercios_ of Tilly and Wallenstein.
Cumbrous indeed these were, but by long practice they had acquired no
small manoeuvring power, of which Breitenfeld affords a striking
example. The Swedes, however, completely surpassed them. The progress
thus made may be gauged from the fact that under Gustavus the largest
closed body of infantry was less than 300 strong. Briefly, the genius of
a great commander, the ardour of a born cavalry leader, better arms and
better organization, carried the Swedes to the end of their career of
victory, but how personal was the _vis viva_ which inspired the army was
quickly noticeable after the death of Gustavus. Even a Bernhard could,
in the end, evoke no more heroism from a Swedish army than from any
other, and the real Swedish troops fought their last battle at
Nördlingen (1634). After this, little distinguished the "Swedish" forces
from the general mass of the armies of the time, save their system, to
which, and to its influence on the training of such leaders as Banér,
Torstensson and Wrangel, all their later victories were due. So much of
Gustavus' work survived even the carnage of Nördlingen, and his system
always obtained better results, even with the heterogeneous troops of
this later period, than any other of the time.

27. _The English Civil War_ (see GREAT REBELLION).--The armies on either
side which, about the same time, were fighting out the constitutional
quarrel in England were essentially different from all those of the
continent, though their formal organization was similar to that of the
Swedes. The military expression of a national conscience had appeared
rarely indeed in the Thirty Years' War, which was a means of livelihood
for, rather than an assertion of principle by, those who engaged in it.
In England, on the other hand, there were no mercenaries, and the whole
character of the operations was settled by the burning desire of a true
"nation in arms" to decide at once, by the arbitrament of battle, the
vital points at issue. A German critic (Fritz Hoenig) has indicated
Worcester as the prototype of Sedan; at any rate, battles of this kind
invariably resulted in failure when entrusted to a "standing" army of
the 18th century. But the national armies disappeared at the end of the
struggle; after the Restoration, English political aims became, so far
as military activity was concerned, similar in scope and execution to
those of the continent; and the example of Cromwell and the "New Model,"
which might have revolutionized military Europe, passed away without
having any marked influence on the armies of other nations.

28. _Standing Armies._--Nine years after Nördlingen, the old Spanish
army fought its last and most honourable battle at Rocroi. Its
conquerors were the new French troops, whose victory created as great a
sensation as Pavia and Creçy had done. Infusing a new military spirit
into the formal organization of Gustavus' system, the French army was
now to "set the fashion" for a century. France had been the first power
to revive regular forces, and the famous "Picardie" regiment disputed
for precedence even with the old _tercios_. The country had emerged from
the confusion of the past century with the foreign and domestic strength
of a practically absolute central power. The Fronde continued the
military history of the army from the end of the Thirty Years' War; and
when the period of consolidation was finally closed, all was prepared
for the introduction of a "standing army," practically always at war
strength, and entirely at the disposal of the sovereign. The
reorganization of the military establishments by Louvois may be taken as
the formal date at which standing armies came into prominence (see
historical sketch of the French army below). Other powers rapidly
followed the lead of France, for the defects of enlisted troops had
become very clear, and the possession of an army always ready for war
was an obvious advantage in dynastic politics. The French proprietary
system of regiments, and the general scheme of army administration which
replaced it, may be taken as typical of the armies of other great powers
in the time of Louis XIV.

29. _Character of the Standing Armies._--A peculiar character was from
the first imparted to the new organizations by the results of the Thirty
Years' War. A well-founded horror of military barbarity had the effect
of separating the soldier from the civilian by an impassable gulf. The
drain of thirty years on the population, resources and finances of
almost every country in middle Europe, everywhere limited the size of
the new armies; and the decision in 1648 of all questions save those of
dynastic interest dictated the nature of their employment. The best
soldiers of the time pronounced in favour of small field armies, for in
the then state of communications and agriculture large forces proved in
practice too cumbrous for good work. In every country, therefore, the
army took the form of a professional body, nearly though not quite
independent of extra recruits for war, set apart entirely from all
contact with civil life, rigidly restricted as to conduct in peace and
war, and employed mostly in the "maintenance" of their superiors'
private quarrels. Iron discipline produced splendid tenacity in action,
and wholesale desertion at all times. In the Seven Years' War, for
instance, the Austrians stated one-fifth of their total loss as due to
desertion, and Thackeray's _Barry Lyndon_ gives no untrue picture of the
life of a soldier under the old régime. Further, since men were costly,
rigid economy of their lives in action, and minute care for their
feeding and shelter on the march, occupied a disproportionate amount of
the attention of their generals. Armies necessarily moved slowly and
remained concentrated to facilitate supply and to check desertion, and
thus, when a commander had every unit of his troops within a short ride
of his headquarters, there was little need for intermediate general
officers, and still less for a highly trained staff.

30. _Organization in the 18th Century._--All armies were now almost
equal in fighting value, and war was consequently reduced to a set of
rules (not principles), since superiority was only to be gained by
methods, not by men. Soldiers such as Marlborough, who were superior to
these jejune prescriptions, met indeed with uniform success. But the
methods of the 18th century failed to receive full illustration, save by
the accident of a great captain's direction, even amidst the
circumstances for which they were designed. It is hardly to be wondered
at, therefore, that they failed, when forced by a new phase of
development to cope with events completely beyond their element. The
inner organization was not markedly altered. Artillery was still outside
the normal organization of the line of battle, though in the period
1660-1740 much was done in all countries to improve the material, and
above all to turn the _personnel_ into disciplined soldiers. Cavalry was
organized in regiments and squadrons, and armed with sabre and pistol.
Infantry had by 1703 begun to assume its three-deep line formation and
the typical weapons of the arm, musket and bayonet. Regiments and
battalions were the units of combat as well as organization. In the
fight the company was entirely merged in the higher unit, but as an
administrative body it still remained. As for the higher organization,
an army consisted simply of a greater or less number of battalions and
squadrons, without, as a rule, intermediate commands and groupings. The
army was arrayed as a whole in two lines of battle, with the infantry in
the centre and the cavalry on the flanks, and an advanced guard; the
so-called reserve consisting merely of troops not assigned to the
regular commands. It was divided, for command in action, into right and
left wings, both of cavalry and infantry, of each line. This was the
famous "linear" organization, which in theory produced the maximum
effort in the minimum time, but in practice, handled by officers whose
chief care was to avoid the expenditure of effort, achieved only
negative results. To see its defects one need only suppose a battalion
of the first line hard pressed by the enemy. A battalion of the second
line was directly behind it, but there was no authority, less than that
of the wing commander, which could order it up to support the first. All
the conditions of the time were opposed to tactical subdivision, as the
term is now understood. That the 18th century did not revive
_schiltrons_ was due to the new fire tactics, to which everything but
control was sacrificed. This "control," as has been said, implied not so
much command as police supervision. But far beyond any faults of
organization and recruiting, the inherent vice of these armies was, as
Machiavelli had pointed out two centuries previously, and as Prussia was
to learn to her cost in 1806, that once they were thoroughly defeated,
the only thing left to be done was to make peace at once, since there
was no other armed force capable of retrieving a failure.

31. _Frederick the Great._--The military career of Frederick the Great
is very different from those of his predecessors. With an army organized
on the customary system, and trained and equipped, better indeed, but
still on the same lines as those of his rivals, the king of Prussia
achieved results out of all proportion to those imagined by contemporary
soldiers. It is to his campaigns, therefore, that the student must refer
for the real, if usually latent, possibilities of the army of the 18th
century. The prime secret of his success lay in the fact that he was his
own master, and responsible to no superior for the uses to which he put
his men. This position had never, since the introduction of standing
armies, been attained by any one, even Eugene and Leopold of Dessau
being subject to the common restriction; and with this extraordinary
advantage over his opponents, Frederick had further the firmness and
ruthless energy of a great commander. Prussia, moreover, was more
strictly organized than other countries, and there was relatively little
of that opposition of local authorities to the movement of troops which
was conspicuous in Austria. The military successes of Prussia,
therefore, up to 1757, were not primarily due to the system and the
formal tactics, but were the logical outcome of greater energy in the
leading, and less friction in the administration, of her armies. But the
conditions were totally different in 1758-1762, when the full force of
the alliance against Prussia developed itself in four theatres of war.
Frederick was driven back to the old methods of making war, and his men
were no longer the soldiers of Leuthen and Hohenfriedberg. If discipline
was severe before, it was merciless then; the king obtained men by force
and fraud from every part of Germany, and had both to repress and to
train them in the face of the enemy. That under such conditions, and
with such men, the weaker party finally emerged triumphant, was indeed a
startling phenomenon. Yet its result for soldiers was not the production
of the national army, though the dynastic forces had once more shown
themselves incapable of compassing decisive victories, nor yet the
removal of the barrier between army and people, for the operations of
Frederick's recruiting agents made a lasting impression, and, further,
large numbers of men who had thought to make a profession of arms were
turned adrift at the end of the war. On the contrary, all that the great
and prolonged _tour de force_ of these years produced was a tendency,
quite in the spirit of the age, to make a formal science out of the art
of war. Better working and better methods were less sought after than
systematization of the special practices of the most successful
commanders. Thus Frederick's methods, since 1758 essentially the same as
those of others, were taken as the basis of the science now for the
first time called "strategy," the fact that his opponents had also
practised it without success being strangely ignored. Along with this
came a mania for imitation. Prussian drill, uniforms and hair-powder
were slavishly copied by every state, and for the next twenty years, and
especially when the war-trained officers and men had left active
service, the purest pedantry reigned in all the armies of Europe,
including that of Prussia. One of the ablest of Frederick's subordinates
wrote a book in which he urged that the cadence of the infantry step
should be increased by one pace per minute. The only exceptions to the
universal prevalence of this spirit were in the Austrian army, which was
saved from atrophy by its Turkish wars, and in a few British and French
troops who served in the American War of Independence. The British
regiments were sent to die of fever in the West Indies; when the storm
of the French Revolution broke over Europe, the Austrian army was the
only stable element of resistance.

32. _The French Revolution._--Very different were the armies of the
Revolution. Europe, after being given over to professional soldiers for
five hundred years, at last produced the modern system of the "nation in
arms." The French volunteers of 1792 were a force by which the routine
generals of the enemy, working with instruments and by rules designed
for other conditions, were completely puzzled, and France gained a short
respite. The year 1793 witnessed the most remarkable event that is
recorded in the history of armies. Raw enthusiasm was replaced, after
the disasters and defections which marked the beginning of the campaign,
by a systematic and unsparing conscription, and the masses of men thus
enrolled, inspired by ardent patriotism and directed by the ferocious
energy of the Committee of Public Safety, met the disciplined formalists
with an opposition before which the attack completely collapsed. It was
less marvellous in fact than in appearance that this should be so. Not
to mention the influence of pedantry and senility on the course of the
operations, it may be admitted that Frederick and his army at their best
would have been unable to accomplish the downfall of the now thoroughly
roused French. Tactically, the fire of the regulars' line caused the
Revolutionary levies to melt away by thousands, but men were ready to
fill the gaps. No complicated supply system bound the French to
magazines and fortresses, for Europe could once more feed an army
without convoys, and roads were now good and numerous. No fear of
desertion kept them concentrated under canvas, for each man was
personally concerned with the issue. If the allies tried to oppose them
on an equal front, they were weak at all points, and the old
organization had no provision for the working of a scattered army. While
ten victorious campaigns had not carried Marlborough nearer to Paris
than some marches beyond the Sambre, two campaigns now carried a French
army to within a few miles of Vienna. It was obvious that, before such
forces and such mobility, the old system was doomed, and with each
successive failure the old armies became more discouraged. Napoleon's
victories finally closed this chapter of military development, and by
1808 the only army left to represent it was the British. Even to this
the Peninsular War opened a line of progress, which, if different in
many essentials from continental practice, was in any case much more
than a copy of an obsolete model.

33. _The Conscription._--In 1793, at a moment when the danger to France
was so great as to produce the rigorous emergency methods of the Reign
of Terror, the combined enemies of the Republic had less than 300,000
men in the field between Basel and Dunkirk. On the other hand, the call
of the "country in danger" produced more than four times this number of
men for the French armies within a few months. Louis XIV., even when all
France had been awakened to warlike enthusiasm by a similar threat
(1709), had not been able to put in the field more than one-fifth of
this force. The methods of the great war minister Carnot were enforced
by the ruthless committee, and when men's lives were safer before the
bayonets of the allies than before the civil tribunals at home, there
was no difficulty in enlisting the whole military spirit of France.
There is therefore not much to be said as to the earliest application of
the conscription, at least as regards its formal working, since any
system possessing elasticity would equally have served the purpose. In
the meanwhile, the older plans of organization had proved inadequate for
dealing with such imposing masses of men. Even with disciplined soldiers
they had long been known as applicable only to small armies, and the
deficiencies of the French, with their consequences in tactics and
strategy, soon produced the first illustrations of modern methods.
Unable to meet the allies in the plain, they fought in broken ground and
on the widest possible front. This of course produced decentralization
and subdivision; and it became absolutely necessary that each detachment
on a front of battle 30 m. long (e.g. Stokach) should be properly
commanded and self-sufficing. The army was therefore constituted in a
number of _divisions_, each of two or more brigades with cavalry and
artillery sufficient for its own needs. It was even more important that
each divisional general, with his own staff, should be a real commander,
and not merely the supervisor of a section of the line of battle, for he
was almost in the position that a commander-in-chief had formerly held.
The need of generals was easily supplied when there was so wide a field
of selection. For the allies the mere adoption of new forms was without
result, since it was contrary both to tradition and to existing
organization. The attempts which were made in this direction did not
tend to mitigate the evils of inferior numbers and _moral_. The French
soon followed up the divisional system with the further organization of
groups of divisions under specially selected general officers; this
again quickly developed into the modern army corps.

34. _Napoleon._--Revolutionary government, however, gave way in a few
years to more ordinary institutions, and the spirit of French politics
had become that of aggrandizement in the name of liberty. The ruthless
application of the new principle of masses had been terribly costly, and
the disasters of 1799 reawakened in the mass of the people the old
dislike of war and service. Even before this it had been found necessary
to frame a new act, the famous law proposed by General Jourdan (1798).
With this the conscription for general service began. The legal term of
five years was so far exceeded that the service came to be looked upon
as a career, or servitude, for life; it was therefore both unavoidable
and profitable to admit substitutes. Even in 1806 one quarter of
Napoleon's conscripts failed to come up for duty. The _Grande Armée_
thus from its inception contained elements of doubtful value, and only
the tradition of victory and the 50% of veterans still serving aided the
genius of Napoleon to win the brilliant victories of 1805 and 1806. But
these veterans were gradually eliminated by bloodshed and service
exposure, and when, after the peace of Tilsit, "French" armies began to
be recruited from all sorts of nations, decay had set in. As early as
1806 the emperor had had to "anticipate" the conscription, that is, call
up the conscripts before their time, and by 1810 the percentage of
absentees in France had grown to about 80, the remainder being largely
those who lacked courage to oppose the authorities. Finally, the armies
of Napoleon became masses of men of all nations fighting even more
unwillingly than the armies of the old régime. Little success attended
the emperor's attempt to convert a "nation in arms" into a great
dynastic army. Considered as such, it had even fewer elements of
solidity than the standing armies of the 18th century, for it lacked the
discipline which had made the regiments of Frederick invincible. After
1812 it was attacked by huge armies of patriots which possessed
advantages of organization and skilful direction that the _levée en
masse_ of 1793 had lacked. Only the now fully developed genius and
magnificent tenacity of Napoleon staved off for a time the _débâcle_
which was as inevitable as had been that of the old régime.

35. _The Grande Armée._--In 1805-1806, when the older spirit of the
Revolution was already represented by one-half only of French soldiers,
the actual steadiness and manoeuvring power of the _Grande Armée_ had
attained its highest level. The army at this time was organized into
brigades, divisions and corps, the last-named unit being as a rule a
marshal's command, and always completed as a small army with all the
necessary arms and services. Several such corps (usually of unequal
strength) formed the army. The greatest weakness of the organization,
which was in other respects most pliant and adaptable, was the want of
good staff-officers. The emperor had so far cowed his marshals that few
of them could take the slightest individual responsibility, and the
combatant staff-officers remained, as they had been in the 18th century,
either confidential clerks or merely gallopers. No one but a Napoleon
could have managed huge armies upon these terms; in fact the marshals,
from Berthier downwards, generally failed when in independent commands.
Of the three arms, infantry and cavalry regiments were organized in much
the same way as in Frederick's day, though tactical methods were very
different, and discipline far inferior. The greatest advance had taken
place in the artillery service. Field and horse batteries, as organized
and disciplined units, had come into general use during the
Revolutionary wars, and the division, corps and army commanders had
always batteries assigned to their several commands as a permanent and
integral part of the fighting troops. Napoleon himself, and his
brilliant artillery officers Sénarmont and Drouot, brought the arm to
such a pitch of efficiency that it enabled him to win splendid victories
almost by its own action. As a typical organization we may take the III.
corps of Marshal Davout in 1806. This was formed of the following
troops:--

  Cavalry brigade--General Vialannes--three regiments, 1538 men. Corps
  artillery, 12 guns.

  1st Division--General Morand--five infantry regiments in three
  brigades, 12 guns, 10,820 men.

  2nd Division--General Friant--five regiments in three brigades, 8
  guns, 8758 men.

  3rd Division--General Gudin--four regiments in three brigades, 12
  guns, 9077 men.

A comparison of this _ordre de bataille_ with that of a modern army
corps will show that the general idea of corps organization has
undergone but slight modification since the days of Napoleon. More
troops allotted to departmental duties, and additional engineers for the
working of modern scientific aids, are the only new features in the
formal organization of a corps in the 20th century. Yet the spirit of
1806 and that of 1906 were essentially different, and the story of the
development of this difference through the 19th century closes for the
present the history of progress in tactical organization.

36. _The Wars of Liberation._--The Prussian defeat at Jena was followed
by a national surrender so abject as to prove conclusively the eternal
truth, that a divorce of armies from national interests is completely
fatal to national well-being. But the oppression of the victors soon
began to produce a spirit of ardent patriotism which, carefully directed
by a small band of able soldiers, led in the end to a national uprising
of a steadier and more lasting kind than that of the French Revolution.
Prussia was compelled, by the rigorous treaty of peace, to keep a small
force only under arms, and circumstances thus drove her into the path of
military development which she subsequently followed. The stipulation of
the treaty was evaded by the _Krümper_ system, by which men were passed
through the ranks as hastily as possible and dismissed to the reserve,
their places being taken by recruits. The regimental establishments were
therefore mere _cadres_, and the _personnel_, recruited by universal
service with few exemptions, ever-changing. This system depended on the
willingness of the reserves to come up when called upon, and the
arrogance of the French was quite sufficient to ensure this. The
_dénouement_ of the Napoleonic wars came too swiftly for the full
development of the armed strength of Prussia on these lines; and at the
outbreak of the Wars of Liberation a newly formed _Landwehr_ and
numerous volunteer corps took the field with no more training than the
French had had in 1793. Still, the principles of universal service
(_allgemeine Wehrpflicht_) and of the army reserve were, for the first
time in modern history, systematically put into action, and modern
military development has concerned itself more with the consolidation of
the _Krümper_ system than with the creation of another. The début of the
new Prussian army was most unsuccessful, for Napoleon had now attained
the highest point of soldierly skill, and managed to inflict heavy
defeats on the allies. But the Prussians were not discouraged; like the
French in 1793 they took to broken ground, and managed to win combats
against all leaders opposed to them except Napoleon himself. The Russian
army formed a solid background for the Prussians, and in the end Austria
joined the coalition. Reconstituted on modern lines, the Austrian army
in 1813, except in the higher leading, was probably the best-organized
on the continent. After three desperate campaigns the Napoleonic régime
came to an end, and men felt that there would be no such struggle again
in their lifetime. Military Europe settled down into grooves along which
it ran until 1866. France, exhausted of its manhood, sought a field for
military activities in colonial wars waged by long-service troops. The
conscription was still in force, but the citizens served most
unwillingly, and substitution produced a professional army, which as
usual became a dynastic tool. Austria, always menaced with foreign war
and internal disorder, maintained the best army in Europe. The British
army, though employed far differently, retained substantially the
Peninsular system.

37. _European Armies 1815-1870._--The events of the period 1815-1859
showed afresh that such long-service armies were incomparably the best
form of military machine for the purpose of giving expression to a
hostile "view" (not "feeling"). Austrian armies triumphed in Italy,
French armies in Spain, Belgium, Algeria, Italy and Russia, British in
innumerable and exacting colonial wars. Only the Prussian forces
retained the characteristics of the levies of 1813, and the enthusiasm
which had carried these through Leipzig and the other great battles was
hardly to be expected of their sons, ranged on the side of despotism in
the troubled times of 1848-1850. But the principle was not permitted to
die out. The Bronnzell-Olmütz incident of 1850 (see SEVEN WEEKS' WAR)
showed that the organization of 1813 was defective, and this was altered
in spite of the fiercest opposition of all classes. Soon afterwards, and
before the new Prussian army proved itself on a great battlefield, the
American Civil War, a fiercer struggle than any of those which followed
it in Europe, illustrated the capabilities and the weaknesses of
voluntary-service troops. Here the hostile "view" was replaced by a
hostile "feeling," and the battles of the disciplined enthusiasts on
either side were of a very different kind from those of contemporary
Europe. But, if the experiences of 1861-1865 proved that armies
voluntarily enlisted "for the war" were capable of unexcelled feats of
endurance, they proved further that such armies, whose discipline and
training in peace were relatively little, or indeed wholly absent, were
incapable of forcing a swift decision. The European "nation in arms,"
whatever its other failings, certainly achieved its task, or failed
decisively to do so, in the shortest possible time. Only the special
characteristics of the American theatre of war gave the Union and
Confederate volunteers the space and time necessary for the creation of
armies, and so the great struggle in North America passed without
affecting seriously the war ideas and preparations of Europe. The
weakness of the staff work with which both sides were credited helped
further to confirm the belief of the Prussians in their system, and in
this instance they were justified by the immense superiority of their
own general staff to that of any army in existence. It was in this
particular that a corps of 1870 differed so essentially from a corps of
Napoleon's time. The formal organization had not been altered save as
the varying relative importance of the separate arms had dictated. The
almost intangible spirit which animates the members of a general staff,
causes them not merely to "think"--that was always in the
quartermaster-general's department--but to "think alike," so that a few
simple orders called "directives" sufficed to set armies in motion with
a definite purpose before them, whereas formerly elaborate and detailed
plans of battle had to be devised and distributed in order to achieve
the object in view. A comparison of the number of orders and letters
written by a marshal and by his chief of staff in Napoleon's time with
similar documents in 1870 indicates clearly the changed position of the
staff. In the _Grande Armée_ and in the French army of 1870 the officers
of the general staff were often absent entirely from the scene of
action. In Prussia the new staff system produced a far different
result--indeed, the staff, rather than the Prussian military system, was
the actual victor of 1870. Still, the system would probably have
conquered in the end in any case, and other nations, convinced by events
that their departure from the ideal of 1813, however convenient
formerly, was no longer justified, promptly copied Prussia as exactly,
and, as a matter of fact, as slavishly, as they had done after the Seven
Years' War.

38. _Modern Developments._--Since 1870, then, with the single exception
of Great Britain, all the major European powers have adopted the
principle of compulsory short service with reserves. Along with this has
come the fullest development of the territorial system (see below). The
natural consequence therefore of the heavy work falling upon the
shoulders of the Prussian officer, who had to instruct his men, was, in
the first place, a general staff of the highest class, and in the
second, a system of distributing the troops over the whole country in
such a way that the regiments were permanently stationed in the district
in which they recruited and from which they drew their reserves. Prussia
realized that if the reservists were to be obtained when required the
unit must be strictly localized; France, on the contrary, lost much time
and spent much trouble, in the mobilization of 1870, in forwarding the
reservists to a regiment distant, perhaps, 300 m. The Prussian system
did not work satisfactorily at first, for until all the district
staff-officers were trained in the same way there was great inequality
in the efficiency of the various army corps, and central control, before
the modern development of railways, was relatively slight. Further, the
mobilization must be completed, or nearly so, before concentration
begins, and thus an active professional army, always at war strength,
might annihilate the frontier corps before those in the interior were
ready to move. But the advantages far outweighed the defects of the
system, and, such professional armies having after 1870 disappeared,
there was little to fear. Everywhere, therefore, save in Great Britain
(for at that time the United States was hardly counted as a great
military power, in spite of its two million war-trained veterans in
civil life), the German model was followed, and is now followed, with
but slight divergence. The period of reforms after the Prussian model
(about 1873-1890) practically established the military systems which are
treated below as those of the present day. The last quarter of the
century witnessed a very great development of military forces, without
important organic changes. The chief interest to the student of this
period lies in the severe competition between the great military powers
for predominance in numbers, expressed usually in the reduction of the
period of service with the colours to a minimum. The final results of
this cannot well be predicted: it is enough to say that it is the
_Leitmotiv_ in the present stage in the development of armies. Below
will be found short historical sketches of various armies of the present
day which are of interest in respect of their historical development.
Details of existing forces are given in articles dealing with the
several states to which they belong. Historical accounts of the armies
of Japan and of Egypt will be found in the articles on those states. The
Japanese wars of 1894-95 and 1904-5 contributed little to the history of
military organization as a pure science. The true lessons of this war
were the demonstration of the wide applicability of the German methods,
upon which exclusively the Japanese army had formed itself, and still
more the first illustration of the new moral force of nationalities as
the decisive factor. The form of armies remained unaltered. Neither the
events of the Boer War of 1899-1902 nor the Manchurian operations were
held by European soldiers to warrant any serious modifications in
organization. It is to the moral force alluded to above, rather than to
mere technical improvements, that the best soldiers of Europe, and
notably those of the French general staff (see the works of General H.
Bonnal), have of late years devoted their most earnest attention.


PRESENT-DAY ARMIES

39. The main principles of all military organization as developed in
history would seem to be national recruiting and allegiance, distinctive
methods of training and administration, continuity of service and
general homogeneity of form. The method of raising men is of course
different in different states. In this regard armies may conveniently be
classed as voluntarily enlisted, levied or conscript, and militia,
represented respectively by the forces of Great Britain, Germany and
Switzerland. It must not be forgotten, however, that voluntary troops
may be and are maintained even in states in which the bulk of the army
is levied by compulsion, and the simple militia obligation of defending
the country is universally recognized.

40. _Compulsory Service._--Universal liability to service (_allgemeine
Wehrpflicht_) draws into the active army all, or nearly all, the men of
military age for a continuous period of short service, after which they
pass successively to the reserve, the second and the third line troops
(_Landwehr, Landsturm_, &c.). In this way the greatest number of
soldiers is obtained at the cheapest rate and the number of trained men
in reserve available to keep the army up to strength is in theory that
of the able-bodied manhood of the country. In practice the annual levy
is, however, not exhaustive, and increased numerical strength is
obtained by reducing the term of colour-service to a minimum. This may
be less in a hard-worked conscript army than in one which depends upon
the attractions of the service to induce recruits to join. In conscript
armies, training for war is carried out with undeviating rigour. In
these circumstances the recruits are too numerous and the time available
is too limited for the work of training to be committed to a few
selected instructors, and every officer has therefore to instruct his
own men. The result is usually a corps of officers whose capacity is
beyond question, while the general staff is composed of men whose
ability is above a high general average. As to the rank and file, the
men taken for service are in many respects the best of the nation, and
this superiority is progressively enhanced, since increase of population
is not often accompanied by a corresponding increase in the military
establishments. In Germany in 1905, it is stated, nearly half the
contingent was excused from serving in peace time, over and above the
usual numbers exempted or medically rejected. The financial aspect of
compulsory service may be summed up in a few words. The state does not
offer a wage, the pay of the soldier is a mere trifle, and, for a given
expenditure, at least three times as many men may be kept under arms as
under any known "voluntary" system. Above all, the state has at its
disposal for war an almost inexhaustible supply of trained soldiers.
This aspect of compulsory service has indeed led its admirers sometimes
to sacrifice quality to quantity; but, provided always that the regular
training is adequate, it may be admitted that there is no limit to the
numbers which are susceptible of useful employment. There are, however,
many grave defects inherent in all armies raised by compulsory levy (see
CONSCRIPTION, for a discussion of the chief economical and social
questions involved). Most of the advantages of universal service result,
not from the compulsory enlistment, but from the principle of short
service and reserves. But the cost of maintaining huge armies of the
modern European type on the voluntary system would be entirely
prohibitive, and those nations which have adopted the _allgemeine
Wehrpflicht_ have done so with full cognizance of the evil as well as of
the good points of the system.

The chief of these evils is the doubtful element which exists in all
such armies. Under the merciless discipline of the old regime the most
unwilling men feared their officers more than the enemy. Modern short
service, however, demands the good-will of all ranks and may fail
altogether to make recalcitrants into good soldiers, and it may be taken
for granted that every conscript army contains many men who cannot be
induced to fight. Herein lies the justification of the principle of
"masses," and of reduced colour-service; by drawing into the ranks the
maximum number of men, the government has an eventual residuum of the
bravest men in the nation left in the ranks. What has been said of the
officers of these armies cannot be applied to the non-commissioned
officers. Their promotion is necessarily rapid, and the field of
selection is restricted to those men who are willing to re-engage, i.e.
to serve beyond their compulsory term of two or three years. Many men do
so to avoid the struggles of civil life, and such "fugitive and
cloistered virtue" scarcely fosters the moral strength required for
command. As the best men return to civil life, there is no choice but to
promote inferior men, and the latter, when invested with authority, not
infrequently abuse it. Indeed in some armies the soldier regards his
officer chiefly as his protector from the rapacity or cruelty of his
sergeant or corporal. A true short-service army is almost incapable of
being employed on peace service abroad; quite apart from other
considerations, the cost of conveying to and from home annually
one-third or one-half of the troops would be prohibitive. If, as must be
the case, a professional force is maintained for oversea service many
men would join it who would otherwise be serving as non-commissioned
officers at home and the prevailing difficulty would thus be enhanced.
When colonial defence calls for relatively large numbers of men, i.e. an
army, home resources are severely strained.

41. _Conscription_ in the proper sense, i.e. selection by lot of a
proportion of the able-bodied manhood of a country, is now rarely
practised. The obvious unfairness of selection by lot has always had the
result of admitting substitutes procured by those on whom the lot has
fallen; hence the poorer classes are unduly burdened with the defence of
the country, while the rich escape with a money payment. In practice,
conscription invariably produces a professional long-service army in
which each soldier is paid to discharge the obligations of several
successive conscripts. Such an army is therefore a voluntary
long-service army in the main, _plus_ a proportion of the unwilling men
found in every forced levy. The gravest disadvantage is, however, the
fact that the bulk of the nation has not been through the regular army
at all; it is almost impossible to maintain a large and costly standing
army and at the same time to give a full training to auxiliary forces.
The difference between a "national guard" such as that of the siege of
Paris in 1870-71 and a _Landwehr_ produced under the German system, was
very wide. Regarded as a compromise between universal and voluntary
service, conscription still maintains a precarious existence in Europe.
As the cardinal principle of recruiting armies, it is completely
obsolete.

42. _Voluntary Service._--Existing voluntary armies have usually
developed from armies of the old régime, and seem to owe their continued
existence either to the fact that only comparatively small armaments are
maintained in peace, other and larger armies being specially recruited
during a war (a modification of the "enlistment system"), or to the
necessities of garrisoning colonial empires. The military advantages and
disadvantages of voluntary service are naturally the faults and merits
of the opposite system. The voluntary army is available for general
service. It includes few unwilling soldiers, and its resultant advantage
over an army of the ordinary type has been stated to be as high as 30%.
At all events, we need only examine military history to find that with
conscript armies wholesale shirking is far from unknown. That loss from
this cause does not paralyse operations as it paralysed those of the
18th century, is due to the fact that such fugitives do not desert to
the enemy, but reappear in the ranks of their own side; it must not
therefore be assumed that men have become braver because the "missing"
are not so numerous. In colonial and savage warfare the superior
personal qualities of the voluntary soldier often count for more than
skill on the part of the officers. These would be diminished by
shortening the time of service, and this fact, with the expense of
transport, entails that a reasonably long period must be spent with the
colours. On the other hand, the provision of the large armies of modern
warfare requires the maintenance of a reserve, and no reserve is
possible if the whole period for which men will enlist is spent with the
colours. The demand for long service in the individual, and for trained
men in the aggregate, thus produces a compromise. The principle of long
service, i.e. ten years or more with the colours, is not applicable to
the needs of the modern _grande guerre_; it gives neither great initial
strength nor great reserves. The force thus produced is costly and not
lightly to be risked; it affords relatively little opportunity for the
training of officers, and tends to become a class apart from the rest of
the population. On the other hand, such a force is the best possible
army for foreign and colonial service. A state therefore which relies on
voluntary enlistment for its forces at home and abroad, must either keep
an army which is adaptable to both functions or maintain a separate
service for each.

In a state where relatively small armaments are maintained in peace,
voluntary armies are infinitely superior to any that could be obtained
under any system of compulsion. The state can afford to give a good
wage, and can therefore choose its recruits carefully. It can thus have
either a few incomparable veteran soldiers (long-service), or a fairly
large number of men of superior physique and intelligence, who have
received an adequate short-service training. Even the youngest of such
men are capable of good service, while the veterans are probably better
soldiers than any to be found in conscript armies. This is, however, a
special case. The raw material of any but a small voluntary army usually
tends to be drawn from inferior sources; the cost of a larger force,
paid the full wages of skilled labourers, would be very great, and
numbers commensurate with those of an army of the other model could only
be obtained at an exorbitant price. The short-service principle is
therefore accepted. Here, however, as recruiting depends upon the
good-will of the people, it is impossible to work the soldiers with any
degree of rigour. Hence the voluntary soldier must serve longer than a
conscript in order to attain the same proficiency. The reserve is thus
weakened, and the total trained regular force diminished. Moreover, as
fewer recruits are required annually, there is less work for the
officers to do. In the particular case of Great Britain it is
practically certain that in future, reliance will be placed upon the
auxiliary forces and the civil population for the provision of the
enormous reserves required in a great war; this course is, however, only
feasible in the case of an insular nation which has time to collect its
strength for the final and decisive blow overseas. The application of
the same principle to a continental military power depends on the
capacity for stern and unflagging resistance displayed by the _corps de
couverture_ charged with the duty of gaining the time necessary for the
development and concentration of the national masses. In Great Britain
(except in the case of a surprise invasion) the place of this corps
would be taken by "command of the sea." Abroad, the spirit of the
exposed regiments themselves furnishes the only guarantee, and this can
hardly be calculated with sufficient certainty, under modern conditions,
to justify the adoption of this new "enlistment system." Voluntary
service, therefore, with all its intrinsic merits, is only applicable to
the conditions of a great war when the war reserve can be trained _ad
hoc_.

43. The militia idea (see MILITIA) has been applied most completely in
Switzerland, which has no regular army, but trains almost the whole
nation as a militia. The system, with many serious disadvantages, has
the great merit that the maximum number of men receives a certain amount
of training at a minimum cost both to the state and to the individual.
Mention should also be made of the system of augmenting the national
forces by recruiting "foreign legions." This is, of course, a relic of
the _Werbe-system_; it was practised habitually by the British
governments of the 18th and early 19th centuries. "Hessians" figured
conspicuously in the British armies in the American War of Independence,
and the "King's German Legion" was only the best and most famous of many
foreign corps in the service of George III. during the Revolutionary and
Napoleonic wars. A new German Legion was raised during the Crimean War,
but the almost universal adoption of the _Krümper_ system has naturally
put an end to the old method, for all the best recruits are now
accounted for in the service of their own countries.


ARMY ORGANIZATION

44. _Arms of the Service._--Organization into "arms" is produced by the
multiplicity of the weapons used, their functions and their limitations.
The "three arms"--a term universally applied to infantry (q.v.), cavalry
(q.v.) and artillery (q.v.)--coexist owing to the fact that each can
undertake functions which the others cannot properly fulfil. Thus
cavalry can close with an enemy at the quickest pace, infantry can work
in difficult ground, and artillery is effective at great ranges.
Infantry indeed, having the power of engaging both at close quarters and
at a distance, constitutes the chief part of a fighting force. Other
"arms," such as mounted infantry, cyclists, engineers, &c., are again
differentiated from the three chief arms by their proper functions. In
deciding upon the establishment in peace, or the composition of a force
for war, it is therefore necessary to settle beforehand the relative
importance of these functions in carrying out the work in hand. Thus an
army operating in Essex would be unusually strong in infantry, one on
Salisbury Plain would possess a great number of guns, and an army
operating on the South African veldt would consist very largely of
mounted men. The normal European war has, however, naturally been taken
as the basis upon which the relative proportions of the three arms are
calculated. At the battle of Kolin (1757) the cavalry was more than half
as strong as the infantry engaged. At Borodino (1812) there were 39
cavalry to 100 of other arms, and 5 guns per 1000 men. In 1870 the
Germans had at the outset 7 cavalrymen to every 100 men of other arms,
the French 10. As for guns, the German artillery had 3, the French 3½
per 1000 men. In more modern times the proportions have undergone some
alteration, the artillery having been increased, and the cavalry brought
nearer to the Napoleonic standard. Thus the relative proportions, in
peace time, now stand at 5 or 6 guns per 1000 men, and 16 cavalry
soldiers to 100 men of other arms. It must be borne in mind that cavalry
and artillery are maintained in peace at a higher effective than
infantry, the strength of the latter being much inflated in war, while
cavalry and artillery are not easily extemporized. Thus in the
Manchurian campaign these proportions were very different. The Russian
army on the eve of the battle of Mukden (20th of February 1905)
consisted of 370 battalions, 142 squadrons and 153 field batteries (1200
guns), with, in addition, over 200 heavy guns. The strength of this
force, which was organized in three armies, was about 300,000 infantry
and 18,000 cavalry and Cossacks, with 3½ guns per 1000 men of other
arms. The Japanese armies consisted of 300,000 infantry, 11,000 cavalry,
900 field and 170 heavy guns, the proportion of field artillery being 2½
guns per 1000 men.

It is perhaps not superfluous to mention that all the smaller units in a
modern army consist of one arm only. Formerly several dissimilar weapons
were combined in the same unit. The knight with his four or five
variously armed retainers constituted an example of this method of
organization, which slowly died out as weapons became more uniform and
their functions better defined.

45. _Command._--The first essential of a good organization is to ensure
that each member of the organized body, in his own sphere of action,
should contribute his share to the achievement of the common object.
Further, it is entirely beyond the power of one man, or of a few, to
control every action and provide for every want of a great number of
individuals. The modern system of command, therefore, provides for a
system of grades, in which, theoretically, officers of each grade
control a group of the next lower units. A lieutenant-colonel, for
instance, may be in charge of a group of eight companies, each of which
is under a captain. In practice, all armies are permanently organized on
these lines, up to the colonel's or lieutenant-colonel's command, and
most of them are permanently divided into various higher units under
general officers, the brigade, division and army corps. The almost
invariable practice is to organize _infantry_ into companies, battalions
and regiments. _Cavalry_ is divided into troops, squadrons and
regiments. _Artillery_ is organized in batteries, these being usually
grouped in various ways. The other arms and departments are subdivided
in the same general way. The commands of general officers are the
_brigade_ of infantry, cavalry, and in some cases artillery, the
_division_ of two or more infantry brigades and a force of artillery and
mounted troops, or of cavalry and horse artillery, and the _army corps_
of two or more divisions and "corps troops." _Armies_ of several corps,
and _groups of armies_ are also formed.

46. A _brigade_ is the command of a brigadier or major-general, or of a
colonel. It consists almost invariably of one arm only. In armies of the
old régime it was not usual to assign troops of all arms to the
subordinate generals. Hence the brigade is a much older form of
organization than the division of all arms, and in fact dates from the
16th century. The infantry brigade consists, in the British service, of
the brigadier and his staff, four battalions of infantry, and
administrative and medical units, the combatant strength being about
4000 men. In Germany and France the brigade is composed of the staff,
and two regiments (6 battalions) with a total of over 6000 combatants at
war strength. The cavalry brigade is sometimes formed of three,
sometimes of two regiments; the number of squadrons to a regiment on
service is usually four, exceptionally three, and rarely five and six.
The "brigade" of artillery in Great Britain is a lieutenant-colonel's
command, and the term here corresponds to the _Abtheilung_ of the
German, and the _groupe_ of the French armies (see ARTILLERY). In
Germany and France, however, an artillery brigade consists of two or
more regiments, or twelve batteries at least, under the command of an
artillery general officer.

47. A _division_ is an organization containing troops of all arms. Since
the virtual abolition of the "corps artillery" (see ARTILLERY), the
force of field artillery forming part of an infantry division is
sometimes as high as 72 guns (Germany); in Great Britain the augmented
division of 1906 has 54 field guns, 12 field howitzers, and 4 heavy
guns, a total of 70. The term "infantry" division is, in strictness, no
longer applicable, since such a unit is a miniature army corps of
infantry, artillery and cavalry, with the necessary services for the
supply of ammunition, food and forage, and for the care of the sick and
wounded. A more exact title would be "army" division. In general it is
composed, so far as combatants are concerned, of the divisional
commander and his staff, two or more infantry brigades, a number of
batteries of field artillery forming a regiment, brigade or group, a
small force, varying from a squadron to a regiment, of cavalry
(divisional cavalry), with some engineers. The force of the old British
division (1905) may be taken, on an average, as 10,000 men, increased in
the 1906 reorganization to about 15,000 combatants. In other armies the
fighting force of the division amounts to rather more than 14,000. The
_cavalry division_ (see CAVALRY) is composed of the staff, two or three
cavalry brigades, horse artillery, with perhaps mounted infantry,
cyclists, or even light infantry in addition. In many, if not most,
armies cavalry divisions are formed only in war. In the field the
cavalry division is usually an independent unit with its own commander
and staff. "Cavalry corps" of several divisions have very rarely been
formed in the past, a division having been regarded as the largest unit
capable of being led by one man. There is, however, a growing tendency
in favour of the corps organization, at any rate in war.

48. _Army Corps._--The "corps" of the 18th century was simply a large
detachment, more or less complete in itself, organized for some
particular purpose (e.g. to cover a siege), and placed for the time
being under some general officer other than the chief commander. The
modern army corps is a development from the division of all arms, which
originated in the French Revolutionary wars. It is a unit of
considerable strength, furnished with the due proportion of troops of
all arms and of the auxiliary and medical services, and permanently
placed under the command of one general. The corps organization (though
a _corps d'armée_ was often spoken of as an _armée_) was used in
Napoleon's army in all the campaigns of the Empire. It may be mentioned,
as a curious feature of Napoleon's methods, that he invariably
constituted each _corps d'armée_ of a different strength, so that the
enemy would not be able to estimate his force by the simple process of
counting the corps flags which marked the marshals' headquarters. Thus
in 1812 he constituted one corps of 72,000 men, while another had but
18,000. After the fall of Napoleon a further advance was made. The
adoption of universal service amongst the great military nations brought
in its train the territorial organization, and the corps, representing a
large district, soon became a unit of peace formation. For the smooth
working of the new military system it was essential that the framework
of the war army should exist in peace. The Prussians were the first to
bring the system to perfection; long before 1866 Prussia was permanently
divided into army corps districts, all the troops of the III. army corps
being Brandenburgers, all those of the VI. Silesians, and so on, though
political reasons required, and to some extent still require,
modifications of this principle in dealing with annexed territory (e.g.
Hanover and Alsace-Lorraine). The events of 1866 and of 1870-71 caused
the almost universal adoption of the army corps regional system. In the
case of the British army, operating as it usually did in minor wars, and
rarely having more than sixty or seventy thousand men on one theatre
even in continental wars, there was less need of so large a unit as the
corps. Not only was a British army small in numbers, but it preserved
high traditions of discipline, and was sufficiently well trained to be
susceptible as a unit to the impulse given by one man. Even where the
term "corps" does appear in Peninsular annals, the implication is of a
corps in the old sense of a grand detachment. Neither cavalry nor
artillery was assigned to any of the British "corps" at Waterloo.

49. _Constitution of the Army Corps._--In 1870-71 the III. German army
corps (with which compare Marshal Davout's _ordre de bataille_ above)
consisted of the following combatant units: (a) staff; (b) two infantry
divisions (4 brigades. 8 regiments or 24 battalions), with, in each
division, a cavalry regiment, 4 batteries of artillery or 24 guns, and
engineers; (c) corps troops, artillery (6 field batteries), pioneer
battalion (engineers), train battalion (supply and transport). A rifle
battalion was attached to one of the divisions.

This _ordre de bataille_ was followed more or less generally by all
countries up to the most modern times, but between 1890 and 1902 came a
very considerable change in the point of view from which the corps was
regarded as a fighting unit. This change was expressed in the abolition
of the corps artillery. Formerly the corps commander controlled the
greater part of the field artillery, as well as troops of other arms; at
the present time he has a mere handful of troops. Unless battalions are
taken from the divisions to form a corps reserve, the direct influence
of the corps organization on the battle is due almost solely to the fact
that the commander has at his disposal the special natures of artillery
and also some horse artillery. Thus the (augmented) division is regarded
by many as the fighting unit of the 20th, as the corps was that of the
19th century. In Europe there is even a tendency to substitute the
ancient phrase "reserve artillery" for "corps artillery," showing that
the role to be played by the corps batteries is subordinated to the
operations of the masses of divisional artillery, the whole being
subject, of course, to the technical supervision of the artillery
general officer who accompanies the corps headquarters. Thus limited,
the army corps has now come to consist of the staff, two or more
divisions, the corps or reserve artillery (of special batteries), a
small force of "corps" cavalry, and various technical and departmental
troops. The cavalry is never very numerous, owing to the demands of the
independent cavalry divisions on the one hand and those of the
divisional cavalry on the other. The engineers of an army corps include
telegraph, balloon and pontoon units. Attached to the corps are reserves
of munitions and supplies in ammunition columns, field parks, supply
parks, &c. The term and the organization were discontinued in England in
1906, on the augmentation of the divisions and the assignment of certain
former "corps troops" to the direct control of the army commanders. It
should be noticed that the Japanese, who had no corps organization
during the war of 1904-5, afterwards increased the strength of their
divisions from 15,000 to 20,000; the augmented "division," with the
above _peace_ strength, becomes to all intents and purposes a corps, and
the generals commanding divisions were in 1906 given the title of
generals-in-chief.

50. _Army._--The term "army" is applied, in war time, to any command of
several army corps, or even of several divisions, operating under the
orders of one commander-in-chief. The army in this sense (distinguished
by a number or by a special title) varies, therefore, with
circumstances. In the American Civil War, the Army of the Ohio consisted
in 1864 only of the army staff and the XXIII. corps. At the other
extreme we find that the German II. Army in 1870 consisted of seven army
corps and two cavalry divisions, and the III. Army of six army corps and
two cavalry divisions. The term "army" in this sense is therefore very
elastic in its application, but it is generally held that large groups
of corps operating in one theatre of war should be subdivided into
armies, and that the strength of an army should not exceed about 150,000
men, if indeed this figure is reached at all. This again depends upon
circumstances. It might be advisable to divide a force of five corps
into two armies, or on the other hand it might be impossible to find
suitable leaders for more than two armies when half a million men were
present for duty. In France, organization has been carried a step
further. The bulk of the national forces is, in case of war, organized
into a "group of armies" under a commander, usually, though incorrectly,
called the _generalissimo_. This office, of course, does not exist in
peace, but the insignia, the distinctive marks of the headquarters flag,
&c., are stated in official publications, and the names of the
generalissimo and of his chief of staff are known. Under the
generalissimo would be four or five army commanders, each with three or
four army corps under him. Independent of this "group of armies" there
would be other and minor "armies" where required.

51. _Chief Command._--The leading of the "group of armies" referred to
above does not, in France, imply the supreme command, which would be
exercised by the minister of war in Paris. The German system, on the
other hand, is based upon the leadership of the national forces by the
sovereign in person, and even though the headquarters of the "supreme
war lord" (_Oberste Kriegsherr_) are actually in the field in one
theatre of operations, he directs the movements of the German armies in
all quarters. Similarly, in 1864, General Grant accompanied and
controlled as a "group" the Armies of the Potomac and the James,
supervising at the same time the operations of other groups and armies.
In the same campaign a subordinate general, Sherman, commanded a "group"
consisting of the Armies of the Tennessee, the Cumberland and the Ohio.
The question as to whether the supreme command and the command of the
principal group of armies should be in the same hands is very difficult
of solution. In practice, the method adopted in each case usually grows
out of the military and political conditions. The advantage of the
German method is that the supreme commander is in actual contact with
the troops, and can therefore form an accurate judgment of their powers.
Under these conditions the risk of having cabinet strategy forced upon
the generals is at its minimum, and more especially so if the supreme
commander is the head of the state. On the other hand, his judgment is
very liable to be influenced unduly by facts, coming under his own
notice, which may in reality have no more than a local significance.
Further, the supreme commander is at the mercy of distant subordinates
to a far greater degree than he would be if free to go from one army to
another. Thus, in 1870 the king of Prussia's headquarters before Paris
were subjected to such pressure from subordinate army commanders that on
several occasions selected staff-officers had to be sent to examine, for
the king's private information, the real state of things at the front.
The conduct of operations by one group commander in the campaign of 1864
seemed, at a distance, so eccentric and dangerous that General Grant
actually left his own group of armies and went in person to take over
command at the threatened point. Balanced judgment is thus often
impossible unless the supreme command is independent of, and in a
position to exercise general supervision over, each and every group or
army. At the other end of the scale is the system of command employed by
the Turks in 1877, in which four armies, three of them being actually on
the same theatre of war, were directed from Constantinople. This system
may be condemned unreservedly. It is recognized that, once the armies on
either side have become seriously engaged, a commander-in-chief on the
spot must direct them. Thus in 1904, while the Japanese and Russian
armies were under the supreme command of their respective sovereigns,
General Kuropatkin and Marshal Oyama personally commanded the chief
groups of armies in the field. This is substantially the same as the
system of the French army. It is therefore permissible to regard the
system pursued by the Germans in 1870, and by the Union government in
1864, more as suited to special circumstances than as a general rule. As
has been said above, the special feature of the German system of command
is the personal leadership of the German emperor, and this brings the
student at once to the consideration of another important part of the
"superior leading."

52. The _Chief of the General Staff_ is, as his title implies, the chief
staff officer of the service, and as such, he has duties of the highest
possible importance, both in peace and war. For the general subject of
staff duties see STAFF. Here we are concerned only with the peculiar
position of the chief of staff under a system in which the sovereign is
the actual commander-in-chief. It is obvious in the first place that the
sovereign may not be a great soldier, fitted by mental gifts, training
and character to be placed at the head of an army of, perhaps, a million
men. Allowing that it is imperative that, whatever he may be in himself,
the sovereign should _ex officio_ command the armies, it is easy to see
that the ablest general in these armies must be selected to act as his
adviser, irrespective of rank and seniority. This officer must therefore
be assigned to a station beyond that of his army rank, and his orders
are in fact those of the sovereign himself. Nor is it sufficient that he
should occupy an unofficial position as adviser, or _ad latus_. If he
were no more than this, the sovereign could act without his adviser
being even aware of the action taken. As the staff is the machinery for
the transmission of orders and despatches, all orders of the
commander-in-chief are signed by the chief of staff as a matter of
course, and this position is therefore that in which the adviser has the
necessary influence. The relations between the sovereign and his chief
military adviser are thus of the first importance to the smooth working
of the great military machine, and never have the possibilities of this
apparently strange system been more fully exploited than by King William
and his chief of staff von Moltke in 1866 and in 1870-71. It is not true
to say that the king was the mere figurehead of the German armies, or
that Moltke was the real commander-in-chief. Those who have said this
forget that the sole responsibility for the consequences of every order
lay with the king, and that it is precisely the fear of this
responsibilty that has made so many brilliant subordinates fail when in
chief command. The characters of the two men supplemented each other, as
also in the case of Blücher and Gneisenau and that of Radetzky and Hess.
Under these circumstances, the German system of command works, on the
whole, smoothly. Matters would, however, be different if either of the
two officers failed to realize their mutual interdependence, and the
system is in any case only required when the self-sufficing great
soldier is not available for the chief executive command.

53. _First and Second Lines._--The organization into arms and units is
of course maintained in peace as well as for war. Military forces are
further organized, in peace, into active and reserve troops, first and
second lines, &c., according to the power possessed by the executive
over the men. Broadly speaking, the latter fall into three classes,
regulars, auxiliary forces and irregular troops. The regulars or active
troops are usually liable to serve at all times and in any country to
which they may be sent. Auxiliary forces may be defined as all troops
which undergo actual military training without being constantly under
arms, and in Great Britain these were until 1908 represented by the
Militia, the Yeomanry and the Volunteers, and now by the Territorial
Force and the Special Reserve. In a country in which recruiting is by
voluntary enlistment the classification is, of course, very different
from that prevailing in a conscript army. The various "lines" are
usually composed of separate organizations; the men are recruited upon
different engagements, and receive a varying amount of training. Of the
men not permanently embodied, only the reserve of the active army has
actually served a continuous term with the colours. Other troops, called
by various appellations, of which "militia" may be taken as generic, go
through their military training at intervals. The general lines of army
organization in the case of a country recruiting by universal service
are as follows:--The male population is divided into classes, by ages,
and the total period of liability to service is usually about 25 years.
Thus at any given time, assuming two years' colour-service, the men of
20 and 21 years of age would constitute the active army serving with the
colours, those of, say, 22 and 23, the reserve. The _Landwehr_ or second
line army would consist of all men who had been through the active army
and were now aged 24 to 36. The third line would similarly consist of
men whose ages were between 36 and 44. Assuming the same annual levy,
the active army would consist of 200,000 men, its reserve 200,000, the
second line of 1,300,000, and the third of 800,000. Thus of 2,500,000
men liable to, and trained for, military service, 200,000 only would be
under arms at any given time. The simple system here outlined is of
course modified and complicated in practice owing to re-engagements by
non-commissioned officers, the speedy dismissal to the reserve of
intelligent and educated men, &c.

54. _War Reserves._--In war, the reserves increase the field armies to
400,000 men, the whole or part of the second line is called up and
formed into auxiliary regiments, brigades and divisions, and in case of
necessity the third line is also called upon, though usually this is
only in the last resort and for home defence only. The proportion of
reservists to men with the colours varies of course with the length of
service. Thus in France or Germany, with two years' service in force,
half of the rank and file of a unit in war would be men recalled from
civil life. The true military value of reservists is often questioned,
and under certain circumstances it is probable that units would take the
field at peace strength without waiting for their reservists. The
frontier guards of the continental military powers, which are expected
to move at the earliest possible moment after hostilities have begun,
are maintained at a higher effective than other units, and do not depend
to any great extent on receiving reservists. The peace footing of
cavalry and artillery units is similarly maintained at an artificial
level. An operation of the nature of a _coup de main_ would in any case
be carried out by the troops available at the moment, however large
might be the force required--twenty weak battalions would, in fact, be
employed instead of ten strong ones. There is another class of troops,
which may be called depot troops. These consist of officers and men left
behind when the active corps completed with reserves takes the field,
and they have (a) to furnish drafts for the front--and (b) to form a
nucleus upon which all later formations are built up. The troops of the
second line undertake minor work, such as guarding railways, and also
furnish drafts for the field army. Later, when they have been for some
time under arms, the second line troops are often employed by themselves
in first line. A year's training under war conditions should bring such
troops to the highest efficiency. As for irregulars, they have real
military value only when the various permanent establishments do not
take up the whole fighting strength of the nation, and thus states
having universal service armies do not, as a rule, contemplate the
employment of combatants other than those shown on the peace rolls. The
status of irregulars is ill defined, but it is practically agreed that
combatants, over whose conduct the military authorities have no
disciplinary power, should be denied the privileges of recognized
soldiers, and put to death if captured. So drastic a procedure is
naturally open to abuse and is not always expedient. Still, it is
perfectly right that the same man shall not be allowed, for example, to
shoot a sentry at one moment, and to claim the privileges of a harmless
civilian at the next. The division into first, second and third lines
follows generally from the above. The first line troops, in a conscript
army, are the "active army" or regulars, permanently under arms in peace
time, and its reserves, which are used on the outbreak of war to
complete the existing units to full strength. The German terms
_Landwehr_ and _Landsturm_ are often applied to armies of the second and
the third lines.

55. The military characteristics of the various types of regular troops
have been dealt with in considering the advantages and disadvantages of
the several forms of recruiting. It only remains to give some indication
of the advantages which such forces (irrespective of their time of
service) possess over troops which only come up for training at
intervals. Physically, the men with the colours are always superior to
the rest, owing to their constant exercise and the regularity and order
under which they live; as soldiers, they are more under the control of
their officers, who are their leaders in daily life, in closer touch
with army methods and discipline, and, as regards their formal training,
they possess infinitely greater power of strategic and tactical
manoeuvre. Their steadiness under fire is of course more to be relied
upon than that of other troops. Wellington, speaking of the contrast
between old and young soldiers (regulars), was of opinion that the chief
difference lay in the greater hardiness, power of endurance, and general
campaigning qualities given by experience. This is of course more than
ever true in respect of regular and auxiliary troops, as was strikingly
demonstrated in the Spanish-American War. On the whole, it is true to
say that only a regular army can endure defeat without dissolution, and
that volunteers, reservists or militiamen fresh from civil life may win
a victory but cannot make the fullest use of it when won. At the same
time, when they have been through one or two arduous campaigns, raw
troops become to all intents and purposes equal to any regulars. On the
other hand, the greatest military virtue of auxiliary forces is their
enthusiasm. With this quality were won the great victories of 1792-94 in
France, those of 1813 in Germany, and the beginnings of Italian unity at
Calatafimi and Palermo. The earlier days of the American Civil War
witnessed desperate fighting, of which Shiloh is the best example,
between armies which had had but the slightest military training. In the
same war the first battle of Bull Run illustrated what has been said
above as to the weaknesses of unprofessional armies. Both sides, raw and
untrained, fought for a long time with the greatest determination, after
which the defeated army was completely dissolved in rout and the victors
quite unable to pursue. So far it is the relative military value of the
professional soldier and the citizen-soldier that has been reviewed. A
continental army of the French or German stamp is differently
constituted. It is, first of all, clear that the drilled citizen-soldier
combines the qualities of training and enthusiasm. From this it follows
that a hostile "feeling" as well as a hostile "view" must animate such
an army if it is to do good service. If a modern "nation in arms" is
engaged in a purely dynastic quarrel against a professional army of
inferior strength, the result will probably be victory for the latter.
But the active army of France or Germany constitutes but a small part of
the "nation in arms," and the army for war is composed in addition of
men who have at some period in the past gone through a regular training.
Herein lies the difference between continental and British auxiliary
forces. In the French army, an ex-soldier during his ten years of
reserve service was by the law of 1905 only liable for two months'
training, and for the rest of his military career for two weeks' service
only. The further reduction of this liability was proposed in 1907 and
led to much controversy. The question of the value of auxiliary forces,
then, as between the continuous work of, say, English territorials, and
the permanent though dwindling influence of an original period of active
soldiering, is one of considerable importance. It is largely decided in
any given case by the average age of the men in the ranks.

56. The transfer of troops from the state of peace to that of war is
called _mobilization_. This is, of course, a matter which primarily
depends on good administration, and its minutest details are in all
states laid down beforehand. Reservists have to be summoned, and, on
arrival, to be clothed and equipped out of stores maintained in peace.
Officers and men of the regular army on leave have to be recalled, the
whole medically examined for physical fitness to serve, and a thousand
details have to be worked out before the unit is ready to move to its
concentration station. The concentration and the strategic deployment
are, of course, dependent upon the circumstances of each war, and the
peace organization ceases to be applicable. But throughout a war the
depots at home, the recruiting districts of second-line troops, and
above all the various arsenals, manufactories and offices controlled by
the war department are continually at work in maintaining the troops in
the field at proper strength and effectiveness.

57. _Territorial System._--The feudal system was of course a territorial
system in principle. Indeed, as has been shown above, a feudal army was
chiefly at fault owing to the dislocation of the various levies.
Concentration was equally the characteristic of the professional armies
which succeeded those of feudalism, and only such militia forces as
remained in existence preserved a local character. The origin of
territorial recruiting for first-line troops is to be found in the
"cantonal" system, said to have been introduced by Louis XIV., but
brought to the greatest perfection in Prussia under Frederick William I.
But long service and the absence of a reserve vitiated the system in
practice, since losses had to be made good by general recruiting, and
even the French Revolution may hardly be said to have produced the
territorial system as we understand it to-day. It was only in the
deliberate preparation of the Prussian army on short-service lines that
we find the beginning of the "territorial system of dislocation and
command." This is so intimately connected with the general system of
organization that it cannot be considered merely as a method of
recruiting by districts. It may be defined as a system whereby, for
purposes of command in peace, recruiting, and of organization generally,
the country is divided into districts, which are again divided and
subdivided as may be required. In a country in which universal service
prevails, an army corps district is divided into divisional districts,
these being made up of brigade and of regimental districts. Each of
these units recruits, and is in peace usually stationed, in its own
area; the artillery, cavalry and special arms are recruited for the
corps throughout the whole allotted area, and stationed at various
points within the same. Thus in the German army the III. army corps is
composed entirely of Brandenburgers. The infantry of the corps is
stationed in ten towns, the cavalry in four and the artillery in five.
In countries which adhere to voluntary recruiting, the system, depending
as it does on the calculable certainty of recruiting, is not so fully
developed, but in Great Britain the auxiliary forces have been
reorganized in divisions of all arms on a strictly territorial basis.
The advantage of the system as carried into effect in Germany is
obvious. Training is carried out with a minimum of friction and expense,
as each unit has an ample area for training. Whilst the brigadiers can
exercise general control over the colonels, and the divisional generals
over the brigadiers, there is little undue interference of superior
authority in the work of each grade, and the men, if soldiers by
compulsion, at any rate are serving close to their own homes. Most of
the reservists required on mobilization reside within a few miles of
their barracks. Living in the midst of the civil population, the troops
do not tend to become a class apart. Small garrisons are not, as
formerly, allowed to stagnate, since modern communications make
supervision easy. Further, it must be borne in mind that the essence of
the system is the organization and training for war of the whole
military population. Now so great a mass of men could not be
administered except through this decentralization of authority, and the
corollary of short service universally applied is the full territorial
system, in which the whole enrolled strength of the district is
subjected to the authority of the district commander. Practice, however,
falls short of theory, and the dangers of drawing whole units from
disaffected or unmilitary districts are often foreseen and discounted by
distributing the recruits, non-regionally, amongst more or less distant
regiments.

58. _Army Administration._--The existing systems of command and
organization, being usually based upon purely military considerations,
have thus much, indeed almost all, in common. _Administration_ differs
from them in one important respect. While the methods of command and
organization are the result of the accumulated experience of many armies
through many hundred years, the central administration in each case is
the product of the historical evolution of the particular country, and
is dependent upon forms of government, constitutions and political
parties. Thus France, after 1870, remodelled the organization of her
forces in accordance with the methods which were presumed to have given
Germany the victory, but the headquarters staff at Paris is very
different in all branches from that of Berlin. Great Britain adopted
German tactics, and to some extent even uniform, but the Army Council
has no counterpart in the administration of the German emperor's forces.

The first point for consideration, therefore, is, what is the ultimate,
and what is the proximate, authority supervising the administration? The
former is, in most countries, the people or its representatives in
parliament, for it is in their power to stop supplies, and without money
the whole military fabric must crumble. The constitutional chief of the
army is the sovereign, or, in republics, the president, but in most
countries the direct control of army matters by the representatives of
the people extends over all affairs into which the well-being of the
civil population, the expenditure of money, alleged miscarriages of
military justice, &c., enter, and it is not unusual to find grand
strategy, and even the technical deficiencies of a field-gun or rifle,
the subject of interpellation and debate. The peculiar influence of the
sovereign is in what may be termed patronage (that is, the selection of
officers to fill important positions and the general supervision of the
officer-corps), and in the fact that loyalty is the foundation of the
discipline and soldierly honour which it is the task of the officers to
inculcate into their men. In all cases the head of the state is _ipso
facto_ the head of the army. The difference between various systems may
then be held to depend on the degree of power allowed to or held by him.
This reacts upon the central administration of the army, and is the
cause of the differences of system alluded to. For the civil chief of
the executive is not necessarily a soldier, much less an expert and
capable soldier; he must, therefore, be provided with technical
advisers. The chief of the general staff is often the principal of
these, though in some cases a special commander-in-chief, or the
minister for war, or, as in France and England, a committee or council,
has the duty of advising the executive on technical matters.

59. _Branches of Administration._--In these circumstances the only
general principle of army administration common to all systems is the
division of the labour between two great branches. Military
administration, in respect of the troops and material which it has to
control, is divided between the departments of the _War Office_ and the
_General Staff_. In the staff work of subordinate units, e.g. army corps
and divisions, the same classification of duties is adopted, "general
staff" duties being performed by one set of officers, "routine staff"
duties by another.

The work of a _General Staff_ may be taken as consisting in preparation
for war, and this again, both in Great Britain and abroad, consists of
military policy in all its branches, staff duties in war, the collection
of intelligence, mobilization, plans of operations and concentration,
training, military history and geography, and the preparation of war
regulations. These subjects are usually subdivided into four or five
groups, each of which is dealt with by a separate section of the general
staff, the actual division of the work, of course, varying in different
countries. Thus, the second section of the French staff deals with "the
organization and tactics of foreign armies, study of foreign theatres of
war, and military missions abroad." A _War Office_ is concerned with
peace administration and with the provision of men and material in war.
Under the former category fall such matters as "routine" administration,
finance, justice, recruiting, promotion of officers (though not always),
barracks and buildings generally, armament, equipment and clothing, &c.,
in fact all matters not directly relevant to the training of the troops
for and the employment of the troops in war. In war, some of the
functions of a war office are suspended, but on the other hand the work
necessary for the provision of men and material to augment the army and
to make good its losses is vastly increased. In 1870 the minister of war,
von Roon, accompanied the headquarters in the field, but this arrangement
did not work well, and will not be employed again. The chief duties other
than those of the general staff fall into two classes, the "routine
staff," administration or adjutant-general's branch, which deals with all
matters affecting _personnel_, and the quartermaster-general's branch,
which supervises the provision and issue of supplies, stores and
_matériel_ of all kinds. Over and above these, provision has to be made
for control of all the technical parts of administration, such as
artillery and engineer services (in Great Britain, this, with a portion
of the quartermaster-general's department, is under the master-general of
the ordnance), and for military legislation, preparation of estimates,
&c. These are, of course, special subjects, not directly belonging to the
general administrative system. It is only requisite that the latter
should be sufficiently elastic to admit of these departments being formed
as required. However these subordinate offices may be multiplied, the
main work of the war office is in the two departments of the
adjutant-general (_personnel_) and the quartermaster-general
(_matériel_). Beyond and wholly distinct from these is the general staff,
the creation of which is perhaps the most important contribution of the
past century to the pure science of military organization.

    COMPARATIVE STRENGTH OF VARIOUS ARMIES

  (a) _Compulsory Service_ (1906).

  +-------------------------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
  |                               |            |            |            |  Austria-  |            |
  |                               |   France.  |  Germany.  |  Russia.   |  Hungary.  |   Italy.   |
  +-------------------------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
  | Annual Contingent for the     |            |            |            |            |            |
  |   Colours                     |    230,000 |    222,000 |    254,000 |    128,000 |     83,000 |
  | Medically unfit and exempt    |     90,000 |    127,000 |    120,000 |     57,000 |    110,000 |
  | Excused from Service in       |            |            |            |            |        |
  |   Peace, able-bodied          |     · ·    |    291,000 |    606,000 |    285,000 |    122,000 |
  |                               +------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
  | Total of Men becoming liable  |            |            |            |            |            |
  |   for service in 1907         |    320,000 |    540,000 |    980,000 |    470,000 |    315,000 |
  +-------------------------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
  | Total Permanent Armed Force   |   610,000  |    610,000 |  1,226,000 |    356,000 |    269,000 |
  |  in Peace                     |(not includ-|            |            |            |            |
  |                               |ing colonial|            |            |            |            |
  |                               |   troops   |            |            |            |            |
  +-------------------------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
  | First-Line Troops, war-       |            |            |            |            |            |
  |   strength (estimated)        |  1,350,000 |  1,675,000 |  2,187,000 |    950,000 |    800,000 |
  | Second-Line Troops, war-      |            |            |            |            |            |
  |   strength (estimated)        |  3,000,000 |  2,275,000 |  1,429,000 |  1,450,000 |  1,150,000 |
  | Numbers available in excess   |            |            |            |            |            |
  |   of these (estimated)        |    450,000 |  3,950,000 |  9,384,000 |  5,000,000 |  1,200,000 |
  |                               +------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
  | Total War Resources of all    |            |            |            |            |            |
  |   kinds                       |  4,800,000 |  7,900,000 | 13,000,000 |  7,400,000 |  3,150,000 |
  +-------------------------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
  | Annual Military Expenditure-- |            |            |            |            |            |
  |  total                        |£27,720,000 |£32,228,000 |£36,080,000 |£15,840,000 |£11,280,000 |
  | Annual Military Expenditure-- |            |            |            |            |            |
  |  per head of population       |            |            |            |            |            |
  |  (approximate)                |  13s. 9d.  |  10s. 9d.  |   5s. 3d.  |   6s. 8d.  |   6s. 5d.  |
  +-------------------------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+

  (b) _Authorized Establishments and Approximate Military Resources of
  the British Empire_ (1906-1907).


  +-------------------------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+-----------+
  |                               |         |         |         | Native  |          |           |
  |                               | British |Reserves |Auxiliary| Troops  | Colonial |           |
  |                               | Regular |   for   | Forces. |(Regular,|  Forces  |  Total.   |
  |                               |  Army.  | Regular |         | Reserve,|(various).|           |
  |                               |         |  Army.  |         | &c.).   |          |           |
  +-------------------------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+-----------+
  | Great Britain                 | 117,000 | 120,000 | 500,000 |   · ·   |   · ·    |   737,000 |
  | Channel Islands, Malta,       |         |         |         |         |          |           |
  |   Bermuda, Colonies and       |         |         |         |         |          |           |
  |   Dependencies                |  65,000 |   · ·   |   6,000 |   · ·   |  30,000  |   101,000 |
  | India                         |  75,000 |   · ·   |  30,000 | 202,000 |   · ·    |   307,000 |
  | Canadian Forces               |   · ·   |   · ·   |  46,000 |   · ·   |  59,000  |   105,000 |
  |                               |         |         |         |         |(reserves)|           |
  | Australian Forces (including  |   · ·   |   · ·   |  70,000 |   · ·   |   · ·    |    70,000 |
  |     New Zealand)              |         |         | (appr.) |         |          |           |
  | South African Forces          |   · ·   |   · ·   |  20,000 |   · ·   |   · ·    |    20,000 |
  |                               |         |         | (appr.) |         |          |           |
  |                               +---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+-----------+
  |    Totals                     | 257,000 | 120,000 | 672,000 | 202,000 |  89,000  | 1,340,000 |
  +-------------------------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----------+-----------+

  _Note._--Ex-soldiers of regular and auxiliary forces, still fit for
  service, and estimated _levées en masse_, are not counted. Enlistment
  chiefly voluntary.

  (c) The Regular Army of the United States has a maximum authorized
  establishment (1906) of 60,000 enlisted men; the Organized Militia was
  at the same date 110,000 strong. Voluntary enlistment throughout. (See
  UNITED STATES.) In 1906-1907 the total numbers available for a _levée
  en masse_ were estimated at 13,000,000.


BRITISH ARMY

60. Prior to the Norman Conquest the armed force of England was
essentially a national militia. Every freeman was bound to bear arms for
the defence of the country, or for the maintenance of order. To give
some organization and training to the levy, the several sheriffs had
authority to call out the contingents of their shires for exercise. The
"fyrd," as the levy was named, was available for home service only, and
could not be moved even from its county except in the case of emergency;
and it was principally to repel oversea invasions that its services
were required. Yet even in those days the necessity of some more
permanent force was felt, and bodies of paid troops were maintained by
the kings at their own cost. Thus Canute and his successors, and even
some of the great earls kept up a household force (_huscarles_). The
English army at Hastings consisted of the _fyrd_ and the corps of
_huscarles_.

The English had fought on foot; but the mailed horseman had now become
the chief factor in war, and the Conqueror introduced into England the
system of tenure by knight-service familiar in Normandy. This was based
on the unit of the feudal host, the _constabularia_ of ten knights, the
Conqueror granting lands in return for finding one or more of these
units (in the case of great barons) or some fraction of them (in the
case of lesser tenants). The obligation was to provide knights to serve,
with horse and arms, for forty days in each year at their own charges.
This obligation could be handed on by sub-enfeoffment through a whole
series of under-tenants. The system being based, not on the duty of
personal service, but on the obligation to supply one or more knights
(or it might be only the fraction of a knight), it was early found
convenient to commute this for a money payment known as "scutage" (see
KNIGHT SERVICE and SCUTAGE). This money enabled the king to hire
mercenaries, or pay such of the feudal troops as were willing to serve
beyond the usual time. From time to time proclamations and statutes were
issued reminding the holders of knights' fees of their duties; but the
immediate object was generally to raise money rather than to enforce
personal service, which became more and more rare. The feudal system had
not, however, abrogated the old Saxon levies, and from these arose two
national institutions--the _posse comitatus_, liable to be called out by
the sheriff to maintain the king's peace, and later the _militia_
(q.v.). The _posse comitatus_, or power of the county, included all
males able to bear arms, peers and spiritual men excepted; and though
primarily a police force it was also bound to assist in the defence of
the country. This levy was organized by the Assize of Arms under Henry
II. (1181), and subsequently under Edward I. (1285) by the so-called
"Statute of Winchester," which determined the numbers and description of
weapons to be kept by each man according to his property, and also
provided for their periodical inspection. The early Plantagenets made
free use of mercenaries. But the weakness of the feudal system in
England was preparing, through the 12th and 13th centuries, a nation in
arms absolutely unique in the middle ages. The Scottish and Welsh wars
were, of course, fought by the feudal levy, but this levy was far from
being the mob of unwilling peasants usual abroad, and from the _fyrd_
came the English archers, whose fame was established by Edward I.'s
wars, and carried to the continent by Edward III. Edward III. realized
that there was better material to be had in his own country than abroad,
and the army with which he invaded France was an army of national
mercenaries, or, more simply, of English soldiers. The army at Creçy was
composed exclusively of English, Welsh and Irish. From the pay list of
the army at the siege of Calais (1346) it appears that all ranks, from
the prince of Wales downward, were paid, no attempt being made to force
even the feudal nobles to serve abroad at their own expense. These
armies were raised mainly by contracts entered into "with some knight or
gentleman expert in war, and of great revenue and livelihood in the
country, to serve the king in war with a number of men." Copies of the
indentures executed when Henry V. raised his army for the invasion of
France in 1415 are in existence. Under these the contracting party
agreed to serve the king abroad for one year, with a given number of men
equipped according to agreement, and at a stipulated rate of pay. A
certain sum was usually paid in advance, and in many cases the crown
jewels and plate were given in pledge for the rest. The profession of
arms seems to have been profitable. The pay of the soldier was high as
compared with that of the ordinary labourer, and he had the prospect of
a share of plunder in addition, so that it was not difficult to raise
men where the commander had a good military reputation. Edward III. is
said to have declined the services of numbers of foreign mercenaries who
wished to enrol under him in his wars against France.

The funds for the payment of these armies were provided partly from the
royal revenues, partly from the fines paid in lieu of military service,
and other fines arbitrarily imposed, and partly by grants from
parliament. As the soldier's contract usually ended with the war, and
the king had seldom funds to renew it even if he so wished, the armies
disbanded of themselves at the close of each war. To secure the services
of the soldier during his contract, acts were passed (18 Henry VI. c.
19; and 7 Henry VII. c. 1) inflicting penalties for desertion; and in
Edward VI.'s reign an act "touching the true service of captains and
soldiers" was passed, somewhat of the nature of a Mutiny Act.

61. It is difficult to summarize the history of the army between the
Hundred Years' War and 1642. The final failure of the English arms in
France was soon followed by the Wars of the Roses, and in the long
period of civil strife the only national force remaining to England was
the Calais garrison. Henry VIII. was a soldier-king, but he shared the
public feeling for the old bow and bill, and English armies which served
abroad did not, it seems, win the respect of the advanced professional
soldiers of the continent. In 1519 the Venetian ambassador described the
English forces as consisting of 150,000 men whose peculiar, though not
exclusive, weapon was the long bow (Fortescue i. 117). The national levy
made in 1588 to resist the Armada and the threat of invasion produced
about 750 lancers (heavy-armed cavalry), 2000 light horse and 56,000
foot, beside 20,000 men employed in watching the coasts. The small
proportion of mounted men is very remarkable in a country in which
Cromwell was before long to illustrate the full power of cavalry on the
battlefield. It is indeed not unfair to regard this army as a
miscellaneous levy of inferior quality.

It was in cavalry that England was weakest, and by three different acts
it was sought to improve the breed of horses, though the light horse of
the northern counties had a good reputation, and even won the admiration
of the emperor Charles V. Perhaps the best organized force in England at
this time was the London volunteer association which ultimately became
the Honourable Artillery Company. At Floddon the spirit of the old
English yeomanry triumphed over the outward form of continental
battalions which the Scots had adopted, and doubtless the great victory
did much to retard military progress in England. The chief service of
Henry VIII. to the British army was the formation of an artillery train,
in which he took a special interest. Before he died the forces came to
consist of a few permanent troops (the bodyguard and the fortress
artillery service), the militia or general levy, which was for home, and
indeed for county, service only, and the paid armies which were
collected for a foreign war and disbanded at the conclusion of peace,
and were recruited on the same principle of indents which had served in
the Hundred Years' War. In the reign of Mary, the old Statute of
Winchester was revised (1553), and the new act provided for a
readjustment of the county contingents and in some degree for the
rearmament of the militia. But, from the fall of Calais and the
expedition to Havre up to the battle of the Dunes a century later, the
intervention of British forces in foreign wars was always futile and
generally disastrous. During this time, however, the numerous British
regiments in the service of Holland learned, in the long war of Dutch
independence, the art of war as it had developed on the continent since
1450, and assimilated the regimental system and the drill and armament
of the best models. Thus it was that in 1642 there were many hundreds of
trained and war-experienced officers and sergeants available for the
armies of the king and the parliament. By this time bows and bills had
long disappeared even from the militia, and the Thirty Years' War,
which, even more than the Low Countries, offered a career for the
adventurous man, contributed yet more trained officers and soldiers to
the English and Scottish forces. So closely indeed was war now studied
by Englishmen that the respective adherents of the Dutch and the Swedish
systems quarrelled on the eve of the battle of Edgehill. Francis and
Horace Vere, Sir John Norris, and other Englishmen had become generals
of European reputation. Skippon, Astley, Goring, Rupert, and many others
soon to be famous were distinguished as company and regimental officers
in the battles and sieges of Germany and the Low Countries.

The home forces of England had, as has been said, little or nothing to
revive their ancient renown. Instead, they had come to be regarded as a
menace to the constitution. In Queen Elizabeth's time the demands of the
Irish wars had led to frequent forced levies, and the occasional
billeting of the troops in England also gave rise to murmurs, but the
brilliancy and energy of her reign covered a great deal, and the
peaceful policy of her successor removed all immediate cause of
complaint. But after the accession of Charles I. we find the army a
constant and principal source of dispute between the king and
parliament, until under William III. it is finally established on a
constitutional footing. Charles, wishing to support the Elector Palatine
in the Thirty Years' War, raised an army of 10,000 men. He was already
encumbered with debts, and the parliament refused all grants, on which
he had recourse to forced loans. The army was sent to Spain, but
returned without effecting anything, and was not disbanded, as usual,
but billeted on the inhabitants. The billeting was the more deeply
resented as it appeared that the troops were purposely billeted on those
who had resisted the loan. Forced loans, billeting and martial law--all
directly connected with the maintenance of the army--formed the main
substance of the grievances set forth in the Petition of Right. In
accepting this petition, Charles gave up the right to maintain an army
without consent of parliament; and when in 1639 he wished to raise one
to act against the rebellious Scots, parliament was called together, and
its sanction obtained, on the plea that the army was necessary for the
defence of England. This army again became the source of dispute between
the king and parliament, and finally both sides appealed to arms.

62. The first years of the Great Rebellion (q.v.) showed primarily the
abundance of good officers produced by the wars on the continent, and in
the second place the absolute inadequacy of the military system of the
country; the commissions of array, militia ordinances, &c., had at last
to give way to regular methods of enlistment and a central army
administration. It was clear, at the same time, that when the struggle
was one of principles and not of dynastic politics, excellent recruits,
far different from the wretched levies who had been gathered together
for the Spanish war, were to be had in any reasonable number. These
causes combined to produce the "New Model" which, originating in
Cromwell's own cavalry and the London trained bands of foot, formed of
picked men and officers, severely disciplined, and organized and
administered in the right way, quickly proved its superiority over all
other armies in the field, and in a few years raised its general to
supreme civil power. The 15th of February 1645 was the birthday of the
British standing army, and from its first concentration at Windsor Park
dates the scarlet uniform. The men were for the most part voluntarily
enlisted from existing corps, though deficiencies had immediately to be
made good by impressment.

Four months later the New Model decided the quarrel of king and
parliament at Naseby. When Cromwell, the first lieutenant-general and
the second captain-general of the army, sent his veterans to take part
in the wars of the continent they proved themselves a match for the best
soldiers in Europe. On the restoration of the monarchy in 1660 the army,
now some 80,000 strong, was disbanded. It had enforced the execution of
Charles I., it had dissolved parliament, and England had been for years
governed under a military regime. Thus the most popular measure of the
Restoration was the dissolution of the army. Only Monk's regiment of
foot (now the Coldstream Guards) survived to represent the New Model in
the army of to-day. At the same time the troops (now regiments) of
household cavalry, and the regiment of foot which afterwards became the
Grenadier Guards, were formed, chiefly from Royalists, though the
disbanded New Model contributed many experienced recruits. The permanent
forces of the crown came to consist once more of the "garrisons and
guards," maintained by the king from the revenue allotted to him for
carrying on the government of the country. The "garrisons" were
commissioned to special fortresses--the Tower of London, Portsmouth, &c.
The "guards" comprised the sovereign's bodyguards ("the yeomen of the
guard" and "gentlemen-at-arms," who had existed since the times of Henry
VII. and VIII.), and the regiments mentioned above. Even this small
force, at first not exceeding 3000 men, was looked on with jealousy by
parliament, and every attempt to increase it was opposed. The
acquisition of Tangier and Bombay, as part of the dower of the infanta
of Portugal, led to the formation of a troop of horse (now the 1st Royal
Dragoons) and a regiment of infantry (the 2nd, now Queen's R.W. Surrey,
regiment) for the protection of the former; and a regiment of infantry
(afterwards transferred to the East India Company) to hold the latter
(1661). These troops, not being stationed in the kingdom, created no
distrust; but whenever, as on several occasions during Charles's reign,
considerable armies were raised, they were mostly disbanded when the
occasion ceased. Several regiments, however, were added to the permanent
force, including Dumbarton's regiment (the 1st or Royal Scots, nicknamed
Pontius Pilate's Bodyguard)--which had a long record of service in the
armies of the continent, and represented the Scots brigade of Gustavus
Adolphus's army--and the 3rd Buffs, representing the English regiments
of the Dutch army and through them the volunteers of 1572, and on
Charles's death in 1685 the total force of "guards and garrisons" had
risen to 16,500, of whom about one-half formed what we should now call
the standing army.

63. James II., an experienced soldier and sailor, was more obstinate
than his predecessor in his efforts to increase the army, and Monmouth's
rebellion afforded him the opportunity. A force of about 20,000 men was
maintained in England, and a large camp formed at Hounslow. Eight
cavalry and twelve infantry regiments (the senior of which was the 7th
"Royal" Fusiliers, formed on a new French model) were raised, and given
the numbers which, with few exceptions, they still bear. James even
proposed to disband the militia, which had not distinguished itself in
the late rebellion, and further augment the standing army; and although
the proposal was instantly rejected, he continued to add to the army
till the Revolution deprived him of his throne. The army which he had
raised was to a great extent disbanded, the Irish soldiers especially,
whom he had introduced in large numbers on account of their religion,
being all sent home.

The condition of the army immediately engaged the attention of
parliament. The Bill of Rights had definitely established that "the
raising or keeping of a standing army within the kingdom, unless it be
by the consent of parliament, is against the law," and past experience
made them very jealous of such a force. But civil war was imminent,
foreign war certain; and William had only a few Dutch troops, and the
remains of James's army, with which to meet the storm. Parliament
therefore sanctioned a standing army, trusting to the checks established
by the Bill of Rights and Act of Settlement, and by placing the pay of
the army under the control of the Commons. An event soon showed the
altered position of the army. A regiment mutinied and declared for
James. It was surrounded and compelled to lay down its arms; but William
found himself without legal power to deal with the mutineers. He
therefore applied to parliament, and in 1689 was passed the first Mutiny
Act, which, after repeating the provisions regarding the army inserted
in the Bill of Rights, and declaring the illegality of martial law, gave
power to the crown to deal with the offences of mutiny and desertion by
courts-martial. From this event is often dated the history of the
standing army as a constitutional force (but see Fortescue, _British
Army_, i. 335).

64. Under William the army was considerably augmented. The old regiments
of James's army were reorganized, retaining, however, their original
numbers, and three of cavalry and eleven of infantry (numbered to the
28th) were added. In 1690 parliament sanctioned a force of 62,000 men,
further increased to 65,000 in 1691; but on peace being made in 1697
the Commons immediately passed resolutions to the effect that the land
forces be reduced to 7000 men in England and 12,000 in Ireland. The War
of the Spanish Succession quickly obliged Great Britain again to raise a
large army, at one time exceeding 200,000 men; but of these the greater
number were foreign troops engaged for the continental war. Fortescue
(_op. cit._ i. 555) estimates the British forces at home and abroad as
70,000 men at the highest figure. After the peace of Utrecht the force
was again reduced to 8000 men in Great Britain and 11,000 in the
plantations (i.e. colonies) and abroad. From that time to the present
the strength of the army has been determined by the annual votes of
parliament, and though frequently the subject of warm debates in both
houses, it has ceased to be a matter of dispute between the crown and
parliament. The following table shows the fluctuations from that time
onward--the peace years showing the average peace strength, the war
years the maximum to which the forces were raised:--

        PEACE.           |          WAR.
  Year.         Number.  |   Year.         Number.
  1750          18,857   |   1745          74,187
  1793          17,013   |   1761          67,776
  1822          71,790   |   1777          90,734
  1845         100,011   |   1812         245,996
  1857         156,995   |   1856         275,079
  1866         203,404   |   1858         222,784

  _Note._--Prior to 1856 the British forces serving in India are not
  included.

During William's reign the small English army bore an honourable part in
the wars against Louis XIV., and especially distinguished itself under
the king at Steinkirk, Neerwinden and Namur. Twenty English regiments
took part in the campaign of 1694. In the great wars of Queen Anne's
reign the British army under Marlborough acquired a European reputation.
The cavalry, which had called forth the admiration of Prince Eugene when
passed in review before him after its long march across Germany (1704),
especially distinguished itself in the battle of Blenheim, and
Ramillies, Oudenarde and Malplaquet were added to the list of English
victories. But the army as usual was reduced at once, and even the
cadres of old regiments were disbanded, though the alarm of Jacobite
insurrections soon brought about the re-creation of many of these.
During the reign of the first and second Georges an artillery corps was
organized, and the army further increased by five regiments of cavalry
and thirty-five of infantry. Fresh laurels were won at Dettingen (1743),
in which battle twenty English regiments took part; and though Fontenoy
(q.v.) was a day of disaster for the English arms, it did not lower
their reputation, but rather added to it. Six regiments of infantry won
the chief glory of Prince Ferdinand's victory of Minden (q.v.) in 1759,
and throughout the latter part of the Seven Years' War the British
contingent of Ferdinand's army served with almost unvarying distinction
in numerous actions. About this time the first English regiments were
sent to India, and the 39th shared in Clive's victory at Plassey. During
the first half of George III.'s reign the army was principally occupied
in America; and though the conquest of Canada may be counted with pride
among its exploits, this page in its history is certainly the darkest.
English armies capitulated at Saratoga and at Yorktown, and the war
ended by the evacuation of the revolted states of America and the
acknowledgment of their independence.

65. Before passing to the great French Revolutionary wars, from which a
fresh period in the history of the army may be dated, it will be well to
review the general condition of the army in the preceding century,
injured as it was by the distrust of parliament and departmental
weakness and corruption which went far to neutralize the good work of
the duke of Cumberland as commander-in-chief and of Pitt as war
administrator. Regiments were raised almost as in the days of the
Edwards. The crown contracted with a distinguished soldier, or gentleman
of high position, who undertook to raise the men, receiving a certain
sum as bounty-money for each recruit. In some cases, in lieu of money,
the contractor received the nomination of all or some of the officers,
and recouped himself by selling the commissions. This system--termed
"raising men for rank"--was retained for many years, and originally
helped to create the "purchase system" of promotion. For the maintenance
of the regiment the colonel received an annual sum sufficient to cover
the pay of the men, and the expenses of clothing and of recruiting. The
colonel was given a "beating order," without which no enlistment was
legal, and was responsible for maintaining his regiment at full
strength. "Muster masters" were appointed to muster the regiments, and
to see that the men for whom pay was drawn were really effective.
Sometimes, when casualties were numerous, the allowance was insufficient
to meet the cost of recruiting, and special grants were made. In war
time the ranks were also filled by released debtors, pardoned criminals,
and impressed paupers and vagrants. Where the men were raised by
voluntary enlistment, the period of service was a matter of contract
between the colonel and the soldier, and the engagement was usually for
life; but exceptional levies were enlisted for the duration of war, or
for periods of three or five years. As for the officers, the low rate of
pay and the purchase system combined to exclude all but men of
independent incomes. Appointments (except when in the gift of the
colonel) were made by the king at home, and by the commander-in-chief
abroad; even in Ireland the power of appointment rested with the local
commander of the forces until the Union. The soldier was clothed by his
colonel, the charge being defrayed from the "stock fund." The army lived
in barracks, camps or billets. The barrack accommodation in Great
Britain at the beginning of the 18th century only sufficed for five
thousand men; and though it had gradually risen to twenty thousand in
1792, a large part of the army was constantly in camps and billets--the
latter causing endless complaints and difficulties.

66. The first efforts of the army in the long war with France did not
tend to raise its reputation amongst the armies of Europe. The campaigns
of allied armies under the duke of York in the Netherlands, in which
British contingents figured largely, were uniformly unsuccessful
(1793-94 and 1799), though in this respect they resembled those of
almost all soldiers who commanded against the "New French" army. The
policy of the younger Pitt sent thousands of the best soldiers to
unprofitable employment, and indeed to death, in the West Indies. At
home the administration was corrupt and ineffective, and the people
generally shared the contemptuous feeling towards the regular army which
was then prevalent in Europe. But a better era began with the
appointment of Frederick Augustus, duke of York, as commander-in-chief
of the army. He did much to improve its organization, discipline and
training, and was ably seconded by commanders of distinguished ability.
Under Abercromby in Egypt, under Stuart at Maida, and under Lake,
Wellesley and others in India, the British armies again attached victory
to their standards, and made themselves feared and respected. Later,
Napoleon's threat of invading England excited her martial spirit to the
highest pitch to which it had ever attained. Finally, her military glory
was raised by the series of successful campaigns in the Peninsula, until
it culminated in the great victory of Waterloo; and the army emerged
from the war with the most solidly founded reputation of any in Europe.

The events of this period belong to the history of Europe, and fall
outside the province of an article dealing only with the army. The great
augmentations required during the war were effected partly by raising
additional regiments, but principally by increasing the number of
battalions, some regiments being given as many as four. On the
conclusion of peace these battalions were reduced, but the regiments
were retained, and the army was permanently increased from about twenty
thousand, the usual peace establishment before the war, to an average of
eighty thousand. The duke of York, on first appointment to the command,
had introduced a uniform drill throughout the army, which was further
modified according to Sir David Dundas's system in 1800; and, under the
direction of Sir John Moore and others, a high perfection of drill was
attained. At the beginning of the war, the infantry, like that of the
continental powers, was formed in three ranks; but a two-rank formation
had been introduced in America and in India and gradually became
general, and in 1809 was finally approved. In the Peninsula the army was
permanently organized in divisions, usually consisting of two brigades
of three or four battalions each, and one or two batteries of artillery.
The duke of Wellington had also brought the commissariat and the army
transport to a high pitch of perfection, but in the long peace which
followed these establishments were reduced or broken up.

67. The period which elapsed between Waterloo and the Crimean War is
marked by a number of Indian and colonial wars, but by no organic
changes in the army, with perhaps the single exception of the Limited
Service Act of 1847, by which enlistment for ten or twelve years, with
power to re-engage to complete twenty-one, was substituted for the life
enlistments hitherto in force. The army went to sleep on the laurels and
recollections of the Peninsula. The duke of Wellington, for many years
commander-in-chief, was too anxious to hide it away in the colonies in
order to save it from further reductions or utter extinction, to attempt
any great administrative reforms. The force which was sent to the Crimea
in 1854 was an agglomeration of battalions, individually of the finest
quality, but unused to work together, without trained staff,
administrative departments or army organization of any kind. The lesson
of the winter before Sevastopol was dearly bought, but was not thrown
away. From that time successive war ministers and commanders-in-chief
have laboured perseveringly at the difficult task of army organization
and administration. Foremost in the work was Sidney Herbert (Lord
Herbert of Lea), the soldier's friend, who fell a sacrifice to his
labours (1861), but not before he had done much for the army. The whole
system of administration was revised. In 1854 it was inconceivably
complicated and cumbersome. The "secretary of state for war and
colonies," sitting at the Colonial Office, had a general but vague
control, practically limited to times of war. The "secretary at war" was
the parliamentary representative of the army, and exercised a certain
financial control, not extending, however, to the ordnance corps. The
commander-in-chief was responsible to the sovereign alone in all matters
connected with the discipline, command or patronage of the army, but to
the secretary at war in financial matters. The master-general and board
of ordnance were responsible for the supply of material on requisition,
but were otherwise independent, and had the artillery and engineers
under them. The commissariat department had its headquarters at the
treasury, and until 1852 the militia were under the home secretary. A
number of minor subdepartments, more or less independent, also existed,
causing endless confusion, correspondence and frequent collision. In
1854 the business of the colonies was separated from that of war, and
the then secretary of state, the duke of Newcastle, assumed control over
all the other administrative officers. In the following year the
secretary of state was appointed secretary at war also, and the duties
of the two offices amalgamated. The same year the commissariat office
was transferred to the war department, and the Board of Ordnance
abolished, its functions being divided between the commander-in-chief
and the secretary of state. The minor departments were gradually
absorbed, and the whole administration divided under two great chiefs,
sitting at the war office and Horse Guards respectively. In 1870 these
two were welded into one, and the war office now existing was
constituted.

Corresponding improvements were effected in every branch. The system of
clothing the soldiers was altered, the contracts being taken from the
colonels of regiments, who received a money allowance instead, and the
clothing supplied from government manufactories. The pay, food and
general condition of the soldier were improved; reading and recreation
rooms, libraries, gymnasia and facilities for games of all kinds being
provided. Barracks (q.v.) were built on improved principles, and a large
permanent camp was formed at Aldershot, where considerable forces were
collected and manoeuvred together. Various educational establishments
were opened, a staff college was established for the instruction of
officers wishing to qualify for the staff, and regimental schools were
improved.

68. The Indian Mutiny of 1857, followed by the transference of the
government of India, led to important changes. The East India Company's
white troops were amalgamated with the Queen's army, and the whole
reorganized (see _Indian Army_ below).

The fact that such difficulties as those of 1854 and 1857, not to speak
of the disorders of 1848, had been surmounted by the weak army which
remained over from the reductions of forty years, coupled with the
instantaneous and effective rejoinder to the threats of the French
colonels in 1859--the creation of the Volunteer Force--certainly lulled
the nation and its representatives into a false sense of security. Thus
the two obvious lessons of the German successes of 1866 and 1870--the
power of a national army for offensive invasion, and the rapidity with
which such an army when thoroughly organized could be moved--created the
greatest sensation in England. The year 1870 is, therefore, of prime
importance in the history of the regular forces of the crown. The
strength of the home forces at different times between 1815 and 1870 is
given as follows (Biddulph, _Lord Cardwell at the War Office_):--

  +------+-----------------+--------------+-------------+
  |      |    Regulars.    | Auxiliaries. | Field Guns. |
  +------+-----------------+--------------+-------------+
  | 1820 |      64,426     |    60,740    |      22     |
  | 1830 |      50,876     |    34,614    |      30     |
  | 1840 |      53,379     |    20,791    |      30     |
  | 1850 |      68,538     |    29,868    |      70     |
  | 1860 |     100,701     |   229,301    |     180     |
  | 1870 |      89,051     |   281,692    |     180     |
  |      | (later 109,000) |              |             |
  +------+-----------------+--------------+-------------+

69. The period of reform commences therefore with 1870, and is connected
indissolubly with the name of Edward, Lord Cardwell, secretary of state
for war 1869-1874. In the matter of organization the result of his
labours was seen in the perfectly arranged expedition to Ashanti (1874);
as for recruiting, the introduction of short service and reserve
enlistment together with many rearrangements of pay, &c., proved so far
popular that the number of men annually enlisted was more than trebled
(11,742 in 1869; 39,971 in 1885; 40,729 in 1898), and so far efficient
that "Lord Cardwell's ... system, with but small modification, gave us
during the Boer War 80,000 reservists, of whom 96 or 97% were found
efficient, and has enabled us to keep an army of 150,000 regulars in the
field for 15 months" (Rt. Hon. St John Brodrick, House of Commons, 8th
of March 1901). The localization of the army, subsequently completed by
the territorial system of 1882, was commenced under Cardwell's régime,
and a measure which encountered much powerful opposition at the time,
the abolition of the purchase of commissions, was also effected by him
(1871). The machinery of administration was improved, and autumn
manoeuvres were practised on a scale hitherto unknown in England. In
1871 certain powers over the militia, formerly held by lords-lieutenant,
were transferred to the crown, and the auxiliary forces were placed
directly under the generals commanding districts. In 1881 came an
important change in the infantry of the line, which was entirely
remodelled in two-battalion regiments bearing territorial titles. This
measure (the "linked battalion" system) aroused great opposition; it was
dictated chiefly by the necessity of maintaining the Indian and colonial
garrisons at full strength, and was begun during Lord Cardwell's tenure
of office, the principle being that each regiment should have one
battalion at home and one abroad, the latter being fed by the former,
which in its turn drew upon the reserve to complete it for war. The
working of the system is to be considered as belonging to present
practice rather than to history, and the reader is therefore referred to
the article UNITED KINGDOM. On these general lines the army progressed
up to 1899, when the Boer War called into the field on a distant theatre
of war all the resources of the regular army, and in addition drew
largely upon the existing auxiliary forces, and even upon wholly
untrained civilians, for the numbers required to make war in an area
which comprised nearly all Africa south of the Zambezi. As the result
of this war (see TRANSVAAL) successive schemes of reform were undertaken
by the various war ministers, leading up to Mr Haldane's "territorial"
scheme (1908), which put the organization of the forces in the United
Kingdom (q.v.) on a new basis.

Innovations had not been unknown in the period immediately preceding the
war; as a single example we may take the development of the mounted
infantry (q.v.). It was natural that the war itself, and especially a
war of so peculiar a character, should intensify the spirit of
innovation. The corresponding period in the German army lasted from 1871
to 1888, and such a period of unsettlement is indeed the common,
practically the universal, result of a war on a large scale. Much that
was of value in the Prussian methods, faithfully and even slavishly
copied by Great Britain as by others after 1870, was temporarily
forgotten, but the pendulum swung back again, and the Russo-Japanese War
led to the disappearance, so far as Europe was concerned, of many
products of the period of doubt and controversy which followed the
struggle in South Africa. Side by side with continuous discussions of
the greater questions of military policy, amongst these being many
well-reasoned proposals for universal service, the technical and
administrative efficiency of the service has undergone great
improvement, and this appears to be of more real and permanent value
than the greater part of the solutions given for the larger problems.
The changes in the organization of the artillery afford the best
evidence of this spirit of practical and technical reform. In the first
place the old "royal regiment" was divided into two branches. The
officers for the field and horse artillery stand now on one seniority
list for promotion, the garrison, heavy and mountain batteries on
another. In each branch important changes of organization have been also
made. In the field branch, both for Royal Field and Royal Horse
Artillery, the battery is no longer the one unit for all purposes. A
lieutenant-colonel's command, the "brigade," has been created. It
consists of a group, in the horse artillery of two, in the field
artillery of three batteries. For the practical training of the horse
and field artillery a large area of ground on the wild open country of
Dartmoor, near Okehampton, has for some years been utilized. A similar
school has been started at Glen Imaal in Ireland, and a new training
ground has been opened on Salisbury Plain. Similarly, with the Royal
Garrison Artillery a more perfect system has been devised for the
regulation and practice of the fire of each fortress, in accordance with
the varying circumstances of its position, &c. A practice school for the
garrison artillery has been established at Lydd, but the various coast
fortresses themselves carry out regular practice with service
ammunition.


INDIAN ARMY

70. Historically, the Indian army grew up in three distinct divisions,
the Bengal, Madras and Bombay armies. This separation was the natural
result of the original foundation of separate settlements and factories
in India; and each retains to the present day much of its old identity.

  _Bengal._--The English traders in Bengal were long restricted by the
  native princes to a military establishment of an ensign and 30 men;
  and this force may be taken as the germ of the Indian army. In 1681
  Bengal received the first reinforcement from Madras, and two years
  later a company was sent from Madras, raising the little Bengal army
  to a strength of 250 Europeans. In 1695 native soldiers were first
  enlisted. In 1701-1702 the garrison of Calcutta consisted of 120
  soldiers and seamen gunners. In 1756 occurred the defence of Calcutta
  against Suraj-ud-Dowlah, and the terrible tragedy of the Black Hole.
  The work of reconquest and punishment was carried out by an expedition
  from Madras, and in the little force with which Clive gained the great
  victory of Plassey the Bengal army was represented by a few hundred
  men only (the British 39th, now Dorsetshire regiment, which was also
  present, was the first King's regiment sent to India, and bears the
  motto _Primus in Indis_); but from this date the military power of the
  Company rapidly increased. A company of artillery had been organized
  in 1748; and in 1757, shortly before Plassey, the 1st regiment of
  Bengal native infantry was raised. Next, in 1759 the native infantry
  was augmented, in 1760 dragoons were raised, and in 1763 the total
  forces amounted to 1500 Europeans and 12 battalions of native infantry
  (11,500 men). In 1765 the European infantry was divided into 3
  regiments, and the whole force was organized in 3 brigades, each
  consisting of 1 company of artillery, 1 regiment European infantry, 1
  troop of native cavalry, and 7 battalions of sepoys. In 1766, on the
  reduction of some money allowances, a number of officers of the Bengal
  army agreed to resign their commissions simultaneously. This dangerous
  combination was promptly put down by Clive, to whom the Bengal army
  may be said to owe its existence.

  The constant wars and extensions of dominion of the next thirty years
  led to further augmentations; the number of brigades and of European
  regiments was increased to 6; and in 1794 the Bengal army numbered
  about 3500 Europeans and 24,000 natives.

  71. _Madras._--The first armed force in the Madras presidency was the
  little garrison of Armegon on the Coromandel coast, consisting of 28
  soldiers. In 1644 Fort St George was built and garrisoned, and in 1653
  Madras became a presidency. In 1745 the garrison of Fort St George
  consisted of 200 Europeans, while a similar number, with the addition
  of 200 "Topasses" (descendants of the Portuguese), garrisoned Fort St
  David. In 1748 the various independent companies on the Coromandel
  coast and other places were consolidated into the Madras European
  regiment. From this time the military history of the Madras army was
  full of incident, and it bore the principal part in Clive's victories
  of Arcot, Kavaripak and Plassey. In 1754 the 39th regiment of the
  Royal army was sent to Madras. In 1758 three others followed. In 1772
  the Madras army numbered 3000 European infantry and 16,000 natives,
  and in 1784 the number of native troops had risen to 34,000.

  72. _Bombay._--The island of Bombay formed part of the marriage
  portion received by Charles II. with the infanta of Portugal, and in
  1662 the Bombay regiment of Europeans was raised to defend it. In 1668
  the island was granted to the Company, and the regiment at the same
  time transferred to them. In 1708 Bombay became a presidency, but it
  did not play so important a part as the others in the early extension
  of British power, and its forces were not so rapidly developed. It is
  said, however, to have been the first to discipline native troops, and
  Bombay sepoys were sent to Madras in 1747, and took part in the battle
  of Plassey in 1757. In 1772 the Bombay army consisted of 2500
  Europeans and 3500 sepoys, but in 1794, in consequence of the
  struggles with the Mahratta power, the native troops had been
  increased to 24,000.

  73. _Consolidation of the Army._--In 1796 a general reorganization
  took place. Hitherto the officers in each presidency had been borne on
  general "lists," according to branches of the service. These lists
  were now broken up and cadres of regiments formed. The colonels and
  lieutenant-colonels remained on separate lists, and an establishment
  of general officers was created, while the divisional commands were
  distributed between the royal and Company's officers. Further
  augmentations took place, consequent on the great extension of British
  supremacy. In 1798 the native infantry in India numbered 122
  battalions. In 1808 the total force in India amounted to 24,500
  Europeans and 154,500 natives.

  The first half of the 19th century was filled with wars and
  annexations and the army was steadily increased. Horse artillery was
  formed, and the artillery in general greatly augmented. "Irregular
  cavalry" was raised in Bengal and Bombay, and recruited from a better
  class of troopers, who received high pay and found their own horses
  and equipment. "Local forces" were raised in various parts from time
  to time, the most important being the Punjab irregular force (raised
  after the annexation of the Punjab in 1849), consisting of 3 field
  batteries, 5 regiments of cavalry, and 5 of infantry, and the Nagpur
  and Oudh irregular forces. Another kind of force, which had been
  gradually formed, was that called "contingents"--troops raised by the
  protected native states. The strongest of these was that of Hyderabad,
  originally known as the nizam's army. Changes were also made in the
  organization of the army. Sanitary improvements were effected,
  manufacturing establishments instituted or increased, and the
  administration generally improved.

  74. _The Army before the Mutiny._--The officering and recruiting of
  the three armies were in all essentials similar. The officers were
  mainly supplied by the Company's military college at Addiscombe in
  Surrey (established in 1809), and by direct appointments. The Bengal
  army was recruited from Hindustan, the infantry being mostly drawn
  from Oudh and the great Gangetic plains. The soldiers were chiefly
  high-caste Hindus, a sixth being Mahommedans. The cavalry was composed
  mainly of Mahommedans, recruited from Rohilkhand and the Gangetic
  Doab. The only other elements in the army were four Gurkha regiments,
  enlisted from Nepal, and the local Punjab irregular force. The Madras
  army was chiefly recruited from that presidency, or the native states
  connected with it, and consisted of Mahommedans, Brahmans, and of the
  Mahratta, Tamil and Telugu peoples. The Bombay army was recruited from
  its own presidency, with some Hindustanis, but chiefly formed of
  Mahrattas and Mahommedans; the Bombay light cavalry mainly from
  Hindustan proper.

  Including the local and irregular troops (about 100,000 strong), the
  total strength amounted to 38,000 Europeans of all arms, with 276
  field guns, and 348,000 native troops, with 248 field guns,--truly a
  magnificent establishment, and, outwardly, worthy of the great empire
  which England had created for herself in the East, but inwardly
  unsound, and on the very verge of the great mutiny of 1857.

  In 1856 the establishment in the several presidencies was a follows:--

    +-------------------------------+---------+---------+---------+-------+
    |                               | Bengal. | Madras. | Bombay. | Total.|
    +-------------------------------+---------+---------+---------+-------+
    | British Cavalry Regiments     |    2    |    1    |    1    |    4  |
    | British Infantry Battalions   |   15    |    3    |    4    |   22  |
    | Company's European Battalions |    3    |    3    |    3    |    9  |
    | European and Native Artillery |         |         |         |       |
    |   Battalions                  |   12    |    7    |    5    |   24  |
    | Native Infantry Battalions    |   74    |   52    |   29    |  155  |
    | Native Cavalry Regiments      |   28    |    8    |    3    |   39  |
    +-------------------------------+---------+---------+---------+-------+

  An account of the events of 1857-58 will be found under INDIAN MUTINY.
  After the catastrophe the reorganization of the military forces on
  different lines was of course unavoidable. Fortunately, the armies of
  Madras and Bombay had been almost wholly untouched by the spirit of
  disaffection, and in the darkest days the Sikhs, though formerly
  enemies of the British, had not only remained faithful to them, but
  had rendered them powerful assistance.

  75. _The Reorganization._--By the autumn of 1858 the mutiny was
  virtually crushed, and the task of reorganization commenced. On the
  1st of September 1858 the East India Company ceased to rule, and Her
  Majesty's government took up the reins of power. On the important
  question of the army, the opinions and advice of the most
  distinguished soldiers and civilians were invited. Masses of reports
  and evidence were collected in India, and by a royal commission in
  England. On the report of this commission the new system was based.
  The local European army was abolished, and its personnel amalgamated
  with the royal army. The artillery became wholly British, with the
  exception of a few native mountain batteries. The total strength of
  the British troops, all of the royal army, was largely increased,
  while that of the native troops was largely diminished. Three distinct
  native armies--those of Bengal, Madras and Bombay--were still
  maintained. The reduced Indian armies consisted of cavalry and
  infantry only, with a very few artillery, distributed as follows:--

                    Battalions  Regiments
                     Infantry.   Cavalry.
    Bengal              49         19
    Madras              40          4
    Bombay              30          7
    Punjab Force        12          6
                       ---        ---
        Total          131         36

  There were also three sapper battalions, one to each army.

  The Punjab force, which had 5 batteries of native artillery attached
  to it, continued under the Punjab government. In addition, the
  Hyderabad contingent of 4 cavalry, 6 infantry regiments and 4
  batteries, and a local force in central India of 2 regiments cavalry
  and 6 infantry, were retained under the government of India. After all
  the arrangements had been completed the army of India consisted of
  62,000 British and 125,000 native troops.

  76. _The Modern Army._--The college at Addiscombe was closed in 1860,
  and the direct appointment of British officers to the Indian local
  forces ceased in 1861. In that year a staff corps was formed by royal
  warrant in each presidency "to supply a body of officers for service
  in India, by whom various offices and appointments hitherto held by
  officers borne on the strength of the several corps in the Indian
  forces shall in future be held." Special roles were laid down. The
  corps was at first recruited partly from officers of the Company's
  service and partly from the royal army, holding staff appointments
  (the new regimental employment being considered as staff duty) and all
  kinds of political and civil posts; for the system established later
  see INDIA: _Army_. The native artillery and sappers and miners were to
  be officered from the Royal Artillery and Royal Engineers. The only
  English warrant and non-commissioned officers now to be employed in
  the native army were to be those of the Royal Engineers with the
  sappers and miners.

  A radical change in the regimental organization of all the native
  armies was effected in 1863. The Punjab Frontier Force was from the
  first organized on the irregular system, which was there seen at its
  best, as also were the new regiments raised during the Mutiny. This
  system was now applied to the whole army, each regiment and battalion
  having seven British officers attached to it for command and
  administrative duties, the immediate command of troops and companies
  being left to the native officers. Thus was the system reverted to,
  which was initiated by Clive, of a few British officers only being
  attached to each corps for the higher regimental duties of command and
  control. Time had shown that this was more effective than the regular
  system instituted in 1796 of British officers commanding troops and
  companies.

  A new spirit was breathed into the army. The supremacy of the
  commandant was the main principle. He was less hampered by the
  unbending regulations enjoined upon the old regular regiments, had
  greater powers of reward and punishment, was in a position to assume
  larger responsibility and greater freedom of action, and was supported
  in the full exercise of his authority. The system made the officers.

  Up to 1881 the native army underwent little change, but in that year
  18 regiments of infantry and 4 of cavalry were broken up, almost the
  same total number of men being maintained in fewer and stronger
  regiments. The only reduction made in the British troops was in the
  Royal Artillery, which was diminished by 11 batteries. The events of
  1885, however, on the Russo-Afghan frontier, led to augmentations. The
  11 batteries Royal Artillery were brought back from England; each of
  the 9 British cavalry regiments in India received a fourth squadron;
  each of the British infantry battalions was increased by 100 men, and
  3 battalions were added. The native cavalry had a fourth squadron
  added to each regiment; three of the four regiments broken up in 1881
  were re-raised, while the native infantry was increased in regimental
  strength, and 9 new battalions raised composed of Gurkhas, Sikhs and
  Punjabis. The addition in all amounted to 10,600 British and 21,200
  native troops. In 1890 the strength of the army of India was 73,000
  British and, including irregulars, 147,500 native troops. For the
  Indian volunteers, see VOLUNTEERS.

  Many important changes took place between 1885 and 1904. Seven Madras
  infantry regiments were converted into regiments for service in Burma,
  composed of Gurkhas and hardy races from northern India; six Bengal
  and Bombay regiments were similarly converted into regiments of
  Punjabis, Pathans and Gurkhas; the native mountain batteries have been
  increased to ten; a system of linked battalions has been introduced
  with the formation of regimental centres for mobilization; and
  reserves for infantry and mountain artillery have been formed. The
  number of British officers with each regiment has been increased to
  nine, and the two wing commands in battalions have been converted into
  4 double-company commands of 250 men each, under a British commander,
  who is responsible to the commandant for their training and
  efficiency, the command of the companies being left to the native
  officers. This system, which is analogous to the squadron command in
  the cavalry, admits of closer individual attention to training, and
  distributes among the senior British regimental officers effective
  responsibility of a personal kind.

  An addition (at the imperial expense) of five battalions of Sikhs,
  Punjabi Mahommedans, Jats and hillmen in northern India was made in
  1900, as the result of India being called upon to furnish garrisons
  for Mauritius and other stations overseas.

  The unification of the triplicate army departments in the different
  presidential armies was completed in 1891, all being brought directly
  under the supreme government; and the three separate staff corps of
  Bengal, Madras and Bombay were fused into one in 1891 as the Indian
  Staff Corps. The term "Indian Staff Corps" was in turn replaced by
  that of "Indian Army" in 1903. These measures prepared the way for the
  new system of army organization which, by authority of parliament,
  abolished divided control and placed the whole army of India under the
  governor-general and the commander-in-chief in India.


CANADIAN FORCES

  77. In the earliest European settlements in Canada, the necessity of
  protection against Indians caused the formation of a militia, and in
  1665 companies were raised in every parish. The military history of
  the Canadian forces under French rule is full of incident, and they
  served not only against Indian raiders but also against the troops of
  Great Britain and of her North American colonies. Six militia
  battalions took part in the defence of Quebec in 1759, and even the
  transfer of Canada from the French to the British crown did not cause
  the disbandment of the existing forces. The French Canadians
  distinguished themselves not less than the British settlers in the War
  of American Independence, and in particular in the defence of Quebec
  against Montgomery and Arnold. In 1787 an ordinance was made whereby
  three battalions of the militia were permanently embodied, each
  contingent serving for two years, at the end of which time a fresh
  contingent relieved it, and after this a succession of laws and
  regulations were made with a view to complete organization of the
  force. The brunt of the fighting on the American frontier in the war
  of 1812 was borne very largely by the permanent force of three
  battalions and the fresh units called out, all these being militia
  corps. Up to 1828 a distinction had been made between the British and
  the French regiments: this was then abolished. The militia was again
  employed on active service during the disturbances of 1837, and the
  "Active Militia" in 1863 had grown to a strength of 25,000 men. The
  Fenian troubles of 1864 and 1866 caused the embodiment of the Canadian
  forces once more. In 1867 took place the unification of Canada, after
  which the whole force was completely organized on the basis of a
  militia act (1868). A department of Militia and Defence with a
  responsible minister was established, and the strength of the active
  militia of all arms was fixed at 40,000 rank and file. Two years later
  the militia furnished 6000 men to deal with the Fenian Raid of 1870,
  and took part in Colonel (Lord) Wolseley's Red River expedition. In
  1871 a permanent force, serving the double purpose of a regular
  nucleus and an instructional cadre, was organized in two troops of
  cavalry, two batteries of artillery and one regiment of infantry, and
  in 1876 the Royal Military College of Canada was founded at Kingston.
  In 1885 the Riel rebellion was dealt with, and the important action of
  Batoche won, by the militia, without assistance from regular troops.
  In the same year Canada contributed a force of _voyageurs_ to the Nile
  expedition of Lord Wolseley; the experience of these men was
  admittedly of great assistance in navigating the Rapids. The militia
  sent contingents of all arms to serve in the South African War,
  1899-1902, including "Strathcona's Horse," a special corps, recruited
  almost entirely from the Active Militia and the North-west Mounted
  Police. The latter, a permanent constabulary of mounted riflemen, was
  formed in 1873.

  After the South African War an extensive scheme of reorganization was
  taken in hand, the command being exercised for two years (1902-1904)
  by Major-General Lord Dundonald, and subsequently by a militia council
  (Militia Act 1904), similar in constitution to the home Army Council.
  For details of the present military strength of Canada, see the
  article CANADA.


AUSTRIAN ARMY

78. The _Landsknecht_ infantry constituted the mainstay of the imperial
armies in the 16th century. Maximilian I. and Charles V. are recorded to
have marched and carried the "long pike" in their ranks. Maximilian also
formed a corps of _Kyrisser_, who were the origin of the modern
cuirassiers. It was not, however, until much later that the Austrian
army came into existence as a permanent force. Rudolph II. formed a
small standing force about 1600, but relied upon the "enlistment"
system, like other sovereigns of the time, for the bulk of his armies.
The Thirty Years' War produced the permanence of service which led in
all the states of Europe to the rise of standing armies. In the Empire
it was Wallenstein who first raised a distinctly imperial army of
soldiers owing no duty but to the sovereign; and it was the suspicion
that he intended to use this army, which was raised largely at his own
expense, to further his own ends, that led to his assassination. From
that time the regiments belonged no longer to their colonels, but to the
emperor; and the oldest regiments in the present Austrian army date from
the Thirty Years' War, at the close of which Austria had 19 infantry, 6
cuirassier and 1 dragoon regiments. The almost continuous wars of
Austria against France and the Turks (from 1495 to 1895 Austrian troops
took part in 7000 actions of all sorts) led to a continuous increase in
her establishments. The wars of the time of Montecucculi and of Eugene
were followed by that of the Polish Succession, the two Turkish wars,
and the three great struggles against Frederick the Great. Thus in 1763
the army had been almost continuously on active service for more than
100 years, in the course of which its organization had been modified in
accordance with the lessons of each war. This, in conjunction with the
fact that Austria took part in other Turkish campaigns subsequently,
rendered this army the most formidable opponent of the forces of the
French Revolution (1792). But the superior leading, organization and
numbers of the emperor's forces were totally inadequate to the magnitude
of the task of suppressing the Revolutionary forces, and though such
victories as Neerwinden were sufficient proof of the efficiency and
valour of the Austrians, they made no headway. In later campaigns, in
which the enemy had acquired war experience, and the best of their
officers had come to the front, the tide turned against the Imperialists
even on the field of battle. The archduke Charles's victories of 1796
were more than counterbalanced by Bonaparte's Italian campaign, and the
temporary success of 1799 ended at Marengo and Hohenlinden.

79. The Austrians, during the short peace which preceded the war of
1805, suffered, in consequence of all this, from a feeling of distrust,
not merely in their leaders, but also in the whole system upon which the
army was raised, organized and trained. This was substantially the same
as that of the Seven Years' War time. Enlistment being voluntary and for
long service, the numbers necessary to cope with the output of the
French conscription could not be raised, and the inner history of the
Austrian headquarters in the Ulm campaign shows that the dissensions and
mutual distrust of the general officers had gone far towards the
disintegration of an army which at that time had the most _esprit de
corps_ and the highest military qualities of any army in Europe. But the
disasters of 1805 swept away good and bad alike in the abolition of the
old system. Already the archduke Charles had designed a "nation in arms"
after the French model, and on this basis the reconstruction was begun.
The conscription was put in force and the necessary numbers thus
obtained; the administration was at the same time reformed and the
organization and supply services brought into line with modern
requirements. The war of 1809 surprised Austria in the midst of her
reorganization, yet the new army fought with the greatest spirit. The
invasion of Bavaria was by no means so leisurely as it had been in 1805,
and the archduke Charles obtained one signal victory over Napoleon in
person. Aspern and Wagram were most desperately contested, and though
the archduke ceased to take part in the administration after 1809 the
work went on steadily until, in 1813, the Austrian armies worthily
represented the combination of discipline with the "nation in arms"
principle. Their intervention in the War of Liberation was decisive, and
Austria, in spite of her territorial losses of the past years, put into
the field well-drilled armies far exceeding in numbers those which had
appeared in the wars of the Revolution. After the fall of Napoleon,
Austria's hold on Italy necessitated the maintenance of a large army of
occupation. This army, and in particular its cavalry, was admittedly the
best in Europe, and, having to be ready to march at a few days' notice,
it was saved from the deadening influence of undisturbed peace which
affected every other service in Europe from 1815 to 1850.

80. The Austrian system has conserved much of the peculiar tone of the
army of 1848, of which English readers may obtain a good idea from
George Meredith's _Vittoria_. It was, however, a natural result of this
that the army lost to some considerable extent the spirit of the "nation
in arms" of 1809 and 1813. It was employed in dynastic wars, and the
conscription was of course modified by substitution; thus, when the war
of 1859 resulted unfavourably to the Austrians, the army began to lose
confidence, precisely as had been the case in 1805. Once more, in 1866,
an army animated by the purely professional spirit, which was itself
weakened by distrust, met a "nation in arms," and in this case a nation
well trained in peace and armed with a breechloader. Bad staff work, and
tactics which can only be described as those of pique, precipitated the
disaster, and in seven weeks the victorious Prussians were almost at the
gates of Vienna.

The result of the war, and of the constitutional changes about this
time, was the re-adoption of the principles of 1806-1813, the abolition
of conscription and long service in favour of universal service for a
short term, and a thorough reform in the methods of command and staff
work. It has been said of the Prussian army that "discipline is--the
officers." This is more true of the "K.K." army[1] than of any other in
Europe; the great bond of union between the heterogeneous levies of
recruits of many races is the spirit of the corps of officers, which
retains the personal and professional characteristics of the old army of
Italy.


FRENCH ARMY

81. The French army (see for further details FRANCE: _Law and
Institutions_) dates from the middle of the 15th century, at which time
Charles VII. formed, from mercenaries who had served him in the Hundred
Years' War, the _compagnies d'ordonnance_, and thus laid the foundation
of a national standing army. But the armies that followed the kings in
their wars still consisted mainly of mercenaries, hired for the
occasion; and the work of Charles and his successors was completely
undone in the confusion of the religious wars. Louvois, who was minister
of Louis XIV., was the true creator of the French royal army. The
organization of the first standing army is here given in some detail, as
it served as a model for all armies for more than a century, and is also
followed to some extent in our own times. Before the advent of Louvois,
the forces were royal only in name. The army was a fortuitous concourse
of regiments of horse and foot, each of which was the property of its
colonel. The companies similarly belonged to their captains, and, the
state being then in no condition to buy out these vested interests,
superior control was almost illusory. Indeed, all the well-known devices
for eluding such control, for instance, showing imaginary men on the pay
lists, can be traced to the French army of the 16th century. A further
difficulty lay in the existence of the offices called Colonel-General,
Marshal-General and Grand Master of Artillery, between whom no common
administration was possible. The grand master survived until 1743, but
Louvois managed to suppress the other offices, and even to put one of
his own subordinates into the office of grand master. Thus was assured
direct royal control, exercised through the war minister. Louvois was
unable indeed to overthrow the proprietary system, but he made stringent
regulations against abuses, and confined it to the colonels (_mestre de
camp_ in the cavalry) and the captains. Henceforward the colonel was a
wealthy noble, with few duties beyond that of spending money freely and
of exercising his court influence on behalf of his regiment. The real
work of the service was done by the lieutenant-colonels and lieutenants,
and the king and the minister recognized this on all occasions. Thus
Vauban was given, as a reward for good service, a company in the
"Picardie" regiment without purchase. Promotions from the ranks were
very rare but not unknown, and all promotions were awarded according to
merit except those to captain or colonel. One of the captains in a
regiment was styled major, and acted as adjutant. This post was of
course filled by selection and not by purchase. The grades of general
officers were newly fixed by Louvois--the _brigadier, maréchal de camp_,
lieutenant-general and marshal of France. The general principle was to
give command, but not promotion, according to merit. The rank and file
were recruited by voluntary enlistment for four years' service. The
infantry company was maintained in peace at an effective of 60, except
in the guards and the numerous foreign corps, in which the company was
always at the war strength of 100 to 200 men. This arm was composed, in
1678, of the _Gardes françaises_, the Swiss guards, the old (_vieux_ and
_petits vieux_) regiments of the line, of which the senior, "Picardie,"
claimed to be the oldest regiment in Europe, and the regiments raised
under the new system. The _régiment du roi_, which was deliberately made
the model of all others and was commanded by the celebrated Martinet,
was the senior of these latter. The whole infantry arm in 1678 numbered
320,000 field and garrison troops. The cavalry consisted of the _Maison
du Roi_ (which Louvois converted from a "show" corps to one of the
highest discipline and valour), divided into the _Gardes du Corps_ and
the _Mousquetaires_, the _Gendarmerie_ (descended from the old feudal
cavalry and the _ordonnance_ companies) and the line cavalry, the whole
being about 55,000 strong. There were also 10,000 dragoons. In addition
to the regular army, the king could call out, in case of need, the
ancient _arrière-ban_ or levy, as was in fact done in 1674. On that
occasion, however, it behaved badly, and it was not again employed. In
1688 Louvois organized a militia raised by ballot. This numbered 25,000
men and proved to be better, at any rate, than the _arrière-ban_. Many
infantry regiments of the line were, as has been said, foreign, and in
1678 the foreigners numbered 30,000, the greater part of these being
Swiss.

82. The artillery had been an industrial concern rather than an arm of
the service. In sieges a sum of money was paid for each piece put in
battery, and the grand master was not subordinated to the war office. A
nominee of Louvois, as has been said, filled the post at this time, and
eventually Louvois formed companies of artillerymen, and finally the
regiment of "Fusiliers" which Vauban described as the "finest regiment
in the world." The engineer service, as organized by Vauban, was
composed of engineers "in ordinary," and of line officers especially
employed in war. Louvois further introduced the system of magazines. To
ensure the regular working of supply and transport, he instituted direct
control by the central executive, and stored great quantities of food in
the fortresses, thereby securing for the French armies a precision and
certainty in military operations which had hitherto been wanting. The
higher administration of the army, under the minister of war, fell into
two branches, that of the commissaries and that of the inspecting
officers. The duties of the former resembled those of a modern "routine"
staff--issue of equipment, checking of returns, &c. The latter exercised
functions analogous to those of a general staff, supervising the
training and general efficiency of the troops. Louvois also created an
excellent hospital service, mobile and stationary, founded the Hôtel des
Invalides in Paris for the maintenance of old soldiers, established
cadet schools for the training of young officers, and stimulated bravery
and good conduct by reviving and creating military orders of merit.

83. The last half of the 17th century is a brilliant period in the
annals of the French armies. Thoroughly organized, animated by the
presence of the king, and led by such generals as Condé, Turenne,
Luxembourg, Catinat and Vendôme, they made head against coalitions which
embraced nearly all the powers of Europe, and made France the first
military nation of Europe. The reverses of the later part of Louis
XIV.'s reign were not of course without result upon the tone of the
French army, and the campaigns of Marlborough and Eugene for a time
diminished the repute in which the troops of Louis were held by other
powers. Nevertheless the War of the Spanish Succession closed with
French victories, and generals of the calibre of Villars and Berwick
were not to be found in the service of every prince. The war of the
Polish Succession in Germany and Italy reflected no discredit upon the
French arms; and the German general staff, in its history of the wars of
Frederick the Great, states that "in 1740 the French army was still
regarded as the first in Europe." Since the death of Louvois very little
had changed. The army was still governed as it had been by the great war
minister, and something had been done to reduce evils against which even
he had been powerless. A royal regiment of artillery had come into
existence, and the engineers were justly regarded as the most skilful in
Europe. Certain alterations had been made in the organization of both
the guard and the line, and the total strength of the French in peace
was somewhat less than 200,000. Relatively to the numbers maintained in
other states, it was thus as powerful as before. Indeed, only one
feature of importance differentiated the French army from its
contemporaries--the proportion of officers to men, which was one to
eleven. In view of this, the spirit of the army was necessarily that of
its officers, and these were by no means the equals of their
predecessors of the time of Turenne or Luxembourg. Louvois' principle of
employing professional soldiers for command and wealthy men for
colonelcies and captaincies was not deliberately adopted, but inevitably
grew out of the circumstances of the time. The system answered fairly
whilst continual wars gave the professional soldiers opportunities for
distinction and advancement. But in a long peace the captains of
eighteen and colonels of twenty-three blocked all promotion, and there
was no work save that of routine to be done. Under these conditions the
best soldiers sought service in other countries, the remainder lived
only for pleasure, whilst the titular chiefs of regiments and companies
rarely appeared on parade. Madame de Genlis relates how, when young
courtiers departed to join their regiments for a few weeks' duty, the
ladies of the court decked them with favours, as if proceeding on a
distant and perilous expedition.

On the other hand, the fact that the French armies required large drafts
of militia to bring up their regular forces to war strength gave them a
vitality which was unusual in armies of the time. Even in the time of
Louis XIV. the military spirit of the country had arisen at the threat
of invasion, and the French armies of 1709 fought far more desperately,
as the casualty lists of the allies at Malplaquet showed, than those of
1703 or 1704. In the time of the Revolution the national spirit of the
French army formed a rallying-point for the forces of order, whereas
Prussia, whose army was completely independent of the people, lost all
power of defending herself after a defeat in the field. It is difficult
to summarize the conduct of the royal armies in the wars of 1740-63.
With a few exceptions the superior leaders proved themselves
incompetent, and in three great battles, at least, the troops suffered
ignominious defeat (Dettingen 1743, Rossbach 1757, Minden 1759). On the
other hand, Marshal Saxe and others of the younger generals were
excellent commanders, and Fontenoy was a victory of the first magnitude.
The administration, however, was corrupt and inefficient, and the
general reputation of the French armies fell so low that Frederick the
Great once refused an important command to one of his generals on the
ground that his experience had been gained only against French troops.

Under Louis XVI. things improved somewhat; the American War and the
successes of Lafayette and Rochambeau revived a more warlike spirit.
Instruction was more carefully attended to, and a good system of drill
and tactics was elaborated at the camp of St Omer. Attempts were made to
reform the administration. Artillery and engineer schools had come into
existence, and the intellectual activity of the best officers was
remarkable (see Max Jähns, _Gesch. der Kriegswissenschaften_, vol. iii.
passim). But the Revolution soon broke over France, and the history of
the royal army was henceforward carried on by that revolutionary army,
which, under a new flag, was destined to raise the military fame of
France to its greatest height.

84. If Louis was the creator of the royal army, Carnot was so of the
revolutionary army. At the outbreak of the Revolution the royal army
consisted of 224 infantry battalions, 7 regiments of artillery, and 62
regiments of cavalry, numbering about 173,000 in all, but capable of
augmentation on war strength to 210,000. To this might be added about
60,000 militia (see Chuquet, _Première invasion prussienne_).

The first step of the Constituent Assembly was the abrogation of an
edict of 1781 whereby men of non-noble birth had been denied
commissioned rank (1790). Thus, when many of the officers emigrated
along with their fellows of the _noblesse_, trained non-commissioned
officers, who would already have been officers save for this edict, were
available to fill their places. The general scheme of reform (see
CONSCRIPTION) was less satisfactory, but the formation of a National
Guard, comprising in theory the whole military population, was a step of
the highest importance. At this time the titles of regiments were
abandoned in favour of numbers, and the costly and dangerous _Maison du
Roi_ abolished. But voluntary enlistment soon failed; the old corps,
which kept up their discipline, were depleted, and the men went to the
volunteers, where work was less exacting and promotion more rapid.
_"Aussi fut-on,"_ says a French writer, _"réduit bientôt à forcer
l'engagement volontaire et à imposer le choix du corps."_ The "first
invasion" (July 1792) put an end to half-measures, and the country was
declared "in danger." Even these measures, however, were purely designed
to meet the emergency, and, after Valmy, enthusiasm waned to such a
degree that, of a paper strength of 800,000 men (December 1792), only
112,000 of the line and 290,000 volunteers were actually present. The
disasters of the following spring once more called for extreme energy,
and 300,000 national guards were sent to the line, a step which was
followed by a compulsory _levée en masse_; one million men were thus
assembled to deal with the manifold dangers of civil and foreign war.
France was saved by mere numbers and the driving energy of the
Terrorists, not by discipline and organization. The latter was chaotic,
and almost every element of success was wanting to the tumultuary levies
of the year 1793 save a ferocious energy born of liberty and the
guillotine. But under the Terrorist régime the army became the
rallying-point of the nation, and when Lazare Carnot (q.v.) became
minister of war a better organization and discipline began to appear.
The amalgamation of the old army and the volunteers, which had been
commenced but imperfectly carried out, was effected on a different and
more thorough principle. The infantry was organized in demi-brigades of
three battalions (usually one of the old army to two of volunteers). A
permanent organization in divisions of all arms was introduced, and the
ablest officers selected for the commands. Arsenals and manufactories of
warlike stores were created, schools of instruction were re-established;
the republican forces were transformed from hordes to armies, well
disciplined, organized and equipped. Later measures followed the same
lines, and the artillery and engineers, which in 1790 were admittedly
the best in Europe and which owing to the _roturier_ element in their
officer cadres had not been disorganized by the emigration, steadily
improved. The infantry, and in a less degree the cavalry, became good
and trustworthy soldiers, and the glorious campaigns of 1794, 1795 and
1796, which were the direct result of Carnot's administration, bore
witness to the potentialities of the essentially modern system. But,
great as was the triumph of 1796-97, the exhaustion of years of
continuous warfare had made itself felt: the armies were reduced to mere
skeletons, and no sufficient means existed of replenishing them, till in
1798 the _conscription_ was introduced. From that time the whole male
population of France was practically at her ruler's disposal; and
Napoleon had full scope for his genius in organizing these masses. His
principal improvements were effected in the interval between the peace
of Amiens and the war with the third coalition, while threatening the
invasion of England. His armies were collected in large camps on the
coasts of the Channel, and there received that organization which, with
minor variations, they retained during all his campaigns, and which has
since been copied by all European nations. The divisions had already
given place to the army corps, and Napoleon completed the work of his
predecessors. He withdrew the whole of the cavalry and a portion of the
artillery from the divisions, and thus formed "corps troops" and cavalry
and artillery reserves for the whole army. The grade of marshal of
France was revived at Napoleon's coronation. At the same time, the
operation of Jourdan's law, acquiesced in during times of national
danger and even during peace, soon found opposition when the conscripts
realized that long foreign wars were to be their lot. It was not the
actual losses of the field armies, great as these undoubtedly were,
which led Napoleon in the full tide of his career to adopt the fatal
practice of "anticipating" the conscription, but the steady increase in
the number of _réfractaires_, men who refused to come up for service. To
hunt these men down, no less than forty thousand picked soldiers were
engaged within the borders of France, and the actual French element in
the armies of Napoleon grew less and less with every extension of the
empire. Thus, in the Grand Army of 1809, about one-third of the corps of
all arms were purely German, and in 1812 the army which invaded Russia,
467,000 strong, included 280,000 foreigners. In other words, the million
of men produced by the original conscription of 1793 had dwindled to
about half that number (counting the various subsidiary armies in Spain,
&c.), and one hundred thousand of the best and sturdiest Frenchmen were
engaged in a sort of civil war in France itself. The conscription was
"anticipated" even in 1806, the conscripts for 1807 being called up
before their time. As the later wars of the Empire closed one by one the
foreign sources of recruiting, the conscription became more terrible
every year, with the result that more _réfractaires_ and more trusted
soldiers to hunt them down were kept in non-effective employment.
Finally the capacity for resistance was exhausted, and the army, from
the marshals downward, showed that it had had enough.

85. One of the first acts of the Restoration was to abolish the
conscription, but it had again to be resorted to within three years. In
1818 the annual contingent was fixed at 40,000, and the period of
service at six years; in 1824 the contingent was increased to 60,000,
and in 1832 to 80,000. Of this, however, a part only, according to the
requirements of the service, were enrolled; the remainder were sent home
on leave or furlough. Up to 1855 certain exemptions were authorized, and
substitution or exchange of lots amongst young men who had drawn was
permitted, but the individual drawn was obliged either to serve
personally or find a substitute. The long series of Algerian wars
produced further changes, and in 1855 the law of "dotation" or exemption
by payment was passed, and put an end to personal substitution. The
state now undertook to provide substitutes for all who paid a fixed sum,
and did so by high bounties to volunteers or to soldiers for
re-engaging. Although the price of exemption was fixed as high as £92,
on an average 23,000 were claimed annually, and in 1859 as many as
42,000 were granted. Thus gradually the conscription became rather
subsidiary to voluntary enlistment, and in 1866, out of a total
establishment of 400,000, only 120,000 were conscripts. Changes had also
taken place in the constitution of the army. On the Restoration its
numbers were reduced to 150,000, the old regiments broken up and recast,
and a royal guard created in place of the old imperial one. When the
revolution of July 1830 had driven Charles X. from his throne, the royal
guard, which had made itself peculiarly obnoxious, was dissolved; and
during Louis Philippe's reign the army was augmented to about 240,000
with the colours. Under the Provisional Government of 1848 it was
further increased, and in 1854, when France allied herself with England
against Russia, the army was raised to 500,000 men. The imperial guard
was re-created, and every effort made to revive the old Napoleonic
traditions in the army. In 1859 Napoleon III. took the field as the
champion and ally of Italy, and the victories of Montebello, Magenta and
Solferino raised the reputation of the army to the highest pitch, and
for a time made France the arbiter of Europe. But the campaign of 1866
suddenly made the world aware that a rival military power had arisen,
which was prepared to dispute that supremacy.

Marshal Niel (q.v.), the then war minister, saw clearly that the
organization which had with difficulty maintained 150,000 men in Italy,
was no match for that which had within a month thrown 250,000 into the
very heart of Austria, while waging a successful war on the Main against
Bavaria and her allies. In 1867, therefore, he brought forward a measure
for the reorganization of the army. This was to have been a true "nation
in arms" based on universal service, and Niel calculated upon producing
a first-line army 800,000 strong--half with the colours, half in
reserve--with a separate army of the second line. But many years must
elapse before the full effect of this principle of recruiting can be
produced, as the army is incomplete in some degree until the oldest
reservist is a man who has been through the line training. Niel himself
died within a year, and 1870 witnessed the complete ruin of the French
army. The law of 1868 remained therefore no more than an expression of
principle.

86. At the outbreak of the Franco-German War (q.v.) the French field
troops consisted of 368 battalions, 252 squadrons, and 984 guns. The
strength of the entire army on peace footing was 393,000 men; on war
footing, 567,000. Disasters followed one another in rapid succession,
and the bulk of this war-trained long-service army was captive in
Germany within three months of the opening battle. But the spirit of the
nation rose to the occasion as it had done in 1793. The next year's
contingent of recruits was called out and hastily trained. Fourth
battalions were formed from the depot cadres, and organized into
_régiments de marche_. The _gardes mobiles_ (Niel's creation) were
mobilized, and by successive decrees and under various names nearly all
the manhood of the country called to arms.

The regular troops raised as _régiments de marche_, &c., amounted to
213,000 infantry, 12,000 cavalry and 10,000 artillery. The _garde
mobile_ exceeded 300,000, and the mobilized national guard exceeded
1,100,000--of whom about 180,000 were actually in the field and 250,000
in Paris; the remainder preparing themselves in camps or depots for
active work. Altogether the new formations amounted to nearly 1,700,000.
Though, in the face of the now war-experienced well-led and disciplined
Germans, their efforts failed, this cannot detract from the admiration
which must be felt by every soldier for the patriotism of the people and
the creative energy of their leaders, of whom Gambetta and Freycinet
were the chief. After the war every Frenchman set himself to solve the
army problem not less seriously than had every Prussian after Jena, and
the reformed French army (see FRANCE) was the product of the period of
national reconstruction. The adoption of the "universal service"
principle of active army, reserves and second-line troops, the essential
feature of which is the _line_ training of every man, was almost as a
matter of course the basis of the reorganization, for the want of a
trained reserve was the most obvious cause of the disasters of "the
terrible year."


GERMAN ARMY

87. The German army, strictly speaking, dates only from 1871, or at
earliest 1866. Before the unification of the German empire or
confederation, the several states possessed distinct armies, federal
armies when required being formed from the contingents which the members
of the union, like those of an ordinary alliance, engaged to furnish.
The armies of the Holy Roman Empire were similarly formed from "single,"
"double," or "treble" contingents under the supreme command of specially
appointed field marshals of the Empire. In the troubles of 1848 there
was witnessed the curious spectacle of half of a victorious army being
unable to pursue the enemy; this, being composed of "Prussian" as
distinct from "federal contingent" troops, had to stop at the frontier
of another state. The events of 1866 and 1870 put an end to all this,
and to a very great extent to the separate armies of the old
confederation, all being now remodelled on Prussian lines. The Prussian
army therefore is at once the most important and historically the most
interesting of the forces of the German empire. Its _début_ (about 1630)
was not satisfactory, and in the Thirty Years' War troops of Sweden, of
the Emperor, of the League, &c., plundered Brandenburg unharmed. The
elector, when appealed to for protection, could but answer, "Que faire?
Ils ont des canons." The humiliations of this time, were, however,
avenged by the troops of the next ruler of Brandenburg, called the Great
Elector. The supposed invincibility of the Swedes did not prevent him
from inflicting upon them a severe defeat at Fehrbellin, and thereafter
the Prussian contingents which took part in the many European wars of
the time acquitted themselves creditably. One of their generals was the
famous Leopold of Anhalt-Dessau, and the reckless gallantry of this
leader was conspicuous on many fields, from Blenheim to Malplaquet. But
Leopold's greatest work was done in the years of peace (1715-40), during
which Prussia was preparing the army with which Frederick the Great won
his battles. He had introduced (about 1700) iron ramrods into the
infantry service, and for over twenty years the Prussian infantry was
drilled to a perfection which gave it a superiority of five to three
over the best-drilled troops of the Austrian service, and still greater
predominance over the French, which was then accounted the best in
Europe. Frederick William I., king of Prussia, directed and supervised
the creation of the new Prussian army, and Leopold was his principal
assistant. In organization and methods of recruiting, as well as in
tactical efficiency, the army of 1740 was equally pre-eminent. Then came
the wars of Frederick the Great. It is not too much to say that the
infantry won his earlier battles; the cavalry had been neglected both by
Frederick William and by Leopold, and Frederick wrote that "it was not
worth the devil's while to fetch it away." But the predominance of the
infantry was so far indisputable that Frederick was able to devote
himself to the reorganization of the mounted arm, with results which
appeared in the splendid victories of Hohenfriedberg, Rossbach, Leuthen
and Zorndorf. But long before the close of the Seven Years' War the
incomparable infantry of the old army had disappeared, to be replaced by
foreigners, deserters and vagabonds of all kinds, not to mention the
unwilling Saxon and other recruits forced into the king's service. The
army of 200,000 men which Frederick bequeathed to his successor was
indeed superb, and deserved to be the model of Europe. But with
Frederick's death the genius which had animated it, and which alone gave
value to such heterogeneous materials, was gone. The long peace had the
customary effect of sapping the efficiency of the long-service troops.
They still retained their imposing appearance and precision of movement,
and overweening self-confidence. But in 1806, after two crushing defeats
and a series of humiliating surrenders, Prussia found herself at the
feet of the conqueror, shorn of half her territory, obliged to receive
French troops in all her towns and fortresses, and only existing on
sufferance. But in these very disasters were laid the seeds of her
future greatness. By the treaty of Tilsit the Prussian army was limited
to 43,000 men. This limitation suggested to Scharnhorst "universal
service" on the _Krümper_[2] system already described (see § 36 above).

88. The bitter humiliation and suffering endured under the French yoke
aroused a national spirit which was capable of any sacrifices. The
civilian became eager to be trained to fight against the oppressor of
his country; and when Prussia rose in 1813, the armies she poured into
the field were no longer professional, but national armies, imperfectly
trained and organized, but animated by a spirit which more than
compensated for these defects. At the close of the war her rulers, with
far-seeing sagacity, at once devoted themselves to organize on a
permanent footing the system which had sprung up under the necessities
and enthusiasm of the moment. Universal compulsory service, and a three
years' term in the ranks, with further periods in the reserve and
_Landwehr_, were then introduced; and though variations have
subsequently been made in the distribution of time, the principles were
substantially the same as those now in force. By the law of 1814 the
periods of service were fixed at three years in the army, two in the
reserve and fourteen in the _Landwehr_, and the annual contingent at
40,000 men. As the population increased, it was felt that the service
was unequally distributed, pressing unnecessarily heavily on some, while
others escaped altogether. Further, the experiences of Bronnzell and
Olmütz in 1850, and of 1859, when Prussia armed in anticipation of a war
with France, aroused great doubts as to the efficiency of the
_Landwehr_, which then formed the bulk of Prussia's forces, and of whom
many had been as long as ten years away from the colours. At this time
the French remark that the Prussian army was "a sort of militia" was by
no means untrue. Accordingly, by the law of 1860 the annual contingent
was fixed at 63,000, the period in the reserve was increased from two to
four years, and that in the _Landwehr_ reduced from fourteen to five.
The total armed force thus remained nearly the same (12 contingents of
63,000, in place of 19 of 40,000), but the army and its reserves were
more than doubled (increased from 5 × 40,000 to 7 × 63,000) while the
_Landwehr_ was proportionately reduced.

This change was not effected without great opposition, and led to a
prolonged struggle between the king, guided by Bismarck, and the
parliament. It required the victories of 1866 and 1870, and the position
thereby won for Prussia, to reconcile the nation to the new law. The
military alliance (1866) of Prussia with the other German states gave
place in 1871 to the union of all the armies into the German army as it
is to-day. Some retained their old peculiarities of uniform, and even
more than this was allowed to Bavaria and to Saxony, but the whole army,
which has been increased year by year to its present strength, is
modelled on the Prussian part of it. The Prussian army corps are the
Guard, and the line numbered I. to XI., and XV. to XVIII.

89. The _Saxon Army_ formerly played a prominent part in all the wars of
northern Europe, chiefly in connexion with Poland. In the War of the
Austrian Succession the Saxon army played a prominent part, but in the
end it suffered a heavy defeat in the battle of Kesselsdorf (1745). In
the Seven Years' War Saxony was overrun by the Prussians almost without
resistance, and the military forces of the country under Field Marshal
Rutowski were forced to surrender _en masse_ at Pirna (1756); the men
were compelled by Frederick the Great to join the Prussian army, and
fought, though most unwillingly, through the remainder of the war as
Prussian soldiers. A few outlying regiments which had not been involved
in the catastrophe served with the Austrians, and on one occasion at
least, at Kolin, inflicted a severe blow on the Prussians. At the
outbreak of the wars of the French Revolution the Saxon army was over
30,000 strong. It took part in the campaign of Jena on the side of the
Prussians, and during the Napoleonic domination in Germany Saxony
furnished strong contingents to the armies of Napoleon, who in return
recognized her elector as king, and largely increased his territories.
The newly made king remained faithful to Napoleon even in his reverses;
but the army was too German in feeling to fight willingly under the
French flag. Their defection at Leipzig contributed not a little to the
results of that bloody day. After the peace the king was shorn of a
great part of his dominions, and the army was reconstituted on a smaller
scale. In 1866 Saxony sided with Austria, and her army shared in the
disasters of the brief campaign and the crowning defeat at Königgrätz.
Under the crown prince's leadership, however, the Saxons distinguished
themselves by their courage and steadiness wherever they were engaged.
After the war Saxony became part of the North German Confederation, and
in 1870-1871 her troops, under the command of the crown prince, formed
the XII. corps of the great German army. They were assigned to the II.
army of Prince Frederick Charles, and delivered the decisive attack on
the French right at Gravelotte. Subsequently a IV. army was formed under
the command of the crown prince, in which the XII. corps, now under
Prince George of Saxony, served with unvarying credit in the campaign of
Sedan and the siege of Paris. The Saxon army is now organized in every
respect on Prussian lines, and forms two army corps (XII. at Dresden and
XIX. at Leipzig) of the German army. The German emperor, in concert with
the king of Saxony, names the officers for the higher commands. Saxony
retains, however, her separate war ministry, budget, &c.; and
appointments and promotion to all but the highest commands are made by
the king. The colours of the older Saxon forces, and especially the
green of the tunics, are retained in many of the uniforms of the present
day.

  90. The _Bavarian Army_ has perhaps the most continuous record of good
  service in the field of any of the minor German armies. The oldest
  regiments date from the Thirty Years' War, in which the veteran army
  of the Catholic league, commanded by Count Tilly and formed on the
  nucleus of the Bavarian army, played a conspicuous part. Later in the
  war the Bavarian general, Count Mercy, proved himself a worthy
  opponent of Turenne and Condé. Henceforward the Bavarians were engaged
  in almost every war between France and Austria, taking part
  successively in the wars of the Grand Alliance, the Spanish Succession
  (in which they came into conflict with the English), and the Polish
  and Austrian Succession wars. In pursuance of the traditional
  anti-Austrian policy, the troops of Bavaria, led by a distinguished
  Bavarian, Marshal (Prince) Wrede, served in the campaigns of 1805 to
  1813 side by side with the French, and Napoleon made the electorate
  into a kingdom. But in 1813 Bavaria joined the Alliance, and Wrede
  tried to intercept the French on their retreat from Leipzig. Napoleon,
  however, inflicted a severe defeat on his old general at Hanau, and
  opened his road to France. In 1866 the Bavarians took part against
  Prussia, but owing to their dilatoriness in taking the field, the
  Prussians were able to beat them in detail. In 1870, reorganized to
  some extent on Prussian lines, they joined their former enemy in the
  war against France, and bore their full share in the glories and
  losses of the campaign, the II. Bavarian corps having suffered more
  heavily than any but the III. Prussian corps. The I. Bavarian corps
  distinguished itself very greatly at Sedan and on the Loire. Bavaria
  still retains her separate war office and special organization, and
  the troops have been less affected by the Prussian influence than
  those of the other states. The Bavarian corps are numbered separately
  (I. Bav., Münich; II. Bav., Würzburg; III. Bav., Nuremberg), and the
  old light blue uniforms and other distinctive peculiarities of detail
  are still maintained.

  91. _Württemberg_ furnishes one army corps (XIII.; headquarters,
  Stuttgart), organized, clothed and equipped in all respects like the
  Prussian army. Like the Bavarians, the Württembergers fought against
  the Prussians in 1866, but in 1870 made common cause with them against
  the French, and by the convention entered into the following year
  placed their army permanently under the command of the Prussian king
  as emperor. The emperor nominates to the highest commands, but the
  king of Württemberg retains the nomination and appointment of officers
  in the lower grades.

  92. The old _Hanoverian Army_ disappeared, of course, with the
  annexation of Hanover to Prussia in 1866, but it is still represented
  officially by certain regiments of the X. army corps, and, in one case
  at least, battle honours won by the King's German Legion in the
  British service are borne on German colours of to-day. The _Hessian
  Army_ is now represented by the XXV. (Grand-ducal Hessian) division,
  which forms part of the XVIII. army corps.


ITALIAN ARMY

93. The old conscription law of the kingdom of Sardinia is the basis of
the military organization of Italy, as its constitution is of that of
the modern Italian kingdom. The Piedmontese have long borne a high
reputation for their military qualities, a reputation shared by the
rulers of the house of Savoy (q.v.), many of whom showed special ability
in preserving the independence of their small kingdom between two such
powerful neighbours as France and Austria. During the wars of the French
Revolution Piedmont was temporarily absorbed into the French republic
and empire. The Italian troops who fought under Napoleon proved
themselves, in many if not most cases, the best of the French allies,
and Italy contributed large numbers of excellent general officers to the
_Grande Armée_.

  After 1815 various causes combined to place Piedmont (Sardinia) at the
  head of the national movement which agitated Italy during the ensuing
  thirty years, and bring her in direct antagonism to Austria. Charles
  Albert, her then ruler, had paid great attention to the army, and when
  Italy rose against Austria in 1848 he took the field with an excellent
  force of nearly 70,000 men. At the outset fortune favoured the arms of
  Italy; but the genius and energy of Radetzky, the veteran Austrian
  commander, turned the tide, and in the summer of 1849 after many
  battles the Piedmontese army was decisively defeated at Novara, and
  her king compelled to sue for peace. Charles Albert abdicated in
  favour of his son Victor Emanuel, a prince who had already
  distinguished himself by his personal gallantry in the field. Under
  his care the army soon recovered its efficiency, and the force which
  joined the allied armies in the Crimea attracted general admiration
  from the excellence of its organization, equipment and discipline. In
  1859 Piedmont again took up arms against Austria for the liberation of
  Italy; but this time she had the powerful assistance of France, and
  played but a subordinate part herself. In this campaign the Sardinian
  army was composed of one cavalry and five infantry divisions, and
  numbered about 60,000 combatants. By the peace of Villafranca, Italy,
  with the exception of Venetia, was freed from the Austrians, and
  Lombardy was added to Piedmont. The revolutionary campaign of
  Garibaldi in the following year united the whole peninsula under the
  rule of Victor Emanuel, and in 1866, when Italy for the third time
  took up arms against Austria--this time as the ally of Prussia--her
  forces had risen to nearly 450,000, of whom about 270,000 actually
  took the field. But in quality these were far from being equal to the
  old Piedmontese army; and the northern army, under the personal
  command of the king, was decisively defeated at Custozza by the
  archduke Albert of Austria.

  The existing organization of the Italian army is determined by the
  laws of 1873, which made universal liability to service the basis of
  recruiting. The territorial system has not, however, been adopted at
  the same time, the materials of which the Italian army is composed
  varying so much that it was decided to blend the different types of
  soldiers so far as possible by causing them to serve together. The
  colonial wars in which Italian troops have taken part have been marked
  with great disasters, but relieved by the gallantry of the officers
  and the rank and file.


RUSSIAN ARMY

94. The history of the Russian army begins with the abolition of the
Strelitz (q.v.) by Peter the Great in 1698, the nucleus of the new
forces being four regiments of foot, two of which are well known to-day
under their old titles of Preobrazhenski and Semenovski. Throughout the
18th century Russian military progress obeyed successive dynasties of
western European models--first those of Prussia, then those of France.
In the earlier part of the 19th century the army, used chiefly in wars
against the revolutionary spirit, became, like others of that time, a
dynastic force; subsequently the "nation in arms" principle reasserted
itself, and on this basis has been carried out the reorganization of
Russia's military power. The enormous development of this since 1874 is
one of the most striking phenomena in recent military history. In 1892,
in expectation of a general European war, whole armies were massed in
the districts of Warsaw and Vilna, three-fifths of the entire forces
being in position on the German and Austrian frontiers.

  The Russo-Japanese War of 1904-5 is generally held to have proved that
  the fighting power of the Russian has in no way diminished in
  intrinsic value from that of the days of Zorndorf, Borodino and
  Sevastopol. The proverbial stubbornness of the rank and file is the
  distinctive quality of the armies of the tsar, and in view of the
  general adoption of two-years' service in other countries it is a
  matter for grave consideration whether, against European forces and in
  defence of their own homes, the Russians would not prove more than
  formidable antagonists to the men of more highly individualized races
  who are their probable opponents. Equally remarkable is the new power
  of redistribution possessed by Russia. Formerly it was usual to count
  upon one campaign at least elapsing before Russia could intervene
  effectively in European wars; much, in fact the greater part, of her
  losses in the Crimean War was due to the enormous distances which had
  to be traversed on foot. Nowadays the original equal distribution of
  the army over the country has been modified in accordance with the
  political needs of each moment. In 1892 the centre of gravity was
  shifted to Poland and Kiev, in 1904 the performances of the
  trans-Siberian railway in transporting troops to the seat of war in
  Manchuria excited the admiration of military Europe. The attitude of
  the army in the troubles which followed upon the Japanese War belongs
  to the history of Russia, not to that of military organization, and it
  will be sufficient to say that the conduct of the "nation in arms" at
  times of political unrest may vary between the extremes of
  unquestioning obedience to authority and the most dangerous form of
  licence, examples of both being frequent in the history of nearly all
  national armies. A remarkable innovation in the modern history of this
  army is the conversion of the whole of the cavalry, except a few
  _élite_ regiments, into dragoons of the old type. After the war of
  1904-5, however, this policy was reversed and the cavalry reformed on
  the usual model. The Cossacks still retain to a large extent the
  peculiarities of the light troops of the 18th century.


SPANISH ARMY

95. The feudal sovereignties of medieval Spain differed but little, in
their military organization, from other feudal states. As usual,
mercenaries were the only forces on which reliance was placed for
foreign wars. These troops called _almugávares_ (Arabic = scouts) won a
great reputation on Italian and Greek battlefields of the 13th century,
and with many transformations in name and character appeared from time
to time up to the Peninsular War. Castile, however, had a military
system very different from the rest. The forces of the kingdom were
composed of local contingents similar to the English _fyrd_,
professional soldiers who were paid followers of the great lords, and
the heavy cavalry of the military orders. The groups of cities called
_Hermandades_, while they existed, also had permanent forces in their
pay. At the union of Castile and Aragon the Castilian methods received a
more general application. The new _Hermandad_ was partly a light
cavalry, partly a police, and was organized in the ratio of one soldier
to every hundred families. In the conquest of Grenada (1482-92)
_mesnadas_ or contingents were furnished by the crown, the nobles and
the cities, and permanently kept in the field. The _Hermandad_ served
throughout the war as a matter of course. From the veterans of this war
was drawn the army which in the Italian wars won its reputation as the
first army in Europe.

In 1596 the home defence of Spain was reorganized and the _ordenanza_,
or militia, which was then formed of all men not belonging to the still
extant feudal contingents, was generally analogous to the system of
"assizes at arms" in England. This _ordenanza_ served in the Peninsular
War.

  96. With the Italian wars of the early 16th century came the
  development of the regular army; a brief account of its place in the
  evolution of armies has been given above. Discipline, the feeling of
  comradeship and soldierly honour were the qualities which marked out
  the Spanish army as the model for others to follow, and for more than
  a century the Spanish army maintained its prestige as the first in
  Europe. The oldest regiments of the present Spanish army claiming
  descent from the _tercios_ date from 1535. An officer whose regiment
  was reduced commonly took a pike in some other corps (e.g. Tilly), the
  _señor soldado_ was counted as a gentleman, and his wife and family
  received state allowances. Nor was this army open only to Spaniards.
  Walloons, Italians, Burgundians and other nationalities ruled over by
  the Habsburgs all contributed their quotas. But the career of the old
  army came to an end at Rocroi (1643), and after this the forces of the
  monarchy began more and more to conform to the French model.

  97. The military history of Spain from 1650 to 1700 is full of
  incident, and in the long war of the Spanish Succession both the army
  and the _ordenanza_ found almost continuous employment. They were now
  organized, as were most other armies of Europe, on the lines of the
  French army, and in 1714 the old _tercios_, which had served in the
  Spanish Netherlands under Marlborough, were brought to Spain. The
  king's regiment "Zamora" of the present army descends from one of
  these which, as the _tercio_ of Bovadilla, had been raised in 1580.
  The army underwent few changes of importance during the 18th century,
  and it is interesting to note that there were never less than three
  Irish regiments in the service. In 1808 the _Irlanda, Ultonia_ (=
  Ulster) and _Hibernia_ regiments had come to consist (as had similar
  corps in the French service before the Revolution) largely of native
  soldiers. At that time the Spanish army consisted of 119 Spanish and
  foreign (Swiss, Walloon and Irish) battalions, with 24 cavalry
  regiments and about 8000 artillery and engineers. There were further
  51 battalions of militia, and the total forces numbered actually
  137,000. The part played by the Spanish standing army in the
  Peninsular War was certainly wholly insignificant relatively to these
  figures. It must be borne in mind, however, that only continued wars
  can give real value to long-service troops of the old style, and this
  advantage the Spanish regulars did not possess. Further, the general
  decadence of administration reacted in the usual way, the appointment
  of court favourites to high command was a flagrant evil, and all that
  can be urged is that the best elements of the army behaved as well as
  did the Prussians of 1806, that the higher leading and the
  administration of the army in the field were both sufficiently weak to
  have ruined most armies, and that the men were drawn from the same
  country and the same classes which furnished the _guerrilleros_ whom
  it became fashionable to exalt at the expense of the soldiers. In the
  later campaigns of Wellington, Spanish divisions did good service, and
  the corps of La Romaña (a picked contingent of troops which had been
  sent before the war to Denmark at Napoleon's instance), though often
  defeated, always retained some cohesion and discipline. But the result
  of this war, the second French invasion, and the continued civil wars
  of the 19th century was the destruction of the old army, and the
  present army of Spain still bears traces of the confusion out of which
  it arose.

  The most important changes were in 1870, when conscription was
  introduced, and in 1872, when universal service was proposed in its
  place. The military virtues of the rank and file and the devotion of
  the officers were conspicuously displayed in the Spanish-American War
  of 1898, and it cannot be claimed even for the Germans of 1870 that
  they fired so coolly and accurately as did the defenders of S. Juan
  and El Caney.


TURKISH ARMY

98. The writers who have left the most complete and trustworthy
contemporary accounts of the Turkish army in the 14th and 15th
centuries, when it reached the height of its most characteristic
development, are Bertrandon de la Brocquière, equerry to Philip the
Good, duke of Burgundy, and Francesco Filelfo of Tolentino. Bertrandon,
a professional soldier, visited Palestine in 1432, and returned overland
in 1433, traversing the Balkan Peninsula by the main trade-route from
Constantinople to Belgrade. He wrote an account of his journey for
Philip: see _Early Travels in Palestine_, translated and edited by T.
Wright (London, 1848). Filelfo served as secretary to the Venetian
_baylo_ at Constantinople, and recorded his observations in a series of
letters (see FILELFO). Both ascribe the military superiority of the
Turks over the nations of western Europe to two facts--firstly to their
possession of a well-organized standing army, an institution unknown
elsewhere, and secondly to their far stricter discipline, itself a
result of their military organization and of the moral training afforded
by Islam.

  The regular troops comprised the Janissaries (q.v.), a corps of
  infantry recruited from captured sons of Christians, and trained to
  form a privileged caste of scientific soldiers and religious fanatics;
  and the Spahis, a body of cavalry similarly recruited, and armed with
  scimitar, mace and bow. Celibacy was one of the rules of this standing
  army, which, in its semi-monastic ideals and constitution, resembled
  the knightly orders of the West in their prime. The Janissaries
  numbered about 12,000, the Spahis about 8000. A second army of some
  40,000 men, mostly mounted and armed like the Spahis, was feudal in
  character, and consisted chiefly of the personal followers of the
  Moslem nobility; more than half its numbers were recruited in Europe.
  This force of 60,000 trained soldiers was accompanied by a horde of
  irregulars, levied chiefly among the barbarous mountaineers of the
  Balkans and Asia Minor, and very ill-armed and ill-disciplined. Their
  numbers may be estimated at 140,000, for Bertrandon gives 200,000 as
  the total of the Turkish forces. Many 15th and 16th century writers
  give a smaller total, but refer only to the standing and feudal
  armies. Others place the total higher. Laonicus Chalcocondylas in his
  _Turcica Historia_ states that at the siege of Constantinople in 1453
  the sultan commanded 400,000 troops, but most other eye-witnesses of
  the siege give a total varying from 150,000 to 300,000. Many Christian
  soldiers of fortune enlisted with the Turks as artillerists or
  engineers, and supplied them at Constantinople with the most powerful
  cannon of the age. Other Christians were compelled to serve as
  engineers or in the ranks. As late as 1683 a corps of Wallachians was
  forced to join the Turkish army before Vienna, and entrusted with the
  task of bridging the Danube. But in the 18th and early 19th centuries
  the introduction of Christians tended to weaken the _moral_ of the
  army already sapped by defeat; it was found impossible to maintain the
  discipline of the Janissaries, whose privileges had become a source of
  danger; and the feudal nobility became more and more independent of
  the sultan's authority. These three causes contributed to make
  reorganization inevitable.

  The destruction of the Janissaries in 1826 marked the close of the
  history of the old Turkish army; already the re-creation of the
  service on the accepted models of western Europe had been commenced.
  This was still incomplete when the new force was called upon to meet
  the Russians in 1828, and though the army displayed its accustomed
  bravery, its defective organization and other causes led to its
  defeat. Since then the army has been almost as constantly on active
  service as the British; the Crimean War, the Russo-Turkish War of 1877
  and the Greco-Turkish War of 1897 witnessed the employment of a large
  proportion of the sultan's available forces, while innumerable local
  revolts in different parts of the empire called for great exertions,
  and often for fierce fighting on the part of the troops locally in
  garrison and those sent up from the nearest provinces.


UNITED STATES ARMY

99. The regular army of the United States has always been small. From
the first it has been a voluntary force, and until 1898 its chief work
in peace was to furnish numerous small posts on the frontier and amongst
the Indians, and to act as a reserve to the civil power in the great
cities. In war-time the regular army, if, as was usually the case, it
was insufficient in numbers for the task of subduing the enemy, formed
the nucleus of large armies raised "for the war." In 1790 the rank and
file of the army, as fixed by act of Congress, amounted to 1216 men; and
in 1814 an English expedition of only 3500 men was able to seize and
burn Washington, the capital of a country which even then numbered eight
millions of inhabitants. In 1861, at the beginning of the Civil War, the
whole regular force amounted to about 15,300 men. In April of that year
the president called out 75,000 volunteers for three months; and in May
a further call for 42,000 was made. In July a call for 500,000 men was
authorized by Congress, and as even this vast force proved insufficient
it was found necessary to use a system of drafts. In October 1863 a levy
of 300,000 men was ordered, and in February 1864 a further call of
500,000 was made. Finally, in the beginning of 1865 two further levies,
amounting in all to 500,000 men, were ordered, but were only partially
carried out in consequence of the cessation of hostilities. The total
number of men called under arms by the government of the United States,
between April 1861 and April 1865, amounted to 2,759,049, of whom
2,656,053 were actually embodied in the armies. If to these be added the
1,100,000 men embodied by the South during the same time, the total
armed forces reach the enormous amount of nearly four millions, drawn
from a population of only 32 millions--figures before which the
celebrated uprising of the French nation in 1793, or the efforts of
France and Germany in the Franco-German War, sink into insignificance.
These 2,700,000 Federals were organized into volunteer regiments bearing
state designations. The officers, except general and staff officers,
were appointed by the governors of the respective states. The maximum
authorized strength of the regular army never, during the war, exceeded
40,000 men; and the number in the field, especially towards the close of
the war, was very much less. The states, in order to obtain men to fill
their quotas, offered liberal bounties to induce men to enlist, and it
therefore became very difficult to obtain recruits for the regular army,
for which no bounties were given. The regular regiments accordingly
dwindled away to skeletons. The number of officers present was also much
reduced, since many of them, while retaining their regular commissions,
held higher rank in the volunteer army. After the close of the Civil War
the volunteers were mustered out; and by the act of Congress of the 28th
of July 1866 the line of the army was made to consist of 10 regiments of
cavalry of 12 troops each, 5 regiments of artillery of 12 batteries each
and 45 regiments of infantry of 10 companies. The actual strength in
August 1867 was 53,962. The act of the 3rd of March 1869 reduced the
number of infantry regiments to 25 and the enlisted strength of the army
to 35,036. The numbers were further reduced, without change in
organization, to 32,788 in 1870 and to 25,000 in 1874. The latter number
remained the maximum for twenty-four years.

In March 1898, in view of hostilities with Spain, the artillery was
increased by 2 regiments, and, in April, 2 companies were added to each
infantry regiment, giving it 3 battalions of 4 companies each. The
strength of batteries, troops and companies was increased, the maximum
enlisted strength reached during 1898 being over 63,000. A volunteer
army was also organized. Of this army, 3 regiments of engineer troops, 3
of cavalry and 10 of infantry were United States volunteers, all the
officers being commissioned by the president. The other organizations
came from the states, the officers being appointed by the respective
governors. As fast as they were organized and filled up, they were
mustered into the service of the United States. The total number
furnished for the war with Spain was 10,017 officers and 213,218
enlisted men. All general and staff officers were appointed by the
president. Three hundred and eighty-seven officers of the regular army
received volunteer commissions. After the conclusion of hostilities with
Spain, the mustering out of the volunteers was begun, and by June 1899
all the volunteers, except those in the Philippines, were out of the
service. The latter, as well as those serving elsewhere, having enlisted
only for the war, were brought home and mustered out as soon as
practicable.

The act of the 2nd of March 1899 added 2 batteries to each regiment of
artillery. On the 2nd of February 1901 Congress passed an important bill
providing for the reorganization and augmentation (max. 100,000) of the
regular army, and other measures followed in the next years. (See UNITED
STATES.)


MINOR ARMIES

  100. _Dutch and Belgian Armies._--The military power of the "United
  Provinces" dates its rise from the middle of the 16th century, when,
  after a long and sanguinary struggle, they succeeded in emancipating
  themselves from the yoke of Spain; and in the following century it
  received considerable development in consequence of the wars they had
  to maintain against Louis XIV. In 1702 they had in their pay upwards
  of 100,000 men, including many English and Scottish regiments, besides
  30,000 in the service of the Dutch East India Company. But the
  slaughter of Malplaquet deprived the republic of the flower of the
  army. Its part in the War of the Austrian Succession was far from
  being as creditable as its earlier deeds, a Prussian army overran
  Holland in 1787 almost without opposition, and at the beginning of the
  wars of the French Revolution the army had fallen to 36,000 men. In
  1795 Holland was conquered by the French under Pichegru, and in the
  course of the changes which ensued the army was entirely reorganized,
  and under French direction bore its share in the great wars of the
  empire.

  With the fall of Napoleon and the reconstitution of the Netherlands,
  the Dutch-Belgian army, formed of the troops of the now united
  countries, came into existence. The army fought at Waterloo, but was
  not destined to a long career, for the revolution of 1830 brought
  about the separation of Belgium. A Dutch garrison under Baron Chassé,
  a distinguished veteran of the Napoleonic wars, defended Antwerp
  against the French under Marshal Gérard, and the Netherlands have been
  engaged in many arduous colonial wars in the East Indies. The Belgian
  army similarly has contributed officers and non-commissioned officers
  to the service of the Congo Free State.

  101. _Swiss Army._--The inhabitants of Switzerland were always a hardy
  and independent race, but their high military reputation dates from
  the middle of the 15th century, when the comparatively ill-armed and
  untrained mountaineers signally defeated Charles the Bold of Burgundy
  and the flower of the chivalry of Europe in the battles of Granson,
  Morat and Nancy. The Swabian war, towards the end of that century, and
  the Milanese war, at the beginning of the following one, added to the
  fame of the Swiss infantry, and made it the model on which that arm
  was formed all over Europe. The wealthier countries vied with each
  other in hiring them as mercenaries, and the poor but warlike Swiss
  found the profession of arms a lucrative one.

  A brief account of the Swiss mercenaries will be found earlier in this
  article. Their fall was due in the end to their own indiscipline in
  the first place, and the rise of the Spanish standing army and its
  musketeers in the second. Yet it does not seem that the military
  reputation of the Swiss was discredited, even by reverses such as
  Marignan. On the contrary, they continued all through the 17th and
  18th centuries to furnish whole regiments for the service of other
  countries, notably of France, and individuals, like Jomini in a later
  age, followed the career of the soldier of fortune everywhere. The
  most notable incident in the later military history of the Swiss, the
  heroic faithfulness of Louis XVI.'s Swiss guard, is proverbial, and
  has been commemorated with just pride by their countrymen. The French
  Revolutionary armies overran Switzerland, as they did all the small
  neighbouring states, and during Napoleon's career she had to submit to
  his rule, and furnish her contingent to his armies. On the fall of
  Napoleon she regained her independence, and returned to her old trade
  of furnishing soldiers to the sovereigns and powers of Europe. Charles
  X. of France had at one time as many as 17,000 Swiss in his pay;
  Naples and Rome had each four regiments. The recruiting for these
  foreign services was openly acknowledged and encouraged by the
  government. The young Swiss engaged usually for a period of four or
  six years; they were formed in separate regiments, officered by
  countrymen of their own, and received a higher rate of pay than the
  national regiments; and at the close of their engagement returned with
  their earnings to settle down on their paternal holdings. A series of
  revolutions, however, expelled them from France and Italy, and
  recently the advance of liberal ideas, and the creation of great
  national armies based on the principle of personal service, has
  destroyed their occupation. Switzerland is now remarkable in a
  military sense as being the only country that maintains no standing
  army (see Militia).

  102. The _Swedish Army_ can look back with pride to the days of
  Gustavus Adolphus and of Charles XII. The contributions made by it to
  the military science of the 17th century have been noticed above. The
  triumphs of the small and highly disciplined army of Charles were
  often such as to recall the similar victories of the Greeks under
  Alexander. The then nebulous armies of Russia and Poland resembled
  indeed the forces of Darius in the 4th century B.C., but Peter the
  Great succeeded at last in producing a true army, and the resistance
  of the Swedes collapsed under the weight of the vastly superior
  numbers then brought against them.

  The _Danish Army_ has a long and meritorious record of good service
  dating from the Thirty Years' War.

  103. The existing Army of _Portugal_ dates from the Peninsular War,
  when a considerable force of Portuguese, at one time exceeding 60,000
  men, was organized under Marshal Beresford. Trained and partly
  officered by English officers, it proved itself not unworthy of its
  allies, and bore its full share in the series of campaigns and battles
  by which the French were ultimately expelled from Spain. At the peace
  the army numbered about 50,000 infantry and 5000 cavalry, formed on
  the English model, and all in the highest state of efficiency. This
  force was reduced in 1821, under the new constitutional government, to
  about one-half.

  104. The _Rumanian, Bulgarian_ and _Servian_ armies are the youngest
  in Europe. The conduct of the Rumanians before Plevna in 1877 earned
  for them the respect of soldiers of all countries. Servia and Bulgaria
  came to war in 1885, and the Bulgarian soldiers, under the most
  adverse conditions, achieved splendid victories under the leadership
  of their own officers. In the crisis following the Austrian annexation
  of Bosnia-Herzegovina (1908-9), it seemed likely that the Servian
  forces might play an unexpectedly active part in war even with a
  strong power.

  BIBLIOGRAPHY.--Below are the titles of some of the more important
  works on the subject of armies. See also under biographical headings
  and articles dealing with the several arms, &c. A large proportion of
  the works mentioned below are concerned mainly with the development of
  strategy and tactics.

  V. der Goltz, _Das Volk in Waffen_ (1883, new ed., 1898, English
  translation, P.A. Ashworth, _Nation in Arms_, London, 1887, new ed.,
  1907, French, _Nation armée_, Paris, 1889); Jähns, _Heeresverfassung
  und Völkerleben_ (Berlin, 1885); Berndt, _Die Zahl im Kriege_ (Vienna,
  1895); F.N. Maude, _Evolution of Modern Strategy_ (1903), _Voluntary
  versus Compulsory Service_ (1897), and _War and the World's Life_
  (1907); Pierron, _Méthodes de guerre_, vol. i.; Jähns, _Geschichte der
  Kriegswissenschaften_ (an exhaustive bibliography, with critical
  notes); Troschke, _Mil. Litteratur seit den Befreiungskriegen_
  (Berlin, 1870); T.A. Dodge, _Great Captains_ (_Alexander, Hannibal,
  Caesar, Gustavus, Napoleon_); Bronsart v. Schellendorf (Eng. trans.,
  War Office, 1905) _Duties of the General Staff_; Favé, _Histoire et
  tactique des trois armes_ (Liége, 1850); Maynert, _Gesch. des
  Kriegswesens u. der Heeresverfassungen in Europa_ (Vienna, 1869);
  Jähns, _Handbuch für eine Geschichte des Kriegswesens v. der Urzeit
  bis zur Renaissance_ (Leipzig, 1880); de la Barre Duparcq, _Histoire
  de l'art de la guerre avant l'usage de poudre_ (Paris, 1860); Rüstow
  and Köchly, _Geschichte des griechischen Kriegswesens_ (Aarau, 1852);
  Köchly and Rüstow, _Griechische Kriegsschriftsteller_ (Leipzig, 1855);
  Förster, in _Hermes_, xii. (1877); D.G. Hogarth, _Philip and
  Alexander_ (London, 1897); Macdougall, _Campaigns of Hannibal_
  (London, 1858); Rüstow, _Heerwesen, &c., Julius Casars_ (Nordhausen,
  1855); _Organ der M. Wissensch. Verein_ of 1877 (Vienna); Polybius
  literature of the 17th and 18th centuries; supplement to _M.W.B._,
  1883; the works of Xenophon, Aelian, Arrian, Vegetius, Polybius,
  Caesar, &c. (see Köchly and Rüstow: a collection was made in the 15th
  century, under the title _Veteres de re militari scriptores_, 1487);
  Oman, _A History of the Art of War: Middle Ages_ (London, 1898);
  Delpech, _La Tactique au XIII^e siècle_ (Paris, 1886); Kohler, _Die
  Entwickelung des Kriegswesens v. II. Jahrhdt. bis zu den
  Hussitenkriegen_ (Breslau, 1886-1893); Ricotti, _Storia delle
  Compagnie di Ventura_ (Turin, 1846); Steger, _Gesch. Francesco Sforzas
  und d. ital. Condottieri_ (Leipzig, 1865); J.A. Symonds, _The
  Renaissance in Italy and The Age of the Despots; A Brandenburg
  Mobilization of 1477_ (German General Staff Monograph, No. 3);
  Palacky, "Kriegskunst der Böhmen," _Zeitschrift bohmisch. Museums_
  (Prague, 1828); George, _Battles of English History_ (London, 1895);
  Biottot, _Les Grands inspirés devant la science: Jeanne d'Arc_ (Paris,
  1907); V. Ellger, _Kriegswesen, &c., der Eidgenossen, 14., 15., 16.
  Jahrhdt._ (1873); de la Chauvelays, _Les Armées de Charles le
  Téméraire_ (Paris, 1879); Guillaume, _Hist. des bandes d'ordonnance
  dans les Pays-Bas_ (Brussels, 1873); the works of Froissart, de
  Brantôme, Machiavelli, Lienhard Frönsperger (_Kriegsbuch_, 1570), de
  la Noue, du Bellay, &c.; Villari, _Life and Times of Machiavelli_
  (English version); "Die frommen Landsknechte" (_M. W. B._, supplement,
  1880); _Kriegsbilder aus der Zeit der Landsknechte_ (Stuttgart, 1883);
  C.H. Firth, _Cromwell's Army_ (London, 1902); Heilmann, _Das
  Kriegswesen der Kaiserlichen und Schweden_ (Leipzig, 1850); C. Walton,
  _History of the British Standing Army, 1660-1700_ (London, 1894); E.A.
  Altnam in _United Service Magazine_, February 1907; Austrian official
  history of Prince Eugene's campaigns, &c.; de la Barre Duparcq, _Hist,
  milit. de la Prusse avant 1756_ (Paris, 1857); Marsigli, _L'État
  militaire de l'emp. ottoman_ (1732); Prussian Staff History of the
  Silesian wars; C. von B(inder)-K(rieglstein), _Geist und Stoff im
  Kriege_ (Vienna, 1895); E. d'Hauterive, _L'Armée sous la Révolution_
  (Paris, 1894); C. Rousset, _Les Volontaires de 1791-1794_; Michelet,
  _Les Soldats de la Révolution_ (Paris, 1878); publications of the
  French general staff on the Revolutionary and Napoleonic wars; H.
  Bonnal, _Esprit de la guerre moderne_ (a series of studies in military
  history, 1805-1870); Paimblant du Rouil, _La Division Durutte, les
  Réfractaires_, also supplement, _M.W.B._, 1890; "The French
  Conscription" (suppl. _M.W.B._, 1892); C. v. der Goltz, _Von Rossbach
  bis Jena und Auerstädt_ (a new edition of the original _Rossbach und
  Jena_, Berlin, 1883); German General Staff Monograph, No. 10; _M.W.B._
  supplements of 1845, 1846, 1847, 1854, 1855, 1856, 1857, 1858, 1862,
  1865, 1866, 1867, 1887; v. Duncker, _Preussen während der franz.
  Okkupation_ (1872); Archives of Prussian war ministry, publications of
  1892 and 1896; histories of the wars of 1866 and 1870; V. Chareton,
  _Comme la Prusse a préparé sa revanche, 1806-1813; Reports_ of Col.
  Baron Stoffel, French attaché at Berlin (translation into English, War
  Office, London); Haxthausen, _Les Forces militaires de la Prusse_
  (Paris, 1853); de la Barre Duparcq, _Études historiques générales et
  militaires sur la Prusse_ (Paris, 1854); Paixhans, _Constitution
  militaire de la France_ (Paris, 1849); Duc d'Aumale, _Les Institutions
  militaires de la France_ (Paris, 1867); C. v. Decker, _Über die
  Persönlichkeit des preussischen Soldaten_ (Berlin, 1842); War Office,
  _Army Book of the British Empire_ (London, 1893); M. Jähns, _Das
  französische Heer von der grossen Revolution bis zur Gegenwart_
  (Leipzig, 1873); Baron Kaulbars, _The German Army_ (in Russian) [St
  Petersburg, 1890]; _Die Schweiz im 19. Jahrhundert_ (Berne and
  Lausanne, 1899); Heimann, _L'Armée allemande_ (Paris, 1895); R. de
  l'Homme de Courbière, _Grundzüge der deutschen Militarverwaltung_
  (Berlin, 1882); G.F.R. Henderson, _The Science of War_ (London, 1905);
  J.W. Fortescue, _History of the British Army_ (London, 1899- ----); R.
  de l'Homme de Courbière, _Gesch. der brandenburg-preussisch.
  Heeresverfassung_ (Berlin, 1852); Krippentagel and Küstel, _Die
  preuss. Armee von der ältesten Zeit bis zur Gegenwart_ (Berlin, 1883);
  Gansauge, _Das brandenbg.-preuss. Kriegswesen, 1440, 1640, 1740_
  (Berlin, 1839); A. v. Boguslawksi, _Die Landwehr, 1813-1893_ (1893);
  A.R. v. Sichart, _Gesch. d. k. hannover. Armee_ (Hanover, 1866); v.
  Reitzenstein, _Die k. hannover. Kavallerie, 1631-1866_ (1892); Schlee,
  _Zur Gesch. des hessischen Kriegswesens_ (Kassel, 1867); Leichtlen,
  _Badens Kriegsverfassung_ (Carlsruhe, 1815); v. Stadlinger, _Gesch.
  des württembergischen Kriegswesens_ (Stuttgart, 1858); Münich,
  _Entwickelung der bayerischen Armee_ (Münich, 1864); official _Gesch.
  d. k. bayer. Armee_ (Münich, 1901 onward); Würdinger,
  _Kriegsgeschichte v. Bayern_ (Münich, 1868); H. Meynert, _Gesch. des
  österr. Kriegswesens_ (Vienna, 1852), _Kriegswesen Ungarns_ (Vienna,
  1876); Anger, _Gesch. der K.-K. Armee_ (Vienna, 1886); _Beitrage zur
  Gesch. des österr. Heerwesens, 1754-1814_ (Vienna, 1872); R. v.
  Ottenfeld and Teuber, _Die österr. Armee, 1700-1867_ (Vienna, 1895);
  v. Wrede, _Gesch. d. K. u. K. Wehrmacht_ (Vienna, 1902); May de
  Rainmoter, _Histoire militaire de la Suisse_ (Lausanne, 1788); Cusachs
  y Barado, _La Vida Militar en España_ (Barcelona, 1888); Guillaume,
  _Hist. de l'infanterie wallonne sous la maison d'Espagne_ (Brussels,
  1876); A. Vitu, _Histoire civile de l'armée_ (Paris, 1868); A. Pascal,
  _Hist. de l'armée_ (Paris, 1847); L. Jablonski, _L'Armée française à
  travers les âges_; C. Romagny, _Hist. générale de l'armée nationale_
  (Paris, 1893); E. Simond, _Hist. mil. de la France_; Susane, _Hist. de
  l'infanterie, cavalerie, artillerie françaises_ (Paris, 1874); Père
  Daniel, _Hist. des milices françaises_ (1721); the official
  _Historique des corps de troupe_ (Paris, 1900- ----); Cahu, _Le Soldat
  français_ (Paris, 1876); J. Molard, _Cent ans de l'armée française,
  1780-1889_ (Paris, 1890); v. Stein, _Lehre vom Heerwesen_ (Stuttgart,
  1872); du Verger de S. Thomas, _L'Italie et son armée_, 1865 (Paris,
  1866); "C. Martel," _Military Italy_ (London, 1884); Sir R. Biddulph,
  _Lord Cardwell at the War Office_ (London, 1904); Willoughby Verner,
  _Military Life of the Duke of Cambridge_ (London, 1905); W.H. Daniel,
  _The Military Forces of the Crown_ (London, 1902); War Office, _Annual
  Report of the British Army_; Broome, _Rise and Progress of the Bengal
  Army_ (Calcutta, 1850); W.J. Wilson, _Hist. of the Madras Army_
  (London, 1882-1885); C.M. Clode, _Military Forces of the Crown_;
  Blume, _Die Grundlage unserer Wehrkraft_ (Berlin, 1899); Spenser
  Wilkinson, _The Brain of an Army_ (London, 1890 and 1895); v. Olberg,
  _Die französische Armee im Exerzirplatz und im Felde_ (Berlin, 1861);
  _Die Heere und Flotte der Gegenwart_, ed. Zepelin (Berlin, 1896);
  Molard, _Puissances militaires de l'Europe_ (Paris, 1895); works of
  Montecucculi, Puységur, Vauban, Feuquières, Guibert, Folard, Guichard,
  Joly de Maizeroy, Frederick the Great, Marshal Saxe, the prince de
  Ligne, Napoleon, Carnot, Scharnhorst, Clausewitz, Napoleon III.,
  Moltke, Hamley, &c.

  The principal general military periodicals are:--English, _Journal of
  the R. United Service Institution_; United States, _Journal of the
  Military Service Institution_; French, _Revue d'histoire_ and _Revue
  des armées étrangères_ (general staff); Rau and Lauth, _L'État
  militaire des puissances_ (about every 4 years); _Revue militaire
  générale_, founded in 1907 by General Langlois; _Almanach du drapeau_
  (a popular _aide-mémoire_ published annually); German, the
  _Vierteljahrsheft_ of the general staff; _Militar-Wochenblatt_
  (referred to above as _M.W.B._--the supplements are of great value);
  von Löbell's _Jahresberichte_ (annual detailed reports on the state,
  &c., of all armies--an English _précis_ appears annually in the
  _Journal_ of the R.U.S. Institution); Austrian, _Streffleurs öst.
  Militär-Zeitschrift_, with which was amalgamated (1907) the _Organ d.
  militärwissenschaft. Vereins._ The British War Office issues from time
  to time handbooks dealing with foreign armies, and, quarterly since
  April 1907, a critical review and bibliography of recent military
  literature in the principal languages, under the name of _Recent
  Publications of Military Interest_.     (C. F. A.)


FOOTNOTES:

  [1] The phrase "K. und K." (_Kaiserlich und Königlich_) is applied to
    all services common to the Austrian and Hungarian armies. "K.-K."
    (_Kaiserlich-Königlich_) refers strictly only to the troops of
    Austria, the Hungarian army being known as the "K. Ung." (Royal
    Hungarian) service.

  [2] From _Krümperpferde_ (cast horses attached to batteries, &c., for
    odd jobs), applied to the recruits in jest.




ARNAL, ÉTIENNE (1794-1872), French actor, was born at Meulan,
Seine-et-Oise, on the 1st of February 1794. After serving in the army,
and working in a button factory, he took to the stage. His first
appearance (1815) was in tragedy, and for some time he was unsuccessful;
it was not until 1827 that he showed his real ability in comedy parts,
especially in plays by Félix August Duvert (1795-1876) and Augustin
Théodore Lauzanne (1805-1877), whose _Cabinets particuliers_ (1832), _Le
Mari de la dame de choeurs_ (1837), _Passé minuit, L'Homme blasé_
(1843), _La Clef dans le dos_ (1848), &c., contained parts written for
him. He was twenty years at the Vaudeville, and completed at the various
Parisian theatres a stage career of nearly half a century. Arnal was the
author of _Epître à bouffé_ (1840), which is reprinted in his volume of
poetry, _Boutades en vers_ (1861).




ARNALDUS DE VILLA NOVA, also called ARNALDUS DE VILLANUEVA, ARNALDUS
VILLANOVANUS or ARNAUD DE VILLENEUVE (c. 1235-1313), alchemist,
astrologer and physician, appears to have been of Spanish origin, and to
have studied chemistry, medicine, physics, and also Arabian philosophy.
After having lived at the court of Aragon, he went to Paris, where he
gained a considerable reputation; but he incurred the enmity of the
ecclesiastics and was forced to flee, finally finding an asylum in
Sicily. About 1313 he was summoned to Avignon by Pope Clement V., who
was ill, but he died on the voyage. Many alchemical writings, including
_Thesaurus Thesaurorum_ or _Rosarius Philosophorum, Novum Lumen, Flos
Florum_, and _Speculum Alchimiae_, are ascribed to him, but they are of
very doubtful authenticity. Collected editions of them were published at
Lyons in 1504 and 1532 (with a biography by Symphorianus Campegius), at
Basel in 1585, at Frankfort in 1603, and at Lyons in 1686. He is also
the reputed author of various medical works, including _Breviarium
Practicae_.

  See J.B. Hauréau in the _Histoire littéraire de la France_ (1881),
  vol. 28; E. Lalande, _Arnaud de Villeneuve, sa vie et ses oeuvres_
  (Paris, 1896). A list of writings is given by J. Ferguson in his
  _Bibliotheca Chemica_ (1906). See also U. Chevalier, _Repertoire des
  sources hist., &c., Bio-bibliographie_ (Paris, 1903).




ARNAUD, HENRI (1641-1721), pastor and general of the Vaudois or
Waldensians of Piedmont, was born at Embrun. About 1650 his family
returned to their native valley of Luserna, where Arnaud was educated at
La Tour (the chief village), later visiting the college at Basel (1662
and 1668) and the Academy at Geneva (1666). He then returned home, and
seems to have been pastor in several of the Vaudois valleys before
attaining that position at La Tour (1685). He was thus the natural
leader of his co-religionists after Victor Amadeus expelled them (1686)
from their valleys, and most probably visited Holland, the ruler of
which, William of Orange, certainly gave him help and money. Arnaud
occupied himself with organizing his 3000 countrymen who had taken
refuge in Switzerland, and who twice (1687-1688) attempted to regain
their homes. The English revolution of 1688, and the election of William
to the throne, encouraged the Vaudois to make yet another attempt.
Furnished with detailed instructions from the veteran Josué Janavel
(prevented by age from taking part in the expedition) Arnaud, with about
1000 followers, started (August 17, 1689) from near Nyon on the Lake of
Geneva for the _glorieuse rentrée_. On the 27th of August, the valiant
band, after many hardships and dangers, reached the Valley of St
Martin, having passed by Sallanches and crossed the Col de Very (6506
ft.), the Enclave de la Fenêtre (7425 ft.), the Col du Bonhomme (8147
ft.), the Col du Mont Iseran (9085 ft.), the Grand Mont Cenis (6893
ft.), the Petit Mont Cenis (7166 ft.), the Col de Clapier (8173 ft.),
the Col de Côteplane (7589 ft.), and the Col du Piz (8550 ft.). They
soon took refuge in the lofty and secure rocky citadel of the Balsille,
where they were besieged (October 24, 1689 to May 14, 1690) by the
troops (about 4000 in number) of the king of France and the duke of
Savoy. They maintained this natural fortress against many fierce attacks
and during the whole of a winter. In particular, on the 2nd of May, one
assault was defeated without the loss of a single man of Arnaud's small
band. But another attack (May 14) was not so successful, so that Arnaud
withdrew his force, under cover of a thick mist, and led them over the
hills to the valley of Angrogna, above La Tour. A month later the
Vaudois were received into favour by the duke of Savoy, who had then
abandoned his alliance with France for one with Great Britain and
Holland. Hence for the next six years the Vaudois helped Savoy against
France, though suffering much from the repeated attacks of the French
troops. But by a clause in the treaty of peace of 1696, made public in
1698, Victor Amadeus again became hostile to the Vaudois, about 3000 of
whom, with Arnaud, found a shelter in Protestant countries, mainly in
Württemberg, where Arnaud became the pastor of Dürrmenz-Schönenberg,
N.W. of Stuttgart (1699). Once again (1704-1706) the Vaudois aided the
duke against France. Arnaud, however, took no part in the military
operations, though he visited England (1707) to obtain pecuniary aid
from Queen Anne. He died at Schönenberg (which was the church hamlet of
the parish of Dürrmenz) in 1721. It was during his retirement that he
compiled from various documents by other hands his _Histoire de la
glorieuse rentrée des Vaudois dans leurs vallées_, which was published
(probably at Cassel) in 1710, with a dedication to Queen Anne. It was
translated into English (1827) by H. Dyke Acland, and has also appeared
in German and Dutch versions. A part of the original MS. is preserved in
the Royal Library in Berlin.

  See K.H. Klaiber, _Henri Arnaud, ein Lebensbild_ (Stuttgart, 1880); A.
  de Rochas d'Aiglun, _Les Vallées vaudoises_ (Paris, 1881); various
  chapters in the _Bulletin du bicentenaire de la glorieuse rentrée_
  (Turin, 1889).     (W. A. B. C.)




ARNAULD, the surname of a family of prominent French lawyers, chiefly
remembered in connexion with the Jansenist troubles of the 17th century.
At their head was ANTOINE ARNAULD (1560-1619), a leader of the Paris
bar; in this capacity he delivered a famous philippic against the
Jesuits in 1594, accusing them of gross disloyalty to the newly
converted Henry IV. This speech was afterwards known as the original sin
of the Arnaulds.

Of his twenty children several grew up to fight the Jesuits on more
important matters. Five gave themselves up wholly to the church. HENRI
ARNAULD (1597-1692), the second son, became bishop of Angers in 1649,
and represented Jansenism on the episcopal Bench for as long as
forty-three years. The youngest son, ANTOINE (1612-1694), was the most
famous of Jansenist theologians (see below). The second daughter,
ANGÉLIQUE (1591-1661), was abbess and reformer of Port Royal; here she
was presently joined by her sister AGNES (1593-1671) and two younger
sisters, both of whom died early.

Only two of Antoine's children married--ROBERT ARNAULD D'ANDILLY
(1588-1674), the eldest son, and CATHERINE LEMAISTRE (1590-1651), the
eldest daughter. But both of these ended their lives under the shadow of
the abbey. Andilly's five daughters all took the veil there; the second,
ANGÉLIQUE DE ST JEAN ARNAULD D'ANDILLY (1624-1684) rose to be abbess,
was a writer of no mean repute, and one of the most remarkable figures
of the second generation of Jansenism. One of Andilly's sons became a
hermit at Port Royal; the eldest, ANTOINE (1615-1699), was first a
soldier, afterwards a priest. As the Abbé Arnauld, he survives as author
of some interesting _Memoirs_ of his time. The second son, SIMON ARNAULD
DE POMPONNE (1616-1699), early entered public life. After holding
various embassies, he rose to be foreign secretary to Louis XIV., and
was created marquis de Pomponne. Lastly Madame Lemaistre and two of her
sons became identified with Port Royal. On her husband's death she took
the veil there. Her eldest son, ANTOINE LEMAISTRE (1608-1658), became
the first of the _solitaires_, or hermits of Port Royal. There he was
joined by his younger brother, ISAAC LEMAISTRE DE SACI (1613-1684), who
presently took holy orders, and became confessor to the hermits.

The Arnaulds' connexion with Port Royal (q.v.)--a convent of Cistercian
nuns in the neighbourhood of Versailles--dated back to 1599, when the
original Antoine secured the abbess's chair for his daughter Angélique,
then a child of eight. About 1608 she started to reform her convent in
the direction of its original Rule; but about 1623 she made the
acquaintance of du Vergier (q.v.) and thenceforward began to move in a
Jansenist direction. Her later history is entirely bound up with the
fortunes of that revival. Angélique's strength lay chiefly in her
character. Her sister and collaborator, Agnes, was also a graceful
writer; and her _Letters_, edited by Prosper Feugère (2 vols., Paris,
1858), throw most valuable light on the inner aims and aspirations of
the Jansenist movement. The first relative to join their projects of
reform was their nephew, Antoine Lemaistre, who threw up brilliant
prospects at the bar to settle down at the Abbey gates (1638). Here he
was presently joined by his brother, de Saci, and other hermits, who led
an austere semi-monastic existence, though without taking any formal
vow. In 1646 they were joined by their uncle, Arnauld d'Andilly,
hitherto a personage of some importance at court and in the world; he
was a special favourite of the queen regent, Anne of Austria, and had
held various offices of dignity in the government. Uncle and nephews
passed their time partly in ascetic exercises--though Andilly never
pretended to vie in austerity with the younger men--partly in managing
the convent estates, and partly in translating religious classics.
Andilly put Josephus, St Augustine's _Confessions_, and many other
works, into singularly delicate French. Lemaistre attacked the lives of
the saints; in 1654 Saci set to work on a translation of the Bible. His
labours were interrupted by the outbreak of persecution. In 1661 he was
forced to go into hiding; in 1666 he was arrested, thrown into the
Bastille, and kept there more than two years. Meanwhile his friends
printed his translation of the New Testament--really in Holland,
nominally at Mons in the Spanish Netherlands (1667). Hence it is usually
known as the _Nouveau Testament de Mons_. It found enthusiastic friends
and violent detractors. Bossuet approved its orthodoxy, but not its
over-elaborate style; and it was destructively criticized by Richard
Simon, the founder of Biblical criticism in France. On the other hand it
undoubtedly did much to popularize the Bible, and was bitterly attacked
by the Jesuits on that ground.


  Le grand Arnauld.

By far the most distinguished of the family, however, was Antoine--_le
grand_ Arnauld, as contemporaries called him--the twentieth and youngest
child of the original Antoine. Born in 1612, he was originally intended
for the bar; but decided instead to study theology at the Sorbonne. Here
he was brilliantly successful, and was on the high-road to preferment,
when he came under the influence of du Vergier, and was drawn in the
direction of Jansenism. His book, _De la fréquente Communion_ (1643),
did more than anything else to make the aims and ideals of this movement
intelligible to the general public. Its appearance raised a violent
storm, and Arnauld eventually withdrew into hiding; for more than twenty
years he dared not make a public appearance in Paris. During all this
time his pen was busy with innumerable Jansenist pamphlets. In 1655 two
very outspoken _Lettres à un duc et pair_ on Jesuit methods in the
confessional brought on a motion to expel him from the Sorbonne. This
motion was the immediate cause of Pascal's _Provincial Letters_. Pascal,
however, failed to save his friend; in February 1656 Arnauld was
solemnly degraded. Twelve years later the tide of fortune turned. The
so-called peace of Clement IX. put an end to persecution. Arnauld
emerged from his retirement, was most graciously received by Louis XIV.,
and treated almost as a popular hero. He now set to work with Nicole
(q.v.) on a great work against the Calvinists: _La Perpétuité de la foi
catholique touchant l'eucharistie_. Ten years later, however, another
storm of persecution burst. Arnauld was compelled to fly from France,
and take refuge in the Netherlands, finally settling down at Brussels.
Here the last sixteen years of his life were spent in incessant
controversy with Jesuits, Calvinists and misbelievers of all kinds; here
he died on the 8th of August 1694. His inexhaustible energy is best
expressed by his famous reply to Nicole, who complained of feeling
tired. "Tired!" echoed Arnauld, "when you have all eternity to rest in?"
Nor was this energy by any means absorbed by purely theological
questions. He was one of the first to adopt the philosophy of Descartes,
though with certain orthodox reservations; and between 1683 and 1685 he
had a long battle with Malebranche on the relation of theology to
metaphysics. On the whole, public opinion leant to Arnauld's side. When
Malebranche complained that his adversary had misunderstood him, Boileau
silenced him with the question: "My dear sir, whom do you expect to
understand you, if M. Arnauld does not?" And popular regard for
Arnauld's penetration was much increased by his _Art de penser_,
commonly known as the _Port-Royal Logic_, which has kept its place as an
elementary text-book until quite modern times. Lastly a considerable
place has quite lately been claimed for Arnauld among the mathematicians
of his age; a recent critic even describes him as the Euclid of the 17th
century. In general, however, since his death his reputation has been
steadily on the wane. Contemporaries admired him chiefly as a master of
close and serried reasoning; herein Bossuet, the greatest theologian of
the age, was quite at one with d'Aguesseau, the greatest lawyer. But a
purely controversial writer is seldom attractive to posterity. Anxiety
to drive home every possible point, and cut his adversary off from every
possible line of retreat, makes him seem intolerably prolix. "In spite
of myself," Arnauld once said regretfully, "my books are seldom very
short." And even lucidity may prove a snare to those who trust to it
alone, and scornfully refuse to appeal to the imagination or the
feelings. It is to be feared that, but for his connexion with Pascal,
Arnauld's name would be almost forgotten--or, at most, live only in the
famous epitaph Boileau consecrated to his memory--

  "Au pied de cet autel de structure grossière
   Gît sans pompe, enfermé dans une vile bière
   Le plus savant mortel qui jamais ait écrit."

  Full details as to the lives and writings of the Arnaulds will be
  found in the various books mentioned at the close of the article on
  Port Royal. The most interesting account of Angélique will be found in
  _Mémoires pour servir a l'histoire de Port-Royal_ (3 vols., Utrecht
  1742). Three volumes of her correspondence were also published at the
  same time and place. There are excellent modern lives of her in
  English by Miss Frances Martin (_Angélique Arnauld_, 1873) and by A.
  K. H. (_Angélique of Port Royal_, 1905). Antoine Arnauld's complete
  works--thirty-seven volumes in forty-two parts--were published in
  Paris, 1775-1781. No modern biography of him exists; but there is a
  study of his philosophy in Bouillier, _Histoire de la philosophie
  cartésienne_ (Paris, 1868); and his mathematical achievements are
  discussed by Dr Bopp in the 14th volume of the _Abhandlungen zur
  Geschichte der mathematischen Wissenschaften_ (Leipzig, 1902). The
  memoirs of Arnauld d'Andilly and of his son, the abbé Arnauld, are
  reprinted both in Petitot's and Poujoulat's collections of memoirs
  illustrative of the 17th century.     (St. C.)




ARNAULT, ANTOINE VINCENT (1766-1834), French dramatist, was born in
Paris in January 1766. His first play, _Marius à Minturnes_ (1791),
immediately established his reputation. A year later he followed up his
first success with a second republican tragedy, _Lucrèce_. He left
France during the Terror and on his return was arrested by the
revolutionary authorities, but was liberated through the intervention of
Fabre d'Eglantine and others. He was commissioned by Bonaparte in 1797
with the reorganization of the Ionian Islands, and was nominated to the
Institute and made secretary general of the university. He was faithful
to his patron through his misfortunes, and after the Hundred Days
remained in exile until 1819. In 1829 he was re-elected to the Academy
and became perpetual secretary in 1833. Others of his plays are _Blanche
et Montcassin, ou les Vénitiens_ (1798); and _Germanicus_ (1816), the
performance of which was the occasion of a disturbance in the _parterre_
which threatened serious political complications. His tragedies are
perhaps less known now than his _Fables_ (1813, 1815 and 1826), which
are written in very graceful verse. Arnault collaborated in a _Vie
politique et militaire de Napoléon_ (1822), and wrote some very
interesting _Souvenirs d'un sexagénaire_ (1833), which contain much
out-of-the-way information about the history of the years previous to
1804. Arnault died at Goderville on the 16th of September 1834.

His eldest son, Émilien Lucien (1787-1863), wrote several tragedies, the
leading rôles in which were interpreted by Talma.

  See Sainte-Beuve, _Causeries du lundi_, vol. 7. Arnault's _Oeuvres
  complètes_ (4 vols.) were published at the Hague and Paris in
  1818-1819 and again (8 vols.) at Paris in 1824.




ARNDT, ERNST MORITZ (1769-1860), German poet and patriot, was born on
the 26th of December 1769 at Schoritz in the island of Rügen, which at
that time belonged to Sweden. He was the son of a prosperous farmer, and
emancipated serf of the lord of the district, Count Putbus; his mother
came of well-to-do German yeoman stock. In 1787 the family removed into
the neighbourhood of Stralsund, where Arndt was enabled to attend the
academy. After an interval of private study he went in 1791 to the
university of Greifswald as a student of theology and history, and in
1793 removed to Jena, where he fell under the influence of Fichte. On
the completion of his university course he returned home, was for two
years a private tutor in the family of Ludwig Kosegarten (1758-1818),
pastor of Wittow and poet, and having qualified for the ministry as a
"candidate of theology," assisted in the church services. At the age of
twenty-eight he renounced the ministry, and for eighteen months he led a
wandering life, visiting Austria, Hungary, Italy, France and Belgium.
Returning homewards up the Rhine, he was moved by the sight of the
ruined castles along its banks to intense bitterness against France. The
impressions of this journey he later described in _Reisen durch einen
Theil Teutschlands, Ungarns, Italiens und Frankreichs in den Jahren 1798
und 1799_ (1802-1804). In 1800 he settled in Greifswald as
_privat-docent_ in history, and the same year published _Über die
Freiheit der alien Republiken_. In 1803 appeared _Germanien und
Europa_," a fragmentary ebullition," as be himself called it, of his
views on the French aggression. This was followed by one of the most
remarkable of his books, _Versuch einer Geschichte der Leibeigenschaft
in Pommern und Rügen_ (Berlin, 1803), a history of serfdom in Pomerania
and Rügen, which was so convincing an indictment that King Gustavus
Adolphus IV. in 1806 abolished the evil. Arndt had meanwhile risen from
_privat-docent_ to extraordinary professor, and in 1806 was appointed to
the chair of history at the university. In this year he published the
first part of his _Geist der Zeit_, in which he flung down the gauntlet
to Napoleon and called on his countrymen to rise and shake off the
French yoke. So great was the excitement it produced that Arndt was
compelled to take refuge in Sweden to escape the vengeance of Napoleon.
Settling in Stockholm, he obtained government employment, but devoted
himself to the great cause which was nearest his heart, and in
pamphlets, poems and songs communicated his enthusiasm to his
countrymen. Schill's heroic death at Stralsund impelled him to return to
Germany and, under the disguise of "Almann, teacher of languages," he
reached Berlin in December 1809. In 1810 he returned to Greifswald, but
only for a few months. He again set out on his adventurous travels,
lived in close contact with the first men of his time, such as Blücher,
Gneisenau and Stein, and in 1812 was summoned by the last named to St
Petersburg to assist in the organization of the final struggle against
France. Meanwhile, pamphlet after pamphlet, full of bitter hatred of the
French oppressor, came from his pen, and his stirring patriotic songs,
such as _Was ist das deutsche Vaterland? Der Gott, der Eisen wachsen
liess_, and _Was blasen die Trompeten?_ were on all lips. When, after
the peace, the university of Bonn was founded in 1818, Arndt was
appointed to the chair of modern history. In this year appeared the
fourth part of his _Geist der Zeit_, in which he criticized the
reactionary policy of the German powers. The boldness of his demands for
reform offended the Prussian government, and in the summer of 1819 he
was arrested and his papers confiscated. Although speedily liberated, he
was in the following year, at the instance of the Central Commission of
Investigation at Mainz, established in accordance with the Carlsbad
Decrees, arraigned before a specially constituted tribunal. Although not
found guilty, he was forbidden to exercise the functions of his
professorship, but was allowed to retain the stipend. The next twenty
years he passed in retirement and literary activity. In 1840 he was
reinstated in his professorship, and in 1841 was chosen rector of the
university. The revolutionary outbreak of 1848 rekindled in the
venerable patriot his old hopes and energies, and he took his seat as
one of the deputies to the National Assembly at Frankfort. He formed one
of the deputation that offered the imperial crown to Frederick William
IV., and indignant at the king's refusal to accept it, he retired with
the majority of von Gagern's adherents from public life. He continued to
lecture and to write with freshness and vigour, and on his 90th birthday
received from all parts of Germany good wishes and tokens of affection.
He died at Bonn on the 29th of January 1860. Arndt was twice married,
first in 1800, his wife dying in the following year; a second time in
1817.

  Arndt's untiring labour for his country rightly won for him the title
  of "the most German of all Germans." His lyric poems are not, however,
  all confined to politics. Many among the Gedichte (1803-1818; complete
  edition, 1860) are religious pieces of great beauty. Among his other
  works are _Reise durch Schweden_ (1797); _Nebenstunden, eine
  Beschreibung und Geschichte der schottländischen Inseln und der
  Orkaden_ (1820); _Die Frage über die Niederlande_ (1831);
  _Erinnerungen aus dem äusseren Leben_ (an autobiography, and the most
  valuable source of information for Arndt's life, 1840); _Rhein- und
  Ahrwanderungen_ (1846), _Wanderungen und Wandlungen mit dem
  Reichsfreiherrn von Stein_ (1858), and _Pro populo Germanico_ (1854),
  which was originally intended to form the fifth part of the _Geist der
  Zeit_. Arndt's _Werke_ have been edited by H. Rösch and H. Meisner in
  8 vols. (not complete) (1892-1898). Biographies have been written by
  E. Langenberg (1869) and Wilhelm Baur (5th ed., 1882); see also H.
  Meisner and R. Geerds, _E.M. Arndt, ein Lebensbild in Briefen_ (1898),
  and R. Thiele, _E.M. Arndt_ (1894). There are monuments to his memory
  at Schoritz, his birthplace, and at Bonn, where he is buried.




ARNDT, JOHANN (1555-1621), German Lutheran theologian, was born at
Ballenstedt, in Anhalt, and studied in several universities. He was at
Helmstadt in 1576; at Wittenberg in 1577. At Wittenberg the
crypto-Calvinist controversy was then at its height, and he took the
side of Melanchthon and the crypto-Calvinists. He continued his studies
in Strassburg, under the professor of Hebrew, Johannes Pappus
(1549-1610), a zealous Lutheran, the crown of whose life's work was the
forcible suppression of Calvinistic preaching and worship in the city,
and who had great influence over him. In Basel, again, he studied
theology under Simon Sulzer (1508-1585), a broad-minded divine of
Lutheran sympathies, whose aim was to reconcile the churches of the
Helvetic and Wittenberg confessions. In 1581 he went back to
Ballenstedt, but was soon recalled to active life by his appointment to
the pastorate at Badeborn in 1583. After some time his Lutheran
tendencies exposed him to the anger of the authorities, who were of the
Reformed Church. Consequently, in 1590 he was deposed for refusing to
remove the pictures from his church and discontinue the use of exorcism
in baptism. He found an asylum in Quedlinburg (1590), and afterwards was
transferred to St Martin's church at Brunswick (1599). Arndt's fame
rests on his writings. These were mainly of a mystical and devotional
kind, and were inspired by St Bernard, J. Tauler and Thomas à Kempis.
His principal work, _Wahres Christentum_ (1606-1609), which has been
translated into most European languages, has served as the foundation of
many books of devotion, both Roman Catholic and Protestant. Arndt here
dwells upon the mystical union between the believer and Christ, and
endeavours, by drawing attention to Christ's life _in_ His people, to
correct the purely forensic side of the Reformation theology, which paid
almost exclusive attention to Christ's death _for_ His people. Like
Luther, Arndt was very fond of the little anonymous book, _Deutsche
Theologie_. He published an edition of it and called attention to its
merits in a special preface. After _Wahres Christentum_, his best-known
work is _Paradiesgärtlein aller christlichen Tugenden_, which was
published in 1612. Both these books have been translated into English;
_Paradiesgärtlein_ with the title the _Garden of Paradise_. Several of
his sermons are published in R. Nesselmann's _Buch der Predigten_
(1858). Arndt has always been held in very high repute by the German
Pietists. The founder of Pietism, Philipp Jacob Spener, repeatedly
called attention to him and his writings, and even went so far as to
compare him with Plato (cf. Karl Scheele, _Plato und Johann Arndt, Ein
Vortrag, &c._, 1857).

  A collected edition of his works was published in Leipzig and Görlitz
  in 1734. A valuable account of Arndt is to be found in C. Aschmann's
  _Essai sur la vie, &c., de J. Arndt_. See further, Herzog-Hauck,
  _Realencyklopadie_.




ARNE, THOMAS AUGUSTINE (1710-1778), English musical composer, was born
in London on the 12th of March 1710, his father being an upholsterer.
Intended for the legal profession, he was educated at Eton, and
afterwards apprenticed to an attorney for three years. His natural
inclination for music, however, proved irresistible, and his father,
finding from his performance at an amateur musical party that he was
already a skilful violinist, furnished him with the means of educating
himself in his favourite art. On the 7th of March 1733 he produced his
first work at Lincoln's Inn Fields theatre, a setting of Addison's
_Rosamond_, the heroine's part being performed by his sister, Susanna
Maria, who afterwards became celebrated as Mrs Gibber. This proving a
success was immediately followed by a burletta, entitled _The Opera of
Operas_, based on Fielding's _Tragedy of Tragedies_. The part of Tom
Thumb was played by Arne's young brother, and the opera was produced at
the Haymarket theatre. On the 19th of December 1733 Arne produced at the
same theatre the masque _Dido and Aeneas_, a subject of which the
musical conception had been immortalized for Englishmen more than half a
century earlier by Henry Purcell. Arne's individuality of style first
distinctly asserted itself in the music to Dr Dalton's adaptation of
Milton's _Comus_, which was performed at Drury Lane in 1738, and
speedily established his reputation. In 1740 he wrote the music for
Thomson and Mallet's _Masque of Alfred_, which is noteworthy as
containing the most popular of all his airs--"Rule, Britannia!" In 1740
he also wrote his beautiful settings of the songs, "Under the greenwood
tree," "Blow, blow, thou winter wind" and "When daisies pied," for a
performance of Shakespeare's _As You Like It_. Four years before this,
in 1736, he had married Cecilia, the eldest daughter of Charles Young,
organist of All Hallows Barking. She was considered the finest English
singer of the day and was frequently engaged by Handel in the
performance of his music. In 1742 Arne went with his wife to Dublin,
where he remained two years and produced his oratorio _Abel_, containing
the beautiful melody known as the Hymn of Eve, the operas _Britannia,
Eliza_ and _Comus_, and where he also gave a number of successful
concerts. On his return to London he was engaged as leader of the band
at Drury Lane theatre (1744), and as composer at Vauxhall (1745). In
this latter year he composed his successful pastoral dialogue, _Colin
and Phoebe_, and in 1746 the song, "Where the bee sucks." In 1759 he
received the degree of doctor of music from Oxford. In 1760 he
transferred his services to Covent Garden theatre, where on the 28th of
November he produced his _Thomas and Sally_. Here, too, on the 2nd of
February 1762 he produced his _Artaxerxes_, an opera in the Italian
style with recitative instead of spoken dialogue, the popularity of
which is attested by the fact that it continued to be performed at
intervals for upwards of eighty years. The libretto, by Arne himself,
was a very poor translation of Metastasio's _Artaserse_. In 1762 also
was produced the ballad-opera _Love in a Cottage_. His oratorio
_Judith_, of which the first performance was on the 27th of February
1761 at Drury Lane, was revived at the chapel of the Lock hospital,
Pimlico, on the 29th of February 1764, in which year was also performed
his setting of Metastasio's _Olimpiade_ in the original language at the
King's theatre in the Haymarket. At a later performance of _Judith_ at
Covent Garden theatre on the 26th of February 1773 Arne for the first
time introduced female voices into oratorio choruses. In 1769 he wrote
the musical parts for Garrick's ode for the Shakespeare jubilee at
Stratford-on-Avon, and in 1770 he gave a mutilated version of Purcell's
_King Arthur_. One of his last dramatic works was the music to Mason's
_Caractacus_, published in 1775. Though inferior to Purcell in intensity
of feeling, Arne has not been surpassed as a composer of graceful and
attractive melody. There is true genius in such airs as "Rule,
Britannia!" and "Where the bee sucks," which still retain their original
freshness and popularity. As a writer of glees he does not take such
high rank, though he deserves notice as the leader in the revival of
that peculiarly English form of composition. He was author as well as
composer of _The Guardian outwitted_, _The Rose_, _The Contest of Beauty
and Virtue_, and _Phoebe at Court_. Dr Arne died on the 5th of March
1778, and was buried at St Paul's, Covent Garden.

  See also the article in _Grove's Dictionary_ (new ed.); and two
  interesting papers in the _Musical Times_, November and December 1901.




ARNETH, ALFRED, RITTER VON (1819-1897), Austrian historian, born at
Vienna on the both of July 1819, was the son of Joseph Calasanza von
Arneth (1791-1863), a well-known historian and archaeologist, who wrote
a history of the Austrian empire (Vienna, 1827) and several works on
numismatics. Alfred Arneth studied law, and became an official of the
Austrian state archives, of which in 1868 he was appointed keeper. He
was a moderate liberal in politics and a supporter of the ideal of
German unity. As such he was elected to the Frankfort parliament in
1848. In 1861 he became a member of the Lower Austrian diet and in 1869
was nominated to the Upper House of the Austrian Reichsrath. In 1879 he
was appointed president of the _Kaiserliche Akademie der Wissenschaften_
(Academy of Sciences) at Vienna, and in 1896 succeeded von Sybel as
chairman of the historical commission at Münich. He died on the 30th of
July 1897.

Arneth was an indefatigable worker, and, as director of the archives,
his broad-minded willingness to listen to the advice of experts, as well
as his own sound sense, did much to promote the more scientific
treatment and use of public records in most of the archives of Europe.
His scientific temper and the special facilities which he enjoyed for
drawing from original sources give to his numerous historical works a
very special value.

  Among his publications may be mentioned: _Leben des Feld-marschalls
  Grafen Guido Starhemberg_ (Vienna, 1863); _Prinz Eueen von Savoyen_ (3
  vols., _ib_. 1864); _Gesch. der Maria Theresa_ (10 vols., _ib_.
  1863-1879); _Maria Theresa u. Marie Antoinette, ihr Briefwechsel_
  (_ib_. 1866); _Marie Antoinette, Joseph II. und Leopold II., ihr
  Briefwechsel_ (1866); _Maria Theresa und Joseph II., ihre
  Korrespondenz samt Briefen Josephs an seinen Bruder Leopold_ (3 vols.,
  1867); _Beaumarchais und Sonnenfels_ (1868); _Joseph II. und Katharina
  von Russland, ihr Briefwechsel_ (1869); _Johann Christian Barthenstein
  und seine Zeit_ (1871); _Joseph II. und Leopold von Toskana, ihr
  Briefwechsel_ (2 vols., 1872); _Briefe der Kaiserin Maria Theresa an
  ihre Kinder und Freunde_ (4 vols., 1881); _Marie Antoinette:
  Correspondance secrète entre Marie-Thérèse et le comte de
  Mercy-Argenteau_ (3 vols., Paris, 1875), in collaboration with Auguste
  Geffroy; _Graf Philipp Cobenzl und seine Memoiren_ (1885);
  _Correspondance secrete du comte de Mercy-Argenteau avec l'empereur
  Joseph II. et Kaunitz_ (2 vols., 1889-1891), in collaboration with
  Jules Flammermont; _Anton Ritter von Schmerling. Episoden aus seinem
  Leben 1835, 1848-1849_ (1895); _Johann Freiherr von Wessenberg, ein
  österreichischer Staatsmann des 19. Jahrh._ (2 vols., 1898). Arneth
  also published in 1893 two volumes of early reminiscences under the
  title of _Aus meinem Leben_.




ARNHEM, or ARNHEIM, the capital of the province of Gelderland, Holland,
on the right bank of the Rhine (here crossed by a pontoon bridge), and a
junction station 35 m. by rail E.S.E. of Utrecht. Pop. (1900) 57,240. It
is connected by tramway with Zutphen and Utrecht, and there is a regular
service of steamers to Cologne, Amsterdam, Nijmwegen, Tiel, 's
Hertogenbosch and Rotterdam. Arnhem is a gay and fashionable town
prettily situated at the foot of the Veluwe hills, and enjoys a special
reputation for beauty on account of its wooded and hilly surroundings,
which have attracted many wealthy people to its neighbourhood. The
Groote Kerk of St Eusebius, built in the third quarter of the 15th
century, contains the marble monument to Charles (d. 1538), the last
duke of Gelderland of the Egmont dynasty. High up against the wall is an
effigy of the same duke in his armour. The fine lofty tower contains a
chime of forty-five bells. The Roman Catholic church of St Walburgis is
of earlier date, and a new Roman Catholic church dates from 1894. The
town hall was built as a palace by Maarten van Rossum, Duke Charles's
general, at the end of the 15th century, and was only converted to its
present use in 1830. Its grotesque external ornamentation earned for it
the name of Duivelshuis, or devil's house. The provincial government
house occupies the site of the former palace of the dukes of Gelderland.
Other buildings are the court-house, a public library containing many
old works, a theatre, a large concert-hall, a museum of antiquities (as
well as a separate collection of Spanish antiquities), a gymnasium, a
teachers' and art school, a building (1880) to contain the provincial
archives, a hospital (1889) and barracks. On account of its proximity to
the fertile Betuwe district and its situation near the confluence of the
Rhine and Ysel, the markets and shipping of Arnhem are in a flourishing
condition. A wharf for building and repairing iron steamers was
constructed in 1889. The manufactures include woollen and cotton goods,
paper, earthenware, soap, carriages, furniture and tobacco, which is
cultivated in the neighbourhood. Wool-combing and dyeing are also
carried on, and there are oil and timber mills.

The environs of Arnhem are much admired. Following either the Zutphen or
the Utrecht road, numerous pleasing views of the Rhine valley present
themselves, and country houses and villas appear among the woods on
every side. At Bronbeek, a short distance east of the town, is a
hospital endowed by King William III. for soldiers of the colonial army.
Beyond is the popular summer resort of Velp, with the castle of Biljoen
built by Charles, duke of Gelderland, in 1530, and the beautiful park of
the ancient castle of Rozendaal in the vicinity. The origin of the
castle of Rozendaal is unknown. The first account of it is in connexion
with a tournament given there by Reinald I., count of Gelderland, in the
beginning of the 14th century, and it ever after remained the favourite
residence of the counts and dukes of Gelderland. About the beginning of
the 18th century fountains and lanes in the style of those at Versailles
were laid out in the park, and soon after the castle itself, of which
only the round tower remained (and is still standing), was rebuilt. The
park is open to the public, and is famous for the beauty of the beech
avenues and fir woods. Beyond this is De Steeg, another popular resort,
whence stretches the famous Middachten Allee of beech trees to Dieren.
On the Apeldoorn road is Sonsbeek, with a wooded park and small lakes,
formerly a private seat and now belonging to the municipality. On the
west of Arnhem is another pleasure ground, called the Reeberg, with a
casino, and the woods of Heienoord. Close by is the ancient and
well-preserved castle of Doornwerth with its own chapel. It was the seat
of an independent lordship until 1402, after which time it was held in
fief from the dukes of Gelderland. Beyond Doornwerth, at Renkum, is the
royal country seat called Oranje-Nassau's Oord, which was bought by the
crown in 1881.

_History._--Arnhem, called _Arnoldi Villa_ in the middle ages, is,
according to some, the _Arenacum_ of the Romans, and is first mentioned
in a document in 893. In 1233 Otto II., count of Gelderland, chose this
spot as his residence, conferred municipal rights on the town, and
fortified it. At a later period it entered the Hanseatic League. In 1473
it was captured by Charles the Bold of Burgundy. In 1505 it received the
right of coining from Philip, son of the emperor Maximilian I. In 1514
Charles of Egmont, duke of Gelderland, took it from the Spaniards; but
in 1543 it fell to the emperor Charles V., who made it the seat of the
council of Gelderland. It joined the union of Utrecht in 1579, and came
finally under the effective government of the states-general in 1585,
all the later attacks of the Spaniards being repulsed. In 1586 Sir
Philip Sidney died in the town from the effects of his wound received
before Zutphen. The French took the town in 1672, but left it dismantled
in 1674. It was refortified by the celebrated Dutch general of
engineers, Coehoorn, in the beginning of the 18th century. In 1795 it
was again stormed by the French, and in 1813 it was taken from them by
the Prussians under Büllow. Gardens and promenades have now taken the
place of the old ramparts, the last of which was levelled in 1853.




ARNICA, a genus of plants belonging to the natural order Compositae, and
containing 18 species, mostly north-west American. The most important
species is _Arnicamontana_ (mountain tobacco), a perennial herb found
in upland meadows in northern and central Europe (but not extending to
Britain), and on the mountains of western and central Europe. A closely
allied species (_A. angustifolia_), with very narrow leaves, is met with
in Arctic Asia and America. The heads of flowers are large, 2 to 2½ in.
across, orange-yellow in colour, and borne on the summit of the stem or
branches; the outer ray-flowers are an inch in length. The achenes
(fruits) are brown and hairy, and are crowned by a tuft of stiffish
hairs (pappus). The root-stock of _A. montana_ is tough, slender, of a
dark brown colour and an inch or two in length. It gives off numerous
simple roots from its under side, and shows on its upper side the
remains of rosettes of leaves. It yields an essential oil in small
quantity, and a resinous matter called arnicin, C12H22O2, a yellow
crystalline substance with an acrid taste. The tincture prepared from it
is an old remedy which has a popular reputation in the treatment of
bruises and sprains. The plant was introduced into English gardens about
the middle of the 18th century, but is not often grown; it is a handsome
plant for a rockery.




ARNIM, ELISABETH (BETTINA) VON (1785-1859), German authoress, sister of
Klemens Brentano, was born at Frankfort-On-Main on the 4th of April
1785. After being educated at a convent school in Fritzlar, she lived
for a while with her grandmother, the novelist, Sophie Laroche
(1731-1807), at Offenbach, and from 1803 to 1806 with her
brother-in-law, Friedrich von Savigny, the famous jurist, at Marburg. In
1807 she made at Weimar the acquaintance of Goethe, for whom she
entertained a violent passion, which the poet, although entering into
correspondence with her, did not requite, but only regarded as a
harmless fancy. Their friendship came to an abrupt end in 1811, owing to
"Bettina's" insolent behaviour to Goethe's wife. In this year she
married Ludwig Achim von Arnim (q.v.), by whom she had seven children.
After her husband's death in 1831, her passion for Goethe revived, and
in 1835 she published her remarkable book, _Goethes Briefwechsel mit
einem Kinde_, which purported to be a correspondence between herself and
the poet. Regarded at first as genuine, it was afterwards for many years
looked upon as wholly fictitious, until the publication in 1879 of G.
von Loeper's _Briefe Goethes an Sophie Laroche und Bettina Brentano,
nebst dichterischen Beilagen_, which proved it to be based on authentic
material, though treated with the greatest poetical licence. Equally
fantastic is her correspondence _Die Gunderode_ (1840), with her unhappy
friend, the poet, Karoline von Gunderode (1780-1806), who committed
suicide, and that with her brother Klemens Brentano, under the title
_Klemens Brentanos Fruhlingskranz_ (1844). She also published _Dies Buck
gehort dem Konig_ (1843), in which she advocated the emancipation of the
Jews, and the abolition of capital punishment. Among her other works may
be mentioned _Ilius Pamphilius und die Ambrosia_ (1848), also a
supposititious correspondence. In all her writings she showed real
poetical genius, combined with evidence of an unbalanced mind and a
mannerism which becomes tiresome. She died at Berlin on the 20th of
January 1859. Part of a design by her for a colossal statue of Goethe,
executed in marble by the sculptor Karl Steinhauser (1813-1878), is in
the museum at Weimar.

  Her collected works (_Samtliche Schriften_) were published in Berlin
  in 11 vols., 1853. Goethe's _Briefwechsel mit einem Kinde_ has been
  edited by H. Grimm (4th ed., Berlin, 1890). See also C. Alberti, _B.
  von Arnim_ (Leipzig, 1885); Moritz Carriere, _Bettina von Arnim_
  (Breslau, 1887), and the literature cited under Ludwig von Arnim.




ARNIM, HARRY KARL KURT EDUARD VON, COUNT (1824-1881), German
diplomatist, was a member of one of the most numerous and most widely
spread families of the Prussian nobility. He was born in Pomerania on
the 3rd of October 1824, and brought up by his uncle Heinrich von Arnim,
who was Prussian ambassador at Paris and foreign minister from March to
June 1848, while Count Arnim-Boytzenburg, whose daughter Harry von Arnim
afterwards married, was minister-president. It is noticeable that the
uncle was brought before a court of justice and fined for publishing a
pamphlet directed against the ministry of Manteuffel. After holding
other posts in the diplomatic service Arnim was in 1864 appointed
Prussian envoy (and in 1867 envoy of the North German Confederation) at
the papal court. In 1869 he proposed that the governments should appoint
representatives to be present at the Vatican council, a suggestion which
was rejected by Bismarck, and foretold that the promulgation of papal
infallibility would bring serious political difficulties. After the
recall of the French troops from Rome he attempted unsuccessfully to
mediate between the pope and the Italian government. He was appointed in
1871 German commissioner to arrange the final treaty with France, a task
which he carried out with such success that in 1871 he was appointed
German envoy at Paris, and in 1872 received his definite appointment as
ambassador, a post of the greatest difficulty and responsibility.
Differences soon arose between him and Bismarck; he wished to support
the monarchical party which was trying to overthrow Thiers, while
Bismarck ordered him to stand aloof from all French parties; he did not
give that implicit obedience to his instructions which Bismarck
required. Bismarck, however, was unable to recall him because of the
great influence which he enjoyed at court and the confidence which the
emperor placed in him. He was looked upon by the Conservative party, who
were trying to overthrow Bismarck, as his successor, and it is said that
he was closely connected with the court intrigues against the
chancellor. In the beginning of 1874 he was recalled and appointed to
the embassy at Constantinople, but this appointment was immediately
revoked. A Vienna newspaper published some correspondence on the Vatican
council, including confidential despatches of Arnim's, with the object
of showing that he had shown greater foresight than Bismarck. It was
then found that a considerable number of papers were missing from the
Paris embassy, and on the 4th of October Arnim was arrested on the
charge of embezzling state papers. This recourse to the criminal law
against a man of his rank, who had held one of the most important
diplomatic posts, caused great astonishment. His defence was that the
papers were not official, and he was acquitted on the charge of
embezzlement, but convicted of undue delay in restoring official papers
and condemned to three months' imprisonment. On appeal the sentence was
increased to nine months. Arnim avoided imprisonment by leaving the
country, and in 1875 published anonymously at Zurich a pamphlet entitled
"Pro nihilo," in which he attempted to show that the attack on him was
caused by Bismarck's personal jealousy. For this he was accused of
treason, insult to the emperor, and libelling Bismarck, and in his
absence condemned to five years' penal servitude. From his exile in
Austria he published two more pamphlets on the ecclesiastical policy of
Prussia, "Der Nunzius kommt!" (Vienna, 1878), and "Quid faciamus nos?"
(_ib._ 1879). He made repeated attempts, which were supported by his
family, to be allowed to return to Germany in order to take his trial
afresh on the charge of treason; his request had just been granted when
he died on the 19th of May 1881.

In 1876 Bismarck carried an amendment to the criminal code making it an
offence punishable with imprisonment or a fine up to £250 for an
official of the foreign office to communicate to others official
documents, or for an envoy to act contrary to his instructions. These
clauses are commonly spoken of in Germany as the "Arnim paragraphs."
     (J. W. He.)




ARNIM, LUDWIG ACHIM (JOACHIM) VON (1781-1831), German poet and novelist,
was born at Berlin on the 26th of January 1781. He studied natural
science at Halle and Göttingen, and published one or two essays on
scientific subjects; but his bent was from the first towards literature.
From the earlier writings of Goethe and Herder he learned to appreciate
the beauties of German traditional legends and folk-songs; and, forming
a collection of these, published the result (1806-1808), in
collaboration with Klemens Brentano (q.v.) under the title _Des Knaben
Wunderhorn._ From 1810 onward he lived with his wife Bettina, Brentano's
sister, alternately at Berlin and on his estate at Wiepersdorf, near
Dahme in Brandenburg, where he died on the 21st of January 1831. Arnim
was a prolific and versatile writer, gifted with a sense of humour and a
refined imagination--qualities shown in the best-known of his works,
_Des Knaben Wunderhorn_, deficient as this is in the philological
accuracy and faithfulness to original sources which would now be
expected of such a compilation. In general, however, his writings, full
as they are of the exaggerated sentiment and affectations of the
romantic school, make but little appeal to modern taste. There are
possible exceptions, such as the short stories _Furst Ganzgott und
Sanger Halbgott_ and _Der tolle Invalide auf dem Fort Ratonneau_ and the
unfinished romance _Die Kronenwachter_ (1817), which promised to develop
into one of the finest historical romances of the 19th century. Among
Arnim's other works may be mentioned _Hollins Liebesleben_ (1802), _Der
Wintergarten_ (1809), a collection of tales; _Armut, Reichtum Schuld,
und Busse der Grafin Dolores_ (1810), a novel; _Halle und Jerusalem_
(1811), a dramatic romance; and one or two smaller novels, such as
_Isabella von Ägypten_ (1812).

  Arnim's _Samtliche Werke_ were edited by his widow and published in
  Berlin in 1839-1840; second edition in 22 vols., 1853-1856. Selections
  have been edited by J. Dohmke (1892); M. Koch, _Arnim, Klemens und
  Bettina Brentano, Gorres_ (1893). _Des Knaben Wunderhorn_ has been
  frequently republished, the best edition being that of A. Birlinger
  and W. Crecelius (2 vols., 1872-1876). See R. Steig, _Achim von Arnim
  und Klemens Brentano_ (1894).




ARNIM-BOYTZENBURG, HANS GEORG VON (1581-1641), German general and
diplomatist, was born in 1581 at Boytzenburg in Brandenburg. From 1613
to 1617 he served in the Swedish army under Gustavus Adolphus, took part
in the Russian War, and afterwards fought against the Turks in the
service of the king of Poland. In 1626, though a Protestant, he was
induced by Wallenstein to join the new imperial army, in which he
quickly rose to the rank of field marshal, and won the esteem of his
soldiers as well as that of his commander, whose close friend and
faithful ally he became. This attachment to Wallenstein, and a spirit of
religious toleration, were the leading motives of a strange career of
military and political inconstancy. Thus the dismissal of Wallenstein
and the perilous condition of German Protestantism after the edict of
Restitution combined to induce Arnim to quit the imperial service for
that of the elector of Saxony. He had served under Gustavus many years
before, and later he had defeated him in the field, when in command of a
Polish army; the fortune of war now placed Arnim at the head of the
Saxon army which fought by the side of the Swedes at Breitenfeld (1631),
and indeed the alliance of these two Protestant powers in the cause of
their common religion was largely his work. The reappearances of
Wallenstein, however, caused him to hesitate and open negotiations,
though he did not attempt to conceal his proceedings from the elector
and Gustavus. During the Lützen campaign, Arnim was operating with
success at the head of an allied army in Silesia. In the following year
he was under the hard necessity of opposing his old friend in the field,
but little was done by either; the complicated political situation which
followed the death of Gustavus at Lützen led him into a renewal of the
private negotiations of the previous year, though he did nothing
actually treasonable in his relations with Wallenstein. In 1634
Wallenstein was assassinated, and Arnim began at once more active
operations. He won an important victory at Liegnitz in May 1634, but
from this time he became more and more estranged from the Swedes. The
peace of Prague followed, in which Arnim's part, though considerable,
was not all-important (1635). Soon after this event he refused an offer
of high command in the French army and retired from active life. From
1637 to 1638 he was imprisoned in Stockholm, having been seized at
Boytzenburg by the Swedes on suspicion of being concerned in various
intrigues. He made his escape ultimately, and returned to Saxony. Arnim
died suddenly at Dresden in 1641, whilst engaged in raising an army to
free German soil from foreign armies of all kinds. (See THIRTY YEARS'
WAR.)

  See K.G. Helbig, "Wallenstein und Arnim" (1850) and "Der Prager
  Friede," in Raumer's _Historisches Taschenbuch_ (1858); also E.D.M.
  Kirchner, _Das Schloss Boytzenburg, &c._ (1860) and _Archiv für die
  sachsische Geschichte_, vol. viii. (1870).




ARNO, ARN or AQUILA (c. 750-821), bishop and afterwards archbishop of
Salzburg, entered the church at an early age, and after passing some
time at Freising became abbot of Elnon, or St Amand as it was afterwards
called, where he made the acquaintance of Alcuin. In 785 he was made
bishop of Salzburg and in 787 was employed by Tassilo III., duke of the
Bavarians, as an envoy to Charlemagne at Rome. He appears to have
attracted the notice of the Frankish king, through whose influence in
798 Salzburg was made the seat of an archbishopric; and Arno, as the
first holder of this office, became metropolitan of Bavaria and received
the pallium from Pope Leo III. The area of his authority was extended to
the east by the conquests of Charlemagne over the Avars, and he began to
take a prominent part in the government of Bavaria. He acted as one of
the _missi dominici_, and spent some time at the court of Charlemagne,
where he was known by the assembled scholars as Aquila, and his name
appears as one of the signatories to the emperor's will. He established
a library at Salzburg, furthered in other ways the interests of
learning, and presided over several synods called to improve the
condition of the church in Bavaria. Soon after the death of Charlemagne
in 814, Arno appears to have withdrawn from active life, although he
retained his archbishopric until his death on the 24th of January 821.
Aided by a deacon named Benedict, Arno drew up about 788 a catalogue of
lands and proprietary rights belonging to the church in Bavaria, under
the title of _Indiculus_ or _Congestum Arnonis_. An edition of this
work, which is of considerable value to historical students, was
published at Münich in 1869 with notes by F. Keinz. Many other works
were produced under the protection of Arno, among them a Salzburg
consuetudinary, an edition of which appears in _Quellen und Erorterungen
zur bayrischen und deutschen Geschichte_, Band vii., edited by L.
Rockinger (Münich, 1856). It has been suggested by W. von Giesebrecht
that Arno was the author of an early section of _Annales Laurissenses
majores_, which deals with the history of the Frankish kings from 741 to
829, and of which an edition appears in _Monumenta Germaniae historica.
Scriptores_, Band i. pp. 128-131, edited by G.H. Pertz (Hanover, 1826).
If this supposition be correct, Arno was the first extant writer to
apply the name _Deutsch_ (_theodisca_) to the German language.




ARNO (anc. _Arnus_), a river of Italy which rises from the Monte
Falterona, about 25 m. E.N.E. of Florence, 4265 ft. above the sea. It
first runs S.S.E. through a beautiful valley, the Casentino; near Arezzo
it turns W., and at Montevarchi N.N.W.; 10 m. below it forces its way
through the limestone rock at Incisa and 10 m. farther on, at
Pontassieve, it is joined by the Sieve. Thence it runs westward to
Florence and through the gorge of Golfolina onwards to Empoli and Pisa,
receiving various tributaries in its course, and falls into the sea 7½
m. west of Pisa, after a total course of 155 m. In prehistoric times the
river ran straight on along the valley of the Chiana and joined the
Tiber near Orvieto; and there was a great lake, the north end of which
was at Incisa and the south at the lake of Chiusi. The distance from
Pisa to the mouth in the time of Strabo was only 2½ m. The Serchio (anc.
_Auser_), which joined the Arno at Pisa in ancient times, now flows into
the sea independently. The Arno is navigable for barges as far as
Florence; but it is liable to sudden floods, and brings down with it
large quantities of earth and stones, so that it requires careful
regulation. The most remarkable inundations were those of 1537 and 1740;
in the former year the water rose to 8 ft. in the streets of Florence.
The valley between Incisa and Arezzo contains accumulations of fossil
bones of the deer, elephant, rhinoceros, mastodon, hippopotamus, bear,
tiger, &c.




ARNOBIUS (called _Afer_, and sometimes "the Elder"), early Christian
writer, was a teacher of rhetoric at Sicca Venerea in proconsular Africa
during the reign of Diocletian. His conversion to Christianity is said
by Jerome to have been occasioned by a dream; and the same writer adds
that the bishop to whom Arnobius applied distrusted his professions, and
asked some proof of them, and that the treatise _Adversus Gentes_ was
composed for this purpose. But this story seems rather improbable; for
Arnobius speaks contemptuously of dreams, and besides, his work bears no
traces of having been written in a short time, or of having been revised
by a Christian bishop. From internal evidence (bk. iv. 36) the time of
composition may be fixed at about A.D. 303. Nothing further is known of
the life of Arnobius. He is said to have been the author of a work on
rhetoric, which, however, has not been preserved. His great treatise, in
seven books, _Adversus Gentes_ (or _Nationes_), on account of which he
takes rank as a Christian apologist, appears to have been occasioned by
a desire to answer the complaint then brought against the Christians,
that the prevalent calamities and disasters were due to their impiety
and had come upon men since the establishment of their religion. In the
first book Arnobius carefully discusses this complaint; he shows that
the allegation of greater calamities having come upon men since the
Christian era is false; and that, even if it were true, it could by no
means be attributed to the Christians. He skilfully contends that
Christians who worship the self-existent God cannot justly be called
less religious than those who worship subordinate deities, and concludes
by vindicating the Godhead of Christ. In the second book Arnobius
digresses into a long discussion on the soul, which he does not think is
of divine origin, and which he scarcely believes to be immortal. He even
says that a belief in the soul's immortality would tend to remove moral
restraint, and have a prejudicial effect on human life. In the
concluding chapters he answers the objections drawn from the recent
origin of Christianity. Books iii., iv. and v. contain a violent attack
on the heathen mythology, in which he narrates with powerful sarcasm the
scandalous chronicles of the gods, and contrasts with their grossness
and immorality the pure and holy worship of the Christian. These books
are valuable as a repertory of mythological stories. Books vi. and vii.
ably handle the questions of sacrifices and worship of images. The
confusion of the final chapter points to some interruption. The work of
Arnobius appears to have been written when he was a recent convert, for
he does not possess a very extensive knowledge of Scripture. He knows
nothing of the Old Testament, and only the life of Christ in the New,
while he does not quote directly from the Gospels. He is also at fault
in regard to the Jewish sects. He was much influenced by Lucretius and
had read Plato. His statements concerning Greek and Roman mythology are
based respectively on the _Protrepticus_ of Clement of Alexandria, and
on Antistius Labeo, who belonged to the preceding generation and
attempted to restore Neoplatonism. There are some pleasing passages in
Arnobius, but on the whole he is a tumid and a tedious author.

  EDITIONS.--Migne, _Patr. Lat._ iv. 349; A. Reifferscheich in the
  _Vienna Corpus Script. Eccles. Lat._ (1875).

  TRANSLATIONS.--A.H. Bryce and H. Campbell in _Ante-Nicene Fathers_,
  vi.

  LITERATURE.--H.C.G. Moule in _Dict. Chr. Biog._ i.; Herzog-Hauck,
  _Realencyklopadie_; and G. Kruger, _Early Chr. Lit._ p. 304 (where
  full bibliographies are given).




ARNOBIUS ("the younger"), Christian priest or bishop in Gaul, flourished
about 460. He is the author of a mystical and allegorical commentary on
the Psalms, first published by Erasmus in 1522, and by him attributed to
the elder Arnobius. It has been frequently reprinted, and in the edition
of De la Barre, 1580, is accompanied by some notes on the Gospels by the
same author. To him has sometimes been ascribed the anonymous treatise,
_Arnobii catholici et Serapionis conflictus de Deo trino et uno ... de
gratiae liberi arbitrii concordia_, which was probably written by a
follower of Augustine. The opinions of Arnobius, as appears from the
commentary, are semi-Pelagian.




ARNOLD, known as "ARNOLD OF BRESCIA" (d. 1155), one of the most ardent
adversaries of the temporal power of the popes. He belonged to a family
of importance, if not noble, and was born probably at Brescia, in Italy,
towards the end of the 11th century. He distinguished himself in his
monastic studies, and went to France about 1115. He studied theology in
Paris, but there is no proof that he was a pupil of Abelard. Returning
to Italy he became a canon regular. His life was rigidly austere, St
Bernard calling him "homo neque manducans neque bibens." He at once
directed his efforts against the corruption of the clergy, and
especially against the temporal ambitions of the high dignitaries of the
church. During the schism of Anacletus (1131-1137) the town of Brescia
was torn by the struggles between the partisans of Pope Innocent II. and
the adherents of the anti-pope, and Arnold gave effect to his abhorrence
of the political episcopate by inciting the people to rise against their
bishop, and, exiled by Innocent II., went to France. St Bernard accused
him of sharing the doctrines of Abelard (see _Ep._ 189, 195), and
procured his condemnation by the council of Sens (1140) at the same time
as that of the great scholastic. This was perhaps no more than the
outcome of the fierce polemical spirit of the abbot of Clairvaux, which
led him to include all his adversaries under a single anathema. It seems
certain that Arnold professed moral theology in Paris, and several times
reprimanded St Bernard, whom he accused of pride and jealousy. St
Bernard, as a last resort, begged King Louis VII. to take severe
measures against Arnold, who had to leave France and take refuge at
Zurich. There he soon became popular, especially with the lay nobility;
but, denounced anew by St Bernard to the ecclesiastical authorities, he
returned to Italy, and turned his steps towards Rome (1145). It was two
years since, in 1143, the Romans had rejected the temporal power of the
pope. The urban nobles had set up a republic, which, under forms
ostensibly modelled on antiquity (e.g. patriciate, _senatus populusque
romanus_, &c.), concealed but clumsily a purely oligarchical government.
Pope Eugenius III. and his adherents had been forced after a feeble
resistance to resign themselves to exile at Viterbo. Arnold, after
returning to Rome, immediately began a campaign of virulent denunciation
against the Roman clergy, and, in particular, against the Curia, which
he stigmatized as a "house of merchandise and den of thieves." His
enemies have attributed to him certain doctrinal heresies, but their
accusations do not bear examination. According to Otto of Freising
(_Lib. de gestis Friderici_, bk. ii. chap. xx.) the whole of his
teaching, outside the preaching of penitence, was summed up in these
maxims:--"Clerks who have estates, bishops who hold fiefs, monks who
possess property, cannot be saved." His eloquence gained him a hearing
and a numerous following, including many laymen, but consisting
principally of poor ecclesiastics, who formed around him a party
characterized by a rigid morality and not unlike the Lombard Patarenes
of the 11th century. But his purely political action was very
restricted, and not to be compared with that of a Rienzi or a
Savonarola. The Roman revolution availed itself of Arnold's popularity,
and of his theories, but was carried out without his aid. His name was
associated with this political reform solely because his was the only
vigorous personality which stood out from the mass of rebels, and
because he was the principal victim of the repression that ensued. On
the 15th of July 1148 Eugenius III. anathematized Arnold and his
adherents; but when, a short time afterwards, the pope, through the
support of the king of Naples and the king of France, succeeded in
entering Rome, Arnold remained in the town unmolested, under the
protection of the senate. But in 1152 the German king Conrad III., whom
the papal party and the Roman republic had in vain begged to intervene,
was succeeded by Frederick I. Barbarossa. Frederick, whose authoritative
temper was at once offended by the independent tone of the Arnoldist
party, concluded with the pope a treaty of alliance (October 16, 1152)
of such a nature that the Arnoldists were at once put in a minority in
the Roman government; and when the second successor of Eugenius III.,
the energetic and austere Adrian IV. (the Englishman, Nicholas
Breakspear), placed Rome under an interdict, the senate, already rudely
shaken, submitted, and Arnold was forced to fly into Campania (1155). At
the request of the pope he was seized by order of the emperor Frederick,
then in Italy, and delivered to the prefect of Rome, by whom he was
condemned to death. In June 1155 Arnold was hanged, his body burnt, and
the ashes were thrown into the Tiber. His death produced but a feeble
sensation in Rome, which was already pacified, and passed almost
unnoticed in Italy. The adherents of Arnold do not appear actually to
have formed, either before or after his death, a heretical sect. It is
probable that his adherents became merged in the communities of the
Lombard Waldenses, who shared their ideas on the corruption of the
clergy. Legend, poetry, drama and politics have from time to time been
much occupied with the personality of Arnold of Brescia, and not seldom
have distorted it, through the desire to see in him a hero of Italian
independence and a modern democrat. He was before everything an ascetic,
who denied to the church the right of holding property, and who occupied
himself only as an accessory with the political and social consequences
of his religious principles.

  The bibliography of Arnold of Brescia is very vast and of very unequal
  value. The following works will be found useful: W. von Giesebrecht,
  _Arnold van Brescia_ (Münich, 1873); G. Gaggia, _Arnaldo da Brescia_
  (Brescia, 1882); and notices by Vacandard in the _Revue des questions
  historiques_ (Paris, 1884), pp. 52-114, by R. Breyer in the _Histor.
  Taschenbuch_ (Leipzig, 1889), vol. viii. pp. 123-178, and by A.
  Hausrath in _Neue Heidelberg. Jahrb._ (1891), Band i. pp. 72-144.
       (P. A.)




ARNOLD, BENEDICT (1741-1801), American soldier, born in Norwich,
Connecticut, on the 14th of January 1741. He was the great-grandson of
Benedict Arnold (1615-1678), thrice colonial governor of Rhode Island
between 1663 and 1678; and was the fourth in direct descent to bear the
name. He received a fair education but was not studious, and his youth
was marked by the same waywardness which characterized his whole career.
At fifteen he ran away from home and took part in an expedition against
the French, but, restless under restraint, he soon deserted and returned
home. In 1762 he settled in New Haven, where he became the proprietor of
a drug and book shop; and he subsequently engaged successfully in trade
with the West Indies. Immediately after the battle of Lexington Arnold
led the local militia company, of which he was captain, and additional
volunteers to Cambridge, and on the 29th of April 1775 he proposed to
the Massachusetts Committee of Safety an expedition against Crown Point
and Ticonderoga. After a delay of four days the offer was accepted, and
as a colonel of Massachusetts militia he was directed to enlist in the
west part of Massachusetts and in the neighbouring colonies the men
necessary for the undertaking. He was forestalled, however, by Ethan
Allen (q.v.), acting on behalf of some members of the Connecticut
Assembly. Under him, reluctantly waiving his own claim to command,
Arnold served as a volunteer; and soon afterwards, Massachusetts having
yielded to Connecticut, and having angered Arnold by sending a committee
to make an inquiry into his conduct, he resigned and returned to
Cambridge. He was then ordered to co-operate with General Richard
Montgomery in the invasion of Canada, which he had been one of the first
to suggest to the Continental Congress. Starting with 1100 men from
Cambridge on the 17th of September 1775, he reached Gardiner, Maine, on
the 20th, advanced through the Maine woods, and after suffering terrible
privations and hardships, his little force, depleted by death and
desertion, reached Quebec on the 13th of November. The garrison had been
forewarned, and Arnold was compelled to await the coming of Montgomery
from Montreal. The combined attack on the 31st of December 1775 failed;
Montgomery was killed, and Arnold was severely wounded. Arnold, who had
been commissioned a brigadier-general in January 1776, remained in
Canada until the following June, being after April in command at
Montreal.

Some time after the retreat from Canada, charges of misconduct and
dishonesty, growing chiefly out of his seizure from merchants in
Montreal of goods for the use of his troops, were brought against him;
these charges were tardily investigated by the Board of War, which in a
report made on the 23rd of May 1777, and confirmed by Congress, declared
that his "character and conduct" had been "cruelly and groundlessly
aspersed." Having constructed a flotilla on Lake Champlain, Arnold
engaged a greatly superior British fleet near Valcour Island (October
11, 1776), and after inflicting severe loss on the enemy, made his
escape under cover of night. Two days later he was overtaken by the
British fleet, which however he, with only one war-vessel, and that
crippled, delayed long enough to enable his other vessels to make good
their escape, fighting with desperate valour and finally running his own
ship aground and escaping to Crown Point. The engagement of the 11th was
the first between British and American fleets. Arnold's brilliant
exploits had drawn attention to him as one of the most promising of the
Continental officers, and had won for him the friendship of Washington.
Nevertheless, when in February 1777 Congress created five new
major-generals, Arnold, although the ranking brigadier, was passed over,
partly at least for sectional reasons--Connecticut had already two
major-generals--in favour of his juniors. At this time it was only
Washington's urgent persuasion that prevented Arnold from leaving the
service. Two months later while he was at New Haven, Governor Tryon's
descent on Danbury took place; and Arnold, who took command of the
militia after the death of General Wooster, attacked the British with
such vigour at Ridgefield (April 27, 1777) that they escaped to their
ships with difficulty.

In recognition of this service Arnold was now commissioned major-general
(his commission dating from 17th February) but without his former
relative rank. After serving in New Jersey with Washington, he joined
General Philip Schuyler in the Northern Department, and in August 1777
proceeded up the Mohawk Valley against Colonel St Leger, and raised the
siege of Fort Stanwix (or Schuyler). Subsequently, after Gates had
superseded Schuyler (August 19), Arnold commanded the American left wing
in the first battle of Saratoga (September 19, 1777). His ill-treatment
at the hands of General Gates, whose jealousy had been aroused, led to a
quarrel which terminated in Arnold being relieved of command. He
remained with the army, however, at the urgent request of his brother
officers, and although nominally without command served brilliantly in
the second battle of Saratoga (October 7, 1777), during which he was
seriously wounded. For his services he was thanked by Congress, and
received a new commission giving him at last his proper relative rank.

In June 1778 Washington placed him in command of Philadelphia. Here he
soon came into conflict with the state authorities, jealous of any
outside control. In the social life of Philadelphia, largely dominated
by families of Loyalist sympathies, Arnold was the most conspicuous
figure; he lived extravagantly, entertained lavishly, and in April 1779
took for his second wife, Margaret Shippen (1760-1804), the daughter of
Edward Shippen (1729-1806), a moderate Loyalist, who eventually became
reconciled to the new order and was in 1799-1805 chief-justice of the
state. Early in February 1779 the executive council of Pennsylvania,
presided over by Joseph Reed, one of his most persistent enemies,
presented to Congress eight charges of misconduct against Arnold, none
of which was of any great importance. Arnold at once demanded an
investigation, and in March a committee of Congress made a report
exonerating him; but Reed obtained a reconsideration, and in April 1779
Congress, though throwing out four charges, referred the other four to a
court-martial. Despite Arnold's demand for a speedy trial, it was
December before the court was convened. It was probably during this
period of vexatious delay that Arnold, always sensitive and now incited
by a keen sense of injustice, entered into a secret correspondence with
Sir Henry Clinton with a view to joining the British service. On the
26th of January 1780 the court, before which Arnold had ably argued his
own case, rendered its verdict, practically acquitting him of all
intentional wrong, but, apparently in deference to the Pennsylvania
authorities, directing Washington to reprimand him for two trivial and
very venial offences. Arnold, who had confidently expected absolute
acquittal, was inflamed with a burning anger that even Washington's
kindly reprimand, couched almost in words of praise, could not subdue.

It was now apparently that he first conceived the plan of betraying some
important post to the British. With this in view he sought and obtained
from Washington (August 1780) command of West Point, the key to the
Hudson River Valley. Arnold's offers now became more explicit, and, in
order to perfect the details of the plot, Clinton's adjutant-general,
Major John André, met him near Stony Point on the night of the 21st of
September. On the 23rd, while returning by land, André with
incriminating papers was captured, and the officer to whom he was
entrusted unsuspectingly sent information of his capture to Arnold, who
was thus enabled to escape to the British lines. Arnold, commissioned a
brigadier-general in the British army, received £6315 in compensation
for his property losses, and was employed in leading an expedition into
Virginia which burned Richmond, and in an attack upon New London (q.v.)
in September 1781. In December 1781 he removed to London and was
consulted on American affairs by the king and ministry, but could obtain
no further employment in the active service. Disappointed at the failure
of his plans and embittered by the neglect and scorn which he met in
England, he spent the years 1787-1791 at St John, New Brunswick, once
more engaging in the West India trade, but in 1791 he returned to
London, and after war had broken out between Great Britain and France,
was active in fitting out privateers. Gradually sinking into
melancholia, worn down by depression, and suffering from a nervous
disease, he died at London on the 14th of June 1801.

Arnold had three sons--Benedict, Richard and Henry--by his first wife,
and four sons--Edward Shippen, James Robertson, George and William
Fitch--by his second wife; five of them, and one grandson, served in the
British army. Benedict (1768-1795) was an officer of the artillery and
was mortally wounded in the West Indies. Edward Shippen (1780-1813)
became lieutenant of the Sixth Bengal Cavalry and later paymaster at
Muttra, India. James Robertson (1781-1854) entered the corps of Royal
Engineers in 1798, served in the Napoleonic wars, in Egypt and in the
West Indies, and rose to the rank of lieutenant-general, was an
aide-de-camp to William IV., and was created a knight of the Hanoverian
Guelphic order and a knight of the Crescent. George (1787-1828) was a
lieutenant-colonel in the Second Bengal Cavalry at the time of his
death. William Fitch (1794-1828) became a captain in the Nineteenth
Royal Lancers; his son, William Trail (1826-1855) served in the Crimean
War as captain of the Fourth Regiment of Foot and was killed during the
siege of Sevastopol.

  BIBLIOGRAPHY.--Jared Sparks' _Life and Treason of Benedict Arnold_
  (Boston, 1835), in his "Library of American Biography," is biassed and
  unfair. The best general account is Isaac Newton Arnold's _Life of
  Benedict Arnold_ (Chicago, 1880), which, while offering no apologies
  or defence of his treason, lays perhaps too great emphasis on his
  provocations. Charles Burr Todd's _The Real Benedict Arnold_ (New
  York, 1903) is a curious attempt to make Arnold's wife wholly
  responsible for his defection. François de Barbé-Marbois's _Complot
  d'Arnold et de Sir H. Clinton contre les États-Unis_ (Paris, 1816)
  contains much interesting material, but is inaccurate. Two good
  accounts of the Canadian Expedition are Justin H. Smith's _Arnold's
  March from Cambridge to Quebec_ (New York, 1903), which contains a
  reprint of Arnold's journal of the expedition; and John Codman's
  _Arnold's Expedition to Quebec_ (New York, 1901). Arnold's _Letters on
  the Expedition to Canada_ were printed in the Maine Historical
  Society's _Collections_ for 1831 (repr. 1865). See also William
  Abbatt, _The Crisis of the Revolution_ (New York, 1899); _The Northern
  Invasion of 1780_ (Bradford Club Series, No. 6, New York, 1866); "The
  Treason of Benedict Arnold" (letters of Sir Henry Clinton to Lord
  George Germaine) in _Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography_,
  vol. xxii. (Philadelphia, 1898); and _Proceedings of a General Court
  Martial for the Trial of Major-General Arnold_ (Philadelphia, 1780;
  reprinted with introduction and notes, New York, 1865).




ARNOLD, SIR EDWIN (1832-1904), British poet and journalist, was born on
the 10th of June 1832, and was educated at the King's school, Rochester;
King's College, London; and University College, Oxford, where in 1852 he
gained the Newdigate prize for a poem on Belshazzar's feast. On leaving
Oxford he became a schoolmaster, and went to India as principal of the
government Sanskrit College at Poona, a post which he held during the
mutiny of 1857, when he was able to render services for which he was
publicly thanked by Lord Elphinstone in the Bombay council. Returning to
England in 1861 he worked as a journalist on the staff of the _Daily
Telegraph_, a newspaper with which he continued to be associated for
more than forty years. It was he who, on behalf of the proprietors of
the _Daily Telegraph_ in conjunction with the _New York Herald_,
arranged for the journey of H.M. Stanley to Africa to discover the
course of the Congo, and Stanley named after him a mountain to the
north-east of Albert Edward Nyanza. Arnold must also be credited with
the first idea of a great trunk line traversing the entire African
continent, for in 1874 he first employed the phrase "a Cape to Cairo
railway" subsequently popularized by Cecil Rhodes. It was, however, as a
poet that he was best known to his contemporaries. _The Light of Asia_
appeared in 1879 and won an immediate success, going through numerous
editions both in England and America. It is an Indian epic, dealing with
the life and teaching of Buddha, which are expounded with much wealth of
local colour and not a little felicity of versification. The poem
contains many lines of unquestionable beauty; and its immediate
popularity was rather increased than diminished by the twofold criticism
to which it was subjected. On the one hand it was held by Oriental
scholars to give a false impression of Buddhist doctrine; while, on the
other, the suggested analogy between Sakyamuni and Christ offended the
taste of some devout Christians. The latter criticism probably suggested
to Arnold the idea of attempting a second narrative poem of which the
central figure should be the founder of Christianity, as the founder of
Buddhism had been that of the first. But though _The Light of the World_
(1891), in which this idea took shape, had considerable poetic merit, it
lacked the novelty of theme and setting which had given the earlier poem
much of its attractiveness; and it failed to repeat the success attained
by _The Light of Asia_. Arnold's other principal volumes of poetry were
_Indian Song of Songs_ (1875), _Pearls of the Faith_ (1883), _The Song
Celestial_ (1885), _With Sadi in the Garden_ (1888), _Potiphar's Wife_
(1892) and _Adzuma_ (1893). In his later years Arnold resided for some
time in Japan, and his third wife was a Japanese lady. In _Seas and
Lands_ (1891) and _Japonica_ (1892) he gives an interesting study of
Japanese life. He received the order of C.S.I. on the occasion of the
proclamation of Queen Victoria as empress of India in 1877, and in 1888
was created K.C.I.E. He also possessed decorations conferred by the
rulers of Japan, Persia, Turkey and Siam. Sir Edwin Arnold died on the
24th of March 1904.




ARNOLD, GOTTFRIED (1666-1714), German Protestant divine, was born at
Annaberg, in Saxony, where his father was a schoolmaster. In 1682 he
went to the Gymnasium at Gera, and three years later to the university
of Wittenberg. Here he made a special study of theology and history, and
afterwards, through the influence of P.J. Spener, "the father of
pietism," he became tutor in Quedlinburg. His first work, _Die Erste
Liebe zu Christo_, to which in modern times attention was again directed
by Leo Tolstoy, appeared in 1696. It went through five editions before
1728, and gained the author much reputation. In the year after its
publication he was invited to Giessen as professor of church history.
The life and work here, however, proved so distasteful to him that he
resigned in 1698, and returned to Quedlinburg. In 1699 he began to
publish his largest work, described by Tolstoy (_The Kingdom of God is
within You_, chap, iii.) as "remarkable, although little known,"
_Unparteiische Kirchen- und Ketzerhistorie_, in which he has been
thought by some to show more impartiality towards heresy than towards
the Church (cp. Otto Pfleiderer, _Development of Theology_, p. 277). His
next work, _Geheimniss der göttlichen Sophia_, published in 1700, seemed
to indicate that he had developed a form of mysticism. Soon afterwards,
however, his acceptance of a pastorate marked a change, and he produced
a number of noteworthy works on practical theology. He was also known as
the author of sacred poems. Gottfried Arnold has rightly been classed
with the pietistic section of Protestant historians (_Bibliotheca
Sacra_, 1850).

  See Calwer-Zeller, _Theologisches Handwörterbuch_, and the account of
  him in Albert Knapp's new edition of _Die erste Liebe zu Christo_
  (1845).




ARNOLD, MATTHEW (1822-1888), English poet, literary critic and inspector
of schools, was born at Laleham, near Staines, on the 24th of December
1822. When it is said that he was the son of the famous Dr Arnold of
Rugby, and that Winchester, Rugby and Balliol College, Oxford,
contributed their best towards his education, it seems superfluous to
add that, in estimating Matthew Arnold and his work, training no less
than original endowment has to be considered. A full academic training
has its disadvantages as well as its gains. In the individual no less
than in the species the history of man's development is the history of
the struggle between the impulse to express original personal force and
the impulse to make that force bow to the authority of custom. Where in
any individual the first of these impulses is stronger than usual, a
complete academic training is a gain; but where the second of these
impulses is the dominant one, the effect of the academic habit upon the
mind at its most sensitive and most plastic period is apt to be
crippling. In regard to Matthew Arnold, it would be a bold critic of his
life and his writings who should attempt to say what his work would have
been if his training had been different. In his judgments on Goethe,
Wordsworth, Byron, Shelley and Hugo, it may be seen how strong was his
impulse to bow to authority. On the other hand, in Arnold's ingenious
reasoning away the conception of Providence to "a stream of tendency not
ourselves which makes for righteousness," we see how strong was his
natural impulse for taking original views. The fact that the very air
Arnold breathed during the whole of the impressionable period of his
life was academic is therefore a very important fact to bear in mind.

In one of his own most charming critical essays he contrasts the poetry
of Homer, which consists of "natural thoughts in natural words," with
the poetry of Tennyson, which consists of "distilled thoughts in
distilled words." "Distilled" is one of the happiest words to be found
in poetical criticism, and may be used with equal aptitude in the
criticism of life. To most people the waters of life come with all their
natural qualities--sweet or bitter--undistilled. Only the ordinary
conditions of civilization, common to all, flavoured the waters of life
to Shakespeare, to Cervantes, to Burns, to Scott, to Dumas, and those
other great creators whose minds were mirrors--broad and clear--for
reflecting the rich drama of life around them. To Arnold the waters of
life came distilled so carefully that the wonder is that he had any
originality left. A member of the upper stratum of that "middle class"
which he despised, or pretended to despise--the eldest son of one of the
most accomplished as well as one of the most noble-tempered men of his
time--Arnold from the moment of his birth drank the finest distilled
waters that can be drunk even in these days. Perhaps, on the whole, the
surprising thing is how little he suffered thereby. Indeed those who had
formed an idea of Arnold's personality from their knowledge of his
"culture," and especially those who had been delighted by the fastidious
and feminine delicacy of his prose style, used to be quite bewildered
when for the first time they met him at a dinner-table or in a friend's
smoking-room. His prose was so self-conscious that what people expected
to find in the writer was the Arnold as he was conceived by certain
"young lions" of journalism whom he satirized--a somewhat over-cultured
_petit-maître_--almost, indeed, a coxcomb of letters. On the other hand,
those who had been captured by his poetry expected to find a man whose
sensitive organism responded nervously to every uttered word as an
aeolian harp answers to the faintest breeze. What they found was a
broad-shouldered, manly--almost burly--Englishman with a fine
countenance, bronzed by the open air of England, wrinkled apparently by
the sun, wind-worn as an English skipper's, open and frank as a
fox-hunting squire's--and yet a countenance whose finely chiselled
features were as high-bred and as commanding as Wellington's or Sir
Charles Napier's. The voice they heard was deep-toned, fearless, rich
and frank, and yet modulated to express every _nuance_ of thought, every
movement of emotion and humour. In his prose essays the humour he showed
was of a somewhat thin-lipped kind; in his more important poems he
showed none at all. It was here, in this matter of humour, that Arnold's
writings were specially misleading as to the personality of the man.
Judged from his poems, it was not with a poet like the writer of "The
Northern Farmer," or a poet like the writer of "Ned Bratts," that any
student of poetry would have dreamed of classing him. Such a student
would actually have been more likely to class him with two of his
contemporaries between whom and himself there were but few points in
common, the "humourless" William Morris and the "humourless" Rossetti.
For, singularly enough, between him and them there was this one point of
resemblance: while all three were richly endowed with humour, while all
three were the very lights of the sets in which they moved, the moment
they took pen in hand to write poetry they became sad. It would almost
seem as if, like Rossetti, Arnold actually held that poetry was not the
proper medium for humour. No wonder, then, if the absence of humour in
his poetry did much to mislead the student of his work as to the real
character of the man.

After a year at Winchester, Matthew Arnold entered Rugby school in 1837.
He early began to write and print verses. His first publication was a
Rugby prize poem, _Alaric at Rome_, in 1840. This was followed in 1843,
after he had gone up to Oxford in 1840 as a scholar of Balliol, by his
poem _Cromwell_, which won the Newdigate prize. In 1844 he graduated
with second-class honours, and in 1845 was elected a fellow of Oriel
College, where among his colleagues was A.H. Clough, his friendship with
whom is commemorated in that exquisite elegy _Thyrsis_. From 1847 to
1851 he acted as private secretary to Lord Lansdowne; and in the latter
year, after acting for a short time as assistant-master at Rugby, he was
appointed to an inspectorship of schools, a post which he retained until
two years before his death. He married, in June 1851, the daughter of Mr
Justice Wightman, Meanwhile, in 1849, appeared _The Strayed Reveller,
and other Poems, by A_, a volume which gained a considerable esoteric
reputation. In 1852 he published another volume under the same initial,
_Empedocles on Etna, and other Poems_. _Empedocles_ is as undramatic a
poem perhaps as was ever written in dramatic form, but studded with
lyrical beauties of a very high order. In 1853 Arnold published a volume
of _Poems_ under his own name. This consisted partially of poems
selected from the two previous volumes. A second series of poems, which
contained, however, only two new ones, was published in 1855. So great
was the impression made by these in academic circles, that in 1857
Arnold was elected professor of poetry at Oxford, and he held the chair
for ten years. In 1858 he published his classical tragedy, _Merope_.
Nine years afterwards his _New Poems_ (1867) were published. While he
held the Oxford professorship he published several series of lectures,
which gave him a high place as a scholar and critic. The essays[1] _On
Translating Homer: Three Lectures given at Oxford_, published in 1861,
supplemented in 1862 by _On Translating Homer: Last Words_, a fourth
lecture given in reply to F.W. Newman's _Homeric Translation in Theory
and Practice_ (1861), and _On the Study of Celtic Literature_, published
in 1867, were full of subtle and brilliant if not of profound criticism.
So were the two series of _Essays in Criticism_, the first of which,
consisting of articles reprinted from various reviews, appeared in 1865.
The essay on "A Persian Passion Play" was added in the editions of 1875;
and a second series, edited by Lord Coleridge, appeared in 1888.

Arnold's poetic activity almost ceased after he left the chair of poetry
at Oxford. He was several times sent by government to make inquiries
into the state of education in France, Germany, Holland and other
countries; and his reports, with their thorough-going and searching
criticism of continental methods, as contrasted with English methods,
showed how conscientiously he had devoted some of his best energies to
the work. His fame as a poet and a literary critic has somewhat
overshadowed the fact that he was during thirty-five years of his
life--from 1851 to 1836--employed in the Education Department as one of
H.M. inspectors of schools, while his literary work was achieved in such
intervals of leisure as could be spared from the public service. At the
time of his appointment the government, by arrangement with the
religious bodies, entrusted the inspection of schools connected with the
Church of England to clergymen, and agreed also to send Roman Catholic
inspectors to schools managed by members of that communion. Other
schools--those of the British and Foreign Society, the Wesleyans, and
undenominational schools generally--were inspected by laymen, of whom
Arnold was one. There were only three or four of these officers at
first, and their districts were necessarily large. It is to the
experience gained in intercourse with Nonconformist school managers that
we may attribute the curiously intimate knowledge of religious sects
which furnished the material for some of his keen though good-humoured
sarcasms. The Education Act of 1870, which simplified the administrative
system, abolished denominational inspection, and thus greatly reduced
the area assigned to a single inspector. Arnold took charge of the
district of Westminster, and remained in that office until his
resignation, taking also an occasional share in the inspection of
training colleges for teachers, and in conferences at the central
office. His letters, _passim_, show that some of the routine which
devolved upon him was distasteful, and that he was glad to entrust to a
skilled assistant much of the duty of individual examination and the
making up of schedules and returns. But the influence he exerted on
schools, on the department, and on the primary education of the whole
country, was indirectly far greater than is generally supposed. His
annual reports, of which more than twenty were collected into a volume
by his friend and official chief, Sir Francis (afterwards Lord)
Sandford, attracted, by reason of their freshness of style and thought,
much more of public attention than is usually accorded to blue-book
literature; and his high aims, and his sympathetic appreciation of the
efforts and difficulties of the teachers, had a remarkable effect in
raising the tone of elementary education, and in indicating the way to
improvement. In particular, he insisted on the formative elements of
school education, on literature and the "humanities," as distinguished
from the collection of scraps of information and "useful knowledge"; and
he sought to impress all the young teachers with the necessity of
broader mental cultivation than was absolutely required to obtain the
government certificate. In his reports also he dwelt often and forcibly
on the place which the study of the Bible, not the distinctive
formularies of the churches, ought to hold in English schools. He urged
that besides the religious and moral purposes of Scriptural teaching, it
had a literary value of its own, and was the best instrument in the
hands even of the elementary teacher for uplifting the soul and refining
and enlarging the thoughts of young children.

On three occasions Arnold was asked to assist the government by making
special inquiries into the state of education in foreign countries.
These duties were especially welcome to him, serving as they did as a
relief from the monotony of school inspection at home, and as
opportunities for taking a wider survey of the whole subject of
education, and for expressing his views on principles and national aims
as well as administrative details. In 1859, as foreign assistant
commissioner, he prepared for the duke of Newcastle's commission to
inquire into the subject of elementary education a report (printed 1860)
which was afterwards reprinted (1861) in a volume entitled _The Popular
Education of France, with Notices of that of Holland and Switzerland_.
In 1865 he was again employed as assistant-commissioner by the Schools
Inquiry Commission under Lord Taunton; and his report on this subject,
_On Secondary Education in Foreign Countries_ (1866), was subsequently
reprinted under the title _Schools and Universities on the Continent_
(1868). Twenty years later he was sent by the Education Department to
make special inquiries on certain specified points, e.g. free education,
the status and training of teachers, and compulsory attendance at
schools. The result of this investigation appeared as a parliamentary
paper, _Special Report on certain points connected with Elementary
Education in Germany, Switzerland and France_, in 1886. He also
contributed the chapter on "Schools" (1837-1887) to the second volume of
Mr Humphry Ward's _Reign of Queen Victoria_. Part of his official
writings may be studied in _Reports for Elementary Schools_ (1852-1882),
edited by Sir F. Sandford in 1889.

All these reports form substantial contributions to the history and
literature of education in the Victorian age. They have been quoted
often, and have exercised marked influence on subsequent changes and
controversies. One great purpose underlies them all. It is to bring home
to the English people a conviction that education ought to be a national
concern, that it should not be left entirely to local, or private, or
irresponsible initiative, that the watchful jealousy so long shown by
Liberals, and especially by Nonconformists, in regard to state action
was a grave practical mistake, and that in an enlightened democracy,
animated by a progressive spirit and noble and generous ideals, it was
the part of wisdom to invoke the collective power of the state to give
effect to those ideals. To this theme he constantly recurred in his
essays, articles and official reports. "_Porro unum est necessarium_.
One thing is needful; organize your secondary education."

In 1883 a pension of £250 was conferred on Arnold in recognition of his
literary merits. In the same year he went to the United States on a
lecturing tour, and again in 1886, his subjects being "Emerson" and the
"Principles and Value of Numbers." The success of these lectures, though
they were admirable in matter and form, was marred by the lecturer's
lack of experience in delivery. It is sufficient, further, to say that
_Culture and Anarchy: an Essay in Political and Social Criticism_,
appeared in 1869; _St Paul and Protestantism, with an Introduction on
Puritanism and the Church of England_ (1870); _Friendship's Garland:
being the Conversations, Letters and Opinions of the late Arminius Baron
van Thunder-ten-Tronckh_ (1871); _Literature and Dogma: an Essay towards
a Better Apprehension of the Bible_ (1873); _God and the Bible: a Review
of Objections to Literature and Dogma_ (1875); _Last Essays on Church
and Religion_ (1877); _Mixed Essays_ (1879); _Irish Essays and Others_
(1882); _Discourses in America_ (1885). Such essays as the first of
these, embodying as they did Arnold's views of theological and polemical
subjects, attracted much attention at the time of their publication,
owing to the state of the intellectual atmosphere at the moment; but it
is doubtful, perhaps, whether they will be greatly considered in the
near future. Many severe things have been said, and will be said,
concerning the inadequacy of poets like Coleridge and Wordsworth when
confronting subjects of a theological or philosophical kind.
Wordsworth's High Church Pantheism and Coleridge's disquisitions on the
Logos seem farther removed from the speculations of to-day than do the
dreams of Lucretius. But these two great writers lived before the days
of modern science. Arnold, living only a few years later, came at a
transition period when the winds of tyrannous knowledge had blown off
the protecting roof that had covered the centuries before, but when time
and much labour were needed to build another roof of new materials--a
period when it was impossible for the poet to enjoy either the quietism
of High Church Pantheism in which Wordsworth had basked, or the
sheltering protection of German metaphysics under which Coleridge had
preached--a period, nevertheless, when the wonderful revelations of
science were still too raw, too cold and hard, to satisfy the yearnings
of the poetic soul. Objectionable as Arnold's rationalizing criticism
was to contemporary orthodoxy, and questionable as was his equipment in
point of theological learning, his spirituality of outlook and ethical
purpose were not to be denied. Yet it is not Arnold's views that have
become current coin so much as his literary phrases--his craving for
"culture" and "sweetness and light," his contempt for "the dissidence of
Dissent and the Protestantism of the Protestant religion," his "stream
of tendency not ourselves making for righteousness," his classification
of "Philistines and barbarians"--and so forth. His death at Liverpool,
of heart failure on the 15th of April 1888, was sudden and quite
unexpected.

Arnold was a prominent figure in that great galaxy of Victorian poets
who were working simultaneously--Tennyson, Browning, Rossetti, William
Morris and Swinburne--poets between whom there was at least this
connecting link, that the quest of all of them was the old-fashioned
poetical quest of the beautiful. Beauty was their watchword, as it had
been the watchword of their immediate predecessors--Wordsworth,
Coleridge, Keats, Shelley and Byron. That this group of early
19th-century poets might be divided into two--those whose primary quest
was physical beauty, and those whose primary quest was moral beauty-is
no doubt true. Still, in so far as beauty was their quest they were all
akin. And so with the Victorian group to which Arnold belonged. As to
the position which he takes among them opinions must necessarily vary.
On the whole, his place in the group will be below all the others. The
question as to whether he was primarily a poet or a _prosateur_ has been
often asked. If we were to try to answer that question here, we should
have to examine his poetry in detail--we should have to inquire whether
his primary impulse of expression was to seize upon the innate
suggestive power of words, or whether his primary impulse was to rely
upon the logical power of the sentence. In nobility of temper, in
clearness of statement, and especially in descriptive power, he is
beyond praise. But intellect, judgment, culture and study of great poets
may do much towards enabling a prose-writer to write what must needs be
called good poetry. What they cannot enable him to do is to produce
those magical effects which poets of the rarer kind can achieve by
seizing that mysterious, suggestive power of words which is far beyond
all mere statement. Notwithstanding the exquisite work that Arnold has
left behind him, some critics have come to the conclusion that his
primary impulse in expression was that of the poetically-minded
_prosateur_ rather than that of the born poet. And this has been said by
some who nevertheless deeply admire poems like "The Scholar Gypsy,"
"Thyrsis," "The Forsaken Merman," "Dover Beach," "Heine's Grave," "Rugby
Chapel," "The Grande Chartreuse," "Sohrab and Rustum," "The Sick King in
Bokhara," "Tristram and Iseult," &c. It would seem that a man may show
all the endowments of a poet save one, and that one the most
essential--the instinctive mastery over metrical effects.

In all literary expression there are two kinds of emphasis, the emphasis
of sound and the emphasis of sense. Indeed the difference between those
who have and those who have not the true rhythmic instinct is that,
while the former have the innate faculty of making the emphasis of sound
and the emphasis of sense meet and strengthen each other, the latter are
without that faculty. But so imperfect is the human mind that it can
rarely apprehend or grasp simultaneously these two kinds of emphasis.
While to the born _prosateur_ the emphasis of sense comes first, and
refuses to be more than partially conditioned by the emphasis of sound,
to the born poet the emphasis of sound comes first, and sometimes will,
even as in the case of Shelley, revolt against the tyranny of the
emphasis of sense. Perhaps the very origin of the old quantitative
metres was the desire to make these two kinds of emphasis meet in the
same syllable. In manipulating their quantitative metrical system the
Greeks had facilities for bringing one kind of emphasis into harmony
with the other such as are unknown to writers in accentuated metres.
This accounts for the measureless superiority of Greek poetry in verbal
melody as well as in general harmonic scheme to all the poetry of the
modern world. In writers so diverse in many ways as Homer, Aeschylus,
Sophocles, Pindar, Sappho, the harmony between the emphasis of sound and
the emphasis of sense is so complete that each of these kinds of
emphasis seems always begetting, yet always born of the other. When in
Europe the quantitative measures were superseded by the accentuated
measures a reminiscence was naturally and inevitably left behind of the
old system; and the result has been, in the English language at least,
that no really great line can be written in which the emphasis of
accent, the emphasis of quantity and the emphasis of sense do not meet
on the same syllable. Whenever this junction does not take place the
weaker line, or lines, are always introduced, not for makeshift
purposes, but for variety, as in the finest lines of Milton and
Wordsworth. Wordsworth no doubt seems to have had a theory that the
accent of certain words, such as "without," "within," &c., could be
disturbed in an iambic line; but in his best work he does not act upon
his theory, and endeavours most successfully to make the emphasis of
accent, of quantity and of sense meet. It might not be well for a poem
to contain an entire sequence of such perfect lines as

  "I thought of Chatterton, the marvellous boy,"

or

  "Thy soul was like a star and dwelt apart,"

for then the metricist's art would declare itself too loudly and weaken
the imaginative strength of the picture. But such lines should no doubt
form the basis of the poem, and weaker lines--lines in which there is no
such combination of the three kinds of emphasis--should be sparingly
used, and never used for makeshift purposes. Now, neither by instinct
nor by critical study was Arnold ever able to apprehend this law of
prosody. If he does write a line of the first order, metrically
speaking, he seems to do so by accident. Such weak lines as these are
constantly occurring--

  "The poet, to whose mighty heart
   Heaven doth a quicker pulse impart,
   Subdues that energy to scan
   Not his own course, but that of man."

Much has been said about what is called the "Greek temper" of Matthew
Arnold's muse. A good deal depends upon what it meant by the Hellenic
spirit. But if the Greek temper expresses itself, as is generally
supposed, in the sweet acceptance and melodious utterance of the beauty
of the world as it is, accepting that beauty without inquiring as to
what it means and as to whither it goes, it is difficult to see where in
Arnold's poetry this temper declares itself. Surely it is not in
_Empedocles on Etna_, and surely it is not in _Merope_. If there is a
poem of his in which one would expect to find the joyous acceptance of
life apart from questionings about the civilization in which the poet
finds himself environed (its hopes, its fears, its aspirations and its
failures)--such questionings, in short, as were for ever Vexing Arnold's
soul--it would be in "The Scholar Gypsy," a poem in which the poet tries
to throw himself into the mood of a "Romany Rye." The great attraction
of the gypsies to Englishmen of a certain temperament is that they alone
seem to feel the joyous acceptance of life which is supposed to be
specially Greek. Hence it would have been but reasonable to look, if
anywhere, for the expression of Arnold's Greek temper in a poem which
sets out to describe the feelings of the student who, according to
Glanville's story, left Oxford to wander over England with the Romanies.
But instead of this we got the old fretting about the unsatisfactoriness
of modern civilization. Glanville's Oxford student, whose story is
glanced at now and again in the poem, flits about in the scenery like a
cloud-shadow on the grass; but the way in which Arnold contrives to
avoid giving us the faintest idea either dramatic or pictorial of the
student about whom he talks so much, and the gypsies with whom the
student lived, is one of the most singular feats in poetry. The
reflections which come to a young Oxonian lying on the grass and longing
to escape life's fitful fever without shuffling off this mortal coil,
are, no doubt, beautiful reflections beautifully expressed, but the
temper they show is the very opposite of the Greek. To say this is not
in the least to disparage Arnold. "A man is more like the age in which
he lives," says the Chinese aphorism, "than he is like his own father
and mother," and Arnold's polemical writings alone are sufficient to
show that the waters of life he drank were from fountains distilled,
seven times distilled, at the topmost slope of 19th-century
civilization. Mr George Meredith's "Old Chartist" exhibits far more of
the temper of acceptance than does any poem by Matthew Arnold.

His most famous critical dictum is that poetry is a "criticism of
life." What he seems to have meant is that poetry is the crowning fruit
of a criticism of life; that just as the poet's metrical effects are and
must be the result of a thousand semiconscious generalizations upon the
laws of cause and effect in metric art, so the beautiful things he says
about life and the beautiful pictures he paints of life are the result
of his generalizations upon life as he passes through it, and
consequently that the value of his poetry consists in the beauty and the
truth of his generalizations. But this is saying no more than is said in
the line--

  "Rien n'est beau que le vrai; le vrai seul est aimable"--

or in the still more famous lines--

  "'Beauty is truth, truth beauty,'--that is all
   Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know."

To suppose that Arnold confounded the poet with the writer of _pensées_
would be absurd. Yet having decided that poetry consists of
generalizations on human life, in reading poetry he kept on the watch
for those generalizations, and at last seemed to think that the less and
not the more they are hidden behind the dramatic action, and the more
unmistakably they are intruded as generalizations, the better. For
instance, in one of his essays he quotes those lines from the "Chanson
de Roland" of Turoldus, where Roland, mortally wounded, lays himself
down under a pine-tree with his face turned towards Spain and the enemy,
and begins to "call many things to remembrance; all the lands which his
valour conquered, and pleasant France, and the men of his lineage, and
Charlemagne, his liege lord, who nourished him"--

  "De plusurs choses à remembrer li prist,
   De tames teres cume li bers cunquist,
   De dulce France, des humes de sun ligu,
   De Carlemagne sun seignor ki l'nurrit."

"That," says Arnold, "is primitive work, I repeat, with an undeniable
poetic quality of its own. It deserves such praise, and such praise is
sufficient for it." Then he contrasts it with a famous passage in
Homer--that same passage which is quoted in the article POETRY, for the
very opposite purpose to that of Arnold's, quoted indeed to show how the
epic poet, leaving the dramatic action to act as chorus, weakens the
[Greek: apatae] of the picture--the passage in the _Iliad_ (iii 243-244)
where the poet, after Helen's pathetic mention of her brother's comments
on the causes of their absence, "criticizes life" and generalizes upon
the impotence of human intelligence, the impotence even of human love,
to pierce the darkness in which the web of human fate is woven. He
appends Dr Hawtrey's translation:--

  [Greek: Os phato roys d êdê katechen physizoos aia
  en Lakedaimoni authi, philê en patridi gaiê.]

  "So said she; they long since in Earth's soft arms were reposing
   There, in their own dear land, their fatherland, Lacedaemon."

"We are here," says Arnold, "in another world, another order of poetry
altogether; here is rightly due such supreme praise as that which M.
Vitel gives to the _Chanson de Roland_. If our words are to have any
meaning, if our judgments are to have any solidity, we must not heap
that supreme praise upon poetry of an order immeasurably inferior." He
does not see that the two passages cannot properly be compared at all.
In the one case the poet gives us a dramatic picture; in the other; a
comment on a dramatic picture.

Perhaps, indeed, the place Arnold held and still holds as a critic is
due more to his exquisite felicity in expressing his views than to the
penetration of his criticism. Nothing can exceed the easy grace of his
prose at the best. It is conversational and yet absolutely exact in the
structure of the sentences; and in spite of every vagary, his
distinguishing note is urbanity. Keen-edged as his satire could be, his
writing for the most part is as urbane as Addison's own. His influence
on contemporary criticism and contemporary ideals was considerable, and
generally wholesome. His insistence on the necessity of looking at "the
thing in itself," and the need for acquainting oneself with "the best
that has been thought and said in the world," gave a new stimulus alike
to originality and industry in criticism; and in his own selection of
subjects--such as _Joubert_, or the _de Guérins_--he opened a new world
to a larger class of the better sort of readers, exercising in this
respect an awakening influence in his own time akin to that of Walter
Pater a few years afterwards. The comparison with Pater might indeed be
pressed further, and yet too far. Both were essentially products of
Oxford. But Arnold, whose description of that "home of lost causes, and
forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names, and impossible loyalties," is in
itself almost a poem, had a classical austerity in his style that
savoured more intimately of Oxford tradition, and an ethical earnestness
even in his most flippant moments which kept him notably aloof from the
more sensuous school of aesthetics.

  The first collected edition of Arnold's poems was published in 1869 in
  two volumes, the first consisting of _Narrative and Elegiac Poems_,
  and the second of _Dramatic and Lyric Poems_. Other editions appeared
  in 1877, 1881; a library edition (3 vols., 1885); a one-volume reprint
  of the poems printed in the library edition with one or two additions
  (1890). Publications by Matthew Arnold not mentioned in the foregoing
  article include: _England and the Italian Question_ (1859), a
  pamphlet; _A French Eton; or, Middle Class Education and the State_
  (1864); _Higher Schools and Universities in Germany_ (1874), a partial
  reprint from _Schools and Universities on the Continent_ (1868); _A
  Bible Reading for Schools; The Great Prophecy of Israel's
  Restoration_, an arrangement of _Isaiah_, chs. xl.-lxvi. (1872),
  republished with additions and varying titles in 1875 and 1883; an
  edition of the _Six Chief Lives from Johnson's Lives of the Poets_
  (1878); editions of the _Poems of Wordsworth_ (1879), and the _Poetry
  of Byron_ (1881), for the Golden Treasury Series, with prefatory
  essays reprinted in the second series of _Essays in Criticism_; an
  edition of _Letters, Speeches and Tracts on Irish Affairs by Edmund
  Burke_ (1881); and many contributions to periodical literature. _The
  Letters of Matthew Arnold_ (1848-1888) were collected and arranged by
  George W.E. Russell in 1895, reprinted 1901. _Matthew Arnold's Note
  Books, with a Preface by the Hon. Mrs Wodehouse_, appeared in 1902. A
  complete and uniform edition of _The Works of Matthew Arnold_ (15
  vols., 1904-1905) includes the letters as edited by Mr Russell. Vol.
  iii. contains a complete bibliography of his works, many of the early
  editions of which are very valuable, by Mr T.B. Smart, who published a
  separate bibliography in 1892. A valuable note on the rather
  complicated subject of Arnold's bibliography is given by Mr H. Buxton
  Forman in Arnold's _Poems, Narrative, Elegiac and Lyric_ (Temple
  Classics, 1900).

  It was Arnold's expressed desire that his biography should not be
  written, and before his letters were published they underwent
  considerable editing at the hands of his family. There are, however,
  monographs on Matthew Arnold (1899) in _Modern English Writers_ by
  Prof. Saintsbury, and by Mr H.W. Paul (1902), in the English Men of
  Letters Series. These two works are supplemented by Mr G.W.E. Russell,
  who, as the editor of Arnold's letters, is in a sense the official
  biographer, in _Matthew Arnold_ (1904, Literary Lives Series). There
  are also studies of Arnold in Mr J.M. Robertson's _Modern Humanists_
  (1891), and in W.H. Hudson's _Studies in Interpretation_ (1896), in
  Sir J.G. Fitch's _Thomas and Matthew Arnold_ (1897), and a review of
  some of the works above mentioned in the _Quarterly_ for January 1905
  by T.H. Warren.     (T. W.-D.; J. G. F.)


FOOTNOTE:

  [1] These essays were edited in 1905 with an introduction by W.H.D.
    Rouse.




ARNOLD, SAMUEL (1740-1802), English composer, was born at London on the
both of August 1740. He received a thorough musical education at the
Chapel Royal, and when little more than twenty years of age was
appointed composer at Covent Garden theatre. Here, in 1765, he produced
his popular opera, _The Maid of the Mill_, many of the songs in which
were selected from the works of Italian composers. In 1776 he
transferred his services to the Haymarket theatre. In 1783 he was made
composer to George III. Between 1765 and 1802 he wrote as many as
forty-three operas, after-pieces and pantomimes, of which the best were
_The Maid of the Mill_, _Rosamond_, _Inkle and Yarico_, _The Battle of
Hexham_, _The Mountaineers_. His oratorios included _The Cure of Saul_
(1767), _Abimelech_ (1768), _The Resurrection_ (1773), _The Prodigal
Son_ (1777) and _Elisha_ (1795). In 1783 he became organist to the
Chapel Royal. In 1786 he began an edition of Handel's works, which
extended to 40 volumes, but was never completed. In 1793 he became
organist of Westminster Abbey, where he was buried after his death on
the 22nd of October 1802. Arnold is chiefly remembered now for the
publication of his _Cathedral Music, being a collection in score of the
most valuable and useful compositions for that service by the several
English masters of the last 200 years_ (1790).




ARNOLD, THOMAS (1705-1842), English clergyman and headmaster of Rugby
school, was born at West Cowes, in the Isle of Wight, on the 13th of
June 1795. He was the son of William and Martha Arnold, the former of
whom occupied the situation of collector of customs at Cowes. His
father died suddenly of spasm in the heart in 1801, and his early
education was confided by his mother to her sister, Miss Delafield. From
her tuition he passed to that of Dr Griffiths, at Warminster, in
Wiltshire, in 1803; and in 1807 he was removed to Winchester, where he
remained until 1811, having entered as a commoner, and afterwards become
a scholar of the college. In after life he retained a lively feeling of
interest in Winchester school, and remembered with admiration and profit
the regulative tact of Dr Goddard and the preceptorial ability of Dr
Gabell, who were successively head-masters during his stay there.

From Winchester he removed to Oxford in 1811, where he became a scholar
at Corpus Christi College; in 1815 he was elected fellow of Oriel
College, and there he continued to reside until 1819. This interval was
diligently devoted to the pursuit of classical and historical studies,
to preparing himself for ordination, and to searching investigations,
under the stimulus of continued discussion with a band of talented and
congenial associates, of the profoundest questions in theology,
ecclesiastical polity and social philosophy. The authors he most
carefully studied at this period were Thucydides and Aristotle, and for
their writings he formed an attachment which remained to the close of
his life, and exerted a powerful influence upon his mode of thought and
opinions, as well as upon his literary occupations in subsequent years.
Herodotus also came in for a considerable share of his regard, but more,
apparently, for recreation than for work. Accustomed freely and
fearlessly to investigate whatever came before him, and swayed by a
scrupulous dread of insincerity, he was doomed to long and anxious
hesitation concerning some of the fundamental points of theology before
arriving at a firm conviction of the truth of Christianity. Once
satisfied, however, his faith remained clear and firm; and thenceforward
his life became that of a supremely _religious_ man.

To the name of Christ he was prepared to "surrender his whole soul," and
to render before it "obedience, reverence without measure, intense
humility, most unreserved adoration" (_Serm. ns._ vol. iv. p. 210). He
did not often talk about religion; he had not much of the accredited
phraseology of piety even when he discoursed on spiritual topics; but
more than most men he was directed by religious principle and feeling in
all his conduct. He left Oxford in 1819, and settled at Laleham, near
Staines, where he took pupils for the university. His spare time was
devoted to the prosecution of studies in philology and history, more
particularly to the study of Thucydides, and of the new light which had
been cast upon Roman history and upon historical method in general by
the researches of Niebuhr. He was also occasionally engaged in
preaching, and it was whilst here that he published the first volume of
his sermons. Shortly after he settled at Laleham, he married Mary,
youngest daughter of the Rev. John Penrose, rector of Fledborough,
Nottinghamshire. After nine years spent at Laleham he was induced to
offer himself as a candidate for the vacant head-mastership of Rugby;
and though he entered somewhat late upon the contest, and though none of
the electors was personally known to him, he was elected in December
1827. In June 1828 he received priest's orders; in April end November of
the same year he took his degrees of B.D. and D.D., and in August
entered on his new office.

In one of the testimonials which accompanied his application to the
trustees of Rugby, the writer stated it as his conviction that "if Mr
Arnold were elected, he would change the face of education all through
the public schools of England." This somewhat hazardous pledge was nobly
redeemed. Under Arnold's superintendence the school became not merely a
place where a certain amount of classical or general learning was to be
obtained, but a sphere of intellectual, moral and religious discipline,
where healthy characters were formed, and men were trained for the
duties, and struggles and responsibilities of life. His energies were
chiefly devoted to the business of the school; but he found time also
for much literary work, as well as for an extensive correspondence. Five
volumes of sermons, an edition of Thucydides, with English notes and
dissertations, a History of Rome in three vols. 8vo, beside numerous
articles in reviews, journals, newspapers and encyclopædias, are extant
to attest the untiring activity of his mind, and his patient diligence
during this period. His interest also in public matters was incessant,
especially ecclesiastical questions, and such as bore upon the social
welfare and moral improvement of the masses.

In 1841, after fourteen years at Rugby, Dr Arnold was appointed by Lord
Melbourne, then prime minister, to the chair of modern history at
Oxford. On the 2nd of December 1841 he delivered his inaugural lecture.
Seven other lectures were delivered during the first three weeks of the
Lent term of 1842. When the midsummer vacation arrived, he was preparing
to set out with his family to Fox How in Westmoreland, where he had
purchased some property and built a house. But he was suddenly attacked
by angina pectoris, and died on Sunday, the 12th of June 1842. His
remains were interred on the following Friday in the chancel of Rugby
chapel, immediately under the communion table.

The great peculiarity and charm of Dr Arnold's nature seemed to lie in
the supremacy of the moral and the spiritual element over his whole
being. He was not a notable scholar, and he had not much of what is
usually called tact in his dealings either with the juvenile or the
adult mind. What gave him his power, and secured for him so deeply the
respect and veneration of his pupils and acquaintances, was the
intensely religious character of his whole life. He seemed ever to act
from a severe and lofty estimate of duty. To be just, honest and
truthful, he ever held to be the first aim of his being.

  His _Life_ was written by Dean Stanley (1845).




ARNOTT, NEIL (1788-1874), Scottish physician, was born at Arbroath on
the 15th of May 1788. He studied medicine first at Aberdeen, and
subsequently in London under Sir Everard Home (1756-1832), through whom
he obtained, while yet in his nineteenth year, the appointment of full
surgeon to an East Indiaman. After making two voyages to China he
settled in 1811 to practise in London, and speedily acquired high
reputation in his profession. Within a few years he was made physician
to the French and Spanish embassies, and in 1837 he became a physician
extraordinary to the queen. From his earliest youth Arnott had an
intense love of natural philosophy, and to this was added an
inventiveness which served him in good stead in his profession and
yielded the "Arnott water-bed," the "Arnott ventilator," the "Arnott
stove," &c. He was the author of several works bearing on physical
science or its applications, the most important being his _Elements of
Physics_ (1827), which went through six editions in his lifetime. In
1838 he published a treatise on _Warming and Ventilating_, and, in 1855,
one on the _Smokeless Fireplace_. He was a strong advocate of
scientific, as opposed to purely classical, education; and he manifested
his interest in natural philosophy by the gift of £2000 to each of the
four universities of Scotland and to the university of London, to
promote its study in the experimental and practical form. He died in
London on the 2nd of March 1874.




ARNOULD-PLESSY, JEANNE SYLVANIE (1819-1897), French actress, was born in
Metz on the 7th of September 1819, the daughter of a local actor named
Plessy. She was a pupil of Samson at the Conservatoire in 1829, and made
her _début_ as Emma at the Comédie Française in 1834 in Alexandre
Duval's _La Fille d'honneur_. She had an immense success, and Mlle Mars,
to whom the public already compared her, took her up. Until 1845 she had
prominent parts in all the plays, new and old, at the Théâtre Français,
when suddenly at the height of her success, she left Paris and went to
London, marrying the dramatic author, J.F. Arnould (d. 1854), a man much
older than herself. The Comédie Française, after having tried in vain to
bring her back, brought a suit against her, and obtained heavy damages.
In the meantime Madame Arnould-Plessy accepted an engagement at the
French theatre at St Petersburg, where she played for nine years. In
1855 she returned to Paris and was re-admitted to the Comédie Française,
as _pensionnaire_ with an engagement for eight years. This second part
of her career was even more brilliant than the first. She revived some
of her old rôles, but began to abandon the _jeunes premières_ for the
"lead," in which she had a success unequalled since the retirement of
Mlle Mars. Her later triumphs were especially associated with new plays
by Émile Augier, _Le Fils de Giboyer_ and _Maître Guerin_. Her last
appearance was in Edouard Cadol's _La Grand-maman_; she retired in 1876,
and died in 1897.




ARNSBERG, a town of Germany, in the Prussian province of Westphalia,
romantically situated on an eminence almost surrounded by the river
Ruhr, 44 m. S.E. of Münster and 58 m. E.N.E. of Düsseldorf by rail. Pop.
(1900) 8490. It is the seat of the provincial authorities, and has three
churches, a court of appeal, a Roman Catholic gymnasium, which was
formerly the Benedictine abbey of Weddinghausen, a library, a normal
school and a chamber of commerce. Weaving, brewing and distilling are
carried on, and there are manufactories of white lead, shot and paper,
works for the production of railway plant, and saw-mills. Near the town
are the ruins of the castle of the counts of Arnsberg, the last of whom,
Gottfried, sold his countship, in 1368, to the archbishop of Cologne.
The countship was incorporated by the archbishops in their duchy of
Westphalia, which in 1802 was assigned to Hesse-Darmstadt and in 1815 to
Prussia. The town, which had received its first charter in 1237 and
later joined the Hanseatic League, became the capital of the duchy.




ARNSTADT, a town in the principality of Schwarzburg-Sondershausen,
Germany, on the river Gera, 11 m. S. of Erfurt, with which it is
connected by rail. Pop. (1900) 14,413. There are five churches, four
Protestant and one Catholic. The Evangelical Liebfrauenkirche, a
Romanesque building (mainly 12th-century), has two octagonal towers and
a 10th-century porch. The palace contains collections of pictures and
porcelain, and attached to it is a magnificent tower, all that remains
of the castle built in 1560. The town hall dates from 1561. The
industries of Arnstadt include iron and other metal founding, the
manufacture of leather, cloth, tobacco, weighing-machines, paper,
playing-cards, chairs, gloves, shoes, iron safes, and beer, and
market-gardening and trade in grain and wood are carried on. There are
copper-mines in the neighbourhood, as well as tepid saline springs, the
waters of which are used for bathing, and are much frequented in summer.
Arnstadt dates back to the 8th century. It was bought in 1306 by the
counts of Schwarzburg, who lived here till 1716.




ARNSWALDE, a town of Germany, in the kingdom of Prussia, in a marshy
district between four lakes, 20 m. S.W. of Stargard and on the main line
between that place and Posen. Besides the Gothic church there are no
noteworthy public buildings. Its industries include iron founding,
machinery, and manufactures of cloth, matches and starch. Pop. (1900)
8665.




ARNULF (c. 850-899), Roman emperor, illegitimate son of Carloman, king
of Bavaria and Italy, was made margrave of Carinthia about 876, and on
his father's death in 880 his dignity and possessions were confirmed by
the new king of the east Franks, Louis III. The failure of legitimate
male issue of the later Carolingians gave Arnulf a more important
position than otherwise he would have occupied; but he did homage to the
emperor Charles the Fat in 882, and spent the next few years in constant
warfare with the Slavs and the Northmen. In 887, however, Arnulf
identified himself with the disgust felt by the Bavarians and others at
the incapacity of Charles the Fat. Gathering a large army, he marched to
Tribur; Charles abdicated and the Germans recognized Arnulf as their
king, a proceeding which L. von Ranke describes as "the first
independent action of the German secular world." Arnulf's real authority
did not extend far beyond the confines of Bavaria, and he contented
himself with a nominal recognition of his supremacy by the kings who
sprang up in various parts of the Empire. Having made peace with the
Moravians, he gained a great and splendid victory over the Northmen near
Louvain in October 891, and in spite of some opposition succeeded in
establishing his illegitimate son, Zwentibold, as king of the district
afterwards called Lorraine. Invited by Pope Formosus to deliver him from
the power of Guido III., duke of Spoleto, who had been crowned emperor,
Arnulf went to Italy in 894, but after storming Bergamo and receiving
the homage of some of the nobles at Pavia, he was compelled by
desertions from his army to return. The restoration of peace with the
Moravians and the death of Guido prepared the way for a more successful
expedition in 895 when Rome was stormed by his troops; and Arnulf was
crowned emperor by Formosus in February 896. He then set out to
establish his authority in Spoleto, but on the way was seized with
paralysis. He returned to Bavaria, where he died on the 8th of December
899, and was buried at Regensburg. He left, by his wife Ota, a son Louis
surnamed the Child. Arnulf possessed the qualities of a soldier, and was
a loyal supporter of the church.

  See "Annales Fuldenses" in the _Monumenta Germaniae historica.
  Scriptores_, Band i. (Hanover and Berlin, 1826); E. Dümmler,
  _Geschichte des ostfränkischen Reichs_ (Leipzig, 1887-1888); M.J.L. de
  Gagern, _Arnulfi imperatoris vita_ (Bonn, 1837); E. Dümmler, _De
  Arnulfo Francorum rege_ (Berlin, 1852); W.B. Wenck, _Die Erhebung
  Arnulfs und der Zerfall des karolingischen Reiches_ (Leipzig, 1852);
  O. Dietrich, _Beitrâge zur Geschichte Arnolfs von Karnthen und Ludwigs
  des Kindes_ (Berlin, 1890); E. Mühlbacher, _Die Regesten des
  Kaiserreichs unter den Karolingern_ (Innsbruck, 1881).




AROIDEAE (Arum family), a large and wide-spread botanical order of
Monocotyledons containing about 1000 species in 105 genera. It is
generally distributed in temperate and tropical regions, but especially
developed in warm countries. The common British representative of the
order, _Arum maculatum_ (cuckoo-pint, lords and ladies, or wake robin),
gives a meagre idea of its development. The plants are generally
herbaceous, often, however, reaching a gigantic size, but are sometimes
shrubby, as in _Pothos_, a genus of shrubby climbing plants, chiefly
Malayan. _Monstera_ is a tropical American genus of climbing shrubs,
with large often much-perforated leaves; the fruiting spikes of a
Mexican species, _M. deliciosa_, are eaten. The roots of the climbing
species are of interest in their adaptation to the mode of life of the
plant. For instance, some species of _Philodendron_ have a growth like
that of ivy, with feeding roots penetrating the soil and clasping roots
which fix the plant to its support. In other species of the genus the
seed germinates on a branch, and the seedling produces clasping roots,
and roots which grow downwards hanging like stout cords, and ultimately
reaching the ground. The leaves, which show great variety in size and
form, are generally broad and net-veined, but in sweet-flag (_Acorus
Calamus_) are long and narrow with parallel veins. In _Arum_ the blade
is simple, as also in the so-called arum-lily (_Richardia_), a South
African species common in Britain as a greenhouse plant, and in
_Caladium_, a tropical South American genus, and _Alocasia_ (tropical
Asia), species of which are favourite warm-greenhouse plants on account
of their variegated leaves. In other genera the leaves are much divided
and sometimes very large; those of _Dracontium_ (tropical America) may
be 15 ft. high, with a long stem-like stalk and a much-branched
spreading blade. The East Indian genus _Amorphophallus_ has a similar
habit. A good series of tropical aroids is to be seen in the aroid house
at Kew. The so-called water cabbage (_Pistia Stratiotes_) is a floating
plant widely distributed in the tropics, and consisting of rosettes of
broadish leaves several inches across and a tuft of roots hanging in the
water.

[Illustration: _Arum maculatum_, Cuckoo-pint.

  1. Leaves and inflorescence.
  2. Underground root-stock.
  3. Lower part of spathe cut open.
  4. Spike of fruits. Showing in succession (from below) female flowers,
  male flowers, and sterile flowers forming a ring of hairs borne on the
  spadix.]

The small flowers are densely crowded on thick fleshy spikes, which are
associated with, and often more or less enveloped by, a large leaf
(bract), the so-called spathe, which, as in cuckoo-pint, where it is
green in colour, _Richardia_, where it is white, creamy or yellow,
_Anthurium_, where it is a brilliant scarlet, is often the most striking
feature of the plant. The details of the structure of the flower show a
wide variation; the flowers are often extremely simple, sometimes as in
_Arum_, reduced to a single stamen or pistil. The fruit is a berry--the
scarlet berries of the cuckoo-pint are familiar objects in the hedges in
late summer. The plants generally contain an acrid poisonous juice. The
underground stems (rhizomes or tubers) are rich in starch; from that of
_Arum maculatum_ Portland arrowroot was formerly extensively prepared by
pounding with water and then straining; the starch was deposited from
the strained liquid.

The order is represented in Britain by _Arum maculatum_, a low
herbaceous plant common in woods and hedgerows in England, but probably
not wild in Scotland. It grows from a whitish root-stock which sends up
in the spring a few long-stalked, arrow-shaped leaves of a polished
green, often marked with dark blotches. These are followed by the
inflorescence, a fleshy spadix bearing in the lower part numerous
closely crowded simple unisexual flowers and continued above into a
purplish or yellowish appendage; the spadix is enveloped by a leafy
spathe, constricted in the lower part to form a chamber, in which are
the flowers. The mouth of this chamber is protected by a ring of hairs
pointing downwards, which allow the entrance but prevent the escape of
small flies; after fertilization of the pistils the hairs wither. The
insects visit the plant in large numbers, attracted by the foetid smell,
and act as carriers of the pollen from one spathe to another. As the
fruit ripens the spathe withers, and the brilliant red berries are
exposed.

The sweet-flag _Acorus Calamus_ (q.v.), which occurs apparently wild in
England in ditches, ponds, &c., is supposed to have been introduced.




AROLSEN, a town of Germany, capital of the principality of Waldeck, 25
m. N.W. of Cassel, with which it is connected by rail via Warburg. Pop.
3000. It lies in a pleasant undulating country at an elevation of 900
ft. above the sea. The Evangelical parish church contains some fine
statues by Christian Rauch, and the palace (built 1710-1720), in
addition to a valuable library of 30,000 vols., a collection of coins
and pictures, among the latter several by Angelica Kauffmann. Arolsen is
the birthplace of the sculptor C. Rauch and of the painters Wilhelm and
Friedrich Kaulbach.




ARONA, a town of Piedmont, Italy, in the province of Novara, on the W.
bank of Lake Maggiore, 3 m. from its S. extremity, 23 m. N. of Novara,
and 42 m. N.W. of Milan by rail. Pop. (1901) 4700. It is a railway
centre of some importance on the Simplon line, and is also the southern
terminus of the steamers which ply on Lake Maggiore. The church of S.
Maria contains a fine altar-piece by Gaudenzio Ferrari. On a hill to the
north of the town stands a colossal bronze statue of S. Carlo Borromeo
(born here in 1538), erected in 1697. The pedestal, of red granite, is
42 ft. high, and the statue 70 ft. high; the latter is hollow, and can
be ascended from within.




ARPEGGIO (from Ital. _arpeggiare_, to play upon the harp), in music, the
notes of a chord, played in rapid succession as on a harp, and not
together.




ARPI (Gr. [Greek: Hargorippa]), an ancient city of Apulia, 20 m. W. of
the sea coast, and 5 m. N. of the modern Foggia. The legend attributes
its foundation to Diomedes, and the figure of a horse, which appears on
its coins, shows the importance of horse-breeding in early times in the
district. Its territory extended to the sea, and Strabo says that from
the extent of the city walls one could gather that it had once been one
of the greatest cities of Italy. As a protection against the Samnites
Arpi became an ally of Rome, and remained faithful until after the
battle of Cannae, but Fabius captured it in 213 B.C., and it never
recovered its former importance. It lay on a by-road from Luceria to
Sipontum. No Roman inscriptions have, indeed, been found here, and
remains of antiquity are scanty. Foggia is its medieval representative.
     (T. As.)




ARPINO (anc. _Arpinum_), a town of Campania, Italy, in the province of
Caserta, 1475 ft. above sea-level; 12 m. by rail N.W. of Roccasecca, a
station on the railway from Naples to Rome. Pop. (1901) 10,607. Arpino
occupies the lower part of the site of the ancient Volscian town of
Arpinum, which was finally taken from the Samnites by the Romans in 305
B.C. It became a _civitas sine suffragio_, but received full privileges
(_civitas cum suffragio_) in 188 B.C. with Formiae and Fundi; it was
governed as a _praefectura_ until the Social War, and then became a
_municipium_. The ancient polygonal walls, which are still finely
preserved, are among the best in Italy. They are built of blocks of
pudding-stone, originally well jointed, but now much weathered. They
stand free in places to a height of 11 ft., and are about 7 ft. wide at
the top. A single line of wall, with medieval round towers at intervals,
runs on the north side from the present town to Civitavecchia (2055
ft.), on the site of the ancient citadel. Here is the Porta dell' Arco,
a gate of the old wall, with an aperture 15 ft. high, formed by the
gradual inclination of the two sides towards one another. Below Arpino,
in the valley of the Liris, between the two arms of its tributary the
Fibrenus, and ¾ m. north of Isola del Liri, lies the church of S.
Domenico, which marks the site of the villa in which Cicero was born and
frequently resided. Near it is an ancient bridge, of a road which
crossed the Liris to Cereatae (modern Casamari). The painter Giuseppe
Cesari (1560-1640), more often known as the Cavaliere d' Arpino, was
also born here.

  See O.E. Schmidt, _Arpinum, eine topographisch-historische Skizze_
  (Meissen, 1900).     (T. As.)




ARQUÀ PETRARCA, a village of Venetia, Italy, in the province of Padua, 3
m. to the S.W. of Battaglia. Pop. (1901) 1573. It is chiefly famous as
the place where Petrarch lived his last few years and died in 1374. His
house still exists, and his tomb, a sarcophagus supported by four short
columns of red marble, stands in front of the church. Near Arquà, on the
banks of the small Lago della Costa, is the site of a prehistoric lake
village, excavations in which have produced interesting results.

  See A. Moschetti and F. Cordenone in _Bollettino del Museo Civico di
  Padova_, iv. (1901), 102 seq.




ARQUEBUS (also called harquebus, hackbut, &c.), a firearm of the 16th
century, the immediate predecessor of the musket. The word itself is
certainly to be derived from the German Hakenbühse (mod. Hakenbüchse,
cf. Eng. _hackbut_ and _hackbush_), "hook gun." The "hook" is often
supposed to refer to the bent shape of the butt, which differentiated it
from the straight-stocked hand gun, but it has also been suggested that
the original arquebus had a metal hook near the muzzle, which was used
to grip the wall (or other fixed object) so as to steady the aim and
take up the force of recoil, that from this the name _Hakenbühse_
spread till it became the generic name for small arms, and that the
original form of the weapon then took the name of _arquebus à croc_. The
French form _arquebuse_ and Italian _arcobugio_, _archibugio_, often and
wrongly supposed to indicate the hackbut's affinity with the crossbow
("hollow bow" or "mouthed bow"), are popular corruptions, the Italian
being apparently the earlier of the two and supplanting the first and
purest French form _haquebut_. Previous to the French wars in Italy,
hand-gun men and even arbalisters seem to have been called arquebusiers,
but in the course of these wars the arquebus or hackbut came into
prominence as a distinct type of weapon. The Spanish arquebusiers, who
used it with the greatest effect in the Italian wars, notably at Bicocca
(1522) and Pavia (1525), are the originators of modern infantry fire
action. Filippo Strozzi made many improvements in the arquebus about
1530, and his weapons were effective up to four and five hundred paces.
He also standardized the calibres of the arquebuses of the French army,
and from this characteristic feature of the improved weapon arose the
English term "caliver." In the latter part of the 16th century (c. 1570)
the arquebus began to be displaced by the musket.




ARQUES-LA-BATAILLE, a village of France, in the department of
Seine-Inférieure, 4 m. S.E. of Dieppe by the Western railway. Pop.
(1906) 1250. Arques is situated near the confluence of the rivers
Varenne and Bethune; the forest of Arques stretches to the north-east.
The interest of the place centres in the castle dominating the town,
which was built in the 11th century by William of Arques; his nephew,
William the Conqueror, regarding it as a menace to his own power,
besieged and occupied it. After frequently changing hands, it came into
the possession of the English, who were expelled in 1449 after an
occupation of thirty years. In 1589 its cannon decided the battle of
Arques in favour of Henry IV. Since 1869 the castle has been state
property. The first line of fortification was the work of Francis I.;
the second line and the donjon date back to the 11th century. The church
of Arques, a building of the 16th century, preserves a fine stone rood
screen, statuary, stained glass and other relics of the Renaissance
period.




ARRACK, RACK or RAK, a generic name applied to a variety of spirituous
liquors distilled in the Far East. According to some authorities the
word is derived from the Arabic _arak_ (perspiration), but according to
others (see Morewood's _History of Inebriating Liquors_, 1834, p. 140)
it is derived from the _areca-nut_, a material from which a variety of
arrack was long manufactured, and is of Indian origin. The liquor to
which this or a similar name is applied is (or was, since the
introduction of European spirits and methods of manufacture is gradually
causing the native spirit industries on the old lines to decay)
manufactured in India, Ceylon, Siam, Java, Batavia, China, Corea, &c.,
and its manufacture still constitutes a considerable industry. The term
arrack as designating a distilled liquor does not, however, appear to
have been confined to the Far East, as, in Timkowski's _Travels_, it is
stated that a spirit distilled from koumiss (q.v.) by the Tatars,
Mongols and presumably the Caucasian races generally, is called _arrack,
araka or ariki_. In Ceylon arrack is distilled chiefly from palm toddy,
which is the fermented juice drawn from the unexpanded flower-spathes of
various palms, such as the Palmyra palm (_Borassus flabelliformis_) and
the cocoa palm (_Cocos nucifera_). At the beginning of the 19th century
the arrack industry of Ceylon was of considerable dimensions, whole
woods being set apart for no other purpose than that of procuring toddy,
and the distillation of the spirit took place at every village round the
coast. The land rents in 1831 included a sum of £35,573 on the cocoa-nut
trees, and the duties on the manufacture and retail of the spirit
amounted to over £30,000. On the Indian continent arrack is made from
palm toddy, rice and the refuse of the sugar refineries, but mainly from
the flowers of the muohwa or mahua tree (_Bassia latifolia_). The mahua
flowers are very rich in sugar, and may, according to H.H. Mann, contain
as much as 58% of fermentable sugar, calculated on the total solids.
Even at the present day the process of manufacture is very primitive,
the fermentation as a rule being carried on in so concentrated a liquid
that complete fermentation rarely takes place. According to Mann, the
total sugar in the liquor ready for fermentation may reach 20%. The
ferment employed (it is so impure that it can scarcely be called yeast)
is obtained from a previous fermentation, and, as the latter is never
vigorous, it is not surprising that the resulting spirit contains,
compared with the more scientifically prepared European spirits, a very
high proportion of by-products (acid, fusel oil, &c.). The injurious
nature of these native spirits has long been known and has been
frequently set down to the admixture of drugs, such as hemp (_ganga_),
but a recent investigation of this question appears to show that this is
not generally the case. The chemical constitution of these liquors alone
affords sufficient proof of their inferior and probably injurious
character.

  See H.H. Mann, _The Analyst_ (1904).




ARRAH, a town of British India, headquarters of Shahabad district, in
the Patna division of Bengal, situated on a navigable canal connecting
the river Sone with the Ganges. It is a station on the East Indian
railway, 368 m. from Calcutta. In 1901 the population was 40,170. Arrah
is famous for an incident in the Mutiny, when a dozen Englishmen, with
50 Sikhs, defended an ordinary house against 2000 Sepoys and a multitude
of armed insurgents, perhaps four times that number. A British regiment,
despatched to their assistance from Dinapur, was disastrously repulsed;
but they were ultimately relieved, after eight days' continuous
fighting, by a small force under Major (afterwards Sir Vincent) Eyre.




ARRAIGNMENT (from Lat. _ad_, to, and _rationare_, to reason, call to
account), a law term, properly denoting the calling of a person to
answer in form of law upon an indictment. After a true bill has been
found against a prisoner by the grand jury, he is called by name to the
bar, the indictment is read over to him, and he is asked whether he be
guilty or not of the offence charged. This is the arraignment. Formerly,
it was usual to require the prisoner to hold up his hand, in order to
identify him the more completely, but this practice is now obsolete, as
well as that of asking him how he will be tried. His plea in answer to
the charge is then entered, or a plea of not guilty is entered for him
if he stands mute of malice and refuses to plead, If a person is mute by
the visitation of God (i.e. deaf and dumb), it will be no bar to an
arraignment if intelligence can be conveyed to him by signs or symbols.
If he pleads guilty, sentence may be passed forthwith; if he pleads not
guilty, he is then given in charge to a jury of twelve men to inquire
into the truth of the indictment. He may also plead in abatement, or to
the jurisdiction, or demur on a point of law. Several defendants, except
those entitled to the privilege of peerage, charged on the same
indictment, are arraigned together.

In Scots law the term for arraignment is _calling the diet_.

The _Clerk of Arraigns_ is a subordinate officer attached to assize
courts and to the Old Bailey. He is appointed by the clerk of assize
(see ASSIZE) and acts as his deputy. He assists at the arraignment of
prisoners, and puts the formal questions to the jury when delivering
their verdict.




ARRAN, EARLS OF. The extinct Scottish title of the earls of Arran (not
to be confused with the modern Irish earls of Arran--from the Arran or
Aran Islands, Galway--a title created in 1762) was borne by some famous
characters in Scottish history. Except the first earl, Thomas Boyd (see
ARRAN), and James Stewart, all the holders of this title were members of
the Hamilton family.

JAMES HAMILTON, 1st earl of Arran of the new creation (c. 1475-1529),
son of James, 1st Lord Hamilton, and of Mary Stewart, daughter of James
II. of Scotland, was born about 1475, and succeeded in 1479 to his
father's titles and estates. In 1489 he was made sheriff of Lanark, was
appointed a privy councillor to James IV., and in 1503 negotiated in
England the marriage between the king and Margaret Tudor. Hamilton
excelled in the knightly exercises of the day, and the same year on the
11th of August, after distinguishing himself in a famous tournament, he
was created earl and justiciary of Arran. In 1504 as lieutenant-general
of the realm he was employed in reducing the Hebrides, and about the
same time in an expedition with 10,000 men in aid of John, king of
Denmark. In 1507 he was sent ambassador to France, and on his return
through England was seized and imprisoned by Henry VII. After the
accession of Henry VIII., Arran, in 1509, signed the treaty of peace
between the two countries, and later, when hostilities began, was given
command of a great fleet equipped for the aid of France in 1513. The
expedition proved a failure, Arran wasting time by a useless attack on
Carrickfergus, lingering for months on the Scottish coast, and returning
with a mere remnant of his fleet, the larger ships having probably been
purchased by the French government. During his absence the battle of
Flodden had been lost, and Arran found his rival Angus, who enjoyed
Henry's support, married to the queen dowager and in control of the
government. Arran naturally turned to the French party and supported the
regency of the duke of Albany. Later, however, becoming impatient of the
latter's monopoly of power, he entered into various plots against him,
and on Albany's departure in 1517 he was chosen president of the council
of regency and provost of Edinburgh. The same year he led an expedition
to the border to punish the murderers of the French knight La Bastie. In
September, however, after a temporary absence with the young king, the
gates of Edinburgh were shut against him by the Douglases, and on the
30th of April 1520 the fierce fight of "Cleanse the Causeway" took place
in the streets between the two factions, in which the Hamiltons were
worsted. The quarrel, however, between Angus and his wife, the
queen-mother, with whom Arran now allied himself, gave the latter
another opportunity of regaining power, which he held from 1522, after
Albany's return to France, till 1524, when he was forced to include
Angus in the government. In 1526, on the refusal of the latter to give
up his control of the king on the expiry of his term of office, Arran
took up arms, but retreated before Angus's forces, and having made terms
with him, supported him in his close custody of the king, in September
defeating the earl of Lennox, who was marching to Edinburgh to liberate
James. On the proscription of Angus and the Douglases, Arran joined the
king at Stirling. He died in 1529. His eldest son James succeeded him.

JAMES HAMILTON, 2nd earl of Arran and duke of Châtelherault (c.
1515-1575), accompanied James V. in 1536 to France, and on the latter's
death in 1542 was, in consequence of his position as next successor to
the throne after the infant Mary, proclaimed protector of the realm and
heir-presumptive of the crown, in 1543. He was a zealous supporter of
the reformation, authorized the translation and reading of the
Scriptures in the vulgar tongue, and at first supported the English
policy in opposition to Cardinal Beaton, whom he arrested on the 27th of
January 1543, arranging the treaty with England and the marriage of Mary
with Prince Edward in July, and being offered by Henry the hand of the
princess Elizabeth for his son. But on the 3rd of September he suddenly
joined the French party, met Beaton at Stirling, and abjured his
religion for Roman Catholicism. On the 13th of January 1544, with Angus,
Lennox and others, he signed a bond repudiating the English alliance. In
1544 an attempt was made to transfer the regency from him to Mary of
Lorraine, but Arran fortified Edinburgh and her forces retired; in March
1545 a truce was arranged by which each had a share in the government.
Meanwhile, immediately on the repudiation of the treaty, war had broken
out with England, and Arran was unable either to maintain order within
the realm or defend it from outside aggression, the Scots being defeated
at Pinkie on the 10th of September 1547. He reluctantly agreed in July
1548 to the marriage of the dauphin with Mary, whom he had designed for
his son, to the appeal for French aid, and to the removal of Mary for
security to France, and on the 5th of February 1549 was created duke of
Châtelherault in Poitou, his eldest son James being henceforth commonly
styled earl of Arran. In June 1548 he had also been made a knight of the
order of St Michael in France. On the 12th of April 1554 he abdicated in
favour of the queen-mother, whose government he supported till after the
capture of Edinburgh in October 1559 by the lords of the congregation,
when he declared himself on their side and took the Covenant. The same
month he was one of the council of the Protestant lords, joined them in
suspending Mary of Lorraine from the regency, and was made provisionally
one of the governors of the kingdom. In order to discredit him with the
English government a letter was forged by his enemies, in which Arran
declared his allegiance to Francis II., but the plot was exposed. On the
27th of February 1560 he agreed to the treaty of Berwick with Elizabeth,
which placed Scotland under her protection. The death the same year of
Francis II. renewed his hopes of a union between his son and Mary, but
disappointment drove him into an attitude of hostility to the court. In
1562 he was accused by his son, probably already insane, of plots
against Mary's person, and he was obliged to give up Dumbarton Castle.
Lennox claimed precedence over Arran in the succession to the throne, on
the plea of the latter's supposed illegitimacy, and his restoration to
favour in 1564, together with the project of Mary's marriage with
Darnley, still further embittered Arran; he refused to appear at court,
was declared a traitor, and fled to England, where on his consent to go
into exile for five years he received a pardon from Mary. In 1566 he
went to France, where he made vain attempts to regain his confiscated
duchy. After the murder of Darnley in 1567 he was nominated by Mary on
her abdication one of the regents, and he returned to Scotland in 1569
as a strong supporter of her cause. In March in an assembly of nobles
called by Murray, he acknowledged James as king, but on the 5th of April
he was arrested for not fulfilling the compact, and continued in
confinement till April 1570. After Murray's assassination in January
1570, the regency in July was given to Lennox, and in June 1571 Arran
assembled a parliament, when it was declared that Mary's abdication was
obtained by fear, and the king's coronation was annulled. On the 28th of
August he was declared a traitor and "forfeited," but he continued to
support Mary's hopeless cause and to appeal for help to France and
Spain, in spite of the pillage of his houses and estates, till February
1573, when he acknowledged James's authority and laid down his arms. He
died on the 22nd of January 1575. He was by general consent a weak,
fickle man, whose birth alone called him to high office. He married
Margaret, daughter of James Douglas, 3rd earl of Morton, and had,
besides several daughters, four sons: James, who succeeded him as 3rd
earl of Arran, John, 1st marquess of Hamilton, David, and Claud, Lord
Paisley, ancestor of the dukes of Abercorn.

JAMES HAMILTON, 3rd earl (c. 1537-1609), was styled earl of Arran after
the creation of his father as duke of Châtelherault in 1549; the latter
title did not descend to him, having been resumed by the French crown.
His father's ambition destined him for the hand of Mary queen of Scots,
and his union with the princess Elizabeth was proposed by Henry VIII. as
the price of his father's adherence to the English interest. He was
early involved in the political troubles in which Scotland was then
immersed. In 1546 he was seized as a hostage at St Andrews by the
murderers of Cardinal Beaton and released in 1547. In 1550 he went to
France, was given the command of the Scots guards, and in 1557
distinguished himself in the defence of St Quentin. He became a strong
adherent of the reformed doctrine. His arrest was ordered by Henry II.
in 1559, Mary (probably in consequence of his projected union with
Elizabeth which would have raised the Hamiltons higher than the Stuarts)
declaring her wish that he should be "used as an arrant traitor." He,
however, escaped to Geneva and then to England, and had an interview
with Elizabeth in August. He returned to Scotland in September, where he
supported his father's adherence to the lords of the Congregation
against Mary of Lorraine, upheld the alliance with Elizabeth, and became
one of the leaders of the Protestant party in the subsequent fighting,
in particular organizing, together with Lord James Stuart (afterwards
earl of Murray), in 1560, a stubborn resistance to the French at Dysart,
and saving Fife. In November 1559 he had declined Bothwell's challenge
to single combat. Subsequently he signed the treaty of Berwick, became
one of the lords of the Congregation, and was appointed a visitor for
the destruction of the religious houses. The same year proposals were
again made for his marriage with Elizabeth, which were rejected by the
latter in 1561; and subsequently after the death of Francis II. (in
December 1560), he became, with the strong support of the Protestants
and Hamiltons, a suitor for Mary, also without success. He was chosen a
member of her council on her arrival in Scotland in 1561, but took up a
hostile attitude to the court in consequence of the practice of the
Roman Catholic religion. He now showed marked signs of insanity, and was
confined in Edinburgh Castle, where he remained till May 1566. He had
then lost the power of speech, and from 1568 he lived in retirement with
his mother at Craignethan Castle, while his estates were administered by
his brother John, afterwards 1st marquess of Hamilton. In 1579, at the
time of the fresh prosecution of the Hamiltons, when the helpless Arran
was also included in the attainder of his brothers and his titles
forfeited, the castle was besieged on the pretence of delivering him
from unlawful confinement, and Arran and his mother were brought to
Linlithgow, while the charge of his estates was taken over by the
government. In 1580 James Stewart (see below) was appointed his
guardian, and in 1581 acquired the earldom; but his title and estates
were restored after Stewart's disgrace in 1586, when the forfeiture was
repealed. Arran died unmarried in March 1609, the title devolving on his
nephew James, 2nd marquess of Hamilton.

JAMES STEWART (d. 1595), the rival earl of Arran above referred to, was
the son of Andrew Stewart, 2nd Lord Ochiltree. He served in his youth
with the Dutch forces in Holland against the Spanish, and returned to
Scotland in 1579. He immediately became a favourite of the young king,
and in 1580 was made gentleman of the bedchamber and tutor of his
cousin, the 3rd earl of Arran. The same year he was the principal
accuser of the earl of Morton, and in 1581 was rewarded for having
accomplished the latter's destruction by being appointed a member of the
privy council, and by the grant the same year, to the prejudice of his
ward, of the earldom of Arran and the Hamilton estates, on the pretence
that the children of his grandmother's father, the 1st earl of Arran, by
his third wife, from whom sprang the succeeding earls of Arran, were
illegitimate. He claimed the position of second person in the kingdom as
nearest to the king by descent. The same year he married Elizabeth,
daughter of John Stewart, earl of Atholl, and wife of the earl of March,
after both had been compelled to undergo the discipline of the kirk on
account of previous illicit intercourse. He became the rival of Lennox
for the chief power in the kingdom, but both were deprived of office by
the raid of Ruthven on the 22nd of August 1582, and Arran was imprisoned
till September under the charge of the earl of Gowrie. In 1583, however,
he assembled a force of 12,000 men against the new government; the
Protestant lords escaped over the border, and Arran, returning to power,
was made governor of Stirling Castle and in 1584 lord chancellor. The
same year Gowrie was captured through Arran's treachery and executed
after the failure of the plot of the Protestant lords against the
latter's government. He now obtained the governorship of Edinburgh
Castle and was made provost of the city and lieutenant-general of the
king's forces. Arran induced the English government to refrain from
aiding the banished lords, and further secured his power by the
forfeitures of his opponents. His tyranny and insolence, however,
stirred up a multitude of enemies and caused his rapid fall from power.
His agent in England, Patrick, Master of Gray, was secretly conspiring
against him at Elizabeth's court. On account of the murder of Lord
Russell on the border in July 1585, of which he was accused by
Elizabeth, he was imprisoned at the castle of St Andrews, and
subsequently the banished lords with Elizabeth's support entered
Scotland, seized the government and proclaimed Arran a traitor. He fled
in November, and from this time his movements are furtive and uncertain.
In 1586 he was ordered to leave the country, but it is doubtful whether
he ever quitted Scotland. He contrived secretly to maintain friendly
communications with James, and in 1592 returned to Edinburgh, and
endeavoured unsuccessfully to get reinstated in the court and kirk.
Subsequently he is reported as making a voyage to Spain, probably in
connexion with James's intrigues with that country. His unscrupulous and
adventurous career was finally terminated towards the close of 1595 by
his assassination near Symontown in Lanarkshire at the hands of Sir
James Douglas (nephew of his victim the earl of Morton), who carried his
head in triumph on the point of a spear through the country, while his
body was left a prey to the dogs and swine. He had three sons, the
eldest of whom became Lord Ochiltree.




ARRAN, the largest island of the county of Bute, Scotland, at the mouth
of the Firth of Clyde. Its greatest length, from the Cock of Arran to
Bennan Head, is about 20 m., and the greatest breadth--from Drumadoon
Point to King's Cross Point--is 11 m. Its area is 105,814 acres or 165
sq. m. In 1891 its population was 4824, in 1901, 4819 (or 29 persons to
the sq. m.). In 1901 there were 1900 persons who spoke English and
Gaelic and nine Gaelic only. There is daily winter communication with
Brodick and Lamlash by steamer from Ardrossan, and in summer by many
steamers which call not only at these piers, but at Corrie, Whiting Bay
and Loch Ranza.

The chief mountains are in the north. The highest is Goatfell (2866 ft.,
the name said to be a corruption of the Gaelic _Goadh Bhein_, "mountain
of the winds"). Others are Caistel Abhail (2735 ft., "peaks of the
castles"), Beinn Tarsuinn (2706 ft.), Cir Mhor (2618 ft.) and Beinn Nuis
(2597 ft.). In the south Tighvein (1497 ft.) and Cnoc Dubh (1385 ft.)
are the most important. Owing to the mountainous character of the
island, glens are numerous. Glen Rosa and Glen Sannox are remarkable for
their wild beauty, and among others are Iorsa, Catacol, Chalmadale,
Cloy, Shant, Shurig, Tuie, Clachan, Monamore, Ashdale (with two
cascades) and Scorrodale. Excepting Loch Tanna, the inland lakes are
small. Loch Ranza, an arm of the sea, is one of the most beautiful in
Scotland. The streams, or "waters" as they are called, are nearly all
hill burns, affording good fishing.

The oldest rocks, consisting of slate, mica-schists and grits, which
have been correlated with the metamorphic series of the eastern
Highlands, form an incomplete ring round the granite in the north of the
island and occupy the whole of the west coast from Loch Ranza south to
Dougrie. On the east side in North Glen Sannox Burn, they are associated
with cherts, grits and dark schists with pillowy lavas, tuffs and
agglomerates which, on lithological grounds, have been regarded as
probably of the same age as the Arenig cherts and volcanic rocks in the
south of Scotland. The Lower Old Red Sandstone strata are separated from
the foregoing series by a fault and forma curving belt extending from
Corloch on the east coast south by Brodick Castle to Dougrie on the west
shore. Consisting of red sandstones, mudstones and conglomerates, they
are inclined at high angles usually away from the granite massif and the
encircling metamorphic rocks. They are associated with a thin band of
lava visible on the west side of the island near Auchencar and traceable
inland to Garbh Thorr. The Upper Old Red Sandstone, composed of red
sandstone and conglomerates, is only sparingly developed. The strata
occur on the east shore between the Fallen Rocks and Corrie, and they
appear along a narrow strip to the east and south of the lower division
of the system, between Sannox Bay and Dougrie. On the north side of
North Glen Sannox they rest unconformably on the Lower Old Red rocks.
Contemporaneous lavas, highly decomposed, are intercalated with this
division on the north side of North Glen Sannox where the band is highly
faulted. The Carboniferous rocks of Arran include representatives of the
Calciferous Sandstone, the three subdivisions of the Carboniferous
Limestone series, and to a small extent the Coal Measures, and are
confined to the north part of the island. They appear on the east coast
between the Fallen Rocks and the Cock of Arran, where they form a strip
about a quarter of a mile broad, bounded on the west by a fault. Here
there is an ascending sequence from the Calciferous Sandstone, through
the Carboniferous Limestone with thin coals formerly worked, to the Coal
Measures, the strata being inclined at high angles to the north. On the
south side of a well-marked anticline in the Upper Old Red Sandstone at
North Sannox, the Carboniferous strata reappear on the coast with a
south dip showing a similar ascending sequence for about half a mile.
The lower limestones are well seen at Corrie, but the thin coals are not
there represented. From Corrie they can be traced southwards and inland
to near the head of Ben Lister Glen. The small development of Upper
Carboniferous strata, visible on the shore south of Corrie and in Ben
Lister Glen, consists of sandstones, red and mottled clays and purple
shales, which yield plant-remains of Upper Carboniferous facies. These
may represent partly the Millstone Grit and partly the Coal Measures.
Contemporaneous volcanic rocks, belonging to three stages of the
Carboniferous formation, occur in Arran. The lowest group is on the
horizon of the Calciferous Sandstone series, being visible at Corrie
where it underlies the Corrie limestone, and is traceable southwards
beyond Brodick. The second is represented by a thin lava, associated
with the Upper Limestone group of the Carboniferous Limestone series,
and the highest is found in Ben Lister Glen intercalated with the Upper
Carboniferous strata, and may be the equivalent of the volcanic series
which, in Ayrshire, occupies the position of the Millstone Grit. The
Triassic rocks are arranged in two groups, a lower, composed of
conglomerates and sandstones, and an upper one consisting of red and
mottled shales and marls with thin sandstones and nodular limestones. In
the extreme north at the Cock of Arran, there is a small development of
these beds; they also occupy the whole of the east coast south of
Corrie, and they spread over the south part of the island south of a
line between Brodick Bay and Machrie Bay on the west. At Corrie and the
Cock of Arran they rest on Upper Carboniferous strata; in Ben Lister
Glen, on the lower limestone group of the Carboniferous Limestone
series; and on the west coast they repose on the Old Red Sandstone.
There is, therefore, a clear discordance between the Trias and all older
strata in Arran. The former extension of Rhaetic, Liassic and Cretaceous
formations in the island is indicated by the presence of fragments of
these strata in a large volcanic vent on the plateau, on the south side
of the road leading from Brodick to Shiskine. The fossils from the
Rhaetic beds belong to the _Avicula contorta_ zone, those from the Lias
to the _Ammonites angulatus_ zone, while the blocks of limestone with
chert contain _Inoceramus_, Cretaceous foraminifera and other organisms.
The materials yielding these fossils are embedded in a course volcanic
agglomerate which gives rise to crags and is pierced by acid and basic
igneous rocks. One of the striking features in the geology of Arran is
the remarkable series of intrusive igneous rocks of Tertiary age which
occupy nearly one-half of the area and form the wildest and grandest
scenery in the island. Of these the most important is the great oval
mass of granite in the North, composed of two varieties; one,
coarse-grained and older, forms the outside rim, while the fine-grained
and newer type occurs in the interior. Another granite area appears on
the south side of the road between Brodick and Shiskine, where it is
associated with granophyre and quartz-diorite and traverses the volcanic
vent of post-Cretaceous or Tertiary age already described. In the south
of the island there are sills and dykes of felsite, quartz-porphyry,
rhyolite, trachyte and pitchstone. The felsite sheets are well
represented in Holy Island. It is worthy of note that the dykes and
sheets of felsite are seldom pierced by the basalt dykes and are
probably about the most recent of the intrusive rocks. The best example
of the basic sills forms the Clauchland Hills and runs out to sea at
Clauchland Point. Finally the basic dykes of dolerite, basalt and
augite-andesite are abundant and traverse the various sedimentary
formations and the granite.

The chief crops are oats and potatoes. Cattle and sheep are raised in
considerable numbers. The game, which is abundant, consisting of
blackcock and grouse, is strictly preserved. A few red deer still occur
in the wilder hilly district. The fisheries are of some value. Loch
Ranza being an important station.

Standing stones, cairns and other memorials of a remote antiquity occur
near Tormore, on Machrie Bay, Lamlash, and other places. The Norse
raiders found a home in Arran for a long period until the defeat of
Haakon V. at Largs (1263) compelled them to retire. The chief name in
the island's history is that of Robert Bruce, who found shelter in the
King's Caves on the western coast. One was reputed to be his kitchen,
another his cellar, a third his stable, while the hill above was styled
the King's Hill. From a point still known as King's Cross he crossed
over to Carrick, in answer to the signal which warned him that the
moment for the supreme effort for his country was come. In Glen Cloy the
ruins of a fort bear the name of Bruce's Castle, in which his men lay
concealed, and on the southern arm of Loch Ranza stands a picturesque
ruined castle which is said to have been his hunting-seat. Kildonan
Castle, near the south-easternmost point, is a fine ruin of the 14th
century, once a royal stronghold. The island gave the title of earl to
Thomas Boyd, who married the elder sister of James III., a step so
unpopular with his peers that he had to fly the country, and the title
soon afterwards passed to the Hamiltons. Brodick Castle, the ancestral
seat of the dukes of Hamilton, is a splendid mansion on the northern
shore of Brodick Bay.

Brodick is the chief village in Arran, but most of the dwelling-houses
have been built at Invercloy, close to the pier. Three m. south (by
road) is Lamlash, on a fine bay so completely sheltered by Holy Island
as to form an excellent harbour for ships of all sizes. Four m. to the
north lies the village of Corrie which takes its name from a rugged
hollow in the hill of Am Binnein (2172 ft.) which overshadows it. Daniel
Macmillan (1813-1857), the founder of the publishing firm of Macmillan &
Co., was a native of Corrie.

About a mile and a half east of Lamlash village lies Holy Island, which
forms a natural breakwater to the bay. It is 1¾ m. long, nearly ¾ m.
wide, and its finely-marked basaltic cone rises to a height of 1030 ft.
The island takes its name from the fact that St Molios, a disciple of St
Columba, founded a church near the north-western point. In the saint's
cave on the shore may be seen the rocky shelf on which he made his bed,
but his remains were interred in the hamlet of Clachan, some 2 m. from
Blackwaterfoot. Off the south-eastern coast, ¾ m. from Port Dearg, lies
the pear-shaped isle of Pladda, which serves as the telegraph station
from which the arrival of vessels in the Clyde is notified to Glasgow
and Greenock.




ARRANT (a variant of "errant," from Lat. _errare_, to wander), a word at
first used in its original meaning of wandering, as in "knight-errant,"
thus an arrant or itinerant preacher, an arrant thief, one outlawed and
wandering at large; the meaning easily passed to that of self-declared,
notorious, and by the middle of the 16th century was confined, as an
intensive adjective, to words of opprobrium and abuse, an arrant coward
meaning thus a self-declared, downright coward.




ARRAS, a city of northern France, chief town of the department of
Pas-de-Calais, 38 m. N.N.E. of Amiens on the Northern railway between
that city and Lille. Pop (1906) 20,738. Arras is situated in a fertile
plain on the right and southern bank of the Scarpe, at its junction with
the Crinchon which skirts the town on the south and east. Of the
fortifications erected by Vauban in the 17th century, only a gateway and
the partially dismantled citadel, nicknamed _la Belle Inutile_, are
left. The most interesting quarter lies in the east of the town, where
the lofty houses which border the spacious squares known as the Grande
and the Petite Place are in the Flemish style. They are built with their
upper storeys projecting over the footway and supported on columns so as
to form arcades; beneath these are deep cellars extending under the
squares themselves. The celebrated hôtel de ville of the 16th century
overlooks the Petite Place; its belfry, which contains a fine peal of
bells, rises to a height of 240 ft. The decoration is in the richest
Gothic style, and is especially admirable in the case of the windows. Of
the numerous ecclesiastical buildings the cathedral, a church of the
18th century possessing some good pictures, is the most important. It
occupies the site of the church of the abbey of St Vaast, the buildings
of which adjoin it and contain the bishop's palace, the ecclesiastical
seminary, a museum of antiquities, paintings and sculptures, and a rich
library.

Arras is the seat of a prefect and of a bishop. It has tribunals of
first instance and of commerce, a chamber of commerce, a branch of the
Bank of France, a communal college, training colleges, and a school of
military engineering. Its industrial establishments include oil-works,
dye-works and breweries, and manufactories of hosiery, railings and
other iron-work, and of oil-cake. For the tapestry manufacture formerly
flourishing at Arras see TAPESTRY. It has a very important market for
cereals and oleaginous grains. The trade of the town is facilitated by
the canalization of the Scarpe, the basin of which forms the port.

Before the opening of the Christian era Arras was known as _Nemetacum_,
or _Nemetocenna_, and was the chief town of the Atrebates, from which
the word Arras is derived. Passing under the rule of the Romans, it
became a place of some importance, and traces of the Roman occupation
have been found. In 407 it was destroyed by the Vandals, and having been
partially rebuilt, came into the hands of the Franks. Christianity was
introduced by St Vedast (Vaast), who founded a bishopric at Arras about
500. This was soon transferred to Cambrai, but brought back to its
original seat about 1100. As the chief town of the province of Artois,
Arras passed to Baldwin I., count of Flanders, in 863, and about 880 was
ravaged by the Normans. During this troubled period it retained some
vestiges of its former trade, and the woollen manufacture was
established here at an early date. Early in the 12th century a commune
was established here, but the earliest known charter only dates from
about 1180; owing to the importance of Arras, this soon became a model
for many neighbouring communes. At this time the city appears to have
been divided into two parts, one dependent upon the bishop, and the
other upon the count. When Philip Augustus, king of France, married
Isabella, niece of Philip, count of Flanders, Arras came under the rule
of the French king, who confirmed its privileges in 1194. As part of
Artois it came in 1237 to Robert, son of Louis VIII., king of France,
and in 1384 to Philip the Bold, duke of Burgundy, who promised to
respect its privileges. Anxious to recover the city for France, Louis
XI. placed a garrison therein after the death of Charles the Bold, duke
of Burgundy, in 1477. This was driven out by the inhabitants, and Louis
then stormed Arras, razed the walls, deported the citizens, whose places
were taken by Frenchmen, and changed the name to _Franchise_. The
successor of Louis, Charles VIII., restored the city to its former name
and position, and as part of the inheritance of Mary, daughter and
heiress of Charles the Bold, it was contended for by the French king,
and his rival, the German king, Maximilian I. The peace of Senlis in
1493 gave Arras to Maximilian, and in spite of attacks by the French, it
remained under the rule of the Habsburgs until 1640. Taken in this year
by the French, this capture was ratified by the peace of the Pyrenees in
1659, and henceforward it remained part of France. It suffered severely
during the French Revolution, especially from Joseph Lebon, who, like
the brothers Maximilien and Augustin Robespierre, was a native of the
town. Owing to its position and importance, Arras has been the scene of
various treaties. In 1414 the peace between the Armagnacs and the
Burgundians was made here, and in 1435 a congress met here to make peace
between the English and their Burgundian allies on the one side, and the
French on the other, and after the English representatives had
withdrawn, a treaty was signed on the 20th of September between France
and Burgundy. In 1482 Louis XI. made a treaty here with the estates and
towns of Flanders about the inheritance of Mary of Burgundy, wife of the
German king Maximilian I.

  See E. Lecesne, _Histoire d'Arras jusqu'en 1789_ (Arras, 1880); _Arras
  sous la Révolution_ (Arras, 1882-1883).




ARRAY (from the O. Fr. _areyer_, Med. Lat. _arredare_, to get ready), an
orderly arrangement, particularly the drawing up of an army in position
of battle. From the 13th century onwards in England "Commissions of
Array" issued from the king for the levy of military forces (see
MILITIA). In English law the term is used for the setting in order, name
by name, of the panel of a jury, which may be challenged as a whole, "to
the array," or individually, "to the polls."




ARRENOTOKOUS, ARRENOTOKY (from Gr. [Greek: arraen], male, and [Greek:
tokos] from [Greek: tiktein], to beget), biological terms proposed by
Leuckart and Eduard von Siebold to denote those parthenogenetic females
which produce male young, while "thelytokous" and "thelytoky" would
denote their producing female young.




ARREST (Fr. _arrester, arrêter_, to stop or stay), the restraint of a
man's person, for the purpose of compelling him to be obedient to the
law. It is defined to be the execution of the command of some court of
record or officer of justice.

Arrests in England are either in civil or in criminal cases.

I. _In Civil Cases._--The arrest must be by virtue of a precept or order
out of some court, and must be effected by corporal seizing or touching
the defendant's body, or as directed by the writ, _capias et attachias_,
take and catch hold of. And if the defendant make his escape it is a
_rescous_, or rescue, and attachment may be had against him, and the
bailiff may then justify the breaking open of the house in which he is,
to carry him away.

_Arrests on mesne process_ (see PROCESS), before judgment obtained, were
abolished by the Debtors Act 1869, s. 6; an exception, however, is made
in cases in which the plaintiff proves, at any time before final
judgment, by evidence on oath to the satisfaction of a judge of one of
the superior courts, that he has a good cause of action to the amount of
£50, that the defendant is about to quit the country, and that his
absence will materially prejudice the plaintiff in prosecuting his
action. In such cases an order for arrest may be obtained till security
to the amount of the claim be found.

Formerly a judgment creditor might arrest his debtor under a writ of
_capias ad satisfaciendum_, but since 1869 imprisonment for debt has
been abolished in England, except in certain cases, and in these the
period of detention must not exceed one year.

The following persons are privileged from arrest, viz., 1st, members of
the royal family and the ordinary servants of the king or queen regnant,
chaplains, lords of the bedchamber, &c. This privilege does not extend
to servants of a consort queen or dowager. 2nd, peers of the realm,
peeresses by birth, creation or marriage, Scottish and Irish peers and
peeresses. 3rd, members of the House of Commons during the session of
parliament, and for a convenient time (forty days) before and after it.
Members of Convocation appear to have the same privilege. 4th, foreign
ambassadors and their "domestics and domestic servants." Temporary
privilege from arrest in civil process is enjoyed by barristers
travelling on circuit, by parties, witnesses or attorneys connected with
a cause, and by clergymen whilst performing divine service.

The arrest of any privileged person is irregular _ab initio_, and the
party may be discharged on motion. The only exception is as to
indictable crimes, such as treason, felony and breach of the peace.

There are no longer any places where persons are privileged from arrest,
such as the Mint, Savoy, Whitefriars, &c., on the ground of their being
ancient palaces.

Except in cases of treason, felony or breach of the peace, an arrest
cannot be made on a Sunday, and if made it is void (Sunday Observance
Act 1677); but it may be made in the night as well as in the day.

II. _In Criminal Cases._--All persons whatsoever are, without
distinction, equally liable to this arrest, and any man may arrest
without warrant or precept, and outer doors may be broken open for that
purpose. The arrest may be made,--1st, by warrant; 2nd, by an officer
without warrant; 3rd, by a private person without warrant; or, 4th, by a
hue and cry.

1. Warrants are ordinarily granted by justices of the peace on
information or complaint in writing and upon oath, and they must be
indorsed when it is intended they should be executed in another county
by a magistrate of that county (see Indictable Offences Act 1848). A
warrant issued by a metropolitan police magistrate can be executed
anywhere by a metropolitan police officer. Warrants are also granted in
cases of treason or other offence affecting the government by the privy
council, or one of the secretaries of state, and also by the chief or
other justice of the court of king's bench (_bench-warrant_) in cases of
felony, misdemeanour or indictment found, or criminal information
granted in that court. Every warrant ought to specify the offence
charged, the authority under which the arrest is to be made, the person
who is to execute it and the person who is to be arrested. A warrant
remains in force till executed or discharged by order of a court. An
officer may break open doors in order to execute a warrant in cases of
treason, felony or indictable offences, provided that, on demand,
admittance cannot otherwise be obtained. (See WARRANT.)

2. The officers who may arrest without warrant are,--justices of the
peace, for felony or breach of the peace committed in their presence;
the sheriff and the coroner in their county, for felony; constables, for
treason, felony or breach of the peace committed in their view,--and
within the metropolitan police district they have even larger powers
(Metropolitan Police Acts 1829-1895).

3. A private person is bound to arrest for a felony committed in his
presence, under penalty of fine and imprisonment. By the Prevention of
Offences Act 1851, a private person is allowed to arrest any one whom he
finds committing an indictable offence by night, and under the Malicious
Damage Act 1861, any person committing an offence against that act may
be arrested without warrant by the owner of the property damaged, or his
servants, or persons authorized by him. So, too, by the Coinage Offences
Act 1861. s. 31, any person may arrest any one whom he shall find
committing any offence relating to the coin, or other offence against
that act.

A person arrested without warrant must not be detained in private
custody but must be taken with all convenient speed to a police station
or justice and there charged (Summary Jurisdiction Act 1879).

4. The arrest by hue and cry is where officers and private persons are
concerned in _pursuing_ felons, or such as have dangerously wounded
others. By the Fugitive Offenders Act 1881, provision was made for the
arrest in the United Kingdom of persons committing treason, and felony
in any of the British colonies and vice versa; as to the arrest of
fugitives in foreign countries see EXTRADITION.

The remedy for a wrongful arrest is by an action for false imprisonment.

In Scotland the law of arrest in criminal procedure has a general
constitutional analogy with that of England, though the practice differs
with the varying character of the judicatories. Colloquially the word
arrest is used in compulsory procedure for the recovery of debt; but the
technical term applicable in that department is _caption_, and the law
on the subject is generically different from that of England. There
never was a practice in Scottish law corresponding with the English
arrest in mesne process; but by old custom a warrant for caption could
be obtained where a creditor made oath that he had reason to believe his
debtor meditated flight from the country, and the writ so issued is
called a warrant against a person _in meditatione fugae_. Imprisonment
of old followed on ecclesiastical cursing, and by fiction of law in
later times it was not the creditor's remedy, but the punishment of a
refractory person denounced rebel for disobedience to the injunctions of
the law requiring fulfilment of his obligation. The system was reformed
and stripped of its cumbrous fictions by an act of the year 1837.
Although the proceedings against the person could only follow on
completed process, yet, by a peculiarity of the Scottish law, documents
executed with certain formalities, and by special statute bills and
promissory notes, can be registered in the records of a court for
execution against the person as if they were judgments of the court.

The general principles as to the law of arrest in most European
countries correspond more or less exactly to those prevailing in
England.

An _arrest of a ship_, which is the method of enforcing the admiralty
process _in rem_, founded either on a maritime lien or on a claim
against the ship, is dealt with under ADMIRALTY JURISDICTION.

See also article ATTACHMENT.

_Arrest of Judgment_ is the assigning just reason why judgment should
not pass, notwithstanding verdict given, either in civil or in criminal
cases, and from intrinsic causes arising on the face of the record.

_United States._--The law of arrest assimilates to that existing in
England. Actual manual touching is not necessary (_Pike_ v. _Hanson_, 9
N.H. 491; _Hill_ v. _Taylor_, 50 Mich. 549); words of arrest by the
officer, not protested against and no resistance offered, are sufficient
(_Emery_ v. _Chesley_, 18 N.H. 198; _Goodell_ v. _Tower_, 1904, 58 Am.
Rep. 790). Words of arrest, staying over night at prisoner's house,
going with him before the magistrate next day constitute arrest
(_Courtery_ v. _Dozier_, 20 Ga. 369). Restraining a person in his own
house is arrest.

In civil cases in most of the states arrest for debt is abolished,
except in cases of fraud or wilful injury to persons or property by
constitutional provision or by statute. One arrested under process of a
federal court cannot be arrested under that of a state court for the
same cause. There is no provision in the United States constitution as
to imprisonment for debt, but congress has enacted (in Rev. Stat., s.
990) that all the provisions of the law of any state applicable to such
imprisonment shall apply to the process of federal courts in that state.
A woman can be arrested in New York for wilful injury to person,
character or property, and in certain other cases (Code, s. 553). The
president, federal officials, governors of states, members of congress
and of state legislatures (during the session), marines, soldiers and
sailors on duty, voters while going to and from the polls, judges, court
officials (1904, 100 N.W. 591), coroners and jurors while attending upon
their public duties, lawyers, parties and witnesses while going to,
attending or returning from court, and generally married women without
separate property, are exempt from arrest.

In criminal cases a bench-warrant in New York may be served in any
county without being backed by a magistrate (Code Crim. Proc., s. 304).
In Nebraska one found violating the law may be arrested and detained
until a legal warrant can be issued (Crim. Code, s. 283). A bail may
lawfully recapture his principal (1905) 121 Georgia Rep. 594. Foreign
ambassadors and ministers and their servants are exempt from arrest.
Exemption from arrest is a privilege, not of the court, as in England,
but of the person, and can be waived (_Petrie_ v. _Fitzgerald_, 1 Daly
401).




ARRESTMENT, in Scots law, the process by which a creditor detains the
goods or effects of his debtor in the hands of third parties till the
debt due to him shall be paid. It is divided into two kinds: (1)
Arrestment in security, used when proceedings are commencing, or in
other circumstances where a claim may become, but is not yet,
enforceable; and (2) Arrestment in execution, following on the decree of
a court, or on a registered document, under a clause or statutory power
of registration, according to the custom of Scotland. By the process of
arrestment the property covered is merely retained in place; to realize
it for the satisfaction of the creditor's claim a further proceeding
called "furthcoming" is necessary. By old practice, alimentary funds,
i.e. those necessary for subsistence, were not liable to arrestment. By
the Wages Arrestment Limitation (Scotland) Act 1870, the wages of all
labourers, farm-servants, manufacturers, artificers and work-people are
not arrestable except (1) in so far as they exceed 20s. per week; but
the expense of the arrestment is not to be charged against the debtor
unless the sum recovered exceed the amount of the said expense; or (2)
under decrees for alimentary allowances and payments, or for rates and
taxes imposed by law.




ARRETIUM (mod. _Arezzo_), an ancient city of Etruria, in the upper
valley of the Arno, situated on the Via Cassia, 50 m. S.E. of Florentia.
The site of the original city is not quite certain; some writers place
it on the isolated hill called Poggio di S. Cornelio, 2½ m. to the S.E.,
where remains of a fortified _enceinte_ still exist (cf. F. Noack in
_Römische Mitteilungen_, 1897, p. 186); while others maintain, and
probably rightly, that it occupied the hill at the summit of the modern
town, where the medieval citadel (_fortezza_) was erected, and which was
enclosed by an ancient wall. Numerous Etruscan tombs have been
discovered within the lower portion of the area of the modern town,
which appears to correspond in site with the Roman (_C.I.L._ xi. p.
1082; G. Gamurrini in _Notizie degli scavi_, 1883, 262; 1887, 437).
Vitruvius (ii. 8. 9) and Pliny (_Nat. Hist._ xxxv. 173) speak of the
strength of its walls of bricks, but these have naturally disappeared.
Many remains of Roman buildings have been discovered within the modern
town, and the amphitheatre is still visible in the southern angle.
Arretium appears as one of the cities which aided the Tarquins after
their expulsion. It was an opponent of Rome at the end of the 4th and
beginning of the 3rd century B.C., but soon sought for help against the
attacks of the Gauls, against whom it was almost a frontier fortress. It
was an important Roman base during the Hannibalic wars (though at one
time it threatened defection--Livy xxvii. 21-24), and in 205 B.C. was
able to furnish Scipio with a considerable quantity of arms and
provisions (Livy xxviii. 45). In 187 B.C. the high road was extended as
far as Bononia. Arretium took the part of Marius against Sulla, and the
latter settled some of his veterans there as colonists. Caesar, or
Octavian, added others, so that there are three classes, _Arretini
veteres, Fidentiores_, and _Iulienses_. A considerable contingent from
Arretium joined Catiline and in 49 B.C. Caesar occupied it. C.
Maecenas[1] was perhaps a native of Arretium. Its fertility was famous
in ancient times, and still more the red pottery made of the local clay,
with its imitation of chased silver. The reliefs upon it are sometimes
of considerable beauty, and large quantities of it, and the sites of
several of the kilns, have been discovered in and near Arretium. It was
also considerably exported. See _Corp. Inscrip. Lat._ xi. (Berlin, 1901)
p. 1081, and _Notizie degli scavi, passim_ (especially, 1884, 369, for
the discovery of a fine group of the moulds from which these vases were
made). The museum contains a very fine collection of these and a good
collection of medieval majolica.     (T. As.)


FOOTNOTE:

  [1] The name Cilnius was apparently never borne by Maecenas himself,
    though he is so described, e.g. by Tacitus, _Ann_. vi. II, cf.
    Macrob. ii. 4, 12. The Cilnii with whom Maecenas was connected were a
    noble Etruscan family.




ARRHENIUS, SVANTE AUGUST (1859-   ), Swedish physicist and chemist, was
born on the 19th of February 1859, at Schloss Wijk, near Upsala. He
studied at Upsala from 1876 to 1881 and at Stockholm from 1881 to 1884,
then returning to Upsala as privat-docent in physical chemistry. He
spent two years from 1886 to 1888 in travelling, and visited Riga
Polytechnic and the universities of Würzburg, Graz, Amsterdam and
Leipzig. In 1891 he was appointed lecturer in physics at Stockholm and
four years later became full professor. Arrhenius is specially
associated with the development of the theory of electrolytic
dissociation, and his great paper on the subject, _Recherches sur la
conductibilité galvanique des électrolytes_--(1) _conductibilité
galvanique des solutions aqueuses extrêmement diluées_, (2) _théorie
chimique des électrolytes_, was presented to the Stockholm Academy of
Sciences in 1883. He was subsequently continuously engaged in extending
the applications of the doctrine of electrolytic conduction in relation
not only to the problems of chemical action but also, on the supposition
that in certain conditions the air conducts electrolytically, to the
phenomena of atmospheric electricity. In 1900 he published a _Lärobok i
teoretik elektrokemi_, which was translated into German and English, and
his _Lehrbuch der kosmischen Physik_ appeared in 1903. In 1904 he
delivered at the university of California a course of lectures, the
object of which was to illustrate the application of the methods of
physical chemistry to the study of the theory of toxins and antitoxins,
and which were published in 1907 under the title _Immunochemistry_. In
his _Worlds in the Making_ (1908), an English translation of _Das Werden
der Welten_ (1907), he combated the generally accepted doctrine that the
universe is tending to what Clausius termed _Wärmetod_ through
exhaustion of all sources of heat and motion, and suggested that by
virtue of a mechanism which maintains its available energy it is
self-renovating, energy being "degraded" in bodies which are in the
solar state, but "elevated" or raised to a higher level in bodies which
are in the nebular state. He further put forward the conception that
life is universally diffused, constantly emitted from all habitable
worlds in the form of spores which traverse space for years or ages, the
majority being ultimately destroyed by the heat of some blazing star,
but some few finding a resting-place on bodies which have reached the
habitable stage.




ARRIA, in Roman history, the heroic wife of Caecina Paetus. When her
husband was implicated in the conspiracy of Scribonianus against the
emperor Claudius (A.D. 42), and condemned to death, she resolved not to
survive him. She accordingly stabbed herself with a dagger, which she
then handed to him with the words, "Paetus, it does not hurt" (_Paete,
non dolet_; see Pliny, _Epp._ iii. 16; Martial i. 14; Dio Cassius lx.
16). Her daughter, also called Arria, was the wife of Thrasea Paetus.
When he was condemned to death by Nero, she would have imitated her
mother's example, but was dissuaded by her husband, who entreated her to
live for the sake of their children. She was sent into banishment
(Tacitus, _Annals_, xvi. 34).




ARRIAN (FLAVIUS ARRIANUS), of Nicomedia in Bithynia, Greek historian and
philosopher, was born about A.D. 96, and lived during the reigns of
Hadrian, Antoninus Pius and Marcus Aurelius. In recognition of his
abilities, he received the citizenship of both Athens and Rome. He was
greatly esteemed by Hadrian, who appointed him governor (_legatus_) of
Cappadocia (131-137), in which capacity he distinguished himself in a
campaign against the Alani. This is the only instance before the 3rd
century in which a first-rate Roman military command was given to a
Greek. Arrian spent a considerable portion of his time at Athens, where
he was archon 147-148. With his retirement or recall from Cappadocia his
official career came to an end. In his declining years, he retired to
his native place, where he devoted himself to literary work. He died
about 180. His biography, by Dio Cassius, is lost.

When young, Arrian was the pupil and friend of Epictetus, who had
probably withdrawn to Nicopolis, when Domitian expelled all philosophers
from Rome. He took verbatim notes of his teacher's lectures, which he
subsequently published under the title of _The Dissertations_ ([Greek:
Diatribai]), in eight books, of which the first four are extant and
constitute the chief authority for Stoic ethics, and _The Encheiridion_
(i.e. Manual) _of Epictetus_, a handbook of moral philosophy, for many
years a favourite instruction book with both Christians and pagans. It
was adapted for Christian use by St Nilus of Constantinople (5th
century), and Simplicius (about 550) wrote a commentary on it which we
still possess.

The most important of Arrian's original works is his _Anabasis of
Alexander_, in seven books, containing the history of Alexander the
Great from his accession to his death. Arrian's chief authorities were,
as he tells us, Aristobulus of Cassandreia and Ptolemy, son of Lagus
(afterwards king of Egypt), who both accompanied Alexander on his
campaigns. In spite of a too indulgent view of his hero's defects, and
some over-credulity, Arrian's is the most complete and trustworthy
account of Alexander that we possess.

Other extant works of Arrian are: _Indica_, a description of India in
the Ionic dialect, including the voyage of Nearchus, intended as a
supplement to the _Anabasis; Acies Contra Alanos_, a fragment of
importance for the knowledge of Roman military affairs; _Periplus of the
Euxine_, an official account written (131) for the emperor Hadrian;
_Tactica_, attributed by some to Aelianus, who wrote in the reign of
Trajan; _Cynegeticus_, a treatise on the chase, supplementing Xenophon's
work on the same subject; the _Periplus of the Erythraean Sea_,
attributed to him, is by a later compiler. Amongst his lost works may be
mentioned: [Greek: Ta mer Alexandron], a history of the period
succeeding Alexander, of which an epitome is preserved in Photius;
histories of Bithynia, the Alani and the Parthian wars under Trajan; the
lives of Timoleon of Syracuse, Dion of Syracuse and a famous brigand
named Timoleon. Arrian's style is simple, lucid and manly; but his
language, though pure, presents some peculiarities. He was called
"Xenophon the younger" from his imitation of that writer, and he even
speaks of himself as Xenophon.

  Complete works ed. F. Dubner (1846); _Anabasis_, C. Abicht (1889);
  with notes, C.W. Kniger (1835), C. Sintenis (1867) C. Abicht (1875);
  _Scripta Minora_, R. Hercher and A. Eberhard (1885), A.J. Roos, i.,
  containing the _Anabasis_ (Teubner series, 1907). English translations
  _Anabasis_, Rooke (1812), _Anabasis_ and _Indica_, E.J. Chinnock
  (1893); _Voyage of Nearchus_ with the spurious _Periplus_, W. Vincent
  (1807), J.W. M'Crindle (Calcutta, 1879), _Periplus of the Euxine_, W.
  Falconer (1805), Cynegettcus [W. Dansey] (1831). See also E. Bolla,
  _Arriano di Nicomedia_ (1890); E. Schwartz in Pauly-Wissowa's
  _Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft_ (1896), H.F.
  Pelham, "Arrian as Legate of Cappadocia," in _English Historical
  Review_, October 1896; article GREECE: _History, ancient_,
  "Authorities."




ARRIS (Fr. _areste_, or _arête_), in architecture, the sharp edge or
angle in which two sides or surfaces meet.




ARRONDISSEMENT (from _arrondir_, to make round), an administrative
subdivision of a department in France. Dating nominally from 1800, the
arrondissement was really a re-creation of the "district" of 1790. It
comprises within itself the canton and the commune. It differs from the
department and from the commune in being merely an administrative
division and not a complete legal personality with power to acquire and
possess. The purposes for which it exists are, again, unlike those of
the department and the commune, comparatively limited. It is the
electoral district for the chamber of deputies, each arrondissement
returning one member; if the population is in excess of 100,000 it is
divided into two or more constituencies. It is also a judicial district
having a court of first instance. It is under the control of a
sub-prefect. There are 362 arrondissements in the 87 departments. Each
arrondissement has a council, with as many members as there are cantons,
whose function is to subdivide among the communes their _quota_ of the
direct taxes charged to the arrondissement by the general council of the
department. (See FRANCE) Somewhat different from the arrondissements of
the department are the arrondissements (20 in number) into which Paris
is divided. They bear a certain resemblance to the sub-municipalities
created in London by the London Government Act 1899, and each forms a
local administrative unit (see PARIS).

France is also subdivided, for purposes of defence, into five _maritime_
divisions, termed arrondissements. Instituted originally under the
Consulate, they were suppressed in 1815, but re-established again in
1826. They are under the direction of maritime prefects, who, by a
decree of 1875, must be vice-admirals in the navy.




ARROWROOT. A large proportion of the edible starches obtained from the
rhizomes or root-stocks of various plants are known in commerce under
the name of arrowroot. Properly the name should be restricted to the
starch yielded by two or three species of _Maranta_ (nat. ord.
Marantaceae), the chief of which is _M. arundinacea_; and when genuine
or West Indian arrowroot is spoken of, it is understood that this is the
variety meant. _Maranta arundinacea_ is probably a native of Guiana and
western Brazil, but it has long been cultivated in the West Indian
Islands, and has now spread to most tropical countries. The plant is a
herbaceous perennial with a creeping root-stock which gives off fleshy
cylindrical branches or tubers, covered with pale brown or white scales
and afterwards ringed with their scars. It is at the period when these
tubers are gorged with starch, immediately before the season of rest,
that it is ripe for use. In addition to about 25% of starch, the tubers
contain a proportion of woody tissue, vegetable albumen and various
salts. The arrowroot may be separated on a small scale in the same
manner as potato-starch is frequently prepared, that is, by peeling the
root and grating it in water, when the starch falls to the bottom. The
liquor is then drained off, and the starch purified by repeated washings
till it is ready for drying. On a large scale the manufacture of
arrowroot is conducted with specially arranged machinery. The rhizomes
when dug up are washed free of earthy impurities and afterwards skinned.
Subsequently, according to Pereira's _Materia Medica_, "the carefully
skinned tubers are washed, then ground in a mill, and the pulp washed in
tinned-copper cylindrical washing-machines. The fecula (dim. of Lat.
_faex_, dregs, or sediment) is subsequently dried in drying-houses. In
order to obtain the fecula free from impurity, pure water must be used,
and great care and attention paid in every step of the process. The
skinning or peeling of the tubers must be performed with great nicety,
as the cuticle contains a resinous matter which imparts colour and a
disagreeable flavour to the starch. German-silver palettes are used for
skinning the deposited fecula, and shovels of the same metal for packing
the dried fecula. The drying is effected in pans, covered with white
gauze to exclude dust and insects."

[Illustration: FIG. 1. FIG. 2.

Arrowroot Plant (Maranta arundinacea).--Fig. 1, stem, leaves and
flowers; fig. 2, tubers.]

Arrowroot is distinguished by the granules agglomerating into small
balls, by slightly crepitating when rubbed between the fingers, and by
yielding with boiling water a fine, transparent, inodorous and
pleasant-tasting jelly. In microscopic structure the granules present an
ovoid form, marked with concentric lines very similar to potato-starch,
but readily distinguished by having a "hilum" marking at the thick
extremity of the granule, while in potato-starch the same appearance
occurs at the thin end (compare figs. 3 and 4 below). In addition to the
West Indian supplies, arrowroot is found in the commerce of Brazil, the
East Indies, Australia, Cape Colony and Natal.

[Illustration: FIG. 3. FIG. 4. FIG. 5. FIG. 6. Starch Granules
magnified.

  Fig. 3. Potato.
  Fig. 4. Arrowroot.
  Fig. 5. Tous-les-mois.
  Fig. 6. Manihot.]

The name "arrowroot" is derived from the use by the Mexican Indians of
the juice of the fresh root as an application to wounds produced by
poisoned arrows. Sir Hans Sloane refers to it in his _Catalogue of
Jamaica Plants_ (1696), and it is said to have been introduced into
England by William Houston about 1732. It is grown as a stove-plant in
botanic gardens. The slender, much-branched stem is 5 or 6 ft. high, and
bears numerous leaves with long, narrow sheaths and large spreading
ovate blades, and a few short-stalked white flowers.

_Tous-les-mois_, or Tulema arrowroot, also from the West Indies, is
obtained from several species of _Canna_, a genus allied to _Maranta_,
and cultivated in the same manner. The granules of _tous-les-mois_ are
readily distinguishable by their very large size (fig. 5). East Indian
arrowroot is obtained from the root-stocks of several species of the
genus _Curcuma_ (nat. ord. Zingiberaceae), chiefly _C. angustifolia_, a
native of central India. Brazilian arrowroot is the starch of the
cassava plant, a species of Manihot (fig. 6), which when agglutinated on
hot plates forms the tapioca of commerce. The cassava is cultivated in
the East Indian Archipelago as well as in South America. _Tocca_, or
_Otaheite_ arrowroot, is the produce of _Tacca pinnatifida_, the pia
plant of the South Sea Islands. Portland arrowroot was formerly prepared
on the Isle of Portland from the tubers of the common cuckoo-pint, _Arum
maculatum_. Various other species of arum yield valuable food-starches
in hot countries. Under the name of British arrowroot the farina of
potatoes is sometimes sold, and the French excel in the preparation of
imitations of the more costly starches from this source. The chief use,
however, of potato-farina as an edible starch is for adulterating other
and more costly preparations. This falsification can readily be detected
by microscopic examination, and the accompanying drawings exhibit the
appearance under the microscope of the principal starches we have
described. Although these starches agree in chemical composition, their
value as articles of diet varies considerably, owing to different
degrees of digestibility and pleasantness of taste. Arrowroot contains
about 82% of starch, and about 1% of proteid and mineral matter. Farina,
or British arrowroot, at about one-twelfth the price, is just as useful
and pleasant a food.




ARROWSMITH, the name of an English family of geographers. The first of
them, Aaron Arrowsmith (1750-1823), migrated to London from Winston in
Durham when about twenty years of age, and was employed by John Gary,
the engraver. In 1790 he made himself famous by his large chart of the
world on Mercator's projection. Four years later he published another
large map of the world on the globular projection, with a companion
volume of explanation. The maps of North America (1796) and Scotland
(1807) are the most celebrated of his many later productions. He left
two sons, Aaron and Samuel, the elder of whom was the compiler of the
_Eton Comparative Atlas_, of a Biblical atlas, and of various manuals of
geography. They carried on the business in company with John Arrowsmith
(1790-1873), nephew of the elder Aaron. In 1834 John published his
_London Atlas_, the best set of maps then in existence. He followed up
the atlas with a long series of elaborate and carefully executed maps,
those of Australia, America, Africa and India being especially valuable.
In 1863 he received the gold medal of the Royal Geographical Society, of
which body he was one of the founders.




ARROYO (O. Sp. _arrogio_, Lat. _arrogium_, a rivulet or stream), the
channel of a stream cut in loose earth, found often at the head of a
gully, where the water flows only at certain seasons of the year.




ARSACES, a Persian name, which occurs on a Persian seal, where it is
written in cuneiform characters. The most famous Arsaces was the chief
of the Parni, one of the nomadic Scythian or Dahan tribes in the desert
east of the Caspian Sea. A later tradition, preserved by Arrian, derives
Arsaces I. and Tiridates from the Achaemenian king Artaxerxes II., but
this has evidently no historical value. Arsaces, seeking refuge before
the Bactrian king Diodotes, invaded Parthia, then a province of the
Seleucid empire, about 250 B.C. (Strabo xi. p. 515, cf. Arrian p. 1,
Müller, in Photius, _Cod._ 58, and Syncellus p. 284). After two years
(according to Arrian) he was killed, and his brother Tiridates, who
succeeded him and maintained himself for a short time in Parthia, during
the dissolution of the Seleucid empire by the attacks of Ptolemy III.
(247 ff.), was defeated and expelled by Seleucus II. (about 238). But
when this king was forced, by the rebellion of his brother, Antiochus
Hierax, to return to the west, Tiridates came back and defeated the
Macedonians (Strabo xi. pp. 513, 515; Justin xli. 4; Appian, _Syr._ 65;
Isidorus of Charax 11). He was the real founder of the Parthian empire,
which was of very limited extent until the final decay of the Seleucid
empire, occasioned by the Roman intrigues after the death of Antiochus
IV. Epiphanes (165 B.C.), enabled Mithradates I. and his successors to
conquer Media and Babylonia. Tiridates adopted the name of his brother
Arsaces, and after him all the other Parthian kings (who by the
historians are generally called by their proper names), amounting to the
number of about thirty, officially wear only the name Arsaces. With very
few exceptions only the name [Greek: ARSAKIS] (with various epithets)
occurs on the coins of the Parthian kings, and the obverse generally
shows the seated figure of the founder of the dynasty, holding in his
hand a strung bow. The Arsacidian empire was overthrown in A.D. 226 by
Ardashir (Artaxerxes), the founder of the Sassanid empire, whose
conquests began about A.D. 212. The name Arsaces of Persia is also borne
by some kings of Armenia, who were of Parthian origin. (See PERSIA and
PARTHIA.)     (Ed. M.)




ARS-AN-DER-MOSEL, a town of Germany, in the imperial province
Alsace-Lorraine, 5 m. S. of Metz on the railway to Novéant. It has a
handsome Roman Catholic church and extensive foundries. In the vicinity
are the remains of a Roman aqueduct, which formerly spanned the valley.
Pop. 5000.




ARSCHOT, PHILIPPE DE CROY, DUKE OF (1526-1595), governor-general of
Flanders, was born at Valenciennes, and inherited the estates of the
ancient and wealthy family of Croy. Becoming a soldier, he was made a
knight of the order of the Golden Fleece by Philip II., king of Spain,
and was afterwards employed in diplomatic work. He took part in the
troubles in the Netherlands, and in 1563 refused to join William the
Silent and others in their efforts to remove Cardinal Granvella from his
post. This attitude, together with Arschot's devotion to the Roman
Catholic Church, which he expressed by showing his delight at the
massacre of St Bartholomew, led Philip of Spain to regard him with still
greater favour, which, however, was withdrawn in consequence of
Arschot's ambiguous conduct when welcoming the new governor, Don John of
Austria, to the Netherlands in 1576. In spite, however, of his being
generally distrusted by the inhabitants of the Netherlands, he was
appointed governor of the citadel of Antwerp when the Spanish troops
withdrew in 1577. After a period of vacillation he deserted Don John
towards the end of that year. Jealous of the prince of Orange, he was
then the head of the party which induced the archduke Matthias
(afterwards emperor) to undertake the sovereignty of the Netherlands,
and soon afterwards was appointed governor of Flanders by the state
council. A strong party, including the burghers of Ghent, distrusted the
new governor; and Arschot, who was taken prisoner during a riot at
Ghent, was only released on promising to resign his office. He then
sought to regain the favour of Philip of Spain, and having been pardoned
by the king in 1580 again shared in the government of the Netherlands;
but he refused to serve under the count of Fuentes when he became
governor-general in 1594, and retired to Venice, where he died on the
11th of December 1595.

  See J.L. Motley, _The Rise of the Dutch Republic_.




ARSENAL, an establishment for the construction, repair, receipt, storage
and issue of warlike stores; details as to _matériel_ will be found
under AMMUNITION, ORDNANCE, &c. The word "arsenal" appears in various
forms in Romanic languages (from which it has been adopted into
Teutonic), i.e. Italian _arzanale_, Spanish _arsenal_, &c.; Italian also
has _arzana_ and _darsena_, and Spanish a longer form _atarazanal_. The
word is of Arabic origin, being a corruption of _daras-sina'ah_, house
of trade or manufacture, _dar_, house, _al_, the, and _sina'ah_, trade,
manufacture, _sana'a_, to make. Such guesses as _arx navalis_, naval
citadel, _arx senatus_ (i.e. of Venice, &c.), are now entirely rejected.

A first-class arsenal, which can renew the _matériel_ and equipment of a
large army, embraces a gun factory, carriage factory, laboratory and
small-arms ammunition factory, small-arms factory, harness, saddlery and
tent factories, and a powder factory; in addition it must possess great
store-houses. In a second-class arsenal the factories would be replaced
by workshops. The situation of an arsenal should be governed by
strategical considerations. If of the first class, it should be situated
at the base of operations and supply, secure from attack, not too near a
frontier, and placed so as to draw in readily the resources of the
country. The importance of a large arsenal is such that its defences
would be on the scale of those of a large fortress. The usual
subdivision of branches in a great arsenal is into A, Storekeeping; B,
Construction; C, Administration. Under A we should have the following
departments and stores:--Departments of issue and receipt, pattern room,
armoury department, ordnance or park, harness, saddlery and
accoutrements, camp equipment, tools and instruments, engineer store,
magazines, raw material store, timber yard, breaking-up store,
unserviceable store. Under B--Gun factory, carriage factory, laboratory,
small-arms factory, harness and tent factory, powder factory, &c. In a
second-class arsenal there would be workshops instead of these
factories. C--Under the head of administration would be classed the
chief director of the arsenal, officials military and civil,
non-commissioned officers and military artificers, civilian foremen,
workmen and labourers, with the clerks and writers necessary for the
office work of the establishments. In the manufacturing branches are
required skill, and efficient and economical work, both executive and
administrative; in the storekeeping part, good arrangement, great care,
thorough knowledge of all warlike stores, both in their active and
passive state, and scrupulous exactness in the custody, issue and
receipt of stores. For fuller details the reader is referred to papers
by Sir E. Collen, R.A., in vol. viii., and Lieut. C.E. Grover, R.E., in
vol. vi. _Proceedings of R. Artillery Institution_. In England the Royal
Arsenal, Woolwich, manufactures and stores the requirements of the army
and navy (see WOOLWICH).




ARSENIC (symbol As, atomic weight 75.0), a chemical element, known to
the ancients in the form of its sulphides. Aristotle gave them the name
[Greek: sanoarakae], and Theophrastus mentions them under the name
[Greek: arsenikon]. The oxide known as white arsenic is mentioned by the
Greek alchemist Olympiodorus, who obtained it by roasting arsenic
sulphide. These substances were all known to the later alchemists, who
used minerals containing arsenic in order to give a white colour to
copper. Albertus Magnus was the first to state that arsenic contained a
metal-like substance, although later writers considered it to be a
bastard or semi-metal, and frequently called it _arsenicum rex_. In 1733
G. Brandt showed that white arsenic was the calx of this element, and
after the downfall of the phlogiston theory the views concerning the
composition of white arsenic were identical with those which are now
held, namely that it is an oxide of the element.

Arsenic is found in the uncombined condition in various localities, but
more generally in combination with other metals and sulphur, in the form
of more or less complex sulphides. Native arsenic is usually found as
granular or curvilaminar masses, with a reniform or botryoidal surface.
These masses are of a dull grey colour, owing to surface tarnish; only
on fresh fractures is the colour tin-white with metallic lustre. The
hardness is 3.5 and the specific gravity 5.63-5.73. Crystals of arsenic
belong to the rhombohedral system, and have a perfect cleavage parallel
to the basal plane; natural crystals are, however, of rare occurrence,
and are usually acicular in habit. Native arsenic occurs usually in
metalliferous veins in association with ores of antimony, silver, &c.;
the silver mines of Freiberg in Saxony, St Andreasberg in the Harz, and
Chañarcillo in Chile being well-known localities. Attractive globular
aggregates of well-developed radiating crystals have been found at
Akatani, a village in the province Echizen, in Japan.

Arsenic is a constituent of the minerals arsenical iron, arsenical
pyrites or mispickel, tin-white cobalt or smaltite, arsenical nickel,
realgar, orpiment, pharmacolite and cobalt bloom, whilst it is also met
with in small quantities in nearly all specimens of iron pyrites. The
ordinary commercial arsenic is either the naturally occurring form,
which is, however, more or less contaminated with other metals, or is
the product obtained by heating arsenical pyrites, out of contact with
air, in earthenware retorts which are fitted with a roll of sheet iron
at the mouth, and an earthenware receiver. By this method of
distillation the arsenic sublimes into the receiver, leaving a residue
of iron sulphide in the retort. For further purification, it may be
sublimed, after having been previously mixed with a little powdered
charcoal, or it may be mixed with a small quantity of iodine and heated.
It can also be obtained by the reduction of white arsenic (arsenious
oxide) with carbon. An electro-metallurgical process for the extraction
of arsenic from its sulphides has also been proposed (German Patent.
67,973). These compounds are brought into solution by means of
polysulphides of the alkali metals and the resultant liquor run into the
cathode compartment of a bath, which is divided by diaphragms into a
series of anode and cathode chambers; the anode divisions being closed
and gas-tight, and containing carbon or platinum electrodes. The arsenic
solution is decomposed at the cathode, and the element precipitated
there.

Arsenic possesses a steel-grey colour, and a decided metallic lustre; it
crystallizes on sublimation and slow condensation in rhombohedra,
isomorphous with those of antimony and tellurium. It is very brittle.
Its specific gravity is given variously from 5.395 to 5.959; its
specific heat is 0.083, and its coefficient of linear expansion
0.00000559 (at 40° C.). It is volatile at temperatures above 100° C. and
rapidly vaporizes at a dull red heat. It liquefies when heated under
pressure, and its melting point lies between 446° C. and 457° C. The
vapour of arsenic is of a golden yellow colour, and has a garlic odour.
The vapour density is 10.6 (air = 1) at 564° C., corresponding to a
tetratomic molecule As4; at a white heat the vapour density shows a
considerable lowering in value, due to the dissociation of the complex
molecule.

By condensing arsenic vapour in a glass tube, in a current of an
indifferent gas, such as hydrogen, amorphous arsenic is obtained, the
deposit on the portion of the tube nearest to the source of heat being
crystalline, that farther along (at a temperature of about 210° C.)
being a black amorphous solid, while still farther along the tube a grey
deposit is formed. These two latter forms possess a specific gravity of
4.710 (14° C.) [A. Bettendorff, _Annalen_, 1867, 144, p. 110], and by
heating at about 358°-360° C. pass over into the crystalline variety.
Arsenic burns on heating in a current of oxygen, with a pale
lavender-coloured flame, forming the trioxide. It is easily oxidized by
heating with concentrated nitric acid to arsenic acid, and with
concentrated sulphuric acid to arsenic trioxide; dilute nitric acid only
oxidizes it to arsenious acid. It burns in an atmosphere of chlorine
forming the trichloride; it also combines directly with bromine and
sulphur on heating, while on fusion with alkalis it forms arsenites.

Arsenic and most of its soluble compounds are very poisonous, and
consequently the methods used for the detection of arsenic are very
important. For full accounts of methods used in detecting minute traces
of arsenic in foods, &c., see "Report to Commission to Manchester
Brewers' Central Association," the _Analyst_, 1900, 26, p. 8; "Report of
Conjoint Committee of Society of Chemical Industry and Society of Public
Analysts," the _Analyst_, 1902, 27, p. 48; T.E. Thorpe, _Journal of the
Chemical Society_, 1903, 83, p. 774; O. Hehner and others, _Journal of
Society of Chemical Industry_, 1902, 21, p. 94; also ADULTERATION.

  Arsenic and arsenical compounds generally can be detected by (a)
  _Reinsch's test_: A piece of clean copper is dipped in a solution of
  an arsenious compound which has been previously acidified with pure
  hydrochloric acid. A grey film is produced on the surface of the
  copper, probably due to the formation of a copper arsenide. The
  reaction proceeds better on heating the solution. On removing, washing
  and gently drying the metal and heating it in a glass tube, a white
  crystalline sublimate is formed on the cool part of the tube; under
  the same conditions antimony does not produce a crystalline sublimate.

  (b) _Fleitmann's test_ and _Marsh's test_ depend on the fact that
  arsenic and its compounds, when present in a solution in which
  hydrogen is being generated, are converted into arseniuretted
  hydrogen, which can be readily detected either by its action on silver
  nitrate solution or by its decomposition on heating. In Fleitmann's
  test, the solution containing the arsenious compound is mixed with
  pure potassium hydroxide solution and a piece of pure zinc or
  aluminium foil dropped in and the whole then heated. A piece of
  bibulous paper, moistened with silver nitrate, is held over the mouth
  of the tube, and if arsenic be present, a grey or black deposit is
  seen on the paper, due to the silver nitrate being reduced by the
  arseniuretted hydrogen. Antimony gives no reaction under these
  conditions, so that the method can be used to detect arsenic in the
  presence of antimony, but the test is not so delicate as either
  Reinsch's or Marsh's method.

  In the Marsh test the solution containing the arsenious compounds is
  mixed with pure hydrochloric acid and placed in an apparatus in which
  hydrogen is generated from pure zinc and pure sulphuric acid. The
  arseniuretted hydrogen produced is passed through a tube containing
  lead acetate paper and soda-lime, and finally through a narrow glass
  tube, constricted at various points, and heated by a very small flame.
  As the arseniuretted hydrogen passes over the heated portion it is
  decomposed and a black deposit formed. Instead of heating the tube,
  the gas may be ignited at the mouth of the tube and a cold surface of
  porcelain or platinum placed in the flame, when a black deposit is
  formed on the surface. This may be distinguished from the similar
  antimony deposit by its ready solubility in a solution of sodium
  hypochlorite. A blank experiment should always be carried out in
  testing for small quantities of arsenic, to ensure that the materials
  used are quite free from traces of arsenic. It is to be noted that the
  presence of nitric acid interferes with the Marsh test; and also that
  if the arsenic is present as an _arsenic_ compound it must be reduced
  to the _arsenious_ condition by the action of sulphurous acid. Arsenic
  compounds can be detected in the dry way by heating in a tube with a
  mixture of sodium carbonate and charcoal when a deposit of black
  amorphous arsenic is produced on the cool part of the tube, or by
  conversion of the compound into the trioxide and heating with dry
  sodium acetate when the offensive odour of the extremely poisonous
  cacodyl oxide is produced. In the wet way, arsenious oxide and
  arsenites, acidified with hydrochloric acid, give a yellow precipitate
  of arsenic trisulphide on the addition of sulphuretted hydrogen; this
  precipitate is soluble in solutions of the alkaline hydroxides,
  ammonium carbonate and yellow ammonium sulphide. Under like conditions
  arsenates only give a precipitate on long-continued boiling.

  Arsenic is usually estimated either in the form of magnesium
  pyroarsenate or as arsenic sulphide. For the pyroarsenate method it is
  necessary that the arsenic should be in the _arsenic_ condition, if
  necessary this can be effected by heating with nitric acid; the acid
  solution is then mixed with "magnesia mixture" and made strongly
  alkaline by the addition of ammonia. It is then allowed to stand
  twenty-four hours, filtered, washed with dilute ammonia, dried,
  ignited to constant weight and weighed, the filter paper being
  incinerated separately after moistening with nitric acid. From the
  weight of magnesium pyroarsenate obtained the weight of arsenic can be
  calculated.

  In the sulphide method, the arsenic should be in the _arsenious_ form.
  Sulphuretted hydrogen is passed through the liquid until it is
  thoroughly saturated, the excess of sulphuretted hydrogen is expelled
  from the solution by a brisk stream of carbon dioxide, and the
  precipitate is filtered on a Gooch crucible and washed with water
  containing a little sulphuretted hydrogen and dried at 100° C.; it is
  then well washed with small quantities of pure carbon disulphide to
  remove any free sulphur, again dried and weighed. Arsenic can also be
  estimated by volumetric methods; for this purpose it must be in the
  _arsenious_ condition, and the method of estimation consists in
  converting it into the _arsenic_ condition by means of a standard
  solution of iodine, in the presence of a cold saturated solution of
  sodium bicarbonate.

  The atomic weight of arsenic has been determined by many different
  chemists. J. Berzelius, in 1818, by heating arsenious oxide with
  excess of sulphur obtained the value 74.3; J. Pelouze (_Comptes
  rendus_, 1845, 20, p. 1047) titrated arsenic chloride with silver
  solution and obtained 75.0; and F. Kessler (_Pogg. Ann._ 1861, 113, p.
  134) by converting arsenic trisulphide in hydrochloric acid solution
  into arsenic pentasulphide also obtained 75.0.

  _Compounds._--Arsenic forms two hydrides:--The _dihydride_, As2H2, is
  a brown velvety powder formed when sodium or potassium arsenide is
  decomposed by water. It is a somewhat unstable substance, decomposing
  on being heated, with liberation of hydrogen. Arsenic _trihydride_
  (arsine or arseniuretted hydrogen), AsH3, is formed by decomposing
  zinc arsenide with dilute sulphuric acid; by the action of nascent
  hydrogen on arsenious compounds, and by the electrolysis of solutions
  of arsenious and arsenic acids; it is also a product of the action of
  organic matter on many arsenic compounds. It is a colourless gas of
  unpleasant smell, excessively poisonous, very slightly soluble in
  water. It easily burns, forming arsenious oxide if the combustion
  proceeds in an excess of air, or arsenic if the supply of air is
  limited; it is also decomposed into its constituent elements when
  heated. It liquefies at -40° C. and becomes solid at -118.9° C. (K.
  Olszewski). Metals such as tin, potassium and sodium, when heated in
  the gas, form arsenides, with liberation of hydrogen; and solutions of
  gold and silver salts are reduced by the gas with precipitation of
  metallic gold and silver. Chlorine, bromine and iodine decompose
  arsine readily, the action being most violent in the case of chlorine.

  _Arsenic tribromide_, AsBr3, is formed by the direct union of arsenic
  and bromine, and subsequent distillation from the excess of arsenic;
  it forms colourless deliquescent prisms which melt at 20°-25° C., and
  boil at 220° C. Water decomposes it, a small quantity of water leading
  to the formation of the _oxybromide_, AsOBr, whilst a large excess of
  water gives arsenious oxide, As4O6.

  Arsenic certainly forms two, or possibly three iodides. The
  _di-iodide_, As2I4 or AsI2, which is prepared by heating one part of
  arsenic with two parts of iodine, in a sealed tube to 230° C., forms
  dark cherry-red prisms, which are easily oxidized, and are readily
  decomposed by water. The _tri-iodide_, AsI3, prepared by subliming
  arsenic and iodine together in a retort, by leading arsine into an
  alcoholic iodine solution, or by boiling powdered arsenic and iodine
  with water, filtering and evaporating, forms brick-red hexagonal
  tables, of specific gravity 4.39, soluble in alcohol, ether and
  benzene, and in a large excess of water; in the presence of a small
  quantity of water, it is decomposed with formation of hydriodic acid
  and an insoluble basic salt of the composition 4AsOI·3As4O6·24H2O. It
  combines with alkaline iodides to form very unstable compounds. The
  _pentaiodide_, AsI5, appears to be formed when a mixture of one part
  of arsenic and seven parts of iodine is heated to 190° C., but on
  dissolving the resulting product in carbon bisulphide and
  crystallizing from this solvent, only the tri-iodide is obtained.

  _Arsenic trichloride_, AsCl3, is prepared by distilling white arsenic
  with concentrated sulphuric acid and common salt, or by the direct
  union of arsenic with chlorine, or from the action of phosphorus
  pentachloride on white arsenic. It is a colourless oily heavy liquid
  of specific gravity 2.205 (0° C.), which, when pure and free from
  chlorine, solidifies at -18° C., and boils at 132° C. It is very
  poisonous and decomposes in moist air with evolution of white fumes.
  With a little water it forms arsenic oxychloride, AsOCl, and with
  excess of water it is completely decomposed into hydrochloric acid and
  white arsenic. It combines directly with ammonia to form a solid
  compound variously given as AsCl3·3NH3, or 2AsCl3·7NH3, or AsCl3·4NH3.

  _Arsenic trifiuoride_, AsF3, is prepared by distilling white arsenic
  with fluorspar and sulphuric acid, or by heating arsenic tribromide
  with ammonium fluoride; it is a colourless liquid of specific gravity
  2.73, boiling at 63° C.; it fumes in air, and in contact with the skin
  produces painful wounds. It is decomposed by water into arsenious and
  hydrofluoric acids, and absorbs ammonia forming the compound
  2AsF3·5NH3. By the action of gaseous ammonia on arsenious halides at
  -30° C. to -40° C., _arsenamide_, As(NH2)3, is formed. Water
  decomposes it into arsenious oxide and ammonia, and when heated to 60°
  it loses ammonia and forms _arsenimide_, As2(NH)3 (C. Hugot, _Compt.
  rend._ 1904, 139, p. 54). For AsF5, see _Ber_., 1906, 39, p. 67.

  Two oxides of arsenic are definitely known to exist, namely the
  trioxide (white arsenic), As4O6, and the pentoxide, As2O5, while the
  existence of a suboxide, As2O(?), has also been mooted. Arsenic
  trioxide has been known from the earliest times, and was called
  _Hüttenrauch_ (furnace-smoke) by Basil Valentine. It occurs naturally
  in the mineral claudetite, and can be artificially prepared by burning
  arsenic in air or oxygen. It is obtained commercially by roasting
  arsenical pyrites in either a Brunton's or Oxland's rotatory calciner,
  the crude product being collected in suitable condensing chambers, and
  afterwards refined by resublimation, usually in reverberatory
  furnaces, the foreign matter being deposited in a long flue leading to
  the condensing chambers. White arsenic exists in two crystalline forms
  (octahedral and prismatic) and one amorphous form; the octahedral form
  is produced by the rapid cooling of arsenic vapour, or by cooling a
  warm saturated solution in water, or by crystallization from
  hydrochloric acid, and also by the gradual transition of the amorphous
  variety, this last phenomenon being attended by the evolution of heat.
  Its specific gravity is 3.7; it is only slightly soluble in cold
  water, but is more soluble in hot water, the solution reacting faintly
  acid. The prismatic variety of the oxide can be obtained by
  crystallization from a saturated boiling solution in potassium
  hydroxide, or by the crystallization of a solution of silver arsenite
  in nitric acid. Its specific gravity is 4.15. In the amorphous
  condition it can be obtained by condensing the vapour of the oxide at
  as high a temperature as possible, when a vitreous mass is produced,
  which melts at 200° C., has a specific gravity of 3.68-3.798, and is
  more soluble in water than the crystalline variety.

  Arsenious oxide is very poisonous. It acts as a reducing agent; it is
  not convertible into the pentoxide by the direct action of oxygen; and
  its solution is reduced by many metals (e.g. zinc, tin and cadmium)
  with precipitation of arsenic and formation of arseniuretted hydrogen.
  The solution of arsenious oxide in water reacts acid towards litmus
  and contains tribasic arsenious acid, although on evaporation of the
  solution the trioxide is obtained and not the free acid. The salts of
  the acid are, however, very stable, and are known as arsenites. Of
  these salts several series are known, namely the ortho-arsenites,
  which are derivatives of the acid H3AsO3, the meta-arsenites,
  derivatives of HAsO2, and the pyro-arsenites, derivatives of H4As2O5.
  The arsenites of the alkali metals are soluble in water, those of the
  other metals are insoluble in water, but are readily soluble in acids.
  A neutral solution of an arsenite gives a yellow precipitate of silver
  arsenite, Ag3AsO3, with silver nitrate solution, and a yellowish-green
  precipitate (Scheele's green) of cupric hydrogen arsenite, CuHAsO3,
  with copper sulphate solution. By the action of oxidizing agents such
  as nitric acid, iodine solution, &c., arsenious acid is readily
  converted into arsenic acid, in the latter case the reaction
  proceeding according to the equation H3AsO3 + I2 + H2O = H3AsO4 + 2HI.
  Arsenic pentoxide, As2O5, is most easily obtained by oxidation of a
  solution of arsenious acid with nitric acid; the solution on
  concentration deposits the compound 2H3AsO4·H2O (below 15° C.), which
  on being heated to a dark red heat loses its water of crystallization
  and leaves a white vitreous mass of the pentoxide. This substance
  dissolves slowly in water, forming arsenic acid; by heating to redness
  it decomposes into arsenic and oxygen. It deliquesces in moist air,
  and is easily reduced to arsenic by heating with carbon.

  Arsenic acid, H3AsO4, is prepared as shown above, the compound
  2H3AsO4·H2O on being heated to 100° C. parting with its water of
  crystallization and leaving a residue of the acid, which crystallizes
  in needles. On heating to 180° C. it loses water and yields
  pyroarsenic acid, H4As2O7, which at 200° C. loses more water and
  leaves a crystalline mass of meta-arsenic acid, HAsO3. These latter
  two acids are only stable in the solid state; they dissolve readily in
  water with evolution of heat and immediate transformation into the
  ortho-arsenic acid. The salts of arsenic acid, termed arsenates, are
  isomorphous with the phosphates, and in general character and
  reactions resemble the phosphates very closely; thus both series of
  salts give similar precipitates with "magnesia mixture" and with
  ammonium molybdate solution, but they can be distinguished by their
  behaviour with silver nitrate solution, arsenates giving a
  reddish-brown precipitate, whilst phosphates give a yellow
  precipitate.

  There are three known compounds of arsenic and sulphur, namely,
  realgar As2S2, orpiment As2S3, and arsenic pentasulphide As2S5.
  Realgar occurs native in orange prisms of specific gravity 3.5; it is
  prepared artificially by fusing together arsenic and sulphur, but the
  resulting products vary somewhat in composition; it is readily fusible
  and sublimes unchanged, and burns on heating in a current of oxygen,
  forming arsenic trioxide and sulphur dioxide.

  Orpiment (_auri pigmentum_) occurs native in pale yellow rhombic
  prisms, and can be obtained in the amorphous form by passing a current
  of sulphuretted hydrogen gas through a solution of arsenious oxide or
  an arsenite, previously acidified with dilute hydrochloric acid. It
  melts easily and volatilizes. It burns on heating in air, and is
  soluble in solutions of alkaline hydroxides and carbonates, forming
  thioarsenites, As2S3 + 4KHO = K2HAsO3 + K2HAsS3 + H2O. On acidifying
  the solution so obtained with hydrochloric acid, the whole of the
  arsenic is reprecipitated as trisulphide, K2HAsO3 + K2HAsS3 + 4HCl =
  4KCl + 3H2O + As2S3. Arsenic pentasulphide, As2S5, can be prepared by
  fusing the trisulphide with the requisite amount of sulphur; it is a
  yellow easily-fusible solid, which in absence of air can be sublimed
  unchanged; it is soluble in solutions of the caustic alkalis, forming
  thioarsenates, which can also be obtained by the action of alkali
  polysulphides on orpiment. The thioarsenites and thioarsenates of the
  alkali metals are easily soluble in water, and are readily decomposed
  by the action of mineral acids. Arsenic compounds containing selenium
  and sulphur are known, such as arsenic seleno-sulphide, AsSeS2, and
  arsenic thio-selenide, AsSSe2. Arsenic phosphide, AsP, results when
  phosphine is passed into arsenic trichloride, being precipitated as a
  red-brown powder.

  Many organic arsenic compounds are known, analogous to those of
  nitrogen and phosphorus, but apparently the primary and secondary
  arsines, AsH2·CH3 and AsH(CH3)2, do not exist, although the
  corresponding chlorine derivatives, AsCl2·CH3, methyl arsine chloride,
  and AsCl(CH4)2, dimethyl arsine chloride, are known. The tertiary
  arsines, such as As(CH3)3, trimethyl arsine, and the quaternary
  arsonium iodides and hydroxides, (CH3)4AsI and (CH3)4As·OH,
  tetramethyl arsonium iodide and hydroxide, have been obtained. The
  arsines and arsine chlorides are liquids of overpowering smell, and in
  some cases exert an extremely irritating action on the mucous
  membrane. They do not possess basic properties; the halogen in the
  chlorine compounds is readily replaced by oxygen, and the oxides
  produced behave like basic oxides. The chlorides AsCl2·CH3 and
  AsCl(CH3)2 as well as As(CH3)3 are capable of combining with two atoms
  of chlorine, the arsenic atom apparently changing from the tri- to the
  penta-valent condition, and the corresponding oxygen compounds can
  also be oxidized to compounds containing one oxygen atom or two
  hydroxyl groups more, forming acids or oxides. The compounds of the
  type AsX5, e.g. AsCl4·CH3, AsCl3(CH3)2, on heating break down, with
  separation of methyl chloride and formation of compounds of the type
  AsX3; the breaking down taking place more readily the fewer the number
  of methyl groups in the compound. The dimethyl arsine (or cacodyl)
  compounds have been most studied. On distillation of equal parts of
  dry potassium acetate and arsenious oxide, a colourless liquid of
  unbearable smell passes over, which is spontaneously inflammable and
  excessively poisonous. It is sometimes called Cadet's fuming liquid,
  and its composition was determined by R. Bunsen, who gave it the name
  cacodyl oxide ([Greek: kakodes], stinking); its formation may be shown
  thus:

    As4O6 + 8CH3CO2K = 2[(CH3)2As]2O + 4K2CO3 + 4CO2.

  The liquid is spontaneously inflammable owing to the presence of free
  cacodyl, As2(CH3)4, which is also obtained by heating the oxide with
  zinc clippings in an atmosphere of carbon dioxide; it is a liquid of
  overpowering odour, and boils at 170°C. Cacodyl oxide boils at 150°
  C., and on exposure to air takes up oxygen and water and passes over
  into the crystalline cacodylic acid, thus:

    [(CH3)2As]2O + H2O + O2 = 2(CH3)2As·O·OH.

_Pharmacology._--Of arsenic and its compounds, arsenious acid (dose
1/60-1/15 gr.) and its preparation liquor arsenicalis, Fowler's solution
(dose 2-8 [minim]), are in very common use. The iodide of arsenic (dose
1/20-1/5 gr.) is one of the ingredients of Donovan's solution (see
MERCURY); and iron arsenate (dose 1/16-¼ gr. in a pill), a mixture of
ferrous and ferric arsenates with some iron oxide, is of great use in
certain cases. Sodium arsenate (1/40-1/10 gr.) is somewhat less commonly
prescribed, though all the compounds of this metal have great value in
experienced hands.

Externally, arsenious acid is a powerful caustic when applied to raw
surfaces, though it has no action on the unbroken skin. Internally,
unless the dose be extremely small, all preparations are severe
gastro-intestinal irritants. This effect is the same however the drug be
administered, as, even after subcutaneous injection, the arsenic is
excreted into the stomach after absorption, and thus sets up gastritis
in its passage through the mucous membrane. In minute doses it is a
gastric stimulant, promoting the flow of gastric juice. It is quickly
absorbed into the blood, where its presence can be demonstrated
especially in the white blood corpuscles. In certain forms of anaemia it
increases the number of the red corpuscles and also their haemoglobin
content. None of these known effects of arsenic is sufficient to account
for the profound change that a course of the drug will often produce in
the condition of a patient. It has some power of affecting the general
metabolism, but no wholly satisfactory explanation is forthcoming.
According to Binz and Schultz its power is due to the fact that it is an
oxygen-carrier, arsenious acid withdrawing oxygen from the protoplasm to
form arsenic acid, which subsequently yields up its oxygen again. It is
thus vaguely called an alterative, since the patient recovers under its
use. It is eliminated chiefly by the urine, and to a less extent by the
alimentary canal, sweat, saliva, bile, milk, tears, hair, &c., but it is
also stored up in the body mainly in the liver and kidneys.

_Therapeutics._--Externally arsenious acid has been much used by quack
doctors to destroy morbid growths, &c., a paste or solution being
applied, strong enough to kill the mass of tissue and make it slough out
quickly. But many accidents have resulted from the arsenic being
absorbed, and the patient thereby poisoned. Internally it is useful in
certain forms of dyspepsia, but as some patients are quite unable to
tolerate the drug, it must always be administered in very small doses at
first, the quantity being slowly increased as tolerance is shown.
Children as a rule bear it better than adults. It should never be given
on an empty stomach, but always after a full meal. Certain cases of
anaemia which do not yield to iron are often much improved by arsenic,
though in other apparently similar ones it appears to be valueless. It
is the routine treatment for pernicious anaemia and Hodgkin's disease,
though here again the drug may be of no avail. For the neuralgia and
anaemia following malaria, for rheumatoid arthritis, for chorea and also
asthma and hay fever, it is constantly prescribed with excellent
results. Certain skin diseases, as psoriasis, pemphigus and occasionally
chronic eczema, are much benefited by its use, though occasionally a too
prolonged course will produce the very lesion for which under other
circumstances it is a cure. A recent method of using the drug is in the
form of sodium cacodylate by subcutaneous injection, and this
preparation is said to be free from the cumulative effects sometimes
arising after the prolonged use of the other forms. Other organic
derivatives employed are sodium metharsenite and sodium anilarsenate or
atoxyl; hypodermic injections of the latter have been used in the
treatment of sleeping sickness. Occasionally, as among the Styrians,
individuals acquire the habit of arsenic-eating, which is said to
increase their weight, strength and appetite, and clears their
complexion. The probable explanation is that an antitoxin is developed
within them.

_Toxicology and Forensic Medicine._--The commonest source of arsenical
poisoning is the arsenious acid or white arsenic, which in one form is
white and opaque, like flour, for which it has been mistaken with fatal
results. Also, as it has little taste and no colour it is easily mixed
with food for homicidal purposes. When combined with potash or soda it
is used to saturate flypapers, and strong solutions can be obtained by
soaking these in water; this fact has also been used with criminal
intent. Copper arsenite (or Scheele's green) used to be much employed as
a pigment for wall-papers and fabrics, and toxic effects have resulted
from their use. Metallic arsenic is probably not poisonous, but as it
usually becomes oxidized in the alimentary canal, the usual symptoms of
arsenical poisoning follow its use.

In acute poisoning the interval between the reception of the poison and
the onset of symptoms ranges from ten minutes, or even less, if a strong
solution be taken on an empty stomach, to twelve or more hours if the
drug be taken in solid form and the stomach be full of food. The usual
period, however, is from half an hour to an hour. In a typical case a
sensation of heat developing into a burning pain is felt in the throat
and stomach. This is soon followed by uncontrollable vomiting, and a
little later by severe purging, the stools being first of all faecal but
later assuming a rice water appearance and often containing blood. The
patient suffers from intense thirst, which cannot be relieved, as
drinking is immediately followed by rejection of the swallowed fluid.
There is profound collapse, the features are sunken, the skin moist and
cyanosed. The pulse is feeble and irregular, and respiration is
difficult. The pain in the stomach is persistent, and cramps in the
calves of the legs add to the torture. Death may be preceded by coma,
but consciousness is often maintained to the end. The similarity of the
symptoms to those of cholera is very marked, but if the suspicion arises
it can soon be cleared up by examining any of the secretions for
arsenic. More rarely the poison seems to centre itself on the nerve
centres, and gastro-intestinal symptoms may be almost or quite absent.
In such cases the acute collapse occurs in company with both superficial
and deep anaesthesia of the limbs, and is soon followed by coma
terminating in death. In criminal poisoning repeated doses are usually
given, so that such cases may not be typical, but will present some of
the aspects of acute and some of chronic arsenical poisoning. As regards
treatment, the stomach must be washed out with warm water by means of a
soft rubber tube, an emetic being also administered. Then, if available,
freshly precipitated ferric hydrate must be given, which can be prepared
by adding a solution of ammonia to one of iron perchloride. The
precipitate is strained off, and the patient can swallow it suspended in
water. While this is being obtained, magnesia, castor oil or olive oil
can be given; or failing all these, copious draughts of water. The
collapse must be treated with hot blankets and bottles, and subcutaneous
injections of brandy, ether or strychnine. The pain can be lessened by
injections of morphia.

Arsenic may be gradually absorbed into the system in very small
quantities over a prolonged period, the symptoms of chronic poisoning
resulting. The commonest sources used to be wall-papers, fabrics,
artificial flowers and toys: also certain trades, as in the manufacture
of arsenical sheep-dipping. But at the present time cases arising from
these causes occur very rarely. In 1900 an outbreak of "peripheral
neuritis" with various skin affections occurred in Lancashire, which was
traced to beer made from glucose and invert sugar, in the preparation of
which sulphuric acid contaminated with arsenic was said to have been
used. But the nature of the disease in this case was decidedly obscure.
The symptoms so closely resembled those of _beri-beri_ that it has also
been suggested that the illness was the same, and was caused by the
manufacture of the glucose from mouldy rice (see BERI-BERI), though no
proof of this was possible. The earliest symptoms are slight gastric
disorders, loss of appetite and general malaise, followed later by
colicky pains, irritation of eyelids and skin eruptions. But sooner or
later peripheral neuritis develops, usually beginning with sensory
disturbances, tingling, numbness, formication and occasionally cutaneous
anaesthesia. Later the affected muscles become exquisitely tender, and
then atrophy, while the knee-jerk or other reflex is lost. Pigmentation
of the skin may occur in the later stages. Recovery is very slow, and in
fatal cases death usually results from heart failure.

After acute poisoning, the stomach at a _post-mortem_ presents signs of
intense inflammation, parts or the whole of its mucous membrane being of
a colour varying from dark red to bright vermilion and often corrugated.
Submucous haemorrhages are usually present, but perforation is rare. The
rest of the alimentary canal exhibits inflammatory changes in a somewhat
lesser degree. After chronic poisoning a widely spread fatty
degeneration is present. Arsenic is found in almost every part of the
body, but is retained in largest amount by the liver, secondly by the
kidneys. After death from chronic poisoning it is found present even in
the brain and spongy bone. The detection of arsenic in criminal cases is
effected either by Reinsch's test or by Marsh's test, the urine being
the secretion analysed when available. But Reinsch's test cannot be used
satisfactorily for a quantitative determination, nor can it be used in
the presence of chlorates or nitrates. And Marsh's test is very
unmanageable with organic liquids on account of the uncontrollable
frothing that takes place. But in such cases the organic matter can be
first destroyed by one of the various methods, usually the moist method
devised by Fresenius being chosen.




ARSENIUS (c. 354-450), an anchorite, said to have been born of a noble
Roman family, who achieved a high reputation for his knowledge of Greek
and Roman literature. He was appointed by Theodosius the Great, tutor of
the young princes Arcadius and Honorius, but at the age of forty he
retired to Egypt, where for forty years he lived in monastic seclusion
at Scetis in the Thebais, under the spiritual guidance of St John the
Dwarf. He is said to have gained the admiration of his fellows by the
extreme rigour of his asceticism. The remainder of his life he spent at
Canopus, and Troë near Memphis, where he died at the age of ninety-five.
Of his writings two collections of admonitory maxims are extant: the
first, [Greek: Didaskalia kai parainesis], containing instructions for
monks, is published with a Latin version by Fr. Combefis in _Auctarium
biblioth. patr. novissim._ (Paris, 1672), pp. 301 f.; the second is a
collection of forty-four wise sayings put together by his friends under
the title of [Greek: Apophthegmata] (see Cotelerius, _Eccl. graec.
monum._, 1677, i. pp. 353-372). In the Roman Catholic Church his
festival is on the 19th of July, in the Orthodox Eastern Church on the
8th of May. His biography by Simeon Metaphrastes is largely fiction.




ARSENIUS AUTORIANUS (13th century), patriarch of Constantinople, lived
about the middle of the 13th century. He received his education in
Nicaea at a monastery of which he later became the abbot, though not in
orders. Subsequently he gave himself up to a life of solitary asceticism
in a Bithynian monastery, and is said, probably wrongly, to have
remained some time in a monastery on Mount Athos. From this seclusion he
was in A.D. 1255 called by Theodore II. Lascaris to the position of
patriarch at Nicaea, and four years later, on that emperor's death,
became joint guardian of his son John. His fellow-guardian Georgios
Mouzalon was immediately murdered by Michael Palaeologus, who assumed
the position of tutor. Arsenius then took refuge in the monastery of
Paschasius, retaining his office of patriarch but refusing to discharge
its duties. Nicephorus of Ephesus was appointed in his stead. In 1261
Michael, having recovered Constantinople, induced Arsenius again to
undertake the office of patriarch, but soon incurred his severe censure
by ordering the young prince John to be blinded. Arsenius went so far as
to excommunicate the emperor, who, having vainly sought for pardon, took
refuge in false accusations against Arsenius and caused him to be
banished to Proconnesus, where some years afterwards (according to
Fabricius in 1264; others say in 1273) he died. Throughout these years
he declined to remove the sentence of excommunication which he had
passed upon Michael, and after his death, when the new patriarch
Josephus gave absolution to the emperor, the quarrel was carried on
between the "Arsenites" and the "Josephists." The "Arsenian schism"
lasted till 1315, when reconciliation was effected by the patriarch
Niphon (see Gibbon, _Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire_, ed. J.B.
Bury, 1898, vol. vi. 467 foll.). Arsenius is said to have prepared from
the decisions of the councils and the works of the Fathers a summary of
divine laws under the title _Synopsis Canonum_. This was published
(Greek original and Latin version) by G. Voël and H. Justel in
_Bibliotheca Jur. Canon. Vet._ (Paris, 1661), 749 foll. Some hold that
the _Synopsis_ was the work of another Arsenius, a monk of Athos (see L.
Petit in Vacant's _Dict. théol. cathol._ i. col. 1994); the ascription
depends on whether the patriarch Arsenius did or did not sojourn at
Mount Athos.

  See Georgius Pachymeres ii. 15, iii. _passim_, iv. 1-16; Nicephorus
  Gregoras iii. 1, iv. 1; for the will of Arsenius see Cotelerius,
  _Monumenta_, ii. 168.




ARSES, Persian king, youngest son of Artaxerxes III., was raised to the
throne in 338 B.C. by Bagoas (q.v.), who had murdered his father and
all his brothers. But when the young king tried to make himself
independent, Bagoas killed him too, with all his children, in the third
year of his reign (336) (Diod. 17.5; Strabo 15. 736; Trogus, Prol. x.,
Alexander's despatch to Darius III.; Arrian ii. 14. 5, and the
chronographers). In Plutarch, _De fort. Alex._ ii. 3. 5, he is called
_Oarses_; in Johannes Antioch. p. 38, _Arsamos_; in the canon of
Ptolemy, _Aroges_ (by Elias of Nisibis, _Piruz_); in a chronological
tablet from Babylon (Brit. Mus. Sp. ii. 71, _Zeitschrift für
Assyriologie_, viii. 176, x. 64) he is abbreviated into _Ar_. See
PERSIA: _Ancient History_.     (Ed. M.)




ARSINOË, the name of four Egyptian princesses of the Ptolemaic dynasty.
The name was introduced into the Ptolemaic dynasty by the mother of
Ptolemy I. This Arsinoë was originally a mistress of Philip II. of
Macedon, who presented her to a Macedonian soldier Loqus shortly before
Ptolemy was born. It was, therefore, assumed by the Macedonians that the
Ptolemaic house was really descended from Philip (see PTOLEMIES).

1. Daughter of Lysimachus, king of Thrace, first wife of Ptolemy II.
Philadelphus (285-247 B.C.). Accused of conspiring against her husband,
who perhaps already contemplated marriage with his sister, also named
Arsinoë, she was banished to Coptos, in Upper Egypt. Her son Ptolemy was
afterwards king under the title of Euergetes. It is supposed by some
(e.g. Niebuhr, _Kleine Schriften_; cf. Ehrlichs, _De Callimachi hymnis_)
that she is to be identified with the Arsinoë who became wife of Magas,
king of Cyrene, and that she married him after her exile to Coptos. But
this hypothesis is apparently without foundation. Magas before his death
had betrothed his daughter Berenice to the son of his brother Ptolemy
II. Philadelphus, but Arsinoë, disliking the projected alliance, induced
Demetrius the Fair, son of Demetrius Poliorcetes, to accept the throne
of Cyrene as husband of Berenice. She herself, however, fell in love
with the young prince, and Berenice in revenge formed a conspiracy, and,
having slain Demetrius, married Ptolemy's son (see BERENICE, 3).

2. Daughter of Ptolemy I. Soter and Berenice. Born about 316 B.C., she
married Lysimachus, king of Thrace, who made over to her the territories
of his divorced wife, Amastris. To secure the succession for her own
children she brought about the murder of her stepson Agathocles.
Lysandra, the wife of Agathocles, took refuge with Seleucus, king of
Syria, who made war upon Lysimachus and defeated him (281). After her
husband's death Arsinoë fled to Ephesus and afterwards to Cassandreia in
Macedonia. Seleucus, who had seized Lysimachus's kingdom, was murdered
in 281 by Ptolemy Ceraunus (half-brother of Arsinoë), who thus became
master of Thrace and Macedonia. To obtain possession of Cassandreia, he
offered his hand in marriage to Arsinoë, and being admitted into the
town, killed her two younger sons and banished her to Samothrace.
Escaping to Egypt, she became the wife of her full brother Ptolemy II.,
the first instance of the practice (afterwards common) of the Greek
kings of Egypt marrying their sisters. She was a woman of a masterful
character and won great influence. Her husband, though she bore him no
children, was devoted to her and paid her all possible honour after her
death in 271. He gave her name to a number of cities, and also to a
district (nome) of Egypt.[1] It is related that he ordered the architect
Dinochares to build a temple in her honour in Alexandria; in order that
her statue, made of iron, might appear to be suspended in the air, the
roof was to consist of an arch of loadstones (Pliny, _Hist. Nat._ xxxiv.
42). Coins were also struck, showing her crowned and veiled on the
obverse, with a double cornucopia on the reverse. She was worshipped as
a goddess under the title of [Greek: Thea Philadelphos], and she and her
husband as [Greek: Theoi adelphoi] (Justin xxiv. 2, 3; Pausanias i. 7).

  See von Prott, _Rhein. Mus._ liii. (1898), pp. 460 f.

3. Daughter of Ptolemy III. Euergetes, sister and wife of Ptolemy IV.
Philopator. She seems to be erroneously called Eurydice by Justin (xxx.
2), and Cleopatra by Livy (xxvii. 4). Her presence greatly encouraged
the troops at the battle of Raphia (217), in which Antiochus the Great
was defeated. Her husband put her to death to please his mistress
Agathocleia, a Samian dancer (between 210 and 205). She was worshipped
as [Greek: Thea Philopator]; she and her husband as [Greek: Theoi
Philopatores] (Polybius v. 83, 84, xv. 25-33).

4. Youngest daughter of Ptolemy XIII. Auletes, and sister of the famous
Cleopatra. During the siege of Alexandria by Julius Caesar (48) she was
recognized as queen by the inhabitants, her brother, the young Ptolemy,
being then held captive by Caesar. Caesar took her with him to Rome as a
precaution. After Caesar's triumph she was allowed to return to
Alexandria. After the battle of Philippi she was put to death at Miletus
(or in the temple of Artemis at Ephesus) by order of Mark Antony, at the
request of her sister Cleopatra (Dio Cassius xlii. 39; Caesar, _Bell.
civ._ iii. 112; Appian, _Bell. civ._ v. 9).

  AUTHORITIES.--For general authorities see article PTOLEMIES. The
  article "Arsinoë" in Pauly-Wissowa's _Realencyclopädie_ contains a
  full list of those who bore the name, and also of the numerous towns
  which were called after the various princesses.


FOOTNOTE:

  [1] The appendix to pt. ii. of the Tebtunis series of papyri
    (Grenfell, Hunt and Goodspeed, 1907) contains a lengthy account of
    the topography of the Arsinoite nome.




ARSINOITHERIUM (so called from the Egyptian queen Arsinoë), a gigantic
horned mammal from the Middle Eocene beds of the Fayum, Egypt,
representing a sub-order of Ungulata, called Barypoda. The skull is
remarkable for carrying a huge pair of horn-cores above the muzzle,
which seem to be the enlarged nasal bones, and a rudimentary pair
farther back; the front horn-cores, like the rest of the skull, consist
of a mere shell of bone, and were probably clothed in life with horny
sheaths. The teeth form a continuous even series, the small canines
being crowded between the incisors and premolars; the crowns of the
cheek-series are tall (hypsodont), with a distinctive pattern of their
own. Although the brain is relatively larger, the bones of the limbs,
especially the short, five-toed feet, approximate to those of the
Amblypoda and Proboscidea; but in the articulation of the astragalus
with both the navicular and cuboid _Arsinoitherium_ is nearer the former
than the latter group.

It is probable, however, that these resemblances are mainly due to
parallelism in development, and are in all three cases adaptations
necessary to support the enormous weight of the body. On the other hand,
the marked resemblance of the structure of the tarsus is probably
indicative of descent from nearly allied condylarthrous ancestors (see
PHENACODUS). No importance can be attached to the presence of horns as
an indication of affinity between _Arsinoitherium_ and the Amblypoda;
and there are important differences in the structure of the skulls of
the two, notably in the external auditory meatus, the occiput, the
premaxillae, the palatal foramina and the lower jaw.

From the Proboscidea _Arsinoitherium_ differs broadly in skull
structure, in the form of the cheek-teeth, and in the persistence of the
complete dental series of forty-four without gaps or enlargement of
particular teeth. Whether there is any relationship with the Hyracoidea
cannot be determined until we are acquainted with the forerunners of
_Arsinoitherium_, which is evidently a highly specialized type.

It may be added that as the name Barypoda has been used at an earlier
date for another group of animals, the alternative title Embrithopoda
has been suggested in case the former should be considered barred.

  See C.W. Andrews, _Descriptive Catalogue of the Tertiary Vertebrata of
  the Fayum, British Museum_ (1906).     (R. L.*)




ARSON (from Lat. _ardere_, to burn), a crime which has been described as
the malicious and voluntary burning of the house of another (3 Co.
_Inst._ 66). At common law in England it is an offence of the degree of
felony. In the Roman civil law arson was punishable by death. It appears
early in the history of English law, being known in ancient laws by the
term of _boernet_. It is mentioned by Cnut as one of the bootless
crimes, and under the Saxon laws was punishable by death. The sentence
of death for arson was, says Stephen (_Commentaries_, iv. 89), in the
reign of Edward I. executed by a kind of _lex talionis_, for the
incendiaries were burnt to death; a punishment which was inflicted also
under the Gothic institutions. Death continued to be the penalty at
least down to the reign of King John, according to a reported case
(Gloucester Pleas, pl. 216), but in course of time the penalty became
that of other common-law felonies, death by the gallows. It is one of
the earliest crimes in which the _mens rea_, or criminal intent, was
taken special notice of. Bracton deals at length with the _mala
conscientia_, which he says is necessary for this crime, and contrasts
it with _negligentia_ (f. 146 b), while in many early indictments malice
aforethought (_malitia praecogitata_) appears. Arson was deprived of
"benefit of clergy" under the Tudors, while an act of 8 Henry VI. c. 6
(1429) made the wilful burning of houses, under particular
circumstances, high treason, but acts of 1 Ed. VI. c. 12 (1547) and 1
Mary (1553) reduced it to an ordinary felony. The English law concerning
arson was consolidated by 7 & 8 Geo. IV. c. 30, which was repealed and
re-enacted by the Malicious Damage Act 1861.

The common-law offence of arson (which has been greatly enlarged by the
act of 1861) required some part of the house to be actually burnt;
neither a bare intention nor even an actual attempt by putting fire in
or towards it will constitute the offence, if no part was actually
burnt, but the burning of any part, however trifling, is sufficient, and
the offence is complete even if the fire is put out or goes out of
itself. The burning must be malicious and wilful, otherwise it is only a
trespass. If a man by wilfully setting fire to his own house burn the
house of his neighbour also, it will be a felony, even though the
primary intention of the party was to burn his own house only. The word
_house_, in the definition of the offence at common law, extends not
only to dwelling-houses, "but to all out-houses which are parcel
thereof, though not adjoining thereto." Barns with corn and hay in them,
though distant from a house, are within the definition.

The different varieties of the offence are specified in the Malicious
Damage Act 1861. The following crimes are thereby made felonies: (1)
setting fire to any church, chapel, meeting-house or other place of
divine worship; (2) setting fire to a dwelling-house, any person being
therein; (3) setting fire to a house, out-house, manufactory,
farm-building, &c., with intent to impose and defraud any person; (4)
setting fire to buildings appertaining to any railway, port, dock or
harbour; or (5) setting fire to any public building. In these cases the
act provides that the person convicted shall be liable, at the
discretion of the court, to be kept in penal servitude for life, or for
any term not less than three years (altered to _five_ years by the Penal
Servitude Acts Amendment Act 1864), or to be imprisoned for any time not
exceeding two years, with or without hard labour, and, if a male under
sixteen years of age, with or without whipping. Setting fire to other
buildings, and setting fire to goods in buildings under such
circumstances that, if the building were thereby set fire to, the
offence would amount to felony, are subject to the punishments last
enumerated, with this exception that the period of penal servitude is
limited to fourteen years. The attempt to set fire to any building, or
any matter or thing not enumerated above, is punishable as a felony.
Russell says (_Crimes_, p. 1781) that the term building is no doubt very
indefinite, but it was used in 9 & 10 Vict. c. 25, s. 2; and it was
thought much better to adopt this term and leave it to be interpreted as
each case might arise, than to attempt to define; as any such attempt
would probably have failed in producing any expression more certain than
the term "building" itself. In _R._ v. _Manning_, 1872 (L.R. 1 C.C.R.
338), it was held that an unfinished house was a building within the
meaning of the act. The setting fire to crops of hay, grass, corn, &c.,
is punishable by penal servitude for any period not exceeding fourteen
years, but setting fire to stacks of the same, or any cultivated
vegetable produce, or to peat, coals, &c., is regarded as a more serious
offence, and the penal servitude may be for life. For the attempt to
commit the last two offences penal servitude is limited to seven years.
Setting fire to mines of coal, anthracite or other mineral fuel is
visited with the full measure of penalty, and in the case of an attempt
the penal servitude is limited to fourteen years. By the Dockyards, &c.,
Protection Act 1772 it is a felony punishable by death wilfully and
maliciously to set fire to any of His Majesty's ships or vessels of war,
or any of His Majesty's arsenals, magazines, dockyards, rope-yards,
victualling offices or buildings therein, or any timber, material,
stores or ammunition of war therein or in any part of His Majesty's
dominions. If the person guilty of the offence is a person subject to
naval discipline, he is triable by court-martial, and if found guilty, a
sentence of capital punishment may be passed. The Malicious Damage Act
1861, s. 43, also includes as a felony the setting fire to any ship or
vessel, with intent to prejudice any owner or part owner of the vessel,
or of any goods on the same, or any person who has underwritten any
policy of insurance on the vessel, or upon any goods on board the same.

In Scotland the offence equivalent to arson in England is known by the
more expressive name of fire-raising. The crime was punishable capitally
by old consuetudinary law, but it is now no longer capital, and may be
tried in the sheriff court (50 & 51 Vict. c. 35, s. 56). Formerly the
public prosecutor had the privilege of declining to demand capital
punishment, and he invariably did so. _Wilful fire-raising_, which is
the most heinous form of the crime, requires the raising of fire,
without any lawful object, but with the deliberate intention of
destroying certain premises or things, whether directly by the
application of fire thereto, or indirectly by its application to
something contained in or forming part of or communicating with them;
also the intention to destroy premises or things of a certain
description (much as mentioned above); and such premises or things must
be the property of another than the accused. _Wicked, culpable and
reckless fire-raising_ differs from wilful fire-raising in that the fire
is raised _without_ the deliberate intention of destroying premises or
things, but while the accused was engaged in some unlawful act, or while
he was in such a state of passion, excitement or recklessness as not to
care what results might follow from his acts.

_United States._--The same general principles apply to this crime in
American law. In some states by statute the intent to injure or defraud
must be shown, e.g. when the property is insured. In New York one who
wilfully burns property (including a vessel or its cargo) with intent to
defraud or prejudice the insurer thereof, though the offence of arson is
not committed, is punishable by imprisonment for not more than five
years (N.Y. Pen. Code, ss. 575, 578). There must be an intent to destroy
the building (_ibid._ s. 490; California Code, s. 447). An agreement to
commit arson is conspiracy (_ibid._ s. 171). Killing a person in
committing the crime of arson is murder in the first degree (_ibid._ s.
183); this is so in California, even where the crime is merely an
attempt to commit arson (Cal. Pen. Code, s. 189). Explosion of a house
by gunpowder or dynamite is arson (Texas Pen. Code, art. 761), but a
charge of arson by "burning" will not be sustained by proof of exploding
by dynamite, even though part of the building is burnt by the explosion
(_Landers_ v. _State_ [Tex.], 47 S.W. 1008).

  AUTHORITIES.--W.S. Holdsworth, _History of English Law_, vol. iii.;
  Pollock and Maitland, _History of English Law_; Stephen, _History of
  Criminal Law_, vol. iii.; Stephen, _Commentaries_; Russell on
  _Crimes_.




ARSONVAL, a village of France in the department of Aube, lies on the
right bank of the Aube, about 30 m. east of Troyes. It has a church
dating from the 12th century. Pop. 434.




ARSOT, the name of a forest in France, in the immediate neighbourhood of
Belfort. It has an area of about 1500 acres, is almost encircled by a
small stream, the Eloie, and is about 1400 ft. above the sea. On the
east it is continued by the forest of Denney, which contains the
fortress of Roppe, dominating the road from Colmar into France.




ARSUF, a town on the coast of Palestine, 12 m. N.N.E. of Jaffa, famous
as the scene of a victory of the crusaders under Richard I. of England
over the army of Saladin. After the capture of Acre on the 12th of July
1191, the army of the crusaders, under Richard Coeur-de-Lion and the
duke of Burgundy, opened their campaign for the recovery of Jerusalem by
marching southward towards Jaffa, from which place it was intended to
move direct upon the holy city. The march was along the sea-shore, and,
the forces of Saladin being in the vicinity, the army moved in such a
formation as to be able to give battle at any moment. Richard thus moved
slowly, but in such compact order as to arouse the admiration even of
the enemy. The right column of baggage and supplies, guarded by
infantry, was nearest the sea, the various corps of heavy cavalry, one
behind the other, formed the central column, and on the exposed left
flank was the infantry, well closed up, and "level and firm as a wall,"
according to the testimony of Saracen authors. The columns were united
into a narrow rectangle by the advanced and rear guards. The whole march
was a running fight between untiring horse-archers and steady infantry.
Only once did the column open out, and the opportunity was swiftly
seized by the Saracens, yet so rapid was the rally of the crusaders that
little damage was done (August 25). The latter maintained for many days
an absolutely passive defence, and could not be tempted to fight;
Richard and his knights made occasional charges, but quickly withdrew,
and on the 7th of September this irregular skirmishing, in which the
crusaders had scarcely suffered at all, culminated in the battle of
Arsuf. Saladin had by now decided that the only hope of success lay in
compelling the rear of the Christians' column to halt--and thus opening
a gap, should the van be still on the move. Richard, on the other hand,
had prepared for action by closing up still more, and as the crusaders
were now formed a simple left turn brought them into two lines of
battle, infantry in first line, cavalry in second line. Near Arsuf the
road entered a defile between the sea and a wooded range of hills; and
from the latter the whole Moslem army suddenly burst forth. The weight
of the attack fell upon the rear of Richard's column, as Saladin
desired. The column slowly continued its march, suffering heavily in
horses, but otherwise unharmed. The first assault thus made no
impression, but a fierce hand-to-hand combat followed, in which the
Hospitallers, who formed the rear of the Christian army, were hard
pressed. Their grand master, like many other subordinates in history,
repeatedly begged to be allowed to charge, but Richard, who on this
occasion showed the highest gift of generalship, that of feeling the
pulse of the fight, waited for the favourable moment. Almost as he gave
the signal for the whole line to charge, the sorely pressed Hospitallers
rode out upon the enemy on their own initiative. At once the whole of
the cavalry followed suit. The head (or right wing) and centre were not
closely engaged, and their fleeter opponents had time to ride off, but
the rear of the column carried all before it in its impetuous onset, and
cut down the Saracens in great numbers. A second charge, followed by a
third, dispersed the enemy in all directions. The total loss of the
Saracens was more than tenfold that of the Christians, who lost but
seven hundred men. The army arrived at Jaffa on the 10th of September.

  See Oman, _Hist. of the Art of War_, ii. 303-317.




ARSURE, a village of France in the department of Jura, has some stone
quarries and extensive layers of peat in its neighbourhood. Its church
has a choir dating from the 11th century. Pop. 370.




ARSURES, a village of France in the department of Jura, situated on a
small stream, the Lurine. It is surrounded by vineyards, from which
excellent wine is produced. Pop. 233.




ART, a word in its most extended and most popular sense meaning
everything which we distinguish from Nature. Art and Nature are the two
most comprehensive genera of which the human mind has formed the
conception. Under the genus Nature, or the genus Art, we include all the
phenomena of the universe. But as our conception of Nature is
indeterminate and variable, so in some degree is our conception of Art.
Nor does such ambiguity arise only because some modes of thought refer a
greater number of the phenomena of the universe to the genus Nature, and
others a greater number to the genus Art. It arises also because we do
not strictly limit the one genus by the other. The range of the
phenomena to which we point, when we say Art, is never very exactly
determined by the range of the other phenomena which at the same time we
tacitly refer to the order of Nature. Everybody understands the general
meaning of a phrase like Chaucer's "Nature ne Art ne koude him not
amende," or Pope's "Blest with each grace of nature and of art." In such
phrases we intend to designate familiarly as Nature all which exists
independently of our study, forethought and exertion--in other words,
those phenomena in ourselves or the world which we do not originate but
find; and we intend to designate familiarly as Art all which we do not
find but originate--or, in other words, the phenomena, which we add by
study, forethought and exertion to those existing independently of us.
But we do not use these designations consistently. Sometimes we draw an
arbitrary line in the action of individuals and societies, and say, Here
Nature ends and Art begins--such a law, such a practice, such an
industry even, is natural, and such another is artificial; calling those
natural which happen spontaneously and without much reflection, and the
others artificial. But this line different observers draw at different
places. Sometimes we adopt views which waive the distinction altogether.
One such view is that wherein all phenomena are regarded as equally
natural, and the idea of Nature is extended so as to include "all the
powers existing in either the outer or the inner world, and everything
which exists by means of those powers." In this view Art becomes a part
of Nature. It is illustrated in the familiar passage of Shakespeare,
where Polixenes reminds Perdita that

         "Nature is made better by no mean,
  But nature makes that mean: so, over that art
  Which, you say, adds to nature, is an art
  That nature makes." ...
                          "This is an art
  Which does mend nature, change it rather, but
  The art itself is nature."

A posthumous essay of John Stuart Mill contains a full philosophical
exposition and defence of this mode of regarding the relations of Nature
and Art. Defining Nature as above, and again as a "collective name for
all facts, actual and possible," that writer proceeds to say that such a
definition

  "is evidently inapplicable to some of the modes in which the word is
  familiarly employed. For example, it entirely conflicts with the
  common form of speech by which Nature is opposed to Art, and natural
  to artificial. For in the sense of the word Nature which has thus been
  defined, and which is the true scientific sense, Art is as much Nature
  as anything else; and everything which is artificial is natural--Art
  has no independent powers of its own: Art is but the employment of the
  powers of Nature for an end. Phenomena produced by human agency no
  less than those which, as far as we are concerned, are spontaneous,
  depend on the properties of the elementary forces, or of the
  elementary substances and their compounds. The united powers of the
  whole human race could not create a new property of matter in general,
  or of any one of its species. We can only take advantage for our
  purposes of the properties we find. A ship floats by the same laws of
  specific gravity and equilibrium as a tree uprooted by the wind and
  blown into the water. The corn which men raise for food grows and
  produces its grain by the same laws of vegetation by which the wild
  rose and the mountain strawberry bring forth their flowers and fruit.
  A house stands and holds together by the natural properties, the
  weight and cohesion of the materials which compose it. A steam engine
  works by the natural expansive force of steam, exerting a pressure
  upon one part of a system of arrangements, which pressure, by the
  mechanical properties of the lever, is transferred from that to
  another part, where it raises the weight or removes the obstacle
  brought into connexion with it. In these and all other artificial
  operations the office of man is, as has often been remarked, a very
  limited one; it consists of moving things into certain places. We move
  objects, and by doing this, bring some things into contact which were
  separate, or separate others which were in contact; and by this simple
  change of place, natural forces previously dormant are called into
  action, and produce the desired effect. Even the volition which
  designs, the intelligence which contrives, and the muscular force
  which executes these movements, are themselves powers of Nature."

Another mode of thought, in some sort complementary to the last, is
based on the analogy which the operations of forces external to a man
bear to the operations of man himself. Study, forethought and exertion
are assigned to Nature, and her operations are called operations of Art.
This view was familiar to ancient systems of philosophy, and especially
to that of the Stoics. According to the report of Cicero, Nature as
conceived by Zeno was a fire, and at the same time a voluntary agent
having the power or art of creating things with regularity and design
("naturam esse ignem artificiosum ad gignendum progredientem via"). To
this fire not merely creative force and systematic action were
ascribed, but actual personality. Nature was "non artificiosa solum, sed
plane artifex." "That which in the works of human art is done by hands,
is done with much greater art by Nature, that is, by a fire which
exercises an art and is the teacher of other arts." This conception of
Nature as an all-generating fire, and at the same time as a personal
artist both teaching and including in her own activity all the human
arts, on the one hand may be said, with Polixenes and J.S. Mill, to
merge Art in Nature; but on the other hand it finds the essence of
Nature in the resemblance of her operations to those of Art. "It is the
_proprium_ of art," according to the same system, "to create and beget,"
and the reasoning proceeds--Nature creates and begets, therefore Nature
is an artist or Demiurgus. A kindred view is set forth by Sir Thomas
Browne in the _Religio Medici_, when he declares that "all things are
artificial; for Nature is the Art of God."

But these modes of thought, according to which, on the one hand, the
processes of Art are included among processes of Nature, or on the other
the processes of Nature among the processes of Art, are exceptional. In
ordinary use the two conceptions, each of them somewhat vague and
inexact, are antithetical. Their antithesis was what Dr Johnson had
chiefly in his mind when he defined Art as "the power of doing something
which is not taught by Nature or by instinct." But this definition is
insufficient, because the abstract word Art, whether used of all arts at
once or of one at a time, is a name not only for the power of doing
something, but for the exercise of the power; and not only for the
exercise of the power, but for the rules according to which it is
exercised; and not only for the rules, but for the result. Painting, for
instance, is an art, and the word connotes not only the power to paint,
but the act of painting; and not only the act, but the laws for
performing the act rightly; and not only all these, but the material
consequences of the act or the thing painted. So of agriculture,
navigation and the rest. Exception might also be taken to Dr Johnson's
definition on the ground that it excludes all actions of instinct from
the genus Art, whereas usage has in more languages than one given the
name of Art to several of those ingenuities in the lower animals which
popular theory at the same time declares to be instinctive. Dante, for
instance, speaks of boughs shaken by the wind, but not so violently as
to make the birds forgo their Art--

      "Non però dal lor esser dritto sparte
  Tanto, che gl' augelletti per le cime
  Lasciasser d' operar ogni lor _arte_."

And Fontenelle, speaking in the language not of poetry but of
science:--"Most animals--as, for instance, bees, spiders and
beavers--have a kind of art peculiar to themselves; but each race of
animals has no more than one art, and this one has had no first inventor
among the race. Man, on the other hand, has an infinity of different
arts which were not born with his race, and of which the glory is his
own." Dr Johnson might reply that those properties of variety and of
originality or individual invention, which Fontenelle himself alleges in
the ingenuities of man but not in those of the lower animals, are
sufficient to make a generic difference, and to establish the
impropriety of calling a honeycomb or a spider's web a work of Art. It
is not our purpose to trespass on ground so debateable as that of the
nature of consciousness in the lower animals. Enough that when we use
the term Art of any action, it is because we are thinking of properties
in the action from which we infer, whether justly or not, that the agent
voluntarily and designedly puts forth skill for known ends and by
regular and uniform methods. If, then, we were called upon to frame a
general definition of Art, giving the word its widest and most
comprehensive meaning, it would run thus:--_Every regulated operation or
dexterity by which organized beings pursue ends which they know
beforehand, together with the rules and the result of every such
operation or dexterity_.

Here it will be well to consider very briefly the natural history of the
name which has been given to this very comprehensive conception by the
principal branches of civilized mankind. Our own word Art the English
language has taken, as all the Romance languages of modern Europe have
taken theirs, directly from the Latin. The Latin _ars_, according to the
prevailing opinion of philologists, proceeds from a root AR, of which
the primitive signification was to put or fit things together, and which
is to be found in a large family of Greek words. The Greek [Greek:
technæ], the name both for arts in the particular and art in the
abstract, is by its root related both to [Greek: tek-ton] and [Greek:
tek-non], and thus contains the allied ideas of making and begetting.
The _proprium_ of art in the logic of the Stoics, "to create and beget,"
was strictly in accordance with this etymology. The Teutonic _Kunst_ is
formed from _können_, and _können_ is developed from a primitive _Ich
kann_. In _kann_ philology is inclined to recognize a preterite form of
a lost verb, of which we find the traces in _Kin-d_, a child; and the
form _Ich kann_ thus meaning originally "I begot," contains the germ of
the two several developments,--_können_, "to be master," "to be able,"
and _kennen_, "to know." We thus see that the chief Indo-European
languages have with one consent extended a name for the most elementary
exercise of a constructive or productive power, till that name has
covered the whole range of the skilled and deliberate operations of
sentient beings.

In proportion as men left out of sight the idea of creation, of
constructing or producing, "artificiosum esse ad gignendum," which is
the primitive half of this extended notion, and attended only to the
idea of skill, of proceeding by regular and disciplined methods,
"progredi via," which is the superadded half, the whole notion Art, and
the name for it, might become subject to a process of thought which, if
analysed, would be like this:--What is done by regular and disciplined
methods is Art; facts are observed and classified, and a systematic view
of the order of the universe obtained, by regular and disciplined
methods; the observing and classifying of facts, and obtaining a
systematic view of the order of the universe, is therefore Art. To a
partial extent this did unconsciously take place. Science, of which the
essence is only in knowledge and theory, came to be spoken of as Art, of
which the essence is all in practice and production. Cicero,
notwithstanding his citation of the Stoical dictum that practice and
production were of the essence of Art, elsewhere divides Art into two
kinds--one by which things are only contemplated in the mind, another by
which something is produced and done. ("Quumque artium aliud eiusmodi
sit, ut tantummodo rem cernat; aliud, ut moliatur aliquid et
faciat."--_Acad_. ii. 7.) Of the former kind his instance is geometry;
of the latter the art of playing on the lyre. Now geometry,
understanding by geometry an acquisition of the mind, that is, a
collected body of observations and deductions concerning the properties
of space and magnitude, is a science and not an art; although there is
an art of the geometer, which is the skill by which he solves any given
problem in his science, and the rules of that skill, and his exertion in
putting it forth. And so every science has its instrumental art or
practical discipline; and in as far as the word Art is used only of the
practical discipline or dexterity of the geometer, the astronomer, the
logician, the grammarian, or other person whose business it is to
collect and classify facts for contemplation, in so far the usage is
just. The same justification may be extended to another usage, whereby
in Latin, and some of its derivative languages, the name Art came to be
transferred in a concrete sense to the body of rules, the written code
or manual, which lays down the discipline and regulates the dexterity;
as _ars grammatica, ars logica, ars rhetorica_ and the rest. But when
the word is stretched so as to mean the sciences, as theoretical
acquisitions of the mind, that meaning is illegitimate. Whether or not
Cicero, in the passage above quoted, had in his mind the science of
geometry as a collected body of observations and deductions, it is
certain that the Ciceronian phrase of the _liberal arts_, the _ingenuous
arts_, both in Latin and its derivatives or translations in modern
speech, has been used currently to denote the sciences themselves, and
not merely the disciplines instrumental to them. The _trivium_ and the
_quadrivium_ (grammar, logic and rhetoric--geometry, astronomy, music
and arithmetic) have been habitually called arts, when some of them have
been named in that sense in which they mean not arts but sciences,
"only contemplating things in the mind." Hence the nomenclature, history
and practical organization, especially in Britain, of one great division
of university studies: the division of "arts," with its "faculty," its
examinations, and its degrees.

In the German language the words for Art and Science have in general
been loosely interchanged. The etymology of the word for Art secured a
long continuance for this ambiguity. _Kunst_ was employed
indiscriminately in both the senses of the primitive _Ich kann_, to
signify what I know, or Science, and what I can do, or Art. It was not
till the end of the 17th century that a separate word for Science, the
modern _Wissenschaft_, came into use. On the other hand, the Greek word
[Greek: technae], with its distinct suggestion of the root signification
to make or get, acted probably as a safeguard against this tendency. The
distinction between [Greek: technae], Art or practice, and [Greek:
epistaemae], knowledge or Science, is observed, though not
systematically, in Greek philosophy. But for our present purpose, that
of making clear the true relation between the one conception and the
other, further quotation is rendered superfluous by the discussion the
subject has received at the hands of the modern writer already quoted.
Between Art, of which we practise the rules, and Science, of which we
entertain the doctrines, J.S. Mill establishes the difference in the
simplest shape, by pointing out that one grammatical mood is proper for
the conclusions of Science, and another for those of Art. Science
enunciates her conclusions in the indicative mood, whereas "the
imperative is the characteristic of Art, as distinguished from Science."
And as Art utters her conclusions in her own form, so she supplies the
substance of her own major premise.

  "Every art has one first principle, or general major premise, not
  borrowed from science, that which enunciates the object aimed at, and
  affirms it to be a desirable object. The builder's art assumes that it
  is desirable to have buildings; architecture (as one of the fine arts)
  that it is desirable to have them beautiful and imposing. The hygienic
  and medical arts assume, the one that the preservation of health, the
  other that the cure of disease, are fitting and desirable ends. These
  are not propositions of science. Propositions of science assert a
  matter of fact--an existence, a co-existence, a succession, or a
  resemblance. The propositions now spoken of do not assert that
  anything is, but enjoin or recommend that something should be. They
  are a class by themselves. A proposition of which the predicate is
  expressed by the words _ought_ or _should be_ is generically different
  from one which is expressed by _is_ or _will be_."

And the logical relation of Art and Science, in other words, the manner
of framing the intermediate member between the general major premise of
Art and its imperative conclusion, is thus defined:--

  "The Art [in any given case] proposes to itself an end to be attained,
  defines the end, and hands it over to the Science. The Science
  receives it, considers it as a phenomenon or effect to be studied, and
  having investigated its causes and conditions, sends it back to Art
  with a theorem of the causes and combinations by which it could be
  produced. Art then examines these combinations of circumstances, and
  according as any of them are or are not in human power, pronounces the
  end attainable or not. The only one of the premises, therefore, which
  Art supplies, is the original major premise, which asserts that the
  attainment of the given end is desirable. Science, then, lends to Art
  the proposition (obtained by a series of inductions or deductions)
  that the performance of certain actions will attain the end. From
  these premises Art concludes that the performance of these actions is
  desirable, and finding it also practicable, converts the theorem into
  a rule or precept.... The grounds, then, of every rule of Art are to
  be found in the theorems of Science. An Art, or a body of Art,
  consists of the rules, together with as much of the speculative
  propositions as comprises the justification of these rules. The
  complete Art of any matter includes a selection of such a portion from
  the Science as is necessary to show on what conditions the effects,
  which the Art aims at producing, depend. And Art in general consists
  of the truths of Science arranged in the most convenient order for
  practice, instead of the order which is most convenient for thought.
  Science groups and arranges its truths so as to enable us to take in
  at one view as much as possible of the general order of the universe.
  Art, though it must assume the same general laws, follows them only
  into such of their detailed consequences as have led to the formation
  of rules of conduct, and brings together from parts of the field of
  Science most remote from one another, the truths relating to the
  production of the different and heterogeneous causes necessary to each
  effect which the exigencies of practical life require to be
  produced."--(Mill's _Logic_, vol. ii. pp. 542-549).

The whole discussion may be summed up thus. Science consists in knowing,
Art consists in doing. What I must do in order to know, is Art
subservient to Science: what I must know in order to do, is Science
subservient to Art.

Art, then, is defined by two broad distinctions: first, its popular
distinction from Nature; and next, its practical and theoretic
distinction from Science. Both of these distinctions are observed in the
terms of our definition given above. Within the proper limits of this
definition, the conception of Art, and the use of the word for it, have
undergone sundry variations. These variations correspond to certain
vicissitudes or developments in the order of historical facts and in
society. The requirements of society, stimulating the ingenuity of its
individual members, have led to the invention of arts and groups of
arts, constantly progressing, with the progress of civilization, in
number, in complexity, and in resource. The religious imagination of
early societies, who find themselves in possession of such an art or
group of arts, forgets the history of the invention, and assigns it to
the inspiration or special grace of some god or hero. So the Greeks
assigned the arts of agriculture to Triptolemus, those of spinning and
navigation to Athena, and of music to Apollo. At one stage of
civilization one art or group of arts is held in higher esteem, another
at another. In societies, like most of those of the ancient world, where
slaves were employed in domestic service, and upon the handicrafts
supplying the immediate utilities of life--food, shelter and
clothing--these constituted a group of servile arts. The arts of
husbandry or agriculture, on the other hand, have alternately been
regarded as servile and as honourable according as their exercise has
been in the hands of a subject class, as under feudal institutions, or,
as under the Roman republic, of free cultivators. Under feudal
institutions, or in a society in a state of permanent war, the allied
arts of war and of government have been held the only honourable class.
In commercial states, like the republics of Italy, the arts of gain, or
of production (other than agricultural) and distribution, have made good
their title to equal estimation and greater power beside the art of
captains. But among peaceful arts, industries or trades, some have
always been held to be of higher and others of lower rank; the higher
rank being assigned to those that required larger operations, higher
training, or more thoughtful conduct, and yielded ampler returns--the
lower rank to those which called for simple manual exercise, especially
if such exercise was of a disagreeable or degrading kind. In the cities
of Italy, where both commerce and manufactures were for the first time
organized on a considerable scale, the name _arte_, Art, was retained to
designate the gilds or corporations by which the several industries were
exercised; and, according to the nature of the industry, the art was
classed as higher or lower (_maggiore_ and _minore_).

The arts of which we have hitherto spoken have arisen from positive
requirements, and supply what are strictly utilities, in societies; not
excluding the art of war, at least so far as concerns one-half of war,
the defensive half. But war continued to be an honourable pursuit,
because it was a pursuit associated with birth, power and wealth, as
well as with the virtue of courage, in cases where it had no longer the
plea of utility, but was purely aggressive or predatory; and the arts of
the chase have stood in this respect in an analogous position to those
of war.

There are other arts which have not had their origin in positive
practical needs, but have been practised from the first for pleasure or
amusement. The most primitive human beings of whom we have any
knowledge, the cave-dwellers of the palaeolithic period, had not only
the useful art of chipping stones into spear-heads, knife-heads and
arrow-heads, and making shafts or handles of these implements out of
bone; they had also the ornamental art of scratching upon the bone
handle the outlines of the animals they saw--mammoth, rhinoceros or
reindeer--or of carving such a handle into a rude resemblance of one of
these animals. Here we have a skill exercised, in the first case, for
pure fancy or pleasure, and in the second, for adding an element of
fancy or pleasure to an element of utility. Here, therefore, is the
germ of all those arts which produce imitations of natural objects for
purposes of entertainment or delight, as painting, sculpture, and their
subordinates; and of all those which fashion useful objects in one way
rather than another because the one way gives pleasure and the other
does not, as architecture and the subordinate decorative arts of
furniture, pottery and the rest. Arts that work in a kindred way with
different materials are those of dancing and music. Dancing works with
the physical movements of human beings. Music works with sound. Between
that imitative and plastic group, and the group of these which only
produce motion or sound and pass away, there is the intermediate group
of eloquence and the drama, which deal with the expression of human
feeling in spoken words and acted gestures. There is also the
comprehensive art of poetry, which works with the material of written
words, and can ideally represent the whole material of human life and
experience. Of all these arts the end is not use but pleasure, or
pleasure before use, or at least pleasure and use conjointly. In modern
language, there has grown up a usage which has put them into a class by
themselves under the name of the Fine Arts, as distinguished from the
Useful or Mechanical Arts. (See AESTHETICS and FINE ARTS.) Nay more, to
them alone is often appropriated the use of the generic word Art, as if
they and they only were the arts [Greek: katexochin]. And further yet,
custom has reduced the number which the class-word is meant to include.
When Art and the works of Art are now currently spoken of in this sense,
not even music or poetry is frequently denoted, but only architecture,
sculpture and painting by themselves, or with their subordinate and
decorative branches. In correspondence with this usage, another usage
has removed from the class of _arts_, and put into a contrasted class of
_manufactures_, a large number of industries and their products, to
which the generic term Art, according to our definition, properly
applies. The definition covers the _mechanical_ arts, which can be
efficiently exercised by mere trained habit, rote or calculation, just
as well as the fine arts, which have to be exercised by a higher order
of powers. But the word Art, becoming appropriated to the fine arts, has
been treated as if it necessarily carried along with it, and as if works
to be called works of art must necessarily possess, the attributes of
free individual skill and invention, expressing themselves in ever new
combinations of pleasurable contrivance, and seeking perfection not as a
means towards some ulterior practical end but as an ideal end in itself.
     (S. C.)




ARTA (_Narda_, i.e. [Greek: en Arda], or _Zarta_, i.e. [Greek: eis
Arta]), a town of Greece, in the province of Arta, 59 m. N.N.W. of
Mesolonghi. Pop. about 7000. It is built on the site of the ancient
Ambracia (q.v.), its present designation being derived from a corruption
of the name of the river Arachthus (Arta) on which it stands. This
enters the Gulf of Arta some distance south of the town. The river forms
the frontier between Greece and Turkey, and is crossed by a picturesque
bridge, which is neutral ground. There are a few remains of old
cyclopean walls. The town contains also a Byzantine castle, built on the
lofty site of the ancient citadel; a palace belonging to the Greek
metropolitan; a number of mosques, synagogues and churches, the most
remarkable being the church of the Virgin of Consolation, founded in
819. The streets of the town were widened and improved in 1869.
Manufacture of woollens, cottons, Russia leather and embroidery is
carried on, and there is trade in cattle, wine, tobacco, hemp, hides and
grain. Much of the neighbouring plain is very fertile, and the town is
surrounded with gardens and orchards, in which orange, lemon and citron
come to great perfection. In 1083 Arta was taken by Bohemund of
Tarentum; in 1449 by the Turks; in 1688 by the Venetians. In 1797 it was
held by the French, but in the following year, 1798, Ali Pasha of
Iannina captured it. During the Greek War of Independence it suffered
severely, and was the scene of several conflicts, in which the ultimate
success was with the Turks. An insurrection in 1854 was at once
repressed. It was ceded to Greece in 1881. In the Greco-Turkish War of
1897 the Greeks gained some temporary successes at Arta during April and
May.




ARTA, GULF OF (anc. _Sinus Ambracius_), an inlet of the Ionian Sea, 25
m. long and 10 broad, most of the northern shores of which belong to
Turkey, the southern and eastern to Greece. Its only important affluent,
besides the Arta, is the Luro (anc. _Charadra_), also from the north.
The gulf abounds with mullets, soles and eels. Around its shores are
numerous ruins of ancient cities: Actium at the entrance, where the
famous battle was fought in 31 B.C.; Nicopolis, Argos, Limnaea and
Olpae; and several flourishing towns, such as Preveza, Arta (anc.
_Ambracia_), Karavasara or Karbasaras, and Vonitza.

The river ARTA (anc. _Arachthus_ or _Aratthus_, in Livy xxxviii. 3,
_Aretho_) is the chief river of Epirus, and is said to have been
navigable in ancient times as far as Ambracia. Below this town it flows
through a marshy plain, consisting mainly of its own alluvium; its upper
course is through the territory of the Molossians; its total length is
about 80 m.




ARTABANUS, the name of a number of Persian princes, soldiers and
administrators. The most important are the following:--

1. Brother of Darius I., and, according to Herodotus, the trusted
adviser of his nephew Xerxes. Herodotus makes him a principal figure in
epic dialogues: he warns Darius not to attack the Scythians (iv. 83; cf.
also iv. 143), and predicts to Xerxes his defeat by the Greeks (vii. 10
ff., 46 ff.); Xerxes sent him home to govern the empire during the
campaign (vii. 52, 53).

2. Vizier of Xerxes (Ctesias, _Pers_. 20), whom he murdered in 465 B.C.
According to Aristotle, _Pol_. v. 1311 b, he had previously killed
Xerxes' son Darius, and was afraid that the father would avenge him;
according to Ctesias, _Pers_. 29, Justin iii. 1, Diod. xi. 69, he killed
Xerxes first and then pretended that Darius had murdered him, and
instigated his brother Artaxerxes to avenge the parricide. At all
events, during the first months of the reign of Artaxerxes I., he was
the ruling power in the state (therefore the chronographers wrongly
reckon him as king, with a reign of seven months), until Artaxerxes,
having learned the truth about the murder of his father and his brother,
overwhelmed and killed Artabanus and his sons in open fight.

3. A satrap of Bactria, who revolted against Artaxerxes I., but was
defeated in two battles (Ctes. _Pers_. 31).

The name was borne also by four Parthian kings. The Parthian king
Arsaces, who was attacked by Antiochus III. in 209, has been called
Artabanus by some modern authors without any reason.

4. ARTABANUS I., successor of his nephew Phraates II. about 127 B.C.,
perished in a battle against the Tochari, a Mongolian tribe, which had
invaded the east of Iran (Justin xli. 2). He is perhaps identical with
the Artabanus mentioned in Trogus, Prol. xlii.

5. ARTABANUS II. c. A.D. 10-40, son of an Arsacid princess (Tac. _Ann_.
vi. 48), lived in the East among the Dahan nomads. He was raised to the
throne by those Parthian grandees who would not acknowledge Vonones I.,
whom Augustus had sent from Rome (where he lived as hostage) as
successor of his father Phraates IV. The war between the two pretenders
was long and doubtful; on a coin Vonones mentions a victory over
Artabanus. At last Artabanus defeated his rival completely and occupied
Ctesiphon; Vonones fled to Armenia, where he was acknowledged as king,
under the protection of the Romans. But when Artabanus invaded Armenia,
Vonones fled to Syria, and the emperor Tiberius thought it prudent to
support him no longer. Germanicus, whom he sent to the East, concluded a
treaty with Artabanus, in which he was recognized as king and friend of
the Romans. Armenia was given (A.D. 18) to Zeno, the son of the king of
Pontus (Tac. _Ann_. ii. 3 f., 58; Joseph. _Ant_. 18. 24).

Artabanus II., like all Parthian princes, was much troubled by the
opposition of the grandees. He is said to have been very cruel in
consequence of his education among the Dahan barbarians (Tac. _Ann_. vi.
41). To strengthen his power he killed all the Arsacid princes whom he
could reach (Tac. _Ann_. vi. 31). Rebellions of the subject nations may
have occurred also. We learn that he intervened in the Greek city
Seleucia in favour of the oligarchs (Tac. _Ann_. vi. 48), and that two
Jewish brigands maintained themselves for years in Neerda in the swamps
of Babylonia, and were acknowledged as dynasts by Artabanus (Jos. _Ant._
18. 9). In A.D. 35 he tried anew to conquer Armenia, and to establish
his son Arsaces as king there. A war with Rome seemed inevitable. But
that party among the Parthian magnates which was hostile to Artabanus
applied to Tiberius for a king of the race of Phraates. Tiberius sent
Phraates's grandson, Tiridates III., and ordered L. Vitellius (the
father of the emperor) to restore the Roman authority in the East. By
very dexterous military and diplomatic operations Vitellius succeeded
completely. Artabanus was deserted by his followers and fled to the
East. Tiridates, who was proclaimed king, could no longer maintain
himself, because he appeared to be a vassal of the Romans; Artabanus
returned from Hyrcania with a strong army of Scythian (Dahan)
auxiliaries, and was again acknowledged by the Parthians. Tiridates left
Seleucia and fled to Syria. But Artabanus was not strong enough for a
war with Rome; he therefore concluded a treaty with Vitellius, in which
he gave up all further pretensions (A.D. 37). A short time afterwards
Artabanus was deposed again, and a certain Cinnamus was proclaimed king.
Artabanus took refuge with his vassal, the king Izates, of Adiabene; and
Izates by negotiations and the promise of a complete pardon induced the
Parthians to restore Artabanus once more to the throne (Jos. _Ant._ 20.
3). Shortly afterwards Artabanus died, and was succeeded by his son,
Vardanes, whose reign was still more turbulent than that of his father.

6. ARTABANUS III. reigned a short time in A.D. 80 (on a coin of this
year he calls himself Arsaces Artabanus) and the following years, and
supported a pretender who rose in Asia Minor under the name of Nero
(Zonaras xi. 18), but could not maintain himself against Pacorus II.

7. ARTABANUS IV., the last Parthian king, younger son of Vologaeses IV.,
who died A.D. 209. He rebelled against his brother Vologaeses V. (Dio
Cass. vii. 12), and soon obtained the upper hand, although Vologaeses V.
maintained himself in a part of Babylonia till about A.D. 222. The
emperor Caracalla, wishing to make use of this civil war for a conquest
of the East in imitation of his idol, Alexander the Great, attacked the
Parthians in 216. He crossed the Tigris, destroyed the towns and spoiled
the tombs of Arbela; but when Artabanus advanced at the head of an army,
he retired to Carrhae. There he was murdered by Macrinus in April 217.
Macrinus was defeated at Nisibis and concluded a peace with Artabanus,
in which he gave up all the Roman conquests, restored the booty, and
paid a heavy contribution to the Parthians (Dio Cass. lxxviii. 26 f.).
But at the same time, the Persian dynast Ardashir (q.v.) had already
begun his conquests in Persia and Carmania. When Artabanus tried to
subdue him his troops were defeated. The war lasted several years; at
last Artabanus himself was vanquished and killed (A.D. 226), and the
rule of the Arsacids came to an end.

  See further PERSIA: History, § ancient, and works there quoted.
       (Ed. M.)




ART AND PART, a term used in Scots law to denote the aiding or abetting
in the perpetration of a crime,--the being an accessory before or at the
perpetration of the crime. There is no such offence recognized in
Scotland as that of being an accessory after the fact.




ARTAPHERNES, more correctly ARTAPHRENES, brother of Darius Hystaspis,
and satrap of Sardis. It was he who received the embassy from Athens
sent probably by Cleisthenes (q.v.) in 507 B.C., and subsequently warned
the Athenians to receive back the "tyrant" Hippias. Subsequently he took
an important part in suppressing the Ionian revolt (see IONIA,
ARISTAGORAS, HISTIAEUS), and after the war compelled the cities to make
agreements by which all differences were to be settled by reference. He
also measured out their territories in parasangs and assessed their
tributes accordingly (Herod, vi. 42). In 492 he was superseded in his
satrapy by Mardonius (Herodotus v. 25, 30-32, 35, &c.; Diod. Sic. x.
25). His son, of the same name, was appointed (490), together with
Datis, to take command of the expedition sent by Darius to punish Athens
and Eretria for their share in the Ionian revolt. After the defeat of
Marathon he returned to Asia. In the expedition of Xerxes, ten years
later, he was in command of the Lydians and Mysians (Herod, vi. 94, 119;
vii. 74, Aesch. _Persae_, 21).

Aeschylus in his list of Persian kings (_Persae_, 775 ff.), which is
quite unhistorical, mentions two kings with the name Artaphrenes, who
may have been developed out of these two Persian commanders. (Ed. M.)




ARTAXERXES, a name representing Pers. _Artakhshatra_, "he whose empire
is well-fitted" or "perfected", Heb. _Artakhshasta_, Bab. _Artakshatsu_,
Susian _Irtakshashsha_ (and variants), Gr. [Greek: Artaxerxês], [Greek:
Artoxerxês], and in an inscription of Tralles (Dittenberger, _Sylloge_,
573) [Greek: Artaxerrês]; Herodotus (vi. 98) gives the translation
[Greek: megas arêios], and considers the name as a compound of Xerxes,
showing thereby that he knew nothing of the Persian language; the later
Persian form is _Ardashir_, which occurs in the form Artaxias (Artaxes)
as the name of some kings of Armenia. It was borne by three kings of the
Achaemenian dynasty of ancient Persia; though, so long as its meaning
was understood, it can have been adopted by the kings only after their
accession to the throne.

1. ARTAXERXES I., surnamed _Macrocheir, Longimanus_, "Longhand," because
his right hand was longer than his left (Plut. _Artax._ i.). He was the
younger son of Xerxes, and was raised to the throne in 465 by the vizier
Artabanus, the murderer of his father. After a few months he became
aware of the crimes of the vizier, and slew him and his sons in a
hand-to-hand fight in the palace. His reign was, on the whole, peaceful;
the empire had reached a period of stagnation. Plutarch (_Artax._ i.)
says that he was famous for his mild and magnanimous character, Nepos
(_de Reg._ i.) that he was exceedingly beautiful and valiant. From the
authentic report of his cup-bearer Nehemiah we see that he was a kind,
good-natured, but rather weak monarch, and he was undoubtedly much under
the baneful influence of his mother Amestris (for whose mischievous
character cf. Herod. ix. 109 ff.) and his sister and wife Amytis. The
peacefulness of his rule was interrupted by several insurrections. At
the very beginning the satrap Artabanus raised a rebellion in Bactria,
but was defeated in two battles. More dangerous was the rebellion of
Egypt under Inarus (Inaros), which was put down by Megabyzus only after
a long struggle against the Egyptians and the Athenians (460-454). Out
of it sprang the rebellion of Megabyzus, who was greatly exasperated
because, though he had persuaded Inarus to surrender by promising that
his life would be spared, Artaxerxes, yielding to the entreaties of his
wife Amytis, who wanted to take revenge on Inarus for the death of her
brother Achaemenes, the satrap of Egypt, had surrendered him to her for
execution.

In spite of his weakness, Artaxerxes I. was not unsuccessful in his
polity. In 448 the war with Athens was terminated by the treaty
concluded by Callias (but see CALLIAS and CIMON), by which the Athenians
left Cyprus and Egypt to the Persians, while Persia gave up nothing of
her rights, but promised not to make use of them against the Greek
cities on the Asiatic coast, which had gained their liberty (Ed. Meyer,
_Forschungen zur alt. Gesch._ ii. 71 ff.). In the Samian and the
Peloponnesian wars, Artaxerxes remained neutral, in spite of the
attempts made by both Sparta and Athens to gain his alliance.

During the reign of Artaxerxes I. the Jewish religion was definitely
established and sanctioned by law in Jerusalem, on the basis of a firman
granted by the king to the Babylonian priest Ezra in his seventh year,
458 B.C., and the appointment of his cup-bearer Nehemiah as governor of
Judaea in his twentieth year, 445 B.C. The attempts which have been made
to deny the authenticity of those parts of the books of Ezra and
Nehemiah which contain an account of these two men, taken from their own
memoirs, or to place them in the reign of Artaxerxes II., are not
convincing (cf. Ed. Meyer, _Die Entstehung des Judentums_, 1896; see
further JEWS, §§ 19, 21, 22; EZRA AND NEHEMIAH).

Artaxerxes I. died in December 425, or January 424 (Thuc. iv. 50). To
his reign must belong the famous quadrilingual alabaster vases from
Egypt (on which his name is written in Persian, Susian and Babylonian
cuneiform characters and in hieroglyphics), for Artaxerxes II. and III.
did not possess Egypt. A great many tablets, dated from his reign, have
been found in Nippur (published by H. von Hilprecht and Clay, _The
Babylonian Expedition of the University of Pennsylvania_, series A, vol.
ix.), and a few others at other places in Babylonia. Inscriptions of the
king himself are not extant; his grandson mentions his buildings in
Susa. For the suggested identification of Artaxerxes I. with the
Biblical Ahasuerus, see AHASUERUS.

2. ARTAXERXES II., surnamed _Mnemon_, the eldest son of Darius II., whom
he succeeded in the spring of 404. According to Ctesias (_Pers._ 57;
Plut. _Artax._ i.) he was formerly called Arsaces or Arsikas, whereas
Dinon (Plut. _Artax._ i.) calls him Oarses. This is corroborated by a
Babylonian tablet with observations of the moon (Brit. Mus. Sp. ii. 749;
_Zeitsch. f. Assyriologie_, vii. 223), which is dated from the 26th year
of "Arshu, who is Artakshatsu," i.e. 379 B.C. (cp. Ed. Meyer,
_Forschungen zur allen Geschichte_, ii. 466 ff.). When Artaxerxes II.
mounted the throne, the power of Athens had been broken by Lysander, and
the Greek towns in Asia were again subjects of the Persian empire. But
his whole reign is a time of continuous decay; the original force of the
Persians had been exhausted in luxury and intrigues, and the king,
though personally brave and good-natured, was quite dependent upon his
favourites and his harem, and especially upon his mother Parysatis. In
the beginning of his reign falls the rebellion of his brother Cyrus, who
was secretly favoured by Parysatis and by Sparta. Although Cyrus was
defeated at Cunaxa, this rebellion was disastrous inasmuch as it opened
to the Greeks the way into the interior of the empire, and demonstrated
that no oriental force was able to withstand a band of well-trained
Greek soldiers. Subsequently Greek mercenaries became indispensable not
only to the king but also to the satraps, who thereby gained the means
for attempting successful rebellions, into which they were provoked by
the weakness of the king, and by the continuous intrigues between the
Persian magnates. The reign is, therefore, a continuous succession of
rebellions. Egypt soon revolted anew and could not be subdued again.
When in 399 war broke out between Sparta and Persia, the Persian troops
in Asia Minor were quite unable to resist the Spartan armies. The active
and energetic Persian general Pharnabazus succeeded in creating a fleet
by the help of Evagoras, king of Salamis in Cyprus, and the Athenian
commander Conon, and destroyed the Spartan fleet at Cnidus (August 394).
This victory enabled the Greek allies of Persia (Thebes, Athens, Argos,
Corinth) to carry on the Corinthian war against Sparta, and the Spartans
had to give up the war in Asia Minor. But it soon became evident that
the only gainers by the war were the Athenians, who in 389, under
Thrasybulus, tried to found their old empire anew (see DELIAN LEAGUE).
At the same time Evagoras attempted to conquer the whole of Cyprus, and
was soon in open rebellion. The consequence was that, when in 388 the
Spartan admiral Antalcidas (q.v.) came to Susa, the king was induced to
conclude a peace with Sparta by which Asia fell to him and European
Greece to Sparta. After the peace, Evagoras was attacked. He lost his
conquests, but had to be recognized as independent king of Salamis (380
B.C.). Two expeditions against Egypt (385-383 and 374-372) ended in
complete failure. At the same period there were continuous rebellions in
Asia Minor; Pisidia, Paphlagonia, Bithynia and Lycia, threw off the
Persian yoke and Hecatomnus, the satrap of Caria, obtained an almost
independent position. Similar wars were going on against the mountain
tribes of Armenia and Iran, especially against the Cadusians on the
Caspian Sea. In this war Artaxerxes is said to have distinguished
himself personally (380 B.C.), but got into such difficulties in the
wild country that he was glad when Tiribazus succeeded in concluding a
peace with the Cadusian chieftains.

By the peace of Antalcidas the Persian supremacy was proclaimed over
Greece; and in the following wars all parties, Spartans, Athenians,
Thebans, Argives continually applied to Persia for a decision in their
favour. After the battle of Leuctra, when the power of Thebes was
founded by Epaminondas, Pelopidas went to Susa (367) and restored the
old alliance between Persia and Thebes. The Persian supremacy, however,
was not based upon the power of the empire, but only on the discord of
the Greeks. Shortly after the edict by which the king had proclaimed his
alliance with Thebes, and the conditions of the general peace which he
was going to impose upon Greece, his weakness became evident, for since
366 all the satraps of Asia Minor (Datames, Ariobarzanes, Mausolus,
Orontes, Artabazus) were in rebellion again, in close alliance with
Athens, Sparta and Egypt. The king could do little against them; even
Autophradates, satrap of Lydia, who had remained faithful, was forced
for some time to unite himself with the rebels. But every one of the
allies mistrusted all the others; and the sole object of every satrap
was to improve his condition and his personal power, and to make a
favourable peace with the king, for which his neighbours and former
allies had to pay the costs. The rebellion was at last put down by a
series of treacheries and perfidious negotiations. Some of the rebels
retained their provinces; others were punished, as opportunity offered.
Mithradates betrayed his own father Ariobarzanes, who was crucified, and
murdered Datames, to whom he had introduced himself as a faithful ally.
When the long reign of Artaxerxes II. came to its close in the autumn of
359 the authority of the empire had been restored almost everywhere.

Artaxerxes himself had done very little to obtain this result. In fact,
in the last years of his reign he had sunk into a perfect dotage. All
his time was spent in the pleasures of his harem, the intrigues of which
were further complicated by his falling in love with and marrying his
own daughter Atossa (according to the Persian religion a marriage
between the nearest relations is no incest). At the same time, his sons
were quarrelling about the succession; one of them, Ochus, induced the
father by a series of intrigues to condemn to death three of his older
brothers, who stood in his way. Shortly afterwards, Artaxerxes II. died.

In this reign an important innovation took place in the Persian
religion. Berossus (in Clemens Alex. _Protrept._ i. 5. 65) tells us that
the Persians knew of no images of the gods until Artaxerxes II. erected
images of Anaitis in Babylon, Susa, Ecbatana, Persepolis, Bactra,
Damascus, Sardis. This statement is proved correct by the inscriptions;
all the former kings name only Auramazda (Ahuramazda), but Artaxerxes
II. in his building inscriptions from Susa and Ecbatana invokes
Ahuramazda, Anahita and Mithra. These two gods belonged to the old
popular religion of the Iranians, but had until then been neglected by
the true Zoroastrians; now they were introduced into the official
worship much in the way in which the cult of the saints came into the
Christian religion. About the history of Artaxerxes II. we are
comparatively well informed from Greek sources; for the earlier part of
his reign from Ctesias and Xenophon (_Anabasis_), for the later times
from Dinon of Ephesus, the historian of the Persians (from whom the
account of Justin is derived), from Ephorus (whose account is quoted by
Diodorus) and others. Upon these sources is based the biography of the
king by Plutarch.

3. ARTAXERXES III. is the title adopted by Ochus, the son of Artaxerxes
II., when he succeeded his father in 359. The chronographers generally
retain the name Ochus, and in the Babylonian inscriptions he is called
"Umasu, who is called Artakshatsu." The same form of the name (probably
pronounced Uvasu) occurs in the Syrian version of the canon of Ptolemy
by Elias of Nisibis (Amos).

Artaxerxes III. was a cruel but an energetic ruler. To secure his throne
he put to death almost all his relatives, but he suppressed the
rebellions also. In 356 he ordered all the satraps to dismiss their
mercenaries. Most of them obeyed; Artabazus of Phrygia, who tried to
resist and was supported by his brothers-in-law, Mentor and Memnon of
Rhodes, was defeated and fled to Philip of Macedon. Athens, whose
general Chares had supported Artabazus, was by the threatening messages
of the king forced to conclude peace, and to acknowledge the
independence of its rebellious allies (355 B.C.). Then the king
attempted to subjugate Egypt, but two expeditions were unsuccessful,
and, in consequence, Sidon and the other Phoenician towns, and the
princes of Cyprus, rebelled against Persia and defeated the Persian
generals. After great preparations the king came in person, but again
the attack on Egypt was repelled by the Greek generals of Nectanebus
(346). One or two years later Artaxerxes, at the head of a great army,
began the siege of Sidon. The Sidonian king Tennes considered resistance
hopeless, and betrayed the town to the Persian king, assisted by Mentor,
who had been sent with Greek troops from Egypt to defend the town.
Artaxerxes repressed the rebellion with great cruelty and destroyed the
town. The traitor Tennes was put to death, but Mentor rose high in the
favour of the king, and entered into a close alliance with the eunuch
Bagoas, the king's favourite and vizier. They succeeded in subjecting
the other rebels, and, after a hard fight at Pelusium, and many
intrigues, conquered Egypt (343); Nectanebus fled to Ethiopia.
Artaxerxes used his victory with great cruelty; he plundered the
Egyptian temples and is said to have killed the Apis. After his return
to Susa, Bagoas ruled the court and the upper satrapies, while Mentor
restored the authority of the empire everywhere in the west. He deposed
or killed many Greek dynasts, among them the famous Hermias of Atarneus,
the protector of Aristotle, who had friendly relations with Philip (342
B.C.). When Philip attacked Perinthus and Byzantium (340), Artaxerxes
sent them support, by which they were enabled to withstand the
Macedonians; Philip's antagonists in Greece, Demosthenes and his party,
hoped to get subsidies from the king, but were disappointed.

In 338 Artaxerxes III., with his older sons, was killed by Bagoas, who
raised his youngest son Arses to the throne. Artaxerxes III. is said
never to have entered the country of Persia proper, because, being a
great miser, he would not pay the present of a gold piece for every
Persian woman, which it was usual to give on such occasions (Plut.
_Alex._ 69). But we have a building inscription from Persepolis, which
contains his name and genealogy, and invocations of Ahuramazda and
Mithra.

  For the relations of Artaxerxes I.--III. with the Jews see JEWS, §§
  19-21. For bibliographical references see PERSIA: _Ancient History_.

  The name Artaxerxes was adopted by Bessus when he proclaimed himself
  king after the assassination of Darius III. It was borne by several
  dynasts of Persis, when it formed an independent kingdom in the time
  of the Parthian empire (on their coins they call themselves
  Artakhshathr; one of them is mentioned by Lucian, _Macrobii_, 15), and
  by three kings of the Sassanid dynasty, who are better known under the
  modern form Ardashir (q.v.).     (Ed. M.)




ARTEDI, PETER (1705-1735), Swedish naturalist, was born in the province
of Angermania, in Sweden, on the 22nd of February 1705. Intending to
become a clergyman, he went, in 1724, to study theology at Upsala, but
he turned his attention to medicine and natural history, especially
ichthyology, upon the study of which he exercised great influence (see
ICHTHYOLOGY). In 1728 his countryman Linnaeus arrived in Upsala, and a
lasting friendship was formed between the two. In 1732 both left Upsala,
Artedi for England, and Linnaeus for Lapland; but before parting they
reciprocally bequeathed to each other their manuscripts and books in the
event of death. He was accidentally drowned on the 27th of September
1735 at Amsterdam, where he was engaged in cataloguing the collections
of Albert Seba, a wealthy Dutchman, who had formed what was perhaps the
richest museum of his time. According to agreement, his manuscripts came
into the hands of Linnaeus, and his _Bibliotheca Ichthyologica_ and
_Philosophia Ichthyologica_, together with a life of the author, were
published at Leiden in the year 1738.




ARTEGA, a tribe of African "Arabs," said to be descendants of a sheik of
that name who came from Hadramut in pre-Islamic days, settling near
Tokar. The name is said to be "patrician," and the Artega may be
regarded as the most ancient stock in the Suakin district. They are now
an inferior mixed race. They were all followers of the mahdi and khalifa
in the Sudan wars (1883-1898).

  See _Anglo-Egyptian Sudan_, edited by Count Gleichen (London, 1905).




ARTEL (Russ. for "gang"), the name for the co-operative associations in
Russia. Originally, the artels were true examples of productive
co-operation, bodies of working-men associating together for the purpose
of jointly undertaking some piece of work, and dividing the profits.
This original form of artel still survives among the fishermen of
Archangel. Artels have come, however, to be little more than trade
gilds, with mutual responsibility. (For details see RUSSIA.)




ARTEMIDORUS. (1) A geographer "of Ephesus" who flourished about 100 B.C.
After studying at Alexandria, he travelled extensively and published the
results of his investigations in a large work on general geography
([Greek: Ta geographoumena]) in eleven books, much used by Strabo and
others. The original work is lost, but we possess many small fragments
and larger fragments of an abridgment made by Marcianus of Heracleia
(5th century), which contains the periplus of the Euxine and accounts of
Bithynia and Paphlagonia. (See Müller, _Geographi Graeci Minores_;
Bunbury, _History of Ancient Geography_; Stiehle, "Der Geograph
Artemidoros von Ephesos," in _Philologus_, xi., 1856). (2) A soothsayer
and interpreter of dreams, who flourished in the 2nd century A.D.,
during the reigns of Hadrian and the Antonines. He called himself
Daldianus from his mother's birthplace, Daldis in Lydia, in order to
make its name known to the world. His [Greek: Oneirokritica], or
interpretation of dreams, was said to have been written by command of
Apollo Daldianus, whose initiated votary he was. It is in four books,
with an appendix containing a collection of prophetic dreams which had
been realized. The first three books, addressed to Cassius Maximus, a
Phoenician rhetorician (perhaps identical with Maximus of Tyre), treat
of dreams and divination generally; the fourth--with a reply to his
critics--and the appendix are dedicated to his son, also named
Artemidorus and an interpreter of dreams. Artemidorus boasts of the
trouble expended on his work; he had read all the authorities on dreams,
travelled extensively, and conversed with all who had studied the
subject. The work is valuable as affording an insight into ancient
superstitions. According to Suidas, Artemidorus also wrote on augurs and
cheiromancy, but all trace of these works is lost. (Editions: Reiff,
1805, Hercher, 1864; translation and notes, Krauss, 1881; English
translation by Wood, 1644, and later editions.)




ARTEMIS, one of the principal goddesses in Greek mythology, the
counterpart of the Roman Diana. The suggested etymologies of the name
(see O. Gruppe, _Griechische Mythologie_, ii. p. 1267, note 2), as in
the case of most of the Olympian deities, are unsatisfactory, and throw
no light upon her significance and characteristics. The Homeric and
later conception of Artemis, though by no means the original one, may be
noticed first. She is the daughter of Zeus and Leto, twin-sister and
counterpart of Apollo. She is said to have been born a day before him
(on the 6th of the month) and tradition assigns them different
birthplaces--Delos to Apollo, Ortygia to Artemis. But Ortygia ("home of
quails") applies still to Delos, and may well have been a synonym for
that island. In its original sense it does not apply either to the
island of Ortygia at Syracuse, or to Ortygia near Ephesus, which also
claimed the honour of having been the birthplace of the goddess. Artemis
is the goddess of chastity, an aspect of her character which gradually
assumed more and more importance--the protectress of young men and
maidens, who defies and contemns the power of Aphrodite. Her resemblance
to her brother is shown in many ways. Like him, armed with bow and
arrows, she deals death to mortals, sometimes gently and suddenly,
especially to women, but also as a punishment for offences against
herself or morality. With him she takes part in the combat with Python
and with Tityus, in the slaughter of the children of Niobe, while alone
she executes vengeance on Orion. Although Apollo has nothing to do with
the earlier cult of Artemis, nor Artemis with that of Delphi, their
association was a comparatively early one, and probably originated in
Delos. Here the connexion of Artemis with the Hyperborean legend (see
APOLLO) is shown in the names of the maidens (Opis, Hecaerge) who were
supposed to have brought offerings from the north to Delos, where they
were buried. Both Opis (or Oupis) and Hecaerge are names of Artemis, the
latter being the feminine of Hecaergos, an epithet of Apollo. Like her
brother, she is not only a goddess who deals death, but she is also a
healing and a purifying divinity, [Greek: oulia] ("the healer," cf.
Apollo Oulios), [Greek: luae, luaia] ("purifier,") and [Greek: soteira],
"she who saves from all evils" (cf. Apollo [Greek: apotropaios]). Her
connexion with the prophetic art is doubtful, although mention is made
of an Artemis Sibylla. To her association with Apollo are certainly to
be referred the names Delphinia and Pythia, and the titles referring to
state and family life--[Greek: prostataeria], [Greek: patriotis],
[Greek: boulaia]. It probably accounts for her appearance as a goddess
of seafarers, the bestower of fair weather and prosperous voyages. At
Phigalia in Arcadia, Eurynome, represented as half woman and half fish,
was probably another form of Artemis. To the same association may be
traced her slight connexion with music, song and dance.

It is in the Arcadian and Athenian rites and legends, however, which are
certainly earlier than Homer, that the original conception of the
goddess is to be found. These tend to show that Artemis was first and
foremost a nature goddess, whose cult shows numerous traces of totemism.
As a goddess of fertilizing moisture, lakes, rivers, springs, and marshy
lowlands are brought into close connexion with her. Thus she is [Greek:
limnaia, despoina limnaes] ("lady of the lake"), [Greek: eleia] ("of
marshes"), [Greek: potamia] ("of rivers," especially of the Cladaus and
Alpheus, whence her name [Greek: Alpheiaia]). Her influence is very
active in promoting the increase of the fruits of the field, hence she
is specially a goddess of agriculture. She drives away the mice (cf.
Apollo Smintheus) and slays the Aloidae, the corn spirits; she is the
friend of the reapers, and requires her share of the first fruits. Her
character as a harvest goddess is clearly shown in the legend of the
Calydonian boar, sent by her to ravage the fields out of resentment at
not having received a harvest offering from Oeneus (see MELEAGER). As
[Greek: epimulios] and [Greek: epiklibanios] ("presiding over the mill
and the oven") she extends her protection over the further development
of the grain for the use of man.

Artemis was naturally also a goddess of trees and vegetation. Near
Orchomenus her wooden image stood in a large cedar-tree--an indication
that her worship was originally that of the tree itself ([Greek:
kedreatis], "the cedar goddess"); at Caryae there was an image of
Artemis [Greek: karuatis] ("the nut-tree goddess"). Two curious epithets
in this connexion deserve notice: [Greek: lugodesma] ("bound with
withies"), derived from the legend that the image of Artemis Orthia was
found in a thicket of withies, which twined round it and kept it upright
([Greek: lugos] is the _agnus castus_, and points to Artemis in her
relation to women); and [Greek: apagchomenae] ("the suspended"),
probably a reference to the custom of hanging the mask or image of a
vegetation-divinity on a tree to obtain fertility (Farnell, _Cults of
the Greek States_, ii. p. 429; cf. the "swing" festival ([Greek: aiora])
of the Greeks, and the _oscilla_ of the Romans).

The functions of the goddess extended from the vegetable to the animal
world, to the inhabitants of the woods and mountains. This is clearly
expressed in the cult of Artemis Laphria (possibly connected with
[Greek: laphura], "spoils"), at whose festivals all kinds of animals,
both wild and tame, as well as fruits, were thrown together on a huge
wood fire. Her general name in this connexion was [Greek: agrotera]
("roaming the wilds," not necessarily "goddess of the chase," an aspect
less familiar in the older religion), to whom five hundred goats were
offered every year by the Athenians as a thanksgiving in commemoration
of the victory at Marathon. Numerous animals were sacred to her, and at
Syracuse all kinds of wild beasts, including a lioness, were carried in
procession in her honour. It has been observed that she is rather the
patroness of the wild beasts of the field than of the more agricultural
or domestic animals (Farnell, _Cults_, ii. p. 431), although the epithet
[Greek: Haemerasia] ("the tamer," according to others, the "gentle"
goddess of healing) seems to refer to her connexion with the latter. The
bear was especially associated with her in Arcadia, and in her worship
as Artemis Brauronia at Brauron in Attica. According to the legend,
Callisto, an Arcadian nymph, became by Zeus the mother of Arcas, the
eponymous hero of the Arcadians. Zeus, to conceal the amour, changed
Callisto into a she-bear; Hera, however, discovered it, and persuaded
Artemis to slay Callisto, who was placed amongst the stars as [Greek:
arktos] ("the bear"). There is no doubt that Callisto is identical with
Artemis; her name is an obvious variation of [Greek: kallistae], a
frequent epithet of the goddess, to whom a temple was erected on the
hill where Callisto was supposed to be buried. It is suggested by M.
Kraus in _Classical Review_, February 1908, that Aphaea, the cult-name
of Artemis at Aegina, is of Semitic origin and means "beautiful."
Closely connected with this legend is the worship of Artemis Brauronia.
The accounts of its institution, which differ in detail, agree that it
was intended to appease the wrath of the goddess at the killing of a
bear. A number of young girls, between five and ten years of age,
wearing a bear-skin (afterwards a saffron-coloured robe) danced a
bear-dance, called [Greek: arkteia], the girls themselves being called
[Greek: arktoi]. In one account, a maiden was ordered to be sacrificed
to the bear Artemis, but a certain man who had a goat called it his
daughter and offered it up in secret, just as at Munychium a fawn
dressed up as a girl was sacrificed to the goddess. In place of the goat
or fawn a bear might have been expected, but the choice may have been
influenced by the animal totem of the tribe into whose hands the ritual
fell. The whole is a reminiscence of earlier times, when the goddess
herself was a bear, to whom human sacrifice was offered. Callisto was
originally a bear-goddess worshipped in Arcadia, identified with
Artemis, when nothing remained of the original animal-worship but name
and ritual. The worship of Callisto being merged in that of the greater
divinity, she became the handmaid and companion of Artemis. A stone
figure of a bear found on the Acropolis seems to point to the worship of
Artemis Brauronia. Her death at the hands of the latter was explained by
the wrath of the goddess--in her later aspect as goddess of chastity--at
Callisto's amour with Zeus (see A. Lang, _Myth, Ritual and Religion_,
ii.; Farnell, _Cults_, ii. p. 437). The custom of flogging youths at the
altar of Artemis Orthia[1] at Limnaeum in Laconia, and the legend of
Iphigeneia (q.v.), herself another form of Artemis, connected with
Artemis Taurica of the Tauric Chersonese, are usually supposed to point
to early human sacrifice (but see Farnell). Various explanations have
been given of the epithet [Greek: orthia]: (1) that it refers to the
primitive type of the "erect" wooden idol; (2) that it means "she who
safely rears children after birth," or "heals the sick" (cf. [Greek:
orthios] applied to Asclepius); (3) that it has a phallic significance
(Schreiber in Roscher's _Lexikon_). Scholars differ as to whether
Artemis Taurica is identical with Artemis Tauropolos, worshipped chiefly
at Samos with a milder ritual, but it is more probable that [Greek:
Tauropolos] simply means "protectress of bulls."

The protecting influence of Artemis was extended, like that of Apollo,
to the highest animal, man. She was especially concerned in the bringing
up of the young. Boys were brought by their nurses to the temple of
Artemis [Greek: koruthalia] (= [Greek: kourotrophos]) and there
consecrated to her; at the Apaturia, on the day called [Greek:
koureotis], boys cut off and dedicated their hair to her. Girls as well
as boys were under her protection. Her function as a goddess of marriage
is less certain, and the cult-titles adduced in support of it are hardly
convincing; such are [Greek: Haegemonae], interpreted as "she who leads
home the bride," [Greek: selasphoros], "bearer of light," that is, of
torches at the marriage procession. On the other hand, her connexion
with childbirth is clearly shown: in many places she is even called
Eilithyia, who in the earlier poets was regarded as distinct from her.
In one version of the story of her birth she is said to have been born a
day before Apollo, in order to assist Leto at his birth; women in
childbirth invoked her aid, and after delivery offered up their clothes
or a lock of hair. As already noticed, in Homer Artemis appears as a
goddess of death; closely akin to this is the conception of her as a
goddess of war. As such she is [Greek: nikaephoros] ("bringer of
victory"); the title [Greek: kolainis] is possibly connected with
[Greek: koleos] ("sword-sheath"); and [Greek: laphria] (see above) may
refer to the spoils of war as well as the chase.

The idea of Artemis as a virgin goddess, the "queen and huntress, chaste
and fair," which obtained great prominence in early times, and seems
inconsistent with her association with childbirth, is generally
explained as due to her connexion with Apollo, but it is suggested by
Farnell that [Greek: parthenos] originally meant "unmarried," and that
"[Greek: Artemis parthenos] may have been originally the goddess of a
people who had not yet the advanced Hellenic institutions of settled
marriage ... and when society developed the later family system the
goddess remained celibate, though not opposed to childbirth."

Another view of the original character of Artemis, which has found much
support in modern times, is that she was a moon-goddess. But there is no
trace of Artemis as such in the epic period, and the Homeric hymn knows
nothing of her identification with Selene. The attribute of the torch
will apply equally well to the goddess of the chase, and epithets such
as [Greek: phosphoros, selasphoros, aithopia], although applicable, are
by no means convincing. The idea dates from the 5th century, and was due
to her connexion with Hecate and Apollo. When the latter came to be
identified by philosophical speculation with the sun-god Helios, it was
natural that his sister and counterpart should be identified with the
moon-goddess Selene. But she is nowhere recognized in cult as such (see
Gruppe, _Griechische Mythologie_, ii. p. 1297, note 2).

It has been mentioned that Callisto, Iphigeneia, Eilithyia, are only
Artemis under different names; to these may be added Adrasteia,
Atalanta, Helen, Leto and others (see Wernicke in Pauly-Wissowa's
_Realencyclopädie_).

Again, various non-Hellenic divinities were identified with Artemis, and
their cult gradually amalgamated with hers. The most important of these
was Artemis of Ephesus, whose seat was in the marshy valley of the
Caystrus. Like the Greek Artemis, she was essentially a nature goddess,
the great foster-mother of the vegetable and animal kingdom. A number of
officials were engaged in the performance of her temple service. Her
eunuch priests, [Greek: megabyzoi] (a name which points to a Persian
origin), were under the control of a high priest called Essen (according
to others, there was a body of priests called Essenes). There were also
three classes of priestesses, Mellierae, Hierae, Parierae; there is no
evidence that they were called Melissae ("bees"), although the bee is a
frequent symbol on the coins of the city. Her chief festival, Ephesia or
Artemisia, was held in the spring, at which games and various contests
took place after the Greek fashion, although the ritual continued to be
of a modified oriental, orgiastic type. This goddess is closely
connected with the Amazons (q.v.), who are said to have built her temple
and set up her image in the trunk of a tree. The Greeks of Ephesus
identified her with their own Artemis, and claimed that her birthplace
Ortygia was near Ephesus, not in Delos. She has much in common with the
oriental prototype of Aphrodite, and the Cappadocian goddess Ma, another
form of Cybele. The usual figure of the Ephesian Artemis, which was said
in the first instance to have fallen from heaven, is in the form of a
female with many breasts, the symbol of productivity or a token of her
function as the all-nourishing mother. From the waist to the feet her
image resembles a pillar, narrowing downwards and sculptured all round
with rows of animals (lions, rams and bulls).

Mention may also be made of the following non-Hellenic representatives
of Artemis. Leucophryne (or Leucophrys), whose worship was brought by
emigrants from Magnesia in Thessaly to Magnesia on the Maeander, was a
nature goddess, and her representation on coins exactly resembles that
of the Ephesian Artemis. Her cult, however, from the little that is
known of it appears to have been more Hellenic. There was an altar and
temple of Artemis Pergaea at Perga in Pamphylia, where a yearly festival
was held in her honour. As in the case of Cybele, mendicant priests were
attached to her service. Similar figures were Artemis Coloene,
worshipped at Lake Coloe near Sardis; Artemis Cordax, celebrated in
wanton dances on Mount Sipylus; the Persian Artemis, identical with
Anaitis Bendis, was a Thracian goddess of war and the chase, whose cult
was introduced into Attica in the middle of the 5th century B.C. by
Thracian metics. At her festival called Bendidea, held at the Peiraeus,
there was a procession of Thracians who were settled in the district,
and a torch-race on horseback. (For Britomartis see separate article.)

Among the chief attributes of Artemis are: the hind, specially regarded
as her sacred animal; the bear, the boar and the goat; the zebu (Artemis
Leucophrys); the lion, one of her oldest animal symbols; bow and arrows,
as goddess of the chase and death; a mural crown, as the protectress of
cities; the torch, originally an attribute of the goddess of the chase
or marriage, but, like the crescent (originally an attribute of the
Asiatic nature goddesses), transferred to Artemis, when she came to be
regarded as a moon-goddess. The Greek Artemis was usually represented as
a huntress with bow and quiver, or torch in her hand, in face very like
Apollo, her drapery flowing to her feet, or, more frequently, girt high
for speed. She is accompanied often by a deer or a dog. Perhaps the
finest existing statue of her is the Diana of Versailles from Hadrian's
Villa (now in the Louvre), in which she wears a short tunic drawn in at
the waist and sandals on her feet; her hair is bound up into a knot at
the back of her head, with a band over the forehead. With her left hand
she holds a stag, while drawing an arrow from the quiver on her shoulder
with the right. Another famous statue is one from Gabii, in which she is
finishing her toilet and fastening the chlamys over her tunic. In older
times her figure is fuller and stronger, and the clothing more complete;
certain statues discovered at Delos, imitated from wooden models
(xoana), are supposed to represent Artemis; they are described as stiff
and rigid, the limbs as it were glued to the body without life or
movement, garments closely fitting, the folds of which fall in
symmetrical parallel lines. As a goddess of the moon she wears a long
robe, carries a torch, and her head is surmounted by a crescent. On the
coins of Arcadia, Aetolia, Crete and Sicily, are to be seen varied and
beautiful representations of her head as conceived by the Greek artists
in the best times.

  AUTHORITIES.--Articles in Pauly-Wissowa's _Realencyclopädie_;
  Roscher's _Lexikon der Mythologie_, and Daremberg and Saglio's
  _Dictionnaire des antiquités_ (s.v. Diana, with well-arranged
  bibliography); L. Preller, _Griechische Mythologie_ (4th ed. by C.
  Robert); L.R. Farnell, _The Cults of the Greek States_, ii. (1896); O.
  Gruppe, _Griechische Mythologie und Religions-Geschichte_, ii. (1906);
  A. Claus, _De Dianae antiquissima apud Graecos natura_ (Breslau,
  1880). In the article GREEK ART, fig. 11 (a gold ornament from
  Camirus) represents the Oriental goddess identified by the Greeks with
  Artemis.

  For the Roman goddess identified with Artemis see DIANA.     (J. H. F.)


FOOTNOTE:

  [1] The site of the temple of Artemis Orthia was excavated by the
    British School of Archaeology at Athens (see _Annual_, 1906). The
    flogging ([Greek: diamastigosis]) is explained by R.C. Bosanquet as a
    late institution of decadent Sparta, an exaggeration of an old ritual
    practice of whipping away boys who tried to steal cheeses from the
    altar (see _The Year's Work in Classical Studies_, ed. W.H.D. Rouse,
    1907).




ARTEMISIA, daughter of Lygdamis, was queen of Halicarnassus and Cos
about 480 B.C. Being a dependent of Persia, she took part in person in
the expedition of Xerxes against the Greeks, and fitted out five ships,
with which she distinguished herself in the sea-fight near Salamis
(480). When closely pursued by the Athenians she escaped by the
stratagem of attacking one of the Persian vessels, whereupon the
Athenians concluded that she was an ally, and gave up the pursuit
(Herod. vii. 99, viii. 68). After the battle Xerxes declared that the
men had fought like women, and the women like men. By her advice he did
not risk another battle, but at once retired from Greece. She is said to
have loved a young man named Dardanus, of Abydos, and, enraged at his
neglect of her, to have put out his eyes while he was asleep. The gods,
as a punishment for this, ordered her, by an oracle, to take the famous
but rather mythical _lover's leap_ from the Leucadian promontory
(Photius, _Cod. 153a_).




ARTEMISIA, the sister and wife of Mausolus (or Maussollus), king of
Caria, was sole ruler from about 353 to 350 B.C. She has immortalized
herself by the honours paid to the memory of her husband. She built for
him, in Halicarnassus, a very magnificent tomb, called the Mausoleum,
which was one of the seven wonders of the world, and from which the name
mausoleum was afterwards given to all tombs remarkable for their
grandeur. She appointed panegyrics to be composed in his honour, and
offered valuable prizes for the best oratorical and tragic compositions.
She also erected a monument, or trophy, in Rhodes, to commemorate her
conquest of that island. When the Rhodians regained their freedom they
built round this trophy so as to render it inaccessible, whence it was
known as the _Abaton_. There are statues of Mausolus and Artemisia in
the British Museum.

  Vitruvius ii. 8; Diodorus Siculus xvi. 36; Cicero, _Tusc._ iii. 31;
  Val. Max. iv. 6.




ARTEMON (fl. c. A.D. 230), a prominent Christian teacher at Rome, who
held Adoptianist (see ADOPTIANISM), or humanitarian views, of the same
type as his elder contemporaries the Theodotians, though perhaps
asserting more definitely than they the superiority of Christ to the
prophets in respect of His supernatural birth and sinlessness. He was
excommunicated by Zephyrinus, despite his remarkable claim that all that
bishop's predecessors in the see of Rome had held the humanitarian
position. (See also MONARCHIANISM.)




ARTENA, a village of Italy, in the province of Rome, situated at the
N.N.W. extremity of the Volscian Mountains; it is 36 m. S.E. by rail,
and 24 m. direct from Rome. Pop. (1901) 5016. On the mountain above it
(2073 ft.) are the fine remains of the fortifications of a city built in
a very primitive style, in cyclopean blocks of local limestone; within
the walls are traces of buildings, and a massive terrace which supported
some edifice of importance. The name of this city is quite uncertain;
Ecetra is a possible suggestion. The modern village, which was called
Monte Fortino until 1870, owes its present name to an unwarrantable
identification of the site with the ancient Volscian Artena, destroyed
in 404 B.C. Another Artena, which belonged to the district of Caere, and
lay between it and Veii, was destroyed in the period of the kings, and
its site is quite unknown.

  See T. Ashby and G.J. Pfeiffer in _Supplementary Papers of the
  American School in Rome_, i. 87 seq.




ARTERIES (Gr. [Greek: artaeria], probably from [Greek: airein], to
raise, but popularly connected by the ancients with [Greek: aaer], air),
in anatomy, the elastic tubes which carry the blood away from the heart
to the tissues. As, after death, they are always found empty, the older
anatomists believed that they contained air, and to this belief they owe
the name, which was originally given to the windpipe (_trachea_). Two
great trunks, the aorta and pulmonary artery, leave the heart and divide
again and again, until they become minute vessels to which the name of
arterioles is given. The larger trunks are fairly constant in position
and receive definite names, but as the smaller branches are reached
there is an increasing inconstancy in their position, and anatomists are
still undecided as to the normal, i.e. most frequent, arrangement of
many of the smaller arteries. From a common-sense point of view it is
probably of greater importance to realize how variable the distribution
of small arteries is than to remember the names of twigs which are of
neither surgical nor morphological importance. Arteries adapt themselves
more quickly than most other structures to any mechanical obstruction,
and many of the differences between the arterial systems of Man and
other animals are due to the assumption of the erect position. Many
arteries are tortuous, especially when they supply movable parts such as
the face or scalp, but when one or two sharp bends are found they are
generally due to the artery going out of its way to give off a constant
and important branch. Small arteries unite or anastomose with others
near them very freely, so that when even a large artery is obliterated a
collateral circulation is carried on by the rapid increase in size of
the communications between the branches coming off above and below the
point of obstruction. Some branches, however, such as those going to the
basal ganglia of the brain and to the spleen, are known as "end
arteries," and these do not anastomose with their neighbours at all;
thus, if one is blocked, arterial blood is cut off from its area of
supply. As a rule, there is little arterial anastomosis across the
middle line of the body near the surface, though the scalp, lips and
thyroid body are exceptions.

  The distribution of the pulmonary artery is considered in connexion
  with the anatomy of the lungs (see RESPIRATORY SYSTEM). That of the
  aorta will now be briefly described.


    Aorta.

  The _Aorta_ lies in the cavities of the thorax and abdomen, and arises
  from the base of the left ventricle of the heart. It ascends forward,
  upward, and to the right as far as the level of the second right
  costal cartilage, then runs backward, and to the left to reach the
  left side of the body of the 4th thoracic vertebra, and then descends
  almost vertically. It thus forms the _arch of the aorta_, which arches
  over the root of the left lung, and which has attached to its concave
  surface a fibrous cord, known as the obliterated _ductus arteriosus_,
  which connects it with the left branch of the pulmonary artery. The
  aorta continues its course downward in close relation to the bodies of
  the thoracic vertebrae, then passes through an opening in the
  diaphragm (q.v.), enters the abdomen, and descends in front of the
  bodies of the lumbar vertebrae as low as the 4th, where it usually
  divides into two terminal branches, the common iliac arteries. Above
  and behind the angle of bifurcation, however, a long slender artery,
  called the _middle sacral_, is prolonged downward in front of the
  sacrum to the end of the coccyx.

  It will be convenient to describe the distribution of the arteries
  under the following headings:--(1) Branches for the head, neck and
  upper limbs; (2) branches for the viscera of the thorax and abdomen;
  (3) branches for the walls of the thorax and abdomen; (4) branches for
  the pelvis and lower limbs.

  The branches for the head, neck and upper limbs arise as three large
  arteries from the transverse part of the aorta; they are named
  _innominate, left common carotid_ and _left subclavian_. The
  innominate artery is the largest and passes upward and to the right,
  to the root of the neck, where it divides into the right common
  carotid and the right subclavian. The carotid arteries supply the two
  sides of the head and neck; the subclavian arteries the two upper
  extremities.


    Carotid system.

  The _common carotid_ artery runs up the neck by the side of the
  windpipe, and on a level with the upper border of the thyroid
  cartilage divides into the internal and external carotid arteries.

  The _internal carotid_ artery ascends through the carotid canal in the
  temporal bone into the cranial cavity. It gives off an _ophthalmic_
  branch to the eyeball and other contents of the orbit, and then
  divides into the _anterior_ and _middle cerebral_ arteries. The middle
  cerebral artery extends outward into the Sylvian fissure of the brain,
  and supplies the island of Reil, the orbital part, and the outer face
  of the frontal lobe, the parietal lobe, and the temporo-sphenoidal
  lobe; it also gives a choroid branch to the choroid plexus of the
  velum interpositum. The anterior cerebral artery supplies the inner
  face of the hemisphere from the anterior end of the frontal lobe as
  far back as the internal parieto-occipital fissure. At the base of the
  brain not only do the two internal carotids anastomose with each other
  through the _anterior communicating_ artery, which passes between
  their anterior cerebral branches, but the internal carotid on each
  side anastomoses with the posterior cerebral branch of the basilar, by
  a _posterior communicating_ artery. In this manner a vascular circle,
  the _circle of Willis_, is formed, which permits of freedom of the
  arterial circulation by the anastomoses between arteries not only on
  the same side, but on opposite sides of the mesial plane. The
  vertebral and internal carotid arteries, which are the arteries of
  supply for the brain, are distinguished by lying at some depth from
  the surface in their course to the organ, by having curves or twists
  in their course, and by the absence of large collateral branches.

  The _external carotid_ artery ascends through the upper part of the
  side of the neck, and behind the lower jaw into the parotid gland,
  where it divides into the internal maxillary and superficial temporal
  branches. This artery gives off the following branches:--(a) _Superior
  thyroid_ to the larynx and thyroid body; (b) _Lingual_ to the tongue
  and sublingual gland; (c) _Facial_ to the face, palate, tonsil and
  sub-maxillary gland; (d) _Occipital_ to the sterno-mastoid muscle and
  back of the scalp; (e) _Posterior auricular_ to the back of the ear
  and the adjacent part of the scalp; (f) _Superficial temporal_ to the
  scalp in front of the ear, and by its _transverse facial_ branch to
  the back part of the face; (g) _Internal maxillary_, giving _muscular_
  branches to the muscles of mastication, _meningeal_ branches to the
  dura mater, _dental_ branches to the teeth, and other branches to the
  nose, palate and tympanum; (h) _Ascending pharyngeal_, which gives
  branches to the pharynx, palate, tonsils and dura mater.


    Subclavian system.

  The _subclavian_ artery is the commencement of the great arterial
  trunk for the upper limb. It passes across the root of the neck and
  behind the clavicle, where it enters the armpit, and becomes the
  _axillary_ artery; by that name it extends as far as the posterior
  fold of the axilla, where it enters the upper arm, takes the name of
  brachial, and courses as far as the bend of the elbow; here it
  bifurcates into the _radial_ and _ulnar_ arteries. From the subclavian
  part of the trunk the following branches arise:--(a) _Vertebral_,
  which enters the foramen at the root of the transverse process of the
  6th cervical vertebra, ascends through the corresponding foramina in
  the vertebrae above, lies in a groove on the arch of the atlas, and
  enters the skull through the foramen magnum, where it joins its fellow
  to form the _basilar_ artery; it gives off _muscular_ branches to the
  deep muscles of the neck, _spinal_ branches to the spinal cord,
  _meningeal_ branches to the dura mater, and an _inferior cerebellar_
  branch to the under surface of the cerebellum. The _basilar_ artery,
  formed by the junction of the two vertebrals, extends from the lower
  to the upper border of the pons Varolii; it gives off _transverse_
  branches to the pons, _auditory_ branches to the internal ear,
  _inferior cerebellar_ branches to the under surface of the cerebellum,
  whilst it breaks up into four terminal branches, viz. two _superior
  cerebellar_ to the upper surface of the cerebellum, and two _posterior
  cerebral_ which supply the tentorial and mesial aspects of the
  temporo-sphenoidal lobes, the occipital lobes, and the posterior
  convolutions of the parietal lobes. (b) _Thyroid axis_, which
  immediately divides into the _inferior thyroid_, the _supra-scapular_,
  and the _transverse cervical_ branches; the _inferior thyroid_
  supplies the thyroid body, and gives off an _ascending cervical_
  branch to the muscles of the neck; the _supra-scapular_ supplies the
  muscles on the dorsum scapulae; the _transverse cervical_ supplies the
  trapezius and the muscles attached to the vertebral border of the
  scapula. (c) _Internal mammary_ supplies the anterior surface of the
  walls of the chest and abdomen, and the upper surface of the
  diaphragm. (d) _Superior intercostal_ supplies the first intercostal
  space, and by its deep _cervical_ branch the deep muscles of the back
  of the neck.

  The _axillary_ artery supplies _thoracic_ branches to the wall of the
  chest, the pectoral muscles, and the fat and glands of the axilla; an
  _acromio-thoracic_ to the parts about the acromion; _anterior_ and
  _posterior circumflex_ branches to the shoulder joint and deltoid
  muscle; a _subscapular_ branch to the muscles of the posterior fold of
  the axilla.

  The _brachial_ artery supplies _muscular_ branches to the muscles of
  the upper arm; a _nutrient_ branch to the humerus; _superior_ and
  _inferior profunda_ branches and an _anastomotic_ to the muscles of
  the upper arm and the region of the elbow joint.

  The _ulnar_ artery extends down the ulnar side of the front of the
  fore-arm to the palm of the hand, where it curves outward toward the
  thumb, and anastomoses with the superficial volar or other branch of
  the radial artery to form the _superficial palmar arch_. In the
  fore-arm the ulnar gives off the _interosseous_ arteries, which supply
  the muscles of the fore-arm and give _nutrient_ branches to the bones;
  two _recurrent_ branches to the region of the elbow; _carpal_ branches
  to the wrist joint: in the hand it gives a _deep_ branch to the deep
  muscles of the hand, and from the superficial arch arise _digital_
  branches to the sides of the little, ring, and middle fingers, and the
  ulnar border of the index finger.

  The _radial_ artery extends down the radial side of the front of the
  fore-arm, turns round the outer side of the wrist to the back of the
  hand, passes between the 1st and 2nd metacarpal bones to the palm,
  where it joins the deep branch of the ulnar, and forms the _deep
  palmar arch_. In the fore-arm it gives off a _recurrent_ branch to the
  elbow joint; _carpal_ branches to the wrist joint; and _muscular_
  branches, one of which, named superficial volar, supplies the muscle
  of the thumb and joins the ulnar artery: in the hand it gives off a
  branch to the thumb, and one to the radial side of the index,
  _interosseous_ branches to the interosseous muscles, _perforating_
  branches to the back of the hand, and _recurrent_ branches to the
  wrist.


    Visceral branches.

  The branches of the aorta which supply the viscera of the thorax are
  the coronary, the oesophageal, the bronchial and the pericardiac. The
  _coronary_ arteries, two in number, are the first branches of the
  aorta, and arise opposite the anterior and left posterior segments of
  the semilunar valve, from the wall of the aorta, where it dilates into
  the sinuses of Valsalva. They supply the tissue of the heart.

  The _oesophageal, bronchial_ and _pericardiac_ branches are
  sufficiently described by their names.

  The branches of the aorta which supply the viscera of the abdomen
  arise either singly or in pairs. The single arteries are the coeliac
  axis, the superior mesenteric, and the inferior mesenteric, which
  arise from the front of the aorta; the pairs are the capsular, the two
  renal, and the two spermatic or ovarian, which arise from its sides.
  The single arteries supply viscera which are either completely or
  almost completely invested by the peritoneum, and the veins
  corresponding to them are the roots of the vena portae. The pairs of
  arteries supply viscera developed behind the peritoneum, and the veins
  corresponding to them are rootlets of the inferior vena cava.

  The _coeliac axis_ is a thick, short artery, which almost immediately
  divides into the gastric, hepatic and splenic branches. The _gastric_
  gives off oesophageal branches and then runs along the lesser
  curvature of the stomach. The _hepatic_ artery ends in the substance
  of the liver; but gives off a _cystic_ branch to the gall bladder, a
  _pyloric_ branch to the stomach, a _gastro-duodenal_ branch, which
  divides into a _superior pancreatico-duodenal_ for the pancreas and
  duodenum, and a _right gastro-epiploic_ for the stomach and omentum.
  The _splenic_ artery ends in the substance of the spleen; but gives
  off _pancreatic_ branches to the pancreas, _vasa brevia_ to the left
  end of the stomach, and a _left gastro-epiploic_ to the stomach and
  omentum.

  The _superior mesenteric_ artery gives off an _inferior
  pancreatico-duodenal_ branch to the pancreas and duodenum; about
  twelve _intestinal_ branches to the small intestines, which form in
  the substance of the mesentery a series of arches before they end in
  the wall of the intestines; an _ileocolic_ branch to the end of the
  ileum, the caecum, and beginning of the colon; a _right colic_ branch
  to the ascending colon; and a _middle colic_ branch to the transverse
  colon.

  The _inferior mesenteric_ artery gives off a _left colic_ branch to
  the descending colon, a _sigmoid_ branch to the iliac and pelvic
  colon, and ends in the superior _haemorrhoidal_ artery, which supplies
  the rectum. The arteries which supply the coats of the alimentary tube
  from the oesophagus to the rectum anastomose freely with each other in
  the wall of the tube, or in its mesenteric attachment, and the
  anastomoses are usually by the formation of arches or loops between
  adjacent branches.

  The _capsular arteries_, small in size, run outward from the aorta to
  end in the supra-renal capsules.

  The _renal_ arteries pass one to each kidney, in which they for the
  most part end, but in the substance of the organ they give off small
  _perforating_ branches, which pierce the capsule of the kidney, and
  are distributed in the surrounding fat. Additional renal arteries are
  fairly common.

  The _spermatic_ arteries are two long slender arteries, which descend,
  one in each spermatic cord, into the scrotum to supply the testicle.
  The corresponding ovarian arteries in the female do not leave the
  abdomen.


    Parietal branches.

  The branches of the aorta which supply the walls of the thorax,
  abdomen and pelvis, are the intercostal, the lumbar, the phrenic, and
  the middle sacral.

  [Illustration: FIG. 1.--Diagram of a pair of intercostal arteries.

    Ao, The aorta transversely divided, giving off at each side an
     intercostal artery.
    PB, The posterior or dorsal branch.
    AB, The anterior or proper intercostal branch.
    IM, A transverse section through the internal mammary artery.]

  The _intercostal_ arteries arise from the back of the thoracic aorta,
  and are usually nine pairs. They run round the sides of the vertebral
  bodies as far as the commencement of the intercostal spaces, where
  each divides into a _dorsal_ and a _proper intercostal_ branch; the
  dorsal branch passes to the back of the thorax to supply the deep
  muscles of the spine; the proper intercostal branch (AB.) runs outward
  in the intercostal space to supply its muscles, and the lower pairs of
  intercostals also give branches to the diaphragm and wall of the
  abdomen. Below the last rib a subcostal artery runs.

  The _lumbar_ arteries arise from the back of the abdominal aorta, and
  are usually four pairs. They run round the sides of the lumbar
  vertebrae, and divide into a _dorsal_ branch which supplies the deep
  muscles of the back of the loins, and an _abdominal_ branch which runs
  outward to supply the wall of the abdomen. The distribution of the
  lumbar and intercostal arteries exhibits a transversely segmented
  arrangement of the vascular system, like the transversely segmented
  arrangement of the bones, muscles and nerves met with in these
  localities, but more especially in the thoracic region.

  The _phrenic_ arteries, two in number, pass to supply the under
  surface of the diaphragm.

  The _middle sacral_ artery, as it runs down the front of the sacrum,
  gives branches to the back of the pelvic wall.

  Injections made by Sir W. Turner have shown that, both in the thoracic
  and abdominal cavities, slender anastomosing communications exist
  between the visceral and parietal branches.

  The arteries to the pelvis and hind limbs begin at the bifurcation of
  the aorta into the two common iliacs.


    Iliac system.

  The _common iliac_ artery, after a short course, divides into the
  internal and external iliac arteries. The _internal iliac_ enters the
  pelvis and divides into branches for the supply of the pelvic walls
  and viscera, including the organs of generation, and for the great
  muscles of the buttock. The _external iliac_ descends behind Poupart's
  ligament into the thigh, where it takes the name of _femoral_ artery.
  The femoral descends along the front and inner surface of the thigh,
  gives off a _profunda_ or deep branch, which, by its _circumflex_ and
  _perforating_ branches, supplies the numerous muscles of the thigh;
  most of these extend to the back of the limb to carry blood to the
  muscles situated there. The femoral artery then runs to the back of
  the limb in the ham, where it is called _popliteal_ artery. The
  popliteal divides into two branches, of which one, called _anterior
  tibial_, passes between the bones to the front of the leg, and then
  downward to the upper surface of the foot; the other, _posterior
  tibial_, continues down the back of the leg to the sole of the foot,
  and divides into the _internal_ and _external plantar_ arteries;
  branches proceed from the external plantar artery to the sides of the
  toes, and constitute the _digital_ arteries. From the large arterial
  trunks in the leg many branches proceed, to carry blood to the
  different structures in the limb.


    Structure of arteries.

  The wall of an artery consists of several coats (see fig. 2). The
  outermost is the _tunica adventitia_, composed of connective tissue;
  immediately internal to this is the _yellow elastic_ coat; within this
  again the _muscular coat_, formed of involuntary. muscular tissue, the
  contractile fibre-cells of which are for the most part arranged
  transversely to the long axis of the artery; in the larger arteries
  the elastic coat is much thicker than the muscular, but in the smaller
  the muscular coat is relatively strong; the vaso-motor nerves
  terminate in the muscular coat. In the first part of the aorta,
  pulmonary artery and arteries of the retina there is no muscular coat.
  Internal to the muscular coat is the _elastic fenestrated coat_,
  formed of a smooth elastic membrane perforated by small apertures.
  Most internal of all is a layer of _endothelial cells_, which form the
  free surface over which the blood flows. The arteries are not
  nourished by the blood which flows through them, but by minute
  vessels, _vasa vasorum_, distributed in their external, elastic and
  muscular coats.

  [Illustration: FIG. 2.--Diagram of the structure of an artery. A,
  tunica adventitia; E, elastic coat; M, muscular coat; F, fenestrated
  coat; En, endothelium continuous with the endothelial wall of C, the
  capillaries.]


  EMBRYOLOGY

  [Illustration: FIG. 3.--Diagram of the Embryonic Arterial Arches. 1,
  2, 3, 4, 5, 6, point to the six arches. (The black parts are
  obliterated in the adult human subject.)

    V.Ao. Ventral Aorta.
    A.Ao. Arch of Aorta.
    D.Ar. Ductus Arteriosus.
    In. Innominate Artery.
    R.I.C.-L.I.C. Right and Left Internal Carotid Arteries.
    D.B. Duct of Botalli.
    R.S.-L.S. Right and Left Subclavian Arteries.
    R.V.-L.V. Right and Left Vertebral Arteries.
    P.A. Posterior Auricular Artery.
    Oph. Ophthalmic Artery.
    D.Ao. Dorsal Aorta.
    P.T. Pulmonary trunk.
    R.P.A.-L.P.A. Right and Left Pulmonary Arteries.
    R.C.C.-L.C.C. Right and Left Common Carotid Arteries.
    E.C. External Carotid Artery.
    Oc. Occipital Artery.
    I.M. Internal Maxillary Artery.]

  [Illustration: FIG. 4.--Diagram of the Human Aorta and its branches.
  S.T., Superficial Temporal Artery.]

  The earliest appearance of the blood vessels is dealt with under
  VASCULAR SYSTEM. Here will be briefly described the fate of the main
  vessel which carries the blood away from the truncus arteriosus of the
  developing heart (q.v.). This ventral aorta, if traced forward, soon
  divides into two lateral parts, the explanation being that there were
  originally two vessels, side by side, which fused to form the heart,
  but continued separate anteriorly. The two parts run for a little
  distance toward the head of the embryo, ventral to the alimentary
  canal, and then turn toward the dorsum, passing one on either side of
  that tube to form the first aortic arch. Having reached the dorsum
  they turn backward toward the tail end and form the dorsal aortae;
  here, according to A.H. Young (_Studies in Anatomy_, Owens College,
  1891 and 1900) they again turn toward the ventral side and become,
  after a transitional stage, the _hypogastric, placental, allantoic_ or
  _umbilical_ arteries. This authority does not believe that the middle
  sacral artery of the adult is the real continuation of the single
  median dorsal aorta into which the two parallel dorsal vessels just
  mentioned soon coalesce, though until recently it has always been so
  regarded. The anterior loop between the ventral and dorsal aortae
  already described as the first aortic arch is included in the
  _maxillary_ or _first visceral arch_ of the soft parts (see fig. 3,
  _1_). Later, four other well-marked aortic arches grow behind this in
  the more caudal visceral arches, so that there are altogether five
  arterial arches on each side of the pharynx, through which the blood
  can pass from the ventral to the dorsal aorta. Of these arches the
  first soon disappears, but is probably partly represented in the adult
  by the _internal maxillary_ artery, one branch of which, the
  _infraorbital_, is enclosed in the upper jaw, while another, the
  _inferior dental_, is surrounded by the lower jaw. Possibly the
  ophthalmic artery also belongs to this arch. The second arch also
  disappears, but the _posterior auricular_ and _occipital_ arteries
  probably spring from it, and at an early period it passed through the
  stapes as the transitory stapedial artery. The third arch forms the
  beginning of the internal carotid. The fourth arch becomes the arch of
  the adult aorta, between the origins of the left carotid and left
  subclavian, on the left side, and the first part of the right
  subclavian artery on the right. The apparent fifth arch on the left
  side (fig. 3, _6_) remains all through foetal life as the _ductus
  arteriosus_, and, as the lungs develop, the _pulmonary_ arteries are
  derived from it. J.E.V. Boas and W. Zimmermann have shown that this
  arch is in reality the sixth, and that there is a very transitory true
  fifth arch in front of it (fig. 3, _5_). The part of the ventral aorta
  from which this last arch rises is a single median vessel due to the
  same fusion of the two primitive ventral aortae which precedes the
  formation of the heart, but a spiral septum has appeared in it which
  divides it in such a way that while the anterior or cephalic arches
  communicate with the left ventricle of the heart, the last one
  communicates with the right (see HEART). The fate of the ventral and
  dorsal longitudinal vessels must now be followed. The fused part of
  the two ventral aortae, just in front of the heart, forms the
  ascending part of the adult aortic arch, and where this trunk divides
  between the fifth and fourth arches (strictly speaking, the sixth and
  fifth), the right one forms the _innominate_ (fig. 3, In.) and the
  left one a very short part of the _transverse arch_ of the aorta until
  the fourth arch comes off (see fig. 4). From this point to the origin
  of the third arch is _common carotid_, and after that, to the head,
  _external carotid_ on each side. The _dorsal longitudinal_ arteries on
  the head side of the junction with the third arch form the _internal
  carotids_. Between the third and fourth arches they are obliterated,
  while on the caudal side of this, until the point of fusion is reached
  on the dorsal side of the heart, the left artery forms the upper part
  of the dorsal aorta while the right entirely disappears. Below this
  point the _thoracic_ and _abdominal aortae_ are formed by the two
  _primitive dorsal aortae_ which have fused to form a single median
  vessel. As the limbs are developed, vessels bud out in them. The
  _subclavian_ for the arm comes from the fourth aortic arch on each
  side, while in the leg the main artery is a branch of the _caudal
  arch_ which is curving ventralward to form the umbilical artery. From
  the convexity of this arch the internal iliac and sciatic at first
  carry the blood to the limb, as they do permanently in reptiles, but
  later the external iliac and femoral become developed, and, as they
  are on the concave side of the bend of the hip, while the sciatic is
  on the convex, they have a mechanical advantage and become the
  permanent main channel.

  For further details see O. Hertwig, _Handbuch der vergleichenden und
  experimentellen Entwickelungslehre der Wirbeltiere_ (Jena, 1905).


  COMPARATIVE ANATOMY

  In the Acrania the lancelet (Amphioxus) shows certain arrangements of
  its arteries which are suggestive of the embryonic stages of the
  higher vertebrates and Man. There is a median ventral aorta below the
  pharynx, from which branchial arteries run up on each side between the
  branchial clefts, where the blood is aerated, to join two dorsal
  aortae which run back side by side until the hind end of the pharynx
  is reached; here they fuse to form a median vessel from which branches
  are distributed to the straight intestine. There is no heart, but the
  ventral aorta is contractile, and the blood is driven forward in it
  and backward in the dorsal aortae. The branchial arteries are very
  numerous, and cannot be homologized closely with the five (originally
  six) pairs of aortic arches in Man.

  In the fish the ventral aorta gives rise to five afferent branchial
  arteries carrying the blood to the gills, though these may not all
  come off as independent trunks from the aorta. From the gills the
  afferent branchials carry the blood to the median dorsal aorta. As
  pectoral and pelvic fins are now developed, subclavian and iliac
  arteries are found rising from the dorsal aorta, though the aorta
  itself is continued directly backward as the caudal artery into the
  tail. In the Dipnoi or mud fish, in which the swim bladder is
  converted into a functional lung, the hindmost afferent branchial
  artery, corresponding to the fifth (strictly speaking the sixth)
  aortic arch of the human embryo, gives off on each side a pulmonary
  artery to that structure.

  The arrangement of the branchial aortic arches in the tailed Amphibia
  (Urodela), and in the tadpole stage of the tailless forms (Anura),
  makes it probable that the generalized vertebrate has six (if not
  more) pairs of these instead of the five which are evident in the
  human embryo. Four pairs of arches are present, the first of which is
  the carotid and corresponds to the third of Man; the second is the
  true aortic arch on each side; the third undergoes great reduction or
  disappears when the gills atrophy, and is very transitory in the
  Mammalia (fig. 3, _5_), while the fourth is the one from which the
  pulmonary artery is developed when the lungs appear, and corresponds
  to the nominal fifth, though really the sixth arch, of the higher
  forms (fig. 3, _6_). The dorsal part of this sixth arch remains as a
  pervious vessel in the Urodela, joining the pulmonary arch to the
  dorsal aorta. In the central part of the carotid arch the vessel
  breaks up into a plexus, for a short distance forming the so-called
  carotid gland, which has an important effect upon the adult
  circulation of the Amphibia. In the Reptilia the great arteries are
  arranged on the same plan as in the adult Amphibia, but the carotid
  arch retains its dorsal communication with the systematic aortic arch
  on each side, and this communication is known as the duct of Botalli
  (fig. 3, D.B.). In this class, as in the Amphibia, one great artery,
  the coeliaco-mesenteric, usually supplies the liver, spleen, stomach
  and anterior part of the intestines; this is a point of some interest
  when it is noticed how very close together the coeliac axis and
  superior mesenteric arteries rise from the abdominal aorta in Man.

  In the Birds the right fourth arch alone remains as the aorta, the
  dorsal part of the left corresponding arch being obliterated. From the
  arch of the aorta rise two symmetrical innominates, each of which
  divides later into a carotid and subclavian. The blood path from the
  aorta to the hind limb in the Amphibia, Reptilia and Aves, is a dorsal
  one, and passes through the internal iliac and sciatic to the back of
  the thigh, and so to the popliteal space; the external iliac is, if it
  is developed at all, only a small branch to the pelvis.

  In the Mammalia the fourth left arch becomes the aorta, the
  corresponding right one being obliterated, but several cases have been
  recorded in Man in which both arches have persisted, as they do in the
  reptiles (H. Leboucq, _Ann. Sci. Med. Gand_, 1894, p. 7). Examples
  have also been found of a right aortic arch, as in birds, while a very
  common human abnormality is that in which the dorsal part of the
  fourth right arch persists, and from it the right subclavian artery
  arises (see fig. 3).

  The commonest arrangement of the great branches of the aortic arch in
  Mammals is that in which the innominate and left carotid arise by a
  single short trunk, while the left subclavian comes off later; this is
  also Man's commonest abnormality. Sometimes, especially among the
  Ungulata, all the branches may rise from one common trunk; at other
  times two innominate arteries may be present; this is commonest in the
  Cheiroptera, Insectivora and Cetacea. It is extremely rare to find all
  four large arteries rising independently from the aorta, though it has
  been seen in the Koala (F.G. Parsons, "Mammalian Aortic Arch," _Journ.
  of Anat._ vol. xxxvi. p. 389). The human arrangement of the common
  iliacs is not constant among mammals, for in some the external and
  internal iliacs rise independently from the aorta, and this is
  probably the more primitive arrangement. The middle sacral artery has
  already been referred to. A.H. Young and A. Robinson believe, on
  embryological grounds, that this artery in mammals is not homologous
  with the caudal artery of the fish, and is not the direct continuation
  of the aorta; it is an artery which usually gives off two or more
  collateral branches, and sometimes, as in the Ornithorynchus and some
  edentates, breaks up into a network of branches which reunite and so
  form what is known as a _rete mirabile_. These retia mirabilia are
  often found in other parts of the mammalian body, though their
  function is still not satisfactorily explained. The way in which the
  blood is carried to the foot in the pronograde mammals differs from
  that of Man; a large branch called the internal saphenous comes off
  the common femoral in the lower third of the thigh, and this runs down
  the inner side of the leg to the foot. This arrangement is quite
  convenient as long as the knee is flexed, but when it comes to be
  extended, as in the erect posture, the artery is greatly stretched,
  and it is much easier for the blood to pass to the foot through the
  anterior and posterior tibials. A vestige of this saphenous artery,
  however, remains in Man as the anastomotica magna.

  The literature of the Comparative Anatomy of the Arteries up to 1902
  will be found in R. Wiedersheim's _Vergleichende Anatomie der
  Wirbeltiere_ (Jena, 1902). The morphology of the Iliac Arteries is
  described by G. Levi, _Archivio Italiano di Anat. ed Embriol._, vol.
  i. (1902).     (F. G. P.)




ARTERN, a town of Germany, in Prussian Saxony, on the Unstrut, at the
influx of the Helme, at the junction of railways to Erfurt, Naumburg and
Sangerhausen, 8 m. S. of the last named. Pop. 5000. It has an
Evangelical church, an agricultural college and some manufactures of
machinery, sugar and boots. Its brine springs, known as early as the
15th century, are still frequented.




ARTESIAN WELLS, the name properly applied to water-springs rising above
the surface of the ground by natural hydrostatic pressure, on boring a
small hole down through a series of strata to a water-carrying bed
enclosed between two impervious layers; the name is, however, sometimes
loosely applied to any deep well, even when the water is obtained by
pumping. In Europe this mode of well-boring was first practised in the
French province of Artois, whence the name of Artesian is derived. At
Aire, in that province, there is a well from which the water has
continued steadily to flow to a height of 11 feet above the ground for
more than a century; and there is, within the old Carthusian convent at
Lillers, another which dates from the 12th century, and which still
flows. But unmistakable traces of much more ancient bored springs appear
in Lombardy, in Asia Minor, in Persia, in China, in Egypt, in Algeria,
and even in the great desert of Sahara. (See WELL.)




ARTEVELDE, JACOB VAN (c. 1290-1345), Flemish statesman, was born at
Ghent about 1290. He sprang from one of the wealthy commercial families
of this great industrial city, his father's name being probably William
van Artevelde. His brother John, a rich cloth merchant, took a leading
part in public affairs during the first decades of the 14th century.
Jacob, who according to tradition was a brewer by trade, spent three
years in amassing quietly a large fortune. He was twice married, the
second time to Catherine de Coster, whose family was of considerable
influence in Ghent. Not till 1337, when the outbreak of hostilities
between France and England threatened to injure seriously the industrial
welfare of his native town, did Jacob van Artevelde make his first
appearance as a political leader. As the Flemish cities depended upon
England for the supply of the wool for their staple industry of weaving,
he boldly came forward, as a tribune of the people, and at a great
meeting at the monastery of Biloke unfolded his scheme of an alliance of
the Flemish towns, with those of Brabant, Holland and Hainaut, to
maintain an armed neutrality in the dynastic struggle between Edward
III. and Philip VI. of France. His efforts were successful. Bruges,
Ypres and other towns formed a league with Ghent, in which town
Artevelde, with the title of captain-general, henceforth until his death
exercised almost dictatorial authority. His first step was to conclude a
commercial treaty with England. The efforts of the count of Flanders to
overthrow the power of Artevelde by force of arms completely failed, and
he was compelled at Bruges to sign a treaty (June 21, 1338) sanctioning
the federation of the three towns, Ghent, Bruges and Ypres, henceforth
known as the "Three members of Flanders." This was the first of a series
of treaties, made during the year 1339-1340, which gradually brought
into the federation all the towns and provinces of the Netherlands. The
policy of neutrality, however, proved impracticable, and the Flemish
towns, under the leadership of Artevelde, openly took the side of the
English king, with whom a close alliance was concluded. Artevelde now
reached the height of his power, concluding alliances with kings, and
publicly associating with them on equal terms. Under his able
administration trade flourished, and Ghent rose rapidly in wealth and
importance. His well-nigh despotic rule awoke at last among his
compatriots jealousy and resentment. The proposal of Artevelde to disown
the sovereignty of Louis, count of Flanders, and to recognize in its
place that of Edward, prince of Wales (the Black Prince), gave rise to
violent dissatisfaction. A popular insurrection broke out in Ghent, and
Artevelde fell into the hands of the crowd and was murdered on the 24th
of July 1345.

The great services that he rendered to Ghent and to his country have in
later times been recognized. A statue was erected in his native town on
the Marché du Vendredi, and was unveiled by Leopold I., king of the
Belgians, on the 13th of September 1863.

  See J. Hutten, _James and Philip van Artevelde_ (London, 1882); W.J.
  Ashley, _James and Philip van Artevelde_ (London, 1883); P. Namèche,
  _Les van Artevelde et leur époque_ (Louvain, 1887); L. Vanderkindere,
  _Le Siècle des Arteveldes_ (Brussels, 1879).




ARTEVELDE, PHILIP VAN (c. 1340-1382), youngest son of the above, and
godson of Queen Philippa of England, who held him in her arms at his
baptism, lived in retirement until 1381. The Ghenters had in that year
risen in revolt against the oppression of the count of Flanders, and
Philip, now forty years of age, and without any military or political
experience, was offered the supreme command. His name awakened general
enthusiasm. At first his efforts were attended by considerable success.
He defeated Louis de Mâle, count of Flanders, before Bruges, entered
that city in triumph, and was soon master of all Flanders. But France
took up the cause of the Flemish count, and a splendid French army was
led across the frontier by the young king Charles VI. in person.
Artevelde advanced to meet the enemy at the head of a burgher army of
some 50,000 Flemings. The armies met at Roosebeke near Courtrai, with
the result that the Flemings were routed with terrible loss, Philip
himself being among the slain. This happened on the 27th of November
1382.

  The brief but stirring career of this popular leader is admirably
  treated in Sir Henry Taylor's drama, _Philip van Artevelde_.




ART GALLERIES. An art gallery (by which, as distinguished from more
general MUSEUMS OF ART, q.v., is here meant one specially for pictures)
epitomizes so many phases of human thought and imagination that it
connotes much more than a mere collection of paintings. In its technical
and aesthetic aspect the gallery shows the treatment of colour, form and
composition. In its historical aspect we find the true portraits of
great men of the past; we can observe their habits of life, their
manners, their dress, the architecture of their times, and the religious
worship of the period in which they lived. Regarded collectively, the
art of a country epitomizes the whole development of the people that
produced it. Most important of all is the emotional aspect of painting,
which must enter less or more into every picture worthy of notice. To
take examples from the British National Gallery: pathos in its most
intense degree will be found in Francia's "Pietà"; dignity in Velasquez'
portrait of Admiral Pareja; homeliness in Van Eyck's portrait of Jan
Arnolfini and his wife; the interpretation of the varying moods of
nature in the work of Turner or Hobbema; nothing can be more devotional
than the canvases of Bellini or his Umbrian contemporaries. So also the
ruling sentiments of mankind--mysticism, drama and imagination--are the
keynotes of other great conceptions of the artist. All this may be at
the command of those who visit the art gallery; but without patience,
care and study the higher meaning will be lost to the spectator. The
picture which "tells its own story" is often the least didactic, for it
has no inner or deeper lesson to reveal; it gives no stimulus or
training to the eye, quick as that organ may be--_segnius irritant
animos_--to translate sight into thought. In brief, the painter asks
that his [Greek: aethos] may be shared as much as possible by the man
who looks at the painting--the art above all others in which it is most
needful to share the master's spirit if his work is to be fully
appreciated. So, too, the art gallery, recalling the gentler
associations of the past amidst surroundings of harmonious beauty and
its attendant sense of comfort, is essentially a place of rest for the
mind and eye. In the more famous galleries where the wealth of paintings
allows a grouping of pictures according to their respective schools, one
may choose the country, the epoch, the style or even the emotion best
suited to one's taste. According to this theory, though imperfectly
realized owing to the paucity of examples, the philosophic influence of
art galleries is becoming more widely extended; and in its further
development will be found an ever-growing source of interest,
instruction and scholarship to the community. The most suitable method
of describing art galleries is to classify them by their types and
contents rather than by the various countries to which they belong. Thus
the great representative galleries of the world which possess works of
every school are grouped together, followed by state galleries which are
not remarkable for more than one school of national art. Municipal
galleries are divided into those which have general collections, and
those which are notable for special collections. Churches which have
good paintings, together with those which are now secularized, are
treated separately; while the collections in the Vatican and private
houses are described together. The remaining galleries, such as the
Salon or the Royal Academy, are periodical or commercial in character,
and are important in the development of modern art.

[Illustration: FIG. 1.--Plan of the National Gallery, London.

  North Vestibule, Early Italian Schools:
      I. Tuscan School (15th and 16th centuries).
     II. Sienese School, &c.
    III. Tuscan School.
     IV. Lombard School.
      V. Ferrarese and Bolognese Schools.
     VI. Umbrian School, &c.
    VII. Venetian and Brescian Schools.
   VIII. Paduan and Early Venetian Schools.
     IX. Later Venetian School.
      X. Flemish School.
     XI. Early Dutch and Flemish Schools.
    XII. Dutch and Flemish Schools.
   XIII. Flemish School.
    XIV. Spanish School.
     XV. German Schools.
    XVI. French School.
   XVII. French School.
  XVIII. British School.
    XIX. Old British School.
     XX. British School.
    XXI. British School.
   XXII. Turner Collection.
  Octagonal Hall: Miscellaneous.
  East Vestibule: British School.
  West Vestibule: Italian School.]


  State galleries of international schools.

The collections most worthy of attention are the state galleries
representative of international schools. Among these the British
National Gallery holds a high place. The collection was founded in 1824
by the acquisition of the Angerstein pictures. Its accessions are mainly
governed by the parliamentary grant of £5000 to £10,000 a year, a sum
which has occasionally been enlarged to permit special purchases. Thus,
in 1871, the Peel collection of seventy-seven pictures was bought for
£75,000, and in 1885 the Ansidei Madonna (Raphael) and Van Dyck's
portrait of Charles I. were bought, the one for £70,000 and the other
for £17,500. In 1890 the government gave £25,000 to meet a gift of
£30,000 made by three gentlemen to acquire three portraits by Moroni,
Velazquez and Holbein. The most important private gifts were the Vernon
gift in 1847, the Turner bequest in 1856 and the Wynne-Ellis legacy in
1876. Since 1905 the Art Collections Fund, a society of private
subscribers, has also been responsible for important additions to the
gallery, notably the Venus of Velazquez (1907). The gallery contains
very few poor works and all schools are well represented, with the sole
exception of the French school. This, however, can be amply studied at
Hertford House (Wallace Collection), which, besides Dutch, Spanish and
British pictures of the highest value, contains twenty examples of
Greuze, fifteen by Pater, nineteen by Boucher, eleven by Watteau and
fifteen by Meissonier. The national gallery of pictures at Berlin
(Kaiser Friedrich Museum), like the British National Gallery, is
remarkable for its variety of schools and painters, and for the select
type of pictures shown. During the last twenty-five years of the 19th
century, the development of this collection was even more striking than
that of the English gallery. Italian and Dutch examples are specially
numerous, though every school but the British (here as elsewhere) is
really well seen. The purchase grant is considerable, and is well
applied. Two other German capitals have collections of international
importance--Dresden and Münich. The former is famous for the Sistine
Madonna by Raphael, a work of such supreme excellence that there is a
tendency to overlook other Italian pictures of celebrity by Titian,
Giorgione and Correggio. Münich (Old Pinakothek) has examples of all the
best masters, the South German school being particularly noticeable. The
arrangement is good, and the methods of exhibition make this one of the
most pleasant galleries on the continent. Vienna has the Imperial
Gallery, a collection which in point of number cannot be considered
large, as there are not more than 1700 pictures. This, however, is in
itself a safeguard, like the wise provision in a statute of 1856 for
enabling the English authorities to dispose of pictures "unfit for the
collection, or not required." It avoids the undue multiplication of
canvases, and the overcrowding so noticeable in many Italian galleries
where first-rate pictures hang too high to be examined. Thus the
Viennese gallery, besides the intrinsic value of its pictures (Albert
Durer's chief work is there), is admirably adapted for study. The best
gallery in Russia (St Petersburg, Hermitage) was made entirely by royal
efforts, having been founded by Peter the Great, and much enlarged by
the empress Catherine. It contains the collections of Crozat, Brühl and
Walpole. There are about 1800 works, the schools of Flanders and Italy
being of signal merit; and there are at least thirty-five genuine
examples by Rembrandt. The French collection (Louvre Palace, Paris) is
one of the most important of all. In 1880 it was undoubtedly the first
gallery in Europe, but its supremacy has since been menaced by other
establishments where acquisitions are made more frequently and with
greater care, and where the system of classification is such that the
value of the pictures is enhanced rather than diminished by their
display. In 1900 it was partly rearranged with great effect. The feature
of the Louvre is the Salon Carré, a room in which the supposed finest
canvases in the collection are kept together, pictures of world-wide
fame, representing all schools. It is now generally accepted that this
system of selection not only lowers the standard of individual schools
elsewhere by withdrawing their best pictures, but does not add to the
aesthetic or educational value of the masterpieces themselves. In
Florence the Tribuna room of the Uffizi gallery is a similar case in
point. Probably the two most widely known pictures in the Louvre are
Watteau's second "Embarquement pour Cythère," and the "Monna Lisa," a
portrait by Leonardo da Vinci, but each school has many unique examples.
The original drawings should be noted, being of equal importance to the
collection preserved at the British Museum. The last collection to be
mentioned under this heading is that known as the Royal Galleries in
Florence, housed in the Pitti and Uffizi palaces. In some ways this
collection does not represent general painting sufficiently to justify
its inclusion with the galleries of Berlin, Paris and London. On the
other hand, the great number of Italian pictures of vital importance to
the history of international art makes this one of the finest existing
collections. The two great palaces, dating from the 15th and 16th
centuries, are joined together and contain the Medici pictures. They
form the largest gallery in the world, and though many of the rooms are
small and badly lighted, and although many paintings have suffered from
thoughtless restoration, they have a charm and attraction which
certainly make them the most popular galleries in Europe. The Pitti has
ten Raphaels and excellent examples of Andrea del Sarto, Giorgione and
Perugino. The Uffizi is more representative of non-Italian schools, but
is best known for its works by Botticelli, Leonardo da Vinci,
Michelangelo and Sodoma, the schools of Tuscany and Umbria forming the
bulk of both collections. Admission to the galleries is by payment, and
the small income derived from this source is devoted to maintaining and
enlarging the collections.

[Illustration: FIG. 2.--Plan of the first and second floors of the
Imperial Gallery, Vienna.]

As to the ground plans of the National Gallery, London (fig. 1), and of
the Imperial Gallery at Vienna (fig. 2), it will be observed that while
the former has the advantage of uniform top-light, the galleries at
Vienna possess the most ample facilities for minute classification,
small rooms or "cabinets" opening from each large room. Special rooms
are also provided for drawings and water-colours, while special ranges
of rooms are used by copyists and those responsible for the repair and
preservation of the pictures.


  State galleries of national schools.

Though not so comprehensive as the great collections just described, the
state galleries showing national schools of painting and little else are
of striking interest. In England the National Gallery of British Art
(known as the Tate Gallery) contains British pictures. The corresponding
collection of modern French art is at Paris (Luxembourg Palace), Berlin,
Rome, Dresden, Vienna and Madrid having analogous galleries. The
Victoria and Albert Museum has also numerous British pictures,
especially in water-colour, and the National Portrait Gallery, founded
in 1856, and since 1896 housed in its permanent home, is instructive in
this connexion, though many of its pictures are the work of foreign
artists. The national collections at Dublin and Edinburgh may be
mentioned here, though most schools are represented. Brussels and
Antwerp are remarkable for fine examples of Flemish art--Matsys, Memlinc
and Van Eyck of the primitive schools, Rubens and Van Dyck of the later
period. The collections at Amsterdam (Ryks Museum) and the Hague
(Mauritshuis) are a revelation to those who have only studied Rembrandt,
Franz Hals, Van der Helst, and other Dutch portrait painters outside
Holland; and in the former gallery especially, the pictures are arranged
in a manner showing them to the best advantage. The Museo del Prado is
even more noteworthy, for the fifty examples of Velasquez (outrivalling
the Italian pictures, important as they are) make a visit to Madrid
imperative to those who wish to realize the achievements of Spanish art.
Christiania, Stockholm and Copenhagen have large collections of
Scandinavian art, and the cities of Budapest and Basel have galleries of
some importance. In Italy the state maintains twelve collections, mainly
devoted to pictorial art. Of these the best are situated at Bologna,
Lucca, Parma, Venice, Modena, Turin and Milan. In each case the local
school of painting is fully represented. In Rome the Corsini and
Borghese Galleries, the latter being the most catholic in the city,
contain superb examples, some of them accepted masterpieces of Italian
art; there are also good foreign pictures, but their number is limited.
The Accademia at Florence should also be noted as the most important
state gallery of early Italian art. The central Italian Renaissance can
be more adequately studied here than in the Pitti. The "Primavera" of
Botticelli, and the "Last Judgment" by Fra Angelico are perhaps the
best-known works. The large statue of David by Michelangelo is also in
this gallery, which, on the whole, is one of the most remarkable in
Italy. Speaking broadly, these national galleries scattered throughout
the country are not well arranged or classified; and though some are
kept in fine old buildings, beautiful in themselves, the lighting is
often indifferent, and it is with difficulty that the pictures can be
seen. In nearly every case admission fees are charged every day,
festivals and Sundays excepted; few pictures are bought, acquisitions
being chiefly made by removing pictures from churches.


  Municipal galleries of special schools.

Many towns own collections of well-merited repute. In Italy such
galleries are common, and among them may be noted Siena, with Sodoma and
his school; Venice with Tintoretto (Doge's Palace); Genoa, with the
great palaces Balbi and Rosso; Vicenza (Montagna and school), Ferrara
(Dosso and school), Bergamo and Milan (north Italian schools). Other
civic collections of Italian art are maintained at Verona, Pisa, Rome,
Perugia and Padua. In Holland, Haarlem, Leiden, Rotterdam and the Hague
have galleries supplemental to those of the state, and are remarkable in
showing the brilliance of artists like Grebber, de Bray and Ravesteyn,
who are usually ignored. Birmingham and Manchester have good examples of
modern British art. Moscow (Tretiakoff collection) has modern Russian
pictures, and contemporary German and French work will be found in all
the galleries of these two countries included in the municipal group.
Collections of French work are found at Amiens, Rouen, Nancy, Tours, Le
Mans and Angers, but large as these civic collections are, sometimes
containing six and eight hundred canvases, few of their pictures are
really good, many being the enormous patriotic canvases marked "Don de
l'État," which do not confer distinction on the galleries. Cologne has
the central collection of the early Rhenish school; Nuremberg is
remarkable for early German work (Wohlgemut, &c.). Stuttgart, Cassel
(Dutch) and Hamburg (with a considerable number of British pictures) are
also noteworthy, together with Brunswick, Hanover, Augsburg, Darmstadt
and Düsseldorf, where German and Dutch art preponderate. Seville is
famous for twenty-five examples of Murillo, and there are old Spanish
paintings at Valencia, Cordova and Cadiz.


  Municipal galleries of general schools.

In Great Britain the best of the municipal galleries of general schools
are at Liverpool (early Flemish and British), and at Glasgow (Scottish
painters, Rembrandt, Van der Goes and Venetian schools). In France there
are very large galleries at Tours, Montpellier, Lyons (Perugino,
Rubens), Dijon and Grenoble (Italian), Valenciennes (Watteau and
school), while Rennes, Lille and Marseilles have first-rate collections.
Nantes, Orleans, Besançon, Cherbourg and Caen have also many paintings,
French for the most part, but with occasional foreign pictures of real
importance, presented by the state during the Napoleonic conquests, and
not returned on the declaration of peace as were the works of art
amassed in Paris. Some of the American collections have in recent years
made a great advance in their acquisition of good pictures. At Boston
(Museum of Fine Arts) all schools are represented, so too at the
Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, which is strong in Italian and
Dutch works. Modern French and Flemish art is a feature of the Academy
at Philadelphia, at the Lenox Library (New York), and at Chicago, where
there are good examples of Millet, Constable and Rembrandt. The Corcoran
bequest at Washington is of minor importance. The best civic collection
in Germany of this class is the Städel Institute at Frankfort (Van Eyck,
Christus, early Flemish and Italian).


  Churches.

As the great bulk of religious painting was executed for church
decoration, there are still numberless churches which may be considered
picture galleries. Thus at Antwerp cathedral the Rubens paintings are
remarkable; at Ghent, Van Eyck; at Bruges (hospital of St John),
Memlinc; at Pisa, the Campo Santo (early Tuscan schools); at Sant'
Apollinare, Ravenna, primitive Italo-Byzantine mosaics; at Siena,
Pinturichio. Examples could be multiplied indefinitely--in Italy alone
there are 80,000 churches and chapels, in all of which pictorial art has
been employed. In Italy, besides the church "galleries" still used for
religious services, there are some which have been secularized and are
now used as museums, e.g. Certosa at Pavia, and San Vitale at Ravenna
(mosaics); at Florence, the Scalzo (Andrea del Sarto); San Marco (Fra
Angelico); the Riccardi and Pazzi chapels (Gozzoli and Perugino); at
Milan, in the Santa Maria delle Grazie, the "Last Supper," by Leonardo,
and at Padua, the famous Arena chapel (Giotto).


  Private and semi-private galleries.

The Vatican galleries, though best known for their statuary, have fine
examples of painting, chiefly of the Italian school; the most famous
easel picture is Raphael's "Transfiguration," but the Stanze, apartments
entirely decorated by painting, are even more famous. In England three
royal palaces are open to the public--Hampton Court (Mantegna), Windsor
(Van Dyck, Zuccarelli), and Kensington (portraits). At Buckingham Palace
the Dutch pictures are admirable, and Queen Victoria lent the celebrated
Raphael cartoons to the Victoria and Albert Museum. Semi-private
collections belong to Dulwich College (Velasquez and Watteau), Oxford
University (Italian drawings), the Soane Museum (Hogarth and English
school), and the Royal Academy (Leonardo). Among private collections the
most important are the Harrach, and Prince Liechtenstein (Vienna), J.
Pierpont Morgan (including miniatures), Mrs J. Gardner of Boston
(Italian), Prince Corsini (Florence). In Great Britain there are immense
riches in private houses, though many collections have been dispersed.
The most noteworthy (1909) belong to the dukes of Devonshire and
Westminster, Lord Ellesmere, Captain Holford (including the masterpiece
of Cuyp), Ludwig Mond, Lord Lansdowne, Miss Rothschild. The finest
private collection is at Panshanger, formerly the seat of Lord Cowper,
the gallery of Van Dyck's work being quite the best in the world.


  Periodical and commercial.

Many galleries are devoted to periodical exhibitions in London; the
Royal Academy is the leading agency of this character, having held
exhibitions since 1769. Its loan exhibitions of Old Masters are most
important. Similar enterprises are the New Gallery, opened in 1888, the
Grafton Gallery, and others. There are also old-established societies of
etchers, water-colourists, &c. A feature common to these exhibitions is
that the public always pays for admission, though they differ from the
commercial exhibitions, becoming more common every year, in which the
work of a single school or painter is shown for profit. But the annual
exhibitions at the Guildhall, under the auspices of the corporation, are
free. The great periodical exhibition of French art is known as the
Salon, and for some years it has had a rival in the Champ de Mars
exhibition. These two societies are now respectively housed in the Grand
Palais and Petit Palais, in the Champs Elysees, which were erected in
connexion with the Paris Exhibition of 1900, but with the ultimate
object of being devoted to the service of the two Salons. Berlin, Rome,
Vienna and other Continental towns have regular exhibitions of original
work.

  The best history of art galleries is found in their official and other
  catalogues, see article MUSEUMS. See also L. Viardot, _Les Musees
  d'Italie, &c._ (3 vols., Paris, 1842, 1843, 1844); Annual Reports,
  official, of National Portrait Gallery, National Galleries of England,
  Ireland and Scotland; Civil Service Estimates, class iv. official. See
  also the series edited by Lafenestre and E. Richtenberger: _Le Louvre,
  La Belgique, Le Hollande, Florence, Belgique_; A. Lavice, _Revue des
  musees de France,... d'Allemagne,... d'Angleterre, ... d'Espagnc,...
  d'Italie,... de Belgique, de Hollande et de Russie_ (Paris,
  1862-1872); E. Michel, _Les Musees d'Allemagne_ (Paris, 1886); Kate
  Thompson, _Public Picture Galleries of Europe_ (1880); C.L. Eastlake,
  _Notes on Foreign Picture Galleries_; Lord Ronald Gower, _Pocket Guide
  to Art Galleries (public and private) of Belgium and Holland_ (1875);
  and many works, albums, and so forth, issued mainly for the sake of
  the illustrations.     (B.)




ARTHRITIS (from Gr. [Greek: arthron], a joint), inflammation of the
joints, in various forms of what are generally called gout and
rheumatism (qq.v.).




ARTHROPODA, a name, denoting the possession by certain animals of
jointed limbs, now applied to one of the three sub-phyla into which one
of the great phyla (or primary branches) of coelomocoelous animals--the
Appendiculata-is divided; the other two being respectively the
Chaetopoda and the Rotifera. The word "Arthropoda" was first used in
classification by Siebold and Stannius (_Lehrbuch der vergleich.
Anatomie_, Berlin, 1845) as that of a primary division of animals, the
others recognized in that treatise being Protozoa, Zoophyta, Vermes,
Mollusca and Vertebrata. The names Condylopoda and Gnathopoda have been
subsequently proposed for the same group. The word refers to the
jointing of the chitinized exo-skeleton of the limbs or lateral
appendages of the animals included, which are, roughly speaking, the
Crustacea, Arachnida, Hexapoda (so-called "true insects"), Centipedes
and Millipedes. This primary group was set up to indicate the residuum
of Cuvier's Articulata when his class Annelides (the modern Chaetopoda)
was removed from that _embranchement_. At the same time C.T.E. von
Siebold and H. Stannius renovated the group Vermes of Linnaeus, and
placed in it the Chaetopods and the parasitic worms of Cuvier, besides
the Rotifers and Turbellarian worms.[1]

The result of the knowledge gained in the last quarter of the 19th
century has been to discredit altogether the group Vermes (see WORM),
thus set up and so largely accepted by German writers even at the
present day. We have, in fact, returned very nearly to Cuvier's
conception of a great division or branch, which he called Articulata,
including the Arthropoda and the Chaetopoda (Annelides of Lamarck, a
name adopted by Cuvier), and differing from it only by the inclusion of
the Rotifera. The name Articulata, introduced by Cuvier, has not been
retained by subsequent writers. The same, or nearly the same, assemblage
of animals has been called Entomozoaria by de Blainville (1822),
Arthrozoa by Burmeister (1843), Entomozoa or Annellata by H.
Milne-Edwards (1855), and Annulosa by Alexander M'Leay (1819), who was
followed by Huxley (1856). The character pointed to by all these terms
is that of a ring-like segmentation of the body. This, however, is not
the character to which we now ascribe the chief weight as evidence of
the genetic affinity and monophyletic (uni-ancestral) origin of the
Chaetopods, Rotifers and Arthropods. It is the existence in each ring of
the body of a pair of hollow _lateral appendages_ or _parapodia_, moved
by intrinsic muscles and penetrated by blood-spaces, which is the
leading fact indicating the affinities of these great sub-phyla, and
uniting them as blood-relations. The parapodia (fig. 8) of the marine
branchiate worms are the same things genetically as the "legs" of
Crustacea and Insects (figs. 10 and 11). Hence the term Appendiculata
was introduced by Lankester (preface to the English edition of
Gegenbaur's _Comparative Anatomy_, 1878) to indicate the group. The
relationships of the Arthropoda thus stated are shown in the subjoined

table:--

                          / Sub-phylum 1. Rotifera.
  Phylum--APPENDICULATA  <      "      2. Chaetopoda.
                          \     "      3. Arthropoda.

The ROTIFERA are characterized by the retention of what appears in
Molluscs and Chaetopods as an embryonic organ, the velum or ciliated
prae-oral girdle, as a locomotor and food-seizing apparatus, and by the
reduction of the muscular parapodia to a rudimentary or non-existent
condition in all present surviving forms except _Pedalion_. In many
important respects they are degenerate--reduced both in size and
elaboration of structure.

The CHAETOPODA are characterized by the possession of horny epidermic
chaetae embedded in the integument and moved by muscles. Probably the
chaetae preceded the development of parapodia, and by their
concentration and that of the muscular bundles connected with them at
the sides of each segment, led directly to the evolution of the
parapodia. The parapodia of Chaetopoda are never coated with dense
chitin, and are, therefore, never converted into jaws; the primitive
"head-lobe" or prostomium persists, and frequently carries eyes and
sensory tentacles. Further, in all members of the sub-phylum Chaetopoda
the relative position of the prostomium, mouth and peristomium or first
ring of the body, retains its primitive character. We do not find in
Chaetopoda that parapodia, belonging to primitively post-oral rings or
body-segments (called "somites," as proposed by H. Milne-Edwards), pass
in front of the mouth by adaptational shifting of the oral aperture.
(See, however, 8.)

The ARTHROPODA might be better called the "Gnathopoda," since their
distinctive character is, that one or more pairs of appendages behind
the mouth are densely chitinized and turned (fellow to fellow on
opposite sides) towards one another so as to act as jaws. This is
facilitated by an important general change in the position of the
parapodia; their basal attachments are all more ventral in position than
in the Chaetopoda, and tend to approach from the two sides towards the
mid-ventral line. Very usually (but not in the Onychophora =
_Peripatus_) all the parapodia are plated with chitin secreted by the
epidermis, and divided into a series of joints--giving the
"arthropodous" or hinged character.

There are other remarkable and distinctive features of structure which
hold the Arthropoda together, and render it impossible to conceive of
them as having a polyphyletic origin, that is to say, as having
originated separately by two or three distinct lines of descent from
lower animals; and, on the contrary, establish the view that they have
been developed from a single line of primitive Gnathopods which arose by
modification of parapodiate annulate worms not very unlike some of the
existing Chaetopods. These additional features are the following--(1)
All existing Arthropoda have an ostiate heart and have undergone
"phleboedesis," that is to say, the peripheral portions of the
blood-vascular system are not fine tubes as they are in the Chaetopoda
and as they were in the hypothetical ancestors of Arthropoda, but are
swollen so as to obliterate to a large extent the coelom, whilst the
separate veins entering the dorsal vessel or heart have coalesced,
leaving valvate ostia (see fig. 1) by which the blood passes from a
pericardial blood-sinus formed by the fused veins into the dorsal vessel
or heart (see Lankester's _Zoology_, part ii., introductory chapter,
1900). The only exception to this is in the case of minute degenerate
forms where the heart has disappeared altogether. The rigidity of the
integument caused by the deposition of dense chitin upon it is
intimately connected with the physiological activity and form of all the
internal organs, and is undoubtedly correlated with the total
disappearance of the circular muscular layer of the body-wall present in
Chaetopods. (2) In all existing Arthropoda the region in front of the
mouth is no longer formed by the primitive prostomium or head-lobe, but
one or more segments, originally post-oral, with their appendages have
passed in front of the mouth (prosthomeres). At the same time the
prostomium and its appendages cease to be recognizable as distinct
elements of the head. The brain no longer consists solely of the
nerve-ganglion-mass proper to the prostomial lobe, as in Chaetopoda, but
is a composite (syncerebrum) produced by the fusion of this and the
nerve-ganglion-masses proper to the prosthomeres or segments which pass
forwards, whilst their parapodia (= appendages) become converted into
eye-stalks, and antennae, or more rarely grasping organs. (3) As in
Chaetopoda, coelomic funnels (coelomoducts) _may_ occur right and left
as pairs in each ring-like segment or somite of the body, and some of
these are in all cases retained as gonoducts and often as renal
excretory organs (green glands, coxal glands of Arachnida, _not_ crural
glands, which are epidermal in origin); but true nephridia, genetically
identical with the nephridia of earthworms, do not occur (on the subject
of coelom, coelomoducts and nephridia, see the introductory chapter of
part ii. of Lankester's _Treatise on Zoology_).

[Illustration: After Lankester, _Q. J. Mic. Sci._ vol. xxxiv., 1893.

FIG. 1.--Diagram to show the gradual formation of the Arthropod
pericardial blood-sinus and "ostiate" heart by the swelling up
(phleboedesis) of the veins entering the dorsal vessel or heart of a
Chaetopod-like ancestor. The figure on the left represents the condition
in a Chaetopod, that on the right the condition in an Arthropod, the
other two are hypothetical intermediate forms.]

_Tabular Statement of the Grades, Classes and Sub-classes of the
Arthropoda._--It will be convenient now to give in the clearest form a
statement of the larger subdivisions of the Arthropoda which it seems
necessary to recognize at the present day. The justification of the
arrangement adopted will form the substance of the rest of the present
article. The orders included in the various classes are not discussed
here, but are treated of under the following titles:--PERIPATUS
(Onychophora), CENTIPEDE and MILLIPEDE (Myriapoda), HEXAPODA (Insecta),
ARACHNIDA and CRUSTACEA.

  SUB-PHYLUM ARTHROPODA (of the Phylum Appendiculata).

  Grade A. HYPARTHROPODA (hypothetical forms connecting ancestors of
    Chaetopoda with those of Arthropoda).

  Grade B. PROTARTHROPODA.
    Class ONYCHOPHORA.
      Ex.--_Peripatus._

  Grade C. EUARTHROPODA.
    Class 1. DIPLOPODA.
      Ex.--_Julus._
    Class 2. ARACHNIDA.
      Grade a. Anomomeristica.
        Ex.--_Phacops._
      Grade b. Nomomeristica.
        (a) Pantopoda.
          Ex.--_Pycnogonum._
        (b) Euarachnida.
          Ex.--_Limulus, Scorpio, Mygale, Acarus._
    Class 3. CRUSTACEA.
      Grade a. Entomostraca.
        Ex.--_Apus, Branchipus, Cyclops, Balanus._
      Grade b. Malacostraca.
        Ex.--_Nebalia, Astacus, Oniscus, Gammarus._
    Class 4. CHILOPODA.
      Ex.--_Scolopendra._
    Class 5. HEXAPODA (syn. Insecta Pterygota).
      Ex.--_Locusta, Phryganea, Papilio, Apis, Mnsca, Cimex, Lucanus,
        Machilis._

  _Incertae sedis_--Tardigrada, Pentastomidae (degenerate forms).

  _The Segmentation of the Body of Arthropoda._--The body of the
  Arthropoda is more or less clearly divided into a series of rings,
  segments, or somites which can be shown to be repetitions one of
  another, possessing identical parts and organs which may be larger or
  smaller, modified in shape or altogether suppressed in one somite as
  compared with another. A similar constitution of the body is more
  clearly seen in the Chaetopod worms. In the Vertebrata also a
  repetition of units of structure (myotomes, vertebrae, &c.)--which is
  essentially of the same nature as the repetition in Arthropods and
  Chaetopods, but in many respects subject to peculiar developments--is
  observed. The name "metamerism" has been given to this structural
  phenomenon because the "meres," or repeated units, follow one another
  in line. Each such "mere" is often called a "metamere." A satisfactory
  consideration of the structure of the Arthropods demands a knowledge
  of what may be called the laws of metamerism, and reference should be
  made to the article under that head.

  [Illustration: From Goodrich, _Q. J. Micr. Sci._ vol. xi p. 247.

  FIG. 2.--Diagram of the head and adjacent region of an Ohgochaet
  Chaetopod.

    Pr, The prostomium.
    m, The mouth.
    A, The prostomial ganglion-mass or archi-cerebrum.
    I, II, III, coelom of the first, second and third somites.]

  _The Theory of the Arthropod Head._--The Arthropod head is a tagma or
  group of somites which differ in number and in their relative position
  in regard to the mouth, in different classes. In a simple Chaetopod
  (fig. 2) the head consists of the first somite only; that somite is
  perforated by the mouth, and is provided with a prostomium or
  prae-oral lobe. The prostomium is essentially a part or outgrowth of
  the first somite, and cannot be regarded as itself a somite. It gives
  rise to a nerve-ganglion mass, the prostomial ganglion. In the marine
  Chaetopods (the Polychaeta) (fig. 3), we find the same essential
  structure, but the prostomium may give rise to two or more tactile
  tentacles, and to the vesicular eyes. The somites have well-marked
  parapodia, and the second and third, as well as the first, may give
  rise to tentacles which are directed forward, and thus contribute to
  form "the head." But the mouth remains as an inpushing of the wall of
  the first somite.

  [Illustration: FIG. 3.--Diagram of the head and adjacent region of a
  Polychaet Chaetopod Letters as in fig. 1, with the addition of T,
  prostomial tentacle; _Pa_, parapodium. (From Goodrich.)]

  The Arthropoda are all distinguished from the Chaetopoda by the fact
  that the head consists of one or more somites which lie _in front of
  the mouth_ (now called prosthomeres), as well as of one or more
  somites behind it (opisthomeres). The first of the post-oral somites
  invariably has its parapodia modified so as to form a pair of
  hemignaths (mandibles). About 1870 the question arose for discussion
  whether the somites in front of the mouth are to be considered as
  derived from the prostomium of a Chaetopod-like ancestor.
  Milne-Edwards and Huxley had satisfied themselves with discussing and
  establishing, according to the data at their command, the number of
  somites in the Arthropod head, but had not considered the question of
  the _nature_ of the prae-oral somites. Lankester (2) was the first to
  suggest that (as is actually the fact in the Nauplius larva of the
  Crustacea) the prae-oral somites or prosthomeres and their appendages
  were ancestrally post-oral, but have become prae-oral "by adaptational
  shifting of the oral aperture." This has proved to be a sound
  hypothesis and is now accepted as the basis upon which the Arthropod
  head must be interpreted (see Korschelt and Heider (3)). Further, the
  morphologists of the 'fifties appear, with few exceptions, to have
  accepted a preliminary scheme with regard to the Arthropod head and
  Arthropod segmentation generally, which was misleading and caused them
  to adopt forced conclusions and interpretations. It was conceived by
  Huxley, among others, that the same number of cephalic somites would
  be found to be characteristic of all the diverse classes of
  Arthropoda, and that the somites, not only of the head but of the
  various regions of the body, could be closely compared in their
  numerical sequence in classes so distinct as the Hexapods, Crustaceans
  and Arachnids.

  The view which it now appears necessary to take is, on the contrary,
  this--viz that all the Arthropoda are to be traced to a common
  ancestor resembling a Chaetopod worm, but differing from it in having
  lost its chaetae and in having a prosthomere in front of the mouth
  (instead of prostomium only) and a pair of hemignaths (mandibles) on
  the parapodia of the buccal somite. From this ancestor Arthropods with
  heads of varying degrees of complexity have been developed
  characteristic of the different classes, whilst the parapodia and
  somites of the body have become variously modified and grouped in
  these different classes. The resemblances which the members of one
  class often present to the members of another class in regard to the
  form of the limb-branches (rami) of the parapodia and the formation of
  tagmata (regions) are not hastily to be ascribed to common
  inheritance, but we must consider whether they are not due to
  homoplasy--that is, to the moulding of natural selection acting in the
  different classes upon fairly similar elements under like exigencies.

  [Illustration: FIG. 4.--Diagram of the head and adjacent region of
  _Peripatus_. Monoprosthomerous.

    m, Mouth.
    I, Coelom of the first somite which carries the antennae and is in
      front of the mouth.
    II, Coelom of the second somite which carries the mandibles (hence
      deuterognathous).
    III and IV, Coelom of the third and fourth somites.
    FP, Rudimentary frontal processes perhaps representing the
      prostomial tentacles of Polychaeta.
    Ant, Antenna or tactile tentacle.
    Md, Mandible.
    Op, Oral-papilla.
    P, Protocerebrum or foremost cerebral mass belonging to the first
      somite.
    D, Deuterocerebrum, consisting of ganglion cells belonging to the
      second or mandibular somite. (After Goodrich.)]

  The structure of the head in Arthropods presents _three_ profoundly
  separated grades of structure dependent upon the number of
  prosthomeres which have been assimilated by the prae-oral region. The
  classes presenting these distinct plans of head-structure cannot be
  closely associated in any scheme of classification professing to be
  natural. Penpatus, the type-genus of the class Onychophora, stands at
  the base of the series with only a single prosthomere (fig. 4). In
  Peripatus the prostomium of the Chaetopod-like ancestor is atrophied,
  but it is possible that two processes on the front of the head (FP)
  represent in the embryo the dwindled prostomial tentacles. The single
  prosthomere carries the retractile tentacles as its "parapodia." The
  second somite is the buccal somite (II, fig. 4); its parapodia have
  horny jaws on their ends, like the claws on the following legs (fig.
  9), and act as hemignaths (mandibles). The study of sections of the
  embryo establishes these facts beyond doubt. It also shows us that the
  neuromeres, no less than the embryonic coelomic cavities, point to the
  existence of one, and only one, prosthomerp in Peripatus, of which the
  "protocerebrum," P, is the neuromere, whilst the deuterocerebrum, D,
  is the neuromere of the second or buccal somite. A brief indication of
  these facts is given by saying that the Onychophora are
  "deuterognathous"--that is to say, that the buccal somite carrying the
  mandibular hemignaths is the second of the whole series.

  What has become of the nerve-ganglion of the prostomial lobe of the
  Chaetopod in Peripatus is not clearly ascertained, nor is its fate
  indicated by the study of the embryonic head of other Arthropods so
  far. Probably it is fused with the protocerebrum, and may also be
  concerned in the history of the very peculiar paired eyes of
  Peripatus, which are like those of Chaetopods in structure--viz
  vesicles with an intravesicular lens, whereas the eyes of all other
  Arthropods have essentially another structure, being "cups" of the
  epidermis, in which a knob-like or rod-like thickening of the cuticle
  is fitted as refractive medium.

  In Diplopoda (_Julus_, &c.) the results of embryological study point
  to a composition of the front part of the head exactly similar to that
  which we find in Onychophora. They are deuterognathous.

  [Illustration: FIG. 5.--Diagram of the head and adjacent region of an
  Arachnid. Diprosthomerous in the adult condition, though
  embryologically the appendages of somite II and the somite itself are,
  as here drawn, not actually in front of the mouth.

    E, Lateral eye.
    Ch, Chelicera.
    m, Mouth.
    P, Protocerebrum,
    D, Deuterocerebrum.
    I, II, III, IV. Coelom of the first, second, third and fourth
      somites. (After Goodrich.)]

  The Arachnida present the first stage of progress. Here embryology
  shows that there are two prosthomeres (fig. 5), and that the
  gnathobases of the chelae which act as the first pair of hemignaths
  are carried by the third somite. The Arachnida are therefore
  tritognathous. The two prosthomeres are indicated by their coelomic
  cavities in the embryo (I and II, fig. 5), and by two neuromeres, the
  protocerebrum and the deuterocerebrum. The appendages of the first
  prosthomere are not present as tentacles, as in Peripatus and
  Diplopods, but are possibly represented by the eyes or possibly
  altogether aborted. The appendages of the second prosthomere are the
  well-known chelicerae of the Arachnids, rarely, if ever, antenniform,
  but modified as "retroverts" or clasp-knife tangs in spiders.

  The Crustacea (fig. 6) and the Hexapoda (fig. 7) agree in having three
  somites in front of the mouth, and it is probable, though not
  ascertained, that the Chilopoda (Scolopendra, &c.) are in the same
  case. The three prosthomeres or prae-oral somites of Crustacea due to
  the sinking back of the mouth one somite farther than in Arachnida are
  not clearly indicated by coelomic cavities in the embryo, but their
  existence is clearly established by the development and position of
  the appendages and by the neuromeres.

  The eyes in some Crustacea are mounted on articulated stalks, and from
  the fact that they can after injury be replaced by antenna-like
  appendages it is inferred that they represent the parapodia of the
  most anterior prosthomere. The second prosthomere carries the first
  pair of antennae and the third the second pair of antennae. Sometimes
  the pair of appendages has not a merely tactile jointed ramus, but is
  converted into a claw or clasper. Three neuromeres--a proto-,
  deutero-, and trito-cerebrum--corresponding to those three
  prosthomeres are sharply marked in the embryo. The fourth somite is
  that in which the mouth now opens, and which accordingly has its
  appendages converted into hemignathous mandibles. The Crustacea are
  tetartognathous.

  [Illustration: FIG. 6.--Diagram of the head of a Crustacean.
  Tri-prosthomerous.

    FP, Frontal processes (observed in Cirrhiped nauplius-larvae)
      probably representing the prostomial tentacles of Chaetopods.
    e, Eye.
    Ant^1, First pair of antennae.
    Ant^2, Second pair of antennae.
    md, Mandible.
    mx^1, mx^2, First and second pairs of maxillae.
    m, Mouth.
    I, II, and III, The three prosthomeres.
    IV, V, VI, The three somites following the mouth.
    P, Protocerebrum.
    D, Deuterocerebrum.
    T, Tritocerebrum.

  (After Goodrich.)]

  [Illustration: FIG. 7.--Diagram of the head of a Hexapod insect.

    e, Eye.
    ant, Antenna.
    md, Mandible.
    mx^1, First maxilla.
    mx^2, Second maxilla.
    m, Mouth.
    I, Region of the first or eye-bearing prosthomere.
    II, Coelom of the second antenna-bearing prosthomere.
    III, Coelom of the third prosthomere devoid of appendages.
    IV, V, and VI, Coelom of the fourth, fifth and sixth somites.
    P, Protocerebrum belonging to the first prosthomere.
    D, Deuterocerebrum belonging to the second prosthomere.
    T, Tritocerebrum belonging to the third prosthomere.

  (After Goodrich.)]

  The history of the development of the head has been carefully worked
  out in the Hexapod insects. As in Crustacea and Arachnida, a first
  prosthomere is indicated by the paired eyes and the protocerebrum; the
  second prosthomere has a well-marked coelomic cavity, carries the
  antennae, and has the deuterocerebrum for its neuromere. The third
  prosthomere is represented by a well-marked pair of coelomic cavities
  and the tritocerebrum (III, fig. 7), but has no appendages. They
  appear to have aborted. The existence of this third prosthomere
  corresponding to the third prosthomere of the Crustacea is a strong
  argument for the derivation of the Hexapoda, and with them the
  Chilopoda, from some offshoot of the Crustacean stem or class. The
  buccal somite, with its mandibles, is in Hexapoda, as in Crustacea,
  the fourth: they are tetartognathous.

  The adhesion of a greater or less number of somites to the buccal
  somite posteriorly (opisthomeres) is a matter of importance, but of
  minor importance, in the theory and history of the Arthropod head. In
  Peripatus no such adhesion or fusion occurs. In Diplopoda two
  opisthomeres--that is to say, one in addition to the buccal
  somite--are united by a fusion of their terga with the terga of the
  prosthomeres. Their appendages are respectively the mandibles and the
  gnathochilarium.

  In Arachnida the highest forms exhibit a fusion of the tergites of
  five post-oral somites to form one continuous carapace united with the
  terga of the two prosthomeres. The five pairs of appendages of the
  post-oral somites of the head or prosoma thus constituted all
  primitively carry gnathobasic projections on their coxal joints, which
  act as hemignaths: in the more specialized forms the mandibular
  gnathobases cease to develop.

  In Crustacea the fourth or mandibular somite never has less than the
  two following somites associated with it by the adaptation of their
  appendages as jaws, and the ankylosis of their terga with that of the
  prosthomeres. But in higher Crustacea the cephalic "tagma" is
  extended, and more somites are added to the fusion, and their
  appendages adapted as jaws of a kind.

  The Hexapoda are not known to us in their earlier or more primitive
  manifestations; we only know them as possessed of a definite number of
  somites arranged in definite numbers in three great tagmata. The head
  shows two jaw-bearing somites besides the mandibular somite (V, VI, in
  fig. 7)--thus six in all (as in some Crustacea), including
  prosthomeres, all ankylosed by their terga to form a cephalic shield.
  There is, however, good embryological evidence in some Hexapods of the
  existence of a seventh somite, the supra-lingual, occurring between
  the somite of the mandibles and the somite of the first maxillae (4).
  This segment is indicated embryologically by its paired coelomic
  cavities. It is practically an excalated somite, having no existence
  in the adult. It is probably not a mere coincidence that the Hexapod,
  with its two rudimentary somites devoid of appendages, is thus found
  to possess twenty-one somites, including that which carries the anus,
  and that this is also the number present in the Malacostracous
  Crustacea.

  [Illustration: FIG. 8.--Diagram of the somite-appendage or parapodium
  of a Polychaet Chaetopod. The chaetae are omitted.

    Ax, The axis.
    nr.c, Neuropodial cirrhus.
    nr.l^1, nr.l^2, Neuropodial lobes or endites.
    nt.c. Notopodial cirrhus.
    nt.l^1, nt.l^2, Notopodial lobes or exites.

  The parapodium is represented with its neural or ventral surface
  uppermost. (Original).]

  _The Segmented Lateral Appendages or Limbs of Arthropoda._--It has
  taken some time to obtain any general acceptance of the view that the
  parapodia of the Chaetopoda and the limbs of Arthropoda are
  genetically identical structures; yet if we compare the parapodium of
  Tomopteris or of Phyllodoce with one of the foliaceous limbs of
  Branchipus or Apus, the correspondences of the two are striking. An
  erroneous view of the fundamental morphology of the Crustacean limb,
  and consequently of that of other Arthropoda, came into favour owing
  to the acceptance of the highly modified limbs of Astacus as typical.
  Protopodite, endopodite, exopodite, and epipodite were considered to
  be the morphological units of the crustacean limb. Lankester (5) has
  shown (and his views have been accepted by Professors Korschelt and
  Heider in their treatise on _Embryology_) that the limb of the lowest
  Crustacea, such as Apus, consists of a corm or axis which may be
  jointed, and gives rise to outgrowths, either leaf-like or filiform,
  on its inner and outer margins (endites and exites). Such a corm (see
  figs. 10 and 11), with its outgrowths, may be compared to the simple
  parapodia of Chaetopoda with cirrhi and branchial lobe (fig. 8). It is
  by the specialization of two "endites" that the endopodite and
  exopodite of higher Crustacea are formed, whilst a flabelliform exite
  is the homogen or genetic equivalent of the epipodite (see Lankester,
  "Observations and Reflections on Apus Cancriformis," _Q. J. Micr.
  Sci._). The reduction of the outgrowth-bearing "corm" of the
  parapodium of either a Chaetopod or an Arthropod to a simple
  cylindrical stump, devoid of outgrowths, is brought about when
  mechanical conditions favour such a shape. We see it in certain
  Chaetopods (e.g. Hesione) and in the Arthropod Peripatus (fig. 9). The
  conversion of the Arthropod's limb into a jaw, as a rule, is effected
  by the development of an endite near its base into a hard, chitinized,
  and often toothed gnathobase (see figs. 10 and 11, _en^1_). It is not
  true that all the biting processes of the Arthropod limb are thus
  produced--for instance, the jaws of Peripatus are formed by the axis
  or corm itself, whilst the poison-jaws of Chilopods, as also their
  maxillae, appear to be formed rather by the apex or terminal region of
  the ramus of the limb; but the opposing jaws (= hemignaths) of
  Crustacea, Arachnida and Hexapoda are gnathobases, and not the axis or
  corm. The endopodite (corresponding to the fifth endite of the limb of
  Apus, see fig. 10) becomes in Crustacea the "walking leg" of the
  mid-region of the body; it becomes the palp or jointed process of
  anterior segments. A second ramus, the "exopodite," often is also
  retained in the form of a palp or feeler. In Apus, as the figure
  shows, there are four of these "antenna-like" palps or filaments on
  the first thoracic limb. A common modification of the chief ramus of
  the Arthropod parapodium is the chela or nipper formed by the
  elongation of the penultimate joint of the ramus, so that the last
  joint works on it--as, for instance, in the lobster's claw. Such
  chelate rami or limb-branches are independently developed in Crustacea
  and in Arachnida, and are carried by somites of the body which do not
  correspond in position in the two groups. The range of modification of
  which the rami or limb-branches of the limbs of Arthropoda are capable
  is very large, and in allied orders or even families or genera we
  often find what is certainly the palp of the same appendage (as
  determined by numerical position of the segments)--in one case
  antenniform, in another chelate, in another pediform, and in another
  reduced to a mere stump or absent altogether. Very probably the power
  which the appendage of a given segment has of assuming the perfected
  form and proportions previously attained by the appendage of another
  segment must be classed as an instance of "homoeosis," not only where
  such a change is obviously due to abnormal development or injury, but
  also where it constitutes a difference permanently established between
  allied orders or smaller groups, or between the two sexes.

  [Illustration: FIG. 9.--Three somite-appendages or parapodia of
  _Peripatus._

    A, A walking leg; p^1 to p^4, the characteristic "pads"; f, the
      foot; cl^1, cl^2, the two claws.
    B, An oral papilla, one of the second pair of post-oral appendages.
    C, One of the first post-oral pair of appendages or mandibles; cl^1,
      cl^2, the greatly enlarged claws. (Compare A.)

  The appendages are represented with the neural or ventral surface
  uppermost.]

  The most extreme disguise assumed by the Arthropod parapodium or
  appendage is that of becoming a mere stalk supporting an eye--a fact
  which did not obtain general credence until the experiments of Herbst
  in 1895, who found, on cutting off the eye-stalk of Palaemon, that a
  jointed antenna-like appendage was regenerated in its place. Since the
  eye-stalks of Podophthalmate Crustacea represent appendages, we are
  forced to the conclusion that the sessile eyes of other Crustacea, and
  of other Arthropoda generally, indicate the position of appendages
  which have atrophied.[2]

  From what has been said, it is apparent that we cannot, in attempting
  to discover the affinities and divergences of the various forms of
  Arthropoda, attach a very high phylogenetic value to the coincidence
  or divergence in form of the appendages belonging to the somites
  compared with one another.

  [Illustration: After Lankester, _Q. J. Mic. Sci._ vol. xxi., 1881.

  FIG. 10.--The second thoracic (fifth post-oral) appendage of the left
  side of _Apus cancriformis_, placed with its ventral or neural surface
  uppermost to compare with figs. 8 and 9.

    1, 2, The two segments of the axis.
    en^1, The gnathobase.
    en^2 to en^6, The five following "endites."
    fl, The flabellum or anterior exite.
    br, The bract or posterior exite.]

  The principal forms assumed by the Arthropod parapodium and its rami
  may be thus enumerated:--

  (1) Axial corm well developed, unsegmented or with two to four
  segments; lateral endites and exites (rami) numerous and of various
  lengths (certain limbs of lower Crustacea).

  (2) Corm, with short unsegmented rami, forming a flattened foliaceous
  appendage, adapted to swimming and respiration (trunk-limbs of
  Phyllopods).

  (3) Corm alone developed; with no endites or exites, but provided with
  terminal chitinous claws (ordinary leg of Peripatus), with terminal
  jaw teeth (jaw of Peripatus), or with blunt extremity (oral papilla of
  same) (see fig. 9).

  (4) Three of the rami of the primitive limb (endites 5 and 6, and
  exite 1) specially developed as endopodite, exopodite, and
  epipodite--the first two often as firm and strongly chitinized,
  segmented, leg-like structures; the original axis or corm reduced to a
  basal piece, with or without a distinct gnathobase (endite 1)--typical
  tri-ramose limb of higher Crustacea.

  (5) One ramus (the endopodite) alone developed--the original axis or
  corm serving as its basal joint with or without gnathobase. This is
  the usual uni-ramose limb found in the various classes of Arthropoda.
  It varies as to the presence or absence of the jaw-process and as to
  the stoutness of the segments of the ramus, their number (frequently
  six, plus the basal corm), and the modification of the free end. This
  may be filiform or brush-like or lamellate when it is an antenna or
  palp; a simple spike (walking leg of Crustacea, of other aquatic
  forms, and of Chilopods and Diplopods); the terminal joint flattened
  (swimming leg of Crustacea and Gigantostraca); the terminal joint
  provided with two or with three recurved claws (walking leg of many
  terrestrial forms--e.g. Hexapoda and Arachnida); the penultimate joint
  with a process equal in length to the last joint, so as to form a
  nipping organ (chelae of Crustaceans and Arachnids); the last joint
  reflected and movable on the penultimate, as the blade of a
  clasp-knife on its handle (the retrovert, toothed so as to act as a
  biting jaw in the Hexapod _Mantis_, the Crustacean _Squilla_ and
  others); with the last joint produced into a needle-like stabbing
  process in spiders.

  [Illustration: After Lankester, _Q. J. Mic. Sci._ vol. xxi., 1881.

  FIG. 11.--The first thoracic (fourth post-oral) appendage of _Apus
  cancriformis_ (right side).

    Ax^1 to Ax^4, the four segments of the axis with muscular bands.
    En^1, Gnathobase.
    En^2 to En^5, The elongated jointed endites (rami).
    En^6, The rudimentary sixth endite (exopodite of higher Crustacea).
    Fl, The flabellum which becomes the epipodite of higher forms.
    Br, The bract devoid of muscles and respiratory in function.]

  (6) Two rami developed (usually, but perhaps not always, the
  equivalents of the endopodite and exopodite) supported on the somewhat
  elongated corm (basal segment). This is the typical "bi-ramose limb"
  often found in Crustacea. The rami may be flattened for swimming, when
  it is "a bi-ramose swimmeret," or both or only one may be filiform and
  finely annulate; this is the form often presented by the antennae of
  Crustacea, and rarely by prae-oral appendages in other Arthropods.

  (7) The endopoditic ramus is greatly enlarged and flattened, without
  or with only one jointing, the corm (basal segment) is evanescent;
  often the plate-like endopodites of a pair of such appendages unite in
  the middle line with one another or by the intermediary of a sternal
  up-growth and form a single broad plate. These are the plate-like
  swimmerets and opercula of Gigantostraca and Limulus among Arachnids
  and of Isopod Crustaceans. They may have rudimentary exopodites, and
  may or may not have branchial filaments or lamellae developed on their
  posterior faces. The simplest form to which they may be reduced is
  seen in the genital operculum of the scorpion.

  (8) The gnathobase becomes greatly enlarged and not separated by a
  joint from the corm; it acts as a hemignath or half jaw working
  against its fellow of the opposite side. The endopodite may be
  retained as a small segmented palp at the side of the gnathobase or
  disappear (mandible of Crustacea, Chilopoda and Hexapoda).

  (9) The corm becomes the seat of a development of a special visual
  organ, the Arthropod eye (as opposed to the Chaetopod eye). Its
  jointing (segmentation) may be retained, but its rami disappear
  (Podophthalmous Crustacea). Usually it becomes atrophied, leaving the
  eye as a sessile organ upon the prae-oral region of the body (the
  eye-stalk and sessile lateral eyes of Arthropoda generally, exclusive
  of Peripatus).

  (10) The forms assumed by special modification of the elements of the
  parapodium in the maxillae, labium, &c., of Hexapods, Chilopods,
  Diplopods, and of various Crustacea, deserve special enumeration, but
  cannot be dealt with without ample space and illustration.

  It may be pointed out that the most radical difference presented in
  this list is that between appendages consisting of the corm alone
  without rami (Onychophora) and those with more or less developed rami
  (the rest of the Arthropoda). In the latter class we should
  distinguish three phases: (a) those with numerous and comparatively
  undeveloped rami; (b) those with three, or two highly developed rami,
  or with only one--the corm being reduced to the dimensions of a mere
  basal segment; (c) those reduced to a secondary simplicity
  (degeneration) by overwhelming development of one segment (e.g. the
  isolated gnathobase often seen as "mandible" and the genital
  operculum).

  There is no reason to suppose that any of the forms of limb observed
  in Arthropoda may not have been independently developed in two or more
  separate diverging lines of descent.

  _Branchiae._--In connexion with the discussion of the limbs of
  Arthropods, a few words should be devoted to the gill-processes. It
  seems probable that there are branchial plumes or filaments in some
  Arthropoda (some Crustacea) which can be identified with the distinct
  branchial organs of Chaetopoda, which lie dorsal of the parapodia and
  are not part of the parapodium. On the other hand, we cannot refuse to
  admit that any of the processes of an Arthropod parapodium may become
  modified as branchial organs, and that, as a rule, branchial
  out-growths are easily developed, _de novo_, in all the higher groups
  of animals. Therefore, it seems to be, with our present knowledge, a
  hopeless task to analyse the branchial organs of Arthropoda and to
  identify them genetically in groups.

  A brief notice must suffice of the structure and history of the
  _Eyes_, the _Tracheae_ and the so-called _Malpighian tubes_ of
  Arthropoda, though special importance attaches to each in regard to
  the determination of the affinities of the various animals included in
  this great sub-phylum.

  _The Eyes._--The Arthropod eye appears to be an organ of special
  character developed in the common ancestor of the Euarthropoda, and
  distinct from the Chaetopod eye, which is found only in the
  Onychophora where the true Arthropod eye is absent. The essential
  difference between these two kinds of eye appears to be that the
  Chaetopod eye (in its higher developments) is a vesicle enclosing the
  lens, whereas the Arthropod eye is a pit or series of pits into which
  the heavy chitinous cuticle dips and enlarges knobwise as a lens. Two
  distinct forms of the Arthropod eye are observed--the monomeniscous
  (simple) and the polymeniscous (compound). The nerve-end-cells, which
  lie below the lens, are part of the general epidermis. They show in
  the monomeniscous eye (see article ARACHNIDA, fig. 26) a tendency to
  group themselves into "retinulae," consisting of five to twelve cells
  united by vertical deposits of chitin (rhabdoms). In the case of the
  polymeniscous eye (fig. 23, article ARACHNIDA) a single retinula or
  group of nerve-end-cells is grouped beneath each associated lens. A
  further complication occurs in each of these two classes of eye. The
  monomeniscous eye is rarely provided with a single layer of cells
  beneath its lens; when it is so, it is called monostichous (simple
  lateral eye of Scorpion, fig. 22, article ARACHNIDA). More usually, by
  an infolding of the layer of cells in development, we get three layers
  under the lens; the front layer is the corneagen layer, and is
  separated by a membrane from the other two which, more or less, fuse
  and contain the nerve-end-cells (retinal layer). These eyes are called
  diplostichous, and occur in Arachnida and Hexapoda (fig. 24, article
  ARACHNIDA).

  On the other hand, the polymeniscous eye undergoes special elaboration
  on its lines. The retinulae become elongated as deep and very narrow
  pits (fig. 12 and explanation), and develop additional cells near the
  mouth of the narrow pit. Those nearest to the lens are the corneagen
  cells of this more elaborated eye, and those between the original
  retinula cells and the corneagen cells become firm and transparent.
  They are the crystalline cells or vitrella (see Watase, 7). Each such
  complex of cells underlying the lenticle of a compound eye is called
  an "ommatidium"; the entire mass of cells underlying a monomeniscous
  eye is an "ommataeum." The ommataeum, as already stated, tends to
  segregate into retinulae which correspond potentially each to an
  ommatidium of the compound eye. The ommatidium is from the first
  segregate and consists of few cells. The compound eye of the king-crab
  (Limulus) is the only recognized instance of ommatidia in their
  simplest state. Each can be readily compared with the single-layered
  lateral eye of the scorpion. In Crustacea and Hexapoda of all grades
  we find compound eyes with the more complicated ommatidia described
  above. We do not find them in any Arachnida.

  It is difficult in the absence of more detailed knowledge as to the
  eyes of Chilopoda and Diplopoda to give full value to these facts in
  tracing the affinities of the various classes of Arthropods. But they
  seem to point to a community of origin of Hexapods and Crustacea in
  regard to the complicated ommatidia of the compound eye, and to a
  certain isolation of the Arachnida, which are, however, traceable, so
  far as the eyes are concerned, to a distant common origin with
  Crustacea and Hexapoda through the very simple compound eyes
  (monostichous, polymeniscous) of Limulus.

  [Illustration: FIG. 12.--Diagram to show the derivation of the unit or
  "ommatidium" of the compound eye of Crustacea and Hexapoda, C, from a
  simple monomeniscous monostichous eye resembling the lateral eye of a
  scorpion, A, or the unit of the compound lateral eye of Limulus (see
  article ARACHNIDA, figs. 22 and 23). B represents an intermediate
  hypothetical form in which the cells beneath the lens are beginning to
  be superimposed as corneagen, vitrella and retinula, instead of
  standing side by side in horizontal series. The black represents the
  cuticular product of the epidermal cells of the ocular area, taking
  the form either of lens, _cl_, of crystalline body, _cry_, or of
  rhabdom, _rhab_; _hy_, hypodermis or epidermal cells; _corn^1_,
  laterally-placed cells in the simpler stage, A, which like the
  nerve-end cells, _vit^1_ and _ret^1_, are corneagens or
  lens-producing; _corn_, specialized corneagen or lens-producing cells;
  _vit^1_, potential vitrella cells with _cry^1_, potential crystalline
  body now indistinguishable from retinula cells and rhabdomeres; _vit_,
  vitrella cell with _cry_, its contained cuticular product, the
  crystalline cone or body; _ret^1_, _rhab^1_, retinula cells and
  rhabdom of scorpion undifferentiated from adjacent cells, _vit^1;
  ret_, retinula cell; _rhab_, rhabdom; _nf_, optic nerve-fibres.
  (Modified from Watase.)]

  _The Tracheae._--In regard to tracheae the very natural tendency of
  zoologists has been until lately to consider them as having once
  developed and once only, and therefore to hold that a group
  "Tracheata" should be recognized, including all tracheate Arthropods.
  We are driven by the conclusions arrived at as to the derivation of
  the Arachnida from branchiate ancestors, independently of the other
  tracheate Arthropods, to formulate the conclusion that tracheae have
  been independently developed in the Arachnidan class. We are also, by
  the isolation of Peripatus and the impossibility of tracing to it all
  other tracheate Arthropoda, or of regarding it as a degenerate offset
  from some one of the tracheate classes, forced to the conclusion that
  the tracheae of the Onychophora have been independently acquired.
  Having accepted these two conclusions, we formulate the generalization
  that tracheae can be independently acquired by various branches of
  Arthropod descent in adaptation to a terrestrial as opposed to an
  aquatic mode of life. A great point of interest therefore exists in
  the knowledge of the structure and embryology of tracheae in the
  different groups. It must be confessed that we have not such full
  knowledge on this head as could be wished for. Tracheae are
  essentially tubes like blood-vessels--apparently formed from the same
  tissue elements as blood-vessels--which contain air in place of blood,
  and usually communicate by definite orifices, the tracheal stigmata,
  with the atmosphere. They are lined internally by a cuticular deposit
  of chitin. In Peripatus and the Diplopods they consist of bunches of
  fine tubes which do not branch but diverge from one another; the
  chitinous lining is smooth. In the Hexapods and Chilopods, and the
  Arachnids (usually), they form tree-like branching structures, and
  their finest branches are finer than any blood-capillary, actually in
  some cases penetrating a single cell and supplying it with gaseous
  oxygen. In these forms the chitinous lining of the tubes is thickened
  by a close-set spiral ridge similar to the spiral thickening of the
  cellulose wall of the spiral vessels of plants. It is a noteworthy
  fact that other tubes in these same terrestrial Arthropoda--namely,
  the ducts of glands--are similarly strengthened by a chitinous
  cuticle, and that a spiral or annular thickening of the cuticle is
  developed in them also. Chitin is _not_ exclusively an ectodermal
  product, but occurs also in cartilaginous skeletal plates of
  mesoblastic origin (connective tissue). The immediate cavities or pits
  into which the tracheal stigmata open appear to be in many cases
  ectodermic in sinkings, but there seems to be no reason (based on
  embryological observation) for regarding the tracheae as an ingrowth
  of the ectoderm. They appear, in fact, to be an air-holding
  modification of the vasifactive connective tissue. Tracheae are
  abundant just in proportion as blood-vessels become suppressed. They
  are reciprocally exclusive. It seems not improbable that they are two
  modifications of the same tissue-elements. In Peripatus the stigmatic
  pits at which the tracheae communicate with the atmosphere are
  scattered and not definite in their position. In other cases the
  stigmata are definitely paired and placed in a few segments or in
  several. It seems that we have to suppose that the vasifactive tissue
  of Arthropoda can readily take the form of air-holding instead of
  blood-holding tubes, and that this somewhat startling change in its
  character has taken place independently in several instances--viz. in
  the Onychophora, in more than one group of Arachnida, in Diplopoda,
  and again in the Hexapoda and Chilopoda.

  _The Malpighian Tubes._--This name is applied to the numerous fine
  caecal tubes of noticeable length developed from the proctodaeal
  invert of ectodermal origin in Hexapods. These tubes are shown to
  excrete nitrogenous waste products similar to uric acid. Tubes of
  renal excretory function in a like position occur in most terrestrial
  Arthropoda--viz. in Chilopoda, Diplopoda and Arachnida. They are also
  found in some of the semi-terrestrial and purely aquatic Amphipod
  Crustaceans. But the conclusion that all such tubes are identical in
  essential character seems to be without foundation. The Malpighian
  tubes of Hexapods are outgrowths of the proctodaeum, but those of
  Scorpion and the Amphipod Crustacea are part of the metenteron or
  endodermal gut, though originating near its junction with the
  proctodaeum. Hence the presence or absence of such tubes cannot be
  used as an argument as to affinity without some discrimination. The
  Scorpion's so-called Malpighian tubes are _not_ the same organs as
  those so named in the other Tracheata. Such renal caecal tubes seem to
  be readily evolved from either metenteron or proctodaeum when the
  conditions of the out-wash of nitrogenous waste-products are changed
  by the transference from aquatic to terrestrial life. The absence of
  such renal caeca in Limulus and their presence in the terrestrial
  Arachnida is precisely on a parallel with their absence in aquatic
  Crustacea and their presence in the feebly branchiate Amphipoda.

  _Group Characters._--We shall now pass the groups of the Arthropoda in
  review, attempting to characterize them in such a way as will indicate
  their probable affinities and genetic history.

  SUB-PHYLUM ARTHROPODA.--The characters of the sub-phylum and those of
  the associated sub-phyla Chaetopoda and Rotifera have been given
  above, as well as the general characters of the phylum Appendiculata
  which comprises these great sub-phyla.

    Grade A.--Hyparthropoda.

    Hypothetical forms.

    Grade B.--Protarthropoda.

  (a) The integument is covered by a delicate soft cuticle (not firm or
  plated) which allows the body and its appendages great range of
  extension and contraction.

  (b) The paired claws on the ends of the parapodia and the fang-like
  modifications of these on the first post-oral appendages (mandibles)
  are the only hard chitinous portions of the integument.

  (c) The head is deuterognathous--that is to say, there is only one
  prosthomere, and accordingly the first and only pair of hemignaths is
  developed by adaptation of the appendages of the second somite.

  (d) The appendages of the third somite (second post-oral) are clawless
  oral papillae.

  (e) The rest of the somites carry equi-formal simple appendages,
  consisting of a corm or axis tipped with two chitinous claws and
  devoid of rami.

  (f) The segmentation of the body is anomomeristic, there being no
  fixed number of somites characterizing all the forms included.

  (g) The pair of eyes situated on the prosthomere are not of the
  Euarthropod type, but resemble those of Chaetopods (hence
  Nereid-ophthalmous).

  (h) The muscles of the body-wall and gut do not consist of
  transversely-striped muscular fibre, but of the unstriped tissue
  observed also in Chaetopoda.

  (i) A pair of coelomoducts is developed in every somite including the
  prosthomere, in which alone it atrophies in later development.

  (j) The ventral nerve-cords are widely separated--in fact, lateral in
  position.

  (k) There are no masses of nerve-cells forming a ganglion (neuromere)
  in each somite. (In this respect the Protarthropoda are at a lower
  stage than most of the existing Chaetopoda.)

  (l) The genital ducts are formed by the enlargement of the
  coelomoducts of the penultimate somite.

    Class (Unica).--ONYCHOPHORA.

  With the characters of the grade: add the presence within the body of
  fine unbranched tracheal tubes, devoid of spiral thickening, opening
  to the exterior by numerous irregularly scattered tracheal pits.

  Genera--Eoperipatus, Peripatopsis, Opisthopatus, &c. (See PERIPATUS.)

    Grade C (of the Arthropoda).--Euarthropoda.

  (a) Integument heavily plated with firm chitinous cuticle, allowing no
  expansion and retraction of regions of the body nor change of
  dimensions, except, in some cases, a dorso-ventral bellows movement.
  The separation of the heavier plates of chitin by grooves of delicate
  cuticle results in the hinging or jointing of the body and its
  appendages, and the consequent flexing and extending of the jointed
  pieces.

  (b) Claws and fangs are developed on the branches or rami of the
  parapodia, not on the end of the axis or corm.

  (c) The head is either deuterognathous, tritognathous, or
  tetartognathous.

  (d) Rarely only one, and usually at least two, of the somites
  following the mandibular somite carry appendages modified as jaws
  (with exceptions of a secondary origin).

  (e) The rest of the somites may all carry appendages, or only a
  limited number may carry appendages. In all cases the appendages
  primarily develop rami or branches which form the limbs, the primitive
  axis or corm being reduced and of insignificant size. In the most
  primitive stock all the post-oral appendages had gnathobasic
  outgrowths.

  (f) The segmentation of the body is anomomeristic in the more archaic
  members of each class, nomomeristic in the higher members.

  (g) The two eyes of Chaetopod structure have disappeared, and are
  replaced by the Euarthropod eyes.

  (h) The muscles in all parts of the body consist of striped muscular
  fibre, never of unstriped muscular tissue.

  (i) The coelomoducts are suppressed in most somites, and retained only
  as the single pair of genital ducts (very rarely more numerous) and in
  some also as the excretory glands (one or two pairs).

  (j) The ventral nerve-cords approach one another in the mid-ventral
  line behind the mouth.

  (k) The nerve-cells of the ventral nerve cords are segregated as
  paired ganglia in each somite, often united by meristic dislocation
  into composite ganglia.

  (l) The genital ducts may be the coelomoducts of the penultimate or
  ante-penultimate or adjacent somite, or of a somite placed near the
  middle of the series, or of a somite far forward in the series.

    Class 1 (of the Euarthropoda).--DIPLOPODA.

  The head has but one prosthomere (monoprosthomerous), and is
  accordingly deuterognathous. This carries short-jointed antennae (in
  one case bi-ramose) and eyes, the structure and development of which
  require further elucidation. Only one somite following the first
  post-oral or mandibular segment has its appendages modified as jaws.

  The somites of the body, except in Pauropus, either fuse after early
  development and form double somites with two pairs of appendages
  (Julus, &c.), or present legless and leg-bearing somites alternating.

  Somites, anomomeristic, from 12 to 150 in the post-cephalic series.

  The genital ducts open in the fourth, or between the fourth and fifth
  post-oral somite.

  Terrestrial forms with small-jointed legs formed by adaptation of a
  single ramus of the appendage. Tracheae are present.

  _Note._--The Diplopoda include the Juliformia, the Symphyla
  (Scolopendrella), and Pauropoda (Pauropus). They were until recently
  classified with the Chilopoda (Centipedes), with which they have no
  close affinity, but only a superficial resemblance. (Compare the
  definition of the class Chilopoda.)

  The movement of the legs in Diplopoda is like that of those of
  Peripatus, of the Phyllopod Crustacea, and of the parapodia of
  Chaetopoda, symmetrical and identical on the two sides of the body.
  The legs of Chilopoda move in alternating groups on the two sides of
  the body. This implies a very much higher development of nerves and
  muscles in the latter. (See MILLIPEDE.)

    Class 2 (of the Euarthropoda).--ARACHNIDA.

  Head tritognathous and diprosthomerous--that is to say, with two
  prosthomeres, the first bearing typical eyes, the second a pair of
  appendages reduced to a single ramus, which is in more primitive forms
  antenniform, in higher forms chelate or retrovert. The ancestral stock
  was pantognathobasic--i.e. had a gnathobase or jaw process on every
  parapodium. As many as six pairs of appendages following the mouth may
  have an enlarged gnathobase actually functional as a jaw or hemignath,
  but a ramus is well developed on each of these appendages either as a
  simple walking leg, a palp or a chela. In the more primitive forms the
  appendage of every post-oral somite has a gnathobase and two rami; in
  higher specialized forms the gnathobases may be atrophied in every
  appendage, even in the first post-oral.

  The more primitive forms are anomomeristic; the higher forms
  nomomeristic, showing typically three groups or tagmata of six somites
  each.

  The genital apertures are placed on the first somite of the second
  tagma or mesosoma. Their position is unknown in the more primitive
  forms. The more primitive forms have branchial respiratory processes
  developed on a ramus of each of the post-oral appendages. In higher
  specialized forms these branchial processes become first of all
  limited to five segments of the mesosoma, then sunk beneath the
  surface as pulmonary organs, and finally atrophied, their place being
  taken by a well-developed tracheal system.

  A character of great diagnostic value in the more primitive Arachnida
  is the tendency of the chitinous investment of the tergal surface of
  the telson to unite during growth with that of the free somites in
  front of it, so as to form a pygidial shield or posterior carapace,
  often comprising as many as fifteen somites (Trilobites, Limulus).

  A pair of central monomeniscous diplostichous eyes is often present on
  the head. Lateral eyes also are often present which are monostichous
  with aggregated lenses (_Limulus_) or with isolated lenses (Scorpio),
  or are diplostichous with simple lens (_Pedipalpi_, Araneae, &c.).

    Class 3 (of the Euarthropoda).--CRUSTACEA.

  Head tetartognathous and triprosthomerous--that is to say, with three
  prosthomeres; the first bearing typical eyes, the second a pair of
  antenniform appendages (often bi-ramose), the third a pair of
  appendages usually antenniform, sometimes claw-like. The ancestral
  stock was (as in the Arachnida) pantognathobasic, that is to say, had
  a gnathobase or jaw-process on the base of every post-oral appendage.

  Besides the first post-oral or mandibular pair, at least two
  succeeding pairs of appendages are modified as jaws. These have small
  and insignificant rami, or none at all, a feature in which the
  Arachnida differ from them. The appendages of four or more additional
  following somites may be turned upwards towards the mouth and assist
  in the taking of food.

  The more primitive forms (Entomostraca) are anomomeristic, presenting
  great variety as to number of somites, form of appendages, and
  tagmatic grouping; the higher forms (Malacostraca) are nomomeristic,
  showing in front of the telson twenty somites, of which the six hinder
  carry swimmerets and the five next in front ambulatory limbs. The
  genital apertures are neither far forward nor far backward in the
  series of somites, e.g. on the fourteenth post-oral in Apus, on the
  ninth post-oral in female Astacus and in Cyclops.

  With rare exceptions, branchial plates are developed either by
  modification of a ramus of the limbs or as processes on a ramus, or
  upon the sides of the body. No tracheate Crustacea are known, but some
  terrestrial Isopoda develop pulmonary in-sinkings of the integument. A
  characteristic, comparable in value to that presented by the pygidial
  shield of Arachnida, is the frequent development of a pair of long
  appendages by the penultimate somite, which with the telson form a
  trifid, or, when that is small, a bifid termination to the body.

  The lateral eyes of Crustacea are polymeniscous, with highly
  specialized retinulae like those of Hexapoda, and unlike the simpler
  compound lateral eyes of lower Arachnida. Monomeniscous eyes are
  rarely present, and when present, single, minute, and central in
  position.

  _Note._--The Crustacea exhibit a longer and more complete series of
  forms than any other class of Arthropoda, and may be regarded as
  preserving the most completely represented line of descent.

    Class 4.--CHILOPODA.

  Head triprosthomerous[3] and tetartognathous. The two somites
  following the mandibular or first post-oral or buccal somite carry
  appendages modified as maxillae. The fourth post-oral somite has its
  appendages converted into very large and powerful hemignaths, which
  are provided with poison-glands. The remaining somites carry
  single-clawed walking legs, a single pair to each somite. The body is
  anomomeristic, showing in different genera from 17 (inclusive of the
  anal and genital) to 175 somites behind that which bears the poison
  jaws. No tagmata are developed. The genital ducts open on the
  penultimate somite.

  Tracheae are developed which are dendriform and with spiral thickening
  of their lining. Their trunks open at paired stigmata placed laterally
  in each somite of the trunk or in alternate somites. Usually the
  tracheae open by paired stigmata placed upon the sides of a greater or
  less number of the somites, but never quite regularly on alternating
  somites. At most they are present on all the pedigerous somites
  excepting the first and the last. In _Scutigera_ there are seven
  unpaired dorsal stigmata, each leading into a sac whence a number of
  air-holding tubes project into the pencardial blood-sinus.

  Renal caecal tubes (Malpighian tubes) open into the proctodaeum. (See
  CENTIPEDE.)

    Class 5.--HEXAPODA.

  Head shown by its early development to be triprosthomerous and
  consequently tetartognathous. The first prosthomere has its appendages
  represented by the compound eyes and a protocerebrum, the second has
  the antennae for its appendages and a deutocerebral neuromere, the
  third has suffered suppression of its appendages (which corresponded
  to the second pair of antennae of Crustacea), but has a tritocerebrum
  and coelomic chamber. The mandibular somite bears a pair of
  gnathobasic hemignaths without rami or palps, and is followed by two
  jaw-bearing somites (maxillary and labial). This enumeration would
  give six somites in all to the head--three prosthomeres and three
  opisthomeres. Recent investigations (Folsom, 4) show the existence in
  the embryo of a prae-maxillary or supra-lingual somite which is
  suppressed during development. This gives seven somites to the
  Hexapod's head, the tergites of which are fused to form a cephalic
  carapace or box. The number is significant, since it agrees with that
  found in Edriophthalmous Crustacea, and assigns the labium of the
  Hexapod to the same somite numerically as that which carries the
  labium-like maxillipedes of those Crustacea.

  The somites following the head are strictly nomomeristic and
  nomotagmic. The first three form the thorax, the appendages of which
  are the walking legs, tipped with paired claws or ungues (compare the
  homoplastic claws of Scorpio and Peripatus). Eleven somites follow
  these, forming the abdominal "tagma," giving thus twenty-one somites
  in all (as in the higher Crustacea). The somites of the abdomen all
  may carry rudimentary appendages in the embryo, and some of the hinder
  somites may retain their appendages in a modified form in adult life.
  Terminal telescoping of the abdominal somites and excalation may occur
  in the adult, reducing the obvious abdominal somites to as few as
  eight. The genital apertures are median and placed far back in the
  series of somites, viz. the female on the seventh abdominal
  (seventeenth of the whole series) and the male on the ninth or
  ante-penultimate abdominal (nineteenth of the whole series). The
  appendages of the eighth and tenth abdominal somites are modified as
  gonapophyses. The eleventh abdominal segment is the telson, usually
  small and soft; it carries the anus.

  The Hexapoda are not only all confined to a very definite disposition
  of the somites, appendages and apertures, as thus indicated, but in
  other characters also they present the specialization of a
  narrowly-limited highly-developed order of such a class as the
  Crustacea rather than a range from lower more generalized to higher
  more specialized forms such as that group and also the Arachnida
  present. It seems to be a legitimate conclusion that the most
  primitive Hexapoda were provided with wings, and that the term
  Pterygota might be used as a synonym of Hexapoda. Many Hexapoda have
  lost either one pair or both pairs of wings; cases are common of
  wingless genera allied to ordinary Pterygote genera. Sdme Hexapods
  which are very primitive in other respects happen to be also Apterous,
  but this cannot be held to prove that the possession of wings is not a
  primitive character of Hexapods (compare the case of the Struthious
  Birds). The wings of Hexapoda are lateral expansions of the terga of
  the second and third thoracic somites. They appear to be serial
  equivalents (homogenous meromes) of the tracheal gills, which develop
  in a like position on the abdominal segments of some aquatic Hexapods.

  The Hexapoda are all provided with a highly developed tracheal system,
  which presents considerable variation in regard to its stigmata or
  orifices of communication with the exterior. In some a serial
  arrangement of stigmata comparable to that observed in Chilopoda is
  found. In other cases (some larvae) stigmata are absent; in other
  cases again a single stigma is developed, as in the smaller Arachnida
  and Chilopoda, in the median dorsal line or other unexpected position.
  When the facile tendency of Arthropoda to develop tracheal air-tubes
  is admitted, it becomes probable that the tracheae of Hexapods do not
  all belong to one original system, but may be accounted for by new
  developments within the group. Whether the primitive tracheal system
  of Hexapoda was a closed one or open by serial stigmata in every
  somite remains at present doubtful, but the intimate relation of the
  system to the wings and tracheal gills cannot be overlooked.

  The lateral eyes of Hexapoda, like those of Crustacea, belong to the
  most specialized type of "compound eye," found only in these two
  classes. Simple monomeniscous eyes are also present in many Hexapods.

  Renal excretory caeca (Malpighian tubes) are developed from the
  proctodaeum (not from mesenteron as in scorpion and Amphipoda).

  _Concluding Remarks on the Relationships to one another of the
  Classes of the Arthropoda._--Our general conclusion from a survey of
  the Arthropoda amounts to this, that whilst Peripatus, the Diplopoda,
  and the Arachnida represent terrestrial offshoots from successive
  lower grades of primitive aquatic Arthropoda which are extinct, the
  Crustacea alone present a fairly full series of representatives
  leading upwards from unspecialized forms. The latter were not very far
  removed from the aquatic ancestors (Trilobites) of the Arachnida, but
  differed essentially from them by the higher specialization of the
  head. We can gather no indication of the forefathers of the Hexapoda
  or of the Chilopoda less specialized than they are, whilst possessing
  the essential characteristics of these classes. Neither embryology nor
  palaeontology assists us in this direction. On the other hand, the
  facts that the Hexapoda and the Chilopoda have triprosthomerous heads,
  that the Hexapoda have the same total number of somites as the
  nomomeristic Crustacea, and the same number of opisthomeres in the
  head as the more terrestrial Crustacea, together with the same
  adaptation of the form of important appendages in corresponding
  somites, and that the compound eyes of both Crustacea and Hexapoda are
  extremely specialized and elaborate in structure and identical in that
  structure, all lead to the suggestion that the Hexapoda, and with
  them, at no distant point, the Chilopoda, have branched off from the
  Crustacean main stem as specialized terrestrial lines of descent. And
  it seems probable that in the case of the Hexapoda, at any rate, the
  point of departure was subsequent to the attainment of the
  nomomeristic character presented by the higher grade of Crustacea. It
  is on the whole desirable to recognize such affinities in our schemes
  of classification.

  We may tabulate the facts as to head-structure in Chaetopoda and
  Arthropoda as follows:--

    Grade x (below the Arthropoda).--AGNATHA, APROSTHOMERA.

  Without parapodial jaws; without the addition of originally post-oral
  somites to the prae-oral region, which is a simple prostomial lobe of
  the first somite; the first somite is perforated by the mouth and its
  parapodia are not modified as jaws.

    = CHARTOPODA.

    Grade 1 (of the Arthropoda).--MONOGNATHA, MONOPROSTHOMERA.

  With a single pair of parapodial jaws carried by the somite which is
  perforated by the mouth; this is not the first somite, but the second.
  The first somite has become a prosthomere, and carries a pair of
  extensile antennae.

    = ONYCHOPHORA (_Peripatus, &c._).

    Grade 2 (of the Arthropoda).--DIGNATHA, MONOPROSTHOMERA.

  The third somite as well as the second develops a pair of parapodial
  jaws; the first somite is a prosthomere carrying jointed antennae.

    = DIPLOPODA.

    Grade 3 (of the Arthropoda).--PANTOGNATHA, DIPROSTHOMERA.

  A gnathobase is developed (in the primitive stock) on every pair of
  post-oral appendages; two prosthomeres present, the second somite as
  well as the first having passed in front of the mouth, but only the
  second has appendages.

    = ARACHNIDA.

    Grade 4 (of the Arthropoda).--PANTOGNATHA, TRIPROSTHOMERA.

  The original stock, like that of the last grade, has a gnathobase on
  every post-oral appendage, but three prosthomeres are now present, in
  consequence of the movement of the oral aperture from the third to the
  fourth somite. The later eyes are polymeniscous, with specialized
  vitrellae and retinulae of a definite type peculiar to this grade.

    = CRUSTACEA, CHILOPODA, HEXAPODA.

  According to older views the increase of the number of somites in
  front of the mouth would have been regarded as a case of intercalation
  by new somite-budding of new prae-oral somites in the series. We are
  prohibited by a general consideration of metamerism in the Arthropoda
  from adopting the hypothesis of intercalation of somites. However
  strange it may seem, we have to suppose that one by one in the course
  of long historical evolution somites have passed forwards and the
  mouth has passed backwards. In fact, we have to suppose that the
  actual somite which in grades 1 and 2 bore the mandibles lost those
  mandibles, developed their rami as tactile organs, and came to occupy
  a position in front of the mouth, whilst its previous jaw-bearing
  function was taken up by the next somite in order, into which the oral
  aperture had passed. A similar history must have been slowly brought
  about when this second mandibulate somite in its turn became agnathous
  and passed in front of the mouth. The mandibular parapodia may be
  supposed during the successive stages of this history to have had,
  from the first, well-developed rami (one or two) of a palp-like form,
  so that the change required when the mouth passed away from them would
  merely consist in the suppression of the gnathobase. The solid
  palpless mandible such as we now see in some Arthropoda is,
  necessarily, a late specialization. Moreover, it appears probable that
  the first somite never had its parapodia modified as jaws, but became
  a prosthomere with tactile appendages before parapodial jaws were
  developed at all, or rather _pari passu_ with their development on the
  second somite. It is worth while bearing in mind a second possibility
  as to the history of the prosthomeres, viz. that the buccal
  gnathobasic parapodia (the mandibles) were in each of the three grades
  of prosthomerism only developed after the recession of the mouth and
  the addition of one, of two, or of three post-oral somites to the
  prae-oral region had taken place. In fact, we may imagine that the
  characteristic adaptation of one or more pairs of post-oral parapodia
  to the purposes of the mouth as jaws did not occur until after
  ancestral forms with one, with two, and with three prosthomeres had
  come into existence. On the whole the facts seem to be against this
  supposition, though we need not suppose that the gnathobase was very
  large or the rami undeveloped in the buccal parapodia which were
  destined to lose their mandibular features and pass in front of the
  mouth.

  REFERENCES.--1. Bateson, _Materials for the Study of Variation_
  (Macmillan, 1894), p. 85; 2. Lankester, "Primitive Cell-layers of the
  Embryo." _Annals and Mag. Nat. Hist._ (1873), p. 336; 3. Korschelt and
  Heider, _Entwickelungsgeschichte_ (Jena, 1892), cap. xv. p. 389; 4.
  Folsom, "Development of the Mouth Parts of Anurida," _Bulletin Mus.
  Comp. Zool. Harvard College_, vol. xxxvi. No. 5 (1900), pp. 142-146;
  5. Lankester, "Observations and Reflections on the Appendages and
  Nervous System of Apus Cancriformis," _Quart. Journ. Micr. Sci._ vol.
  xxi. (1881); 6. Hofer, "Ein Krebs mit einer Extremität statt eines
  Stielauges," _Verhandl. d. deutschen zool. Gesellsch._ (1894); 7.
  Watase, "On the Morphology of the Compound Eyes of Arthropods,"
  _Studies from the Biol. Lab. of the Johns Hopkins University_, vol.
  iv. pp. 287-334; 8. Benham describes backward shifting of the oral
  aperture in certain Chaetopods, _Proc. Zoolog. Soc. London_ (1900),
  No. lxiv. p. 976. N.B.--References to the early literature concerning
  the group Arthropoda will be found in Carus, _Geschichte der
  Zoologie_. The more important literature up to 1892 is given in the
  admirable treatise on Embryology by Professors Korschelt and Heider.
  Detailed references will be found under the articles on the separate
  groups of Arthropoda.     (E. R. L.)


FOOTNOTES:

  [1] The group Arthropoda itself, thus constituted, was precisely
    identical in its area with the Insecta of Linnaeus, the Entoma of
    Aristotle. But the word "Insect" had become limited since the days of
    Linnaeus to the Hexapod Pterygote forms, to the exclusion of his
    Aptera. Lamarck's penetrating genius is chiefly responsible for the
    shrinkage of the word Insecta, since it was he who, forty years after
    Linnaeus's death, set up and named the two great classes Crustacea
    and Arachnida (included by Linnaeus under Insecta as the order
    "Aptera"), assigning to them equal rank with the remaining Insecta of
    Linnaeus, for which he proposed the very appropriate class-name
    "Hexapoda." Lamarck, however, appears not to have insisted on this
    name Hexapoda, and so the class of Pterygote Hexapods came to retain
    the group-name Insecta, which is, historically or etymologically, no
    more appropriate to them than it is to the classes Crustacea and
    Arachnida. The tendency to retain the original name of an old and
    comprehensive group for one of the fragments into which such group
    becomes divided by the advance of knowledge--instead of keeping the
    name for its logical use as a comprehensive term, including the new
    divisions, each duly provided with a new name--is most curiously
    illustrated in the history of the word physiology. Cicero says,
    "Physiologia naturae ratio," and such was the meaning of the name
    _Physiologus_, given to a cyclopaedia of what was known and imagined
    about earth, sea, sky, birds, beasts and fishes, which for a thousand
    years was the authoritative source of information on these matters,
    and was translated into every European tongue. With the revival of
    learning, however, first one and then another special study became
    recognized--anatomy, botany, zoology, mineralogy, until at last the
    great comprehensive term physiology was bereft of all its
    once-included subject-matter, excepting the study of vital processes
    pursued by the more learned members of the medical profession.
    Professional tradition and an astute perception on their part of the
    omniscience suggested by the terms, have left the medical men in
    English-speaking lands in undisturbed but illogical possession of the
    words physiology, physic and physician.

  [2] H. Milne-Edwards, who was followed by Huxley, long ago formulated
    the conclusion that the eye-stalks of Crustacea are modified
    appendages, basing his argument on a specimen of Palinurus (figured
    in Bateson's book (1), in which the eye-stalk of one side is replaced
    by an antenniform palp. Hofer (6) in 1894 described a similar case in
    Astacus.

  [3] Embryological evidence of this is still wanting. In the other
    classes of Arthropoda we have more or less complete embryological
    evidence on the subject. It appears from observation of the embryo
    that whilst the first prosthomere of Centipedes has its appendages
    reduced and represented only by eye-patches (as in Arachnida,
    Crustacea and Hexapoda). the second has a rudimentary antenna, which
    disappears, whilst the third carries the permanent antennae, which
    accordingly correspond to the second antennae of Crustacea, and are
    absent in Hexapoda.




ARTHUR (Fr. _Artus_), the central hero of the cycle of romance known as
the _Matière de Bretagne_ (see ARTHURIAN LEGEND). Whether there was an
historic Arthur has been much debated; undoubtedly for many centuries
after the appearance of Geoffrey of Monmouth's _Historia Britonum_
(circ. 1136), the statements therein recorded of a mighty monarch, who
ruled over Britain in the 5th-6th centuries, and carried his conquests
far afield, even to the gates of Rome, obtained general, though not
universal, credence. Even in the 12th century there were some who
detected, and derided, the fictitious character of Geoffrey's "History."
As was naturally to be expected, the pendulum swung to the other
extreme, and in a more critical age the existence of Arthur was roundly
denied. The truth probably lies midway between the two. The words of
Wace, the Norman poet who translated the _Historia_ into verse, are here
admirably to the point. Speaking of the tales told of Arthur, he says:--

  "Ne tot mençunge, ne tot veir,
   Ne tot fable, ne tot saveir,
   Tant ont li contéor conté,
   Et li fabléor tant fablé
   Por lor contes embeleter
   Que tout ont fait fable sembler."[1]

The opinion now generally accepted by scholars is that the evidence of
Nennius, whose _Historia Britonum_ preceded that of Geoffrey by some 400
years, is in the main to be relied on. He tells us that Arthur was _Dux
bellorum_, and led the armies of the British kings against the Saxon
invaders, whom he defeated in twelve great battles. _Tunc Arthur
pugnabat cum regibus Britonum, sed ipse dux erat bettorum._

The traditional site of these battles covers a very wide area, and it is
supposed that Arthur held a post analogous to that of the general who,
under the Roman occupation, was known as _Comes Britanniae_, and held a
roving commission to defend the island wherever attacked, in
contradistinction to the _Dux Britanniarum_, who had charge of the
forces in the north, and the _Comes Littoris Saxonici_, whose task it
was to defend the south-east line. The Welsh texts never call Arthur
_gwledig_ (prince), but _amheradawr_ (Latin _imperator_) or emperor, a
title which would be bestowed on the highest official in the island. The
truth thus appears to be that, while there was never a _King_ Arthur,
there was a noted chieftain and general of that name. If we say that he
carried on a successful war against the Saxons, was probably betrayed by
his wife and a near kinsman, and fell in battle, we have stated all
which can be claimed as an historical nucleus for his legend. It is now
generally admitted that the representation of Arthur as world conqueror,
_Welt-Kaiser_, is due to the influence of the Charlemagne cycle. In the
12th century the _Matière de France_ was waning, the _Matière de
Bretagne_ waxing in popularity, and public opinion demanded that the
central figure of the younger cycle (for whatever the date of the
subject matter, as a literary cycle the Arthurian is the younger) should
not be inferior in dignity and importance to that of the earlier. When
we add to this the fact that the writers of the 12th century represented
the personages and events of the 6th in the garb, and under the
conditions, of their own time, we can understand the reason of the
manifold difficulties which beset the study of the cycle.

But into the figure of Arthur as we know him, other elements have
entered; he is not merely an historic personality, but at the same time
a survival of pre-historic myth, a hero of romance, and a fairy king;
and all these threads are woven together in one fascinating but
bewildering web. It is only possible here to summarize the leading
features which may be claimed as characteristic of each phase.

_Mythic._--Certain elements of the story point to Arthur as a culture
hero; as such his name has been identified with the _Mercurius Artaius_
of the Gauls. In this role he slays monsters, the boar Twrch Trwyth, the
giant of Mont St Michel and the Demon Cat of Losanne (André de Coutances
tells us that Arthur was really vanquished and carried off by the Cat,
but that one durst not tell that tale before Britons!). He never, it
should be noted, rides on purely chivalric ventures, such as aiding
distressed damsels, seeking the Grail, &c. His expeditions are all more
or less warlike. The story of his youth belongs, as Alfred Nutt
(_Folk-lore_, vol. iv.) has shown, to the group of tales classified as
the _Aryan Expulsion and Return_ formula, found in all Aryan lands.
Numerous parallels exist between the Arthurian and early Irish heroic
cycles, notably the Fenian or Ossianic. This Fenian cycle is very
closely connected with the Tuatha de Danaan, the Celtic deities of
vegetation and increase; recent research has shown that two notable
features of the Arthurian story, the Round Table and the Grail, can be
most reasonably accounted for as survivals of this Nature worship, and
were probably parts of the legend from the first.

_Romantic._--The character of Arthur as a romantic hero is, in reality,
very different from that which, mainly through the popularity of
Tennyson's _Idylls_, English people are wont to suppose. In the earlier
poems he is practically a lay figure, his court the point of departure
and return for the knights whose adventures are related in detail, but
he himself a passive spectator. In the prose romances he is a monarch,
the splendour of whose court, whose riches and generosity, are the
admiration of all; but morally he is no whit different from the knights
who surround him; he takes advantage of his _bonnes fortunes_ as do
others. He has two sons, neither of them born in wedlock; one, Modred,
is alike his son and his nephew. In certain romances, the _Perlesvaus_
and _Diu Crône_, he is a veritable _roi fainéant_, overcome by sloth and
luxury. Certain traits of his story appear to show the influence of
Northern romance. Such is the story of his begetting, where Uther takes
upon him the form of Gorlois to deceive Yguerne, even as Siegfried
changed shapes with Gunther to the undoing of Brünnhilde. The sword in
the perron (stone pillar or block), the withdrawal of which proves his
right to the kingdom, is the sword of the Branstock. Morgain carries him
off, mortally wounded, to Avalon, even as the Valkyr bears the Northern
hero to Valhal. Morgain herself has many traits in common with the
Valkyrie; she is one of nine sisters, she can fly through the air as a
bird (Swan maiden); she possesses a marvellous ointment (as does Hilde,
the typical Valkyr). The idea of a slumbering hero who shall awake at
the hour of his country's greatest need is world-wide, but the most
famous instances are Northern, e.g. Olger Danske and Barbarossa, and
depend ultimately on an identification with the gods of the Northern
Pantheon, notably Thor. W. Larminie cited an instance of a rhyme current
in the Orkneys as a charm against nightmare, which confuses Arthur with
Siegfried and his winning of the Valkyr.

_Fairy._--We find that at Arthur's birth (according to Layamon, who here
differs from Wace), three ladies appeared and prophesied his future
greatness. This incident is also found in the first continuation to the
_Perceval_, where the prediction is due to a lady met with beside a
forest spring, clearly here a water fairy. In the late romance of _La
Bataille de Loquifer_ Avalon has become a purely fairy kingdom, where
Arthur rules in conjunction with Morgain. In _Huon de Bordeaux_ he is
Oberon's heir and successor, while in the romance of _Brun de la
Montagne_, preserved in a unique MS. of the Bibliothèque Nationale, we
have the curious statement that all fairy-haunted places, wherever
found, belong to Arthur:--

  "Et touz ces lieux faés
   Sont Artus de Bretagne."

This brief summary of the leading features of the Arthurian tradition
will indicate with what confused and complex material we are here
dealing. (See also ARTHURIAN LEGEND, GRAIL, MERLIN, ROUND TABLE; and
CELT: _Celtic literature_.)

  _Texts_. Historic:--Nennius, _Historia Britonum_; H. Zimmer, _Nennius
  Vindicatus_ (Berlin, 1893), an examination into the credibility of
  Nennius; Geoffrey of Monmouth, _Historia Britonum_ (translations of
  both histories are in Bohn's Library); Wace, the _Brut_ (ed. by Leroux
  de Lincey); Layamon (ed. by Sir Fred. Madden).

  Romantic:--_Merlin_--alike in the Ordinary, or Vulgate (ed. Sommer),
  the _Suite_ or "Huth" _Merlin_, the 13th century _Merlin_ (ed. by G.
  Paris and J. Ulrich), and the unpublished and unique version of _Bibl.
  nat. fonds français_, 337 (cf. Freymond's analysis in _Zeitschrift für
  franz. Sprache_, xxii.)--devotes considerable space to the elaboration
  of the material supplied by the chronicles, the beginning of Arthur's
  reign, his marriage and wars with the Saxons. The imitation of the
  Charlemagne romances is here evident; the Saxons bear names of Saracen
  origin, and camels and elephants appear on the scene. The _Morte
  Arthur_, or _Mort au roi Artus_, a metrical romance, of which a unique
  English version exists in the Thornton collection (ed. for Early
  English Text Society), gives an expanded account of the passing of
  Arthur; in the French prose form it is now always found incorporated
  with the _Lancelot_, of which it forms the concluding section. The
  remains of the Welsh tradition are to be found in the _Mabinogion_
  (cf. Nutt's edition, where the stories are correctly classified), and
  in the Triads. Professor Rhys' _Studies in the Arthurian Legend_ are
  largely based on Welsh material, and may be consulted for details,
  though the conclusions drawn are not in harmony with recent research.
  These are the only texts in which Arthur is the central figure; in the
  great bulk of the romances his is but a subordinate rôle.
       (J. L. W.)


FOOTNOTE:

  [1] Nor all a lie, nor all true, nor all fable, nor all known, so
    much have the story-tellers told, and the fablers fabled, in order to
    embellish their tales, that they have made all seem fable.




ARTHUR I. (1187-1203), duke of Brittany, was the posthumous son of
Geoffrey, the fourth son of Henry II. of England, and Constance, heiress
of Conan IV., duke of Brittany. The Bretons hoped that their young
prince would uphold their independence, which was threatened by the
English. Henry II. tried to seize Brittany, and in 1187 forced Constance
to marry one of his favourites, Randulph de Blundevill, earl of Chester
(d. 1232). Henry, however, died soon afterwards (1189). The new king of
England, Richard Coeur de Lion, claimed the guardianship of the young
Arthur, but in 1190 Richard left for the Crusade. Constance profited by
his absence by governing the duchy, and in 1194 she had Arthur
proclaimed duke of Brittany by an assembly of barons and bishops.
Richard invaded Brittany in 1196, but was defeated in 1197 and became
reconciled to Constance. On his death in 1189, the nobles of Anjou,
Maine and Touraine refused to recognize John of England, and did homage
to Arthur, who declared himself the vassal of Philip Augustus. In 1202
war was resumed between the king of England and the king of France. The
king of France recognized Arthur's right to Brittany, Anjou, Maine and
Poitou. While Philip Augustus was invading Normandy, Arthur tried to
seize Poitou. But, surprised at Mirebeau, he fell into the hands of
John, who sent him prisoner to Falaise. In the following year he was
transferred to Rouen, and disappeared suddenly. It is thought that John
killed him with his own hand. After this murder John was condemned by
the court of peers of France, and stripped of the fiefs which he
possessed in France.

  See Ralph of Coggeshall, "Chronicon Anglicanum," in the _Monumenta
  Britanniae historica_; Dom Lobineau, _Histoire de Bretagne_ (1702);
  Dom Morice, _Histoire de Bretagne_ (1742-1756); A. de la Borderie,
  _Histoire de Bretagne_, vol. iii. (1899); Bémont, "De la condamnation
  de Jean-sans-Terre par la Cour des Pairs de France," in the _Revue
  historique_ (1886), vol. xxxii.




ARTHUR III. (1393-1458), earl of Richmond, constable of France, and
afterwards duke of Brittany, was the third son of John IV., duke of
Brittany, and Joan of Navarre, afterwards the wife of Henry IV. of
England. His brother, John V., gave him his earldom of Richmond in
England. While still very young, he took part in the civil wars which
desolated France during the reign of Charles VI. From 1410 to 1414 he
served on the side of the Armagnacs, and afterwards entered the service
of Louis the dauphin, whose intimate friend he became. He profited by
his position at court to obtain the lieutenancy of the Bastille, the
governorship of the duchy of Nemours, and the confiscated territories of
Jean Larchevêque, seigneur of Parthenay. His efforts to reduce the
latter were, however, interrupted by the necessity of marching against
the English. At Agincourt he was wounded and captured, and remained a
prisoner in England from 1415 to 1420. Released on parole, he gained the
favour of King Henry V. by persuading his brother, the duke of Brittany,
to conclude the treaty of Troyes, by which France was handed over to the
English king. He was rewarded with the countship of Ivry.

In 1423 Arthur married Margaret of Burgundy, widow of the dauphin Louis,
and became thus the brother-in-law of Philip the Good of Burgundy, and
of the regent, the duke of Bedford. Offended, however, by Bedford's
refusal to give him a high command, he severed his connexion with the
English, and in March 1425 accepted the constable's sword from King
Charles VII. He now threw himself with ardour into the French cause,
and persuaded his brother, John V. of Brittany, to conclude with Charles
VII. the treaty of Saumur (October 7, 1425). But though he saw clearly
enough the measures necessary for success, he lacked the means to carry
them out. In the field he met with a whole series of reverses; and at
court, where his rough and overbearing manners made him disliked, his
influence was overshadowed by that of a series of incompetent
favourites. The peace concluded between the duke of Brittany and the
English in September 1427 led to his expulsion from the court, where
Georges de la Trémoille, whom he himself had recommended to the king,
remained supreme for six years, during which Richmond tried in vain to
overthrow him. In the meantime, in June 1429, he joined Joan of Arc at
Orleans, and fought in several battles under her banner, till the
influence of La Trémoille forced his withdrawal from the army. On the
5th of March 1432 Charles VII. concluded with him and with Brittany the
treaty of Rennes; but it was not until June of the following year that
La Trémoille was overthrown. Arthur now resumed the war against the
English, and at the same time took vigorous measures against the
plundering bands of soldiers and peasants known as _routiers_ or
_écorcheurs_. On the 20th of September 1435, mainly as a result of his
diplomacy, was signed the treaty of Arras between Charles VII. and the
duke of Burgundy, to which France owed her salvation.

On the 13th of April 1436, Arthur took Paris from the English; but he
was ill seconded by the king, and hampered by the necessity for leading
frequent expeditions against the _écorcheurs_; it was not till May 1444
that the armistice of Tours gave him leisure to carry out the
reorganization of the army which he had long projected. He now created
the _compagnies d'ordonnance_, and endeavoured to organize the militia
of the _francs archers_. This reform had its effect in the struggles
that followed. In alliance with his nephew, the duke of Brittany, he
reconquered, during September and October 1449, nearly all the Cotentin;
on the 15th of April 1450 he gained over the English the battle of
Formigny; and during the year he recovered for France the whole of
Normandy, which for the next six or seven years it was his task to
defend from English attacks. On the death of his nephew Peter II., on
the 22nd of September 1457, he became duke of Brittany, and though
retaining his office of constable of France, he refused, like his
predecessors, to do homage to the French king for his duchy. He reigned
little more than a year, dying on the 26th of December 1458, and was
succeeded by his nephew Francis II., son of his brother Richard, count
of Étampes.

Arthur was three times married: (1) to Margaret of Burgundy, duchess of
Guienne (d. 1442); (2) to Jeanne d'Albret, daughter of Charles II. of
Albret (d. 1444); (3) to Catherine of Luxemburg, daughter of Peter of
Luxemburg, count of St Pol, who survived him. He left no legitimate
children.

  AUTHORITIES.--The main source for the life of Duke Arthur III. is the
  chronicle of Guillaume Gruel (c. 1410-1474-1482). Gruel entered the
  service of the earl of Richmond about 1425, shared in all his
  campaigns, and lived with him on intimate terms. The chronicle covers
  the whole period of the duke's life, but the earlier part, up to 1425,
  is much less full and important than the later, which is based on
  Gruel's personal knowledge and observation. In spite of a perhaps
  exaggerated admiration for his hero, Gruel displays in his work so
  much good faith, insight and originality that he is accepted as a
  thoroughly trustworthy authority. It was first published at Paris in
  1622. Of the numerous later editions, the best is that of Achille le
  Vavasseur, _Chronique d'Arthur de Richemont_ (Paris, 1890). See also
  E. Cosneau, _Le Connétable de Richemont_ (Paris, 1886); G. du Fresne
  de Beaucourt, _Histoire de Charles VII._ (Paris, 1881, seq.).




ARTHUR, CHESTER ALAN (1830-1886), twenty-first president of the United
States, was born in Fairfield, Vermont, on the 5th of October 1830. His
father, William Arthur (1796-1875), when eighteen years of age,
emigrated from Co. Antrim, Ireland, and, after teaching in various
places in Vermont and Lower Canada, became a Baptist minister. William
Arthur had married Malvina Stone, an American girl who lived at the time
of the marriage in Canada, and the numerous changes of the family
residence afforded a basis for allegations in 1880 that the son Chester
was born not in Vermont, but in Canada, and was therefore ineligible for
the presidency. Chester entered Union College as a sophomore, and
graduated with honour in 1848. He then became a schoolmaster, at the
same time studying law. In 1853 he entered a law office in New York
city, and in the following year was admitted to the bar. His reputation
as a lawyer began with his connexion with the famous "Lemmon slave
case," in which, as one of the special counsel for the state, he secured
a decision from the highest state courts that slaves brought into New
York while in transit between two slave states were _ipso facto_ free.
In another noted case, in 1855, he obtained a decision that negroes were
entitled to the same accommodations as whites on the street railways of
New York city. In politics he was actively associated from the outset
with the Republican party. When the Civil War began he held the position
of engineer-in-chief on Governor Edwin D. Morgan's staff, and afterwards
became successively acting quartermaster-general, inspector-general, and
quartermaster-general of the state troops, in which capacities he showed
much administrative efficiency. At the close of Governor Morgan's term,
on the 31st of December 1862, General Arthur resumed the practice of his
profession, remaining active, however, in party politics in New York
city. In November 1871 he was appointed by President U.S. Grant
collector of customs for the port of New York. The custom-house had long
been conspicuous for the most flagrant abuses of the "spoils system";
and though General Arthur admitted that the evils existed and that they
rendered efficient administration impossible, he made no extensive
reforms. In 1877 President Rutherford B. Hayes began the reform of the
civil service with the New York custom-house. A non-partisan commission,
appointed by Secretary John Sherman, recommended sweeping changes. The
president demanded the resignation of Arthur and his two principal
subordinates, George H. Sharpe, the surveyor, and Alonzo B. Cornell, the
naval officer, of the Port. General Arthur refused to resign on the
ground that to retire "under fire" would be to acknowledge wrong-doing,
and claimed that as the abuses were inherent in a widespread system he
should not be made to bear the responsibility alone. His cause was
espoused by Senator Roscoe Conkling, for a time successfully; but on the
11th of July 1878, during a recess of the Senate, the collector was
removed, and in January 1879, after another severe struggle, this action
received the approval of the Senate. In 1880 General Arthur was a
delegate at large from New York to the Republican national convention.
In common with the rest of the "Stalwarts," he worked hard for the
nomination of Gen. U.S. Grant for a third term. Upon the triumph of
James A. Garfield, the necessity of conciliating the defeated faction
led to the hasty acceptance of Arthur for the second place on the
ticket. His nomination was coldly received by the public; and when,
after his election and accession, he actively engaged on behalf of
Conkling in the great conflict with Garfield over the New York
patronage, the impression was widespread that he was unworthy of his
position. Upon the death of President Garfield, on the 19th of September
1881, Arthur took the oath as his successor. Contrary to the general
expectation, his appointments were as a rule unexceptionable, and he
earnestly promoted the Pendleton law for the reform of the civil
service. His use of the veto in 1882 in the cases of a Chinese
Immigration Bill (prohibiting immigration of Chinese for twenty years)
and a River and Harbour Bill (appropriating over $18,000,000, to be
expended on many insignificant as well as important streams) confirmed
the favourable impression which had been made. The most important events
of his administration were the passage of the Tariff Act of 1883 and of
the "Edmunds Law" prohibiting polygamy in the territories, and the
completion of three great trans-continental railways--the Southern
Pacific, the Northern Pacific, and the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fé. His
administration was lacking in political situations of a dramatic
character, but on all questions that arose his policy was sane and
dignified. In 1884 he allowed his name to be presented for renomination
in the Republican convention, but he was easily defeated by the friends
of James G. Blaine. At the expiration of his term he resumed his
residence in New York city, where he died on the 18th of November 1886.

  For an account of his administration see UNITED STATES: _History_.




ARTHURIAN LEGEND. By the "Arthurian legend," or _Matière de Brelagne_,
we mean the subject-matter of that important body of medieval literature
known as the Arthurian cycle (see ARTHUR). The period covered by the
texts in their present form represents, roughly speaking, the century
1150-1250. The _History_ of Nennius is, of course, considerably earlier,
and that of Geoffrey of Monmouth somewhat antedates 1150 (1136), but
with these exceptions the dates above given will be found to cover the
composition of all our extant texts.

As to the origin of this _Matière de Bretagne_, and the circumstances
under which it became a favourite theme for literary treatment, two
diametrically opposite theories are held. One body of scholars, headed
by Professor Wendelin Förster of Bonn, while admitting that, so far as
any historic basis can be traced, the events recorded must have happened
on insular ground, maintain that the knowledge of these events, and
their romantic development, are due entirely to the Bretons of the
continent. The British who fled before the Teutonic and Scandinavian
invasions of the 6th and 8th centuries, had carried with them to
Armorica, and fondly cherished, the remembrance of Arthur and his deeds,
which in time had become interwoven with traditions of purely Breton
origin. On the other side of the Channel, i.e. in Arthur's own land,
these memories had died out, or at most survived only as the faint echo
of historic tradition. Through the medium of French-speaking Bretons
these tales came to the cognizance of Northern French poets, notably
Chrétien de Troyes, who wove them into romances. According to Professor
Förster there were no Arthurian romances previous to Chrétien, and
equally, of course, no insular romantic tradition. This theory reposes
mainly on the supposed absence of pre-Chrétien poems, and on the
writings of Professor H. Zimmer, who derives the Arthurian names largely
from Breton roots. This represents the prevailing standpoint of German
scholars, and may be called the "continental" theory. In opposition to
this the school of which the late Gaston Paris was the leading, and most
brilliant, representative, maintains that the Arthurian tradition,
romantic equally with historic, was preserved in Wales through the
medium of the bards, was by them communicated to their Norman
conquerors, worked up into poems by the Anglo-Normans, and by them
transmitted to the continental poets. This, the "insular" theory, in
spite of its inherent probability, has hitherto been at a disadvantage
through lack of positive evidence, but in a recently acquired MS. of the
British Museum, Add. 36614, we find the first continuator of the
_Perceval_, Wauchier de Denain, quoting as authority for stories of
Gawain a certain Bleheris, whom he states to have been "born and bred in
Wales." The identity of this Bleheris with the Bledhericus mentioned by
Giraldus Cambrensis as _Famosus ille fabulator_, living at a bygone and
unspecified date, and with the Bréri quoted by Thomas as authority for
the _Tristan_ story, has been fully accepted by leading French scholars.
Further, on the evidence of certain MSS. of the _Perceval_, notably the
Paris MS. (Bibl. Nat. 1450), it is clear that Chrétien was using, and
using freely, the work of a predecessor, large fragments of which have
been preserved by the copyists who completed his unfinished work. The
evidence of recent discoveries is all in favour of the insular, or
French, view.

So far as the character, as distinguished from the _provenance_, of this
subject-matter is concerned, it is largely of folk-lore origin,
representing the working over of traditions, in some cases (as e.g. in
the account of Arthur's birth and upbringing) common to all the Aryan
peoples, in others specifically Celtic. Thus there are a number of
parallels between the Arthurian and the Irish heroic cycles, the precise
nature of which has yet to be determined. So far as Arthur himself is
concerned these parallels are with the Fenian, or Ossianic, cycle, in
the case of Gawain with the Ultonian.

In its literary form the cycle falls into three
groups:--pseudo-historic: the _Histories_ of Nennius and Geoffrey, the
_Brut_ of Wace and Layamon (see ARTHUR); poetic: the works of Chrétien
de Troyes, Thomas, Raoul de Houdenc and others (see GAWAIN, PERCEVAL,
TRISTAN, and the writers named above); prose: the largest and most
important group (see GRAIL, LANCELOT, MERLIN, TRISTAN). Of these three
branches the prose romances offer the most insuperable problems; none
can be dated with any certainty; all are of enormous length; and all
have undergone several redactions. Of not one do we as yet possess a
critical and comparative text, and in the absence of such texts the
publication of any definite and detailed theory as to the evolution and
relative position of the separate branches of the Arthurian cycle is to
be deprecated. The material is so vast in extent, and in so chaotic a
condition, that the construction of any such theory is only calculated
to invite refutation and discredit.

  The best general study of the cycle is to be found in Gaston Paris's
  manual _La Littérature française au moyen âge_ (new and revised
  edition, 1905). See also the introduction to vol. xxx. of _Histoire
  littéraire de la France_. For the theories as to origin, see the
  Introductions to Professor Förster's editions of the poems of Chrétien
  de Troyes, notably that to vol. iv., _Der Karrenritter_, which is a
  long and elaborate restating of his position. Also Professor H.
  Zimmer's articles in _Gottingische gelehrte Anzeigen_, 12 and 20. For
  the Insular view, Ferd. Lot's "Études sur la provenance du cycle
  arthurien," _Romania_, vols. xxiv.-xxviii., are very valuable. For a
  popular treatment of the subject, cf. Nos. i. and iv. of _Popular
  Studies in Romance and Folk-lore_ (Nutt). Robert Huntington Fletcher's
  "The Arthurian Matter in the Chronicles" (vol. x. of _Harvard Studies
  and Notes in Philology and Literature_), is a most useful summary.
       (J. L. W.)




ARTICHOKE. The common artichoke, _Cynara, scolymus_, is a plant
belonging to the natural order Compositae, having some resemblance to a
large thistle. It has long been esteemed as a culinary vegetable; the
parts chiefly employed being the immature receptacle or floret disk,
with the lower part of the surrounding leaf-scales, which are known as
"artichoke bottoms." In Italy the receptacles, dried, are largely used
in soups; those of the cultivated plant as _Carciofo domestico_, and of
the wild variety as _Carciofo spinoso_.

The Jerusalem artichoke, _Helianthus tuberosus_, is a distinct plant
belonging to the same order, cultivated for its tubers. It closely
resembles the sunflower, and its popular name is a corruption of the
Italian _Girasole Articiocco_, the sunflower artichoke. It is a native
of Canada and the north-eastern United States, and was cultivated by the
aborigines. The tubers are rich in the carbohydrate inulin and in sugar.

The name is derived from the northern Italian _articiocco_, or
_arciciocco_, modern _carciofo_; these words come, through the Spanish,
from the Arabic _al-kharshuf_. False etymology has corrupted the word in
many languages: it has been derived in English from "choke," and
"heart," or the Latin _hortus_, a garden; and in French, the form
_artichaut_ has been connected with _chaud_, hot, and _chou_, a cabbage.




ARTICLE (from Lat. _articulus_, a joint), a term primarily for that
which connects two parts together, and so transferred to the parts thus
joined; thus the word is used of the separate clauses or heads in
contracts, treaties or statutes and the like; of a literary composition
on some specific subject in a periodical; or of particular commodities,
as in "articles of trade and commerce." It appears also in the phrase
"in the article of death" to translate _in articulo mortis_, at the
moment of death. In grammar the term is used of the adjectives which
state the extension of a substantive, i.e. the number of individuals to
which a name applies; the indefinite article denoting one or any of a
particular class, the definite denoting a particular member of a class.




ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION, in English company law, the regulations for the
internal management of a joint stock company registered under the
Companies Acts. They are, in fact, the terms of the partnership agreed
upon by the shareholders among themselves. They regulate such matters as
the transfer and forfeiture of shares, calls upon shares, the
appointment and qualification of directors, their powers and
proceedings, general meetings of the shareholders, votes, dividends, the
keeping and audit of accounts, and other such matters. In regard to
these internal regulations the legislature has left the company free to
adopt whatever terms of association it chooses. It has furnished in the
schedule to the Companies Act 1862 (Table A), a model or specimen set of
regulations, but their adoption, wholly or in part, is optional; only if
a company does not register articles of its own these statutory
regulations are to apply. When, as is commonly the case, a company
decides to have articles of its own framing, such articles must be
expressed in separate paragraphs, numbered arithmetically, and signed by
the subscribers of the memorandum of association. They must also be
printed, stamped like a deed, and attested. When so perfected, they are
to be delivered, with the memorandum of association, to the registrar of
joint stock companies, who is to retain and register them. The articles
of association thereupon become a public document, which any person may
inspect on payment of a fee of one shilling. This has important
consequences, because every person dealing with the company is presumed
to be acquainted with its constitution, and to have read its articles.
The articles, also, upon registration, bind the company and its members
to the same extent as if each member had subscribed his name and affixed
his seal to them. (See also MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION; COMPANY;
INCORPORATION.)

In the United States, articles of association are any instrument in
writing which sets forth the purposes, the terms and conditions upon
which a body of persons have united for the prosecution of a joint
enterprise. When this instrument is duly executed and filed, the law
gives it the force and effects of a charter of incorporation.




ARTICULATA, a zoological name now obsolete, applied by Cuvier to
animals, such as insects and worms, in which the body displays a jointed
structure. (See ARTHROPODA.)




ARTICULATION (from Lat. _articulare_, to divide into joints), the act of
joining together; in anatomy the junction of the bones (see JOINTS); in
botany the point of attachment and separation of the deciduous parts of
a plant, such as a leaf. The word is also used for division into
distinct parts, as of human speech by words or syllables.




ARTILLERY (the O. Fr. _artiller_, to equip with engines of war, probably
comes from Late Lat. _articulum_, dim. of _ars_, art, cf. "engine" from
_ingenium_, or of _artus_, joint), a term originally applied to all
engines for discharging missiles, and in this sense used in English in
the early 17th century. In a more restricted sense, artillery has come
to mean all firearms not carried and used by hand, and also the
_personnel_ and organization by which the power of such weapons is
wielded. It is, however, not usual to class _machine guns_ (q.v.) as
artillery. The present article deals with the development and
contemporary state of the artillery arm in land warfare, in respect of
its organization, personnel and special or "formal" employment. For the
_matériel_--the guns, their carriages and their ammunition--see ORDNANCE
and AMMUNITION. For _ballistics_, see that heading, and for the work of
artillery in combination with the other arms, see TACTICS.

Artillery, as distinct from ordnance, is usually classified in
accordance with the functions it has to perform. The simplest division
is that into _mobile_ and _immobile_ artillery, the former being
concerned with the handling of all weapons so mounted as to be capable
of more or less easy movement from place to place, the latter with that
of weapons which are installed in fixed positions. Mobile artillery is
subdivided, again chiefly in respect of its employment, into _horse_ and
_field_ batteries, _heavy field_ or _position_ artillery, _field
howitzers, mountain artillery_ and _siege trains_, adapted to every kind
of terrain in which field troops may be employed, and work they may have
to do. Immobile artillery is used in fixed positions of all kinds, and
above all in permanent fortifications; it cannot, therefore, be
classified as above, inasmuch as the _raison d'être_, and consequently
the armament of one fort or battery may be totally distinct from that of
another. "Fortress," "Garrison" and "Foot" artillery are the usual names
for this branch. The dividing line, indeed, in the case of the heavier
weapons, varies with circumstances; guns of position may remain on their
ground while elaborate fortifications grow up around them, or the
deficiencies of a field army in artillery may be made good from the
_matériel_, more frequently still from the _personnel_, of the fortress
artillery. Thus it may happen that mobile artillery becomes immobile and
vice versa. But under normal circumstances the principle of
classification indicated is maintained in all organized military forces.


HISTORICAL SKETCH

1. _Early Artillery._--Mechanical appliances for throwing projectiles
were produced early in the history of organized warfare, and "engines
invented by cunning men to shoot arrows and great stones" are mentioned
in the Old Testament. These were continually improved, and, under the
various names of _catapulta, balista, onager, trébuchet_, &c., were
employed throughout the ancient and medieval periods of warfare. The
machines finally produced were very powerful, and, even when a
propelling agent so strong as gunpowder was discovered and applied, the
supersession of the older weapons was not effected suddenly nor without
considerable opposition. The date of the first employment of cannon
cannot be established with any certainty, but there is good evidence to
show that the Germans used guns at the siege of Cividale in Italy
(1331). The terms of a commission given (1414) by Henry V. to his
_magister operationum, ingeniarum, et gunnarum ac aliarum ordinationum_,
one Nicholas Merbury, show that the organization of artillery
establishments was grafted upon that which was already in existence for
the service of the old-fashioned machines. Previously to this it is
recorded that of some 340 men forming the ordnance establishment of
Edward III. in 1344 only 12 were artillerymen and gunners. Two years
later, at Creçy, it is said, the English brought guns into the open
field for the first time. At the siege of Harfleur (1415) the ordnance
establishment included 25 "master gunners" and 50 "servitour gunners."
The "gunner" appears to have been the captain of the gun, with general
charge of the guns and stores, and the special duty of laying and firing
the piece in action.

2. _The Beginnings of Field Artillery._--It is clear, from such evidence
as we possess, that the chief and almost the only use of guns at this
time was to batter the walls of fortifications, and it is not until
later in the 15th century that their employment in the field became
general (see also CAVALRY). The introduction of field artillery may be
attributed to John Zizka, and it was in his Hussite wars (1419-1424)
that the _Wagenburg_, a term of more general application, but taken here
as denoting a cart or vehicle armed with several small guns, came into
prominence. This device allowed a relatively high manoeuvring power to
be attained, and it is found occasionally in European wars two centuries
later, as for instance at Wimpfen in 1622 and Cropredy Bridge in 1644.
In an act of attainder passed by the Lancastrian party against the
Yorkists (1459), it is stated that the latter were "traiterously ranged
in bataill ... their cartes with gonnes set before their batailles"
(Rot. Parl. 38 Henry VI., v. 348). In the London fighting of 1460, small
guns were used to clear the streets, heavy ordnance to batter the walls
of the Tower. The battle of Lose Coat Field (1469) was decided almost
entirely by Edward IV.'s field guns, while at Blackheath (1497) "some
cornets of horse, and bandes of foot, and good store of artillery
wheeling about" were sent to "put themselves beyond" the rebel camp
(Bacon, _Henry VII._). The greatest example of artillery work in the
15th century was the siege of Constantinople in 1453, at which the Turks
used a large force of artillery, and in particular some monster pieces,
some of which survived to engage a British squadron in 1807, when a
stone shot weighing some 700 lb. cut the mainmast of Admiral (Sir) J.T.
Duckworth's flagship in two, and another killed and wounded sixty men.
For siege purposes the new weapon was indeed highly effective, and the
castles of rebellious barons were easily knocked to pieces by the prince
who owned, or succeeded in borrowing, a few pieces of ordnance (cf.
Carlyle, _Frederick the Great_, book iii. chap. i.).

3. _The 16th Century._--In the Italian wars waged by Charles VIII.,
Louis XII. and Francis I. of France, artillery played a most conspicuous
part, both in siege and field warfare. Indeed, cannon did excellent
service in the field before hand firearms attained any considerable
importance. At Ravenna (1512) and Marignan (1515) field artillery did
great execution, and at the latter battle "the French artillery played a
new and distinguished part, not only by protecting the centre of the
army from the charges of the Swiss phalanxes, and causing them excessive
loss, but also by rapidly taking up such positions from time to time ...
as enabled the guns to play upon the flanks of the attacking columns"
(Chesney, _Observations on Firearms_, 1852). In this connexion it must,
however, be observed that, when the arquebus and other small arms became
really efficient (about 1525), less is heard of this small and handy
field artillery, which had hitherto been the only means of breaking up
the heavy masses of the hostile pikemen. We have seen that artillery was
not ignored in England; but, in view of the splendid and unique
efficiency of the archers, there was no great opportunity of developing
the new arm. In the time of Henry VIII., the ordnance in use in the
field consisted in the main of heavy _culverins_ and other guns of
position, and of lighter field pieces, termed _sakers, falcons_, &c. It
is to be noticed that already the lightest pieces had disappeared, the
smallest of the above being a 2-pounder. In the earlier days of field
artillery, the artillery train was a miscellaneous congeries of pontoon,
supply, baggage and tool wagons, heavy ordnance and light guns in carts.
With the development of infantry fire the use of the last-named weapons
died out, and it is largely due to this fact that "artillery" came to
imply cumbrous and immobile guns of position. Little is, therefore,
heard of smart manoeuvring, such as that at Marignan, during the latter
part of the 16th century. The guns now usually come into action in
advance of the troops, but, from their want of mobility, could neither
accompany a farther advance nor protect a retreat, and they were
generally captured and recaptured with every changing phase of the
fight. Great progress was in the meanwhile made in the adaptation of
ordnance to the attack and defence of fortresses and, in particular,
vertical fire came into vogue. A great Turkish gun, carrying a 600-lb.
stone shot, was used in the siege of Constantinople, apparently in this
way, since Gibbon records that at the range of a mile the shot buried
itself a fathom deep in earth, a fact which implies that a high angle of
elevation was given. In the celebrated siege of Malta in 1565 artillery
played a conspicuous part.

4. _The Thirty Years' War._--Such, in its broadest outlines, is the
history of artillery work during the first three centuries of its
existence. Whilst the material had undergone a very considerable
improvement, the organization remained almost unchanged, and the
tactical employment of guns had become restricted, owing to their
slowness and difficulty of movement on the march and immobility in
action. In wars of the type of the War of Dutch Independence and the
earlier part of the Thirty Years' War, this heavy artillery naturally
remained useful enough, and the _Wagenburg_ had given place to the
musketry initiated by the Spaniards at Bicocca and Pavia, which since
1525 had steadily improved and developed. It is not, therefore, until
the appearance of a captain whose secret of success was vigour and
mobility that the first serious attempt was made to produce field
artillery in the proper sense of the word, that is, a gun of good power,
and at the same time so mounted as to be capable of rapid movement. The
"carte with gonnes" had been, as is the modern machine gun, a mechanical
concentration of musketry rather than a piece of artillery. Maurice of
Nassau, indeed, helped to develop the field gun, and the French had
invented the limber, but Gustavus Adolphus was the first to give
artillery its true position on the battlefield. At the first battle of
Breitenfeld (1631) Gustavus had twelve heavy and forty-two light guns
engaged, as against Tilly's heavy 24-pounders, which were naturally far
too cumbrous for field work. At the Lech (1632) Gustavus seems to have
obtained a local superiority over his opponent owing to the handiness of
his field artillery even more than by its fire-power. At Lützen (1632)
he had sixty guns to Wallenstein's twenty-one. His field pieces were not
the celebrated "leather" guns (which were indeed a mere makeshift used
in Gustavus' Polish wars) but iron 4-pounders. These were distributed
amongst the infantry units, and thus began the system of "battalion
guns" which survived in the armies of Europe long after the conditions
requiring it had vanished. The object of thus dispersing the guns was
doubtless to ensure in the first place more certain co-operation between
the two arms, and in the second to exercise a military supervision over
the lighter and more useful field pieces which it was as yet impossible
to exercise over the _personnel_ of the heavy artillery.

5. _Personnel and Classification._--More than 300 years after the first
employment of ordnance, the men working the guns and the transport
drivers were still civilians. The actual commander of the artillery was
indeed, both in Germany and in England, usually a soldier, and Lennart
Torstensson, the commander of Gustavus' artillery, became a brilliant
and successful general. But the transport and the drivers were still
hired, and even the gunners were chiefly concerned for the safety of
their pieces, the latter being often the property, not of the king
waging war, but of some "master gunner" whose services he had secured,
and the latter's apprentices were usually in entire charge of the
material. These civilian "artists," as they were termed, owed no more
duty to the prince than any other employés, and even Gustavus, it would
appear, made no great improvement in the matter of the reorganization of
artillery trains. Soldiers as drivers do not appear until 150 years
later, and in the meanwhile companies of "firelocks" and "fusiliers"
(q.v.) came into existence, as much to prevent the gunners and drivers
from running away as to protect them from the enemy. A further cause of
difficulties, in England at any rate, was the age of the "gunners." In
the reign of Elizabeth, some of the Tower gunners were over ninety years
of age. Complaints as to the inefficiency of these men are frequent in
the years preceding the English Civil War. Gustavus, however, has the
merit of being the first to make the broad classification of artillery,
as mobile or non-mobile, which has since been almost universally in
force. In his time the 12-pounder was the heaviest gun classed as
mobile, and the "feildpeece" _par excellence_ was the 9-pounder or
_demi-culverin_. After the death of Gustavus at Lützen (1632), his
principles came universally into practice, and amongst them were those
of the employment of field artillery.

6. _The English Civil War._--Even in the English Civil War (Great
Rebellion), in which artillery was hampered by the previous neglect of a
century, its field work was not often contemptible, and on occasion the
arm did excellent service. But in the campaigns of this war, fought out
by men whose most ardent desire was to decide the quarrel swiftly, the
marching and manoeuvring were unusually rapid. The consequence of this
was that the guns were sometimes either late in arriving, as at
Edgehill, or absent altogether, as at Preston. The _rôle_ of guns was
further reduced by the fact that there were few fortresses to be
reduced, and country houses, however strong, rarely required to be
battered by a siege train. The New Model army usually sent for siege
guns only when they were needed for particular service. On such
occasions, indeed, the heavy ordnance did its work so quickly and
effectually that the assault often took place one or two days after the
guns had opened fire. Cromwell in his sieges made great use of shells,
12-inch and even larger mortars being employed. The castle of Devizes,
which had successfully resisted the Parliamentary battering guns,
succumbed at once to vertical fire. It does not, however, appear certain
that there was any separation of field from siege ordnance, although the
Swedish system was followed in almost all military matters.

7. _Artillery Progress, 1660-1740._--Cromwell's practice of relegating
heavy guns to the rear, except when a serious siege operation was in
view, and in very rapid movements leaving even the field pieces far
behind, was followed to some extent in the campaigns of the age of Louis
XIV. The number of ammunition wagons, and above all of horses, required
for each gun was four or five times as great as that required even for a
modern quick-firer. In the days of Turenne heavy guns were much
employed, as the campaigns of the French were directed as a rule to the
methodical conquest of territory and fortified towns. Similarly,
Marlborough, working amidst the fortresses of the Netherlands in 1706,
had over 100 pieces of artillery (of which 60 were mortars) to a force
of some 11,000 men, or about 9 pieces per 1000 men. On the other hand,
in his celebrated march to the Danube in 1704, he had but few guns, and
the allied armies at Blenheim brought into the field only 1 piece per
1000 men. At Oudenarde "from the _rapidity of the march_ ... the battle
was fought with little aid from artillery on either side" (Coxe,
_Marlborough_). There was less need now than ever before for rapid
manoeuvres of mobile artillery, since the pike finally disappeared from
the scene about 1700, and infantry fire-power had become the decisive
factor in battles. In the meantime, artillery was gradually ceasing to
be the province of the skilled workman, and assuming its position as an
arm of the military service. In the 17th century, when armies were as a
rule raised only "for the war" and disbanded at the conclusion of
hostilities, there had been no very pressing need for the maintenance in
peace of an expensive _personnel_ and material. Gunners therefore
remained, as civilians, outside the regular administration of the
forces, until the general adoption of the "standing army" principle in
the last years of the century (see ARMY). From this time steps were
taken, in all countries, to organize the artillery as a military force.
After various attempts had been made, the "Royal Regiment of Artillery"
came into existence in England in 1716. It is, however, stated that the
English artillery did not "begin to assume a military appearance until
the Flanders campaigns" of the War of the Austrian Succession. Even in
the War of American Independence a dispute arose as to whether a general
officer, whose regimental service had been in the Royal Artillery, was
entitled to command troops of all arms, and the artillery drivers were
not actually soldiers until 1793 at the earliest. French artillery
officers received military rank only in 1732.

8. _Artillery in the Wars of Frederick the Great._--By the time of
Frederick the Great's first wars, artillery had thus been divided into
(a) those guns moving with an army in the field, and (b) those which
were either wholly stationary or were called upon only when a siege was
expected. The _personnel_ was gradually becoming more efficient and more
amenable to discipline; the transport arrangements, however, remained in
a backward state. Siege and fortress artillery was now organized and
employed in accordance with the system of the "formal attack" as finally
developed by Vauban. For details of this, as involving the tactical
procedure of artillery in the attack and defence of fortresses, the
reader is referred to FORTIFICATION AND SIEGECRAFT. We are concerned
here more especially with the progress of field artillery. The part
played by this arm began now to vary according to the circumstances of
each action, and the "moral" support of guns was calculated as a factor
in the dispositions. In the early Silesian wars, heavy or reserve guns
protected the deployment of the army and endeavoured to prepare for the
subsequent advance by firing upon the hostile troops; the battalion guns
remained close to the infantry, accompanied its movements and assisted
in the fire fight. Their support was not without value, and the heavy
guns often provoked the enemy into a premature advance, as at Mollwitz.
But the infantry or the cavalry forced the decision. It has been
mentioned that with the final disappearance of the pike, about 1700,
infantry fire-power ruled the battlefield. Throughout the 18th century,
it will be found, when the infantry is equal to its work the guns have
only a subordinate part in the fighting of pitched battles. At
Kunersdorf (1759) the first dashing charge of the Prussian grenadiers
captured 72 guns from the Russian army. Later the total of captured
ordnance reached 180, yet the Russians, then almost wholly in flight,
were not cut to pieces, for only a few light guns of the Prussian army
could get to the front; their heavy pieces, though twelve horses were
harnessed to each, never came into action. This example will serve to
illustrate the difference between the artillery of 1760 and that of
fifty years later. According to Tempelhof, who was present, Kunersdorf
was the finest opportunity for field artillery that he had ever seen.
Yet the field artillery of the 18th century was, if anything, more
powerful than that of Napoleon's time; it was the want of mobility alone
which prevented the Prussians from turning to good account an
opportunity fully as favourable as that of the German artillery at
Sedan. That Frederick made more use of his guns in the later campaigns
of the Seven Years' War is accounted for by the fact that his infantry
and cavalry were no longer capable of forcing a decision, and also by
changes in the general character of the operations. These were fought in
and about broken country and entrenched positions, and the mobility of
the other arms sank to that of the artillery. Thus power came to the
front again, and the heavier weapons regained their former supremacy. In
a _bataille rangée_ in the open field the proportion of guns to men had
been, in 1741, 2 per 1000. At Leuthen (1757) heavy fortress guns were
brought to the front for a special purpose. At Kunersdorf the proportion
was 4 and 5 per 1000 men, with what degree of effectiveness we have
seen. In the later campaigns the Austrian artillery, which was,
throughout the Seven Years' War, the best in Europe, placed its numerous
and powerful ordnance (an "amphitheatre of 400 guns," as Frederick said)
in long lines of field works. The combination of guns and obstacles was
almost invariably too formidable to offer the slightest chance of a
successful assault. It was at this stage that Frederick, in 1759,
introduced horse artillery to keep pace with the movements of cavalry, a
proof, if proof were needed, of the inability of the field artillery to
manoeuvre. The field howitzer, the weapon _par excellence_ for the
attack of field works, has never perhaps been more extensively employed
than it was by the Prussians at that time. At Burkersdorf (1762)
Frederick placed 45 howitzers in one battery. In those days the mobile
artillery was always formed in groups or "batteries" of from 10 to 20
pieces. England too was certainly abreast of other countries in the
organization of the field artillery arm. About the middle of the 18th
century the guns in use consisted of 24-pounders, 12-pounders,
6-pounders and 3-pounders. The guns were divided into "brigades" of
four, five and six guns respectively, and began to be separated into
"heavy" and "light" brigades. Each field gun was drawn by four horses,
the two leaders being ridden by artillerymen, and had 100 rounds of shot
and 30 rounds of grape. The British artillery distinguished itself in
the latter part of the Seven Years' War. Foreign critics praised its
lightness, its elegance and the good quality of its materials. At
Marburg (1760) "the English artillery could not have been better served;
it followed the enemy with such vivacity, and maintained its fire so
well, that it was impossible for the latter to re-form," says Tempelhof,
the Prussian artillery officer who records the lost opportunity of
Kunersdorf. The merits and the faults of the artillery had been made
clear, and nowhere was the lesson taken to heart more than in France,
where General Gribeauval, a French officer who had served in the war
with the Austrian artillery, initiated reforms which in the end led to
the artillery triumphs of the Napoleonic era. While Frederick had
endeavoured to employ, as profitably as possible, the existing heavy
equipments, Gribeauval sought improvement in other directions.

9. _Gribeauval's Reforms._--At the commencement of the 18th century,
French artillery had made but little progress. The carriages and wagons
were driven by wagoners on foot, and on the field of battle the guns
were dragged about by ropes or remained stationary. Towards the middle
of the century some improvements were made. Field guns and carriages
were lightened, and the guns separated into brigades. Siege carriages
were introduced. From 1765 onwards, however, Gribeauval strove to build
up a complete system both of _personnel_ and _matériel_, creating a
distinct _matériel_ for field, siege, garrison and coast artillery.
Alive to the vital importance of mobility for field artillery, he
dismissed to other branches all pieces of greater calibre than
12-pounders, and reduced the weight of those retained. His reforms were
resisted, and for a time successfully; but in 1776 he became first
inspector-general of artillery, and was able to put his ideas into
force. The field artillery of the new system included 4-pounder
regimental guns, and for the reserve 8- and 12-pounders, with 6-inch
howitzers. For siege and garrison service Gribeauval adopted the
16-pounder and 12-pounder guns, 8-inch howitzer and 10-inch mortar, 12-,
10- and 8-inch mortars being introduced in 1785.

The carriages were constructed on a uniform model and technically
improved. The horses were harnessed in pairs, instead of in file as
formerly, but the manner in which the teams were driven remained much
the same. The _prolong_ (a sort of tow-rope) was introduced, to unite
the trail of the gun and the limber in slow retiring movements. Siege
carriages differed from those of field artillery only in details.
Gribeauval also introduced new carriages for garrison and coast service.
The great step made was in a uniform construction being adopted for all
_matériel_, and in making the parts interchangeable so far as possible.
In 1765 the _personnel_ of the French artillery was reorganized. The
corps or reserve artillery was organized in divisions of eight guns. The
battery or division was thus made a unit, with guns, munitions and
gunners complete, the horses and drivers being added at a later date.
Horse artillery was introduced into the French army in 1791. The last
step was made in 1800, when the establishment of a driver corps of
soldiers put an end to the old system of horsing by contract.

10. _British Artillery, 1793-1815._--Meanwhile the numbers of the
English artillery had increased to nearly 4000 men. For some five
centuries the word "artillery" in England meant entirely garrison
artillery; the field artillery only existed in time of war. When war
broke out, a train of artillery was organized, consisting of a certain
number of field (or siege) guns, manned by garrison gunners; and when
peace was proclaimed the train was disbanded, the _matériel_ being
returned into store, and the gunners reverting to some fort or
stronghold. In 1793 the British artillery was anything but efficient.
Guns were still dispersed among the infantry, mobility had declined
again since the Seven Years' War, and the American war had been fought
out by the other arms. The drivers were mere carters on foot with long
whips, and the whole field equipment was scarcely able to break from a
foot-pace. Prior to the Peninsular War, however, the exertions of an
able officer, Major Spearman, had done much to bring about improvement.
Horse artillery had been introduced in 1793, and the driver corps
established in 1794. Battalion guns were abolished in 1802, and field
"brigades of six guns" were formed, horse artillery batteries being
styled "troops." Military drivers were introduced, and the horses teamed
in pairs. The drivers were mounted on the near horses, the gunners
either rode the off horses or were carried on the limbers and wagons.
The equipment was lightened, and a new system of manoeuvres introduced.
A troop of horse artillery and a field brigade each had five guns and
one howitzer. The "driver corps," raised in 1794, was divided into
troops, the addition of one of which to a company of foot artillery
converted it into a field brigade. The horse artillery possessed both
drivers and horses, and required very limited assistance from the driver
corps.

11. _French Revolutionary Wars._--During the long wars of the French
Revolution and Empire the artillery of the field army by degrees became
field artillery as we know it to-day. The development of musketry in the
16th century had taken the work of preparing an assault out of the hands
of the gunners. _Per contra_, the decadence of infantry fire-power in
the latter part of the Seven Years' War had reinstated the artillery
arm. A similar decadence of the infantry arm was destined to produce, in
1807, artillery predominance, but this time with an important
difference, viz. _mobility_, and when mobility is thus achieved we have
the first modern field artillery. The new tactics of the French in the
Revolutionary wars, forced upon them by circumstances, involved an
almost complete abandonment of the fire-tactics of Frederick's day, and
the need for artillery was, from the first fight at Valmy onwards, so
obvious that its moral support was demanded even in the outpost line of
the new French armies. St Cyr (_Armies of the Rhine_, p. 112) quotes a
case in which "right in the very farthest outpost line" the original
4-pounder guns were replaced by 8-, 16-, and in the end by 24-pounders.
The cardinal principle of massing batteries was not, indeed, forgotten,
notwithstanding the weakness of raw levies. But though, as we have seen,
the _matériel_ had already been greatly improved, and the artillery was
less affected by the Revolution than other arms of the service,
circumstances were against it, and we rarely find examples of artillery
work in the Revolutionary wars which show any great improvement upon
older methods. The field guns were however, at last organized in
batteries each complete in itself, as mentioned above. The battalion gun
disappeared; it was a relic of days in which it was thought advisable,
both for other reasons and also because the short range of guns forbade
any attempt at concentration of fire from several positions at one
target, to have some force of artillery at any point that might be
threatened. Though it was officially retained in the regulations of the
French army, "officers and men combined to reject it" (Rouquerol, _Q.F.
Field Artillery_, p. 121), and its last appearances, in 1809 and in
1813, were due merely to an endeavour on the part of Napoleon to give
cohesion thereby to the battalions of raw soldiers which then
constituted his army. But, with the development of mobility, it was
probably found that sufficient guns could be taken to any threatened
point, and no one had ever denied the principle of massed batteries,
although, in practice, dispersion had been thought to be unavoidable.

12. _Napoleon's Artillery Tactics._--During the war the French artillery
steadily improved in manoeuvring power. But many years elapsed before
perfection was attained. Meanwhile, the infantry, handled without regard
to losses in every fight, had in consequence deteriorated. The final
production of the field artillery battle, usually dated as from the
battle of Friedland (June 14, 1807), therefore saved the situation for
the French. Henceforward Napoleon's battles depend for their success on
an "artillery preparation," the like of which had never been seen.
Napoleon's own maxim illustrates the typical tactics of 1807-1815. "When
once the _melée_ has begun," he says, "the man who is clever enough to
bring up an unexpected force of artillery, without the enemy knowing it,
is sure to carry the day." The guns no longer "prepared" the infantry
advance by slowly disintegrating the hostile forces. Still less was it
their business merely to cover a deployment. On the contrary, they now
went in to the closest ranges and, by actually _annihilating_ a portion
of the enemy's line with case-shot fire, "covered" the assault so
effectively that columns of cavalry and infantry reached the gap thus
created without striking a blow. It is unnecessary to give examples.
Every one of Napoleon's later battles illustrates the principle. The
most famous case is that of the great battery of 100 guns at Wagram
(q.v.) which preceded the final attack of the centre. When Napoleon at
Leipzig saw the allied guns forming up in long lines to prepare the
assault, he exclaimed, "At last they have learned something." This
"case-shot preparation," of course, involved a high degree of efficiency
in manoeuvre, as the guns had to gallop forward far in front of the
infantry. The want of this quality had retarded the development of field
artillery for 300 years, during which it had only been important
relatively to the occasional inferiority of other troops. After
Napoleon's time the art of tactics became the art of _combining the
three arms_.

[Illustration: PLATE I.

  FIGS. 1 and 2.--15th Century Field Artillery (Napoleon III).

  FIG. 3.--Field Artillery. 1525 (Napoleon III).

  FIG. 4.--French Artillery 1735 (_Journal d'Armée_,1835).

  FIG. 5.--French Field Artillery,1835 (_Journal d'Armée_,1835).

  FIG. 6.--Artillery in Action, Roveredo, 1796 (C. Vernet).]

[Illustration: PLATE II.

  BREACH LOADING FIELD BATTERY (15-PR. B.L.).
  _Photo, Gale & Polden._

  QUICK-FIRING HORSE ARTILLERY (ROYAL HORSE ARTILLERY, 13-PR. Q.F.).
  _Photo, Gale & Polden._

  Q.F. FIELD ARTILLERY (18-PR. Q.F., R.F.A.).
  _Photo, Gale & Polden._

  FRENCH (75-MM. Q.F.) FIELD ARTILLERY MANOEUVRING.
  _Photo, Topical Press._]

13. _Artillery, 1815-1865._--Henceforward, therefore, the history of
artillery becomes the history of its technical effectiveness,
particularly in relation to infantry fire, and of improvements or
modifications in the method of putting well-recognized principles into
action. Infantry fire, however, being more variable in its effectiveness
than that of artillery, the period 1815-1870 saw many changes in the
relations of the two arms. In the time of Napoleon, infantry fire never
equalled that of the Seven Years' War, and after the period of the great
wars the musket was less and less effectively used. Economy was,
however, practised to excess in every army of Europe during the period
1815-1850, and even if there had been great battles at this time, the
artillery, which was maintained on a minimum strength of guns, men and
horses, would not have repeated the exploits of Sénarmont and Drouot in
the Napoleonic wars. The principle was well understood, but under such
conditions the practice was impossible. It was at this stage that the
general introduction of the rifled musket put an end, once for all,
to the artillery tactics of the smooth-bore days. Infantry, armed with a
far-ranging rifle, as in the American Civil War, kept the guns beyond
case-shot range, compelling them to use only round shot or common shell.
In that war, therefore, attacking infantry met, on reaching close
quarters, not regiments already broken by a _feu d'enfer_, but the full
force of the defenders' artillery and infantry, both arms fresh and
unshaken, and the full volume of their case shot and musketry. At
Fredericksburg the Federal infantry attacked, unsupported by a single
field piece; at Gettysburg the Federal artillery general Hunt was able
to reserve his ammunition to meet Lee's assault, although the infantry
of his own side was meanwhile subjected to the fire of 137 Confederate
guns. Thus, in both these cases the assault became one of infantry
against unshaken infantry and artillery. On many occasions, indeed, the
batteries on either side went into close ranges, as the traditions of
the old United States army dictated, but their losses were then totally
out of proportion to their effectiveness. Indeed, the increased range at
which battles were now fought, and the ineffectiveness of the
projectiles necessarily used by the artillery at these ranges, so far
neutralized even rifled guns that artillery generals could speak of
"idle cannonades" as the "besetting sin" of some commanders.

14. _The Franco-German War, 1870-71._--In the next great war, that of
1866 (Bohemia), guns were present on both sides in great numbers, the
average for both sides being three guns per 1000 men. Artillery,
however, played but a small part in the Prussian attacks, this being due
to the inadequate training then afforded, and also to the mixture of
rifled guns and smooth-bores in their armament. In Prussia, however, the
exertions of General v. Hindersin, the improvement of the _matériel_,
and above all the better tactical training of the batteries, were
rewarded four years later by success on the battlefield almost as
decisive as Napoleon's. In 1870 the French artillery was invariably
defeated by that of the Germans, who were then free to turn their
attention to the hostile infantry. At first, indeed, the German infantry
was too impatient to wait until the victorious artillery had prepared
the way for them by disintegrating the opposing line of riflemen. Thus
the attack of the Prussian Guards at St Privat (August 18, 1870) melted
away before the unbroken fire-power of the French, as had that of the
Federals at Fredericksburg and that of the Confederates at Gettysburg.
But such experiences taught the German infantry commanders the necessity
of patience, and at Sedan the French army was enveloped by the fire of
nearly 600 guns, which did their work so thoroughly that the Germans
annihilated the Imperial army at the cost of only 5% of casualties.

15. _Results of the War._--The tactical lessons of the war, so far as
field artillery is concerned, may be briefly summarized as (a)
employment of great masses of guns; (b) forward position of guns in the
order of march, in order to bring them into action as quickly as
possible; (c) the so-called "artillery duel," in which the assailant
subdues the enemy's artillery fire; and (d) when this is achieved, and
not before, the thorough preparation of all infantry attacks by
artillery bombardment. This theory of field artillery action has not,
even with the almost revolutionary improvements of the present period,
entirely lost its value, and it may be studied in detail in the
well-known work of von Schell, _Taktik der Feldartillerie_ (1877), later
translated into English by Major-General Sir A.E. Turner (_Tactics of
Field Artillery_, 1900). In one important matter, however, the precepts
of Schell and his contemporaries no longer hold good. "It is absolutely
necessary that the object of the infantry's attack should be cannonaded
before it advances. To accomplish this, sufficient time should be given
to the artillery, and on no account should the infantry be ordered to
advance until the fire of the guns has produced the desired effect."
This, the direct outcome of the slaughter at St Privat, represents the
best possibilities of breech-loading guns with common shell--no more
than a slow disintegration of the enemy's power of resistance by a
thorough and lengthy "artillery preparation." Against troops sheltered
behind works (as in the Russo-Turkish War of 1877-78) the common shell
usually failed to give satisfactory results, if for no other reason,
because the "preparation" consumed an inordinate time, and in any case
the hostile artillery had first of all to be subdued in the artillery
duel.

16. _Quick-firing Field Guns._--In 1891, a work by General Wille of the
German army (_The Field Gun of the Future_) and in 1892 another by
Colonel Langlois of the French service (_Field Artillery with the other
Arms_) foreshadowed many revolutionary changes in _matériel_ and tactics
which have now taken place. The new ideas spread rapidly, and the
quick-firing gun came by degrees to be used in every army. The original
designs have been greatly improved upon (see ORDNANCE: _Field artillery
equipments_), but the principles of these designs have not undergone
serious modification. These are, briefly, the mechanical absorption of
the recoil, by means of brakes or buffers, and the development of "time
shrapnel" as the projectile of field artillery. The absorption of recoil
of itself permits of a higher rate of fire, since the gun does not
require to be run up and relaid after every shot. Formerly such an
advantage was illusory (since aim could not be taken through the thick
bank of smoke produced by rapid fire), but the introduction of smokeless
powder removed this objection. Artillerists, no longer handicapped, at
once turned their attention to the increase of the rate of fire. At the
same time a shield was applied to the gun, for the protection of the
detachment. This advantage is solely the result of the non-recoiling
carriage. The gunners had formerly to stand clear of the recoiling gun,
and a shield was therefore of but slight value.

17. _Time Shrapnel._--The power of modern artillery owes even more to
the improvement of the projectile than to that of the gun (see
AMMUNITION). The French, always in the forefront of artillery progress,
were the first nation to realize the new significance of the time-fuze
and the shrapnel shell. These had been in existence for many years; to
the British army are due both the invention and the development of the
shrapnel, which made its first appearance in European warfare at Vimeira
in 1808. But, up to the introduction of rifled pieces, the Napoleonic
case-shot attack was universally and justly considered the best method
of fighting, and in the transition stage of the _matériel_ many soldiers
continued to put faith in the old method,--hence the Prussian artillery
in 1866 had many smooth-bore batteries in the field,--and between 1860
and 1870 gunners, now convinced of the superiority of the new
equipments, undoubtedly sought to turn to account the minute accuracy of
the rifled weapons in unnecessarily fine shooting. Thus, in 1870 the
French time-fuze was only graduated for two ranges, and the Germans used
percussion fuzes only. But this phase has passed, and General Langlois
has summarized the tactics of the newest field artillery in one phrase:
"It results in transferring to 3000 yds. the point-blank and case-shot
fire of the smooth-bore." The meaning of this will be discussed later;
here it will be sufficient to say that it is claimed for the modern gun
and the modern shell that the Napoleonic method[1] of annihilating by a
rain of bullets has been revived, with the distinction that the shell,
and not the gun, fires the bullets close up to the enemy. In the Boer
War, Pieter's Hill furnished a notable example of this "covering," as
distinct from "preparation," of an assault by artillery fire.

18. _Heavy Field, Siege and Garrison Artillery._--Amongst other results
of this war was a recrudescence of the idea of "dispersion." This will
be noticed later; the more material result of the Boer War, and of the
generally increasing specialization in the various functions of the
artillery arm, has been the reintroduction of heavy ordnance into field
armies. The field howitzer reappeared some time before the outbreak of
that war, and the British howitzers had illustrated their shell-power in
the Sudan campaign of 1898. During the latter part of the 19th century,
siege and fortress artillery underwent a development hardly less
remarkable than that of field artillery in the same time. Rifled guns,
"long" and "short" for direct and curved fire, formed the siege
artillery of the Germans in 1870-71, and with the reduction of the
old-fashioned fortresses of France began a new era in siegecraft (see
FORTIFICATION AND SIEGECRAFT). At the present time howitzers[2] (B.L.
rifled) are the principal siege weapons, while heavy direct-fire guns
(see ORDNANCE _passim_) still retain a part of the work formerly
assigned to the artillery of the attack. For an account of a siege with
modern artillery see Macalik and Länger, _Kampf um eine Festung_, which
describes an imaginary siege of Königgrätz. On the whole, it may be said
that modern artillery has caused a revolution in methods of
fortification and siegecraft, which is little less far-reaching than the
original change from the trébuchet to the bombard.


ORGANIZATION

19. _Field Artillery Organization._--A _battery_ of field artillery
comprises three elements, viz. _matériel_,--guns, carriages, ammunition
and stores; _personnel_,--officers, non-commissioned officers, gunners,
drivers and artificers; and _transport_,--almost invariably horses,
though other animals, and also motor and mechanical transport, are used
under special circumstances. As for the _matériel_, the guns used by
field artillery in almost all countries are quick-firers, throwing
shells of 13 to 18 pounds; details of these will be found in the article
ORDNANCE. The number of guns in a battery varies in different countries
between four and eight; by far the most usual number is six. With the
introduction of the quick-firing gun, the tendency towards small
batteries (of four guns) has become very pronounced, the ruling motives
being (a) better control of fire in action, and (b) more horses
available to draw the increased number of ammunition wagons required.
"Mixed" batteries of guns and howitzers were formerly employed on
occasion, and were supposed to be adapted to every kind of work.
However, the difference between the gun and the howitzer was so great
that at all times one part of the armament was idle, while the general
increase in the artillery arm has permitted batteries and brigades of
howitzers to be formed, separately, as required. Machine guns (q.v.) are
not treated in Great Britain as being artillery weapons, though abroad
they are often organized in batteries. During, and subsequent to the
Boer War, heavier machine guns, called pompoms, came into use. The
rocket (q.v.), formerly a common weapon of the artillery, is now used,
if at all, only for mountain and forest warfare against savages.

20. _Ammunition._--The vehicles of a battery include (besides guns and
limbers) ammunition wagons, store and provision carts or wagons and
forage wagons. On the amount of ammunition that should be carried with a
field battery there was formerly a considerable diversity of opinion.
The greater the amount a battery carries with it, the more independent
it is; on the other hand, every additional wagon makes the battery more
cumbrous and, by lengthening out the column, keeps back the combatant
troops marching in rear. But since the introduction of the Q.F. gun it
has been universally recognized that the gun must have a very liberal
supply of ammunition present with it in action, and the old standard
allowance of one wagon per gun has been increased to that of two and
even three. Formerly batteries were further hampered by having to carry
the reserve of small-arm ammunition for infantry and cavalry. But the
greater distances of modern warfare accentuate the difficulties of such
a system, and the reserve ammunition for all arms is now carried in
special "ammunition columns" (see AMMUNITION), the _personnel_ and
transport of which is furnished by the artillery.

21. _Interior Economy._--The organization and interior economy of a
battery is much the same in all field artillery. In England the command
is held by a major, the second in command is a captain. The battery is
divided into three "sections" of two guns each, each under a subaltern
officer, who is responsible for everything connected with his
section--men, horses, guns, carriages, ammunition and stores. Each
section again consists of two sub-sections, each comprising one gun and
its wagons, men and horses, and at the head of each is the "No. 1" of
the gun detachment--usually a sergeant--who is immediately responsible
to the section commander for his sub-section.

The No. 1 rides with the gun, there is also another mounted
non-commissioned officer who rides with the first wagon, and the gunners
are seated on the gun-carriage, wagon and limbers. The increased number
of wagons now accompanying the gun has, however, given more seating
accommodation to the detachment, and this distribution has in some cases
been altered. The three drivers ride the near horses of their respective
pairs, each gun and each wagon being drawn by six horses. On the march,
the gun is attached to the limber, a two-wheeled carriage drawn by the
gun team; the wagon consists likewise of a "body" and a limber. A
battery has also a number of non-combatant carriages, such as forge and
baggage wagons. In addition to the gunners and drivers, there are men
specially trained in range-taking, signalling, &c., in all batteries.

22. _Special Natures of Field Artillery._--_Horse Artillery_ differs
from field in that the whole gun detachment is mounted, and the gun and
wagon therefore are freed from the load of men and their equipment. The
organization of a battery of horse artillery differs but slightly from
that of a field battery; it is somewhat stronger in rank and file, as
horse-holders have to be provided for the gunners in action. Horse
artillery is often lightened, moreover, by sacrificing power (see
ORDNANCE). The essential feature of _Mountain Artillery_ in general is
the carrying of the whole equipment on the backs of mules or other
animals. The total weight is usually distributed in four or five
mule-loads. For action the loads are lifted off the saddles and
"assembled," and the time required to do this is, in well-trained
batteries, only one minute. For the technical questions connected with
the gun and its carriage, see ORDNANCE. The weight of a shell in a
mountain gun rarely exceeds 12 lb., and is usually less. In most armies
the _field howitzer_ has, after an eclipse of many years, reasserted its
place. The weapons used are B.L. or Q.F. howitzers on field carriages;
the calibre varies from about 4 to 5 in. In Great Britain the field
howitzer batteries are organized as, and form part of, the Royal Field
Artillery, two batteries of six howitzers each forming a brigade.

23. _Heavy Ordnance._--_Heavy Field Artillery_, officially defined as
"all artillery equipped with mobile guns of 4-in. calibre and upwards,"
is usually composed, in Great Britain, of 5-in. or 4.7-in. Q.F. guns on
field carriages. 6-in. Q.F. guns have also been used. A battery (4 guns)
is attached to the divisional artillery of each division, a company of
the Royal Garrison Artillery furnishing the _personnel_. The four guns
are divided into two sections, each section under an officer and each
subsection under a non-commissioned officer, as in the horse and field
batteries. _Siege_ and _garrison artillery_ have not usually the
complete and permanent organization that distinguishes field artillery.
For siege trains the _matériel_ is usually kept in store, and the
_personnel_ and transport are supplied from other sources according to
requirement. In garrison artillery, the guns mounted in fortresses and
batteries, or stored in arsenals for the purpose, furnish the
_matériel_, and the companies of garrison artillery the _personnel_. In
Great Britain, the Royal Garrison Artillery finds the mountain batteries
and the heavy field artillery in addition to its own units. The siege
trains are, as has been said, organized _ad hoc_ on each particular
occasion (see FORTIFICATION AND SIEGECRAFT). In Great Britain, the guns
and howitzers manned by the R.G.A. would be 6-in. and 8-in. howitzers,
4.7-in. and 6-in. guns, and still heavier howitzers, as well as the
field and heavy batteries belonging to the divisions making the siege.

24. _Higher Organization of Artillery._--The higher units, in almost
every country except Great Britain, are the regiment, and, sometimes,
the brigade of two or more regiments. These units are distributed to
army corps, divisions and districts, in the same way as units of other
arms (see ARMY). In Great Britain the Royal Regiment of Artillery still
comprises the whole _personnel_ of the arm, being divided into the Royal
Horse, Royal Field and Royal Garrison Artillery; to each branch Special
Reserve and Territorial artillery are affiliated. Over and above the
military command of these higher units, provision is usually made for
technical control of the _matériel_, and a variety of training and
experimental establishments, such as schools of gunnery, are maintained
in all countries. The more special unit of organization in mobile
artillery is the _brigade_, formerly called brigade-division (German,
_Abteilung_; French _groupe_). The brigade is in Great Britain the
administrative and tactical unit. Mountain artillery is not organized in
brigades in the British empire. The unit consists, in the case of guns,
of three batteries (18 guns, heavy artillery 12), in the case of field
howitzers of two batteries (12 howitzers), and in the horse artillery of
two batteries (12 guns), and is commanded by a lieutenant-colonel. To
each brigade is allotted an ammunition column. The necessity for such a
grouping of batteries will be apparent if the reader notes that 54 field
guns, 12 howitzers and 4 heavy field guns form the artillery of a single
British division of about 15,000 combatants.

25. _Grouping of the Artillery._--The "corps artillery" (formerly the
"reserve artillery") now consists only of the howitzer and heavy
brigades, with a brigade of horse artillery. The latter is held at the
disposal of the corps commander for the swift reinforcement of a
threatened point; the howitzers and the heavy guns have, of course,
functions widely different from those of the mass of guns. As the field
artillery is required to come into action at the earliest possible
moment, it has now been distributed amongst the infantry divisions, and
marches almost at the head of the various combatant columns, instead of
being relegated perhaps to the tail of the centre column. The
redistribution of the British army (1907) on a divisional basis is a
remarkable example of this; even the special natures of artillery
(except horse artillery) are distributed amongst the divisions. In
Germany two "regiments" (each of 2 _Abteilungen_ = 6 batteries) form a
brigade, under an artillery general in each division who thus disposes
of 72 field guns, and the howitzers, with such horse artillery batteries
as remain over after the cavalry has been supplied, still form a corps
or reserve artillery. In 1903 the French, after long hesitation,
assigned the whole of the field artillery to the various divisions, but
later (for reasons stated in the article TACTICS) arranged to
reconstitute the old-fashioned corps artillery in war. (See also ARMY, §
49).


TACTICAL WORK

26. _General Characteristics of Field Artillery Action._--The duty of
field artillery in action is to fire with the greatest effect on the
target which is for the moment of the greatest tactical importance. This
definition of field artillery tactics brings the student at once to
questions of combined tactics, for which consult the article TACTICS.
The purpose of the present article is to indicate the methods employed
by the gunners to give effect to their fire at the targets mentioned.
For this purpose the artillery has at its disposal two types of
projectile, common (or rather, high explosive) shell and shrapnel, and
two fuzes, "time" and "percussion" (see AMMUNITION). The actual process
of coming into action may be described in a few words. The gun is, at or
near its position in action, "unlimbered" and the gun limber and team
sent back under cover. Ammunition for the gun is first taken from the
wagon that accompanies it, as it is very desirable to keep the limbers
full as long as possible, in case of emergencies such as that of a
temporary separation from the wagon. Limber supply is, however, allowed
in certain circumstances. The wagon is now placed as a rule by the side
of the gun, an arrangement which immensely simplifies the supply of
ammunition, this being done under cover of the armour on the wagon and
of the gun-shield and also without fatigue to the men. The older method
of placing the wagon at some distance behind the gun is still
occasionally used, especially in the case of unshielded equipments. No
horses are allowed, in any case, to be actually with the line of guns.
According to the British _Field Artillery Training_ of 1906, a battery
in action would be thus distributed: first, the "fighting battery"
consisting of the six guns, each with its wagon alongside, and the
limbers of the two flank guns; then, under cover in rear, the "first
line of wagons" comprising the teams of the fighting battery, the four
remaining gun limbers, and six more wagons. The non-combatant vehicles
form the "second line of wagons."

27. _Occupation of a Position._--This depends primarily upon
considerations of tactics, for the accurate co-operation of the guns is
the first essential to success in the general task. In details, however,
the choice of position varies to some extent with the nature of the
equipment: for instance, an elevated position is better adapted than a
low one for high velocity guns firing over the heads of their own
infantry, and again, the "spade" with which nearly all equipments are
furnished (see ORDNANCE) should have soil in which it can find a hold.
Cover for the gun and its detachment cannot well be obtained from the
configuration of the ground, because, if the gun can shoot over the
covering mass of earth, the hostile shells can of course do likewise.
Sufficient protection is given by the shield, and thus "cover" for
field-guns simply means concealment. Cover for the "first line of
wagons" is, however, a very serious consideration. As to concealment, it
is stated that "the broad white flash from a gun firing smokeless powder
is visible" to an enemy "unless the muzzle is at least 10 ft. below the
covering crest" (Bethell, _Modern Guns and Gunnery_, 1907, p. 147).
Concealment therefore, means only the skilful use of ground in such a
way as to make the enemy's ranging difficult. This frequently involves
the use of retired positions, on reverse slopes, in low ground, &c., and
in all modern artillery the greatest stress is laid on practice in
firing by indirect means. Controversy has, however, arisen as to whether
inability to see the foreground is not a drawback so serious that direct
fire from a crest position, in spite of its exposure, must be taken as
the normal method. The latter is of course immensely facilitated by the
introduction of the shield. A great advantage of retired positions is
that, provided unity of direction is kept, an overwhelming artillery
surprise (see _F.A. Training_, 1906, p. 225) is carried out more easily
than from a visible position. The extent of _front_ of a battery in
action is governed by the rule that no two gun detachments should be
exposed to being hit by the bullets of one shell, and also by the
necessity of having as many guns as possible at work. These two
conditions are met by the adoption of a 20-yards interval between the
muzzles of the guns. At the present time the gun and its wagon are
placed as close together as possible, to obtain the full advantage of
the armoured equipment. The _shield_, behind which the detachments
remain at all times covered from rifle (except at very short range) and
shrapnel bullets,[3] enables the artillery commander to handle his
batteries far more boldly than formerly was the case. General Langlois
says "the shield-protected carriage is the corollary to the quick-firing
gun." Armour on the wagon, enabling ammunition supply as well as the
service of the gun, to be carried on under cover, soon followed the
introduction of the shield. The disadvantage of extra weight and
consequently increased difficulty of "man-handling" the equipment is
held to be of far less importance than the advantages obtained by the
use of armour.

28. _Laying._--"Elevation" may be defined as the vertical inclination of
the gun, "direction" as the horizontal inclination to the right or left,
necessary to direct the path of the projectile to the object aimed at.
"Laying" the gun, in the case of most modern equipments, is divided, by
means of the device called the independent line of sight (see ORDNANCE),
into two processes, performed simultaneously by different men, the
adjustment of the sights and that of the gun. The first is the act of
finding the "line of sight," or line joining the sights and the point
aimed at; for this the equipment has to be "traversed" right or left so
as to point in the proper direction, and also adjusted in the vertical
plane. The simplest form of laying for direction, or "line," is called
the "direct" method. If the point aimed at is the target, and it can be
seen by the layer, he has merely to look over the "open" sights. But the
point aimed at is rarely the target itself. In war, the target, even if
visible, is often indistinct, and in this case, as also when the guns
are under cover or engaging a target under cover, an "aiming point" or
"auxiliary mark," a conspicuous point quite apart and distinct from the
target, has to be employed ("indirect" method). In the Russo-Japanese
War the sun was sometimes used as an aiming point. When the guns are
behind cover and the foreground cannot be seen, an artificial aiming
point is often made by placing a line of "aiming posts" in the ground.
If an aiming point can be found which is in line with the target, as
would be the case when aiming posts are laid out, the laying is simple,
but it is as often as not out of the line. Finding the "line" in this
case involves the calculation, from a distant observing point, of the
angle at which the guns must be laid in order that, when the sights are
directed upon the aiming point, the shell will strike the target. It is
further necessary to find the "angle of sight" or inclination of the
line of sight to the horizontal plane. If aim be taken over the open
sights at the target, the line of sight naturally passes through the
target, but in any other case it may be above or below it. Then the
point where the projectile will meet the line of sight, which should
coincide with the target, is beyond it if the line of sight is below or
angle of sight is too small, and short of it if the line of sight is too
high--that is, range and fuze will be wrong. The process of indirect
laying for elevation therefore is, first, the measurement of the angle
of sight, and secondly, the setting of the sights to that angle by means
of a clinometer; this is called clinometer laying. In all cases the
actual elevation of the gun to enable the shell to strike the target is
a purely mechanical adjustment, performed independently; the gun is
moved relatively to the sights, which have been previously set as
described. Frequently the battery commander directs the guns from a
point at some distance, communication being maintained by signallers or
by field telephone. This is the normal procedure when the guns are
firing from cover. Instruments of precision and careful calculations
are, of course, required to fight a battery in this manner, many
allowances having to be made for the differences in height, distance and
angle between the position of the battery commander and that of the
guns.

29. _Ranging_[4] (except on the French system alluded to below) is,
first, finding the range (i.e. elevation required), and secondly,
correcting the standard length of fuze for that range in accordance with
the circumstances of each case. To find the elevation required, it is
necessary to observe the bursts of shells "on graze" with reference to
the target. The battery commander orders two elevations differing by 300
yds., e.g. "2500, 2800," and tells off a "ranging section" of two guns.
These proceed to fire percussion shrapnel at the two different
elevations, in order to obtain bursts "over" (+) and "short" (-). When
it is certain that this "long bracket" is obtained, the "100 yds.
bracket" is found, the elevations in the given case being, perhaps, 2600
and 2700 yds. "Verifying" rounds are then fired, to make certain of the
100 yds. bracket. The old "short bracket" (50 yds.) is not now required
except at standing targets. Circumstances may, of course, shorten the
process; for instance, a hit upon the target itself could be "verified"
at once. The determination of the fuze (by time shrapnel) follows. The
fuze has a standard length for the ascertained range, but the proper
correction of this standard length to suit the atmospheric conditions
has to be made. The commander has therefore already given out a series
of corrector[5] lengths, his object being to secure bursts both in air
and on graze. When he is finally satisfied he opens fire "for effect."

30. An example of the ordinary method of ranging, adapted from _Field
Artillery Training_, 1906, is given below.

  Battery commander gives target, &c., and orders: "Right section
  ranging section; remainder corrector 150 increase 10, 4400-4700," for
  the long bracket.

  No. 1 gun fires, elevation 4400 yds., P.S., round observed -
  No. 2  "    "        "     4700  "      "     "       "    +
                B.C. orders "4500-4600."
  No. 1 gun fires, elevation 4500 yds., P.S., round observed -
  No. 2  "    "        "     4600  "      "     "       "    +

  The 100 yds. bracket appears to be 4500-4600. B.C. orders: "Remainder
  4500 time shrapnel," and gives the ranging section 4500-4600 to
  "verify." Guns 3, 4, 5, 6 set fuzes for 4500 with correctors 150, 160,
  170, 180.

  No. 1 gun fires, elevation 4500 yds., P.S., round observed -
  No. 2  "    "        "     4600  "      "     "       "    +
     B.C. orders: "Remainder 4500, one round gun fire, 3 seconds."
             No. 3 elevation 4500 yds. T.S. corrector 150 air
             No. 4     "      "    "    "       "     160 air
             No. 5     "      "    "    "       "     160 graze
             No. 6     "      "    "    "       "     180   "

  B.C. selects corrector 160 and goes to "section fire."

  The battery now begins to fire "for effect."

             No. 1 elevation 4500 yds. T.S. corrector 160 air
             No. 3     "      "         "      "       "   "

  followed by Nos. 5, 2, 4 and 6.

There is another method of ranging, viz. with time shrapnel only. In
this the principle is that several shells, fired with the same corrector
setting, but at different elevations, will burst in air at different
points along one line. Bursts high in the air cannot be judged, and it
is therefore necessary to bring down the line of bursts to the target,
so that the bursts in air appear directly in front or directly in rear
of it. Rounds are therefore fired (in pairs owing to possible
imperfections in the fuzes) to ascertain the corrector which gives the
best line of observation. This found, the target is bracketed by bursts
low in the air observed + and -, as in the ordinary method with
percussion shrapnel.

The operations of finding the "line of fire" and the proper elevation
may be combined, as the shells in ranging can be made to "bracket" for
direction as well as for elevation. The line can be changed towards a
new target in any kind of direct and indirect laying, in the latter case
by observing the angle made with it by the original line of fire and
giving deflection to the guns accordingly. Further, the fire of several
dispersed batteries may be concentrated, distributed, or "switched" from
one target to another on a wide front, at the will of the commander.

31. _Observation of Fire_, on the accuracy of which depends the success
of ranging, may be done either by the battery commander himself or by a
special "observing" party. In either case the shooting is carefully
observed throughout, and corrections ordered at any time, whether during
the process of ranging or during fire for effect. The difficulties of
observation vary considerably with the ground, &c., for instance, the
light may be so bad that the target can hardly be seen, or again, if
there be a hollow in front of the target, a shell may burst in it so far
below that the smoke appears thin, the round being then judged "over"
instead of "short." On the other hand, a hollow behind the target may
cause a round to be lost altogether. Ranging with time shrapnel has the
merit of avoiding most of these "traps." The "French system of fire
discipline," referred to below, has this method as the usual procedure.

32. _Fire._--Field Artillery ranges are classed in the British service
as: "distant," 6000 to 4500 yds.; "long," 4500 to 3500; "effective,"
3500 to 2000: and "decisive," 2000 and under. The actual methods of
fire employed are matters of detail; it will be sufficient to say that
"section fire," in which the two guns of a section are fired alternately
at a named interval, usually 30 seconds, and "rapid fire," in which two,
three or more rounds as ordered are fired by each gun as quickly as
possible, are the normal methods. Each battery usually engages a portion
of the objective equal in length to its own front, owing to the spread
of the cone of shrapnel bullets (see below). The fire is, of course,
almost always frontal, though enfilade and oblique fire, when
opportunities occur for their employment, are more deadly than ever,
because of the depth of the cone. As for the general conduct of an
artillery action, accurate fire for effect, at a medium rate, is used in
most armies, but in the French and, since 1906, in the British services
a new method has arisen, in consequence of the introduction of the
modern quick-firer and the perfection of the time shrapnel. The French
battery (1900 Q.F. equipment) consists of four guns and twelve wagons.
The gun is shielded, as also are the wagons; the high velocity and flat
trajectory give a maximum depth to the cone of shrapnel bullets. In the
hope of obtaining a rapid and overwhelming fire, the French artillery
ranges only for a long bracket, and once this bracket is found, the
ground within its limits is swept from end to end in a burst of rapid
fire. This is termed a _rafale_ (squall or gust), and technically
signifies "a series of eight rounds per gun, each two rounds being laid
with 100 metres more elevation than the last pair, the whole fired off
as rapidly as possible." The cone of time shrapnel being assumed as 300
yds. (or metres), it is clear that four pairs of rounds, bursting, say,
at 1000, 1100, 1200 and 1300 yds. (adding, for the last, 300 yds. for
its forward effect), sweep the whole ground between 1000 and 1600 yds.
from the guns. The maximum depth would, of course, be obtained with four
elevations differing by the depth of the cone; in such a case the space
from 1000 to 2200 yds. would be covered, though much less effectively,
since the same number of bullets are distributed over a larger area. On
the other hand, the _rafale_, at a minimum, covers 300 yds., all the
guns in this case being laid at the same elevation throughout. Here the
maximum number of bullets is obtained for every square yard attacked.
Between these extremes, a skilful artillery officer can vary the
_rafale_ to the needs of each several case almost indefinitely.
"Sweeping" fire is a series of three rounds per gun, one in the original
line, one to the right and one to the left of it; this is significantly
called "mowing" (_tir fauchant_). A further refinement in both services
is the combined "search and sweep." Forty-eight rounds, constituting in
the French army a series of this last kind, can, it is said, be fired in
1 minute and 15 seconds, without setting fuzes beforehand, to cover an
area of 600 × 200 metres. The result of such a series, worked out
mathematically, is that 19% of all men and 75% of all horses, in the
area and not under cover, should be hit by separate bullets (Bethell,
_Modern Guns and Gunnery_, 1907). Even allowing a liberal deduction for
imperfect distribution of bullets, we may feel certain that nothing but
shielded guns could live long in the fire-swept zone. This is, of
course, a rate of fire which could not be kept up for any length of time
by the same battery. A French battery, firing at the maximum rate, would
expend every available round in 13 minutes.

33. _Projectiles Employed._--"Time shrapnel," say the German Field
Artillery regulations, "is the projectile _par excellence_ ... against
all animate targets which are not under cover." It achieves its purpose,
as has been said, by sending a shower of bullets over an area of ground
in such quantity that this is swept from end to end. These bullets are
propelled, in a cone, forward from the point of burst of the shell, and
the effective depth of this cone at medium ranges with a fairly high
velocity gun may be taken at 300 yds. Further, the corrector enables the
artillery commander to burst his shells at any desired point; for
example, a long fuze may be given, to burst them close up when firing
upon a deep target (such as troops in several lines, one behind the
other), and thereby to obtain the maximum searching effect, or to obtain
direct hits on shielded guns, while a short corrector, bursting the
shell well in front of the enemy, allows the maximum lateral spread of
the bullets, and therefore sweeps the greatest front. The number of
bullets in the shell is such that troops in the open under effective
shrapnel fire must suffer very heavily, and may be almost annihilated.
If the enemy is close behind good cover, the bullets, indeed, pass
harmlessly overhead. This, however, leads to a very important fact, viz.
that artillery can keep down the fire of hostile infantry, "blind" the
enemy, in Langlois' phrase, by _pinning it down_ to cover. Under cover
the men are safe, but if they raise their heads to take careful aim,
they will almost certainly be hit. Their fire under such conditions is
therefore unaimed and wild at the best, and may be wholly ineffective.
_Common_ shell and _high-explosive_ shell (see AMMUNITION) belong to
another class of projectile. The former is now not often used, but a
certain proportion of H.E. shell is carried by the field artillery in
many armies (see table in ORDNANCE: _Field Equipments_). This has a very
violent local effect within a radius of 20 to 25 yds. of the point of
burst (see AMMUNITION, fig. 10). It therefore covers far less ground
than shrapnel, and is naturally used either (a) against troops under
substantial cover or (b) to wreck cover and buildings. In the former
case the shell is supposed to send a rain of splinters vertically
downwards. This it will do, provided the fuze is minutely accurate, and
a burst is thus obtained exactly over the heads of the enemy, but this
is now generally held to be unlikely, and in so far as effect against
_personnel_ is concerned the H.E. shell is not thought to be of much
value. Indeed, in the British and several other services, no H.E. shells
at all are carried by field batteries, reliance being placed upon
percussion shrapnel in attacking localities, buildings, &c., and for
ranging. Experiments have been made towards producing a "H.E. shrapnel,"
which combines the characteristics of both types (see, for a
description, AMMUNITION). For the projectiles used in attacking shielded
guns, see section on "field howitzers" below. _Case shot_ is now rarely
employed. In the war of 1870-71 Prince Kraft von Hohenlohe-Ingelfingen,
who commanded the Prussian Guard artillery, reported the expenditure of
only one round of case, and even that was merely "broken in transport."
The close-quarters projectile of to-day is more usually shrapnel with
the fuze set at zero. Langlois, however, calls case shot "the true
projectile for critical moments, which nothing can replace."

34. _Tactics of Field Artillery._--On the march, the position and
movement of the guns are regulated by the necessity of coming quickly
into action; the usual place for the arm is at or near the heads of the
combatant columns, i.e. as far forward as is consistent with safety.
Safety is further provided for by an "escort," or, if such be not
detailed, by the nearest infantry or cavalry. In attack, the role of the
field artillery is usually (1) to assist if necessary the advanced guard
in the preliminary fighting--for this purpose a battery is usually
assigned to that corps of troops, other batteries also being sent up to
the front as required, (2) to prepare, and (3) to support or cover the
infantry attack. "Preparation" consists chiefly in engaging and subduing
the hostile artillery. This is often spoken of as the "artillery duel,"
and is not a meaningless bombardment, but an essential preliminary to
the advance. Massed guns with modern shrapnel would, if allowed to play
freely upon the attack, infallibly stop, and probably annihilate, the
troops making it. The task of the guns, then, is to destroy the opposing
guns and artillerymen, a task which will engage almost all the resources
of the assailant's artillery in the struggle for artillery superiority.
Shielded guns, enhanced rate of fire, perfection in indirect laying
apparatus, and many other factors, have modified the lessons of 1870,
and complicated the work of achieving victory in the artillery duel so
far that the simple "hard pounding" of former days has given way to a
variety of expedients for inflicting the desired loss and damage, as to
which opinions differ in and within every army. One point is, however,
clear and meets with universal acceptance. "The whole object of the duel
is to enable the artillery subsequently to devote all available
resources to its principal task, which is the material and moral support
of the infantry during each succeeding stage of the fight" (French
regulations). One side must be victorious in the end, and when, and not
until, the hostile artillery is beaten out of action, the victor has
acquired the power of pressing home the attack. The British regulations
(1906), indeed, deal with the steps to be taken when, though the
artillery of the attack is beaten, the infantry advance is continued,
but only so as to order the guns to "reopen at all costs," in other
words, as a forlorn hope. The second part of the preparation, the
gradual disintegration of the opposing line of infantry, has practically
disappeared from the drill books. The next task of the guns, and that in
which modern artillery asserts its power to the utmost, is the _support_
of the infantry attack. The artillery and infantry co-operate, "the
former by firing rapidly when they see their own infantry ... press
forward, and the latter by making full use of the periods of intense
artillery fire to gain ground" (British _F.A. Training_, 1906). Thus
aided, the infantry closes in to decisive ranges, and as it gains ground
to the front, every gun "must be at once turned upon the points selected
... the most effective support afforded to the attacking infantry by the
concentrated fire of guns and field howitzers. The former tie the
defenders to their entrenchments (for retreat is practically impossible
over ground swept by shrapnel bullets), distract their attention and
tend to make them keep their heads down, while the shell from the field
howitzers searches out the interior of the trenches, the reverse slopes
of the position, and checks the movement of reinforcements towards the
threatened point." In these words the British Field Artillery drill-book
of 1902 summarizes the act of "covering" the infantry advance.
Unofficial publications are still more emphatic. The advance of the
infantry to decisive range would often be covered by a mass of one
hundred or more field guns, firing shrapnel at the rate of ten rounds
per gun per minute at the critical moment. Against such a storm of fire
the defending infantry, even supposing that its own guns had refitted
and were again in action, would be powerless. It is in recognition of
the appalling power of field artillery (which has increased in a ratio
out of all proportion to the improvements of modern rifles) that the
French system has been elaborated to the perfection which it has now
attained.

With modern guns and modern tactics artillery almost invariably fires
over the heads of its own infantry. The German regulations indeed say
that it should be avoided as far as possible, but, as a matter of fact,
if the numerous guns of a modern army (at Königgrätz there were 1550
guns on the field, at Gravelotte 1252, at Mukden 3000) were to be given
a clear front, there would be no room for deploying the infantry.
Consequently the French regulations, in which the power of the artillery
is given the greatest possible scope, say that "it almost always fires
over the heads of its own infantry." With field guns and on level ground
it is considered dangerous that infantry in front of the guns should be
less than 600 yds. distant--not for fear of the shells striking the
infantry, but because the fragments resulting from a "premature" burst
are dangerous up to that distance. The question of distance is more
important in connexion with the "covering" of the assault. Up to a
point, the artillery enables the attacking infantry to advance with a
minimum of loss and exhaustion, and thus to close with the enemy at
least on equal terms, if not with a serious advantage, for the fire of
the guns may shake, perhaps almost destroy the enemy's power of
resistance. But when the infantry approaches the enemy the guns can no
longer fire upon the latter's front line without risk of injuring their
friends. All that they can do, when the opposing infantries can see the
whites of each other's eyes, is to lengthen the fuze, raise the
trajectory and sweep the ground where the enemy's supports are posted.
Under these circumstances it is practically agreed that the risk should
be taken without hesitation at so critical a moment as that of a
decisive infantry assault which must be pushed home at whatever cost.
"It will be better for the infantry to chance a few friendly shells than
to be received at short range with a fresh outburst of hostile rifle
fire" (Rouquerol, _Tactical Employment of Quick-firing Field
Artillery_). Thus, the distance at which direct support ceases, formerly
600 yds., has been diminished to 100, and even to 50 yds. Howitzers can,
of course, maintain their fire almost up to the very last stage, and, in
general, high-explosive shell, owing to its purely local effect, may be
employed for some time after it has become unsafe to use shrapnel.

35. Field artillery in _defence_, which would presumably be inferior to
that of the attack, must, of course, act according to circumstances. We
are here concerned not with the absolute strength or weakness of the
passive defensive, which is a matter of tactics (q.v.), but with the
tactical procedure of artillery, which, relatively to other methods, is
held to offer the best chance of success, so far as success is
attainable. On the defensive in a prepared position, which in European
warfare at any rate will be an unusually favourable case for the
defender--the guns have two functions, that of engaging and holding the
hostile artillery, and that of meeting the infantry assault. The dilemma
is this, that on the one hand a position in rear of the line of battle,
with modern improvements in communicating and indirect laying apparatus,
is well suited for engaging the hostile guns, but not for meeting the
assault; and on the other, guns on the forward slope of the defender's
ridge or hill can fire direct, but are quickly located and overwhelmed,
for they can hardly remain silent while their own infantry bears the
fire of the assailant's shrapnel. Thus the defender's guns would, as a
rule, have to be divided. One portion would seek to fight from rearward
concealed positions, and use every device to delay the victory of the
enemy's guns and the development of the battle until it is too late in
the day for a serious infantry attack. Further, the enemy's mistakes and
the "fortune of war" may give opportunities of inflicting severe losses;
such opportunities have always occurred and will do so again. In the
possible (though very far from probable) case of the defender not merely
baffling, but crushing his opponent in the artillery duel, he may, if he
so desires, himself assume the role of assailant, and at any rate he
places a veto on the enemy's attack.

The portion told off to meet the infantry assault would be entrenched on
the forward slope and would take no part in the artillery duel. Very
exceptionally, this advanced artillery might fire upon favourable
targets, but its paramount duty is to remain intact for the decisive
moment. Here again the defender is confronted with grave difficulties.
It is true that his advanced batteries may be of the greatest possible
assistance at the crisis of the infantry assault, yet even so the
covering fire of the hostile guns, as soon as the hostile infantry had
found them their target, may be absolutely overwhelming; moreover, once
the fight has begun, the guns cannot be withdrawn, nor can their
positions easily be modified to meet unexpected developments. The
proportion of the whole artillery force which should be committed to the
forward position is disputed. Colonel Bethell (_Journal Royal
Artillery_, vol. xxxiii. p. 67) holds that all the mountain guns, and
two-thirds of the field guns, should be in the forward, all the
howitzers and heavy guns and one-third of the field guns in the retired
position. But in view of the facts that if once the advanced guns are
submerged in the tide of the enemy's assault, they will be
irrecoverable, and that a modern Q.F. gun, with plenty of ammunition at
hand, may use "rapid fire" freely, artillery opinion, as a whole, is in
favour of having fewer guns and an abnormal ammunition supply in the
forward entrenchments, and the bulk of the artillery (with the
ammunition columns at hand) in rear. But the purely passive defensive is
usually but a preliminary to an active counter-stroke. This
counter-attack would naturally be supported to the utmost by the
offensive tactics of the artillery, which might thus at the end of a
battle achieve far greater results than it could have done at the
beginning of the day. In _pursuit_, it is universally agreed that the
action of the artillery may be bold to the verge of rashness. The
employment of field artillery in _advanced_ and _rear guard actions_
varies almost indefinitely according to circumstances; with _outposts_,
guns would only be employed exceptionally.

36. _Marches._--The importance of having the artillery well up at the
front of a marching column is perhaps best expressed in the phrase of
Prince Kraft von Hohenlohe-Ingelfingen, "save hours and not minutes."
The Germans in 1870 so far acted up to the principle that Prince
Hohenlohe, when asked, at the beginning of the battle of Sedan, for a
couple of guns, was able to reply, "You shall have ninety" (see, for
details of the march of the Guard artillery, his _Letters on Artillery_,
6th letter). The German regulations for field service say, very plainly,
"the horses have not done their work until they have got the guns into
action, even at the cost of utter exhaustion." A notable march was made
by the 62nd battery, R.F.A., in the South African War. On the day of the
battle of Modder River, the battery marched 32 m. (mostly through deep
sand) arriving in time to take part in the action. Such forced marches,
if rare, are nowadays expected to be within the power of field artillery
to accomplish. Horse artillery is capable of more than this, and as to
pace, manoeuvring at the cavalry rate. Heavy guns are the least mobile,
and would rarely be able to keep pace with infantry in a forced march.
Field artillery walks 4, trots 9, and gallops at the rate of 15 m. an
hour. A fair marching pace (trot and walk) is 4 m. an hour for field, 5
for horse batteries. A march of 14 m. would, according to the German
regulations, be performed by

  a field battery in 5 hours,
  a horse battery in 4 hours,

under favourable circumstances (Bronsart von Schellendorf).

37. _Power and Mobility._--It will have been made clear that every gun
represents a compromise between these two requirements, and that each
type of artillery has been evolved in accordance with the relative
requirements of these conditions in respect of the work to be performed.
The classification which has been followed in this article represents
the practically unanimous decision of every important military state.
Still, there has always been controversy between the individual
adherents of each side, and the Boer War experiences raised the question
as to whether field artillery, as the term is usually understood, should
not be abolished, with a view to having only heavy guns and horse
artillery with a field army.

38. _Concentration and Dispersion._--The use of their artillery made by
the Boers in the South African War led to the revival of the idea of
"dispersing" guns instead of "concentrating" them. It would be more
accurate to say that military thinkers had, after the introduction of
the quick-firing gun, challenged every received principle, and amongst
others the employment of artillery in masses, which, as a result of the
war of 1870, "had become almost an article of faith." The idea was to
make use of the increased power of the guns to gain equally great
results with the employment of less material than formerly. Thus the
dispersion of guns is bound up with the passive defensive. The first
editions of the British _Field Artillery Training_ and _Combined
Training_, strongly influenced as they were by South African experience,
did not legislate, even in dealing with defence, for "dispersion" in the
Boer manner, but only for adaptability (see _Field Artillery Training_,
1902, p. 15). In the Boer War, whilst the Boers nearly always scattered
their guns, almost the only occasion upon which their artillery played a
decisive part was at Spion Kop, where its fire was concentrated upon the
point of assault. At Pieter's Hill, the fire of seventy guns covered the
British infantry assault in the Napoleonic manner. On the whole it may
be accepted as a general truth that guns are safe, and may be locally
effective, when dispersed, but that they cannot produce decisive effect
except when used in masses. It must, however, be clearly understood that
a "mass" in this sense means a large number of guns, under one command,
and susceptible of being handled as a unit, so far as the direction and
effectiveness of their fire is concerned. _This being secured_, and on
that condition only, it does not matter whether the actual gun positions
are scattered over a few square miles, or are closed in one long line
and using direct fire--they are still a mass, and capable of acting
effectively as such. While there are undoubtedly grave dangers in using
the indirect method too freely, technical improvements in laying,
telephones, &c., have had much to do with the possibility, at any rate
under favourable circumstances, of a concentration which may be
described as one of shells rather than of guns, and the reader is
reminded in this connexion that the work formerly done by the gun is now
performed by the shell.

39. _Horse Artillery_ is to be regarded as field artillery of great
mobility and manoeuvring power. Its value may be said, in general terms,
to lie in augmenting the weak fire-power of the mounted troops, and in
facilitating their work as much as possible. Thus, when cavalry meets
serious opposition in reconnoitring, the guns may be able to break down
the enemy's resistance without calling for assistance from the main body
of the cavalry, and, in the action of cavalry _versus_ cavalry, the
"paramount duty of the horse artillery is to shatter the enemy's
cavalry" (_Field Artillery Training_, 1906), i.e. to "prepare" the
success of the cavalry charge by breaking up as far as possible the
enemy's power of meeting it. In the cavalry battle, covering fire is
practically impossible, owing both to the short distances separating the
combatants and to the rapidity of their movements, but steps are taken
"to enable all the guns to bear on the enemy's cavalry at the points of
collision." The ideal position for the horse artillery is out to a
flank, the cavalry manoeuvring so as to draw the enemy's cavalry under
enfilade fire, and at the same time to force them to mask the fire of
their own horse artillery. Another and a most important function of the
horse batteries is to reinforce, with the greatest possible speed, any
point in the general line of battle which is in need of artillery
support. For this reason the corps artillery generally includes horse
batteries.

40. _Field Howitzers_ are somewhat less mobile than field guns; they
have, however, far greater shell power. The special features of the
weapon are, of course, the product of the special requirements which
have called it into existence. These are, briefly (a) the necessity of
being able to "search" the interior of earthworks, a task which, as has
been said, is beyond the power of high-velocity field guns, and (b)
demolition work, which is equally beyond the power of even a H.E. shell
of field-gun calibre. The first of these conditions implies a steep
"angle of descent," which again implies a high angle of elevation. The
second requires great shell power but does not call for high velocity.
The howitzer, therefore, is a short gun, firing a heavy shell at high
angles of elevation. Howitzers almost always are laid by the indirect
method of fire from under cover, since it is clear that, with high
angles of elevation, the gun may be brought close up to the covering
mass, and still fire over it. Ranging must be done very accurately and
yet economically, as but few of their heavy shells can be carried in the
wagons and limbers, and the shells descending upon an enemy almost
vertically lose the long sweeping effect of the field shrapnel which
neutralizes minor errors of ranging. The projectiles employed are high
explosive and shrapnel, the latter for use against _personnel_ under
cover, the former for demolition of field works, casemates or buildings.
It is very generally held that howitzer time shrapnel is the best form
of projectile for the attack of shielded guns. Here it may be said that
no completely satisfactory method of dealing with these has yet been
discovered. The best procedure with field guns is said to be lengthening
the fuze to obtain a high percentage of bursts on graze. A shell
striking the face of the shield will penetrate it, and should kill some
at least of the gun detachment behind. The high-explosive shrapnel
alluded to above is designed primarily for the attack of shielded guns.

41. _Heavy Field Artillery_, alternatively called _Artillery of
Position_, as has been said, includes all guns of 4-in. calibre and
upwards, mounted on travelling carriages. In South Africa, where firm
soil was usually to be found, 6-in. guns were employed as heavy field
guns, but in Europe even the 5-in. (British Service) is liable to sink
into the ground. In Great Britain, guns only are used by this branch;
abroad, the "heavy artillery of the field army," the "light siege
train," &c., as it is variously called, is as a rule composed of
howitzers of a heavier calibre than the field howitzer, the 15-cm.
(6-in.) howitzer being most commonly met with. This artillery has,
however, a different tactical rôle from the heavy field artillery of the
British service; and it is always with a view to the attack of permanent
or semi-permanent fortifications that the _matériel_ is organized. In
Great Britain, heavy batteries armed with the 5-in. gun are considered
as "an auxiliary to the horse and field artillery" (_Heavy Artillery
Training_). Ranging is conducted with greater deliberation than ranging
with the lighter guns, though upon the same general lines. Parts of the
process may, however, be omitted in certain circumstances. Heavy guns
use high-explosive (lyddite) shells and time shrapnel, the former for
ranging and for demolishing cover, the latter against _personnel_.
Laying is usually indirect. The tactical principles upon which heavy
artillery does its work are based, in the main, on the long range (up to
10,000 yds.) and great shell-power of the guns. This power enables the
artillery to reach with effect targets which are beyond the range of
lighter ordnance, and it is, therefore, considered possible to disperse
the guns in batteries, and even in sections of two guns, along the front
of the army, without forfeiting the power of concentrating their fire on
any point--a power which otherwise they would not possess owing to their
want of mobility. At the same time it is not forbidden to bring them
into line with the rest of the artillery, in order to achieve a decisive
result. In the _attack_, beside the general task of supplementing the
effect of other natures of ordnance, heavy artillery may demolish cover,
buildings, &c., held by the enemy, and during the infantry assault they
may do excellent service in sweeping a great depth of ground, their
smaller angle of descent, and the greater remaining velocity and heavier
driving charge of their shrapnel, as compared with field guns, enabling
them to do this effectively. In the _defence_, long-range fire has great
value, especially in sweeping approaches which the enemy must use. In
_pursuit_, the heavy artillery may be able to shell the main body of the
enemy during its retreat, even if it has left a rearguard. In _retreat_,
the want of mobility of these guns militates against their employment in
exposed positions, such as rearguards usually have to take up.

  BIBLIOGRAPHY.[6]--Amongst general historical works may be mentioned
  Napoleon III. and Col. Favé, _Études sur le passé et l'avenir de
  l'artillerie_ (Paris. 1846-1871); C. von Decker, _Geschichte des
  Geschützwesens_ (Berlin, 1822); H.W.L. Hime, _Stray Military Papers_
  (London, 1901); _Die Beziehung Friedrichs des Grossen zu seiner
  Artillerie_ (Berlin, 1865); H. von Müller, _Die Entwickelung der
  Feldartillerie, 1815-1892_ (Berlin, 1893-1894); J. Campana,
  _L'Artillerie de campagne, 1792-1901_ (Paris, 1901); v. Reitzenstein,
  _Das Geschützwesen, &c. in Hannover und Braunschweig 1365 bis zur
  Gegenwart_ (Leipzig, 1900); Kretschmar, _Gesch. d. sächsischen
  Feldart. 1620-1878_ (1879); Schöning, _Gesch. des brandenbg.-preuss.
  Art._ (1844-1845); Schneller, _Litteratur d. Artillerie_ (1768); v.
  Tempelhof, _Gesch. d. Artillerie_ (1797); Duncan, _Hist. of the Royal
  Artillery_. A complete bibliography and criticism of the artillery
  works of the 14th, 15th and 16th centuries will be found in Max Jähns,
  _Geschichte der Kriegswissenschaften_, pp. 221-236, 382-424, 621, 658
  and 747-752. For the early 17th century, Diego Ufano, _Tratado de la
  Artilleria_ (1613) is a standard treatise of the time, but the mystery
  preserved by artillerists in regard to their arm is responsible for an
  astonishing dearth of artillery literature even in the time of the
  Thirty Years' War. In 1650 appeared Casimir Simienowicz' _Ars magnae
  artilleriae_, an English translation of which was published in London
  in 1729, and in 1683 Michael Mieth published _Artilleriae Recentior
  Praxis_. The first edition of Surirey de S. Remy, _Mémoires
  d'Artillerie_, appeared in Paris in 1697. With the reorganization of
  the arm in the early 18th century came many manuals and other works
  (see Jähns, _op. cit._ pp. 1607-1621 and 1692-1698), amongst which may
  be mentioned the marquis de Quincy's _Art de la guerre_ (1726). From
  1740 onwards numerous manuals appeared, mostly official
  _règlements_--see French General Staff, _L'Artillerie française au
  XVIII^e siècle_ (1908); and the tactical handling of the arm is
  treated in general works, such as Guibert's, on war. See also de
  Morla, _Tratado de la Artilleria_ (1784), translated into German by
  Hoyer (_Lehrbuch der Art.-Wissenschaft_, Leipzig, 1821-1826); _Du
  Service de l'artillerie à la guerre_ (Paris, 1780, German translation,
  Dresden, 1782, and English, by Capt. Thomson, R.A., London, 1789),
  Bardet de Villeneuve's _Traité de l'artillerie_ (Hague, 1741), and
  Hennébert, _Gribeauval, Lieut.-Général des armées du Roy_ (Paris,
  1896). Important works of the period 1800-1850 are Scharnhorst,
  _Handbuch der Artillerie_ (Hanover, 1804-1806, French translation by
  Fourcy, _Traité sur l'artillerie_, Paris, 1840-1841); Rouvroy,
  _Vorlesungen über die Artillerie_ (Dresden, 1821-1825); Timmerhans,
  _Essai d'un traité d'artillerie_ (Brussels, 1839-1846); C. v. Decker,
  _Die Artillerie für alle Waffen_ (1826); Griffiths, _The Artillerist's
  Manual_ (Woolwich, 1840); Piobert, _Traité d'artillerie_ (Paris,
  1845-1847); Taubert (translated by Maxwell), _Use of Field Artillery
  on Service_ (London, 1856); Capt. Simmonds, R.A., _Application of
  Artillery in the Field_ (London, 1819); Gassendi, _Aide-mémoire à
  l'usage des officiers d'artillerie_ (Paris, 1819). See also Girod de
  l'Ain, _Grands artilleurs, Drouot, Sénarmont, Éblé_ (Paris, 1894).
  Among the numerous works on modern field artillery may be mentioned
  Prince Hohenlohe-Ingelfingen, _Briefe über Artillerie_ (Berlin, 1887,
  2nd ed., English translation by Col. Walford, _Letters on Artillery_,
  Woolwich, 1887); Hoffbauer, _Taktik der Feldartillerie, 1866 und
  1870-1871_ (Berlin, 1876), and _Applikatorische Studie über Verwendung
  der Artillerie_ (Berlin, 1884); Erb, _L'Artillerie dans les batailles
  de Metz_ (Paris, 1906); Leurs, _L'Art. de campagne prussienne
  1864-1870_ (Brussels, 1874); v. Schell, _Studie über Taktik der
  Feldartillerie_ (quoted above); Hennébert, _Artillerie moderne_
  (Paris, 1889); and for quick-firing artillery, Langlois, _Artillerie
  de campagne en liaison avec les autres armes_ (Paris, 1892 and 1907);
  Wille, _Feldgeschütz der Zukunft_ (Berlin, 1891); _Waffenlehre_ (2nd
  ed., 1901); and _Zur Feldgeschützfrage_ (Berlin, 1896); Rohne, _Die
  Taktik der Feldartillerie_ (Berlin, 1900), _Studie über d.
  Schnellfeuergeschütze in Rohrrücklauflafette_ (Berlin, 1901), _Die
  französische Feldartillerie_ (Berlin, 1902); _Entwicklung des
  Massengebrauchs der Feldartillerie_ (Berlin, 1900); and articles in
  _Jahrbücher f. d. Deutsche Armee und Marine_ (October 1901 and January
  1905); Hoffbauer, _Die Frage des Schnellfeuerfeldgeschützes_ (Berlin,
  1902), and _Verwendung der Feldhaubitzen_ (Berlin, 1901); Wangemann,
  _Für die leichte Feldhaubitze_ (Berlin, 1904); von Reichenau, _Studie
  über ... Ausbildung der Feldart_. (Berlin, 1896), _Einfluss der
  Schilde auf die Entwicklung des F.-A. Materials_, and _Neue Studien
  über die Entwicklung der Feldart._ (Berlin, 1902 and 1903); Smekal,
  _Führung und Verwendung der Divisions-Artillerie_ (Vienna, 1901);
  Korzen and Kühn, _Waffenlehre_ (Vienna, 1906); G. Rouquerol, _Emploi
  de l'artillerie de campagne à tir rapide_ (Paris, 1901), and
  _Organisation de l'artillerie de campagne_ (Paris, 1903);
  Girardon-Lagabbe, _Organisation du matériel de l'artillerie de
  campagne_ (Paris, 1903); and in English, Capt. P. de B. Radcliffe's
  translation of Rouquerol's work (_The Tactical Employment of
  Quick-firing Field Artillery_, London, 1903), and especially Lt.-Col.
  H.A. Bethell, _Modern Guns and Gunnery_ (Woolwich, 1907). See also the
  current drill manuals of the British, French and German artillery.
       (C. F. A.)


FOOTNOTES:

  [1] Napoleon's maxim, quoted above, reappears in spirit in the
    British F.A. Training of 1906 (p. 225).

  [2] The old smooth-bore mortar for high-angle fire has of course
    disappeared, but the name "mortar" is still applied in some countries
    to short rifled howitzers.

  [3] Though not of course against the direct impact of shrapnel or
    H.E. shells.

  [4] Finding the line is also an integral part of ranging. When an
    aiming point is used, the angle at which the guns must be laid with
    reference to it is calculated and given out by the battery commander.
    The modern goniometric sight permits of a wide angle (in England 180°
    right or left) being given. "Deflection" is a small angular
    correction applied to individual guns.

  [5] The "corrector" is an adjustment on the sights of the gun used to
    determine the correct fuze. In the British Q.F. equipment, a
    graduated dial or drum shows the elevation of the gun above the line
    of sight. The fuze lengths are marked on a movable scale opposite the
    range graduations to which they apply, and the "corrector" moves this
    fuze scale so as to bring different fuze lengths opposite the range
    graduation. For example, a certain corrector setting gives 11½ on the
    fuze scale opposite 4000 yds. on the range scale, and if the shells
    set to 11½ burst too high, a new corrector setting is taken, the fuze
    length 12 is now opposite to the 4000 range graduation, and this
    length gives bursts closer up and lower. In the German service a
    corrector (_Aufsatzschieber_) alters the real elevation given to the
    gun, so that while throughout the battery all guns have the same
    (nominal or ordered) elevation shown on the sights, the real
    elevations of individual guns vary according to the different
    corrector settings. Thus bursts at different heights and distances
    from the target are obtained by shifting the trajectory of the shell.
    The fuze, being set for the nominal elevation common to all the guns,
    burns for the same time in each case, and thus the burst will be
    lower and closer to the target with a less (real) elevation, and
    higher and farther from it with a greater.

  [6] Most of the works named deal with technical questions of
    equipment, ammunition, ballistics, &c.




ARTIODACTYLA (from Gr. [Greek: artios], even, and [Greek: daktylos], a
finger or toe, "even-toed"), the suborder of ungulate mammals in which
the central (and in some cases the only) pair of toes in each foot are
arranged symmetrically on each side of a vertical line running through
the axes of the limbs. As contrasted with the Perissodactyla living, and
in a great degree extinct, Artiodactyla are characterized by the
following structural features. The upper premolar and molar teeth are
not alike, the former being single and the latter two-lobed; and the
last lower molar of both first and second dentition is almost invariably
three-lobed. Nasal bones not expanded posteriorly. No alisphenoid canal.
Dorsal and lumbar vertebrae together always nineteen, though the former
may vary from twelve to fifteen. Femur without third trochanter. Third
and fourth digits of both feet almost equally developed, and their
terminal phalanges flattened on their inner or contiguous surfaces, so
that each is not symmetrical in itself, but when the two are placed
together they form a figure symmetrically disposed to a line drawn
between them. Or, in other words, the axis or median line of the whole
foot is a line drawn between the third and fourth digits (fig. 1). Lower
articular surface of the astragalus divided into two nearly equal
facets, one for the navicular and a second for the cuboid bone. The
calcaneum with an articular facet for the lower end of the fibula.
Stomach almost always more or less complex. Colon convoluted. Caecum
small. Placenta diffused or cotyledonary. Teats either few and inguinal,
or numerous and abdominal.

Artiodactyla date from the Eocene period, when they appear to have been
less numerous than the Perissodactyla, although at the present day they
are immeasurably ahead of that group, and form indeed the dominant
ungulates. As regards the gradual specialization and development of the
modern types, the following features are noteworthy.

1. As regards the teeth, we have the passage of a simply tubercular, or
bunodont ([Greek: bounos], a hillock) type of molar into one in which
the four main tubercles, or columns, have assumed a crescentic form,
whence this type is termed selenodont ([Greek: selaenae], the new moon).
Further, there is the modification of the latter from a short-crowned,
or brachyodont type, to one in which the columns are tall, constituting
the hypsodont, or hypsiselenodont, type. It is noteworthy, however, that
in some instances there appears to have been a retrograde modification
from the selenodont towards the bunodont type, the hippopotamus being a
case in point. Other modifications are the loss of the upper incisors;
the development of the canines into projecting tusks; and the loss of
the anterior premolars.

2. As regards the limbs. Reduction of the ulna from a complete and
distinct bone to a comparatively rudimentary state in which it coalesces
more or less firmly with the radius. Reduction of the fibula till
nothing but its lower extremity remains. Reduction and final loss of
outer pair of digits (second and fifth), with coalescence of the
metacarpal and metatarsal bones of the two middle digits to form a
cannon-bone. Union of the navicular and cuboid, and sometimes the
ectocuneiform bone, of the tarsus.

3. Change of form of the odontoid process of the second or axis
vertebrae from a cone to a hollow half-cylinder.

4. Development of horns or antlers on the frontal bones, and gradual
complication of form of antlers.

5. By inference only, increasing complication of stomach with ruminating
function superadded. Modification of placenta from simple diffused to
cotyledonary form.

[Illustration: FIG. 1.--Bones of Right Fore Feet of existing
Artiodactyla.

  A, Pig (_Sus scrofa_).             l, Lunar.
  B, Red deer (_Cervus elaphus_).    s, Scaphoid.
  C, Camel (_Camelus bactrianus_).   u, Unciform.
  U, Ulna.                           m, Magnum.
  R, Radius.                         td, Trapezoid.]
  c, Cuneiform.

In the Sheep and the Camel the long compound bone, supporting the two
main (or only) toes is the cannon-bone.

The primitive Artiodactyla thus probably had the typical number (44) of
incisor, canine and molar teeth, brachyodont molars, conical odontoid
process, four distinct toes on each foot, with metacarpal, metatarsal
and all the tarsal bones distinct, and no frontal appendages.


  Pecora.

As regards classification, the first group is that of the Pecora, or
Cotylophora, in which the cheek-teeth are selenodont, but there are no
upper incisors or canine-like premolars, while upper canines are
generally absent, though sometimes largely developed. Inferior incisors,
three on each side with an incisiform canine in contact with them.
Cheek-teeth consisting of p.3/3, m.3/3, in continuous series. Auditory
bulla simple and hollow within. Odontoid process of second vertebra in
the form of a crescent, hollow above. Lower extremity of the fibula
represented by a distinct malleolar bone articulating with the outer
surface of the lower end of the tibia. Third and fourth metacarpals and
metatarsals confluent into cannon-bones (fig. 1 B), and the toes
enclosed in hoofs. Outer toes small and rudimentary, or in some cases
entirely suppressed; their metacarpal or metatarsal bones never
complete. Navicular and cuboid bones of tarsus united. The skull
generally lacks a sagittal crest; and the condyle of the lower jaw is
transversely elongated. Horns or antlers usually present, at least in
the male sex. Left brachial artery arising from a common innominate
trunk, instead of coming off separately from the aortic arch. Stomach
with four complete cavities. Placenta cotyledonous. Teats 2 or 4.

The group at the present day is divided into _Giraffidae_ (giraffe and
okapi), _Cervidae_ (deer), _Antilocapridae_ (prongbuck), and _Bovidae_
(oxen, sheep, goats, antelopes, &c.). (See PECORA.)


  Tylopoda.

The second group is represented at the present day by the camels
(_Camelus_) of the Old, and the llamas (_Lama_) of the New World,
collectively constituting the family _Camelidae_. They derive their name
of Tylopoda ("boss-footed") from the circumstance that the feet form
large cushion-like pads, supporting the weight of the body, while the
toes have broad nails on their upper surface only, instead of being
encased in hoofs. The cheek-teeth are selenodont, and one pair of upper
incisors is retained, while some of the anterior premolars assume a
canine-like shape, and are separated from the rest of the cheek-series.
Auditory bulla filled with honeycombed bony tissue. Odontoid process of
second vertebra semi-cylindrical; skull with a sagittal crest; and the
condyle of the lower jaw rounded. Third and fourth metacarpals and
metatarsals (which are alone present) fused into cannon-bones for the
greater part of their length, but diverging inferiorly (fig. 1, C) and
with their articular surfaces for the toes smooth, instead of ridged as
in the Pecora. Navicular and cuboid bones of tarsus distinct. No horns
or antlers. Stomach, although complex, differing essentially from that
of the Pecora. Placenta diffuse, without cotyledons. Teats few. (See
TYLOPODA.)

In the same sectional group is included the North American family of
oreodonts (_Oreodontidae_), which are much more primitive ruminants, with
shorter necks and limbs, the full series of 44 teeth, all in apposition,
and the metacarpal and metatarsal bones separate, and the toes generally
of more normal type, although sometimes claw-like. (See OREODON.) The
Eocene American genus _Homacodon_ is regarded as representing a third
family group, the _Homacodontidae (= Pantolestidae_), in which the molars
were of a bunodont type, and approximate to those of the Condylarthra
from which this family appears to have sprung, and to have given origin
on the one hand to the _Oreodontidae_, and on the other to the
_Camelidae_. The family is represented in the Lower, or Wasatch, Eocene
by _Trigonolestes_, in the Middle (Bridger) Eocene by _Homacodon_
(Pantolestes), and in the Upper (Uinta) Eocene by _Bunomeryx_.


  Tragulina.

The third group is that represented by the chevrotains or mouse-deer,
forming the family _Tragulidae_, with _Tragulus_ in south-eastern Asia
and _Dorcatherium_ (or _Hyomoschus_) in equatorial Africa. The
cheek-teeth are selenodont, as in the two preceding groups; there are no
upper incisors, but there are long, narrow and pointed upper canines,
which attain a large size in the males; the lower canines are
incisor-like, as in the Pecora, and there are no caniniform premolars in
either jaw. Cheek-teeth in a continuous series consisting of p. 3/3, m.
3/3. Odontoid process of axis conical. Fibula complete. Four complete
toes on each foot. The middle metacarpals and metatarsals generally
confluent, the outer ones (second and fifth) slender but complete, i.e.
extending from the carpus or tarsus to the digit. Navicular, cuboid and
ectocuneiform bones of tarsus united. Auditory bulla of skull filled
with cancellar tissue. No frontal appendages. Ruminating, but the
stomach with only three distinct compartments, the maniplies or third
cavity of the stomach of the Pecora being rudimentary. Placenta
diffused. (See CHEVROTAIN.)


  Anoplotherina.

In this place must be mentioned the extinct Oligocene European group
typified by the well-known genus _Anoplotherium_ of the Paris
gypsum-quarries, and hence termed Anoplotherina, although the
alternative title Dichobunoidea has been suggested. It includes the two
families _Anoplotheriidae_ and _Dichobunidae_, of which the first died
out with the Oligocene, while the second may have given origin to the
Tragulina and perhaps the Pecora. There is the full series of 44 teeth,
generally without any gaps, and most of the bones of the skeleton are
separate and complete; while, in many instances at any rate, the tail
was much longer than in any existing ungulates, and the whole bodily
form approximated to that of a carnivore. The upper molars, which may
be either selenodont or buno-selenodont, carry five cusps each, instead
of the four characteristic of all the preceding groups; and they are all
very low-crowned, so as to expose the whole of the valleys between the
cusps. In _Anoplotherium_, some of the species of which were larger than
tapirs, there were either two or three toes, the latter number being
almost unique among the Artiodactyla. Allied genera are _Diplobune_ and
_Dacrytherium_.

The _Dichobunidae_ include the genus _Dichobune_, of which the species
were small animals with buno-selenodont molars. _Xiphodon_ and
_Dichodon_ represent another type with cutting premolars and selenodont
molars; while _Caenotherium_ and _Plesiomeryx_ form yet another branch,
with resemblances to the ruminants. The most interesting genera are
however, the Upper Oligocene and Lower Miocene _Gelocus_ and
_Prodremotherium_, which have perfectly selenodont teeth, and the third
and fourth metacarpal and metatarsal bones respectively fused into an
imperfect cannon-bone, with the reduction of the lateral metacarpals and
metatarsals to mere remnants of their upper and lower extremities. While
_Gelocus_ exhibits a marked approximation to the _Tragulidae,
Prodremotherium_ comes nearer to the _Cervidae_, of which it not
improbably indicates the ancestral type. The _Dichobunidae_ may be
regarded as occupying a position analogous to that of the
_Homacodontidae_ in the Tylopoda, and like the latter, are probably the
direct descendants of Condylarthra.

[Illustration: FIG 2.--Restoration of _Anoplotherium commune._]


  Suina.

The last section of the Artiodactyla is that of the Suina, represented
at the present day by the pigs (_Suidae_), and the hippopotamuses
(_Hippopotamidae_), and in past times by the _Anthracotheriidae_, in
which may probably be included the _Elotheriidae._ In the existing
members of the group the cheek-teeth approximate to the bunodont type,
although showing signs of being degenerate modifications of the
selenodont modification. There is at least one pair of upper incisors,
while the full series of 44 teeth may be present. The metacarpals and
metatarsals are generally distinct (fig. 1 A), and never fuse into a
complete cannon-bone; and the navicular and cuboid bones of the tarsus
are separate. The odontoid process of the second vertebra is pig-like:
and the tibia and fibula and radius and ulna are severally distinct. The
stomach is simple or somewhat complex, and the placenta diffused. The
_Suidae_ include the Old World pigs (_Suinae_) and the American
peccaries (_Dicotylinae_), and are characterized by the snout
terminating in a fleshy disk-like expansion, in the midst of which are
perforated the nostrils; while the toes are enclosed in sharp hoofs, of
which the lateral ones do not touch the ground. There is a caecum. The
_Dicotylinae_ differ from the _Suinae_ in that the upper canines are
directed downwards (instead of curving upwards) and have sharp
cutting-edges, while the toes are four in front and three behind
(instead of four on each foot), and the stomach is complex instead of
simple. In the Old World a large number of fossil forms are known, of
which the earliest is the Egyptian Eocene _Geniohyus._ Originally the
family was an Old World type, but in the Miocene it gained access into
North America, where the earliest form is _Bothriolabis_, an ancestral
peccary showing signs of affinity with the European Miocene genus
_Palaeochoerus._ (See SWINE and PECCARY.)

The _Hippopotamidae_ are an exclusively Old World group, in which the
muzzle is broad and rounded and quite unlike that of the _Suidae_, while
the crowns of the cheek-teeth form a distinctly trefoil pattern, when
partially worn, which is only foreshadowed in those of the latter. The
short and broad teeth terminate in four subequal toes, protected by
short rounded hoofs, and all reaching the ground. The hinder end of the
lower jaw is provided with a deep descending flange. Both incisors and
canines are devoid of roots and grow throughout life, the canines, and
in the typical species one pair of lower incisors, growing to an immense
size. The stomach is complex; but there is no caecum. Although now
exclusively African, the family (of which all the representatives may be
included in the single genus _Hippopotamus_, with several subgeneric
groups) is represented in the Pliocene of Europe and the Lower Pliocene
of northern India. Its place of origin cannot yet be determined.

The extinct _Anthracotheriidae_ were evidently nearly allied to the
_Hippopotamidae_, of which they are in all probability the ancestral
stock. They agree, for instance, with that family in the presence of a
descending flange at the hinder end of each side of the lower jaw; but
their dentition is of a more generalized type, comprising the full
series of 44 teeth, among which the incisors and canines are of normal
form, but specially enlarged, and developing roots in the usual manner.
The molars are partially selenodont in the typical genus
_Anthracotherium_, with five cusps, or columns, on the crowns of those
of the upper jaw, which are nearly square. The genus has a very wide
distribution, extending from Europe through Asia to North America, and
occurring in strata which are of Oligocene and Miocene age. In _Ancodon_
(_Hyopotamus_) the cusps on the molars are taller, so that the dentition
is more decidedly selenodont; the distribution of this genus includes
not only Europe, Asia and North Africa, but also Egypt where it occurs
in Upper Eocene beds in company with the European genus _Rhagatherium_,
which is nearer _Anthracotherium._ On the other hand, in
_Merycopotamus_, of the Lower Pliocene of India and Burma, the upper
molars have lost the fifth intermediate cusp of _Ancodon_; and thus,
although highly selenodont, might be easily modified, by a kind of
retrograde development, into the trefoil-columned molars of
_Hippopotamus._ In the above genera, so far as is known, the feet were
four-toed, although with the lateral digits relatively small; but in
_Elotherium_ (or _Entelodon_), from the Lower Miocene of Europe and the
Oligocene of North America, the two lateral digits in each foot had
disappeared. This is the more remarkable seeing that _Elotherium_ may be
regarded as a kind of bunodont _Anthracotherium._ It shows the
characteristic hippopotamus-flange to the lower jaw, but has also a
large descending process from the jugal bone of the zygomatic arch of
the skull. Finally, we have in the Pliocene of India the genus
_Tetraconodon_, remarkable for the enormous size attained by the bluntly
conical premolars; as the molars are purely bunodont, this genus seems
to be a late and specialized survivor of a primitive type.     (R. L.*)




ARTISAN, or ARTIZAN, a mechanic; a handicraftsman in distinction to an
artist. The English word (from Late Lat. _artitianus_, instructed in
arts) at one time meant "artist," but has been restricted to signify the
operative workman only.




ARTOIS, an ancient province of the north of France, corresponding to the
present department of Pas de Calais, with the exclusion of the
arrondissements of Boulogne and Montreuil, which belonged to Picardy. It
is a rich and well-watered country, producing abundance of grain and
hops, and yielding excellent pasture for cattle. The capital of the
province was Arras, and the other important places were Saint-Omer,
Béthune, Aire, Hesdin, Bapaume, Lens, Lillers, Saint-Pol and
Saint-Venant. The name Artois (still more corrupted in "Arras") is
derived from the Atrebates, who possessed the district in the time of
Caesar. From the 9th to the 12th century Artois belonged to the counts
of Flanders. It was bestowed in 1180 on Philip Augustus of France by
Philip of Alsace, as the dowry of his niece Isabella of Hainaut. At her
death in 1190, Baldwin IX., count of Flanders (d. 1206), and then his
son-in-law, Ferrand (Ferdinand) of Portugal, count of Flanders, disputed
the possession of the country with the king of France, Ferrand being in
the coalition which was overthrown by Philip Augustus at Bouvines
(1214). In 1237 Artois, which was raised to a countship the following
year, was conferred as an appanage by Saint Louis on his brother
Robert, who died on crusade in 1250. His son, Robert II., took part in
the wars in Navarre, Sicily, Guienne and Flanders, and was killed at the
battle of Courtrai in 1302. After his death, his son Philip having
predeceased him (1298), Artois was adjudged to his daughter Mahaut, or
Matilda, as against her nephew Robert, son of Philip, who attempted to
support his claim to the countship by forged titles. Banished from
France for this crime (1322), Robert of Artois took refuge in England,
where he became earl of Richmond, and incited Edward III. to make war
upon Philip of Valois. His descendants, the counts of Eu (q.v.),
continued to style themselves counts of Artois. By the marriage of
Mahaut (d. 1329) with Otto IV., Artois passed to the house of Burgundy,
in whose possession it remained till the marriage of Mary, the daughter
of Charles the Bold, to the archduke Maximilian brought it to the house
of Austria. Louis XI., however, occupied portions of Artois, and the
claims of Austria were contested by France until the treaty of Senlis
(1493). The emperor Charles V. established the council of Artois, with
sovereign authority. At the end of the Thirty Years' War Artois was
again conquered by the French, and the conquest was ratified in the
treaty of the Pyrenees (1659) by Spain, to whom the province had fallen
in 1634. During the war between France and Holland (1672-77) and that of
the Spanish Succession. Artois was invaded again, but the treaties of
Nijmwegen (1678) and of Utrecht (1713) confirmed the sovereignty of
France. The title of count of Artois was borne by Charles X. of France
before his accession to the throne. This new creation became extinct on
the death of the comte de Chambord in 1883.




ART SALES. The practice of selling objects of art by auction in England
dates from the latter part of the 17th century, when in most cases the
names of the auctioneers were suppressed. Evelyn (under date June 21,
1693) mentions a "great auction of pictures (_Lord Melford's_) in the
Banquetting House, Whitehall," and the practice is frequently referred
to by other contemporary and later writers. Before the introduction of
regular auctions the practice was, as in the case of the famous
collection formed by Charles I., to price each object and invite
purchasers, just as in other departments of commerce. But this was a
slow process, especially in the case of pictures, and lacked the
incentive of excitement. The first really important art collection to
come under the hammer was that of Edward, earl of Oxford, dispersed by
Cock, under the Piazza, Covent Garden, on 8th March 1741/2 and the five
following days, six more days being required by the coins. Nearly all
the leading men of the day, including Horace Walpole, attended or were
represented at this sale, and the prices varied from five shillings for
an anonymous bishop's "head" to 165 guineas for Vandyck's group of "Sir
Kenelm Digby, lady, and son." The next great dispersal was Dr Richard
Mead's extensive collection, of which the pictures, coins and gems, &c.,
were sold by Langford in February and March 1754, the sale realizing the
total, unprecedented up to that time, of £16,069. The thirty-eight days'
sale (1786) of the Duchess of Portland's collection is very noteworthy,
from the fact that it included the celebrated Portland vase, now in the
British Museum. Many other interesting and important 18th-century sales
might be mentioned. High prices did not become general until the
Calonne, Trumbull (both 1795) and Bryan (1798) sales. As to the quality
of the pictures which had been sold by auction up to the latter part of
the 18th century, it may be assumed that this was not high. The
importation of pictures and other objects of art had assumed extensive
proportions by the end of the 18th century, but the genuine examples of
the Old Masters probably fell far short of 1%. England was felt to be
the only safe asylum for valuable articles, but the home which was
intended to be temporary often became permanent. Had it not been for the
political convulsions on the continent, England, instead of being one of
the richest countries in the world in art treasures, would have been one
of the poorest. This fortuitous circumstance had, moreover, another
effect, in that it greatly raised the critical knowledge of pictures.
Genuine works realized high prices, as, for example, at Sir William
Hamilton's sale (1801), when Beckford paid 1300 guineas for the little
picture of "A Laughing Boy" by Leonardo da Vinci; and when at the
Lafontaine sales (1807 and 1811) two Rembrandts each realized 5000
guineas, "The Woman taken in Adultery," now in the National Gallery, and
"The Master Shipbuilder," now at Buckingham Palace. The Beckford sale of
1823 (41 days, £43,869) was the forerunner of the great art dispersal of
the 19th century; Horace Walpole's accumulation at Strawberry Hill, 1842
(24 days, £33,450), and the Stowe collection, 1848 (41 days, £75,562),
were also celebrated. They comprised every phase of art work, and in all
the quality was of a very high order. They acted as a most healthy
stimulus to art collecting, a stimulus which was further nourished by
the sales of the superb collection of Ralph Bernal in 1855 (32 days,
£62,690), and of the almost equally fine but not so comprehensive
collection of Samuel Rogers, 1856 (18 days, £42,367). Three years later
came the dispersal of the 1500 pictures which formed Lord Northwick's
gallery at Cheltenham (pictures and works of art, 18 days, £94,722).

Towards the latter part of the first half of the 19th century an
entirely new race of collectors gradually came into existence; they were
for the most part men who had made, or were making, large fortunes in
the various industries of the midlands and north of England and other
centres. They were untrammelled by "collecting" traditions, and their
patronage was almost exclusively extended to the artists of the day. The
dispersals of these collections began in 1863 with the Bicknell Gallery,
and continued at irregular intervals for many years, e.g. Gillott
(1872), Mendel (1875), Wynn Ellis and Albert Levy (1876), Albert Grant
(1877) and Munro of Novar (1878). These patrons purchased at munificent
prices either direct from the easel or from the exhibitions not only
pictures in oils but also water-colour drawings. As a matter of
investment their purchases frequently realized far more than the
original outlay; sometimes, however, the reverse happened, as, for
instance, in the case of Landseer's "Otter Hunt," for which Baron Grant
is said to have paid £10,000 and which realized shortly afterwards only
5650 guineas. One of the features of the sales of the 'seventies was the
high appreciation of water-colour drawings. At the Gillott sale (1872)
160 examples realized £27,423, Turner's "Bamborough Castle" fetching
3150 gns.; at the Quilter sale (1875) David Cox's "Hayfield," for which
a dealer paid him 50 gns. in 1850, brought 2810 gns. The following are
the most remarkable prices of later years. In 1895 Cox's "Welsh Funeral"
(which cost about £20) sold for 2400 gns., and Burne-Jones's
"Hesperides" for 2460 gns. In 1908, 13 Turner drawings fetched £12,415
(Acland-Hood sale) and 7 brought £11,077 (Holland sale), the
"Heidelberg" reaching 4200 gns. For Fred Walker's "Harbour of Refuge"
2580 gns. were paid (Tatham sale) and 2700 gns. for his "Marlow Ferry"
(Holland). The demand for pictures by modern artists, whose works sold
at almost fabulous prices in the 'seventies, has somewhat declined; but
during all its _furore_ there was still a small band of collectors to
whom the works of the Old Masters more especially appealed. The
dispersal of such collections as the Bredel (1875), Watts Russell
(1875), Foster of Clewer Manor (1876), the Hamilton Palace (17 days,
£397,562)--the greatest art sale in the annals of Great Britain--Bale
(1882), Leigh Court (1884), and Dudley (1892) resulted, as did the sale
of many minor collections each season, in many very fine works of the
Old Masters finding eager purchasers at high prices. A striking example
of the high prices given was the £24,250 realized by the pair of Vandyck
portraits of a Genoese senator and his wife in the Peel sale, 1900.

Since the last quarter of the 19th century the chief feature in art
sales has been the demand for works, particularly female portraits, by
Reynolds, his contemporaries and successors. This may be traced to the
South Kensington Exhibitions of 1867 and 1868 and the annual winter
exhibitions at Burlington House, which revealed an unsuspected wealth
and charm in the works of many English artists who had almost fallen
into oblivion. A few of the most remarkable prices for such pictures may
be quoted: Reynolds's "Lady Betty Delmé" (1894), 11,000 gns.; Romney's
"The Ladies Spencer" (1896), 10,500 gns.; Gainsborough's "Duchess of
Devonshire" (1876), 10,100 gns. (for the history of its disappearance
see GAINSBOROUGH, THOMAS), "Maria Walpole," 12,100 gns. (Duke of
Cambridge's sale, 1904); Constable's "Stratford Mill" (1895), 8500 gns.;
Hoppner's "Lady Waldegrave" (1906), 6000 gns.; Lawrence's "Childhood's
Innocence" (1907), 8000 gns.; Raeburn's "Lady Raeburn" (1905), 8500 gns.
Here may also be mentioned the 12,600 gns. paid for Turner's "Mortlake
Terrace" in 1908 (Holland sale).

The "appreciation" of the modern continental schools, particularly the
French, has been marked since 1880; of high prices paid may be mentioned
Corot's "Danse des Amours" (1898), £7200; Rosa Bonheur's "Denizens of
the Highlands" (1888), 5550 gns.; Jules Breton's "First Communion,"
£9100 in New York (1886); Meissonier's "Napoleon I. in the Campaign of
Paris," 12¼ in. by 9¼ in. (1882), 5800 gns., and "The Sign Painter"
(1891), 6450 gns. High prices are also fetched by pictures of Daubigny,
Fortuny, Gallait, Gérôme, Troyon and Israëls. The most marked feature of
late has been the demand for the 18th-century painters Watteau, Boucher,
Fragonard, Pater and Lancret; thus "La Ronde Champêtre" of the last
named brought £11,200 at the Say Sale in 1908, and Fragonard's "Le
Reveil de Vénus" £5520 at the Sedelmeyer sale, 1907.

"Specialism" is the one important development in art collecting which
has manifested itself since the middle of the 19th century. This
accounts for and explains the high average quality of the Wellesley
(1866), the Buccleuch (1888) and the Holford (1893) collections of
drawings by the Old Masters; for the Sibson Wedgwood (1877), the Duc de
Forli Dresden (1877), the Shuldham blue and white porcelain (1880), the
Benson collection of antique coins (1909), and for the objects of art at
the Massey-Mainwaring and Lewis-Hill sales of 1907. Very many other
illustrations in nearly every department of art collecting might be
quoted--the superb series of Marlborough gems (1875 and 1899) might be
included in this category but for the fact that it was formed chiefly in
the 18th century. The appreciation--commercially at all events--of
mezzotint portraits and of portraits printed in colours, after masters
of the early English school, was one of the most remarkable features in
art sales during the last years of the 19th century. The shillings of
fifty years before were then represented by pounds. The Fraser
collection (December 4 to 6, 1900) realized about ten times the original
outlay, the mezzotint of the "Sisters Frankland," after Hoppner, by W.
Ward, selling for 290 guineas as against 10 guineas paid for it about
thirty years previously. The H.A. Blyth sale (March 11 to 13, 1901, 346
lots, £21,717: 10s.) of mezzotint portraits was even more remarkable,
and as a collection it was the choicest sold within recent times, the
engravings being mostly in the first state. The record prices were
numerous, and, in many cases, far surpassed the prices which Sir Joshua
Reynolds received for the original pictures; e.g. the exceptionally fine
example of the first state of the "Duchess of Rutland," after Reynolds,
by V. Green, realized 1000 guineas, whereas the artist received only
£150 for the painting itself. Even this unprecedented price for a
mezzotint portrait was exceeded on the 30th of April 1901, when an
example of the first published state of "Mrs Carnac," after Reynolds, by
J.R. Smith, sold for 1160 guineas. At the Louis Huth sale (1905) 83 lots
brought nearly £10,000, Reynolds's "Lady Bampfylde" by T. Watson, first
state before letters, unpublished, fetching 1200 guineas. Such prices as
these and many others which might be quoted are exceptional, but they
were paid for objects of exceptional rarity or quality.

It is not necessary to pursue the chronicle of recent sales, which have
become a feature of every season. It is worth mentioning, however, that
the Holland sale, in June 1908, realized £138,118 (432 lots), a "record"
sum for a collection of pictures mainly by modern artists; and that for
the Rodolphe Kann collection (Paris) of pictures and objects of art,
including 11 magnificent Rembrandts, Messrs Duveen paid £1,000,000 in
1907. In every direction there has been a tendency to increase prices
for really great artistic pieces, even to a sensational extent. The
competition has become acute, largely owing to American and German
acquisitiveness. The demand for the finest works of art of all
descriptions is much greater than the supply. As an illustration of the
magnitude of the art sale business it may be mentioned that the
"turnover" of one firm in London alone has occasionally exceeded
£1,000,000 annually.

  BIBLIOGRAPHY.--The chief compilations dealing with art sales in Great
  Britain are: G. Redford, _Art Sales_ (1888); and W. Roberts,
  _Memorials of Christie's_ (1897); whilst other books containing much
  important matter are W. Buchanan, _Memoirs of Painting_; _The Year's
  Art_ (1880 and each succeeding year); F.S. Robinson, _The
  Connoisseur_; and L. Soullie, _Les Ventes de tableaux, dessins et
  objets d'art au XIX^e siècle_ (chiefly French).




ARTS AND CRAFTS, a comprehensive title for the arts of decorative design
and handicraft--all those which, in association with the mother-craft of
building (or architecture), go to the making of the house beautiful.
Accounts of these will be found under separate headings. "Arts and
crafts" are also associated with the movement generally understood as
the English revival of decorative art, which began about 1875. The title
itself only came into general use when the Arts and Crafts Exhibition
Society was founded, and held its first exhibition at the New Gallery,
London, in the autumn of 1888, since which time arts and crafts
exhibitions have been common all over Great Britain. The idea of forming
a society for the purpose of showing contemporary work in design and
handicraft really arose out of a movement of revolt or protest against
the exclusive view of art encouraged by the Royal Academy exhibitions,
in which oil paintings in gilt frames claimed almost exclusive
attention--sculpture, architecture and the arts of decorative design
being relegated to quite subordinate positions. In 1886, out of a
feeling of discontent among artists as to the inadequacy of the Royal
Academy exhibitions, considered as representing the art of Great
Britain, a demand arose for a national exhibition to include all the
arts of design. One of the points of this demand was for the annual
election of the hanging committee by the whole body of artists. After
many meetings the group representing the arts and crafts (who belonged
to a larger body of artists and craftsmen called the Art-workers' Guild,
founded in 1884),[1] perceiving that the painters, especially the
leading group of a school not hitherto well represented in the Academy
exhibitions, only cherished the hope of forcing certain reforms on the
Academy, and were by no means prepared to lose their chances of
admission to its privileges, still less to run any risk in the
establishment of a really comprehensive national exhibition of art,
decided to organize an exhibition themselves in which artists and
craftsmen might show their productions, so that contemporary work in
decorative art should be displayed to the public on the same footing,
and with the same advantages as had hitherto been monopolized by
pictorial art. For many years previously there had been great activity
in the study and revival in the practice of many of the neglected
decorative handicrafts. Amateur societies and classes were in existence,
like the Home Arts and Industries Association, which had established
village classes in wood-carving, metal work, spinning and weaving,
needlework, pottery and basket-work, and the public interest in
handicraft was steadily growing. The machine production of an industrial
century had laid its iron hands upon what had formerly been the
exclusive province of the handicraftsman, who only lingered on in a few
obscure trades and in forgotten corners of England for the most part.
The ideal of mechanical perfection dominated British workmen, and the
factory system, first by extreme division of labour, and then by the
further specialization of the workman under machine production, left no
room for individual artistic feeling among craftsmen trained and working
under such conditions. The demand of the world-market ruled the
character and quality of production, and to the few who would seek some
humanity, simplicity of construction or artistic feeling in their
domestic decorations and furniture, the only choice was that of the
tradesman or salesman, or a plunge into costly and doubtful experiments
in original design. From the 'forties onward there had been much
research and study of medieval art in England; there had been many able
designers, architects and antiquaries, such as the Pugins and Henry Shaw
(1800-1873) and later William Burges (1827-1881), William Butterfield
(1814-1900) and G.E. Street and others. The school of pre-Raphaelite
painters, by their careful and thorough methods, and their sympathy with
medieval design, were among the first to turn attention to beauty of
design, colour and significance in the accessories of daily life, and
artists like D.G. Rossetti, Ford Madox Brown, and W. Holman Hunt
themselves designed and painted furniture. The most successful and most
practical effort indeed towards the revival of sounder ideas of
construction and workmanship may be said to have arisen out of the work
of this group of artists, and may be traced to the workshop of William
Morris and his associates in Queen Square, London. William Morris, whose
name covers so large a field of artistic as well as literary and social
work, came well equipped to his task of raising the arts of design and
handicraft, of changing the taste of his countrymen from the corrupt and
vulgar ostentation of the Second Empire, and its cheap imitations, which
prevailed in the 'fifties and 'sixties, and of winning them back, for a
time at least, to the massive simplicity of plain oak furniture, or the
delicate beauty of inlays of choice woods, or the charm of painted work,
the richness and frank colour of formal floral and heraldic pattern in
silk textiles and wall-hangings and carpets, the gaiety and freshness of
printed cotton, or the romantic splendour of arras tapestry. Both
William Morris and his artistic comrade and lifelong friend, Edward
Burne-Jones, were no doubt much influenced at the outset by the
imaginative insight, the passionate artistic feeling, and the love of
medieval romance and colour of Dante Gabriel Rossetti, who remains so
remarkable a figure in the great artistic and poetic revival of the
latter half of the 19th century. To William Morris himself, in his
artistic career, it was no small advantage to gain the ear of the
English public first by his poetry. His verse-craft helped his
handicraft, but both lived side by side. The secret of Morris's great
influence in the revival was no doubt to be attributed to his way of
personally mastering the working details and handling of each craft he
took up in turn, as well as to his power of inspiring his helpers and
followers. He was painter, designer, scribe, illuminator, wood-engraver,
dyer, weaver and finally printer and papermaker, and having mastered
these crafts he could effectively direct and criticize the work of
others. His own work and that of Burne-Jones were well known to the
public, and in high favour long before the Arts and Crafts Exhibition
Society was formed, and though largely helped and inspired by the work
of these two artists, the aims and objects of the society rather
represented those of a younger generation, and were in some measure a
fresh development both of the social and the artistic ideas which were
represented by Ruskin, Rossetti and Morris, though the society includes
men of different schools. Other sources of influence might be named,
such as the work of Norman Shaw and Philip Webb in architecture and
decoration, of Lewis Day in surface pattern, and William de Morgan in
pottery. The demand for the acknowledgment of the personality of each
responsible craftsman in a co-operative work was new, and it had direct
bearing upon the social and economic conditions of artistic production.
The principle, too, of regarding the material, object, method and
purpose of a work as essential conditions of its artistic expression,
the form and character of which must always be controlled by such
conditions, had never before been so emphatically stated, though it
practically endorsed the somewhat vague aspirations current for the
unity of beauty with utility. Again, a very notable return to extreme
simplicity of design in furniture and surface decoration may be
remarked; and a certain reserve in the use of colour and ornament, and a
love of abstract forms in decoration generally, which are characteristic
of later taste. Not less remarkable has been the new development in the
design and workmanship of jewelry, gold- and silversmiths' work, and
enamels, with which the names of Alexander Fisher, Henry Wilson, Nelson
Dawson and C.R. Ashbee are associated. Among the arts and crafts of
design which have blossomed into new life in recent years-and there is
hardly one which has not been touched by the new spirit--book-binding
must be named as having attained a fresh and tasteful development
through the work of Mr Cobden-Sanderson and his pupils. The art and
craft of the needle also must not be forgotten, and its progress is a
good criterion of taste in design, choice of colour and treatment. The
work of Mrs Morris, of Miss Burden (sometime instructress at the Royal
School of Art Needlework, which has carried on its work from 1875), of
Miss May Morris, of Miss Una Taylor, of Miss Buckle, of Mrs Walter
Crane, of Mrs Newbery, besides many other skilled needlewomen, has been
frequently exhibited. Good work is often seen in the national
competition works of the students of the English art schools, shown at
South Kensington in July. The increase of late years in these
exhibitions of designs worked out in the actual material for which they
were intended is very remarkable, and is an evidence of the spread of
the arts and crafts movement (fostered no doubt by the increase of
technical schools, especially of the type of the Central School of Arts
and Crafts under the Technical Education Board of the London County
Council), of which it may be said that if it has not turned all British
craftsmen into artists or all British artists into craftsmen, it had
done not a little to expand and socialize the idea of art, and (perhaps
it is not too much to say) has made the tasteful English house with its
furniture and decorations a model for the civilized world.     (W. Cr.)


FOOTNOTE:

  [1] Whose members, comprehending as they do the principal living
    designers, architects, painters and craftsmen of all kinds, have
    played no inconsiderable part in the English revival.




ART SOCIETIES. In banding themselves into societies and associations
artists have always been especially remarkable. The fundamental motive
of such leaguing together is apparent, for, by the establishment of
societies, it becomes possible for the working members of these to hold
exhibitions and thereby to obtain some compensation or reward for their
labours. With the growth of artistic practice and public interest,
however, art societies have been instituted where this primary object is
either absent or is allied to others of more general scope. The
furtherance of a cult and the specializing of work have also given rise
to many new associations in Great Britain, besides the Royal Academy
(see ACADEMY, ROYAL). At the outset, therefore, it will be well to
mention the leading art societies thus described. The (now Royal)
Society of Painters in Water Colours, founded in 1804, and the (now
Royal) Society of British Artists (1823), are typical of those societies
which exist merely for purposes of holding exhibitions and conferring
diplomas of membership. The British Institution (for the encouragement
of British artists) was started in 1806 on a plan formed by Sir Thomas
Bernard; and in the gallery, erected by Alderman Boydell to exhibit the
paintings executed for his edition of Shakespeare, were from time to
time exhibited pictures by the old masters, deceased British artists and
others, till 1867, when the lease of the premises expired. A fund of
£16,200, then in the hands of trustees, had accumulated to £24,610 in
1884. The Artists' Society, formed in 1830, has for its object the
providing of facilities to enable its members to perfect themselves in
their art. To this end there is a good library of works on art, and
abundant opportunities are afforded for general study from the life. In
the furtherance of a cult the Japan Society, devoted to the
encouragement of the study of the arts and industries of Japan, is a
typical example; and the Society of Mezzotint Engravers is
representative of those bodies formed in the interests of particular
groups of workers. One of the remarkable features in the history of art
in Great Britain has been the rapid increase of the artistic rank and
file. Taking the number of exhibitors at the principal London and
provincial exhibitions, it is found that in the period 1885-1900 the
ranks were doubled. At the end of the 19th century it was estimated that
there were quite 7000 practising artists. Coincident with this
astonishing development there has been a corresponding addition of new
art societies and the enlargement of older bodies. For instance, the
membership of the Royal Society of British Artists advanced in the
period mentioned from 80 to 150. Similar extensions can be noted in
other societies, or in such a case as that of the Royal Institute of
Painters in Water Colours, where the membership is limited to 100, it
is to be noticed that more space is given to the works of outsiders. But
the expansion of older exhibiting societies has not proved sufficient.
Portrait painters, pastellists, designers, miniaturists and women
artists have felt the necessity of forming separate coteries.
Interesting though these movements from within may be, the growth of
societies originating in the spirit of altruism associated with such
names as Ruskin and Kyrle is equally instructive. Nearly all these are
the products of the last quarter of the 19th century, and include the
Sunday Society, which in 1896 secured the Sunday opening of the national
museums and galleries in the metropolis.

The specializing of study and work has also given rise to much artistic
endeavour. For a long time archaeology--British and Egyptian--claimed
almost exclusive attention. Latterly the arts of India and Japan have
engaged much notice, and societies have been organized to further their
study. Finally, bands of workers in particular branches of art have felt
the need of clubbing together in order to protect their special
interests. A slight suspicion of trade-unionism is attached to some of
these; but on the whole the establishment of such bodies as the Society
of Illustrators, the Society of Designers, and the Society of Mezzotint
Engravers has been with a view to advancing the public knowledge of the
merits of these branches of artistic enterprise.

EXHIBITING SOCIETIES.--(a) Old Established. These in London are: The
Royal Academy, the Royal Water Colour Society, the Royal Institute of
Painters in Water Colours, the Society of Oil Painters, and the Royal
Society of British Artists. In the provinces, the Birmingham Royal
Society of Artists has been in existence since 1825, and has a life
academy with professors attached. (b) Modern.--In this category are many
which reflect the new spirit which came into artistic life in the last
quarter of the 19th century. The New English Art Club, founded in 1885
as a protest against academic art, achieves its purpose by exhibition
only. The International Society of Painters and Engravers, again,
represents the wider ideas of the 20th century. The Royal Society of
Painter-Etchers and Engravers, consisting of fellows and associates, not
exceeding 150 in all, conserves the interests of a numerous body of
workers, and, in addition to holding exhibitions, confers diplomas (R.E.
and A.R.E.) on the exhibitors of meritorious etchings or engravings. The
Society of Women Artists (formerly the Society of Lady Artists) is
wholly devoted to the display of works by female artists, and in 1891
the Society of Portrait Painters was formed to carry out the object
conveyed in its title. Two associations advance the art of the
miniature-painter, and the Pastel Society, formed in 1898, holds
displays of members' work at the Royal Institute Galleries. In Scotland
there is the Royal Scottish Academy. The Royal Scottish Society of
Painters in Water Colours (Glasgow) grants the title R.S.W. to its
members, and the Society of Scottish Artists (Edinburgh), founded in
1891, has a membership of nearly 500 young artists. Other exhibiting
societies which call for mention are: The Yorkshire Union of Artists
(Leeds), which consolidates many local societies; the Nottingham Society
of Artists, which also encourages drawing from the living model; and the
Liverpool Sketching Club, founded in 1870, which holds an annual
exhibition.

SOCIETIES OF INSTRUCTION AND POPULAR ENCOURAGEMENT.--It is under this
head that the chief evidence of the modern art revival will be found.
First it should be noted that there are very few societies designed for
the artistic improvement of artists. The Artists' Society has already
been mentioned; and the Art Workers' Guild, which meets at Clifford's
Inn Hall, provides meetings, from which the public is excluded, where
profitable discussions take place on questions of craft and design. But,
as a rule, the art society, of which only artists are members, is
organized for exhibition purposes or for the protection of interests.
With regard to those societies of popular and educational intention the
old Society of Arts in the Adelphi, founded in 1754, enjoys a good
record. Numerous lectures on art subjects have from time to time been
given, and in 1887 a scheme was devised by which awards are made to
student-workers in design. The Society for the Encouragement of the Fine
Arts (Conduit Street) has also laboured since its foundation in 1858 to
increase a technical knowledge, its members holding conversazioni at
various picture galleries. The Artists' and Amateurs' Conversazione,
instituted in 1831, which used to meet at the Piccadilly Galleries and
is now defunct, carried out a similar plan. Two other societies, now
obsolete, should be mentioned whose method were directly educational.
The Arundel Society, which for many years promoted the knowledge of art
by copying and publishing important works of ancient masters, issued to
its members on payment of annual subscriptions, was eventually wound up
on the last day of 1897. The Arundel Club, founded in 1904, continues
the aim, but with a wider scope, reproducing works of art rendered
somewhat inaccessible by being in private collections. The International
Chalcographical Society, formed for the study of the early history of
engraving, also did useful work. Another association of painters,
sculptors, architects and engravers, the Graphic Society, ceased on the
29th of October 1890. This was one of the most interesting of societies,
rare works of art being exhibited and discussed at its meetings. A very
active educational body, originated in 1888, namely the Royal Drawing
Society, has for its definite object the teaching of drawing as a means
of education. The methods of instruction are based on the facts that
very young children try to draw before they can write, and that they
have very keen perception and retentive memory. The society aims,
therefore, at using drawing as a means of developing these innate
characteristics of the young, and already nearly 300 important schools
follow out its system. Lord Leighton, Sir John Millais, and Sir Edward
Burne-Jones took an active part in the society's labours. The Art for
Schools Association, founded in 1883, has also done steady work in
endeavouring to provide schools with works of art. These are chiefly
reproductions of standard works of art or of historical and natural
subjects. The wave of enthusiasm aroused by Mr Ruskin's teachings caused
Societies of the Rose to be founded in London, Manchester, Sheffield,
Birmingham, Aberdeen and Glasgow; but some of these eventually ceased
active work, to be revived again, however, by the Ruskin Union, formed
in the year of the great writer's death (1900). Most of these societies
were formed in 1879; but it should not be forgotten that two years
earlier the Kyrle Society was started with the object of bringing the
refining and cheering influences of natural and artistic beauty to the
homes of the people. Under the presidency of Earl Brownlow, the Home
Arts and Industries Association continues a work which was started in
1884, and anticipated much of the present system of technical education.
Voluntary teachers organize classes for working people, at which a
practical knowledge of art handiwork is taught. Training classes for
voluntary teachers are held at the studios at the Albert Hall, as well
as an annual exhibition. An interesting type of society has been
established in Bolton, Lancashire. Under the title of an Arts Guild the
members, numbering over 200, devote themselves to the advancement of
taste in municipal improvements.

SOCIETIES OF SPECIAL STUDY, PRACTICE AND PROTECTION.--Under this head
should be placed those associations which affect a cult, or are composed
of particular workers, or which protect public or private interests.
Perhaps the chief of the first kind is the Japan Society, which, since
its inception in 1892, has been joined by over 1350 members interested
in matters relating to Japanese art and industries. The Dürer Society,
formed in 1897, has for its main object the reproduction of works by
Albrecht Dürer, and his German and Italian contemporaries. The Vasari
Society, founded in 1905, works in harmony with the Arundel Club and the
Dürer Society, reproducing drawings by the Old Masters. In this category
of special study may also be placed the Society for the Encouragement
and Preservation of Indian Art, the Egypt Exploration Fund, and the
Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies. Of the societies of
special practice it has already been noticed that some are purely
exhibiting associations, such as the Portrait Painters, the Pastel
Society, and the two miniature bodies. The formation of the Society of
Mezzotint Engravers in 1898 is an example of the leaguing together of
particular workers to call attention to their interests. Original and
translator engravers, together with collectors and connoisseurs,
comprise the membership. The decaying art of wood engraving is also
fostered by the International Society of Wood Engravers, and the Society
of Designers, founded in 1896, safeguards the interests of professional
designers for applied art, without holding exhibitions. Special practice
and protection are also considered by the Society of Illustrators,
composed of artists who work in black and white for the illustrated
press. This society was inaugurated in 1894, and fifteen of the members
of the committee must be active workers in illustration. As an instance
of the tendency of art workers to combine, the Society of Art Masters is
a good illustration. This is an association of teachers of art schools,
controlled by the art branch of the Board of Education, and has a
membership of over 300. Good work of another kind occupies the National
Trust for Places of Historic Interest or Natural Beauty. The council of
the Trust includes representatives of such bodies as the National
Gallery, the Royal Academy, the Royal Society of Painters in Water
Colours, the Society of Antiquaries, the Royal Institute of British
Architects, the Universities, Kyrle Society, Society for the Protection
of Ancient Buildings and the Selborne Society.

FOREIGN ART SOCIETIES.--The following are brief particulars of the chief
art societies elsewhere than in Great Britain:--

  AUSTRIA.--Vienna, _Vereinigung bildender Künstler Österreichs_
  (Society of Austrian Painters) and the _Wiener Künstlergenossenschaft_
  (Association of Viennese Artists).

  BELGIUM.--Brussels, _Société des beaux-arts_, the _Libre Esthétique_,
  _Société des aquarellistes et pastellistes_, _Société royale beige des
  aquarellistes_, and numerous private societies (_cercles_) in
  Brussels, Antwerp, Liége, Ghent and other cities.

  FRANCE.--Paris, the _Société des artistes français_ (The Salon),
  _Société nationale des beaux-arts_ (The New Salon), _Société des
  aquarellistes_. Exhibiting societies are the _Société des artistes
  indépendants_, _Société des orientalistes_, and _Salon des
  pastellistes_.

  GERMANY.--The small local societies are affiliated to one large parent
  body, the _Deutsche Künstlergenossenschaft_, in Berlin under the
  presidency of Anton von Werner. The _Deutsche Illustratoren-verband_
  watches over the interests of illustrators and designers. In Münich
  there are two bodies--the _Künstlergenossenschaft_ (old society of
  artists), holding its exhibitions in the Glaspalast, and the _Verein
  bildender Künstler_, the Secessionists.

  ITALY.--Four exhibiting societies: Rome, _Società in Arte Libertas_,
  _Scuola degli Aquarellisti_; Milan, _Famiglia Artistica_, _Società
  degli Artiste_; Florence, _Circolo Artistico_; Naples, _Instituti di
  Belli Arti._

  PORTUGAL.--_Sociedade promotora das Bellas-Artes_ and _Gremio
  Artistico_.

  RUSSIA.--There is no exclusively art society of importance, but there
  is at St Petersburg the _Société littéraire et artistique_.

  SPAIN.--Madrid, _L'Association des artistes espagnols_.

  SWEDEN.--Stockholm, _Svenska Konstuareruas Forening_.

  SWITZERLAND.--Berne, _La Société des peintres et sculpteurs suisses_.

  UNITED STATES.--New York, National Academy of Design, American Water
  Color Society, and National Sculpture Society. (A. C. R. C.)




ART TEACHING. It is the tendency of all departments of the human mind to
outgrow their original limits. Traditions of teaching are long-lived,
especially in art, and new ideas only slowly displace the old, so that
art teaching as a whole is seldom abreast of the ideas and practice of
the more advanced artists. The old academic system adapted to the
methods and aims in art in the 18th century, which has been carried on
in the principal art schools of Great Britain with but slight changes of
method, consisted chiefly of a course of drawing from casts of antique
statues in outline, and in light and shade without backgrounds, of
anatomical drawings, perspective, and drawing and painting from the
living model. Such a training seems to be more or less a response to
Lessing's definition of painting as "the imitation of solid bodies upon
a plane surface." It seems to have been influenced more by the
sculptor's art than any other. Indeed, the academic teaching from the
time of the Italian Renaissance was no doubt principally derived from
the study of antique sculpture; the proportions of the figure, the
style, pose, and sentiment being all taken from Graeco-Roman and Roman
sculptures, discovered so abundantly in Italy from the 16th century
onwards. As British ideas of art were principally derived from Italy,
British academics endeavoured to follow the methods of teaching in vogue
there in later times, and so the art student in Great Britain has had
his intention and efforts directed almost exclusively to the
representations of the abstract human form in abstract relief.
Traditions in art, however, may sometimes prove helpful and beneficial,
and preservative of beauty and character, as in the case of certain
decorative and constructive arts and handicrafts in common use, such as
those of the rural waggon-maker and wheelwright, and horse-harness
maker.

Some schools of painting, sculpture and architecture have preserved fine
and noble traditions which yet allowed for individuality. Such
traditions may be said to have been characteristic of the art of the
middle ages. It often happens, too, when many streams of artistic
influence meet, there may be a certain domination or ascendancy of the
traditions of one art over the others, which is injurious in its effects
on those arts and diverts them from their true path. The domination of
individualistic painting and sculpture over the arts of design during
the last century or two is a case in point.

With the awakening of interest in industrial art--sharply separated by
pedantic classification from fine art--which began in England about the
middle of the 19th century, schools of design were established which
included more varied studies. Even as early as 1836 a government grant
was made towards the opening of public galleries and the establishment
of a normal school of design with a museum and lectures, and in 1837 the
first school of design was opened at Somerset House. In 1840 grants were
made to establish schools of the same kind in provincial towns, such as
Manchester, Birmingham, Glasgow, Leeds and Paisley. The names of G.
Wallis in 1847, and Ambrose Poynter in 1850, are associated with schemes
of art instruction adopted in the government art schools, and the year
1851, the year of the Great Exhibition, was also marked by the first
public exhibition of students' works, and the first institution of
prizes and scholarships. In 1852 "the Department of Practical Art" was
constituted, and a museum of objects collected at Marlborough House
which afterwards formed the nucleus of the future museum at South
Kensington. In 1853 "the Department of Science and Art" was established,
and in 1857, under the auspices of Henry Cole, the offices of the
department and the National Art Training School were removed from
Marlborough House to South Kensington. Classes for instruction in
various crafts had been carried on both at Somerset House and
Marlborough House, and the whole object of the government schools of
design was to give an artistic training to the designer and craftsman,
so that he could carry back to his trade or craft improved taste and
skill. The schools, however, became largely filled by students of
another type--leisured amateurs who sought to acquire some artistic
accomplishment, and even in the case of genuine designers and craftsmen
who developed pictorial skill in their studies, the attraction and
superior social distinction and possibility of superior commercial value
accruing to the career of a painter of easel pictures diverted the
schools from their original purpose.

For some time after the removal to South Kensington, during the progress
of the new buildings, and under the direction of Godfrey Sykes and F.W.
Moody, practical decorative work both in modelling and painting was
carried out in the National Art Training School; but on the completion
of these works, the school relapsed into a more or less academic school
on the ordinary lines, and was regarded chiefly as a school for the
training of art teachers and masters who were required to pass through
certain stereotyped courses and execute a certain series of drawings in
order to obtain their certificates. Thus model-drawing, freehand
outline, plant-drawing in outline, outline from the cast, light and
shade from the cast, drawing of the antique figure, still life,
anatomical drawings, drawing and painting from the life, ornamental
design, historic studies of ornament, perspective and geometry, were all
taken up in a cut-and-dried way, as isolated studies, and with a view
solely to obtaining the certificate or passing an examination. This
theoretic kind of training, though still in force, and though it
enabled the department to turn out certificated teachers for the
schools of the country of a certain standard, and to give to students a
general theoretic idea of art, has been found wanting, since, in
practice, when the student in design leaves his school and desires to
take up practical work as a designer or craftsman, he requires _special_
knowledge, and specialized skill in design for his work to be of use;
and though he may be able to impart to others what he himself has
laboriously acquired, the theoretic and general character of his
training proves of little or no use, face to face with the ever shifting
and changing demands of the modern manufacturer and the modern market.

A growing conviction of the inadequacy of the schools of the Science and
Art Department (now the Board of Education), considered as training
grounds for practical designers and craftsmen, led to the establishment
of new technical schools in the principal towns of Great Britain. The
circumstance of certain large sums, diverted from their original purpose
of compensation to brewers, being available for educational purposes and
at the disposal of the county councils and municipal bodies, provided
the means for the building and equipment of these new technical schools,
which in many cases are under the same roof as the art school in the
provincial towns, and, since the Education Act of 1902, are generally
rate-supported. The art schools formerly managed by private committees
and supported by private donors, assisted by the government grants, are
now, in the principal industrial towns of Great Britain, taken over by
the municipality. Birmingham is singularly well organized in this
respect, and its art school has long held a leading position. The school
is well housed in a new building with class-rooms with every appliance,
not only for the drawing, designing and modelling side, but also for the
practice of artistic handicrafts such as metal repoussé, enamelling,
wood-carving, embroidery, &c. The municipality have also established a
jewelry school, so as to associate the practical study of art with local
industry. Manchester and other cities are also equipped with
well-organized art schools.

The important change involved in the incorporation of the Science and
Art Department with the Board of Education also led to a reorganization
of the Royal College of Art. A special council of advice on art matters
was appointed, consisting of representatives of painting, sculpture,
architecture and design, who deal with the Royal College of Art, and
appoint the professors who control the teaching in the classes for
architecture, design and handicraft, decorative painting and sculpture,
modelling and carving. The council decide upon the curriculum, and
examine and criticize the work of the college from time to time. They
also advise the board in regard to the syllabus issued to the art
schools of the country, and act as referees in regard to purchases for
the museum.

Of other institutions for the teaching of art, the following may be
named: The Royal Drawing Society of Great Britain and Ireland, which was
formed principally to promote the teaching of drawing in schools as a
means of education. The system therein adopted differs from the ordinary
drawing courses, and favours the use of the brush. Brushwork has
generally been adopted for elementary work, too, by London County
Council teachers, drawing being now a compulsory subject. Remarkable
results have been obtained by the Alma Road Council schools in the
teaching of boys from eight to twelve by giving them spaces to fill with
given forms--leaf shapes--from which patterns are constructed to fill
the spaces, brush and water-colour being the means employed. At the
Royal Female School of Art in Queen Square, London, classes in drawing
and painting from life are held, and decorative design is also studied.
There are also the Royal School of Art Needlework and the School of Art
Wood-carving, all aided by the London County Council. The City and
Guilds of London Institute has two departments for what is termed
"applied" art, one at the South London School of Technical Art, and the
other at the Art Department in the Technical College, Finsbury. The
Slade School of Drawing, Painting and Sculpture, University College,
Gower Street, confines itself to drawing and painting from the antique
and life, and exercise in pictorial composition. There are also lectures
on anatomy and perspective. The Slade professorships at Oxford and
Cambridge universities are concerned with the teaching and literature of
art, but they do not concern themselves with the practice. There are
also, in addition to the schools of art named and those in connexion
with the Board of Education and the London County Council in the various
districts of London, many and various private clubs and schools, such as
the Langham and "Heatherley's," chiefly concerned in encouraging drawing
and painting from the life, and for the study of art from the pictorial
point of view, or for the preparation of candidates for the Royal
Academy or other schools. The polytechnics and technical institutes also
provide instruction in a great variety of artistic crafts.

A general survey, therefore, of the various institutions which are
established for the teaching of art in Great Britain gives the
impression that the study of art is not neglected, although, perhaps,
further inquiry might show that, compared with the great educational
establishments, the proportion is not excessive. Now that the Education
Act 1902 has given the county councils control of elementary and
secondary education and charged them with the task of promoting the
co-ordination of all forms of education in consultation with the Board
of Education, it is probable that an elementary scholar who shows
artistic ability will be enabled to pass on from the elementary classes
in one school to the higher art and technical schools, secondary and
advanced, without retracing his steps, thus escaping the depression of
going over old ground.

The general movement of revival of interest in the arts of decorative
design and the allied handicrafts, with the desire to re-establish their
influence in art-teaching, has been due to many causes, among which the
work of the Arts and Crafts Exhibition Society may count as important.
From the leading members of this body the London County Council
Technical Educational Board, when it was face to face with the problem
of organizing its new schools and its technical classes, sought advice
and aid. Success has attended their schools, especially the Central
School of Arts and Crafts at Morley Hall, Regent Street. The object of
the school is to provide the craftsman in the various branches of
decorative design with such means of improving his taste and skill as
the workshop does not afford. It does not concern itself with the
amateur or with theoretic drawing. The main difference in principle
adopted in this school in the teaching of design is the absence of
teaching design _apart from handicraft._ It is considered that a
craftsman thoroughly acquainted with the natural capacities of his
material and strictly understanding the conditions of his work, would be
able, if he had any feeling or invention, to design appropriately in
that material, and no designing can be good apart from a knowledge of
the material in which it is intended to be carried out. It should be
remembered, too, that graphic skill in representing the appearances of
natural objects is one sort of skill, and the executive skill of the
craftsman in working out his design, say in wood or metal, is quite
another. It follows that the works of drawing or design made by the
craftsman would be of quite a different character from a pictorial
drawing, and might be quite simple and abstract, while clear and
accurate. The training for the pictorial artist and for the craftsman
would, therefore, naturally be different.

The character of the art-teaching adopted in any country must of course
depend upon the dominant conception of art and its function and purpose.
If we regard it as an idle accomplishment for the leisured few, its
methods will be amateurish and superficial. If we regard art as an
important factor in education, as a language of the intelligence, as an
indispensable companion to literature, we shall favour systematic study
and a training in the power of direct expression by means of line. We
shall value the symbolic drawing of early civilizations like the
Egyptian, and symbolic art generally, and in the history of decorative
art we shall find the true accompaniment and illustration of human
history itself. From this point of view we shall value the acquisition
of the power of drawing for the purpose of presenting and explaining the
facts and forms of nature. Drawing will be the most direct means at the
command of the teacher to explain, to expound, to demonstrate where mere
words are not sufficiently definite or explicit. Drawing in this sense
is taking a more important place in education, especially in primary
education, though there is no need for it to stop there, and one feels
it may be destined to take a more important position both as a training
for the eye and hand and an aid to the teacher. Then, again, we may
regard art more from its social aspect as an essential accompaniment of
human life, not only for its illustrative and depicting powers, but also
and no less for its pleasure-giving properties, its power of awakening
and stimulating the observation and sympathy with the moods of nature,
its power of touching the emotions, and above all of appealing to our
sense of beauty. We shall regard the study of art from this point of
view as the greatest civilizer, the most permeating of social and human
forces. Such ideas as these, shared no doubt by all who take pleasure
and interest in art, or feel it to be an important element in their
lives, are crossed and often obscured by a multitude of mundane
considerations, and it is probably out of the struggle for ascendancy
between these that our systems of art teaching are evolved. There is the
demand of the right to live on the part of the artist and the teacher of
art. There is the demand on the part of the manufacturer and salesman
for such art as will help him to dispose of his goods. In the present
commercial rivalry between nations this latter demand is brought into
prominent relief, and art is apt to be made a minister, or perhaps a
slave to the market. These are but accidental relationships with art.
All who care for art value it as a means of expression, and for the
pleasure and beauty it infuses into all it touches, or as essential and
inseparable from life itself. Seeing then the importance of art from any
point of view, individual, social, commercial, intellectual, emotional,
economic, it should be important to us in our systems of art-teaching
not to lose sight of the end in arranging the means--not to allow our
teaching to be dominated by either dilettantism or commercialism,
neither to be feeble for want of technical skill, nor to sacrifice
everything to technique. The true object of art-teaching is very much
like that of all education--to inform the mind, while you give skill to
the hand--not to impose certain rigid rules, or fixed recipes and
methods of work, but while giving instruction in definite methods and
the use of materials, to allow for the individual development of the
student and enable him to acquire the power to express himself through
different media without forgetting the grammar and alphabet of design.
Practice may vary, but principles remain, and there is a certain logic
in art, as well as in reasoning. All art is conditioned in the mode of
its expression by its material, and even the most individual kind of art
has a convention of its own by the very necessities and means of its
existence. Methods of expression, conventions alter as each artist, each
age seeks some new interpretation of nature and the imagination--the
well-springs of artistic life, and from these reviving streams
continually flow new harmonies, new inventions and recombinations,
taking form and colour according to the temperaments which give them
birth.     (W. Cr.)




ARTUSI, GIOVANNI MARIA, Italian composer and musical theorist, was born
in Bologna, and died on the 18th of August 1613. He was _canonico
regulare_ at the church of San Salvatore in his native city. He is
chiefly famous in the history of music for his attacks upon Monteverde
(q.v.) embodied in his _L'Artusi overo d. imp._ (1600). For an
exhaustive explanation and a translation of excerpts from these the
studies of Dr G. Vogel and O. Riemann should be consulted. These will be
found in the _Vierteljahrsschrift für Musikwissenschaft_, Leipzig, vol.
3, pp. 326, 380 and 426.




ARU ISLANDS (Dutch _Aroe_), a group in the residency of Amboyna, Dutch
East Indies; between 5° 18' and 7° 5' S., and 134° and 135° E.; the
member nearest to the south-west coast of New Guinea lying about 70 m.
from it. The larger islands (Wokan, Kobrur, Maikor and Trangan), and
certain of the lesser ones, are regarded by the Malays as one land mass
which they call _tana besar_ ("great land"). This is justified inasmuch
as its parts are only isolated by narrow creeks of curious form, having
the character of rivers. The smaller islands number some eighty; the
total land area is 3244 sq. m.; and the population about 22,000. The
islands are low, but it is only on the coast that the ground is swampy.
The principal formation is coralline limestone; the eastern coast is
defended by coral reefs, and the neighbouring sea (extending as far as
New Guinea, and thus demonstrating a physical connexion with that land)
is shallow, and abounds in coral in full growth. A large part of the
surface is covered with virgin forest, consisting of screw-pines, palm
trees, tree ferns, canariums, &c. The fauna is altogether Papuan. The
natives are also Papuans, but of mixed blood. They are divided into two
confederations, the Uli-luna and the Uli-sawa, which are hostile to each
other. The houses are remarkable as being built on piles sunk in the
solid rock and having two rooms, the one surrounding the other. The
people are in manners complete savages. The natives are governed by
rajas (_orang kajas_), the Dutch government being represented by a
_posthouder._ In the interior is said to exist a tribe--the
Korongoeis--with white skins and fair hair, but it has never been seen
by travellers. A few villages are nominally Christian, and the Malays
have introduced Mahommedanism, but most of the natives have no religion.
Dobbo, on a small western island, is the chief place; its resident
population is reinforced annually, at the time of the west monsoon, by
traders from that quarter, who deal in the tripang, pearl shell,
tortoise-shell, and other produce of the islands.




ARUNDEL, EARLDOM OF. This historic dignity, the premier earldom of
England, is popularly but erroneously supposed to be annexed to the
possession of Arundel Castle. Norman earls were earls of counties,
though sometimes styled from their chief residence or from the county
town, and Mr J.H. Round has shown that the earldom of "Arundel" was
really that of Sussex. Its origin was the grant by Henry I. to his
second wife, in dower, of the forfeited "honour" of Arundel, of which
the castle was the head, and which comprised a large portion of Sussex.
After his death she married William "de Albini" (i.e. d'Aubigny), who
from about the year 1141 is variously styled earl of Sussex, of
Chichester, or of Arundel, or even Earl William "de Albini." His first
known appearance as earl is at Christmas 1141, and it has been
ascertained that, after acquiring the castle by marriage, he had not
thereby become an earl. Henry II., on his accession, "gave" him the
castle and honour of Arundel, in fee, together with "the third penny of
the pleas of Sussex, of which he is earl." His male line of heirs became
extinct on the death of Hugh "de Albini," earl of Arundel, in 1243, who
had four sisters and co-heirs. In the partition of his estates, the
castle and honour of Arundel were assigned to his second sister's son,
John Fitzalan of a Breton house, from which sprang also the royal house
of Stuart. It is proved, however, by record evidence, that neither John
nor his son and successor were ever earls; but from about the end of
1289, when his grandson Richard came of age, he is styled earl of
Arundel. Richard's son Edmund was forfeited and beheaded in 1326, and
Arundel was out of possession of the family till 1331, when his son was
restored, and regained the castle and also the earldom by separate
grants. Both were again lost in 1397 on his son being beheaded and
attainted. But the latter's son was restored to both the earldom and the
estates by Henry IV. in 1400. He died without issue in 1415.

The castle and estates now passed to the late earl's cousin and
heir-male under a family entail, but the representation in blood of the
late earl passed to his sisters and co-heirs, of whom the eldest had
married Thomas Mowbray, duke of Norfolk. The descent of the earldom
remained in doubt, till the heir-male's son and heir successfully
claimed it in 1433, in virtue of his tenure of the castle, alleging that
it was "a dignity or name united and annexed to the castle and lordship
of Arundel for time whereof memory of man was not to the contrary." His
claim was opposed on behalf of the Mowbrays, and the allegation on which
it was based is discussed and refuted at great length in the _Lords'
Reports on the Dignity of a Peer_ (i. 404-429). In the descendants of
his brother the earldom remained vested till 1580, when the last
Fitzalan earl died, leaving as his sole heir his daughter's son Philip
Howard, whose father Thomas, duke of Norfolk, had been beheaded and
attainted in 1572.

Philip, who was through his father senior representative of the earls of
Arundel down to 1415, and through his mother sole representative of the
subsequent earls, was summoned to parliament as earl in January 1581,
but was attainted in 1589. His son Thomas was restored to the earldom
and certain other honours in 1604, and, in 1627, obtained an act of
parliament "concerning the title, name and dignity of Earl of Arundel,
and for the annexing of the Castle, Honour, Manor and Lordship of
Arundel ... with the titles and dignities of the Baronies of Fitzalan,
Clun and Oswaldestre, and Maltravers, ... to the same title, name and
dignity of Earl of Arundel." This act, which was based on the earl's
allegation that the title had been "invariably used and enjoyed" by the
owners of the castle, "and by reason of the said inheritance and
seisin," has been much discussed, especially in the _Lords' Reports_ (i.
430-434). There is no doubt that the earl's object was to entail the
earldom and the castle strictly on a certain line of heirs, and this was
effected by elaborate remainders (passing over the Howards, earls of
Suffolk). It is under this act of parliament that the earldom has been
held ever since, and that it passed with the castle in 1777 to the
heir-male of the Howards, although the representation in blood then
passed to heirs general. Thus the castle and the earldom cannot be
alienated from the line of heirs on whom it is entailed by the act of
1627; while the heirship in blood of the earlier earls (to 1415) is
vested in Lords Mowbray and Petre and the Baroness Berkeley, and that of
the later earls (to 1777) in Lords Mowbray and Petre.

The precedence of the earldom was challenged in 1446 by Thomas
Courtenay, earl of Devon, owing to the question as to its descent spoken
of above, but the king in council confirmed to the earl the precedence
of his ancestors "by reason of the Castle, Honour and Lordship of
Arundel." In the act of 1627 the "places" and "pre-eminences" belonging
to the earldom were secured to it. It would appear, however, that the
decision of the dispute with the earl of Devon in 1446 restricts that
precedency to such as the earl's ancestors had enjoyed, if indeed it
goes farther than to guarantee his precedence over the earl of Devon.
But as there is no other existing earldom older than that of Shrewsbury
(1442), the present position of Arundel as the premier earldom is beyond
dispute.

  See _Lords' Reports on the Dignity of a Peer_; Dugdale's _Baronage_;
  Tierney's _History of Arundel_; G.E. C[okayne]'s _Complete Peerage_;
  Round's _Geoffrey de Mandeville_; Pike's _Constitutional History of
  the House of Lords_.     (J. H. R.)




ARUNDEL, EARLS OF. According to Cokayne (_Complete Peerage_, i. p. 138,
note a) there is an old Sussex tradition to the effect that

  "Since William rose and Harold fell
   There have been earls of Arundel."

This, he adds, "is the case if for 'of' we read 'at.'" The questions
involved in this distinction are discussed in the preceding article on
the earldom of Arundel, now held by the duke of Norfolk. The present
article is confined to a biographical sketch of the more conspicuous
earls of Arundel, first in the Fitzalan line, and then in the Howard
line.

RICHARD FITZALAN (1267-1302), earl of Arundel, was a son of John, lord
of Arundel (1246-1272), and a grandson of another John, lord of Arundel,
Clun and Oswaldestre (Oswestry), who took a prominent, if somewhat
wavering, part in the troubles during the reign of Henry III., and who
died in November 1267. Richard, who was called earl of Arundel about
1289, fought for Edward I. in France and in Scotland, and died on the
9th of March 1302.

He was succeeded by his son, EDMUND (1285-1326), who married Alice,
sister of John, earl de Warenne. A bitter enemy of Piers Gaveston,
Arundel was one of the ordainers appointed in 1310; he declined to march
with Edward II. to Bannockburn, and after the king's humiliation he was
closely associated with Thomas, earl of Lancaster, until about 1321,
when he became connected with the Despensers and sided with the king. He
was faithful to Edward to the last, and was executed at Hereford by the
partisans of Queen Isabella on the 17th of November 1326.

His son, RICHARD (c. 1307-1376), who obtained his father's earldom and
lands in 1331, was a soldier of renown and a faithful servant of Edward
III. He was present at the battle of Sluys and at the siege of Tournai
in 1340; he led one of the divisions of the English army at Creçy and
took part in the siege of Calais; and he fought in the naval battle with
the Spaniards off Winchelsea in August 1350. Moreover, he was often
employed by Edward on diplomatic business. Soon after 1347 Arundel
inherited the estates of his uncle John, earl de Warenne, and in 1361 he
assumed the title of earl de Warenne or earl of Surrey. He was regent of
England in 1355, and died on the 24th of January 1376, leaving three
sons, the youngest of whom, Thomas, became archbishop of Canterbury.

Richard's eldest son, RICHARD, earl of Arundel and Surrey (c.
1346-1397), was a member of the royal council during the minority of
Richard II., and about 1381 was made one of the young king's governors.
As admiral of the west and south he saw a good deal of service on the
sea, but without earning any marked distinction except in 1387 when he
gained a victory over the French and their allies off Margate. About
1385 the earl joined the baronial party led by the king's uncle, Thomas
of Woodstock, duke of Gloucester, and in 1386 was a member of the
commission appointed to regulate the kingdom and the royal household.
Then came Richard's rash but futile attempt to arrest Arundel, which was
the signal for the outbreak of hostilities. The Gloucester faction
quickly gained the upper hand, and the earl was one, and perhaps the
most bitter, of the lords appellant. He was again a member of the royal
council, and was involved in a quarrel with John of Gaunt, duke of
Lancaster, whom he accused in the parliament of 1394. After a personal
altercation with the king at Westminster in the same year Arundel
underwent a short imprisonment, and in 1397 came the final episode of
his life. Suspicious of Richard he refused the royal invitation to a
banquet, but his party had broken up, and he was persuaded by his
brother, Thomas Arundel, archbishop of Canterbury, to surrender himself
and to trust to the king's clemency. At once he was tried, was attainted
and sentenced to death, and, bearing himself with great intrepidity, was
beheaded on the 21st of September 1397. He was twice married and had
three sons and four daughters. The earl founded a hospital at Arundel,
and his tomb in the church of the Augustinian Friars, Broad Street,
London, was long a place of pilgrimage.

His only surviving son, THOMAS (1381-1415), was a ward of John Holand,
duke of Exeter, from whose keeping he escaped about 1398 and joined his
uncle, Archbishop Thomas Arundel, at Utrecht, returning to England with
Henry of Lancaster, afterwards King Henry IV., in 1399. After Henry's
coronation he was restored to his father's titles and estates, and was
employed in fighting against various rebels in Wales and in the north of
England. Having left the side of his uncle, the archbishop, Arundel
joined the party of the Beauforts, and was one of the leaders of the
English army which went to France in 1411; then after a period of
retirement he became lord treasurer on the accession of Henry V. From
the siege of Harfleur he returned ill to England and died on the 13th of
October 1415. His wife was Beatrix (d. 1439), a natural daughter of John
I., king of Portugal, but he left no children, and the lordship of
Arundel passed to a kinsman, JOHN FITZALAN, Lord Maltravers (1385-1421),
who was summoned as earl of Arundel in 1416.

John's son, JOHN (1408-1435), did not secure the earldom until 1433,
when as the "English Achilles" he had already won great distinction in
the French wars. He was created duke of Touraine, and continued to serve
Henry VI. in the field until his death at Beauvais from the effects of a
wound on the 12th of June 1435. The earl's only son, Humphrey, died in
April 1438, when the earldom passed to John's brother, WILLIAM
(1417-1488).

HENRY FITZALAN, 12th earl of Arundel (c. 1517-1580), son of William,
11th earl, by Anne, daughter of Henry Percy, 4th earl of
Northumberland, was born about 1517. He entered King Henry's household,
attending the latter to Calais in 1532. In 1533 he was summoned to
parliament in his father's barony of Maltravers, and in 1540 he was made
deputy of Calais, where his vigorous administration was much praised. He
returned to England in April 1544 after the death of his father, and was
made a knight of the Garter. In July of the same year he commanded with
Suffolk the English expedition to France as lord marshal, and besieged
and took Boulogne. On his return to England he was made lord
chamberlain, an office which he retained after the accession in 1547 of
Edward VI., at whose coronation he acted as high constable. He was one
of the twelve counsellors nominated in Henry VIII.'s will to assist the
executors, but he had little power during the protectorship of Somerset
or the ascendancy of Warwick (afterwards duke of Northumberland), and in
1550 by the latter's device he was accused of embezzlement, removed from
the council, confined to his house, and fined £12,000--£8000 of this sum
being afterwards remitted and the charges never being proved.
Subsequently he allied himself with Somerset, and was implicated in 1551
in the latter's plot against Northumberland, being imprisoned in the
Tower in November. On the 3rd of December 1552, though he had never been
brought to trial, he signed a submission and confession before the privy
council, and was liberated after having been again heavily fined. As
Edward's reign drew to its close, Arundel's support was desired by
Northumberland to further his designs on the throne for his family, and
he was accordingly reinstated in the council and discharged of his fine.
In June 1553 he opposed Edward's "device" for the succession, which
passed over his sisters Mary and Elizabeth as illegitimate, and left the
crown to the children of the duchess of Suffolk, and alone of the
council refused the "engagement" to support it, though he signed the
letters patent. On the death of Edward (July 6, 1553) he ostensibly
joined in furthering the duke's plans, but secretly took measures to
destroy them, and according to some accounts sent a letter to Mary the
same evening informing her of Edward's death and advising her to retreat
to a place of security. Meanwhile he continued to attend the meetings of
the council, signed the letter to Mary declaring her illegitimacy and
Lady Jane Grey's right to the throne, accompanied Northumberland to
announce to Jane her accession, and urged Northumberland to leave London
and place himself at the head of the forces to attack Mary, wishing him
God-speed on his departure. In Northumberland's absence, he gained over
his fellow-councillors, and having succeeded with them in getting out of
the Tower, called an assembly of the corporation and chief men of the
city, denounced Northumberland, and had Mary proclaimed queen,
subsequently riding off to join her with the Great Seal at Framlingham.
On the 20th of July he secured Northumberland at Cambridge, and returned
in triumph with Mary to London on the 3rd of August, riding before her
with the sword of state. He was now made a privy councillor and lord
steward, and was granted several favours and privileges, acting as high
constable at the coronation, and obtaining the right to create sixty
knights. He took a prominent part in various public acts of the reign,
was a commissioner to treat for the queen's marriage, presided at the
trial of the duke of Suffolk, assisted in suppressing Wyatt's rebellion
in 1554, was despatched on foreign missions, and in September 1555
accompanied Philip to Brussels. The same year he received, together with
other persons, a charter under the name of the Merchant Adventurers of
England, for the discovery of unknown lands, and was made high steward
of Oxford University, being chosen chancellor in 1559, but resigning his
office in the same year. In 1557, on the prospect of the war with
France, he was appointed lieutenant-general of the forces for the
defence of the country, and in 1558 attended the conference at the abbey
of Cercamp for the negotiation of a peace. He returned to England on the
death of Mary in November 1558, and is described to Philip II. at that
time as "going about in high glee, very smart" and with hopes of
marrying the queen, but as "flighty" and of "small ability." He was
reinstated in all his offices by Elizabeth, served as high constable at
her coronation, and was visited several times by the queen at Nonsuch in
Surrey. As a Roman Catholic he violently opposed the arrest of his
co-religionists and the war with Scotland, and in 1560 came to blows
with Lord Clinton in the queen's presence on a dispute arising on those
questions. He incurred the queen's displeasure in 1562 by holding a
meeting at his house during her illness to consider the question of the
succession and promote the claims of Lady Catherine Grey. In 1564, being
suspected of intrigues against the government, he was dismissed from the
lord-stewardship and confined to his house, but was restored to favour
in December. In March 1566 he went to Padua, but being summoned back by
the queen he returned to London accompanied by a large cavalcade on the
17th of April 1567. Next year he served on the commission of inquiry
into the charges against Mary, queen of Scots. Subsequently he furthered
the marriage of Mary with the duke of Norfolk, his son-in-law, together
with the restoration of the Roman Catholic religion and government, and
deposition of Elizabeth, in collusion with Spain. He made use of the
incident in 1568, of the seizure of treasure at Southampton intended for
Philip, as a means of effecting Cecil's overthrow, and urged upon the
Spanish government the stoppage of trade. He is described in 1569 to
Philip as having "good intentions," "whilst benefiting himself as he was
very needy." In January he alarmed Elizabeth by communicating to her a
supposed Spanish project for aiding Mary and replacing her on her
throne, and put before the queen in writing his own objections to the
adoption of extreme measures against her. In June he received with
Norfolk and Lumley 6000 crowns from Philip. In September, on the
discovery of Norfolk's plot, he was arrested, but not having committed
himself sufficiently to incur the charge of treason in the northern
rebellion he escaped punishment, was released in March 1570, and was
recalled by Leicester to the council with the aim of embarrassing Cecil.
He again renewed his treasonable intrigues, which were at length to some
extent exposed by the discovery of the Ridolfi plot in September 1571.
He was once more arrested, and not liberated till December 1572 after
Norfolk's execution. He died on the 24th of February 1580, and was
buried in the chapel at Arundel, where a monument was erected to his
memory.

He married (1) Catherine, daughter of Thomas Grey, 2nd marquess of
Dorset, by whom he had Henry, who predeceased him, and two daughters, of
whom Mary married Thomas Howard, 4th duke of Norfolk; and (2) Mary,
daughter of Sir John Arundell and dowager countess of Sussex, by whom he
had no children. Arundel was the last earl of his family, the title at
his death passing through his daughter Mary to the Howards.

  AUTHORITIES.--MS. Life by a contemporary in _Royal MSS._, British
  Museum, 17 A ix., printed with notes in _Gent. Mag._ (1833)(ii.), pp.
  11, 118, 210, 490; M.A. Tierney, _Hist. of Arundel_, p. 319;
  _Chronicle of Queen Jane_ (Camden Soc. 1850); _Literary Remains of
  Edward VI._ (Roxburghe Club, 1857); J. Nichols, _Progresses of Queen
  Elizabeth_ (1823), i. 74; Wood, _Fasti Oxon._ (Bliss), i. 153, 156;
  _Cal. State Papers, Simancas_, i. 18, ii. 152, &c., _Notes and
  Queries_, 2 Ser. iv. 84, &c.

PHILIP HOWARD, 1st earl[1] of Arundel (1557-1595), eldest son of Thomas
Howard, 4th duke of Norfolk, executed for high treason in 1572, and of
Lady Mary, daughter and heiress of Henry Fitzalan, 12th earl of Arundel,
was born on the 28th of June 1557. He was married in 1571 to Anne,
daughter and co-heiress of Thomas Dacre, Lord Dacre (1566), and was
educated at Cambridge, being accorded the degree of M.A. in 1576.
Subsequently Lord Surrey, as he was styled, came to court, partook in
its extravagant gaieties and dissipations, and kept his wife in the
background; but he nevertheless failed to secure the favour of
Elizabeth, who suspected the Howards generally. On the death of his
maternal grandfather in February 1580 he became earl of Arundel and
retired from the court. In 1582 his wife joined the church of Rome, and
was committed to the charge of Sir Thomas Shirley by the queen. He was
himself suspected of disloyalty, and was regarded by the discontented
Roman Catholics as the centre of the plots against the queen's
government, and even as a possible successor. In 1583 he was with some
reason suspected of complicity in Throgmorton's plot and prepared to
escape to Flanders, but his plans were interrupted by a visit from
Elizabeth at his house in London, and by her order subsequently to
confine himself there. In September 1584 he became a Roman Catholic,
dissembling his conversion and attempting next year once more to escape
abroad; but having been brought back he was placed in the Tower on the
25th of April 1585, and charged before the Star Chamber with being a
Romanist, with quitting England without leave, sharing in Jesuit plots,
and claiming the dukedom of Norfolk. He was sentenced to pay £10,000 and
to be imprisoned during the queen's pleasure. In July 1586 his liberty
was offered to him if he would carry the sword of state before the queen
to church. In 1588 he was accused of praying, together with other
Romanists, for the success of the Spanish Armada. He was tried for high
treason on the 14th of April 1589, found guilty and condemned to death;
but lingered in confinement under his sentence, which was never
executed, till his death on the 19th of October 1595. He was buried in
the Tower, whence his remains were removed in 1624 to Arundel. His
career, his later religious constancy and his tragic end have evoked
general sympathy, but his conduct gave rise to grave suspicions, and the
punishment inflicted upon him was not unwarranted; while the account of
the severity of his imprisonment given by his anonymous and contemporary
biographer should be compared with his own letters expressing gratitude
for favours allowed.[2] There appears no foundation for the belief that
he was poisoned, and according to Camden his death was caused by his
religious austerities.[3] He was the author of a translation of _An
Epistle of Jesus Christ to the Faithful Soule_ by Johann Justus (1595,
reprinted 1871) and of three MS. treatises _On the Excellence and
Utility of Virtue_. Inscriptions carved by his hand are still to be seen
in the Tower. He had two children, Elizabeth, who died young, and
Thomas, who (restored in blood) succeeded him as 2nd earl of Arundel,
and was created earl of Norfolk in 1644.

  AUTHORITIES.--Article in the _Dict. of Nat. Biography_ and authorities
  there collected; the contemporary _Lives of Philip Howard, Earl of
  Arundel and of Anne Dacre his Wife_, ed. by the duke of Norfolk
  (1857); M. Tierney, _History of Arundel_ (1834), p. 357; C.H. Cooper,
  _Athenae Cantabrigenses_ (1861), with bibliography, ii. 187 and 547;
  H. Howard, _Memoirs of the Howard Family_ (1824).

THOMAS HOWARD, 2nd earl of Arundel, and earl of Surrey and of Norfolk
(c. 1585-1646), son of Philip, 1st earl of Arundel and of Lady Anne
Dacre, was born in 1585 or 1586 and educated at Westminster school and
at Trinity College, Cambridge. Owing to the attainder of his father he
was styled Lord Maltravers, but at the accession of James I. he was
restored to his father's earldoms of Arundel and Surrey, and to the
baronies of his grandfather, Thomas, 4th duke of Norfolk. He came to
court, travelled subsequently abroad, acquiring a taste for art, and was
created K. G. on his return in May 1611. In 1613 he escorted Elizabeth,
the electress palatine, to Heidelberg, and again visited Italy. On
Christmas day 1615 Arundel joined the Church of England, and took
office, being appointed a privy councillor in 1616. He supported
Raleigh's expedition in 1617, became a member of the New England
Plantations Committee in 1620 and planned the colonization of
Madagascar. He presided over the House of Lords Committee in April 1621
for investigating the charges against Bacon, whom he defended from
degradation from the peerage, and at whose fall he was appointed a
commissioner of the great seal. On the 16th of May he was sent to the
Tower by the Lords on account of violent and insulting language used by
him to Lord Spencer. He incurred Prince Charles's and Buckingham's anger
by his opposition to the war with Spain in 1624, and by his share in the
duke's impeachment, and on the occasion of his son's marriage to Lady
Elizabeth Stewart without the king's approval he was imprisoned in the
Tower by Charles I., shortly after his accession, but was released at
the instance of the Lords in June 1626, being again confined to his
house till March 1628, when he was once more liberated by the Lords. In
the debates on the Petition of Right, while approving its essential
demands, he supported the retention of some discretionary power by the
king in committing to prison. The same year he was reconciled to the
king and again made a privy councillor. On the 29th of August 1621 he
had been appointed earl marshal, and in 1623 constable of England, in
1630 reviving the earl marshal's court. In 1625 he was made
lord-lieutenant of Sussex and in 1635 of Surrey. He was sent to the
Hague in 1632 on a mission of condolence to the queen of Bohemia on her
husband's death. In 1634 he was made chief justice in eyre of the
forests north of the Trent; he accompanied Charles the same year to
Scotland on the occasion of his coronation, and in 1636 undertook an
unsuccessful mission to the emperor to procure the restitution of the
Palatinate to the young elector. In 1638 he supported the king's
exactions from the vintners, was entrusted with the charge of the Border
forts, and, supporting alone amongst the peers the war against the
Scots, was made general of the king's forces in the first Bishops' War,
though according to Clarendon "he had nothing martial about him but his
presence and looks." He was not employed in the second Bishops' War, but
in August 1640 was nominated captain-general south of the Trent. In
April he was appointed lord steward of the royal household, and in 1641
as lord high steward presided at the trial of Strafford. This closed his
public career. He became again estranged from the court, and in 1641 he
escorted home Marie de' Medici, remaining abroad, with the exception of
a short visit to England in 1642, for the rest of his life, and taking
up permanent residence at Padua. He contributed a sum of £34,000 to the
king's cause, and suffered severe losses in the war. On the 6th of June
1644 he was created earl of Norfolk. He died at Padua, when on the point
of returning home, on the 14th of September 1646, and was buried at
Arundel.

Lord Arundel was a man of high character, an exemplary husband and
parent, but reserved and unpopular, and Clarendon ridicules his family
pride. His claim to fame rests upon his patronage of arts and learning
and his magnificent collections. He employed Hollar, Oughtred, Francis
Junius and Inigo Jones; included among his friends Sir Robert Cotton,
Spelman, Camden, Selden and John Evelyn, and his portrait was painted by
Rubens and Vandyck. He is called the "Father of vertu in England," and
was admired by a contemporary as the person to whom "this angle of the
world oweth the first sight of Greek and Roman statues."[4] He was the
first to form any considerable collection of art in Great Britain. His
acquisitions, obtained while on his travels or through agents, and
including inscribed marbles, statues, fragments, pictures, gems, coins,
books and manuscripts, were deposited at Arundel House, and suffered
considerable damage during the Civil War; and, owing to the carelessness
and want of appreciation of his successors, nearly half of the marbles
were destroyed. After his death the treasures were dispersed. The
marbles and many of the statues were given by his grandson, Henry, 6th
duke of Norfolk, to the university of Oxford in 1667, became known as
the _Arundel_ (or Oxford) _Marbles_, and included the famous _Parian
Chronicle_, or _Marmor Chronicon_, a marble slab on which are recorded
in Greek events in Grecian history from 1582 B.C. to 354 B.C., said to
have been executed in the island of Paros about 263 B.C. Its narration
of events differs in some respects from the most trustworthy historical
accounts, but its genuineness, challenged by some writers, has been
strongly supported by Porson and others, and is considered fairly
established. Other statues were presented to the university by Henrietta
Louisa, countess of Pomfret, in 1755. The cabinets and gems were removed
by the wife of Henry, 7th duke of Norfolk, in 1685, and after her death
found their way into the Marlborough collection. The pictures and
drawings were sold in 1685 and 1691, and Lord Stafford's moiety of the
collection in 1720. The coins and medals were, bought by Heneage Finch,
2nd earl of Winchelsea, and dispersed in 1696; the library, at the
instance of John Evelyn, who feared its total loss, was given to the
Royal Society, and a part, consisting of genealogical and heraldic
collections, to the College of Heralds, the manuscript portion of the
Royal Society's moiety being transferred to the British Museum in 1831
and forming the present Arundel Collection. The famous bust of Homer
reached the British Museum after passing through various hands.

Lord Arundel married in 1606 Lady Alethea, daughter and heir of Gilbert
Talbot, 7th earl of Shrewsbury, by whom, besides three sons who died
young and one daughter, he had John, who predeceased him, Henry
Frederick, who succeeded him as 3rd earl of Arundel and earl of Surrey
and of Norfolk, and William, Viscount Stafford, executed in 1680. In
1849 the Arundel Society for promoting artistic knowledge was founded in
his memory. Henry Frederick's grandson Thomas, by the reversal (1660) of
the attainder of 1572, succeeded to the dukedom of Norfolk, in which the
earldom has since then been merged.

  AUTHORITIES.--See the article in the _Dict, of Nat. Biography_, and
  authorities there collected; D. Lloyd, _Mémoires_ (1668), p. 284; Sir
  E. Walker, _Historical Discourses_ (1705), p. 209 (MS. in Harleian,
  6272 f. 152); M. Tierney, _History of Arundel_ (1834), p. 414; Sir
  Thomas Roe's _Negotiations_ (1740: letters relating to his
  collections), 334, 444, 495; W. Crowne, _A True Relation of all the
  Remarkable Places ... in the Travels of ... Thomas, Earl of Arundell:
  A.D. 1636_ (1637); _Die englische Mission des Grafen v. Arundel in
  Nurnberg_ (_archivalische Zeitschrift_: neue Folge, Bd. xi., 1904); H.
  Howard, _Memorials of the Howard Family_ (1834), p. 31; H.K.S.
  Causton, _The Howard Papers_ (1862); _Preface to Catalogue of Arundel
  MSS_., Brit. Museum (1840), &c. For publications relating to the
  Parian Chronicle see _Marmora Arundelliana_, publ. J. Selden (1628);
  Prideaux's _Marmora Oxoniensia_ (1676); Maittaire's variorum edition
  (1732); Chandler's _Marmora Oxoniensia_ (1763 and 1791), G. Roberts;
  J. Robertson, _The Parian Chronicle_ (1788); J. Hewlett, _A
  Vindication_ (1789); R. Porson, "The Parian Chronicle," in _Tracts_,
  ed. by T. Kidd (1815); _Chronicon Parium_, ed. by C.F.C. Wagner
  (1832-1833); C. Müller's _Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum_ (1841), i.
  533; F. Jacoby, _Das Marmor Parium_ (1904).


FOOTNOTES:

  [1] i.e. in the Howard line.

  [2] See _Cal. of St. Pap. Dom. 1581-1590_. 611; and _Hist. MSS. Comm.
    Marq. of Salisbury's MSS._ iii. 253, 414.

  [3] Camden's _Elizabeth_ in _Hist. of England_ (1706), 587.

  [4] Peacham in _Compleat Gentleman_ (1634), p. 107, and _Secret Hist.
    of James I._ (1811), i. 199.