Taught by experience, the new pope considered what steps could be taken

to prevent the recurrence of such abuses; in 1274, at the council of

Lyons, he promulgated the constitution _Ubi periculum_, the substance of

which was as follows: At the death of the pope, the cardinals who were

present are to await their absent colleagues for ten days; they are then

to meet in one of the papal palaces in a closed conclave; none of them

is to have to wait on him more than one servant, or two at most if he

were ill; in the conclave they are to lead a life in common, not even

having separate cells; they are to have no communication with the outer

world, under pain of excommunication for any who should attempt to

communicate with them; food is to be supplied to the cardinals through a

window which would be under watch; after three days, their meals are to

consist of a single dish only; and after five days, of bread and water,

with a little wine. During the conclave the cardinals are to receive no

ecclesiastical revenue. No account is to be taken of those who are

absent or have left the conclave. Finally, the election is to be the

sole business of the conclave, and the magistrates of the town where it

was held are called upon to see that these provisions be observed.

Adrian V. and John XX. were weak enough to suspend the constitution _Ubi

periculum_; but the abuses at once reappeared; the Holy See was again

vacant for long periods; this further proof was therefore decisive, and

Celestine V., who was elected after a vacancy of more than two years,

took care, before abdicating the pontificate, to revive the constitution

of Gregory X., which was inserted in the Decretals (lib. i. tit. vi.,

_de election._ cap. 3).

Julius II.

Since then the laws relating to the conclave have been observed, even

during the great schism; the only exception was the election of Martin

V., which was performed by the cardinals of the three obediences, to

which the council of Constance added five prelates of each of the six

nations represented in that assembly. The same was the case up to the

16th century. At this period the Italian republics, later Spain, and

finally the other powers, took an intimate interest in the choice of the

holder of what was a considerable political power; and each brought more

or less honest means to bear, sometimes that of simony. It was against

simony that Julius II. directed the bull _Cum tam divino_ (1503), which

directed that simoniacal election of the pope should be declared null;

that any one could attack it; that men should withdraw themselves from

the obedience of a pope thus elected; that simoniacal agreements should

be invalid; that the guilty cardinals should be excommunicate till their

death, and that the rest should proceed immediately to a new election.

The purpose of this measure was good, but the proposed remedy extremely

dangerous; it was fortunately never applied. Similarly, Paul IV.

endeavoured by severe punishments to check the intriguing and plotting

for the election of a new pope while his predecessor was still living;

but the bull _Cum secundum_ (1558) was of no effect.

Pius IV.

Gregory XV.

Pius IV. undertook the task of reforming and completing the legislation

of the conclave. The bull _In eligendis_ (of October 1st, 1562), signed

by all the cardinals, is a model of precision and wisdom. In addition to

the points already stated, we may add the following: that every day

there was to be a scrutiny, i.e. a solemn voting by specially prepared

voting papers (concealing the name of the voter, and to be opened only

in case of an election being made at that scrutiny), and that this was

to be followed by the "accessit," i.e. a second voting, in which the

cardinals might transfer their suffrages to those who had obtained the

greatest number of votes in the first. Except in case of urgent matters,

the election was to form the whole business of the conclave. The cells

were to be assigned by lot. The functionaries of the conclave were to be

elected by the secret vote of the Sacred College. The most stringent

measures were to be taken to ensure seclusion. The bull _Aeterni Patris_

of Gregory XV. (15th of November 1621) is a collection of minute

regulations. In it is the rule compelling each cardinal, before giving

his vote, to take the oath that he will elect him whom he shall judge to

be the most worthy; it also makes rules for the forms of voting and of

the voting papers, for the counting, the scrutiny, and in fact all the

processes of the election. A second bull, _Decet Romanum Pontificem_, of

the 12th of March 1622, fixed the ceremonial of the conclave with such

minuteness that it has not been changed since.

All previous legislation concerning the conclave was codified and

renewed by Pius X.'s bull, _Vacante Sede Apostolico_ (Dec. 25, 1904),

which abrogates the earlier texts, except Leo XIII.'s constitution

_Praedecessores Nostri_ (May 24, 1882), authorizing occasional

derogations in circumstances of difficulty, e.g. the death of a pope

away from Rome or an attempt to interfere with the liberty of the Sacred

College. The bull of Pius X. is rather a codification than a reform, the

principal change being the abolition of the scrutiny of accession and

the substitution of a second ordinary scrutiny during the same session.

On some occasions exceptional circumstances have given rise to

transitory measures. In 1797 and 1798 Pius VI. authorized the cardinals

to act contrary to such of the laws concerning the conclave as a

majority of them should decide not to observe, as being impossible in

practice. Similarly Pius IX., by means of various acts which remained

secret up till 1892, had taken the most minute precautions in order to

secure a free and rapid election, and to avoid all interference on the

part of the secular powers. We know that the conclaves in which Leo

XIII. and Pius X. were elected enjoyed the most complete liberty, and

the hypothetical measures foreseen by Pius IX. were not applied.

The conclave at Rome.

Until after the Great Schism the conclaves were held in various towns

outside of Rome; but since then they have all been held in Rome, with

the single exception of the conclave of Venice (1800), and in most cases

in the Vatican.

Modern procedure.

There was no place permanently established for the purpose, but

removable wooden cells were installed in the various apartments of the

palace, grouped around the Sistine chapel, in which the scrutinies took

place. The arrangements prepared in the Quirinal in 1823 did duty only

three times, and for the most recent conclaves it was necessary to

arrange an inner enclosure within the vast but irregular palace of the

Vatican. Each cardinal is accompanied by a clerk or secretary, known for

this reason as a conclavist, and by one servant only. With the officials

of the conclave, this makes about two hundred and fifty persons who

enter the conclave and have no further communication with the outer

world save by means of turning-boxes. Since 1870 the solemn ceremonies

of earlier times have naturally not been seen; for instance the

procession which used to celebrate the entry into conclave; or the daily

arrival in procession of the clergy and the brotherhoods to enquire at

the "rota" (turning-box) of the auditors of the Rota: "Habemusne

Pontificem?" and their return accompanied by the chanting of the "_Veni

Creator_"; or the "Marshal of the Holy Roman Church and perpetual

guardian of the conclave" visiting the churches in state. But a crowd

still collects morning and evening in the great square of St Peter's,

towards the time of the completion of the vote, to look for the smoke

which rises from the burning of the voting-papers after each session;

when the election has not been effected, a little straw is burnt with

the papers, and the column of smoke then apprises the spectators that

they have still no pope. Within the conclave, the cardinals, alone in

the common hall, usually the Sistine chapel, proceed morning and evening

to their double vote, the direct vote and the "accessit." Sometimes

these sessions have been very numerous; for example, in 1740, Benedict

XIV. was only elected after 255 scrutinies; on other occasions, however,

and notably in the case of the last few popes, a well-defined majority

has soon been evident, and there have been but few scrutinies. Each vote

is immediately counted by three scrutators, appointed in rotation, the

most minute precautions being taken to ensure that the voting shall be

secret and sincere. When one cardinal has at last obtained two-thirds of

the votes, the dean of the cardinals formally asks him whether he

accepts his election, and what name he wishes to assume. As soon as he

has accepted, the first "obedience" or "adoration" takes place, and

immediately after the first cardinal deacon goes to the _Loggia_ of St

Peter's and announces the great news to the assembled people. The

conclave is dissolved; on the following day take place the two other

"obediences," and the election is officially announced to the various

governments. If the pope be not a bishop (Gregory XVI. was not), he is

then consecrated; and finally, a few days after his election, takes

place the coronation, from which the pontificate is officially dated.

The pope then receives the tiara with the triple crown, the sign of his

supreme spiritual authority. The ceremony of the coronation goes back to

the 9th century, and the tiara, in the form of a high conical cap, is

equally ancient (see TIARA).

The right of veto.

In conclusion, a few words should be said with regard to the right of

_veto_. In the 16th and 17th centuries the character of the conclaves

was determined by the influence of what were then known as the

"factions," i.e. the formation of the cardinals into groups according to

their nationality or their relations with one of the Catholic courts of

Spain, France or the Empire, or again according as they favoured the

political policy of the late pope or his predecessor. These groups

upheld or opposed certain candidates. The Catholic courts naturally

entrusted the cardinals "of the crown," i.e. those of their nation, with

the mission of removing, as far as lay in their power, candidates who

were distasteful to their party; the various governments could even make

public their desire to exclude certain candidates. But they soon claimed

an actual right of formal and direct exclusion, which should be notified

in the conclave in their name by a cardinal charged with this mission,

and should have a decisive effect; this is what has been called the

right of veto. We cannot say precisely at what time during the 16th

century this transformation of the practice into a right, tacitly

accepted by the Sacred College, took place; it was doubtless felt to be

less dangerous formally to recognize the right of the three sovereigns

each to object to one candidate, than to face the inconvenience of

objections, such as were formulated on several occasions by Philip II.,

which, though less legal in form, might apply to an indefinite number of

candidates. The fact remains, however, that it was a right based on

custom, and was not supported by any text or written concession; but the

diplomatic right was straightforward and definite, and was better than

the intrigues of former days. During the 19th century Austria exercised,

or tried to exercise, the right of veto at all the conclaves, except

that which elected Leo XIII. (1878); it did so again at the conclave of

1903. On the 2nd of August Cardinal Rampolla had received twenty-nine

votes, when Cardinal Kolzielsko Puzina, bishop of Cracow, declared that

the Austrian government opposed the election of Cardinal Rampolla; the

Sacred College considered that it ought to yield, and on the 4th of

August elected Cardinal Sarto, who took the name of Pius X. By the bull

_Commissum Nobis_ (January 20, 1904), Pius X. suppressed all right of

"veto" or "exclusion" on the part of the secular governments, and

forbade, under pain of excommunication reserved to the future pope, any

cardinal or conclavist to accept from his government the charge of

proposing a "veto," or to exhibit it to the conclave under any form.

BIBLIOGRAPHY.--The best and most complete work is Lucius Lector, _Le

Conclave, origine, histoire, organisation, legislation ancienne et

moderne_ (Paris, 1894). See also Ferraris, _Prompta Bibliotheca, s. v.

Papa_, art. i.; Moroni, _Dizionario di erudizione

storico-ecclesiastica, s. v. Conclave, Conclavisti, Cella, Elezione,

Esclusiva_; Bouix, _De Curia Romana_, part i. c. x.; _De Papa_, part

vii. (Paris, 1859, 1870); Barbier de Montault, _Le Conclave_ (Paris,

1878). On the conclave of Leo XIII., R. de Cesare, _Conclave di Leone

XIII._ (Rome, 1888). On the conclave of Pius X.: an eye-witness (Card.

Mathieu), _Les Derniers Jours de Leon XIII et le conclave_ (Paris,

1904). See further, for the right of veto: Phillips, _Kirchenrecht_,

t. v. p. 138; Sagmuller, _Die Papstwahlen und die Staate_ (Tubingen,

1890); _Die Papstwahlbullen und das staatliche Recht des Exclusive_

(Tubingen, 1892); Wahrmund, _Ausschliessungsrecht der katholischen

Staaten_ (Vienna, 1888). (A. Bo.*)

CONCORD, a township of Middlesex county, Massachusetts, U.S.A., about 20

m. N.W. of Boston. Pop. (1900) 5652; (1910, U.S. census) 6421. Area 25

sq. m. It is traversed by the Boston & Maine railway. Where the Sudbury

and Assabet unite to form the beautiful little Concord river, celebrated

by Thoreau, is the village of Concord, straggling, placid and beautiful,

full of associations with the opening of the War of Independence and

with American literature. Of particular interest is the "Old Manse,"

built in 1765 for Rev. William Emerson, in which his grandson R. W.

Emerson wrote _Nature_, and Hawthorne his _Mosses from an Old Manse_,

containing a charming description of the building and its associations.

At Concord there is a state reformatory, whose inmates, about 800 in

number, are employed in manufacturing various articles, but otherwise

the town has only minor business and industrial interests. The

introduction of the "Concord" grape, first produced here by Ephraim Bull

in 1853, is said to have marked the beginning of the profitable

commercial cultivation of table grapes in the United States. Concord was

settled and incorporated as a township in 1635, and was (with Dedham)

the first settlement in Massachusetts back from the sea-coast. A county

convention at Concord village in August 1774 recommended the calling of

the first Provincial Congress of Massachusetts--one of the first

independent legislatures of America--which assembled here on the 11th of

October 1774, and again in March and April 1775. The village became

thereafter a storehouse of provisions and munitions of war, and hence

became the objective of the British expedition that on the 19th of April

1775 opened with the armed conflict at Lexington (q.v.) the American War

of Independence. As the British proceeded to Concord the whole country

was rising, and at Concord about 500 minute-men confronted the British

regulars who were holding the village and searching for arms and stores.

Volleys were exchanged, the British retreated, the minute-men hung on

their flanks and from the hillsides shot them down, driving their

columns on Lexington. A granite obelisk, erected in 1837, when Emerson

wrote his ode on the battle, marks the spot where the first British

soldiers fell; while across the stream a fine bionze "Minute-Man" (1875)

by D. C. French (a native of Concord) marks the spot where once "the

embattled farmers stood and fired the shot heard round the world"

(Emerson). Concord was long one of the shire-townships of Middlesex

county, losing this honour in 1867. The village is famous as the home of

R. W. Emerson, Nathaniel Hawthorne, Henry D. Thoreau, Louisa M. Alcott

and her father, A. Bronson Alcott, who maintained here from 1879 to 1888

(in a building still standing) the Concord school of philosophy, which

counted Benjamin Peirce, W. T. Harris, Mrs J. W. Howe, T. W. Higginson,

Professor William James and Emerson among its lecturers. Emerson,

Hawthorne, Thoreau and the Alcotts are buried here in the beautiful

Sleepy Hollow Cemetery. Of the various orations (among others one by

Edward Everett in 1825) that have been delivered at Concord

anniversaries perhaps the finest is that of George William Curtis,

delivered in 1875.

See A. S. Hudson, _The History of Concord_, vol. i. (Concord, 1904);

G. B. Bartlett, _Concord: Historic, Literary and Picturesque_ (Boston,

1885); and Mrs J. L. Swayne, _Story of Concord_ (Boston, 1907).

CONCORD, a city and the county-seat of Cabarrus county, North Carolina,

U.S.A., on the Rocky river, about 150 m. W.S.W. of Raleigh. Pop. (1890)

4339; (1900) 7910 (1789 negroes); (1910) 8715. It is served by the

Southern railway. Concord is situated in a cotton-growing region, and

its chief interest is in the manufacture of cotton goods. The city is

the seat of Scotia seminary (for negro girls), founded in 1870 and under

the care of the Presbyterian Board of Missions for Freedmen, Pittsburgh

Pa. Concord was laid out in 1793 and was first incorporated in 1851.

CONCORD, the capital of New Hampshire, U.S.A., and the county-seat of

Merrimack county, on both sides of the Merrimac river, about 75 m. N.W.

of Boston, Massachusetts. Pop. (1890) 17,004; (1900) 19,632, of whom

3813 were foreign-born; (1910, census) 21,497. Concord is served by the

Boston & Maine railway. The area of the city in 1906 was 45.16 sq. m.

Concord has broad streets bordered with shade trees; and has several

parks, including Penacook, White, Rollins and the Contoocook river.

Among the principal buildings are the state capitol, the state library,

the city hall, the county court-house, the post-office, a public library

(17,000 vols.), the state hospital, the state prison, the Centennial

home for the aged, the Margaret Pillsbury memorial hospital, the Rolfe

and Rumford asylum for orphan girls, founded by Count Rumford's

daughter, and some fine churches, including the Christian Science church

built by Mrs Eddy. There are a soldiers' memorial arch, a statue of

Daniel Webster by Thomas Ball, and statues of John P. Hale, John Stark,

and Commodore George H. Perkins, the last by Daniel C. French; and at

Penacook, 6 m. N.W. of Concord, there is a monument to Hannah Dustin

(see HAVERHILL). Among the educational institutions are the well-known

St Paul's school for boys (Protestant Episcopal, 1853), about 2 m. W. of

the city, and St Mary's school for girls (Protestant Episcopal, 1885).

From 1847 to 1867 Concord was the seat of the Biblical Institute

(Methodist Episcopal), founded in Newbury, Vermont, in 1841, removed to

Boston as the Boston Theological Seminary in 1867, and after 1871 a part

of Boston University. The city has various manufactures, including flour

and grist mill products, silver ware, cotton and woollen goods,

carriages, harnesses and leather belting, furniture, wooden ware, pianos

and clothing; the Boston & Maine Railroad has a large repair shop in the

city, and there are valuable granite quarries in the vicinity. In 1905

Concord ranked third among the cities of the state in the value of its

factory products, which was $6,387,372, being an increase of 51.7% since

1900. When first visited by the English settlers, the site of Concord

was occupied by Penacook Indians; a trading post was built here about

1660. In 1725 Massachusetts granted the land in this vicinity to some of

her citizens; but this grant was not recognized by New Hampshire, whose

legislature issued (1727) a grant (the Township of Bow) overlapping the

Massachusetts grant, which was known as Penacook or Penny Cook. The New

Hampshire grantees undertook to establish here a colony of Londonderry

Irish; but the Massachusetts settlers were firmly established by the

spring of 1727, Massachusetts definitely assumed jurisdiction in 1731,

and in 1734 her general court incorporated the settlement under the name

of Rumford. The conflicting rights of Rumford and Bow gave rise to one

of the most celebrated of colonial land cases, and although the New

Hampshire authorities enforced their claims of jurisdiction, the privy

council in 1755 confirmed the Rumford settlers in their possession. In

1765 the name was changed to the "parish of Concord," and in 1784 the

town of Concord was incorporated. Here, for some years before the War of

American Independence, lived Benjamin Thompson, later Count Rumford. In

1778 and again in 1781-1782 a state constitutional convention met here;

the first New Hampshire legislature met at Concord in 1782; the

convention which ratified for New Hampshire the Federal Constitution met

here in 1788; and in 1808 the state capital was definitely established

here. The New Hampshire _Patriot_, founded here in 1808 (and for twenty

years edited) by Isaac Hill (1788-1851), who was a member of the United

States Senate in 1831-1836, and governor of New Hampshire in 1836-1839,

became one of the leading exponents of Jacksonian Democracy in New

England. In 1814 the Middlesex Canal, connecting Concord with Boston,

was completed. A city charter granted by the legislature in 1849 was not

accepted by the city until 1853.

See J. O. Lyford, _The History of Concord, New Hampshire_ (City

History Commission) (2 vols., Concord, 1903); _Concord Town Records,

1732-1820_ (Concord, 1894); J. B. Moore, _Annals of Concord,

1726-1823_ (Concord, 1824); and Nathaniel Bouton, _The History of

Concord_ (Concord, 1856).

CONCORD, BOOK OF (_Liber Concordiae_), the collective documents of the

Lutheran confession, consisting of the _Confessio Augustana_, the

_Apologia Confessionis Augustanae_, the _Articula Smalcaldici_, the

_Catechismi Major et Minor_ and the _Formula Concordiae_. This last was

a formula issued on the 25th of June 1580 (the jubilee of the Augsburg

Confession) by the Lutheran Church in an attempt to heal the breach

which, since the death of Luther, had been widening between the extreme

Lutherans and the Crypto-Calvinists. Previous attempts at concord had

been made at the request of different rulers, especially by Jacob Andrea

with his Swabian Concordia in 1573, and Abel Scherdinger with the

Maulbronn Formula in 1575. In 1576 the elector of Saxony called a

conference of theologians at Torgau to discuss these two efforts and

from them produce a third. The _Book of Torgau_ was evolved, circulated

and criticized; a new committee, prominent on which was Martin Chemnitz,

sitting at Bergen near Magdeburg, considered the criticisms and finally

drew up the _Formula Concordiae_. It consists of (a) the "Epitome," (b)

the "Solid Repetition and Declaration," each part comprising twelve

articles; and was accepted by Saxony, Wurttemberg, Baden among other

states, but rejected by Hesse, Nassau and Holstein. Even the free cities

were divided, Hamburg and Lubeck for, Bremen and Frankfort against.

Hungary and Sweden accepted it, and so finally did Denmark, where at

first it was rejected, and its publication made a crime punishable by

death. In spite of this very limited reception the _Formula Concordiae_

has always been reckoned with the five other documents as of

confessional authority.

See P. Schaff, _Creeds of Christendom_, i. 258-340, iii. 92-180.

CONCORDANCE (Late Lat. _concordantia_, harmony, from _cum_, with, and

_cor_, heart), literally agreement, harmony; hence derivatively a

citation of parallel passages, and specifically an alphabetical

arrangement of the words contained in a book with citations of the

passages in which they occur. Concordances in this last sense were first

made for the Bible. Originally the word was only used in this connexion

in the plural _concordantiae_, each group of parallel passages being

properly a _concordantia_. The Germans distinguish between concordances

of things and concordances of words, the former indexing the subject

matter of a book ("real" concordance), the latter the words ("verbal"

concordance).

The original impetus to the making of concordances was due to the

conviction that the several parts of the Bible are consistent with each

other, as parts of a divine revelation, and may be combined as

harmonious elements in one system of spiritual truth. To Anthony of

Padua (1195-1231) ancient tradition ascribes the first concordance, the

anonymous _Concordantiae Morales_, of which the basis was the Vulgate.

The first authentic work of the kind was due to Cardinal Hugh of St

Cher, a Dominican monk (d. 1263), who, in preparing for a commentary on

the Scriptures, found the need of a concordance, and is reported to have

used for the purpose the services of five hundred of his brother monks.

This concordance was the basis of two which succeeded in time and

importance, one by Conrad of Halberstadt (fl. c. 1290) and the other by

John of Segovia in the next century. This book was published in a

greatly improved and amplified form in the middle of the 19th century by

David Nutt, of London, edited by T. P. Dutripon. The first Hebrew

concordance was compiled in 1437-1445 by Rabbi Isaac Nathan b. Kalonymus

of Arles. It was printed at Venice in 1523 by Daniel Bomberg, in Basel

in 1556, 1569 and 1581. It was published under the title _Meir Natib_,

"The Light of the Way." In 1556 it was translated into Latin by Johann

Reuchlin, but many errors appeared in both the Hebrew and the Latin

edition. These were corrected by Marius de Calasio, a Franciscan friar,

who published a four volume folio _Concordantiae Sacr. Bibl. Hebr. et

Latin._ at Rome, 1621, much enlarged, with proper names included.

Another concordance based on Nathan's was Johann Buxtorf the elder's

_Concordantiae Bibl. Ebraicae nova et artificiosa methodo dispositae_,

Basel, 1632. It marks a stage in both the arrangement and the knowledge

of the roots of words, but can only be used by those who know the

massoretic system, as the references are made by Hebrew letters and

relate to rabbinical divisions of the Old Testament. Calasio's

concordance was republished in London under the direction of William

Romaine in 1747-1749, in four volumes folio, under the patronage of all

the monarchs of Europe and also of the pope. In 1754 John Taylor, D.D.,

a Presbyterian divine in Norwich, published in two volumes the _Hebrew

Concordance adapted to the English Bible_, disposed after the manner of

Buxtorf. This was the most complete and convenient concordance up to the

date of its publication. In the middle of the 19th century Dr Julius

Furst issued a thoroughly revised edition of Buxtorf's concordance. The

_Hebraischen und chaldaischen Concordanz zu den Heiligen Schriften Alten

Testaments_ (Leipzig, 1840) carried forward the development of the

concordance in several directions. It gave (1) a corrected text founded

on Hahn's Vanderhoogt's Bible; (2) the Rabbinical meanings; (3)

explanations in Latin, and illustrations from the three Greek versions,

the Aramaic paraphrase, and the Vulgate; (4) the Greek words employed by

the Septuagint as renderings of the Hebrew; (5) notes on philology and

archaeology, so that the concordance contained a Hebrew lexicon. An

English translation by Dr Samuel Davidson was published in 1867. A

revised edition of Buxtorf's work with additions from Furst's was

published by B. Bar (Stettin, 1862). A new concordance embodying the

matter of all previous works with lists of proper names and particles

was published by Solomon Mandelkern in Leipzig (1896); a smaller edition

of the same, without quotations, appeared in 1900. There are also

concordances of Biblical proper names by G. Brecher (Frankfort-on-Main,

1876) and Schusslovicz (Wilna, 1878).

A _Concordance to the Septuagint_ was published at Frankfort in 1602 by

Conrad Kircher of Augsburg; in this the Hebrew words are placed in

alphabetical order and the Greek words by which they are translated are

placed under them. A Septuagint concordance, giving the Greek words in

alphabetical order, was published in 1718 in two volumes by Abraham

Tromm, a learned minister at Groningen, then in the eighty-fourth year

of his age. It gives the Greek words in alphabetical order; a Latin

translation; the Hebrew word or words for which the Greek term is used

by the Septuagint; then the places where the words occur in the order of

the books and chapters; at the end of the quotations from the Septuagint

places are given where the word occurs in Aquila, Symmachus and

Theodotion, the other Greek translations of the O. T.; and the words of

the Apocrypha follow in each case. Besides an index to the Hebrew and

Chaldaic words there is another index which contains a lexicon to the

_Hexapla_ of Origen. In 1887 (London) appeared the _Handy Concordance of

the Septuagint giving various readings from Codices Vaticanus,

Alexandrinus, Sinaiticus and Ephraemi, with an appendix of words from

Origen's Hexapla, not found in the above manuscripts_, by G. M., without

quotations. A work of the best modern scholarship was brought out in

1897 by the Clarendon Press, Oxford, entitled _A Concordance to the

Septuagint and the other Greek versions of the Old Testament including

the Apocryphal Books_, by Edwin Hatch and H. A. Redpath, assisted by

other scholars; this was completed in 1900 by a list of proper names.

_The first Greek concordance_ to the New Testament was published at

Basel in 1546 by Sixt Birck or Xystus Betuleius (1500-1554), a

philologist and minister of the Lutheran Church. This was followed by

Stephen's concordance (1594) planned by Robert Stephens and published by

Henry, his son. Then in 1638 came Schmied's [Greek: tamieion], which has

been the basis of subsequent concordances to the New Testament. Erasmus

Schmied or Schmid was a Lutheran divine who was professor of Greek in

Wittenberg, where he died in 1637. Revised editions of the [Greek:

tamieion] were published at Gotha in 1717, and at Glasgow in 1819 by the

University Press. In the middle of the 19th century Charles Hermann

Bruder brought out a beautiful edition (Tauchnitz) with many

improvements. The _apparatus criticus_ was a triumph of New Testament

scholarship. It collates the readings of Erasmus, R. Stephens' third

edition, the Elzevirs, Mill, Bengel, Webster, Knapp, Tittman, Scholz,

Lachmann. It also gives a selection from the most ancient patristic

MSS. and from various interpreters. No various reading of critical value

is omitted. An edition of Bruder with readings of Samuel Prideaux

Tregelles was published in 1888 under the editorship of Westcott and

Hort. The _Englishman's Greek Concordance of the New Testament_, and the

_Englishman's Hebrew and Chaldee Concordance_, are books intended to put

the results of the above-mentioned works at the service of those who

know little Hebrew or Greek. Every word in the Bible is given in Hebrew

or Greek, the word is transliterated, and then every passage in which it

occurs is given--the word, however it may be translated, being

italicized. They are the work of George V. Wigram assisted by W. Burgh

and superintended by S. P. Tregelles, B. Davidson and W. Chalk (1843;

2nd ed. 1860). Another book which deserves mention is, _A Concordance to

the Greek Testament with the English version to each word; the principal

Hebrew roots corresponding to the Greek words of the Septuagint, with

short critical notes and an index_, by John Williams, LL.D., Lond. 1767.

In 1884 Robert Young, author of an analytical concordance mentioned

below, brought out a _Concordance to the Greek New Testament with a

dictionary of Bible Words and Synonyms_: this contains a concise

concordance to eight thousand changes made in the Revised Testament.

Another important work of modern scholarship is the _Concordance to the

Greek Testament_, edited by the Rev. W. F. Moulton and A. E. Geden,

according to the texts adopted by Westcott and Hort, Tischendorf, and

the English revisers.

The first concordance to the English version of the New Testament was

published in London, 1535, by Thomas Gybson. It is a black-letter volume

entitled _The Concordance of the New Testament most necessary to be had

in the hands of all soche as delyte in the communicacion of any place

contayned in ye New Testament_.

The first English concordance of the entire Bible was John Marbeck's, _A

Concordance, that is to saie, a worke wherein by the order of the

letters of the A.B.C. ye maie redely find any worde conteigned in the

whole Bible, so often as it is there expressed or mentioned_, Lond.

1550. Although Robert Stephens had divided the Bible into verses in

1545, Marbeck does not seem to have known this and refers to the

chapters only. In 1550 also appeared Walter Lynne's translation of the

concordance issued by Bullinger, Jude, Pellican and others of the

Reformers. Other English concordances were published by Cotton, Newman,

and in abbreviated forms by John Downham or Downame (cd. 1652), Vavasor

Powell (1617-1670), Jackson and Samuel Clarke (1626-1701). In 1737

Alexander Cruden (q.v.), a London bookseller, born and educated in

Aberdeen, published his _Complete Concordance to the Holy Scriptures of

the Old and New Testament, to which is added a concordance to the books

called Apocrypha_. This book embodied, was based upon and superseded all

its predecessors. Though the first edition was not remunerative, three

editions were published during Cruden's life, and many since his death.

Cruden's work is accurate and full, and later concordances only

supersede his by combining an English with a Greek and Hebrew

concordance. This is done by the _Critical Greek and English

Concordance_ prepared by C. F. Hudson, H. A. Hastings and Ezra Abbot,

LL.D., published in Boston, Mass., and by the _Critical Lexicon and

Concordance to the English and Greek New Testament_, by E. L. Bullinger,

1892. The _Interpreting Concordance to the New Testament_, edited by

James Gall, shows the Greek original of every word, with a glossary

explaining the Greek words of the New Testament, and showing their

varied renderings in the Authorized Version. The most convenient of

these is _Young's Analytical Concordance_, published in Edinburgh in

1879, and since revised and reissued. It shows (1) the original Hebrew

or Greek of any word in the English Bible; (2) the literal and primitive

meaning of every such original word; (3) thoroughly reliable parallel

passages. There is a _Students' Concordance to the Revised Version of

the New Testament_ showing the changes embodied in the revision,

published under licence of the universities; and a concordance to the

Revised Version by J. A. Thoms for the Christian Knowledge Society.

Biblical concordances having familiarized students with the value and

use of such books for the systematic study of an author, the practice of

making concordances has now become common. There are concordances to the

works of Shakespeare, Browning and many other writers. (D. Mn.)

CONCORDAT (Lat. _concordatum_, agreed upon, from _con-_, together, and

_cor_, heart), a term originally denoting an agreement between

ecclesiastical persons or secular persons, but later applied to a pact

concluded between the ecclesiastical authority and the secular authority

on ecclesiastical matters which concern both, and, more specially, to a

pact concluded between the pope, as head of the Catholic Church, and a

temporal sovereign for the regulation of ecclesiastical affairs in the

territory of such sovereign. It is to concordats in this later sense

that this article refers.

No one now questions the profound distinction that exists between the

two powers, spiritual and temporal, between the church and the state.

Yet these two societies are none the less in inevitable relation. The

same men go to compose both; and the church, albeit pursuing a spiritual

end, cannot dispense with the aid of temporal property, which in its

nature depends on the organization of secular society. It follows of

necessity that there are some matters which may be called "mixed," and

which are the legitimate concern of the two powers, such as church

property, places of worship, the appointment and the emoluments of

ecclesiastical dignitaries, the temporal rights and privileges of the

secular and regular clergy, the regulation of public worship, and the

like. The existence of such mixed matters gives rise to inevitable

conflicts of jurisdiction, which may lead, and sometimes have led, to

civil war. It is, therefore, to the general interest that all these

matters should be settled pacifically, by a common accord; and hence

originated those conventions between the two powers which are known by

the significant name of concordat, the official name being _pactum

concordatum_ or _solemnis conventio_. In theory these agreements may

result from the spontaneous and pacific initiative of the contracting

parties, but in reality their object has almost always been to terminate

more or less acute conflicts and remedy more or less disturbed

situations. It is for this reason that concordats always present a

clearly marked character of mutual concession, each of the two powers

renouncing certain of its claims in the interests of peace.

For the purposes of a concordat the state recognizes the official

_status_ of the church and of its ministers and tribunals; guarantees it

certain privileges; and sometimes binds itself to secure for it

subsidies representing compensation for past spoliations. The pope on

his side grants the temporal sovereign certain rights, such as that of

making or controlling the appointment of dignitaries; engages to proceed

in harmony with the government in the creation of dioceses or parishes;

and regularizes the situation produced by the usurpation of church

property &c. The great advantage of concordats--indeed their principal

utility--consists in transforming necessarily unequal unilateral claims

into contractual obligations analogous to those which result from an

international convention. Whatever the obligations of the state towards

the ecclesiastical society may be in pure theory, in practice they

become more precise and stable when they assume the nature of a

bilateral convention by which the state engages itself with regard to a

third party. And reciprocally, whatever may be the absolute rights of

the ecclesiastical society over the appointment of its dignitaries, the

administration of its property, and the government of its adherents, the

exercise of these rights is limited and restricted by the stable

engagements and concessions of the concordatory pact, which bind the

head of the church with regard to the nations.

A concordat may assume divers forms,--historically, three. The most

common in modern times is that of a diplomatic convention debated

between the authorized mandatories of the high contracting parties and

subsequently ratified by the latter; as, for example, the French

concordat of 1801. Or, secondly, the concordat may result from two

identical separate acts, one emanating from the pope and the other from

the sovereign; this was the form of the first true concordat, that of

Worms, in 1122. A third form was employed in the case of the concordat

of 1516 between Leo X. and Francis I. of France; a papal bull published

the concordat in the form of a concession by the pope, and it was

afterwards accepted and published by the king as law of the country. The

shades which distinguish these three forms are not without significance,

but they in no way detract from the contractual character of concordats.

Since concordats are contracts they give rise to that special mutual

obligation which results from every agreement freely entered into; for a

contract is binding on both parties to it. Concordats are undoubtedly

conventions of a particular nature. They may make certain concessions or

privileges once given without any corresponding obligation; they

constitute for a given country a special ecclesiastical law; and it is

thus that writers have sometimes spoken of concordats as privileges.

Again, it is quite certain that the spiritual matters upon which

concordats bear do not concern the two powers in the same manner and in

the same degree; and in this sense concordats are not perfectly equal

agreements. Finally, they do not assume the contracting parties to be

totally independent, i.e. regard is had to the existence of anterior

rights or duties. But with these reservations it must unhesitatingly be

said that concordats are bilateral or synallagmatic contracts, from

which results an equal mutual obligation for the two parties, who enter

into a juridical engagement towards each other. Latterly certain

Catholics have questioned this equality of the concordatory obligation,

and have aroused keen discussion. According to Maurice de Bonald (_Deux

questions sur le concordat de 1801_, Geneva, 1871), who exaggerates the

view of Cardinal Tarquini (_Instit. juris publ. eccl._, 1862 and 1868),

concordats would be pure privileges granted by the pope; the pope would

not be able to enter into agreements on spiritual matters or impose

restraints upon the power of his successors; and consequently he would

not bind himself in any juridical sense and would be able freely to

revoke concordats, just as the author of a privilege can withdraw it at

his pleasure. This exaggerated argument found a certain number of

supporters, several of whom nevertheless sensibly weakened it. But the

best canonists, from the Roman professor De Angelis (_Prael. juris

canon._ i. 106) onwards, and all jurists, have victoriously refuted this

theory, either by insisting on the principles common to all agreements

or by citing the formal text of several concordats and papal acts, which

are as explicit as possible. They have thus upheld the true contractual

nature of concordats and the mutual juridical obligation which results

from them.

The foregoing statements must not be taken to mean that concordats are

in their nature perpetual, and that they cannot be broken or denounced.

They have the perpetuity of conventions which contain no time

limitation; but, like every human convention, they can be denounced, in

the form in use for international treaties, and for good reasons, which

are summed up in the exigencies of the general good of the country.

Nevertheless, there is no example of a concordat having been denounced

or broken by the popes, whereas several have been denounced or broken by

the civil powers, sometimes in the least diplomatic manner, as in the

case of the French concordat in 1905. The rupture of the concordat at

once terminates the obligations which resulted from it on both sides;

but it does not break off all relation between the church and the state,

since the two societies continue to coexist on the same territory. To

the situation defined by concordat, however, succeeds another situation,

more or less uncertain and more or less strained, in which the two

powers legislate separately on mixed matters, sometimes not without

provoking conflicts.

We cannot describe in detail the objects of concordatory conventions.

They bear upon very varied matters,[1] and we must confine ourselves

here to a brief _resume_. In the first place is the official recognition

by the state of the Catholic religion and its ministers. Sometimes the

Catholic religion is declared to be the state religion, and at least the

free and public exercise of its worship is guaranteed. Several

conventions guarantee the free communication of the bishops, clergy and

laity with the Holy See; and this admits of the publication and

execution of apostolic letters in matters spiritual. Others define those

affairs of major importance which may be or must be referred to the Holy

See by appeal, or the decision of which is reserved to the Holy See. On

several occasions concordats have established a new division of

dioceses, and provided that future erections or divisions should be made

by a common accord. Analogous provisions have been made with regard to

the territorial divisions within the dioceses; parishes have been

recast, and the consent of the two authorities has been required for the

establishment of new parishes. As regards candidates for ecclesiastical

offices, the concordats concluded with Catholic nations regularly give

the sovereign the right to nominate or present to bishoprics, often also

to other inferior benefices, such as canonries, important parishes and

abbeys; or at least the choice of the ecclesiastical authority is

submitted to the approval of the civil power. In all cases canonical

institution (which confers ecclesiastical jurisdiction) is reserved to

the pope or the bishops. In countries where the head of the state is not

a Catholic, the bishops are regularly elected by the chapters, but the

civil power has the right to strike out objectionable names from the

list of candidates which is previously submitted to it. Other

conventions secure the exercise of the jurisdiction of the bishops in

their diocese, and determine precisely their authority over seminaries

and other ecclesiastical establishments of instruction and education, as

well as over public schools, so far as concerns the teaching of

religion. Certain concordats deal with the orders and congregations of

monks and nuns with a view to subjecting them to a certain control while

securing to them the legal exercise of their activities. Ecclesiastical

immunities, such as reservation of the criminal cases of the clergy,

exemption from military service and other privileges, are expressly

maintained in a certain number of pacts. One of the most important

subjects is that of church property. An agreement is come to as to the

conditions on which pious foundations are able to be made; the measure

in which church property shall contribute to the public expenses is

indicated; and, in the 19th century, the position of those who have

acquired confiscated church property is regularized. In exchange for

this surrender by the church of its ancient property the state engages

to contribute to the subsistence of the ministers of public worship, or

at least of certain of them.

Scholars agree in associating the earliest concordats with the

celebrated contest about investitures (q.v.), which so profoundly

agitated Christian Europe in the 11th and 12th centuries. The first in

date is that which was concluded for England with Henry I. in 1107 by

the efforts of St Anselm. The convention of Sutri of 1111 between Pope

Paschal II. and the emperor Henry V. having been rejected, negotiations

were resumed by Pope Calixtus II. and ended in the concordat of Worms

(1122), which was confirmed in 1177 by the convention between Alexander

III. and the emperor Frederick I. In this concordat a distinction was

made between spiritual investiture, by the ring and pastoral staff, and

lay or feudal investiture, by the sceptre. The emperor renounced

investiture by ring and staff, and permitted canonical elections; the

pope on his part recognized the king's right to perform lay investiture

and to assist at elections. Analogous to this convention was the

concordat concluded between Nicholas IV. and the king of Portugal in

1289.

The lengthy discussions on ecclesiastical benefices in Germany ended

finally in the concordat of Vienna, promulgated by Nicholas V. in 1448.

Already at the council of Constance attempts had been made to reduce the

excessive papal reservations and taxes in the matter of benefices,

privileges which had been established under the Avignon popes and during

the Great Schism; for example, Martin V. had had to make with the

different nations special arrangements which were valid for five years

only, and by which he renounced the revenues of vacant benefices. The

council of Basel went further: it suppressed annates and all the

benefice reservations which did not appear in the _Corpus Juris_.

Eugenius IV. repudiated the Basel decrees, and the negotiations

terminated in what was called the "concordat of the princes," which was

accepted by Eugenius IV. on his death-bed (bulls of February 5 and 7,

1447). In February 1448 Nicholas V. concluded the arrangement, which

took the name of the concordat of Vienna. This concordat, however, was

not received as law of the Empire. In Germany the concessions made to

the pope and the reservations maintained by him in the matter of taxes

and benefices were deemed excessive, and the prolonged discontent which

resulted was one of the causes of the success of the Lutheran

Reformation.

In France the opposition to the papal exactions had been still more

marked. In 1438 the Pragmatic Sanction of Bourges adopted and put into

practice the Basel decrees, and in spite of the incessant protests of

the Holy See the Pragmatic was observed throughout the 15th century,

even after its nominal abolition by Louis XI. in 1461. The situation was

modified by the concordat of Bologna, which was personally negotiated by

Leo X. and Francis I. of France at Bologna in December 1515, inserted in

the bull _Primitiva_ (August 18, 1516), and promulgated as law of the

realm in 1517, but not without rousing keen opposition. All bishoprics,

abbeys and priories were in the royal nomination, the canonical

institution belonging to the pope. The pope preserved the right to

nominate to vacant benefices _in curia_ and to certain benefices of the

chapters, but all the others were in the nomination of the bishops or

other inferior collators. However, the exercise of the pope's right of

provision still left considerable scope for papal intervention, and the

pope retained the annates.

In the 17th century we have only to mention the concordat between Urban

VIII. and the emperor Ferdinand II. for Bohemia in 1640. In the 18th

century concordats are numerous: there are two for Spain, in 1737 and

1753; two for the duchy of Milan, in 1757 and 1784; one for Poland, in

1736; five for Sardinia and Piedmont, in 1727, 1741, 1742, 1750 and

1770; and one for the kingdom of the Two Sicilies in 1741.

After the political and territorial upheavals which marked the end of

the 18th century and the beginning of the 19th, all these concordats

either fell to the ground or had to be recast. In the 19th century we

find a long series of concordats, of which a good number are still in

force. The first in date and importance is that of 1801, concluded for

France between Napoleon, First Consul, and Pius VII. after laborious

negotiations. Save in the provisions relating to ecclesiastical

benefices, all the property of which had been confiscated, it reproduced

the concordat of 1516. The pope condoned those who had acquired church

property; and by way of compensation the government engaged to give the

bishops and cures suitable salaries. The concordat was solemnly

promulgated on Easter Day 1802, but the government had added to it

unilateral provisions of Gallican tendencies, which were known as the

Organic Articles. After having been the law of the Church of France for

a century, it was denounced by the French government in 1905. It

remains, however, partly in force for Belgium and Alsace-Lorraine, which

formed part of French territory in 1801.

We conclude with a brief chronological survey of the concordats during

the 19th century, some now abrogated or replaced, others maintained. It

must be observed that the denunciation of a concordat by a nation does

not necessarily entail the separation of the church and the state in

that country or the rupture of diplomatic relations with Rome.

1803. For the Italian republic, between Napoleon and Pius VII.,

analogous to the French concordat; abrogated.

1813. It is impossible to designate as a concordat the concessions which

were wrested by violence from Pius VII. when ill and in seclusion at

Fontainebleau, and which he at once retracted.

1817. For Bavaria; still in force.

1817. New French concordat, in which Louis XVIII. endeavoured to revive

the concordat of 1516; but it was not put to the vote in the chambers,

and never came into force.

1817. For Piedmont, completed in 1836 and 1841; was suppressed, like

all other Italian concordats, by the formation of the kingdom of Italy.

1818. For the Two Sicilies, completed in 1834; lasted until the invasion

of the kingdom of Naples by Piedmont.

1821. For Prussia; still in force.

1821. For the Rhine provinces not incorporated in Prussia, with the

special object of regulating episcopal elections; concerned Wurttemberg,

Baden, Hesse, Saxony, Nassau, Frankfort, the Hanseatic towns, Oldenburg

and Waldeck. This first concordat was immediately suspended, and was not

ratified until 1827; it is partially maintained. It had to be replaced

by new concordats concluded with Wurttemberg in 1857 and the grand-duchy

of Baden in 1859; but these conventions, not having been ratified by

those countries, never came into force.

1824. For the kingdom of Hanover; maintained.

1827. For Belgium and Holland; abandoned by a common accord.

1828 and 1845. For Switzerland, for the reorganization of the bishoprics

of Basel and Soleure; in force.

1847. For Russia, never applied by Russia. It was followed by several

partial conventions.

1851. For Tuscany; lasted until the formation of the kingdom of Italy.

1851. For Spain, completed in 1859 and 1888; in force.

A convention on the religious orders was concluded in 1904, but had not

received the assent of the Senate in 1908.

1855. For Austria; denounced in 1870. Several of its provisions are

maintained by unilateral Austrian laws. The emperor of Austria continues

to nominate to bishoprics by virtue of rights anterior to this

concordat.

1857. For Portugal, completed in 1886 for the Portuguese possessions in

the Indies; in force.

1886. For Montenegro; in force.

The numerous concordats concluded towards the middle of the 19th century

with several of the South American republics either have not come into

force or have been denounced and replaced by a more or less pacific

modus vivendi.

For texts see Vincenzio Nussi, _Quinquaginta conventiones de rebus

ecclesiasticis_ (Rome, 1869; Mainz, 1870); Branden, _Concordata inter

S. Sedem et inclytam nationem Germaniae_, &c. (undated). On the nature

and obligation of concordats see Mgr. Giobbio, _I Concordati_ (Monza,

1900); _idem, Lezioni di diplomazia ecclesiastica_ (Rome, 1899-1903);

Cardinal Cavagnis, _Institutiones juris publici ecclesiastici_ (Rome,

1906). For the French concordats see A. Baudrillard, _Quatre cents ans

de concordat_ (Paris, 1905); Boulay de la Meurthe, _Documents sur la

negociation du concordat et sur les autres rapports de la France avec

le Saint-Siege_ (Paris, 1891-1905); Cardinal Mathieu, _Le Concordat de

1801_ (Paris, 1903); E. Sevestre, _Le Concordat de 1801, l'histoire,

le texte, la destinee_ (Paris, 1905). On the relations between the

church and the state in various countries see Vering, _Kirchenrecht_,

SS 30-53. (A. Bo.*)

FOOTNOTE:

[1] These are arranged under thirty-five distinct heads in Nussi's

_Quinquaginta conventiones de rebus ecclesiasticis_ (Rome, 1869).

CONCORDIA, a Roman goddess, the personification of peace and goodwill.

Several temples in her honour were erected at Rome, the most ancient

being one on the Capitol, dedicated to her by Camillus (367 B.C.),

subsequently restored by Livia, the wife of Augustus, and consecrated by

Tiberius (A.D. 10). Other temples were frequently built to commemorate

the restoration of civil harmony. Offerings were made to Concordia on

the birthdays of emperors, and Concordia Augusta was worshipped as the

promoter of harmony in the imperial household. Concordia was represented

as a matron holding in her right hand a _patera_ or an olive branch, and

in her left a _cornu copiae_ or a sceptre. Her symbols were two hands

joined together, and two serpents entwined about a herald's staff.

CONCORDIA (mod. _Concordia Sagittaria_), an ancient town of Venetia, in

Italy, 16 ft. above sea-level, 31 m. W. of Aquileia, at the junction of

roads to Altinum and Patavium, to Opitergium (and thence either to

Vicetia and Verona, or Feltria and Tridentum), to Noricum by the valley

of the Tilaventus (Tagliamento), and to Aquileia. It was a mere village

until the time of Augustus, who made it a colony. Under the later empire

it was one of the most important towns of Italy; it had a strong

garrison and a factory of missiles for the army. The cemetery of the

garrison has been excavated since 1873, and a large number of important

inscriptions, the majority belonging to the end of the 4th and the

beginning of the 5th centuries, have been discovered. It was taken and

destroyed by Attila in A.D. 452. Considerable remains of the ancient

town have been found--parts of the city walls, the sites of the forum

and the theatre, and probably that of the arms factory. The objects

found are preserved at Portogruaro, 1-1/4 m. to the N. The see of Concordia

was founded at an early period, and transferred in 1339 to Portogruaro,

where it still remains. The baptistery of Concordia was probably erected

in 1100.

See Ch. Hulsen in Pauly-Wissowa, _Realencyclopadie_, iv. (Stuttgart,

1901) 830. (T. As.)

CONCRETE (Lat. _concretus_, participle of _concrescere_, to grow

together), a term used in various technical senses with the general

significance of combination, conjunction, solidity. Thus the building

material made up of separate substances combined into one is known as

concrete (see below). In mathematics and music, the adjective has been

used as synonymous with "continuous" as opposed to "discrete," i.e.

"separate," "discontinuous." This antithesis is no doubt influenced by

the idea that the two words derive from a common origin, whereas

"discrete" is derived from the Latin _discernere_. In logic and also in

common language concrete terms are those which signify persons or things

as opposed to abstract terms which signify qualities, relations,

attributes (so J. S. Mill). Thus the term "man" is concrete, while

"manhood" and "humanity" are abstract, the names of the qualities

implied. Confusions between abstract and concrete terms are frequent;

thus the word "relation," which is strictly an abstract term implying

connexion between two things or persons, is often used instead of the

correct term "relative" for people related to one another. Concrete

terms are further subdivided as Singular, the names of things regarded

as individuals, and General or Common, the names which a number of

things bear in common in virtue of their possession of common

characteristics. These latter terms, though concrete in so far as they

denote the persons or things which are known by them (see DENOTATION),

have also an abstract sense when viewed connotatively, i.e. as implying

the quality or qualities in isolation from the individuals. The

ascription of adjectives to the class of concrete terms, upheld by J. S.

Mill, has been disputed on the ground that adjectives are applied both

to concrete and to abstract terms. Hence some logicians make a separate

class for adjectives, as being the names neither of things nor of

qualities, and describe them as Attributive terms.

CONCRETE, the name given to a building material consisting generally of

a mixture of broken stone, sand and some kind of cement. To these is

added water, which combining chemically with the cement conglomerates

the whole mixture into a solid mass, and forms a rough but strong

artificial stone. It has thus the immense advantage over natural stone

that it can be easily moulded while wet to any desired shape or size.

Moreover, its constituents can be obtained in almost any part of the

world, and its manufacture is extremely simple. On account of these

properties, builders have come to give it a distinct preference over

stone, brick, timber and other building materials. So popular has it

become that besides being used for massive constructions like

breakwaters, dock walls, culverts, and for foundations of buildings,

lighthouses and bridges, it is also proving its usefulness to the

architect and engineer in many other ways. A remarkable extension of the

use of concrete has been made possible by the introduction of scientific

methods of combining it with steel or iron. The floors and even the

walls of important buildings are made of this combination, and long span

bridges, tall factory chimneys, and large water-tanks are among the many

novel uses to which it has been put. Piles made of steel concrete are

driven into the ground with blows that would shatter the best of timber.

A fuller description of the combination of steel and concrete will be

given later.

Constituents.

The constituents of concrete are sometimes spoken of as the _matrix_ and

the _aggregate_, and these terms, though somewhat old-fashioned, are

convenient. The matrix is the lime or cement, whose chemical action

with the added water causes the concrete to solidify; and the aggregate

is the broken stone or hard material which is embedded in the matrix.

The matrix most commonly used is Portland cement, by far the best and

strongest of them all. The subject of its manufacture and examination is

a most important and interesting one, and the special article dealing

with it should be studied (see CEMENT), Here it will only be said that

before using Portland cement very careful tests should be made to

ascertain its quality and condition. Moreover, it should be kept in a

damp-proof store for a few weeks; and when taken out for use it should

be mixed and placed in position as quickly as possible, because rain, or

even moist air, spoils it by causing it to set prematurely. The oldest

of all the matrices is lime, and many splendid examples of its use by

the Romans still exist. It has been to a great extent superseded by

Portland cement, on account of the much greater strength of the latter,

though lime concrete is still used in many places for dry foundations

and small structures. To be of service the lime should be what is known

as "hydraulic," that is, not pure or "fat," but containing some

argillaceous matter, and should be carefully slaked with water before

being mixed with the aggregate. To ensure this being properly done, the

lumps of lime should be broken up small, and enough water to slake them

should be added, the lime then being allowed to rest for about

forty-eight hours, when the water changes the particles of quicklime to

hydrate of lime, and breaks up the hard lumps into a powder. The

hydrated lime, after being passed through a fine screen to sort out any

lumps unaffected by the water, is ready for concrete making, and if not

required at once should be stored in a dry place. Other matrices are

slag cement, a comparatively recent invention, and some other natural

and artificial cements which find occasional advocates. Materials like

tar and pitch are sometimes employed as a matrix; they are used hot and

without water, the solidifying action being due to cooling and to

evaporation of the mineral oils contained in them. Whatever matrix is

used, it is almost invariably "diluted" with sand, the grains of which

become coated with the finer particles of the matrix. The sand should be

coarse-grained and hard. It should be free from dirt--that is to say,

free from clay or soft mud, for instance, which prevents the cement

adhering to its particles, or again from sewage matter or any substance

which will chemically destroy the matrix. The grains should show no

signs of decay, and by preference should be of an angular shape. The

sand obtained by crushing granite and hard stones is excellent. When

lime is used as a matrix, certain natural earths such as pozzuolana or

trass, or, failing these, powdered bricks or tiles, may be used instead

of sand with great advantage. They have the property of entering into

chemical combination with the lime, forming a hard setting compound, and

increasing the hardness of the resulting concrete.

The commonest aggregates are broken stone and natural flint gravel.

Broken bricks or tiles and broken furnace slag are sometimes used, the

essential points being that the aggregate should be hard, clean and

sound. Generally speaking, broken stones will be rough and angular,

whereas the stones in flint gravel will be comparatively smooth and

round. It might be supposed, therefore, that the broken stone will

necessarily be the better aggregate, but this does not always follow.

Experience shows that, although spherical pebbles are to be avoided,

Portland cement adheres tightly to smooth flint surfaces, and that rough

stones often give a less compact concrete than smooth ones on account of

the difficulty of bedding them into the matrix when laying the concrete.

In mixing concrete there is always a tendency for the stones to separate

themselves from the sand and cement, and to form "pockets" of

honeycombed concrete which are neither water-tight nor strong. These are

much more liable to occur when the stones are flat and angular than when

they are round. Modern engineers favour the practice of having the

stones of various sizes instead of being uniform, because if these sizes

are wisely proportioned the whole mixture can be made more solid, and

the rough "pockets" avoided. For first-class work, however, and

especially in steel concrete, it is customary to reject very large

stones, and to insist that all shall pass through a ring 7/8 of an inch

in diameter.

The water, like all the other constituents of concrete, should be clean

and free from vegetable matter. At one time sea-water was thought to be

injurious, but modern investigation finds no objection to it except on

the score of appearance, efflorescence being more likely to occur when

it is used.

Sometimes in massive concrete structures large and heavy stones as big

as a man can lift are buried in the concrete after it is laid in

position but while it is still wet. The stones should be hard and clean,

and care must be taken that they are completely surrounded. Such

concrete is known as _rubble concrete_.

Proportions.

In proportioning the quantities of matrix to aggregate the ideal to be

aimed at is to get a concrete in which the voids or air-spaces shall be

as small as possible; and as the lime or cement is usually by far the

most expensive item, it is desirable to use as little of it as is

consistent with strength. When natural flint gravel containing both

stones and sand is used, it is usual to mix so much gravel with so much

lime or cement. The proportions in practice generally run from 3 to 1

for very strong work, down to 12 to 1 for unimportant work. Some

engineers have the sand separated from the stones by screens or sieves

and then remixed in definite proportions. When stones and sand are

obtained from different sources, their relative proportions have to be

decided upon. A common way of doing this is first to choose a proportion

of sand to cement, which will probably vary from 1 to 1 up to 4 to 1. It

then remains to determine what proportion of stones should be added. For

this purpose a large can, whose volume is known, is filled loosely with

stones, and the volume of the voids between them is determined by

measuring how much water the can will hold in addition to the stones. It

is then assumed that the quantity of sand and cement should be equal to

the voids. Moreover, the volume of sand and cement together is generally

assumed to be equal to that of the sand alone, as the cement to a large

extent fills up voids in the sand. For example, suppose it is resolved

to use 2 parts of sand to 1 of cement, and suppose that experiment shows

that in a pailful of stones two-fifths of the volume consists of voids,

then 2 parts of sand (or sand with cement) will fill voids in 5 parts of

stones, and the proportion of cement, sand, stones becomes 1:2:5. There

are several weak points in this reasoning, and a more accurate way of

determining the best proportions is to try different mixtures of cement,

stones and sand, filling them into different pails of the same size, and

then ascertaining, by weighing the pails, which mixture is the densest.

In determining the amount of water to be added, several things must be

considered. The amount required to combine chemically with the cement is

about 16% by weight, but in practice much more than this is used,

because of loss by evaporation, and the difficulty of ensuring that the

water shall be uniformly distributed. If the situation is cool, the

stone hard, and the concrete carefully rammed directly it is laid down

and kept moist with damp cloths, only just sufficient to moisten the

whole mass is required. On the other hand, water should be given

generously in hot weather, also when absorbent stone is used or when the

concrete is not rammed. In these cases the concrete should be allowed to

take all it can, but an excess of water which would flow away, carrying

the cement with it, should be avoided.

Mixing.

The thorough mixing of the constituents is a most important item in the

production of good concrete. Its object is to distribute all the

materials evenly throughout the mass, and it is performed in many

different ways, both by hand and by machine. The relative values of hand

and machine work are often discussed. Roughly it may be said that where

a large mass of concrete is to be mixed at one or two places a good

machine will be of great advantage. On the other hand, where the mixing

platform has to be constantly shifted, hand mixing is the more

convenient way. In hand mixing it is usual to measure out from gauge

boxes the sand, stones and cement or lime in a heap on a wooden

platform. Then they are turned once or twice in their dry state by men

with shovels. Next water is carefully added, and the mixture again

turned, when it is ready for depositing. For important work and

especially for thin structures the number of turnings should be

increased. Many types of mixing machines are obtainable; the favourite

type is one in which the materials are placed in a large iron box which

is made to rotate, thus tumbling the matrix and aggregate over each

other again and again. Another simple apparatus is a large vertical pipe

or shoot in which sloping baffle plates or shelves are placed at

intervals. The materials are fed in at the top of the shoot and fall

from shelf to shelf, the mixing being effected by the various shocks

thus given. When mixed the concrete is carried at once to the position

required, and if the matrix is quick-setting Portland cement this

operation must not be delayed.

Moulds.

One of the few drawbacks of concrete is that, unlike brickwork or

masonry, it has nearly always to be deposited within moulds or framing

which give it the required shape, and which are removed after it is set.

Indeed, the trouble and expense of these moulds sometimes prohibit its

use. It is essential that they shall be strong and stiff, so as not to

yield at all from the pressure of the wet concrete. The moulds for the

face of a wall consist generally of wooden shutters, leaning against

upright timbers which are secured by horizontal or raking struts to firm

ground, or to anything that will bear the weight. If a smooth and neat

face is wanted other precautions must be taken. The shutters must be

planed, and coated with a mixture of soap and oil, so as to come away

easily after the concrete is set. Moreover, when depositing the

concrete, a shovel or other tool must be worked between the wet concrete

and the shutter. This draws sand and water to the face and prevents the

rough stones from showing themselves. Sometimes rough concrete is

rendered over with a plaster of cement and sand after the shutters have

been removed, but this is liable to peel off and should be avoided.

Depositing.

The method of depositing depends on the situation. If for important

walls, or for small scantlings such as steel concrete generally

involves, the concrete should be deposited in quite small quantities and

very carefully rammed into position. If for massive walls, it is usual

to tip it out in large quantities from a barrow or wagon, and simply

spread it in layers about a foot thick. Depositing concrete under water

for breakwaters and bridge foundations requires special skill and

special appliances. It is usually done in one of three ways:--(a) By

moulding the concrete ashore into large blocks, which, when sufficiently

hard, are lowered through the water into position by a crane or similar

machine with the aid of divers. The most notable instance of this type

of construction was at the port of Dublin, where Mr B. B. Stoney made

blocks no less than 350 tons in weight. Each block formed a piece of the

quay wall 12 ft. long and 27 ft. high, being made on shore and then

deposited in position by floating sheers of special design. (b) By

moulding the concrete into what are called "bag-blocks." In this system

the concrete is filled into bags, which are at once lowered through the

water like the blocks. But in this case the concrete being still wet can

adapt itself more or less to the shape of the adjoining bags, and strong

rough walls can be built in this way. Sometimes the bags are made of

enormous size, as at Aberdeen breakwater, where the contents of each bag

weighed 50 tons. The canvas was laid in a hopper barge and there filled

with the concrete and sewn up. The enormous bag was then dropped through

a door in the bottom of the barge upon the breakwater foundation. (c) By

depositing the wet concrete through the water between temporary upright

timber frames which form the two faces of the wall. In this case very

great care has to be taken to prevent the cement from being washed away

from the other constituents when passing through the water. Indeed, this

is bound to happen more or less, but it is guarded against by lowering

the concrete slowly in a special box, the bottom of which is opened as

it reaches the ground on which the concrete is to be laid. This method

can only be carried out in still water, and where strong and tight

framing can be built which will prevent the concrete from escaping. For

small work the box can be replaced by a canvas bag secured by a special

tripping noose which can be loosened when the bag has reached the

ground. The concrete escapes from the bag, which is then drawn up and

refilled.

Strength.

Concrete may be compared with other building materials like masonry or

timber from various points of view, such as strength, durability,

convenience of building, fire-resistance, appearance and cost. Its

strength varies within very wide limits according to the quality and

proportions of the constituents, and the skill shown in mixing and

placing them. To give a rough idea, however, it may be said that its

safe crushing load would be about 1/2 cwt. per sq. in. for lime concrete,

and 1 to 5 cwt. for Portland cement concrete. The safe tensile strength

of Portland cement concrete would be something like one-tenth of its

compressive strength, and might be far less. On this account it is usual

to neglect the tensile strength of concrete in designing structures, and

to arrange the material in such a way that tensile stresses are avoided.

Hence slabs or beams of long span should not be built of plain concrete,

though when reinforced with steel it is admirably adapted for these

purposes.

Durability.

In regard to durability good Portland cement concrete is one of the most

durable materials known. Neither hot, cold, nor wet weather has

practically any effect whatever upon it. Frost will not injure it after

it has once set, though it is essential to guard it from frost during

the operations of mixing and depositing. The same praise cannot,

however, be given to lime concrete. Even though the best hydraulic lime

be used it is wise to confine it to places where it is not exposed to

the air, or to running water, and indeed for important structures the

use of lime should be avoided. Good Portland cement is so much stronger

than any lime that there are few situations where it is not cheaper as

well as better to use the former, because, although cement is the more

expensive matrix, a smaller proportion of it will suffice for use. Lime

should never be used in work exposed to sea-water, or to water

containing chemicals of any kind. Portland cement concrete, on the other

hand, may be used without fear in sea-water, provided that certain

reasonable precautions are taken. Considerable alarm was created about

the year 1887 by the failure of two or three large structures of

Portland cement concrete exposed to sea-water, both in England and other

countries. The matter was carefully investigated, and it was found that

the sulphate of magnesia in the sea-water has a decomposing action on

Portland cements, especially those which contain a large proportion of

lime or even of alumina. Indeed, no Portland cement is free from the

liability to be decomposed by sea-water, and on a moderate scale this

action is always going on more or less. But to ensure the permanence of

structures in sea-water the great object is to choose a cement

containing as little lime and alumina as possible, and free from

sulphates such as gypsum; and more important still to proportion the

sand and stones in the concrete in such a way that the structure is

practically non-porous. If this is done there is really nothing to fear.

On the other hand, if the concrete is rough and porous the sea-water

will gradually eat into the heart of the structure, especially in a case

like a dam, where the water, being higher on one side than the other,

constantly forces its way through the rough material, and decomposes the

Portland cement it contains.

Convenience and appearance.

As regards its convenience for building purposes it may be said roughly

that in "mass" work concrete is vastly more convenient than any other

material. But concrete is hampered by the fact that the surface always

has to be formed by means of wooden or other framing, and in the case of

thin walls or floors this framing becomes a serious item, involving

expense and delay. In appearance concrete can rarely if ever rival stone

or brickwork. It is true that it can be moulded to any desired shape,

but mouldings in concrete generally give the appearance of being

unsatisfactory imitations of stone. Moreover, its colour is not

pleasing. These defects will no doubt be overcome as concrete grows in

popularity as a building material and its aesthetic treatment is better

understood. Concrete pavings are being used in buildings of first

importance, the aggregate being very carefully selected, and in many

cases the whole mixture coloured by the use of pigments. Care must be

taken in their selection, however, as certain colouring matters such as

red lead are destructive to the cement. One of the great objections to

the appearance of concrete is the fact that soon after its erection

irregular cracks invariably appear on its surface. These cracks are

probably due to shrinkage while setting, aggravated by changes in

temperature. They occur no less in structures of masonry and brickwork,

but in these cases they generally follow the joints, and are almost

imperceptible. In the case of a smooth concrete face there are no joints

to follow, and the cracks become an ugly feature. They are sometimes

regulated by forming artificial "joints" in the structure by embedding

strips of wood or sheet iron at regular intervals, thus forming "lines

of weakness," at which the cracks therefore take place. A pleasing

"rough" appearance can be given to concrete by brushing it over soon

after it has set with a stiff brush dipped in water or dilute acid. Or,

if hard, its surface can be picked all over with a bush hammer.

Resistance to fire.

At one time Portland cement concrete was considered to be lacking in

fireproof qualities, but now it is regarded as one of the best

fire-resisting materials known. Although experiments on this matter are

badly needed, there is little doubt that good steel concrete is very

nearly indestructible by fire. The matrix should be Portland cement, and

the nature of the aggregate is important. Cinders have been and are

still much favoured for this purpose. The reason for this preference

lies in the fact that being porous and full of air, they are a good

non-conductor. But they are weak, and modern experience goes to show

that a strong concrete is the best, and that probably materials like

broken clamp bricks or burnt clay, which are porous and yet strong, are

far better than cinders as a fireproof aggregate. Limestone should be

avoided, as it soon splits under heat. The steel reinforcement is of

immense importance in fireproof work, because, if properly designed, it

enables the concrete to hold together and do its work even when it has

been cracked by fire and water. On the other hand, the concrete, being a

non-conductor, preserves the steel from being softened and twisted by

excessive temperature.

Cost.

Only very general remarks can be made on the subject of cost, as this

item varies greatly in different situations and with the market price of

the materials used. But in England it may be said that for massive work

such as big walls and foundations concrete is nearly always cheaper than

brickwork or masonry. On the other hand, for reasons already given, thin

walls, such as house walls, will cost more in concrete. Steel concrete

is even more difficult to generalize about, as its use is comparatively

new, but even in the matter of first cost it is proving a serious rival

to timber and to plate steel work, in floors, bridges and tanks, and to

brickwork and plain concrete in structures such as culverts and

retaining walls, towers and domes.

_Artificial Stones._--There are many varieties of concrete known as

"artificial stones" which can now be bought ready moulded into the form

of paving slabs, wall blocks and pipes: they are both pleasing in

appearance and very durable, being carefully made by skilled workmen.

Granolithic, globe granite and synthetic stone are examples of these.

Some, such as victoria stone, imperial stone and others, are hardened

and rendered non-porous after manufacture by immersion in a solution of

silicate of soda. Others, like Ford's silicate of limestone, are

practically lime mortars of excellent quality, which can be carved and

cut like a sandstone of fine quality.

_Steel Concrete._--The introduction of steel concrete (also known as

ferroconcrete, armoured concrete, or reinforced concrete) is generally

attributed to Joseph Monier, a French gardener, who about the year 1868

was anxious to build some concrete water basins. In order to reduce the

thickness of the walls and floor he conceived the idea of strengthening

them by building in a network of iron rods. As a matter of fact other

inventors were at work before Monier, but he deserves much credit for

having pushed his invention with vigour, and for having popularized the

use of this invaluable combination. The important point of his idea was

that it combined steel and concrete in such a way that the best

qualities of each material were brought into play. Concrete is readily

procured and easily moulded into shape. It has considerable compressive

or crushing strength, but is somewhat deficient in shearing strength,

and distinctly weak in tensile or pulling strength. Steel, on the other

hand, is easily procurable in simple forms such as long bars, and is

exceedingly strong. But it is difficult and expensive to work up into

various forms. Concrete has been avoided for making beams, slabs and

thin walls, just because its deficiency in tensile strength doomed it to

failure in such structures. But if a concrete slab be "reinforced" with

a network of small steel rods on its under surface where the tensile

stresses occur (see fig. 1) its strength will be enormously increased.

Thus the one point of weakness in the concrete slab is overcome by the

addition of steel in its simplest form, and both materials are used to

their best advantage. The scientific and practical value of this idea

was soon seized upon by various inventors and others, and the number of

patented systems of combining steel with concrete is constantly

increasing. Many of them are but slight modifications of the older

systems, and no attempt will be made here to describe them in full. In

England it is customary to allow the patentee of one or other system to

furnish his own designs, but this is as much because he has gained the

experience needed for success as because of any special virtue in this

or that system. The majority of these systems have emanated from France,

where steel concrete is largely used. America and Germany adopted them

readily, and in England some very large structures have been erected

with this material.

[Illustration: FIG. 1.--Expanded Steel Concrete Slab.]

[Illustration: FIG. 2. Expanded Metal.

Section through Intersection.]

The concrete itself should always be the very best quality, and Portland

cement should be used on account of its superiority to all others. The

aggregate should be the best obtainable and of different sizes, the

stones being freshly crushed and screened to pass through a 7/8 in.

ring. Very special care should be taken so to proportion the sand as to

make a perfectly impervious mixture. The proportions generally used are

4 to 1 and 5 to 1 in the case of gravel concrete, or 1:2:4 or 1:2-1/2:6 in

the case of broken stone concrete. But, generally speaking, in steel

concrete the cost of the cement is but a small item of the whole

expense, and it is worth while to be generous with it. If It is used in

piles or structures where it is likely to be bruised the proportion of

cement should be increased. The mixing and laying should all be done

very thoroughly; the concrete should be rammed in position, and any old

surface of concrete which has to be covered should be cleaned and coated

with fresh cement.

[Illustration: FIG. 3.--Hennebique System.]

The reinforcement mostly consists of mild steel and sometimes of wrought

iron: steel, however, is stronger and generally cheaper, so that in

English practice it holds the field. It should be mild and is usually

specified to have a breaking (tensile) strength of 28 to 32 tons per sq.

in., with an elongation of at least 20% in 8 in. Any bar should be

capable of being bent cold to the shape of the letter U without breaking

it. The steel is generally used in the form of long bars of circular

section. At first it was feared that such bars would have a tendency to

slip through the concrete in which they were embedded, but experiments

have shown that if the bar is not painted but has a natural rusty

surface a very considerable adhesion between the concrete and steel--as

much as 2 cwt. per sq. in. of contact surface--may be relied upon. Many

devices are used, however, to ensure the adhesion between concrete and

bar being perfect. (1) In the Hennebique system of construction the bars

are flattened at the end and split to form a "fish tail." (2) In the

Ransome system round bars are rejected in favour of square bars, which

have been twisted in a lathe in "barley sugar" fashion. (3) In the

Habrick system a flat bar similarly twisted is used. (4) In the Thacher

system a flat bar with projections like rivet heads is specially rolled

for this purpose. (5) In the Kahn system a square bar with "branches" is

used. (6) In the "expanded metal" system no bars are used, but instead a

strong steel netting is manufactured in large sheets by special

machinery. It is made by cutting a series of long slots at regular

intervals in a plain steel plate, which is then forcibly stretched out

sideways until the slots become diamond-shaped openings, and a trellis

work of steel without any joints is the result (fig. 2).

[Illustration: FIG. 4. Hennebique System.]

The structures in which steel concrete is used may be analysed as

consisting essentially of (1) walls, (2) columns, (3) piles, (4) beams,

(5) slabs, (6) arches. The designs differ considerably according to

which of these purposes the structure is to fulfil.

The effect of reinforcing _walls_ with steel is that they can be made

much thinner. The steel reinforcement is generally applied in the form

of vertical rods built in the wall at intervals, with lighter horizontal

rods which cross the vertical ones, and thus form a network of steel

which is buried in the concrete. These rods assist in taking the weight,

and the whole network binds the concrete together and prevents it from

cracking under a heavy load. The vertical rods should not be quite in

the middle of the wall but near the inner and outer faces alternately.

Care must be taken, however, that all the rods are covered by at least

an inch of concrete to preserve them from damage by rust or fire. In

the Cottancin system the concrete is replaced by bricks pierced with

holes through which the vertical rods are threaded; the horizontal

tie-rods are also used, but these do not merely cross the vertical ones,

but are woven in and out of them.

[Illustration: FIG. 5.--Steel and Concrete Pile (Williams System).]

[Illustration: FIG. 6.]

[Illustration: FIG. 7.]

_Columns_ have generally to bear a heavier weight than walls, and have

to be correspondingly stronger. They have usually been made square with

a vertical steel rod at each corner. To prevent these rods from

spreading apart they must be tied together at frequent intervals. In

some systems this is done by loops of stout wire connecting each rod to

its neighbour, and placed one above the other about every 10 in. up the

column (figs. 3 and 4). In other systems a stout wire is wound

continuously in a spiral form round the four rods. Modern investigation

goes to prove that the latter is theoretically the more economical way

of using the steel, as the spiral binding wire acts like the binding of

a wire gun, and prevents the concrete which it encloses from bursting

even under very great loads.

[Illustration: FIG. 8.]

[Illustration: FIG. 9.]

[Illustration: FIG. 10.]

[Illustration: FIG. 11.]

That steel concrete can be used for _piles_ is perhaps the most

astonishing feature in this invention. The fact that a comparatively

brittle material like concrete can be subjected not only to heavy loads

but also to the jar and vibration from the blows of a heavy pile ram

makes it appear as if its nature and properties had been changed by the

steel reinforcement. In a sense this is undoubtedly the case. A. G.

Considere's experiments have shown that concrete when reinforced is

capable of being stretched, without fracture, about twenty times as much

as plain concrete. Most of the piles driven in Great Britain have been

made on the Hennebique system with four or six longitudinal steel rods

tied together by stirrups or loops at frequent intervals. Piles made on

the Williams system have a steel rolled joist of I section buried in the

heart of the pile, and round it a series of steel wire hoops at regular

intervals (fig. 5). Whatever system is used, care must be taken not to

batter the head of the pile to pieces with the heavy ram. To prevent

this an iron "helmet" containing a lining of sawdust is fitted over the

head of the pile. The sawdust adapts itself to the rough shape of the

concrete, and deadens the blow to some extent.

[Illustration: FIG. 12.]

[Illustration: FIG. 13.]

[Illustration: FIG. 14.--Stirrup (Hennebique System).]

[Illustration: FIG. 15.]

But it is in the design of steel concrete _beams_ that the greatest

ingenuity has been shown, and almost every patentee of a "system" has

some new device for arranging the steel reinforcement to the best

advantage. Concrete by itself, though strong in compression, can offer

but little resistance to tensile and shearing stresses, and as these

stresses always occur in beams the problem arises how best to arrange

the steel so as to assist the concrete in bearing them. To meet tensile

stresses the steel is nearly always inserted in the form of bars running

along the beam. Figs. 6 to 9 show how they are arranged for different

loading. In each case the object is to place the bars as nearly as

possible where the tensile stresses occur. In cases where all the

stresses are heavy, that portion of the beam which is under compression

is similarly reinforced, though with smaller bars (figs. 10 and 11). But

as these tension and compression bars are generally placed near the

under and upper surface of the beam they are of little use in helping to

resist the shearing stresses which are greatest at its neutral axis.

(See BRIDGES.) These shearing stresses in a heavily loaded beam would

cause it to split horizontally at or near the centre. To prevent this

many ingenious devices have been introduced. (1) Perhaps one of the most

efficient is a diagonal bracing of steel wire passing to and fro between

the upper and lower bars and firmly secured to each by lapping or

otherwise (fig. 12); this device is used in the Coignet and other French

systems. (2) In the Hennebique system (which has found great favour in

England) vertical bands or "stirrups," as they are generally called, of

hoop steel are used (fig. 13). They are of U shape, and passing round

the tension bars extend to the top of the beam (figs. 14 and 3). They

are exceedingly thin, but being buried in concrete no danger of their

perishing from rust is to be feared. (3) In the Boussiron system a

similar stirrup is used, but instead of being vertical the two parts are

spread so that each is slightly inclined. (4) In the Coularon system,

the stirrups are inclined as in fig. 15, and consist of rods, the ends

of which are hooked over the tension and compression bars. (5) In the

Kahn system the stirrups are similarly arranged, but instead of being

merely secured to the tension bar, they form an integral part of it like

branches on a stem, the bar being rolled to a special section to admit

of this. (6) In many systems such as the "expanded metal" system, the

tension and compression rods together with the stirrups are all

abandoned in favour of a single rolled steel joist of I section, buried

in concrete (see fig. 16). Probably the weight of steel used in this way

is excessive, but the joists are cheap, readily procurable and easy to

handle.

Floor _slabs_ may be regarded as wide and shallow beams, and the remarks

made about the stresses in the one apply to the other also; accordingly,

the various devices which are used for strengthening beams recur in the

slabs. But in a thin slab, with its comparatively small span and light

load, the concrete is generally strong enough to bear the shearing

stresses unaided, and the reinforcement is devoted to assisting it where

the tensile stresses occur. For this purpose many designers simply use

the modification of the Monier system, consisting of a horizontal

network of crossed steel rods buried in the concrete. "Expanded metal"

too is admirably adapted for the purpose (fig. 1). In the Matrai system

thin wires are used instead of rods, and are securely fastened to rolled

steel joists, which form the beams on which the slabs rest; moreover,

the wires instead of being stretched tight from side to side of the slab

are allowed to sag as much as the thickness of the concrete will allow.

In the Williams system small flat bars are used, which are not quite

horizontal, but pass alternately over and under the rolled joists which

support the slabs.

[Illustration: FIG. 16.]

A concrete _arch_ is reinforced in much the same way as a wall, the

stresses being somewhat similar. The reinforcing rods are generally laid

both longitudinally and circumferentially. In the case of a culvert the

circumferential rods are sometimes laid continuously in the form of a

spiral as in the Bordenave system.

To those wishing to pursue the subject further, the following books

among others may be suggested:--Sabin, _Cement and Concrete_ (New

York); Taylor and Thompson, _Concrete, Plain and Reinforced_ (London);

Sutcliffe, _Concrete, Nature and Uses_ (London); Marsh and Dunn,

_Reinforced Concrete_ (London); Twelvetrees, _Concrete Steel_

(London); Paul Christophe, _Le Beton arme_ (Paris); Buel and Hill,

_Reinforced Concrete Construction_ (London). (F. E. W.-S.)

CONCRETION, in petrology, a name applied to nodular or irregularly

shaped masses of various size occurring in a great variety of

sedimentary rocks, differing in composition from the main mass of the

rock, and in most cases obviously formed by some chemical process which

ensued after the rock was deposited. As these bodies present so many

variations in composition and in structure, it will conduce to clearness

if some of the commonest be briefly adverted to. In sandstones there are

often hard rounded lumps, which separate out when the rock is broken or

weathered. They are mostly siliceous, but sometimes calcareous, and may

differ very little in general appearance from the bulk of the sandstone.

Through them the bedding passes uninterrupted, thus showing that they

are not pebbles; often in their centres shells or fragments of plants

are found. Argillaceous sandstones and flagstones very frequently

contain "clay galls" or concretionary lumps richer in clay than the

remainder of the rock. Nodules of pyrites and of marcasite are common in

many clays, sandstones and marls. Their outer surfaces are tuberculate;

internally they commonly have a radiate fibrous structure. Usually they

are covered with a dark brown crust of limonite produced by weathering;

occasionally imperfect crystalline faces may bound them. Not

infrequently (e.g. in the Gault) these pyritous nodules contain altered

fossils. In clays also siliceous and calcareous concretions are often

found. They present an extraordinary variety of shapes, often

grotesquely resembling figures of men or animals, fruits, &c, and have

in many countries excited popular wonder, being regarded as of

supernatural origin ("fairy-stones," &c.), and used as charms.

Another type of concretion, very abundant in many clays and shales, is

the "septarian nodule." These are usually flattened disk-shaped or

ovoid, often lobulate externally like the surface of a kidney. When

split open they prove to be traversed by a network of cracks, which are

usually filled with calcite and other minerals. These white infillings

of the fissures resemble partitions; hence the name from the Latin

_septum_, a partition. Sometimes the cracks are partly empty. They vary

up to half an inch in breadth, and are best seen when the nodule is cut

through with a saw. These concretions may be calcareous or may consist

of carbonate of iron. The former are common in some beds of the London

Clay, and were formerly used for making cement. The clay-ironstone

nodules or sphaerosiderites are very abundant in some Carboniferous

shales, and have served in some places as iron ores. Some of the largest

specimens are 3 ft. in diameter. In the centre of these nodules fossils

are often found, e.g. coprolites, pieces of plants, fish teeth and

scales. Phosphatic concretions are often present in certain limestones,

clays, shelly sands and marls. They occur, for example, in the Cambridge

Greensand, and at the base of certain of the Pliocene beds in the east

of England. In many places they have been worked, under the name of

"coprolite-beds," as sources of artificial manures. Bones of animals

more or less completely mineralized are frequent in these phosphatic

concretions, the commonest being fragments of extinct reptilia. Their

presence points to a source for the phosphate of lime.

Another very important series of concretionary structures are the flint

nodules which occur in chalk, and the patches and bands of chert which

are found in limestones. Flints consist of dark-coloured

cryptocrystalline silica. They weather grey or white by the removal of

their more soluble portions by percolating water. Their shapes are

exceedingly varied, and often they are studded with tubercules and

nodosities. Sometimes they have internal cavities, and very frequently

they contain shells of echinoderms, molluscs, &c., partly or entirely

replaced by silica, but preserving their original forms. Chert occurs in

bands and tabular masses rather than in nodules; it often replaces

considerable portions of a bed of limestone (as in the Carboniferous

Limestones of Ireland). Corals and other fossils frequently occur in

chert, and when sliced and microscopically examined both flint and chert

often show silicified foraminifera, polyzoa &c., and sponge spicules.

Flints in chalk frequently lie along joints which may be vertical or may

be nearly horizontal and parallel to the bedding. Hence they increase

the stratified appearance of natural exposures of chalk.

It will be seen from the details given above that concretions may be

calcareous, siliceous, argillaceous and phosphatic, and they may consist

of carbonate or sulphide of iron. In the red clay of the deep sea bottom

concretionary masses rich in manganese dioxide are being formed, and are

sometimes brought up by the dredge. In clays large crystals of gypsum,

having the shape of an arrow-head, are occasionally found in some

numbers. They bear a considerable resemblance to some concretions, e.g.

crystalline marcasite and pyrite nodules. These examples will indicate

the great variety of substances which may give rise to concretionary

structures.

Some concretions are amorphous, e.g. phosphatic nodules; others are

cryptocrystalline, e.g. flint and chert; others finely crystalline, e.g.

pyrites, sphaerosiderite; others consist of large crystals, e.g. gypsum,

barytes, pyrites and marcasite. From this it is clear that the formation

of concretions is not closely dependent on any single inorganic

substance, or on any type of crystalline structure. Concretions seem to

arise from the tendency of chemical compounds to be slowly dissolved by

interstitial water, either while the deposit is unconsolidated or at a

later period. Certain nuclei, present in the rock, then determine

reprecipitation of these solutions, and the deposit once begun goes on

till either the supply of material for growth is exhausted, or the

physical character of the bed is changed by pressure and consolidation

till it is no longer favourable to further accretion. The process

resembles the growth of a crystal in a solution by slowly attracting to

itself molecules of suitable nature from the surrounding medium. But in

the majority of cases it is not the crystalline forces, or not these

alone, which attract the particles. The structure of a flint, for

example, shows that the material had so little tendency to crystallize

that it remained permanently in cryptocrystalline or sub-crystalline

state. That the concretions grew in the solid sediment is proved by the

manner in which lines of bedding pass through them and not round them.

This is beautifully shown by many siliceous and calcareous nodules out

of recent clays. That the sediment was in a soft condition may be

inferred from the purity and perfect crystalline form of some of these

bodies, e.g. gypsum, pyrites, marcasite. The crystals must have pushed

aside the yielding matrix as they gradually enlarged. In deep-sea

dredgings concretions of phosphate of lime and manganese dioxide are

frequently brought up; this shows that concretionary action operates on

the sea floor in muddy sediments, which have only recently been laid

down. The phosphatic nodules seem to originate around the dead bodies of

fishes, and manganese incrustations frequently enclose teeth of sharks,

ear-bones of whales, &c. This recalls the occurrence of fossils in

septarian nodules, flints, phosphatic concretions, &c., in the older

strata. Probably the decomposing organic matter partly supplied

substances for the growth of the nodules (phosphates, carbonates, &c.),

partly acted as reducing agents, or otherwise determined mineral

precipitation in those places where organic remains were mingled with

the sediment. (J. S. F.)

CONCUBINAGE (Lat. _concubina_, a concubine; from _con-_, with, and

_cubare_, to lie), the state of a man and woman cohabiting as married

persons without the full sanctions of legal marriage. In early

historical times, when marriage laws had scarcely advanced beyond the

purely customary stage, the concubine was definitely recognized as a

sort of inferior wife, differing from those of the first rank mainly by

the absence of permanent guarantees. The history of Abraham's family

shows us clearly that the concubine might be dismissed at any time, and

her children were liable to be cast off equally summarily with gifts, in

order to leave the inheritance free for the wife's sons (Genesis xxi. 9

ff., xxv. 5 ff.).

The Roman law recognized two classes of legal marriage: (1) with the

definite public ceremonies of _confarreatio_ or _coemptio_, and (2)

without any public form whatever and resting merely on the _affectio

maritalis_, i.e. the fixed intention of taking a particular woman as a

permanent spouse.[1] Next to these strictly lawful marriages came

concubinage as a recognized legal status, so long as the two parties

were not married and had no other concubines. It differed from the

formless marriage in the absence (1) of _affectio maritalis_, and

therefore (2) of full conjugal rights. For instance, the concubine was

not raised, like the wife, to her husband's rank, nor were her children

legitimate, though they enjoyed legal rights forbidden to mere bastards,

e.g. the father was bound to maintain them and to leave them (in the

absence of legitimate children) one-sixth of his property; moreover,

they might be fully legitimated by the subsequent marriage of their

parents.

In the East, the emperor Leo the Philosopher (d. 911) insisted on formal

marriage as the only legal status; but in the Western Empire concubinage

was still recognized even by the Christian emperors. The early

Christians had naturally preferred the formless marriage of the Roman

law as being free from all taint of pagan idolatry; and the

ecclesiastical authorities recognized concubinage also. The first

council of Toledo (398) bids the faithful restrict himself "to a single

wife or concubine, as it shall please him";[2] and there is a similar

canon of the Roman synod held by Pope Eugenius II. in 826. Even as late

as the Roman councils of 1052 and 1063, the suspension from communion of

laymen who had a wife and a concubine _at the same time_ implies that

mere concubinage was tolerated. It was also recognized by many early

civil codes. In Germany "left-handed" or "morganatic" marriages were

allowed by the Salic law between nobles and women of lower rank. In

different states of Spain the laws of the later middle ages recognized

concubinage under the name of _barragania_, the contract being

lifelong, the woman obtaining by it a right to maintenance during life,

and sometimes also to part of the succession, and the sons ranking as

nobles if their father was a noble. In Iceland, the concubine was

recognized in addition to the lawful wife, though it was forbidden that

they should dwell in the same house. The Norwegian law of the later

middle ages provided definitely that in default of legitimate sons, the

kingdom should descend to illegitimates. In the Danish code of Valdemar

II., which was in force from 1280 to 1683, it was provided that a

concubine kept openly for three years shall thereby become a legal wife;

this was the custom of _hand vesten_, the "handfasting" of the English

and Scottish borders, which appears in Scott's _Monastery_. In Scotland,

the laws of William the Lion (d. 1214) speak of concubinage as a

recognized institution; and, in the same century, the great English

legist Bracton treats the "concubina _legitima_" as entitled to certain

rights.[3] There seems to have been at times a pardonable confusion

between some quasi-legitimate unions and those marriages by mere word of

mouth, without ecclesiastical or other ceremonies, which the church,

after some natural hesitation, pronounced to be valid.[4] Another and

more serious confusion between concubinage and marriage was caused by

the gradual enforcement of clerical celibacy (see CELIBACY). During the

bitter conflict between laws which forbade sacerdotal marriages and long

custom which had permitted them, it was natural that the legislators and

the ascetic party generally should studiously speak of the priests'

wives as concubines, and do all in their power to reduce them to this

position. This very naturally resulted in a too frequent substitution of

clerical concubinage for marriage; and the resultant evils form one of

the commonest themes of complaint in church councils of the later middle

ages.[5] Concubinage in general was struck at by the concordat between

the Pope Leo X. and Francis I. of France in 1516; and the council of

Trent, while insisting on far more stringent conditions for lawful

marriage than those which had prevailed in the middle ages, imposed at

last heavy ecclesiastical penalties on concubinage and appealed to the

secular arm for help against contumacious offenders (Sessio xxiv. cap.

8).

AUTHORITIES.--Besides those quoted in the notes, the reader may

consult with advantage Du Cange's _Glossarium, s.v. Concubina_, the

article "Concubinat" in Wetzer and Welte's _Kirchenlexikon_ (2nd ed.,

Freiburg i/B., 1884), and Dr H. C. Lea's _History of Sacerdotal

Celibacy_ (3rd ed., London, 1907). (G. G. Co.)

FOOTNOTES:

[1] The difference between English and Scottish law, which once made

"Gretna Green marriages" so frequent, is due to the fact that Scotland

adopted the Roman law (which on this particular point was followed by

the whole medieval church).

[2] Gratian, in the 12th century, tried to explain this away by

assuming that concubinage here referred to meant a formless marriage;

but in 398 a church council can scarcely so have misused the technical

terms of the then current civil law (Gratian, _Decretum_, pars i.

dist. xxiv. c. 4).

[3] Bracton, _De Legibus_, lib. iii. tract. ii. c. 28, S I, and lib.

iv. tract. vi. c. 8, S 4.

[4] F. Pollock and F. W. Maitland, _Hist. of English Law_, 2nd ed.

vol. ii. p. 370. In the case of Richard de Anesty, decided by papal

rescript in 1143, "a marriage solemnly celebrated in church, a

marriage of which a child had been born, was set aside as null in

favour of an earlier marriage constituted by a mere exchange of

consenting words" (ibid. p. 367; cf. the similar decretal of Alexander

III. on p. 371). The great medieval canon lawyer Lyndwood illustrates

the difficulty of distinguishing, even as late as the middle of the

15th century, between concubinage and a clandestine, though legal,

marriage. He falls back on the definition of an earlier canonist that

if the woman eats out of the same dish with the man, and if he takes

her to church, she may be presumed to be his wife; if, however, he

sends her to draw water and dresses her in vile clothing, she is

probably a concubine (_Provinciale_, ed. Oxon. 1679, p. 10, _s.v.

concubinarios_).

[5] It may be gathered from the Dominican C. L. Richard's _Analysis

Conciliorum_ (vol. ii., 1778) that there were more than 110 such

complaints in councils and synods between the years 1009 and 1528. Dr

Rashdall (_Universities of Europe in the Middle Ages_, vol. ii. p.

691, note) points out that a master of the university of Prague, in

1499, complained openly to the authorities against a bachelor for

assaulting his concubine.

CONDE, PRINCES OF. The French title of prince of Conde, assumed from the

ancient town of Conde-sur-l'Escaut, was borne by a branch of the house

of Bourbon. The first who assumed it was the famous Huguenot leader,

Louis de Bourbon (see below), the fifth son of Charles de Bourbon, duke

of Vendome. His son, Henry, prince of Conde (1552-1588), also belonged

to the Huguenot party. Fleeing to Germany he raised a small army with

which in 1575 he joined Alencon. He became leader of the Huguenots, but

after several years' fighting was taken prisoner of war. Not long after

he died of poison, administered, according to the belief of his

contemporaries, by his wife, Catherine de la Tremouille. This event,

among others, awoke strong suspicions as to the legitimacy of his heir

and namesake, Henry, prince of Conde (1588-1646). King Henry IV.,

however, did not take advantage of the scandal. In 1609 he caused the

prince of Conde to marry Charlotte de Montmorency, whom shortly after

Conde was obliged to save from the king's persistent gallantry by a

hasty flight, first to Spain and then to Italy. On the death of Henry,

Conde returned to France, and intrigued against the regent, Marie de'

Medici; but he was seized, and imprisoned for three years (1616-1619).

There was at that time before the court a plea for his divorce from his

wife, but she now devoted herself to enliven his captivity at the cost

of her own liberty. During the rest of his life Conde was a faithful

servant of the king. He strove to blot out the memory of the Huguenot

connexions of his house by affecting the greatest zeal against

Protestants. His old ambition changed into a desire for the safe

aggrandizement of his family, which he magnificently achieved, and with

that end he bowed before Richelieu, whose niece he forced his son to

marry. His son Louis, the great Conde, is separately noticed below.

The next in succession was Henry Jules, prince of Conde (1643-1709), the

son of the great Conde and of Clemence de Maille, niece of Richelieu. He

fought with distinction under his father in Franche-Comte and the Low

Countries; but he was heartless, avaricious and undoubtedly insane. The

end of his life was marked by singular hypochondriacal fancies. He

believed at one time that he was dead, and refused to eat till some of

his attendants dressed in sheets set him the example. His grandson,

Louis Henry, duke of Bourbon (1692-1740), Louis XV.'s minister, did not

assume the title of prince of Conde which properly belonged to him.