FOOTNOTES:_Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, "Groups, Theory of" to "Gwyniad" Volume 12, Slice 6

[1] See "The Precursors of the Violin Family," by Kathleen

Schlesinger, part ii. of _An Illustrated Handbook on the Instruments

of the Orchestra_ (London, 1908), chs. ii. and x.

[2] See Kathleen Schlesinger, _op. cit._ part ii., the "Utrecht

Psalter," pp. 127-135, and the "Question of the Origin of the Utrecht

Psalter," pp. 136-166, where the subject is discussed and

illustrated.

[3] _Idem_, see pl. vi. (2) to the right centre.

[4] _Idem_, see pl. iii. centre and figs. 118 and 119.

[5] _Idem_, see fig. 117, p. 341, and figs. 172 and 116.

[6] _Idem_, see fig. 121, p. 246, figs. 122, 123, 125 and 126 pl.

iii. vi. (1) and (2).

[7] _Idem_, see fig. 126, p. 350, and pl. iii. right centre.

[8] _Idem_, see fig. 173, p. 448.

[9] _Idem_, see fig. 205, p. 480.

[10] See _Museo Pio Clementino_, by Visconti (Milan, 1818).

[11] See for example _Georgics_, iv. 471-475 in the Vatican Virgil

(Cod. 3225), in facsimile (Rome, 1899) (British Museum press-mark 8,

tab. f. vol. ii.).

[12] This rotta was found in an Alamannic tomb of the 4th to the 7th

centuries at Oberflacht in the Black Forest. A facsimile is preserved

in the collection of the Kgl. Hochschule, Berlin, illustrations in

"Grabfunde am Berge Lupfen bei Oberflacht, 1846," _Jahresberichte d.

Wurttemb. Altertums-Vereins_, iii. (Stuttgart, 1846), tab. viii. also

Kathleen Schlesinger, _op. cit._ part ii. fig. 168 (drawing from the

facsimile).

[13] Reproductions of both miniatures are to be found in Professor J.

O. Westwood's _Facsimiles of the Miniatures and Ornaments of

Anglo-Saxon and Irish MSS._ (London, 1868).

[14] An illustration occurs in the fine publication of the Austrian

Academy of Sciences, _Kusejr 'Amra_ (Vienna, 1907, pl. xxxiv.).

[15] See reproduction of some of the miniatures in Jacob and H. von

Hefner-Alteneck, _Trachten des christlichen Mittelalters_ (Darmstadt.

1840-1854, 3 vols.), and in _Trachten, Kunstwerke und Geratschaften

vom fruhen Mittelalter_ (Frankfort-on-Main, 1879-1890),

[16] Add. MS. 34294, British Museum, vol. ii. fol. 83, 161, vol. iii.

fol. 402, vol. iv. fols. 534 and 667.

GUITRY, LUCIEN GERMAIN (1860- ), French actor, was born in Paris. He

became prominent on the French stage at the Porte Saint-Martin theatre

in 1900, and the Varietes in 1901, and then became a member of the

Comedie Francaise, but he resigned very soon in order to become director

of the Renaissance, where he was principally associated with the actress

Marthe Brandes, who had also left the Comedie. Here he established his

reputation, in a number of plays, as the greatest contemporary French

actor in the drama of modern reality.

GUIZOT, FRANCOIS PIERRE GUILLAUME (1787-1874), historian, orator and

statesman, was born at Nimes on the 4th of October 1787, of an

honourable Protestant family belonging to the _bourgeoisie_ of that

city. It is characteristic of the cruel disabilities which still weighed

upon the Protestants of France before the Revolution, that his parents,

at the time of their union, could not be publicly or legally married by

their own pastors, and that the ceremony was clandestine. The liberal

opinions of his family did not, however, save it from the sanguinary

intolerance of the Reign of Terror, and on the 8th April 1794 his father

perished at Nimes upon the scaffold. Thenceforth the education of the

future minister devolved entirely upon his mother, a woman of slight

appearance and of homely manners, but endowed with great strength of

character and clearness of judgment. Madame Guizot was a living type of

the Huguenots of the 16th century, stern in her principles and her

faith, immovable in her convictions and her sense of duty. She formed

the character of her illustrious son and shared every vicissitude of his

life. In the days of his power her simple figure, always clad in deep

mourning for her martyred husband, was not absent from the splendid

circle of his political friends. In the days of his exile in 1848 she

followed him to London, and there at a very advanced age closed her life

and was buried at Kensal Green. Driven from Nimes by the Revolution,

Madame Guizot and her son repaired to Geneva, where he received his

education. In spite of her decided Calvinistic opinions, the theories of

Rousseau, then much in fashion, were not without their influence on

Madame Guizot. She was a strong Liberal, and she even adopted the notion

inculcated in the _Emile_ that every man ought to learn a manual trade

or craft. Young Guizot was taught to be a carpenter, and he so far

succeeded in his work that he made a table with his own hands, which is

still preserved. Of the progress of his graver studies little is known,

for in the work which he entitled _Memoirs of my own Times_ Guizot

omitted all personal details of his earlier life. But his literary

attainments must have been precocious and considerable, for when he

arrived in Paris in 1805 to pursue his studies in the faculty of laws,

he entered at eighteen as tutor into the family of M. Stapfer, formerly

Swiss minister in France, and he soon began to write in a journal edited

by M. Suard, the _Publiciste_. This connexion introduced him to the

literary society of Paris. In October 1809, being then twenty-two, he

wrote a review of M. de Chateaubriand's _Martyrs_, which procured for

him the approbation and cordial thanks of that eminent person, and he

continued to contribute largely to the periodical press. At Suard's he

had made the acquaintance of Pauline Meulan, an accomplished lady of

good family, some fourteen years older than himself, who had been forced

by the hardships of the Revolution to earn her living by literature, and

who also was engaged to contribute a series of articles to Suard's

journal. These contributions were interrupted by her illness, but

immediately resumed and continued by an unknown hand. It was discovered

that Francois Guizot had quietly supplied the deficiency on her behalf.

The acquaintance thus begun ripened into friendship and love, and in

1812 Mademoiselle de Meulan consented to marry her youthful ally. She

died in 1827; she was the author of many esteemed works on female

education. An only son, born in 1819, died in 1837 of consumption. In

1828 Guizot married Elisa Dillon, niece of his first wife, and also an

author. She died in 1833, leaving a son, Maurice Guillaume (1833-1892),

who attained some reputation as a scholar and writer.

During the empire, Guizot, entirely devoted to literary pursuits,

published a collection of French synonyms (1809), an essay on the fine

arts (1811), and a translation of Gibbon with additional notes in 1812.

These works recommended him to the notice of M. de Fontanes, then

grand-master of the university of France, who selected Guizot for the

chair of modern history at the Sorbonne in 1812. His first lecture

(which is reprinted in his _Memoirs_) was delivered on the 11th of

December of that year. The customary compliment to the all-powerful

emperor he declined to insert in it, in spite of the hints given him by

his patron, but the course which followed marks the beginning of the

great revival of historical research in France in the 19th century. He

had now acquired a considerable position in the society of Paris, and

the friendship of Royer-Collard and the leading members of the liberal

party, including the young duc de Broglie. Absent from Paris at the

moment of the fall of Napoleon in 1814, he was at once selected, on the

recommendation of Royer-Collard, to serve the government of Louis XVIII.

in the capacity of secretary-general of the ministry of the interior,

under the abbe de Montesquiou. Upon the return of Napoleon from Elba he

immediately resigned, on the 25th of March 1815 (the statement that he

retained office under General Carnot is incorrect), and returned to his

literary pursuits. After the Hundred Days, he repaired to Ghent, where

he saw Louis XVIII., and in the name of the liberal party pointed out to

his majesty that a frank adoption of a liberal policy could alone secure

the duration of the restored monarchy--advice which was ill-received by

M. de Blacas and the king's confidential advisers. This visit to Ghent,

at the time when France was a prey to a second invasion, was made a

subject of bitter reproach to Guizot in after life by his political

opponents, as an unpatriotic action. "The Man of Ghent" was one of the

terms of insult frequently hurled against him in the days of his power.

But the reproach appears to be wholly unfounded. The true interests of

France were not in the defence of the falling empire, but in

establishing a liberal policy on a monarchical basis and in combating

the reactionary tendencies of the ultra-royalists. It is at any rate a

remarkable circumstance that a young professor of twenty-seven, with

none of the advantages of birth or political experience, should have

been selected to convey so important a message to the ears of the king

of France, and a proof, if any were wanting, that the Revolution had, as

Guizot said, "done its work."

On the second restoration, Guizot was appointed secretary-general of the

ministry of justice under M. de Barbe-Marbois, but resigned with his

chief in 1816. Again in 1819 he was appointed general director of

communes and departments in the ministry of the interior, but lost his

office with the fall of Decazes in February 1820. During these years

Guizot was one of the leaders of the _Doctrinaires_, a small party

strongly attached to the charter and the crown, and advocating a policy

which has become associated (especially by Faguet) with the name of

Guizot, that of the _juste milieu_, a _via media_ between absolutism and

popular government. Their opinions had more of the rigour of a sect than

the elasticity of a political party. Adhering to the great principles of

liberty and toleration, they were sternly opposed to the anarchical

traditions of the Revolution. They knew that the elements of anarchy

were still fermenting in the country; these they hoped to subdue, not by

reactionary measures, but by the firm application of the power of a

limited constitution, based on the suffrages of the middle class and

defended by the highest literary talent of the times. Their motives

were honourable. Their views were philosophical. But they were opposed

alike to the democratical spirit of the age, to the military traditions

of the empire, and to the bigotry and absolutism of the court. The fate

of such a party might be foreseen. They lived by a policy of resistance;

they perished by another revolution (1830). They are remembered more for

their constant opposition to popular demands than by the services they

undoubtedly rendered to the cause of temperate freedom.

In 1820, when the reaction was at its height after the murder of the duc

de Berri, and the fall of the ministry of the duc Decazes, Guizot was

deprived of his offices, and in 1822 even his course of lectures were

interdicted. During the succeeding years he played an important part

among the leaders of the liberal opposition to the government of Charles

X., although he had not yet entered parliament, and this was also the

time of his greatest literary activity. In 1822 he had published his

lectures on representative government (_Histoire des origines du

gouvernement representatif_, 1821-1822, 2 vols.; Eng. trans. 1852); also

a work on capital punishment for political offences and several

important political pamphlets. From 1822 to 1830 he published two

important collections of historical sources, the memoirs of the history

of England in 26 volumes, and the memoirs of the history of France in 31

volumes, and a revised translation of Shakespeare, and a volume of

essays on the history of France. The most remarkable work from his own

pen was the first part of his _Histoire de la revolution d'Angleterre

depuis Charles I^er a Charles II._ (2 vols., 1826-1827; Eng. trans., 2

vols., Oxford, 1838), a book of great merit and impartiality, which he

resumed and completed during his exile in England after 1848. The

Martignac administration restored Guizot in 1828 to his professor's

chair and to the council of state. Then it was that he delivered the

celebrated courses of lectures which raised his reputation as an

historian to the highest point of fame, and placed him amongst the best

writers of France and of Europe. These lectures formed the basis of his

general _Histoire de la civilisation en Europe_ (1828; Eng. trans, by W.

Hazlitt, 3 vols., 1846), and of his _Histoire de la civilisation en

France_ (4 vols., 1830), works which must ever be regarded as classics

of modern historical research.

Hitherto Guizot's fame rested on his merits as a writer on public

affairs and as a lecturer on modern history. He had attained the age of

forty-three before he entered upon the full display of his oratorical

strength. In January 1830 he was elected for the first time by the town

of Lisieux to the chamber of deputies, and he retained that seat during

the whole of his political life. Guizot immediately assumed an important

position in the representative assembly, and the first speech he

delivered was in defence of the celebrated address of the 221, in answer

to the menacing speech from the throne, which was followed by the

dissolution of the chamber, and was the precursor of another revolution.

On his returning to Paris from Nimes on the 27th of July, the fall of

Charles X. was already imminent. Guizot was called upon by his friends

Casimir-Perier, Laffitte, Villemain and Dupin to draw up the protest of

the liberal deputies against the royal ordinances of July, whilst he

applied himself with them to control the revolutionary character of the

late contest. Personally, Guizot was always of opinion that it was a

great misfortune for the cause of parliamentary government in France

that the infatuation and ineptitude of Charles X. and Prince Polignac

rendered a change in the hereditary line of succession inevitable. But,

though convinced that it was inevitable, he became one of the most

ardent supporters of Louis-Philippe. In August 1830 Guizot was made

minister of the interior, but resigned in November. He had now passed

into the ranks of the conservatives, and for the next eighteen years was

the most determined foe of democracy, the unyielding champion of "a

monarchy limited by a limited number of bourgeois."

In 1831 Casimir-Perier formed a more vigorous and compact

administration, which was terminated in May 1832 by his death; the

summer of that year was marked by a formidable republican rising in

Paris, and it was not till the 11th of October 1832 that a stable

government was formed, in which Marshal Soult was first minister, the

duc de Broglie took the foreign office, Thiers the home department, and

Guizot the department of public instruction. This ministry, which lasted

for nearly four years, was by far the ablest that ever served Louis

Philippe. Guizot, however, was already marked with the stigma of

unpopularity by the more advanced liberal party. He remained unpopular

all his life, "not," said he, "that I court unpopularity, but that I

think nothing about it." Yet never were his great abilities more useful

to his country than whilst he filled this office of secondary rank but

of primary importance in the department of public instruction. The

duties it imposed on him were entirely congenial to his literary tastes,

and he was master of the subjects they concerned. He applied himself in

the first instance to carry the law of the 28th of June 1833, and then

for the next three years to put it into execution. In establishing and

organizing primary education in France, this law marked a distinct epoch

in French history. In fifteen years, under its influence, the number of

primary schools rose from ten to twenty-three thousand; normal schools

for teachers, and a general system of inspection, were introduced; and

boards of education, under mixed lay and clerical authority, were

created. The secondary class of schools and the university of France

were equally the subject of his enlightened protection and care, and a

prodigious impulse was given to philosophical study and historical

research. The branch of the Institute of France known as the "Academie

des Sciences Morales et Politiques," which had been suppressed by

Napoleon, was revived by Guizot. Some of the old members of this learned

body--Talleyrand, Sieyes, Roederer and Lakanal--again took their seats

there, and a host of more recent celebrities were added by election for

the free discussion of the great problems of political and social

science. The "Societe de l'Histoire de France" was founded for the

publication of historical works; and a vast publication of medieval

chronicles and diplomatic papers was undertaken at the expense of the

state (see HISTORY; and FRANCE, _History_, section _Sources_).

The object of the cabinet of October 1832 was to organize a conservative

party, and to carry on a policy of resistance to the republican faction

which threatened the existence of the monarchy. It was their pride and

their boast that their measures never exceeded the limits of the law,

and by the exercise of legal power alone they put down an insurrection

amounting to civil war in Lyons and a sanguinary revolt in Paris. The

real strength of the ministry lay not in its nominal heads, but in the

fact that in this government and this alone Guizot and Thiers acted in

cordial co-operation. The two great rivals in French parliamentary

eloquence followed for a time the same path; but neither of them could

submit to the supremacy of the other, and circumstances threw Thiers

almost continuously on a course of opposition, whilst Guizot bore the

graver responsibilities of power.

Once again indeed, in 1839, they were united, but it was in opposition

to M. Mole, who had formed an intermediate government, and this

coalition between Guizot and the leaders of the left centre and the

left, Thiers and Odilon Barrot, due to his ambition and jealousy of

Mole, is justly regarded as one of the chief inconsistencies of his

life. Victory was secured at the expense of principle, and Guizot's

attack upon the government gave rise to a crisis and a republican

insurrection. None of the three chiefs of that alliance took ministerial

office, however, and Guizot was not sorry to accept the post of

ambassador in London, which withdrew him for a time from parliamentary

contests. This was in the spring of 1840, and Thiers succeeded shortly

afterwards to the ministry of foreign affairs.

Guizot was received with marked distinction by the queen and by the

society of London. His literary works were highly esteemed, his

character was respected, and France was never more worthily represented

abroad than by one of her greatest orators. He was known to be well

versed in the history and the literature of England, and sincerely

attached to the alliance of the two nations and the cause of peace. But,

as he himself remarked, he was a stranger to England and a novice in

diplomacy; and unhappily the embroiled state of the Syrian question, on

which the French government had separated itself from the joint policy

of Europe, and possibly the absence of entire confidence between the

ambassador and the minister of foreign affairs, placed him in an

embarrassing and even false position. The warnings he transmitted to

Thiers were not believed. The warlike policy of Thiers was opposed to

his own convictions. The treaty of the 15th of July was signed without

his knowledge and executed in the teeth of his remonstrances. For some

weeks Europe seemed to be on the brink of war, until the king put an end

to the crisis by refusing his assent to the military preparations of

Thiers, and by summoning Guizot from London to form a ministry and to

aid his Majesty in what he termed "ma lutte tenace contre l'anarchie."

Thus began, under dark and adverse circumstances, on the 29th of October

1840, the important administration in which Guizot remained the

master-spirit for nearly eight years. He himself took the office of

minister for foreign affairs, to which he added some years later, on the

retirement of Marshal Soult, the ostensible rank of prime minister. His

first care was the maintenance of peace and the restoration of amicable

relations with the other powers of Europe. If he succeeded, as he did

succeed, in calming the troubled elements and healing the wounded pride

of France, the result was due mainly to the indomitable courage and

splendid eloquence with which he faced a raging opposition, gave unity

and strength to the conservative party, who now felt that they had a

great leader at their head, and appealed to the thrift and prudence of

the nation rather than to their vanity and their ambition. In his

pacific task he was fortunately seconded by the formation of Sir Robert

Peel's administration in England, in the autumn of 1841. Between Lord

Palmerston and Guizot there existed an incompatibility of character

exceedingly dangerous in the foreign ministers of two great and in some

respects rival countries. With Lord Palmerston in office, Guizot felt

that he had a bitter and active antagonist in every British agent

throughout the world; the combative element was strong in his own

disposition; and the result was a system of perpetual conflict and

counter-intrigues. Lord Palmerston held (as it appears from his own

letters) that war between England and France was, sooner or later,

inevitable. Guizot held that such a war would be the greatest of all

calamities, and certainly never contemplated it. In Lord Aberdeen, the

foreign secretary of Sir Robert Peel, Guizot found a friend and an ally

perfectly congenial to himself. Their acquaintance in London had been

slight, but it soon ripened into mutual regard and confidence. They were

both men of high principles and honour; the Scotch Presbyterianism which

had moulded the faith of Lord Aberdeen was reflected in the Huguenot

minister of France; both were men of extreme simplicity of taste, joined

to the refinement of scholarship and culture; both had an intense

aversion to war and felt themselves ill-qualified to carry on those

adventurous operations which inflamed the imagination of their

respective opponents. In the eyes of Lord Palmerston and Thiers their

policy was mean and pitiful; but it was a policy which secured peace to

the world, and united the two great and free nations of the West in what

was termed the _entente cordiale_. Neither of them would have stooped to

snatch an advantage at the expense of the other; they held the common

interest of peace and friendship to be paramount; and when differences

arose, as they did arise, in remote parts of the world,--in Tahiti, in

Morocco, on the Gold Coast,--they were reduced by this principle to

their proper insignificance. The opposition in France denounced Guizot's

foreign policy as basely subservient to England. He replied in terms of

unmeasured contempt,--"You may raise the pile of calumny as high as you

will; vous n'arriverez jamais a la hauteur de mon dedain!" The

opposition in England attacked Lord Aberdeen with the same reproaches,

but in vain. King Louis Philippe visited Windsor. The queen of England

(in 1843) stayed at the Chateau d'Eu. In 1845 British and French troops

fought side by side for the first time in an expedition to the River

Plate.

The fall of Sir Robert Peel's government in 1846 changed these intimate

relations; and the return of Lord Palmerston to the foreign office led

Guizot to believe that he was again exposed to the passionate rivalry of

the British cabinet. A friendly understanding had been established at Eu

between the two courts with reference to the future marriage of the

young queen of Spain. The language of Lord Palmerston and the conduct of

Sir Henry Bulwer (afterwards Lord Dalling) at Madrid led Guizot to

believe that this understanding was broken, and that it was intended to

place a Coburg on the throne of Spain. Determined to resist any such

intrigue, Guizot and the king plunged headlong into a counter-intrigue,

wholly inconsistent with their previous engagements to England, and

fatal to the happiness of the queen of Spain. By their influence she was

urged into a marriage with a despicable offset of the house of Bourbon,

and her sister was at the same time married to the youngest son of the

French king, in direct violation of Louis Philippe's promises. This

transaction, although it was hailed at the time as a triumph of the

policy of France, was in truth as fatal to the monarch as it was

discreditable to the minister. It was accomplished by a mixture of

secrecy and violence. It was defended by subterfuges. By the

dispassionate judgment of history it has been universally condemned. Its

immediate effect was to destroy the Anglo-French alliance, and to throw

Guizot into closer relations with the reactionary policy of Metternich

and the Northern courts.

The history of Guizot's administration, the longest and the last which

existed under the constitutional monarchy of France, bears the stamp of

the great qualities and the great defects of his political character,

for he was throughout the master-spirit of that government. His first

object was to unite and discipline the conservative party, which had

been broken up by previous dissensions and ministerial changes. In this

he entirely succeeded by his courage and eloquence as a parliamentary

leader, and by the use of all those means of influence which France too

liberally supplies to a dominant minister. No one ever doubted the

purity and disinterestedness of Guizot's own conduct. He despised money;

he lived and died poor; and though he encouraged the fever of

money-getting in the French nation, his own habits retained their

primitive simplicity. But he did not disdain to use in others the baser

passions from which he was himself free. Some of his instruments were

mean; he employed them to deal with meanness after its kind. Gross

abuses and breaches of trust came to light even in the ranks of the

government, and under an incorruptible minister the administration was

denounced as corrupt. _Licet uti alieno vitio_ is a proposition as false

in politics as it is in divinity.

Of his parliamentary eloquence it is impossible to speak too highly. It

was terse, austere, demonstrative and commanding,--not persuasive, not

humorous, seldom adorned, but condensed with the force of a supreme

authority in the fewest words. He was essentially a ministerial speaker,

far more powerful in defence than in opposition. Like Pitt he was the

type of authority and resistance, unmoved by the brilliant charges, the

wit, the gaiety, the irony and the discursive power of his great rival.

Nor was he less a master of parliamentary tactics and of those sudden

changes and movements in debate which, as in a battle, sometimes change

the fortune of the day. His confidence in himself, and in the majority

of the chamber which he had moulded to his will, was unbounded; and long

success and the habit of authority led him to forget that in a country

like France there was a people outside the chamber elected by a small

constituency, to which the minister and the king himself were held

responsible.

A government based on the principle of resistance and repression and

marked by dread and distrust of popular power, a system of diplomacy

which sought to revive the traditions of the old French monarchy, a

sovereign who largely exceeded the bounds of constitutional power and

whose obstinacy augmented with years, a minister who, though far removed

from the servility of the courtier, was too obsequious to the personal

influence of the king, were all singularly at variance with the promises

of the Revolution of July, and they narrowed the policy of the

administration. Guizot's view of politics was essentially historical and

philosophical. His tastes and his acquirements gave him little insight

into the practical business of administrative government. Of finance he

knew nothing; trade and commerce were strange to him; military and naval

affairs were unfamiliar to him; all these subjects he dealt with by

second hand through his friends, P. S. Dumon (1797-1870), Charles Marie

Tanneguy, Comte Duchatel (1803-1867), or Marshal Bugeaud. The

consequence was that few measures of practical improvement were carried

by his administration. Still less did the government lend an ear to the

cry for parliamentary reform. On this subject the king's prejudices were

insurmountable, and his ministers had the weakness to give way to them.

It was impossible to defend a system which confined the suffrage to

200,000 citizens, and returned a chamber of whom half were placemen.

Nothing would have been easier than to strengthen the conservative party

by attaching the suffrage to the possession of land in France, but blank

resistance was the sole answer of the government to the just and

moderate demands of the opposition. Warning after warning was addressed

to them in vain by friends and by foes alike; and they remained

profoundly unconscious of their danger till the moment when it

overwhelmed them. Strange to say, Guizot never acknowledged either at

the time or to his dying day the nature of this error; and he speaks of

himself in his memoirs as the much-enduring champion of liberal

government and constitutional law. He utterly fails to perceive that a

more enlarged view of the liberal destinies of France and a less intense

confidence in his own specific theory might have preserved the

constitutional monarchy and averted a vast series of calamities, which

were in the end fatal to every principle he most cherished. But with the

stubborn conviction of absolute truth he dauntlessly adhered to his own

doctrines to the end.

The last scene of his political life was singularly characteristic of

his inflexible adherence to a lost cause. In the afternoon oi the 23rd

of February 1848 the king summoned his minister from the chamber, which

was then sitting, and informed him that the aspect of Paris and the

country during the banquet agitation for reform, and the alarm and

division of opinion in the royal family, led him to doubt whether he

could retain his ministry. That doubt, replied Guizot, is decisive of

the question, and instantly resigned, returning to the chamber only to

announce that the administration was at an end and that Mole had been

sent for by the king. Mole failed in the attempt to form a government,

and between midnight and one in the morning Guizot, who had according to

his custom retired early to rest, was again sent for to the Tuileries.

The king asked his advice. "We are no longer the ministers of your

Majesty," replied Guizot; "it rests with others to decide on the course

to be pursued. But one thing appears to be evident: this street riot

must be put down; these barricades must be taken; and for this purpose

my opinion is that Marshal Bugeaud should be invested with full power,

and ordered to take the necessary military measures, and as your Majesty

has at this moment no minister, I am ready to draw up and countersign

such an order." The marshal, who was present, undertook the task,

saying, "I have never been beaten yet, and I shall not begin to-morrow.

The barricades shall be carried before dawn." After this display of

energy the king hesitated, and soon added: "I ought to tell you that M.

Thiers and his friends are in the next room forming a government!" Upon

this Guizot rejoined, "Then it rests with them to do what they think

fit," and left the palace. Thiers and Barrot decided to withdraw the

troops. The king and Guizot next met at Claremont. This was the most

perilous conjuncture of Guizot's life, but fortunately he found a safe

refuge in Paris for some days in the lodging of a humble miniature

painter whom he had befriended, and shortly afterwards effected his

escape across the Belgian frontier and thence to London, where he

arrived on the 3rd of March. His mother and daughters had preceded him,

and he was speedily installed in a modest habitation in Pelham Crescent,

Brompton.

The society of England, though many persons disapproved of much of his

recent policy, received the fallen statesman with as much distinction

and respect as they had shown eight years before to the king's

ambassador. Sums of money were placed at his disposal, which he

declined. A professorship at Oxford was spoken of, which he was unable

to accept. He stayed in England about a year, devoting himself again to

history. He published two more volumes on the English revolution, and in

1854 his _Histoire de la republique d'Angleterre et de Cromwell_ (2

vols., 1854), then his _Histoire du protectorat de Cromwell et du

retablissement des Stuarts_ (2 vols., 1856). He also published an essay

on Peel, and amid many essays on religion, during the ten years

1858-1868, appeared the extensive _Memoires pour servir a l'histoire de

mon temps_, in nine volumes. His speeches were included in 1863 in his

_Histoire parlementaire de la France_ (5 vols. of parliamentary

speeches, 1863).

Guizot survived the fall of the monarchy and the government he had

served twenty-six years. He passed abruptly from the condition of one of

the most powerful and active statesmen in Europe to the condition of a

philosophical and patriotic spectator of human affairs. He was aware

that the link between himself and public life was broken for ever; and

he never made the slightest attempt to renew it. He was of no party, a

member of no political body; no murmur of disappointed ambition, no

language of asperity, ever passed his lips; it seemed as if the fever of

oratorical debate and ministerial power had passed from him and left him

a greater man than he had been before, in the pursuit of letters, in the

conversation of his friends, and as head of the patriarchal circle of

those he loved. The greater part of the year he spent at his residence

at Val Richer, an Augustine monastery near Lisieux in Normandy, which

had been sold at the time of the first Revolution. His two daughters,

who married two descendants of the illustrious Dutch family of De Witt,

so congenial in faith and manners to the Huguenots of France, kept his

house. One of his sons-in-law farmed the estate. And here Guizot devoted

his later years with undiminished energy to literary labour, which was

in fact his chief means of subsistence. Proud, independent, simple and

contented he remained to the last; and these years of retirement were

perhaps the happiest and most serene portion of his life.

Two institutions may be said even under the second empire to have

retained their freedom--the Institute of France and the Protestant

Consistory. In both of these Guizot continued to the last to take an

active part. He was a member of three of the five academies into which

the Institute of France is divided. The Academy of Moral and Political

Science owed its restoration to him, and he became in 1832 one of its

first associates. The Academy of Inscriptions and Belles Lettres elected

him in 1833 as the successor to M. Dacier; and in 1836 he was chosen a

member of the French Academy, the highest literary distinction of the

country. In these learned bodies Guizot continued for nearly forty years

to take a lively interest and to exercise a powerful influence. He was

the jealous champion of their independence. His voice had the greatest

weight in the choice of new candidates; the younger generation of French

writers never looked in vain to him for encouragement; and his constant

aim was to maintain the dignity and purity of the profession of letters.

In the consistory of the Protestant church in Paris Guizot exercised a

similar influence. His early education and his experience of life

conspired to strengthen the convictions of a religious temperament. He

remained through life a firm believer in the truths of revelation, and a

volume of _Meditations on the Christian Religion_ was one of his latest

works. But though he adhered inflexibly to the church of his fathers and

combated the rationalist tendencies of the age, which seemed to threaten

it with destruction, he retained not a tinge of the intolerance or

asperity of the Calvinistic creed. He respected in the Church of Rome

the faith of the majority of his countrymen; and the writings of the

great Catholic prelates, Bossuet and Bourdaloue, were as familiar and

as dear to him as those of his own persuasion, and were commonly used by

him in the daily exercises of family worship.

In these literary pursuits and in the retirement of Val Richer years

passed smoothly and rapidly away; and as his grandchildren grew up

around him, he began to direct their attention to the history of their

country. From these lessons sprang his last and not his least work, the

_Histoire de France racontee a mes petits enfants_, for although this

publication assumed a popular form, it is not less complete and profound

than it is simple and attractive. The history came down to 1789, and was

continued to 1870 by his daughter Madame Guizot de Witt from her

father's notes.

Down to the summer of 1874 Guizot's mental vigour and activity were

unimpaired. His frame, temperate in all things, was blessed with a

singular immunity from infirmity and disease; but the vital power ebbed

away, and he passed gently away on the 12th of September 1874, reciting

now and then a verse of Corneille or a text of Scripture.

BIBLIOGRAPHY.--See his own _Memoires pour servir a l'histoire de mon

temps_ (8 vols., 1858-1861); _Lettres de M. Guizot a sa famille et a

ses amis_ (1884); C. A. Sainte-Beuve, _Causeries du lundi_ (vol. i.,

1857) and _Nouveaux Lundis_ (vols. i. and ix., 1863-1872); E. Scherer,

_Etudes critiques sur la litterature contemporaine_ (vol. iv., 1873);

Mme de Witt, _Guizot dans sa famille_ (1880); Jules Simon, _Thiers,

Guizot et Remusat_ (1885); E. Faguet, _Politiques et moralistes au

XIX^e siecle_ (1891); G. Bardoux, _Guizot_ (1894) in the series of

"Les Grands Ecrivains francais"; Maurice Guizot, _Les Annees de

retraite de M. Guizot_ (1901); and for a long list of books and

articles on Guizot in periodicals see H. P. Thieme, _Guide

bibliographique de la litterature francaise de 1800 a 1906_ (_s.v._

Guizot, Paris, 1907). For a notice of his first wife see C. A.

Sainte-Beuve, _Portraits de femmes_ (1884), and Ch. de Remusat,

_Critiques et etudes litteraires_ (vol. ii., 1847).

(H. R.; J. T. S.*)

GUJARAT or GUZERAT, a region of India, in the Bombay Presidency. In the

widest sense of the name it includes the whole of the country where the

Gujarati language is spoken, i.e. the northern districts and states of

the Presidency from Palanpur to Damaun, with Kathiawar and Cutch. But it

is more properly confined to the country north of the Nerbudda and east

of the Rann of Cutch and Kathiawar. In this sense it has an area of

29,071 sq. m., with a population in 1901 of 4,798,504. It includes the

states distributed among the agencies of Palanpur, Mahi Kantha, Rewa

Kantha and Cambay, with most of Baroda and the British districts of

Ahmedabad, Kaira, Panch Mahals and Broach. Less than one-fourth is

British territory. The region takes its name from the Gujars, a tribe

who passed into India from the north-west, established a kingdom in

Rajputana, and spread south in A.D. 400-600. The ancient Hindu capital

was Anhilvada; the Mahommedan dynasty, which ruled from 1396 to 1572,

founded Ahmedabad, which is still the largest city; but Gujarat owed

much of its historical importance to the seaports of Broach, Cambay and

Surat. Its fertile plain, with a regular rainfall and numerous rivers,

has caused it to be styled the "garden of India." It suffered, however,

severely from the famine of 1899-1901. For an account of the history,

geography, &c., of Gujarat see the articles on the various states and

districts. Gujarat gives its name to the vernacular of northern Bombay,

viz. Gujarati, one of the three great languages of that Presidency,

spoken by more than 9 millions. It has an ancient literature and a

peculiar character. As the language of the Parsis it is prominent in the

Bombay press; and it is also the commercial language of Bombay city,

which lies outside the territorial area of Gujarat.

See J. Campbell, _History of Gujarat_ (Bombay, 1896); Sir E. C.

Bayley, _The Muhammedan Kingdom of Gujarat_ (1886); A. K. Forbes, _Ras

Mala_ (1856).

GUJARATI and RAJASTHANI, the names of two members of the western

sub-group of the Intermediate Group of Indo-Aryan languages (q.v.). The

remaining member of this sub-group is Panjabi or Punjabi (see

HINDOSTANI). In 1901 the speakers of those now dealt with numbered:

Gujarati, 9,439,925, and Rajasthani, 10,917,712. The two languages are

closely connected and might almost be termed co-dialects of the same

form of speech. Together they occupy an almost square block of country,

some 400 m. broad, reaching from near Agra and Delhi on the river Jumna

to the Arabian Sea. Gujarati (properly _Gujarati_) is spoken in Gujarat,

the northern maritime province of the Bombay Presidency, and also in

Baroda and the native states adjoining. Rajasthani (properly

_Rajasthani_, from "_Rajasthan_," the native name for Rajputana) is

spoken in Rajputana and the adjoining parts of Central India.

In the articles INDO-ARYAN LANGUAGES and PRAKRIT the history of the

earlier stages of the Indo-Aryan vernaculars is given at some length. It

is there shown that, from the most ancient times, there were two main

groups of these forms of speech--one, the language of the Midland,

spoken in the country near the Gangetic Doab, and the other, the

so-called "Outer Band," containing the Midland on three sides, west,

north and south. The country to the west and south-west of the Midland,

in which this outer group of languages was spoken, included the modern

Punjab, Rajputana and Gujarat. In process of time the population of the

Midland expanded and carried its language to its new homes. It occupied

the eastern and central Punjab, and the mixed (or "intermediate")

language which there grew up became the modern Panjabi. To the west it

spread into Rajputana, till its progress was stopped by the Indian

desert, and in Rajputana another intermediate language took rise and

became Rajasthani. As elsewhere explained, the language-wave of the

Midland exercised less and less influence as it travelled farther from

its home, so that, while in eastern Rajputana the local dialect is now

almost a pure midland speech, in the west there are many evident traces

of the old outer language still surviving. To the south-west of

Rajputana there was no desert to stop the wave of Midland expansion,

which therefore rolled on unobstructed into Gujarat, where it reached

the sea. Here the survivals of the old outer language are stronger

still. The old outer Prakrit of north Gujarat was known as "Saurastri,"

while the Prakrit of the Midland invaders was called "Sauraseni," and we

may therefore describe Gujarati as being an intermediate language

derived (as explained in the articles PRAKRIT) from a mixture of the

Apabhramsa forms of Saurastri and Sauraseni, in which the latter

predominated.

It will be observed that, at the present day, Gujarati breaks the

continuity of the outer band of Indo-Aryan languages. To its north it

has Sindhi and to its south Marathi, both outer languages with which it

has only a slight connexion. On the other hand, on the east and

north-east it has Rajasthani, into which it merges so gradually and

imperceptibly that at the conventional border-line, in the state of

Palanpur, the inhabitants of Rajputana say that the local dialect is a

form of Gujarati, while the inhabitants of Gujarat say that it is

Rajasthani.

Language.

Gujarati has no important local dialects, but there is considerable

variation in the speeches of different classes of the community. Parsees

and Mussulmans (when the latter use the language--as a rule the Gujarat

Mussulmans speak Hindostani) have some striking peculiarities of

pronunciation, the most noticeable of which is the disregard by the

latter of the distinction between cerebral and dental letters. The

uneducated Hindus do not pronounce the language in the same way as their

betters, and this difference is accentuated in northern Gujarat, where

the lower classes substitute _e_ for _i_, _c_ for _k_, _ch_ for _kh_,

_s_ for _c_ and _ch_, _h_ for _s_, and drop _h_ as readily as any

cockney. There is also (as in the case of the Mussulmans) a tendency to

confuse cerebral and dental consonants, to substitute _r_ for _d_ and

_l_, to double medial consonants, and to pronounce the letter _a_ as

_a_, something like the _a_ in "all." The Bhils of the hills east of

Gujarat also speak a rude Gujarati, with special dialectic peculiarities

of their own, probably due to the fact that the tribes are of Dravidian

origin. These Bhil peculiarities are further mixed with corruptions of

Marathi idioms in Nimar and Khandesh, where we have almost a new

language.

Rajasthani has numerous dialects, each state claiming one or more of its

own. Thus, in the state of Jaipur there have been catalogued no less

than ten dialects among about 1,688,000 people. All Rajasthani dialects

can, however, be easily classed in four well-defined groups, a

north-eastern, a southern, a western and an east-central. The

north-eastern (Mewati) is that form of Rajasthani which is merging into

the Western Hindi of the Midland. It is a mixed form of speech, and need

not detain us further. Similarly, the southern (Malvi) is much mixed

with the neighbouring Bundeli form of Western Hindi. The western

(Marwari) spoken in Marwar and its neighbourhood, and the east-central

(Jaipuri) spoken in Jaipur and its neighbourhood, may be taken as the

typical Rajasthani dialects. In the following paragraphs we shall

therefore confine ourselves to Gujarati, Marwari and Jaipuri.

We know more about the ancient history of Gujarati than we do about that

of any other Indo-Aryan language. The one native grammar of Apabhramsa

Prakrit which we possess in a printed edition, was written by Hemacandra

(12th century A.D.), who lived in what is now north Gujarat, and who

naturally described most fully the particular vernacular with which he

was personally familiar. It was known as the Nagara Apabhramsa, closely

connected (as above explained) with Sauraseni, and was so named after

the Nagara Brahmans of the locality. These men carried on the tradition

of learning inherited from Hemacandra, and we see Gujarati almost in the

act of taking birth in a work called the _Mugdhavabodhamauktika_,

written by one of them only two hundred years after his death. Formal

Gujarati literature is said to commence with the poet Narsingh Meta in

the 15th century. Rajasthani literature has received but small attention

from European or native scholars, and we are as yet unable to say how

far back the language goes.

Both Gujarati and Rajasthani are usually written in current scripts

related to the well-known Nagari alphabet (see SANSKRIT). The form

employed in Rajputana is known all over northern India as the "Mahajani"

alphabet, being used by bankers or _Mahajans_, most of whom are

Marwaris. It is noteworthy as possessing two distinct characters for _d_

and _r_. The Gujarati character closely resembles the Kaithi character

of northern India (see BIHARI). The Nagari character is also freely used

in Rajputana, and to a less extent in Gujarat, where it is employed by

the Nagara Brahmans, who claim that their tribe has given the alphabet

its name.

In the following description of the main features of our two languages,

the reader is presumed to be familiar with the leading facts stated in

the articles INDO-ARYAN LANGUAGES and PRAKRIT. The article HINDOSTANI

may also be perused with advantage.

(Abbreviations. Skr. = Sanskrit. Pr. = Prakrit. Ap. = Apabhramsa. G. =

Gujarati. R. = Rajasthani. H. = Hindostaani.)

_Vocabulary._--The vocabulary of both Gujarat and Rajasthani is very

free from _tatsama_ words. The great mass of both vocabularies is

_tadbhava_ (see INDO-ARYAN LANGUAGES). Rajputana was from an early

period brought into close contact with the Mogul court at Agra and

Delhi, and even in the 13th century A.D. official documents of the

Rajput princes contained many borrowed Persian and Arabic words.

Gujarati, under the influence of the learned Nagara Brahmans, has

perhaps more _tatsama_ words than Rajasthani, but their employment is

not excessive. On the other hand, Parsees and Mussulmans employ

Persian and Arabic words with great freedom; while, owing to its

maritime connexions, the language has also borrowed occasional words

from other parts of Asia and from Europe. This is specially marked in

the strange dialect of the Kathiawar boatmen who travel all over the

world as lascars on the great steamships. Their language is a mixture

of Hindostani and Gujarati with a heterogeneous vocabulary.

_Phonetics._--With a few exceptions to be mentioned below, the

sound-system of the two languages is the same as that of Sanskrit, and

is represented in the same manner in the Roman character (see

SANSKRIT). The simplest method for considering the subject in regard

to Gujarati is to compare it with the phonetical system of Hindostani

(q.v.). As a rule, Rajasthani closely follows Gujarati and need not be

referred to except in special cases. G. invariably simplifies a medial

Pr. double consonant, lengthening the preceding vowel in compensation.

Thus Skr. _mraksanam_, Ap. _makkhanu_, H. _makkhan_, but G. _makhan_,

butter. In H. this rule is generally observed, but in G. it is

universal, while, on the other hand, in Panjabi the double consonant

is never simplified, but is retained as in Ap. In G. (and sometimes in

R.) when _a_ is followed by _h_ it is changed to _e_, as in H.

_shahr_, G. _seher_, a city. As in other outer languages H. _ai_ and

_au_ are usually represented by a short _e_ and by _a_ (sounded like

the _a_ in "all") respectively. Thus H. _baitha_. G. _betho_, seated;

H. _cautha_, G. _catho_ (written _cotho_), fourth. In R. this _e_ is

often further weakened to the sound of _a_ in "man," a change which

is also common in Bengali. Many words which have _i_ in H. have _a_ in

G. and R., thus, H. _likhe_, G. _lakhe_, he writes; H. din, G. and R.

_dan_, a day. Similarly we have _a_ for _u_, as in H. _tum_, G., R.

_tame_, you. In colloquial G. _a_ often becomes _a_, and _i_ becomes

_e_; thus, _pani_ for _pani_, water; _mares_ for _maris_, I shall

strike. As in most Indo-Aryan vernaculars an _a_ after an accented

syllable is very lightly pronounced, and is here represented by a

small ^a above the line.

The Vedic cerebral _l_ and the cerebral _n_ are very common as medial

letters in both G. and R. (both being unknown to literary H.). The

rule is, as elsewhere in western and southern intermediate and outer

languages, that when n and l represent a double _nn_ (or _nn_) or a

double _ll_ in Pr. they are dental, but when they represent single

medial letters they are cerebralized. Thus Ap. _sonnau_, G. _sonu_,

gold; Ap. _ghanau_, G. _ghanu_, dense; Ap. _callai_, G. _cale_, he

goes; Ap. _calai_, G. _cale_, he moves. In northern G. and in some

caste dialects dental and cerebral letters are absolutely

interchangeable, as in _dah^ado_ or _dahado_, a day; _tu_ or _tu_,

thou; _didho_ or _didho_, given. In G. and R. medial _d_ is pronounced

as a rough cerebral _r_, and is then so transcribed. We have seen that

in the Marwari alphabet there are actually distinct letters for these

two sounds. In colloquial G. _c_ and _ch_ are pronounced _s_,

especially in the north, as in _pas_ for _pac_, five; _pusyo_ for

_puchyo_, he asked. Similarly, in the north, _j_ and _jh_ become _z_,

as in _zad_ for _jhad_, a tree. In some localities (as in Marathi) we

have _ts_ and _dz_ for these sounds, as in _Tsarotar_ (name of a tract

of country) for _Carotar_. On the other hand, _k_, _kh_ and _g_,

especially when preceded or followed by _i_, _e_ or _y_, become in the

north _c_, _ch_ and _j_ respectively; thus, _dic^aro_ for _dik^aro_, a

son; _chetar_ for _khetar_, a field; _lajyo_ for _lagyo_, begun. A

similar change is found in dialectic Marathi, and is, of course, one

of the commonplaces of the philology of the Romance languages. The

sibilants _s_ and _s_ are colloquially pronounced _h_ (as in several

outer languages), especially in the north. Thus _deh_ for _des_, a

country; _hu_ for _su_, what; _ham^ajavyo_ for _sam^ajavyo_, he

explained. An original aspirate is, however, often dropped, as in _'u_

for _hu_, I; _'ate_ for _hathe_, on the hand. Standard G. is at the

same time fond of pronouncing an _h_ where it is not written, as in

_ame_, we, pronounced _ahme_. In other respects both G. and R. closely

agree in their phonetical systems with the Apabhramsa form of

Sauraseni Prakrit from which the Midland language is derived.

_Declension._--Gujarati agrees with Marathi (an outer language) as

against Hindostani in retaining the neuter gender of Sanskrit and

Prakrit. Moreover, the neuter gender is often employed to indicate

living beings of which the sex is uncertain, as in the case of

_dik^aru_, a child, compared with _dik^aro_, a son, and _dik^ari_, a

daughter. In R. there are only sporadic instances of the neuter, which

grow more and more rare as we approach the Midland. Nouns in both G.

and R. may be weak or strong as is fully explained in the article

HINDOSTANI. We have there seen that the strong form of masculine nouns

in Western Hindi generally ends in _au_, the _a_ of words like the

Hindostani _ghora_, a horse, being an accident due to the fact that

the Hindostani dialect of Western Hindi borrows this termination from

Panjabi. G. and R. follow Western Hindi, for their masculine strong

forms end in _o_. Feminine strong forms end in _i_ as elsewhere.

Neuter strong forms in G. end in _u_, derived as follows: Skr,

_svarnakam_, Ap. _sonnau_, G. _sonu_, gold. As an example of the three

genders of the same word we may take G. _chok^aro_ (masc.), a boy;

_chok^ari_ (fem.), a girl; _chok^aru_ (neut.), a child. Long forms

corresponding to the Eastern Hindi _ghor^awa_, a horse, are not much

used, but we not infrequently meet another long form made by suffixing

the pleonastic termination _do_ or _ro_ (fem. _di_ or _ri_; G. neut.

_du_ or _ru_) which is directly descended from the Ap. pleonastic

termination _dau_, _dai_, _dau_. We come across this most often in R.,

where it is used contemptuously, as in _Turuk-ro_, a Turk.

In the article HINDOSTANI it is shown that all the oblique cases of

each number in Sanskrit and Prakrit became melted down in the modern

languages into one general oblique case, which, in the Midland, is

derived in the singular from the Ap. termination _-hi_ or _-hi_, and

that even this has survived only in the case of strong masculine

nouns; thus, _ghora_, obl. _ghore_. In G. and R. this same termination

has also survived, but for all nouns as the case sign of the agent and

locative cases. The general oblique case is the same as the

nominative, except in the case of strong masculine and neuter nouns in

_o_ and _u_ respectively, where it ends in _a_, not _e_. This

_a_-termination is characteristic of the outer band of languages, and

is one of the survivals already referred to. It is derived from the

Apabhramsa genitive form in -_aha_, corresponding to the Magadhi Pr.

(an outer Prakrit) termination -_aha_. Thus, G. _chok^aro_, a son;

_chok^aru_, a child; obl. sing. _chok^ara_.

In G. the nominative and oblique plural for all nouns are formed by

adding _o_ to the oblique form singular, but in the neuter strong

forms the oblique singular is nasalized. The real plural is the same

in form as the oblique singular in the case of masculines, and as a

nasalized oblique singular in the case of neuter strong forms, as in

other modern Indo-Aryan vernaculars, and the added _o_ is a further

plural termination (making a double plural, exactly as it does in the

Ardhamagadhi Prakrit _putta-o_, sons) which is often dropped. The

nasalization of the strong neuter plurals is inherited from Ap., in

which the neuter nom. plural of such nouns ended in -_aai_ In R. the

nominative plural of masculine nouns is the same in form as the

oblique case singular, and the oblique plural ends in _a_. The

feminine has _a_ both in the nominative and in the oblique plural.

These are all explained in the article HINDOSTANI. We thus get the

following paradigms of the declension of nouns.

+----------------------+--------------+---------------+------------+

+----------------------+--------------+---------------+------------+

| Obl.| sonnaaha | sona | .. |

| Obl.| sonnaaha | sona-o | .. |

| "A word." Sing. Nom.| vatta | wat | bat |

| Obl.| vattahi | wat | bat |

+----------------------+--------------+---------------+------------+

The general oblique case can be employed for any case except the

nominative, but, in order to define the meaning, it is customary to

add postpositions as in Hindostani. These are:

+------------+----------+---------------+----------+----------+

+------------+----------+---------------+----------+----------+

| Gujarati | no | ne | thi | ma |

+------------+----------+---------------+----------+----------+

The suffix _no_ of the genitive is believed to be a contraction of

_tano_, which is found in old Gujarati poetry, and which, under the

form _tanas_ in Sanskrit and _tanau_ in Apabhramsa, mean "belonging

to." It is an adjective, and agrees in gender, number and case with

the thing possessed. Thus, _raja-no dik^aro_, the king's son; _raja-ni

dik^ari_, the king's daughter; _raja-nu ghar_, the king's house;

_raja-na dik^ara-ne_, to the king's son (_na_ is in the oblique case

masculine to agree with _dik^ara_); _raja-ne ghare_, in the king's

house. The _ro_ and _ko_ of R. are similarly treated, but, of course,

have no neuter. The dative postpositions are simply locatives of the

genitive ones, as in all modern Indo-Aryan languages (see HINDOSTANI).

_Thi_, the postposition of the G. ablative, is connected with _thawu_,

to be, one of the verbs substantive in that language. The ablative

suffix is made in this way in many modern Indo-Aryan languages (e.g.

Bengali, q.v.). It means literally "having been" and is to be

ultimately referred to the Sanskrit root, _stha_, stand. The

derivation of the other postpositions is discussed in the article

HINDOSTANI.

Strong adjectives agree with the nouns they qualify in gender, number

and case, as in the examples of the genitive above. Weak adjectives

are immutable.

Pronouns closely agree with those found in Hindostani. In the table on

following page we give the first two personal pronouns, and the

demonstrative pronoun "this."

Similarly are formed the remaining pronouns, viz. G. _a_, R. _u_,

he, that; G. _te_, R. _so_ (obl. sing. _ti_), that; G. _je_, R. _jo_,

who; G. _kan_ (obl. _kan_, _ko_, or _ke_), R. _kun_ (obl. _kun_),

who?; G. _su_, R. _kai_, what?; G., R. _koi_, anyone, someone, _kai_

anything, something. G. has two other demonstratives, _pelo_ and

_olyo_, both meaning "that." The derivation of these and of _su_ has

been discussed without any decisive result. The rest are explained in

the article HINDOSTANI. The reflexive pronoun is G. _ap^ane_, R.

_apa_. It is generally employed as a plural of the first personal

pronoun including the person addressed; thus G. _ap^ane_, we

(including you), but _ame_, we (excluding you). In G. _pote_, obl.

_pota_, is used to mean "self."

+------------------+-------------------+----------+----------------+

+------------------+-------------------+----------+----------------+

| I Nom. | hau | hu | hu, mhu, mai |

| WE Nom. | amhe | ame | mhe |

| Obl. | amhaha | am-o | mha |

| THOU Nom. | tuhu | tu | tu |

| THIS, HE Nom. | eho | e | yo |

| Obl. | (?) ehaha, imaha | e | i |

| THESE, THEY Nom. | ei | e-o | e, ye |

| Obl. | eammi, ehana | em | ina, ya. |

+------------------+-------------------+----------+----------------+

_Conjugation._--The old present has survived as in Hindostani and

other Indian languages. Taking the base _call_ or _cal_, go, as our

model, we have:

+-------------+------------+-----------------------+

+-------------+------------+-----------------------+

+-------------+------------+-----------------------+

The derivation of the G. 1 plural is unknown. That of the other G. and

R. forms is manifest. The imperative closely follows this, but as

usual has no termination in the second person singular.

In R. the future may be formed by adding _go_ (cf. Hindostani _ga_),

_lo_, or _la_ to the old present. Thus, _calu-go_, _calu-lo_ or

_calu-la_ I shall go. The _go_ and _lo_ agree in gender and number

with the subject, but _la_ is immutable. The termination with _l_ is

also found in Bhojpuri (see BIHARI), in Marathi and in Nepali. For

_go_ see HINDOSTANI. Another form of the future has _s_ or _h_ for its

characteristic letter, and is the only one employed in G. Thus, Ap.

_callisau_ or _callihau_, G. _calis_, R. (Jaipuri) _cal^asyu_,

(Marwari) _cal^ahu_. The other personal terminations differ

considerably from those of the old present, and closely follow Ap.

Thus, Ap. 3 sing. _callisai_ or _callihi_, G. _cal^ase_, Marwari

_cal^ahi_.

The participles and infinitive are as follows:

+----------------------+------------+-----------------------+

+----------------------+------------+-----------------------+

+----------------------+------------+-----------------------+

In G. the infinitive is simply the neuter of the future passive

participle. The participles are employed to form finite tenses; thus

G. _hu cal^ato_], I used to go; _hu calyo_, I went. If the verb is

transitive (see HINDOSTANI) the passive meaning of the past participle

comes into force. The subject is put into the case of the agent, and

the participle inflects to agree with the object, or, if there is no

object, is employed impersonally in the neuter (in G.) or in the

masculine (in R.). In Hindostani, if the object is expressed in the

dative, the participle is also employed impersonally, in the

masculine; thus _raja-ne sherni-ko mara_ (masc.), not _mari_, (fem.),

by-the-king, with reference-to-the-tigress,

it-(impersonal)-was-killed, i.e. the king killed the tigress. But in

G. and R., even if the object is in the dative, the past participle

agrees with it; thus, G. _rajae waghan-ne mari_, by-the-king,

with-reference-to-the-tigress, she-was-killed. Other examples from G.

of this passive construction are _me kahyu_, by me it was said, I

said; _tene citthi lakhi_, by him a letter was written, he wrote a

letter; _e baie vag^ada-ma, dahada kadya_, by this lady, in the

wilderness, days were passed, i.e. she passed her days in the

wilderness; _rajae vicaryu_, the king considered. The idiom of R. is

exactly the same in these cases, except that the masculine must be

used where G. has the neuter; thus, _rajaai vicaryo_. The future

passive participle is construed in much the same way, but (as in

Latin) the subject may be put into the dative. Thus, _mare a cap^adi

vac^avi, mihi ille liber (est) legendus_, I must read that book, but

also _tene_ (agent case) _e kam kar^avu_, by him this business is to

be done.

G. also forms a past participle in _elo_ (_calelo_), which is one of

the many survivals of the outer language. This -_l_- participle is

typical of most of the languages of the outer band, including Marathi,

Oriya, Bengali, Bihari and Assamese. It is formed by the addition of

the Prakrit pleonastic suffix _-illa-_, which was not used by the

Prakrit of the Midland, but was common elsewhere. Compare, for

instance, the Ardhamagadhi past participle passive _an-illia-_,

brought.

The usual verbs substantive are as follows: G. _chu_, R. _hu_ or

_chu_, I am, which are conjugated regularly as old presents, and G.

_hato_, R. _ho_ or _cho_, was, which is a past participle, like the

Hindostani (q.v.) _tha_. _Hu_, _hato_ and _ho_ are explained in the

article on that language. _Chu_ is for Skr. _[r deg.]cchami_, Ap.

_acchau_. The use of this base is one of the outer band survivals.

Even in Prakrit, it is not found (so far as the present writer is

aware) in the Sauraseni of the Midland. Using these as auxiliaries the

finite verb makes a whole series of periphrastic tenses. A present

definite is formed by conjugating the old present tense (not the

present participle) with the present tense of the verb substantive.

Thus, G. _calu chu_, I am going. A similar idiom is found in some

Western Hindi dialects, but Hindostani employs the present participle;

thus, _calta hu_. In G. and R., however, the imperfect is formed with

the present participle as in H. Thus, G. _hu cal^ato hato_, I was

going. So, as in H., we have a perfect _hu calyo_ (or _calelo_) _chu_,

I have gone, and a pluperfect _hu calyo_ (or _calelo_) _hato_, I had

gone. The R. periphrastic tenses are made on the same principles. With

the genitive of the G. future passive participle, _cal^ava-no_, we

have a kind of gerundive, as in _hu cal^avano chu_, I am to be gone,

i.e. I am about to go; _hu cal^avano hato_, I was about to go.

The same series of derivative verbs occurs in G. and R. as in H. Thus,

we have a potential passive (a simple passive in G.) formed by adding

_a_ to the base, as in G. _lakh^avu_, to write, _lakhavu_, to be

written; and a causal by adding _av_ or _ad_, as in _lakhav^avu_, to

cause to write; _bes^avu_, to sit, _besad^avu_, to seat. A new passive

may be formed in G. from the causal, as in _tap^avu_, to be hot;

_tapav^avu_, to cause to be hot; to heat; _tapavavu_, to be heated.

Several verbs have irregular past participles. These must be learnt

from the grammars. So also the numerous compound verbs, such as (G.)

_cali sak^avu_, to be able to go; _cali cuk^avu_, to have completed

going; _calya kar^avu_, to be in the habit of going, and so on.

Literature.

Very little is known about the literature of Rajputana, except that it

is of large extent. It includes a number of bardic chronicles of which

only one has been partially edited, but the contents of which have been

described by Tod in his admired _Rajasthan_. It also includes a

considerable religious literature, but the whole mass of this is still

in MS. From those specimens which the present writer has examined, it

would appear that most of the authors wrote in Braj Bhasha, the Hindu

literary dialect of Hindostani (q.v.) In Marwar it is an acknowledged

fact that the literature falls into two branches, one called _Pingal_

and couched in Braj Bhasha, and the other called _[D.]ingal_ and couched

in Rajasthani. The most admired work in [D.]ingal is the _Raghunath

Rupak_ written by Mansa Ram in the beginning of the 19th century. It is

nominally a treatise on prosody, but, like many other works of the same

kind, it contrives to pay a double debt, for the examples of the metres

are so arranged as to form a complete epic poem celebrating the deeds of

the hero Rama.

The earliest writer of importance in Gujarati, and its most admired

poet, was Narsingh Meta, who lived in the 15th century A.D. Before him

there were writers on Sanskrit grammar, rhetoric and the like, who

employed an old form of Gujarati for their explanations. Narsingh does

not appear to have written any considerable work, his reputation

depending on his short songs, many of which exhibit much felicity of

diction. He had several successors, all admittedly his inferiors.

Perhaps the most noteworthy of these was Rewa Sankar, the translator of

the _Mahabharata_ (see SANSKRIT: _Literature_). A more important side of

Gujarati literature is its bardic chronicles, the contents of which have

been utilized by Forbes in his _Ras Mala_. Modern Gujarati literature

mostly consists of translations or imitations of English works.

AUTHORITIES.--Volume ix. of the _Linguistic Survey of India_ contains

a full and complete account of Gujarati and Rajasthani, including

their various dialectic forms.

For Rajasthani, see S. H. Kellogg, _Grammar of the Hindi Language_

(2nd ed., London, 1893). In this are described several dialects of

Rajasthani. See also Ram Karn Sarma, _Marwari Vyakarana_ (Jodhpur,

1901) (a Marwari grammar written in that language), and G. Macalister,

_Specimens of the Dialects spoken in the State of Jaipur_ (contains

specimens, vocabularies and grammars) (Allahabad, 1898).

For Gujarati, there are numerous grammars, amongst which we may note

W. St C. Tisdall, _Simplified Grammar of the Gujarati Language_

(London, 1892) and (the most complete) G. P. Taylor, _The Student's

Gujarati Grammar_ (2nd ed., Bombay, 1908). As for dictionaries, the

most authoritative is the _Narma-kos_ of Narmada Sankar (Bhaunagar

and Surat, 1873), in Gujarati throughout. For English readers we may

mention Shahpurji Edalji's (2nd ed., Bombay, 1868), the introduction

to which contains an account of Gujarati literature by J. Glasgow,

Belsare's (Ahmedabad, 1895), and Karbhari's (Ahmedabad, 1899).

(G. A. Gr.)

GUJRANWALA, a town and district of British India, in the Lahore division

of the Punjab. The town is situated 40 m. N. of Lahore by rail. It is of

modern growth, and owes its importance to the father and grandfather of

Maharaja Ranjit Singh, whose capital it formed during the early period

of the Sikh power. Pop. (1901) 29,224. There are manufactures of

brass-ware, jewellery, and silk and cotton scarves.

The DISTRICT comprises an area of 3198 sq. m. In 1901 the population was

756,797, showing an increase of 29% in the decade. The district is

divided between a low alluvial tract along the rivers Chenab and Degh

and the upland between them, which forms the central portion of the

Rechna Doab, intermediate between the fertile submontane plains of

Sialkot and the desert expanses of Jhang. Part of the upland tract has

been brought under cultivation by the Chenab canal. The country is very

bare of trees, and the scenery throughout is tame and in the central

plateau becomes monotonous. It seems likely that the district once

contained the capital of the Punjab, at an epoch when Lahore had not

begun to exist. We learn from the Chinese Buddhist pilgrim, Hsuan Tsang,

that about the year 630 he visited a town known as Tse-kia (or Taki),

the metropolis of the whole country of the five rivers. A mound near the

modern village of Asarur has been identified as the site of the ancient

capital. Until the Mahommedan invasions little is known of Gujranwala,

except that Taki had fallen into oblivion and Lahore had become the

chief city. Under Mahommedan rule the district flourished for a time;

but a mysterious depopulation fell upon the tract, and the whole region

seems to have been almost entirely abandoned. On the rise of Sikh power,

the waste plains of Gujranwala were seized by various military

adventurers. Charat Singh took-possession of the village of Gujranwala,

and here his grandson the great Maharaja Ranjit Singh was born. The Sikh

rule, which was elsewhere so disastrous, appears to have been an

unmitigated benefit to this district. Ranjit Singh settled large

colonies in the various villages, and encouraged cultivation throughout

the depopulated plain. In 1847 the district came under British influence

in connexion with the regency at Lahore; and in 1849 it was included in

the territory annexed after the second Sikh war. A large export trade is

carried on in cotton, wheat and other grains. The district is served by

the main line and branches of the North-Western railway.

GUJRAT, a town and district of British India, in the Rawalpindi division

of the Punjab, lying on the south-western border of Kashmir. The town

stands about 5 m. from the right bank of the river Chenab, 70 m. N. of

Lahore by rail. Pop. (1901) 19,410. It is built upon an ancient site,

formerly occupied, according to tradition, by two successive cities, the

second of which is supposed to have been destroyed in 1303, the year of

a Mongol invasion. More than 200 years later either Sher Shah or Akbar

founded the existing town. Though standing in the midst of a Jat

neighbourhood, the fort was first garrisoned by Gujars, and took the

name of Gujrat. Akbar's fort, largely improved by Gujar Singh, stands in

the centre of the town. The neighbouring shrine of the saint Shah Daula

serves as a kind of native asylum for lunatics. The town has

manufactures of furniture, inlaid work in gold and iron, brass-ware,

boots, cotton goods and shawls.

The DISTRICT OF GUJRAT comprises a narrow wedge of sub-Himalayan plain

country, possessing few natural advantages. From the basin of the Chenab

on the south the general level rises rapidly towards the interior,

which, owing to the great distance of the water beneath the surface,

assumes a dreary and desert aspect. A range of low hills, known as the

Pabbi, traverses the northern angle of Gujrat. They are composed of a

friable Tertiary sandstone and conglomerate, destitute of vegetation,

and presenting a mere barren chaos of naked rock, deeply scored with

precipitous ravines. Immediately below the Pabbi stretches a high

plateau, terminating abruptly in a precipitous bluff some 200 ft. in

height. At the foot of this plateau is a plain, which forms the actual

valley of the Chenab and participates in the irrigation from the river

bed.

Numerous relics of antiquity stud the surface of the district. Mounds of

ancient construction yield early coins, and bricks are found whose size

and type prove them to belong to the prehistoric period. A mound now

occupied by the village of Moga or Mong has been identified as the site

of Nicaea, the city built by Alexander the Great on the field of his

victory over Porus. The Delhi empire established its authority in this

district under Bahlol Lodi (1451-1489). A century later it was visited

by Akbar, who founded Gujrat as the seat of government. During the decay

of the Mogul power, the Ghakkars of Rawalpindi overran this portion of

the Punjab and established themselves in Gujrat about 1741. Meanwhile

the Sikh power had been asserting itself in the eastern Punjab, and in

1765 the Ghakkar chief was defeated by Sirdar Gujar Singh, chief of the

Bhangi confederacy. On his death, his son succeeded him, but after a few

months' warfare, in 1798, he submitted himself as vassal to the Maharaja

Ranjit Singh. In 1846 Gujrat first came under the supervision of British

officials. Two years later the district became the theatre for the

important engagements which decided the event of the second Sikh war.

After several bloody battles in which the British were unsuccessful, the

Sikh power was irretrievably broken at the engagement which took place

at Gujrat on the 22nd of February 1849. The Punjab then passed by

annexation under British rule.

The district comprises an area of 2051 sq. m. In 1901 the population was

750,548, showing a decrease of 1%, compared with an increase of 10% in

the previous decade. The district has a large export trade in wheat and

other grains, oil, wool, cotton and hides. The main line and the

Sind-Sagar branch of the North-Western railway traverse it.

GULA, a Babylonian goddess, the consort of Ninib. She is identical with

another goddess, known as Bau, though it would seem that the two were

originally independent. The name Bau is more common in the oldest period

and gives way in the post-Khammurabic age to Gula. Since it is probable

that Ninib (q.v.) has absorbed the cults of minor sun-deities, the two

names may represent consorts of different gods. However this may be, the

qualities of both are alike, and the two occur as synonymous

designations of Ninib's female consort. Other names borne by this

goddess are Nin-Karrak, Ga-tum-dug and Nin-din-dug, the latter

signifying "the lady who restores to life." The designation well

emphasizes the chief trait of Bau-Gula which is that of healer. She is

often spoken of as "the great physician," and accordingly plays a

specially prominent role in incantations and incantation rituals

intended to relieve those suffering from disease. She is, however, also

invoked to curse those who trample upon the rights of rulers or those

who do wrong with poisonous potions. As in the case of Ninib, the cult

of Bau-Gula is prominent in Shirgulla and in Nippur. While generally in

close association with her consort, she is also invoked by herself, and

thus retains a larger measure of independence than most of the goddesses

of Babylonia and Assyria. She appears in a prominent position on the

designs accompanying the Kudurrus boundary-stone monuments of Babylonia,

being represented by a statue, when other gods and goddesses are merely

pictured by their shrines, by sacred animals or by weapons. In

neo-Babylonian days her cult continues to occupy a prominent position,

and Nebuchadrezzar II. speaks of no less than three chapels or shrines

within the sacred precincts of E-Zida in the city of Borsippa, besides a

temple in her honour at Babylon. (M. Ja.)

GULBARGA, an ancient city of India, situated in the Nizam's dominions,

70 m. S.E. of Sholapur. Pop. (1901) 29,228. Originally a Hindu city, it

was made the capital of the Bahmani kings when that dynasty established

their independence in the Deccan in 1347, and it remained such until

1422. The palaces, mosques and tombs of these kings still stand

half-ruined. The most notable building is a mosque modelled after that

of Cordova in Spain, covering an area of 38,000 sq. ft., which is

almost unique in India as being entirely covered in. Since the opening

of a station on the Great India Peninsula railway, Gulbarga has become a

centre of trade, with cotton-spinning and weaving mills. It is also the

headquarters of a district and division of the same name. The district,

as recently reconstituted, has an area of 6004 sq. m.; pop. (1901),

1,041,067.

GULF STREAM,[1] the name properly applied to the stream current which

issues from the Gulf of Mexico and flows north-eastward, following the

eastern coast of North America, and separated from it by a narrow strip

of cold water (the _Cold Wall_), to a point east of the Grand Banks off

Newfoundland. The Gulf Stream is a narrow, deep current, and its

velocity is estimated at about 80 m. a day. It is joined by, and often

indistinguishable from, a large body of water which comes from outside

the West Indies and follows the same course. The term was formerly

applied to the drift current which carries the mixed waters of the Gulf

Stream and the Labrador current eastwards across the Atlantic. This is

now usually known as the "Gulf Stream drift," although the name is not

altogether appropriate. See Atlantic.

Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, "Groups, Theory of" to "Gwyniad" Volume 12, Slice 6 · 第 34 / 44 题