[1] Edwards recognized the abuse of impulses and impressions, opposed
itinerant and lay preachers, and defended a well-ordered and
well-educated clergy.
[2] These were probably not fiction like _Pamela_, as Sir Leslie
Stephen suggested, for Edwards listed several of Richardson's novels
for his own reading, and considered _Sir Charles Grandison_ a very
moral and excellent work.
[3] Besides the younger Jonathan many of Edwards's descendants were
great, brilliant or versatile men. Among them were: his son
Pierrepont (1750-1826), a brilliant but erratic member of the
Connecticut bar, tolerant in religious matters and bitterly hated by
stern Calvinists, a man whose personal morality resembled greatly
that of Aaron Burr; his grandsons, William Edwards (1770-1851), an
inventor of important leather rolling machinery; Aaron Burr the son
of Esther Edwards; Timothy Dwight (1752-1817), son of Mary Edwards,
and his brother Theodore Dwight, a Federalist politician, a member,
the secretary and the historian of the Hartford Convention; his
great-grandsons, Tryon Edwards (1809-1894) and Sereno Edwards Dwight,
theologian, educationalist and author; and his great-great-grandsons,
Theodore William Dwight, the jurist, and Timothy Dwight, second of
that name to be president of Yale.
EDWARDS, LEWIS (1809-1887), Welsh Nonconformist divine, was born in the
parish of Llanbadarn Fawr, Cardiganshire, on the 27th of October 1809.
He was educated at Aberystwyth and at Llangeitho, and then himself kept
school in both these places. He had already begun to preach for the
Calvinistic Methodists when, in December 1830, he went to London to take
advantage of the newly-opened university. In 1832 he settled as minister
at Laugharne in Carmarthenshire, and the following year went to
Edinburgh, where a special resolution of the senate allowed him to
graduate at the end of his third session. He was now better able to
further his plans for providing a trained ministry for his church.
Previously, the success of the Methodist preachers had been due mainly
to their natural gifts. Edwards made his home at Bala, and there, in
1837, with David Charles, his brother-in-law, he opened a school, which
ultimately became the denominational college for north Wales. He died on
the 19th of July 1887.
Edwards may fairly be called one of the makers of modern Wales. Through
his hands there passed generation after generation of preachers, who
carried his influence to every corner of the principality. By fostering
competitive meetings and by his writings, especially in _Y Traethodydd_
("The Essayist"), a quarterly magazine which he founded in 1845 and
edited for ten years, he did much to inform and educate his countrymen
on literary and theological subjects. A new college was built at Bala in
1867, for which he raised L10,000. His chief publication was a
noteworthy book on _The Doctrine of the Atonement_, cast in the form of
a dialogue between master and pupil; the treatment is forensic, and
emphasis is laid on merit. It was due to him that the North and South
Wales Calvinistic Methodist Associations united to form an annual
General Assembly; he was its moderator in 1866 and again in 1876. He was
successful in bringing the various churches of the Presbyterian order
into closer touch with each other, and unwearying in his efforts to
promote education for his countrymen.
See _Bywyd a Llythyrau y Parch_, (i.e. Life and Letters of the Rev.)
_Lewis Edwards, D.D._, by his son T. C. Edwards.
EDWARDS, RICHARD (c. 1523-1566), English musician and playwright, was
born in Somersetshire, became a scholar of Corpus Christi College,
Oxford, in 1540, and took his M.A. degree in 1547. He was appointed in
1561 a gentleman of the chapel royal and master of the children, and
entered Lincoln's Inn in 1564, where at Christmas in that year he
produced a play which was acted by his choir boys. On the 3rd of
September 1566 his play, _Palamon and Arcite_, was performed before
Queen Elizabeth in the Hall of Christ Church, Oxford. Another play,
_Damon and Pithias_, tragic in subject but with scenes of vulgar farce,
entered at Stationers' Hall in 1567-8, appeared in 1571 and was
reprinted in 1582; it may be found in Dodsley's _Old Plays_, vol. i.,
and _Ancient British Drama_, vol. i. It is written in rhymed lines of
rude construction, varying in length and neglecting the _caesura_. A
number of the author's shorter pieces are preserved in the _Paradise of
Dainty Devices_, first published in 1575, and reprinted in the _British
Bibliographer_, vol. iii.; the best known are the lines on May, the
_Amantium Irae_, and the _Commendation of Music_, which has the honour
of furnishing a stanza to _Romeo and Juliet_. The _Historie of Damocles
and Dionise_ is assigned to him in the 1578 edition of the _Paradise_.
Sir John Hawkins credited him with the part song "In going to my lonely
bed"; the words are certainly his, and probably the music. In his own
day Edwards was highly esteemed. The fine poem, "The Soul's Knell," is
supposed to have been written by him when dying.
See _Grove's Dict. of Music_ (new edition); the _Shakespeare Soc.
Papers_, vol. ii. art. vi.; Ward, _English Dram. Literature_, vol. i.
EDWARDS, THOMAS CHARLES (1837-1900), Welsh Nonconformist divine and
educationist, was born at Bala, Merioneth, on the 22nd of September
1837, the son of Lewis Edwards (q.v.). His resolve to become a minister
was deepened by the revival of 1858-1859. After taking his degrees at
London (B.A. 1861, M.A. 1862), he matriculated at St Alban Hall, Oxford,
in October 1862, the university having just been opened to dissenters.
He obtained a scholarship at Lincoln College in 1864, and took a first
class in the school of Literae Humaniores in 1866. He was especially
influenced by Mark Pattison and Jowett, who counselled him to be true to
the church of his father, in which he had already been ordained. Early
in 1867 he became minister at Windsor Street, Liverpool, but left it to
become first principal of the University College of Wales at
Aberystwyth, which had been established through the efforts of Sir Hugh
Owen and other enthusiasts. The college was opened with a staff of three
professors and twenty-five students in October 1872, and for some years
its career was chequered enough. Edwards, however, proved a skilful
pilot, and his hold on the affection of the Welsh people enabled him to
raise the college to a high level of efficiency. When it was destroyed
by fire in 1885 he collected L25,000 to rebuild it; the remainder of the
necessary L40,000 being given by the government (L10,000) and by the
people of Aberystwyth (L5000). In 1891 he gave up what had been the main
work of his life to accept an undertaking that was even nearer his
heart, the principalship of the theological college at Bala. A stroke of
paralysis in 1894 fatally weakened him, but he continued at work till
his death on the 22nd of March 1900. The Calvinistic Methodist Church of
Wales bestowed on him every honour in their possession, and he received
the degree of D.D. from the universities of Edinburgh (1887) and Wales
(1898). His chief works were a _Commentary on 1 Corinthians_ (1885), the
_Epistle to the Hebrews_ ("Expositor's Bible" series, 1888), and _The
God-Man_ ("Davies Lecture," 1895).
EDWARDSVILLE, a city and the county-seat of Madison county, Illinois,
U.S.A., in the south-western part of the state, on Cahokia Creek, about
18 m. N.E. of St Louis. Pop. (1890) 3561; (1900) 4157 (573
foreign-born); (1910) 5014. Edwardsville is served by the Toledo, St
Louis & Western, the Wabash, the Litchfield & Madison, and the Illinois
Terminal railways, and is connected with St Louis by three electric
lines. It has a Carnegie library. The city's principal manufactures are
carriages, ploughs, brick, machinery, sanitary ware and plumber's goods.
Bituminous coal is extensively mined in the vicinity. Adjoining
Edwardsville is the co-operative village Leclaire (unincorporated), with
the factory of the N.O. Nelson Manufacturing Co., makers of plumber's
supplies, brass goods, sanitary fixtures, &c.; the village was founded
in 1890 by Nelson O. Nelson (b. 1844), and nearly all of the residents
are employed by the company of which he is the head; they share to a
certain extent in its profits, and are encouraged to own their own
homes. The company supports a school, Leclaire Academy, and has built a
club-house, bowling alleys, tennis-courts, base-ball grounds, &c. The
first settlement on the site of Edwardsville was made in 1812, and in
1815 the town was laid out and named in honour of Ninian Edwards
(1775-1833), the governor of the Illinois Territory (1809-1818), and
later United States senator (1818-1824) and governor of the state of
Illinois (1826-1830). Edwardsville was incorporated in 1819 and received
its present charter in 1872.
EDWARDSVILLE, a borough of Luzerne county, Pennsylvania, U.S.A., on the
north branch of the Susquehanna river, adjoining Kingston and close to
the north-western limits of Wilkes-Barre (on the opposite side of the
river), in the north-eastern part of the state; the official name of the
post office is Edwardsdale. Pop. (1890), 3284; (1900), 5165, of whom
2645 were foreign-born; (1910 census), 8407. It is served by the
electric line of the Wilkes-Barre & Wyoming Valley Traction Co. Coal
mining and brewing are the chief industries. Edwardsville was
incorporated in 1884.
EDWIN, AEDUINI or EDWINE (585-633), king of Northumbria, was the son of
Ella of Deira. On the seizure of Deira by AEthelfrith of Bernicia
(probably 605), Edwin was expelled and is said to have taken refuge with
Cadfan, king of Gwynedd. After the battle of Chester, in which
AEthelfrith defeated the Welsh, Edwin fled to Roedwald, the powerful
king of East Anglia, who after some wavering espoused his cause and
defeated and slew AEthelfrith at the river Idle in 617. Edwin thereupon
succeeded to the Northumbrian throne, driving out the sons of
AEthelfrith. There is little evidence of external activity on the part of
Edwin before 625. It is probable that the conquest of the Celtic kingdom
of Elmet, a district in the neighbourhood of the modern Leeds, ruled
over by a king named Cerdic (Ceredig) is to be referred to this period,
and this may have led to the later quarrel with Cadwallon, king of
Gwynedd. Edwin seems also to have annexed Lindsey to his kingdom by 625.
In this year he entered upon negotiations with Eadbald of Kent for a
marriage with his sister AEthelberg. It was made a condition that
Christianity should be tolerated in Northumbria, and accordingly
Paulinus was consecrated bishop by Justus in 625, and was sent to
Northumbria with AEthelberg. According to Bede, Edwin was favourably
disposed towards Christianity owing to a vision he had seen at the court
of Roedwald, and in 626 he allowed Eanfled, his daughter by AEthelberg,
to be baptized. On the day of the birth of his daughter, the king's life
had been attempted by Eomer, an emissary of Cwichelm, king of Wessex.
Preserved by the devotion of his thegn Lilla, Edwin vowed to become a
Christian if victorious over his treacherous enemy. He was successful in
the ensuing campaign, and abstained from the worship of the gods of his
race. A letter of Pope Boniface helped to decide him, and after
consulting his friends and counsellors, of whom the priest Coifi
afterwards took a prominent part in destroying the temple at Goodmanham,
he was baptized with his people and nobles at York, at Easter 627. In
this town he granted Paulinus a see, built a wooden church and began one
of stone. Besides York, Yeavering and Maelmin in Bernicia, and Catterick
in Deira, were the chief scenes of the work of Paulinus. It was the
influence of Edwin which led to the conversion of Eorpwald of East
Anglia. Bede notices the peaceful state of Britain at this time, and
relates that Edwin was preceded on his progresses by a kind of standard
like that borne before the Roman emperors. In 633 Cadwallon of North
Wales and Penda of Mercia rose against Edwin and slew him at Hatfield
near Doncaster. His kinsman Osric succeeded in Deira, and Eanfrith the
son of AEthelfrith in Bernicia. Bede tells us that Edwin had subdued the
islands of Anglesey and Man, and the _Annales Cambriae_ record that he
besieged Cadwallon (perhaps in 632) in the island of Glannauc (Puffin
Island). He was definitely recognized as overlord by all the other
Anglo-Saxon kings of his day except Eadbald of Kent.
See Bede, _Hist. Eccl._ (ed. Plummer, Oxford, 1896), ii. 5, 9, 11, 12,
13, 15, 16, 18, 20; Nennius (ed. San Marte, 1844), S 63; _Vita S.
Oswaldi_, ix. Simeon of Durham (ed. Arnold, London, 1882-1885, vol. i.
R.S.). (F. G. M. B.)
EDWIN, JOHN (1749-1790), English actor, was born in London on the 10th
of August 1749, the son of a watchmaker. As a youth, he appeared in the
provinces, in minor parts; and at Bath in 1768 he formed a connexion
with a Mrs Walmsley, a milliner, who bore him a son, but whom he
afterwards deserted. His first London appearance was at the Haymarket in
1776 as Flaw in Samuel Foote's _The Cozeners_, but when George Colman
took over the theatre he was given better parts and became its leading
actor. In 1779 he was at Covent Garden, and played there or at the
Haymarket until his death on the 31st of October 1790. Ascribed to him
are _The Last Legacy of John Edwin_, 1780; _Edwin's Jests_ and _Edwin's
Pills to Purge Melancholy_.
His son, JOHN EDWIN (1768-1805), made a first appearance on the stage at
the Haymarket as Hengo in Beaumont and Fletcher's _Bonduca_ in 1778, and
from that time acted frequently with his father, and managed the private
theatricals organized by his intimate friend Lord Barrymore at Wargrave,
Berks. In 1791 he married Elizabeth Rebecca Richards, an actress already
well known in juvenile parts, and played at the Haymarket and elsewhere
thereafter with her. He died in Dublin on the 22nd of February 1805. His
widow joined the Drury Lane company (then playing, on account of the
fire of 1809, at the Lyceum), and took all the leading characters in the
comedies of the day. She died on the 3rd of August 1854.
EDWY (EADWIG), "THE FAIR" (c. 940-959), king of the English, was the
eldest son of King Edmund and AElfgifu, and succeeded his uncle Eadred
in 955, when he was little more than fifteen years old. He was crowned
at Kingston by Archbishop Odo, and his troubles began at the coronation
feast. He had retired to enjoy the company of the ladies AEthelgifu
(perhaps his foster-mother) and her daughter AElfgifu, whom the king
intended to marry. The nobles resented the king's withdrawal, and he was
induced by Dunstan and Cynesige, bishop of Lichfield, to return to the
feast. Edwy naturally resented this interference, and in 957 Dunstan was
driven into exile. By the year 956 AElfgifu had become the king's wife,
but in 958 Archbishop Odo of Canterbury secured their separation on the
ground of their being too closely akin. Edwy, to judge from the
disproportionately large numbers of charters issued during his reign,
seems to have been weakly lavish in the granting of privileges, and soon
the chief men of Mercia and Northumbria were disgusted by his partiality
for Wessex. The result was that in the year 957 his brother, the
AEtheling Edgar, was chosen as king by the Mercians and Northumbrians.
It is probable that no actual conflict took place, and in 959, on Edwy's
death, Edgar acceded peaceably to the combined kingdoms of Wessex,
Mercia and Northumbria.
AUTHORITIES.--_Saxon Chronicle_ (ed. Earle and Plummer, Oxford), _sub
ann._; _Memorials of St Dunstan_ (ed. Stubbs, Rolls Series); William
of Malmesbury, _Gesta regum_ (ed. Stubbs, Rolls Series); Birch,
_Cartularium Saxonicum_, vol. ii. Nos. 932-1046; Florence of
Worcester.
EECKHOUT, GERBRAND VAN DEN (1621-1674), Dutch painter, born at Amsterdam
on the 19th of August 1621, entered early into the studio of Rembrandt.
Though a companion pupil to F. Bol and Govaert Flinck, he was inferior
to both in skill and in the extent of his practice; yet at an early
period he assumed Rembrandt's manner with such success that his pictures
were confounded with those of his master; and, even in modern days, the
"Resurrection of the Daughter of Jairus," in the Berlin museum, and the
"Presentation in the Temple," in the Dresden gallery, have been held to
represent worthily the style of Rembrandt. As evidence of the fidelity
of Eeckhout's imitation we may cite his "Presentation in the Temple," at
Berlin, which is executed after Rembrandt's print of 1630, and his
"Tobit with the Angel," at Brunswick, which is composed on the same
background as Rembrandt's "Philosopher in Thought." Eeckhout not merely
copies the subjects; he also takes the shapes, the figures, the Jewish
dress and the pictorial effects of his master. It is difficult to form
an exact judgment of Eeckhout's qualities at the outset of his career.
His earliest pieces are probably those in which he more faithfully
reproduced Rembrandt's peculiarities. Exclusively his is a tinge of
green in shadows marring the harmony of the work, a certain gaudiness of
jarring tints, uniform surface and a touch more quick than subtle.
Besides the pictures already mentioned we should class amongst early
productions on this account the "Woman taken in Adultery," at Amsterdam;
"Anna presenting her Son to the High Priest," in the Louvre; the
"Epiphany," at Turin; and the "Circumcision," at Cassel. Eeckhout
matriculated early in the Gild of Amsterdam. A likeness of a lady at a
dressing-table with a string of beads, at Vienna, bears the date of
1643, and proves that the master at this time possessed more imitative
skill than genuine mastery over nature. As he grew older he succeeded
best in portraits, a very fair example of which is that of the historian
Dappers (1669), in the Stadel collection. Eeckhout occasionally varied
his style so as to recall in later years the "small masters" of the
Dutch school. Waagen justly draws attention to his following of Terburg
in "Gambling Soldiers," at Stafford House, and a "Soldiers'
Merrymaking," in the collection of the marquess of Bute. A "Sportsman
with Hounds," probably executed in 1670, now in the Vander Hoo gallery,
and a "Group of Children with Goats" (1671), in the Hermitage, hardly
exhibit a trace of the artist's first education. Amongst the best of
Eeckhout's works "Christ in the Temple" (1662), at Munich, and the
"Haman and Mordecai" of 1665, at Luton House, occupy a good place.
Eeckhout died at Amsterdam on the 22nd of October 1674.
EEL. The common freshwater eel (Lat. _anguilla_; O. Eng. _oel_) belongs
to a group of soft-rayed fishes distinguished by the presence of an
opening to the air-bladder and the absence of the pelvic fins. With its
nearest relatives it forms the family _Muraenidae_, all of which are of
elongated cylindrical form. The peculiarities of the eel are the
rudimentary scales buried in the skin, the well-developed pectoral fins,
the rounded tail fin continuous with the dorsal and ventral fins. Only
one other species of the family occurs in British waters, namely, the
conger, which is usually much larger and lives in the sea. In the conger
the eyes are larger than in the eel, and the upper jaw overlaps the
lower, whereas in the eel the lower jaw projects beyond the upper. Both
species are voracious and predatory, and feed on almost any animal food
they can obtain, living or dead. The conger is especially fond of squid
or other Cephalopods, while the eel greedily devours carrion. The common
eel occurs in all the rivers and fresh waters of Europe, except those
draining towards the Arctic Ocean, the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea. It
also occurs on the Atlantic side of North America. The conger has a
wider range, extending from the western and southern shores of Britain
and Ireland to the East Indian Archipelago and Japan. It is common in
the Mediterranean.
The ovaries of the eel resemble somewhat those of the salmon in
structure, not forming closed sacs, as in the majority of Teleostei, but
consisting of laminae exposed to the body cavity. The laminae in which
the eggs are produced are very numerous, and are attached transversely
by their inner edges to a membranous band running nearly the whole
length of the body-cavity. The majority of the eels captured for market
are females with the ovaries in an immature condition. The male eel was
first discovered in 1873 by Syrski at Trieste, the testis being
described by him as a lobed elongated organ, in the same relative
position as the ovary in the female, surrounded by a smooth surface
without laminae. He did not find ripe spermatozoa. He discovered the
male by examining small specimens, all the larger being female. L.
Jacoby, a later observer, found no males exceeding 19 in. in length,
while the female may reach a length of 39 in. or more. Dr C. G. J.
Petersen, in a paper published in 1896, states that in Denmark two kinds
of eels are distinguished by the fishermen, namely, yellow eels and
silver eels. The silver eels are further distinguished by the shape of
the snout and the size of the eyes. The snout in front of the eyes is
not flat, as in the yellow eels, but high and compressed, and therefore
appears more pointed, while the eyes are much larger and directed
outwards. In both kinds there are males and females, but Petersen shows
that the yellow eels change into silver eels when they migrate to the
sea. The sexual organs in the silver eels are more developed than in the
yellow eels, and the former have almost or entirely ceased to take food.
The male silver eels are from 11-1/2 to 19 in. in length, the females
from 16-1/2 to about 39 in. It is evident, therefore, that if eels only
spawn once, they do not all reach the same size when they become
sexually mature. The male conger was first described in 1879 by Hermes,
who obtained a ripe specimen in the Berlin Aquarium. This specimen was
not quite 2-1/2 ft. in length, and of the numerous males which have been
identified at the Plymouth Laboratory, none exceeded this length. The
large numbers of conger above this size caught for the market are all
immature females. Female conger of 5 or 6 ft. in length and weighing
from 30 to 50 lb. are common enough, and occasionally they exceed these
limits. The largest recorded was 8 ft. 3 in. long, and weighed 128 lb.
There is every reason to believe that eels and conger spawn but once in
their lives, and die soon after they have discharged their generative
products. When kept in aquaria, both male and female conger are vigorous
and voracious. The males sooner or later cease to feed, and attain to
the sexually mature condition, emitting ripe milt when handled and
gently squeezed. They live in this condition five or six months, taking
no food and showing gradual wasting and disease of the bodily organs.
The eyes and skin become ulcerated, the sight is entirely lost, and the
bones become soft through loss of lime. The females also after a time
cease to feed, and live in a fasting condition for five or six months,
during which time the ovaries develop and reach great size and weight,
while the bones become soft and the teeth disappear. The female,
however, always dies in confinement before the ova are perfectly ripe
and before they are liberated from the ovarian tissue. The absence of
some necessary condition, perhaps merely of the pressure which exists at
the bottom of the sea, evidently prevents the complete development of
the ovary. The invariable death of the fish in the same almost ripe
condition leads to the conclusion that under normal conditions the fish
dies after the mature ova have been discharged. G. B. Grassi states that
he obtained ripe male eels, and ripe specimens of _Muraena_, another
genus of the family, in the whirlpools of the Strait of Messina. A ripe
female _Muraena_ has also been described at Zanzibar. Gravid female
eels, i.e. specimens with ovaries greatly enlarged, have been
occasionally obtained in fresh water, but there is no doubt that,
normally, sexual maturity is attained only in the sea.
Until recent years nothing was known from direct observation concerning
the reproduction of the common eel or any species of the family. It was
a well-known fact that large eels migrated towards the sea in autumn,
and that in the spring small transparent eels of 2 in. in length and
upwards were common on the shore under stones, and ascended rivers and
streams in vast swarms. It was reasonable, therefore, to infer that the
mature eels spawned in the sea, and that there the young were developed.
[Illustration: Leptocephali. (By permission of J. & A. Churchill.)]
A group of peculiar small fishes were, however, known which were called
Leptocephali, from the small proportional size of the head. The first of
these described was captured in 1763 near Holyhead, and became the type
of _L. Morrisii_, other specimens of which have been taken either near
the shore or at the surface of the sea. Other forms placed in the same
genus had been taken by surface fishing in the Mediterranean and in
tropical ocean currents. The chief peculiarities of Leptocephali, in
addition to the smallness of the head, are their ribbon-like shape and
their glassy transparency during life. The body is flattened from side
to side, and broad from the dorsal to the ventral edge. Like the eels,
they are destitute of pelvic fins and no generative organs have been
observed in them (see fig.).
In 1864 the American naturalist, T. N. Gill, published the conclusion
that _L. Morrisii_ was the young or larva of the conger, and
Leptocephali generally the young stages of species of _Muraenidae_. In
1886 this conclusion was confirmed from direct observation by Yves
Delage, who kept alive in a tank at Roscoff a specimen of _L. Morrisii_,
and saw it gradually transformed into a young conger. From 1887 to 1892
Professor Grassi and Dr Calandruccio carried on careful and successful
researches into the development of the Leptocephali at Catania, in
Sicily. The specimens were captured in considerable numbers in the
harbour, and the transformation of _L. Morrisii_ into young conger, and
of various other forms of Leptocephalus into other genera of
_Muraenidae_, such as _Muraena_, _Congromuraena_ and _Ophichthys_, was
observed. In 1894 the same authors published the announcement that
another species of Leptocephalus, namely, _L. brevirostris_, was the
larva of the common eel. This larval form was captured in numbers with
other Leptocephali in the strong currents of the Strait of Messina. In
the metamorphosis of all Leptocephali a great reduction in size occurs.
The _L. brevirostris_ reaches a length of 8 cm., or a little more than
2-1/2 in., while the perfectly-formed young eel is 2 in. long or a
little more.
The Italian naturalists have also satisfied themselves that certain
pelagic fish eggs originally described by Raffaele at Naples are the
eggs of _Muraenidae_, and that among them are the eggs of _Conger_ and
_Anguilla_. They believe that these eggs, although free in the water,
remain usually near the bottom at great depths, and that fertilization
takes place under similar conditions. No fish eggs of the kind to which
reference is here made have yet been obtained on the British coasts,
although conger and eels are so abundant there. Raffaele described and
figured the larva newly hatched from one of the eggs under
consideration, and it is evident that this larva is the earliest stage
of a Leptocephalus.
Although young eels, some of them more or less flat and transparent, are
common enough on the coasts of Great Britain and north-western Europe in
spring, neither eggs nor specimens of _Leptocephalus brevirostris_ have
yet been taken in the North Sea, English Channel or other shallow waters
in the neighbourhood of the British Islands, or in the Baltic. Marked
eels have been proved to migrate from the inmost part of the Baltic to
the Kattegat. Recently, however, search has been made for the larvae in
the more distant and deeper portions of the Atlantic Ocean. In May 1904
a true larval specimen was taken at the surface south-west of the Faeroe
Islands, and another was taken 40 m. north by west of Achill Head,
Ireland. In 1905 numbers were taken in deep water in the Atlantic. The
evidence at present available indicates that the spawning of mature eels
takes place beyond the 100 fathom line, and that the young eels which
reach the coast are already a year old. As eels, both young and old, are
able to live for a long time out of water and have the habit of
travelling at night over land in wet grass and in damp weather, there is
no difficulty in explaining their presence in wells, ponds or other
isolated bodies of fresh water at any distance from the sea.
See "The Eel Question," _Report U.S. Commissioner of Fisheries for
1879_ (Washington, 1882); J. T. Cunningham, "Reproduction and
Development of the Conger," _Journ. Mar. Biol. Assn._ vol. ii.; C. G.
J. Petersen, _Report Dan. Biol. Station_, v. (1894); G. B. Grassi,
_Quart. Journ. Mic. Sci._ vol. xxxix. (1897). (J. T. C.)
EFFENDI (a Turkish word, corrupted from the Gr. [Greek: authentes], a
lord or master), a title of respect, equivalent to the English "sir," in
the Turkish empire and some other eastern countries. It follows the
personal name, when that is used, and is generally given to members of
the learned professions, and to government officials who have no higher
rank, such as Bey, Pasha, &c. It may also indicate a definite office, as
_Hakim effendi_, chief physician to the sultan. The possessive form
_effendim_ (my master) is used by servants and in formal intercourse.
EFFIGIES, MONUMENTAL. An "effigy" (Lat. _effigies_, from _effingere_, to
fashion) is, in general, a material image or likeness of a person; and
the practice of hanging or burning people "in effigy," i.e. their
semblance only, preserves the more general sense of the word. Such
representations may be portraits, caricatures or models. But, apart from
general usages of the term (see e.g. Wax Figures), it is more
particularly applied in the history of art to a particular class of
sculptured figures, in the flat or the round, associated with Christian
sepulchral monuments, dating from the 12th century. The earliest of
these attempts at commemorative portraiture were executed in low relief
upon coffin-lids of stone or purbeck marble, some portions of the
designs for the most part being executed by means of incised lines, cut
upon the raised figure. Gradually, with the increased size and the
greater architectural dignity of monumental structures, effigies
attained to a high rank as works of art, so that before the close of the
13th century very noble examples of figures of this order are found to
have been executed in full relief; and, about the same period, similar
figures also began to be engraved, either upon monumental slabs of stone
or marble, or upon plates of metal, which were affixed to the surfaces
of slabs that were laid in the pavements of churches.
Engraved plates of this class, known as "Brasses" (see BRASSES,
MONUMENTAL), continued in favour until the era of the Reformation, and
in recent times their use has been revived. It seems probable that the
introduction and the prevalence of flat engraved memorials, in place of
commemorative effigies in relief, was due, in the first instance, to the
inconvenience resulting from increasing numbers of raised stones on the
pavement of churches; while the comparatively small cost of engraved
plates, their high artistic capabilities, and their durability, combined
to secure for them the popularity they unquestionably enjoyed. If
considerably less numerous than contemporary incised slabs and engraved
brasses, effigies sculptured in relief--with some exceptions in full
relief--continued for centuries to constitute the most important
features in many medieval monuments. In the 13th century, their origin
being apparently derived from the endeavour to combine a monumental
effigy with a monumental cross upon the same sepulchral stone (whether
in sculpture or by incised lines), parts only of the human figure
sometimes were represented, such as the head or bust, and occasionally
also the feet; in some of the early examples of this curious class the
cross symbol was not introduced, and after awhile half-length figures
became common.
Except in very rare instances, that most important element, genuine
face-portraiture, is not to be looked for, in even the finest sculptured
effigies, earlier than about the middle of the 15th century. In works of
the highest order of art, indeed, the memorials of personages of the
most exalted rank, effigies from an early period in their existence may
be considered occasionally to have been portraits properly so called;
and yet even in such works as these an approximately correct general
resemblance but too frequently appears to have been all that was
contemplated or desired. At the same time, in the earliest monumental
effigies we possess contemporary examples of vestments, costume,[1]
armour, weapons, royal and knightly insignia, and other personal
appointments and accessories, in all of which accurate fidelity has been
certainly observed with scrupulous care and minute exactness. Thus,
since the monumental effigies of England are second to none in artistic
merit, while they have been preserved in far greater numbers, and
generally in better condition than those in other countries, they
represent in unbroken continuity an unrivalled series of original
personal representations of successive generations, very many of them
being, in the most significant acceptation of that term, veritable
contemporaneous portraits.
Once esteemed to be simply objects of antiquarian curiosity, and either
altogether disregarded or too often subjected to injurious indignity,
the monumental effigies in England long awaited the formation of a just
estimate of their true character and their consequent worth in their
capacity as authorities for face-portraiture. In the original contract
for the construction of the monument at Warwick to Richard Beauchamp,
the fifth earl, who died in 1439, it is provided that an effigy of the
deceased noble should be executed in bronze gilt, with all possible
care, by the most skilful and experienced artists of the time; and the
details of the armour and the ornaments of the figure are specified with
minute precision. It is remarkable, however, that the effigy itself is
described only in the general and indefinite terms--"an image of a man
armed." There is no provision that the effigy should be "an image" of
the earl; and much less is anything said as to its being such a
"counterfeit presentment" of the features and person of the living man,
as the contemporaries of Shakespeare had learned to expect in what they
would accept as true portraiture. The effigy, almost as perfect as when
it left the sculptor's hands, still bears witness, as well to the
conscientious care with which the conditions of the contract were
fulfilled, as to the eminent ability of the artists employed. So
complete is the representation of the armour, that this effigy might be
considered actually to have been equipped in the earl's own favourite
suit of the finest Milan steel. The cast of the figure also was
evidently studied from what the earl had been when in life, and the
countenance is sufficiently marked and endowed with the unmistakable
attributes of personal character. Possibly such a resemblance may have
been the highest aim in the image-making of the period, somewhat before
the middle of the 15th century. Three-quarters of a century later, a
decided step towards fidelity in true portraiture is shown to have been
taken, when, in his will (1510 A.D.), Henry VII. spoke of the effigies
of himself and of his late queen, Elizabeth of York, to be executed for
their monument, as "an image of our figure and another of hers." The
existing effigies in the Beauchamp chapel and in Henry VII.'s chapel,
with the passages just quoted from the contract made by the executors of
the Lancastrian earl, strikingly illustrate the gradual development of
the idea of true personal portraiture in monumental effigies, during the
course of the 15th and at the commencement of the 16th century in
England.
Study of the royal effigies still preserved must commence in Worcester
Cathedral with that of King John. This earliest example of a series of
effigies of which the historical value has never yet been duly
appreciated is rude as a work of art, and yet there is on it the impress
of such individuality as demonstrates that the sculptor did his best to
represent the king. Singularly fine as achievements of the sculptor's
art are the effigies of Henry III., Queen Eleanor of Castile, and her
ill-fated son Edward II., the two former in Westminster Abbey, the last
in Gloucester cathedral; and of their fidelity also as portraits no
doubt can be entertained. In like manner the effigies of Edward III. and
his queen Philippa, and those of their grandson Richard II. and his
first consort, Anne of Bohemia (all at Westminster), and of their other
grandson, Henry of Lancaster, with his second consort, Joan of Navarre,
at Canterbury--all convince us that they are true portraits. Next follow
the effigies of Henry VII. and Elizabeth of York,--to be succeeded, and
the royal series to be completed, by the effigies of Queen Elizabeth and
Mary Stuart, all of them in Westminster Abbey. Very instructive would be
a close comparison between the two last-named works and the painted
portraits of the rival queens, especially in the case of Mary, the
pictures of whom differ so remarkably from one another.
As the 15th century advanced, the rank of the personage represented and
the character of the art that distinguishes any effigy goes far to
determine its portrait qualities. Still later, when more exact
face-portraiture had become a recognized element, sculptors must be
supposed to have aimed at the production of such resemblance as their
art would enable them to give to their works; and accordingly, when we
compare effigies with painted portraits of the same personages, we find
that they corroborate one another. The prevalence of portraiture in the
effigies of the 16th and 17th centuries, when their art generally
underwent a palpable decline, by no means raises all works of this
class, or indeed the majority of them, to the dignity of true portraits;
on the contrary, in these effigies, as in those of earlier periods, it
is the character of the art in each particular example that affects its
merit, value and authority as a portrait. In judging of these latter
effigies, however, we must estimate them by the standard of art of their
own era; and, as a general rule, the effigies that are the best as works
of art in their own class are the best also and the most faithful in
their portraiture. The earlier effigies, usually produced without any
express aim at exact portraiture, as we now employ that expression, have
nevertheless strong claims upon our veneration. Often their sculpture is
very noble; and even when they are rudest as works of art, there is
rarely lacking a rough grandeur about them, as exhibited in the fine
bold figure of Fair Rosamond's son, Earl William of the Long Sword,
which reposes in such dignified serenity in his own cathedral at
Salisbury. These effigies may not bring us closely face to face with
remote generations, but they do place before us true images of what the
men and women of those generations were.
Observant students of monumental effigies will not fail to appreciate
the singular felicity with which the medieval sculptors adjusted their
compositions to the recumbent position in which their "images"
necessarily had to be placed. Equally worthy of notice is the manner in
which many monumental effigies, particularly those of comparatively
early date, are found to have assumed an aspect neither living nor
lifeless, and yet impressively life-like. The sound judgment also, and
the good taste of those early sculptors, were signally exemplified in
their excluding, almost without exception, the more extravagant fashions
in the costume of their era from their monumental sculpture, and
introducing only the simpler but not less characteristic styles of dress
and appointments. Monumental effigies, as commonly understood, represent
recumbent figures, and the accessories of the effigies themselves have
been adjusted to that position. With the exceptions when they appear on
one side resting on the elbow (as in the case of Thomas Owen (d. 1598)
and Sir Thomas Heskett (d. 1605), both in Westminster Abbey), these
effigies lie on their backs, and as a general rule (except in the case
of episcopal figures represented in the act of benediction, or of
princes and warriors who sometimes hold a sceptre or a sword) their
hands are uplifted and conjoined as in supplication. The crossed-legged
attitude of numerous armed effigies of the era of mail-armour has been
supposed to imply the personages so represented to have been crusaders
or Knights of the Temple; but in either case the supposition is
unfounded and inconsistent with unquestionable facts. Much beautiful
feeling is conveyed by figures of ministering angels being introduced as
in the act of supporting and smoothing the pillows or cushions that are
placed in very many instances to give support to the heads of the
recumbent effigies. The animals at the feet of these effigies, which
frequently have an heraldic significance, enabled the sculptors, with
equal propriety and effectiveness, to overcome one of the special
difficulties inseparable from the recumbent position. In general,
monumental effigies were carved in stone or marble, or cast in bronze,
but occasionally they were of wood: such is the effigy of Robert
Curthose, son of William I. (d. 1135), whose altar tomb in Gloucester
cathedral was probably set up about 1320.
In addition to recumbent statues, upright figures must receive notice
here, especially those set in wall-monuments in churches mainly. These
usually consisted in half-length figures, seen full-face, placed in a
recess within an architectural setting more or less elaborate. They
belong mainly to the 16th and 17th centuries. Among the many examples in
old St Paul's cathedral (destroyed in the Great Fire of 1666) were those
of Dean Colet (d. 1519), William Aubrey (1595) and Alexander Nowell (d.
1601). In St Giles's, Cripplegate, is the similarly designed effigy of
John Speed (d. 1629); while that of John Stow (d. 1605) is a
full-length, seated figure. This, like the figure of Thomas Owen, is in
alabaster, but since its erection has always been described as
terra-cotta--a material which came into considerable favour for the
purpose of busts and half-lengths towards the end of the 16th century,
imported, of course, from abroad. Sometimes the stone monuments were
painted to resemble life, as in the monuments to Shakespeare and John
Combe (the latter now over-painted white), in Holy Trinity Church,
Stratford-on-Avon.
BIBLIOGRAPHY.--Among the more noteworthy publications are the
following: _Monumental Effigies in Great Britain_ (Norman Conquest to
Henry VIII.), by C. A. Stothard, folio (London, 1876); _The Recumbent
Monumental Effigies in Northamptonshire_, by A. Hartshorne (4to,
London, 1867-1876); _Sepulchral Memorials_ (Northamptonshire), by W.
H. Hyett (folio, London, 1817); _Ancient Sepulchral Effigies and
Monumental Sculpture of Devon_, by W. H. H. Rogers (4to, Exeter,
1877); _The Ancient Sepulchral Monuments of Essex_, ed. by C. M.
Carlton (4to, Chelmsford, 1890); and other works dealing with the
subject according to counties. Of particular value is the _Report of
the Sepulchral Monuments Committee_ of the Society of Antiquaries,
laboriously compiled at the request of the Office of Works, arranged
(1) personally and chronologically, and (2) locally (1872).
(C. B.; M. H. S.)