[1] For Nos. 1-4 see Furtwängler, pl. 14; for Nos. 2-4 see Evans,
_Rev. archéologique_, xxxii. (1898) pl. 8.
GEM, ARTIFICIAL. The term "Artificial Gems" does not mean _imitations_
of real gems, but the actual formation by artificial means of the real
precious stone, so that the product is identical, chemically, physically
and optically, with the one found in nature. For instance, in chemical
composition the lustrous diamond is nothing but crystallized carbon.
Could we take black amorphous carbon in the form of charcoal or
lampblack and dissolve it in a liquid, and by the slow evaporation of
that liquid allow the dissolved carbon to separate out, it would
probably crystallize in the transparent form of diamond. This would be a
true synthesis of diamond, and the product would be just as much
entitled to the name as the choicest products of Kimberley or Golconda.
But this is a very different thing from the imitation diamond so common
in shop windows. Here the chemist has only succeeded in making a paste
or glass having limpidity and a somewhat high refractivity, but wanting
the hardness and "fire" of the real stone.
_The Diamond._--Within recent years chemists have actually succeeded in
making the real diamond by artificial means, and although the largest
yet made is not more than one-fiftieth of an inch across, the process
itself and the train of reasoning leading up to such an achievement are
sufficiently interesting to warrant a somewhat full description.
Attempts to make diamonds artificially have been numerous, but, with the
sole exception of those of Henri Moissan, all have resulted in failure.
The nearest approach to success was attained by J.B. Hannay in 1880 and
R.S. Marsden in 1881; but their results have not been verified by others
who have tried to repeat them, and the probability is that what was then
thought to be diamond was in reality carborundum or carbide of silicon.
Attempts have been made by two methods to make carbon crystallize in the
transparent form. One is to crystallize it slowly from a solution in
which it has been dissolved. The difficulty is to find a solvent. Many
organic and some inorganic bodies hold carbon so loosely combined that
it can be separated out under the influence of chemical action, heat or
electricity, but invariably the carbon assumes the black amorphous form.
The other method is to try to fuse the carbon by fierce heat, when from
analogy it is argued that on cooling it will solidify to a clear limpid
crystal. The progress of science in other directions has now made it
pretty certain that the true mode of making diamond artificially is by a
combination of these two methods. Until recently it was assumed that
carbon was non-volatile at any attainable temperature, but it is now
known that at a temperature of about 3600° C. it volatilizes readily,
passing without liquefying directly from the solid to the gaseous state.
Very few bodies act in this manner, the great majority when heated at
atmospheric pressure to a sufficient temperature passing through the
intermediate condition of liquidity. Some few, however, which when
heated at atmospheric pressure do not liquefy, when heated at higher
pressures in closed vessels obey the common rule and first become liquid
and then volatilize. Sir James Dewar found the critical pressure of
carbon to be about 15 tons on the sq. in.; that is to say, if heated to
its critical temperature (3600° C.), and at the same time subjected to a
pressure of 15 tons to the sq. in., it will assume the liquid form.
Enormous as such pressures and temperatures may appear to be, they have
been exceeded in some of Sir Andrew Noble's and Sir F. Abel's
researches; in their investigations on the gases from gunpowder and
cordite fired in closed steel chambers, these chemists obtained
pressures as great as 95 tons to the sq. in., and temperatures as high
as 4000° C. Here then, if the observations are correct, we have
sufficient temperature and enough pressure to liquefy carbon; and, were
there only sufficient time for these to act on the carbon, there is
little doubt that the artificial formation of diamonds would soon pass
from the microscopic stage to a scale more likely to satisfy the
requirements of science, if not those of personal adornment.
It has long been known that the metal iron in a molten state dissolves
carbon and deposits it on cooling as black opaque graphite. Moissan
carried out a laborious and systematic series of experiments on the
solubility of carbon in iron and other metals, and came to the
conclusion that whereas at ordinary pressures the carbon separates from
the solidifying iron in the form of graphite, if the pressure be greatly
increased the carbon on separation will form liquid drops, which on
solidifying will assume the crystalline shape and become true diamond.
Many other metals dissolve carbon, but molten iron has been found to be
the best solvent. The quantity entering into solution increases with the
temperature of the metal. But temperature alone is not enough; pressure
must be superadded. Here Moissan ingeniously made use of a property
which molten iron possesses in common with some few other
liquids--water, for instance--of increasing in volume in the act of
passing from the liquid to the solid state. Pure iron is mixed with
carbon obtained from the calcination of sugar, and the whole is rapidly
heated in a carbon crucible in an electric furnace, using a current of
700 amperes and 40 volts. The iron melts like wax and saturates itself
with carbon. After a few minutes' heating to a temperature above 4000°
C.--a temperature at which the lime furnace begins to melt and the iron
volatilizes in clouds--the dazzling, fiery crucible is lifted out and
plunged beneath the surface of cold water, where it is held till it
sinks below a red heat. The sudden cooling solidifies the outer skin of
molten metal and holds the inner liquid mass in an iron grip. The
expansion of the inner liquid on solidifying produces enormous pressure,
and under this stress the dissolved carbon separates out in a hard,
transparent, dense form--in fact, as diamond. The succeeding operations
are long and tedious. The metallic ingot is attacked with hot _aqua
regia_ till no iron is left undissolved. The bulky residue consists
chiefly of graphite, together with translucent flakes of
chestnut-coloured carbon, hard black opaque carbon of a density of from
3.0 to 3.5, black diamonds--carbonado, in fact--and a small quantity of
transparent colourless diamonds showing crystalline structure. Besides
these there may be corundum and carbide of silicon, arising from
impurities in the materials employed. Heating with strong sulphuric
acid, with hydrofluoric acid, with nitric acid and potassium chlorate,
and fusing with potassium fluoride--operations repeated over and over
again--at last eliminate the graphite and impurities and leave the true
diamond untouched. The precious residue on microscopic examination shows
many pieces of black diamond, and other colourless transparent pieces,
some amorphous, others crystalline. Although many fragments of crystals
are seen, the writer has scarcely ever met with a complete crystal. All
appear broken up, as if, on being liberated from the intense pressure
under which they were formed, they burst asunder. Direct evidence of
this phenomenon has been seen. A very fine piece of diamond, prepared in
the way just described and carefully mounted on a microscopic slide,
exploded during the night and covered the slide with fragments. This
bursting paroxysm is not unknown at the Kimberley mines.
Sir William Crookes in 1906 communicated to the Royal Society a paper on
a new formation of diamond. Sir Andrew Noble has shown that in the
explosion of cordite in closed steel cylinders pressures of over 50 tons
to the sq. in. and a temperature probably reaching 5400° were obtained.
Here then we have conditions favourable for the liquefaction of carbon,
and if the time of explosion were sufficient to allow the reactions to
take place we should expect to get liquid carbon solidified in the
crystalline state. Experiment proved the truth of these anticipations.
Working with specially prepared explosive containing a little excess of
carbon Sir Andrew Noble collected the residue left in the steel
cylinder. This residue was submitted by Sir William Crookes to the
lengthy operations already described in the account of H. Moissan's
fused iron experiment. Finally, minute crystals were obtained which
showed octahedral planes with dark boundaries due to high refracting
index. The position and angles of their faces, and cleavages, the
absence of bi-refringence, and their high refractive index all showed
that the crystals were true diamond.
The artificial diamonds, so far, have not been larger than microscopic
specimens, and none has measured more than about half a millimetre
across. That, however, is quite enough to show the correctness of the
train of reasoning leading up to the achievement, and there is no reason
to doubt that, working on a larger scale, larger diamonds will result.
Diamonds so made burn in the air when heated to a high temperature, with
formation of carbonic acid; and in lustre, crystalline form, optical
properties, density and hardness, they are identical with the natural
stone.
It having been shown that diamond is formed by the separation of carbon
from molten iron under pressure, it became of interest to see if in some
large metallurgical operations similar conditions might not prevail. A
special form of steel is made at some large establishments by cooling
the molten metal under intense hydraulic pressure. In some samples of
the steel so made Professor Rosel, of the university of Bern, has found
microscopic diamonds. The higher the temperature at which the steel has
been melted the more diamonds it contains, and it has even been
suggested that the hardness of steel in some measure may be due to the
carbon distributed throughout its mass being in this adamantine form.
The largest artificial diamond yet formed was found in a block of steel
and slag from a furnace in Luxembourg; it is clear and crystalline, and
measures about one-fiftieth of an inch across.
A striking confirmation of the theory that natural diamonds have been
produced from their solution in masses of molten iron, the metal from
which has gradually oxidized and been washed away under cycles of
atmospheric influences, is afforded by the occurrence of diamonds in a
meteorite. On a broad open plain in Arizona, over an area of about 5 m.
in diameter, lie scattered thousands of masses of metallic iron, the
fragments varying in weight from half a ton to a fraction of an ounce.
There is little doubt that these fragments formed part of a meteoric
shower, although no record exists as to when the fall took place. Near
the centre, where most of the fragments have been found, is a crater
with raised edges, three-quarters of a mile in diameter and 600 ft.
deep, bearing just the appearance which would be produced had a mighty
mass of iron--a falling star--struck the ground, scattered it in all
directions, and buried itself deeply under the surface, fragments eroded
from the surface forming the pieces now met with. Altogether ten tons of
this iron have been collected, and specimens of the Canyon Diablo
meteorite are in most collectors' cabinets. Dr A.E. Foote, a
mineralogist, when cutting a section of this meteorite, found the tools
injured by something vastly harder than metallic iron, and an emery
wheel used for grinding it was ruined. He attacked the specimen
chemically, and soon afterwards announced to the scientific world that
the Canyon Diablo meteorite contained diamonds, both black and
transparent. This startling discovery was subsequently verified by
Professors C. Friedel and H. Moissan, and also by Sir W. Crookes.
_The Ruby._--It is evident that of the other precious stones only the
most prized are worth producing artificially. Apart from their inferior
hardness and colour, the demand for what are known as "semi-precious
stones" would not pay for the necessarily great expenses of the factory.
Moreover, were it to be known that they were being produced artificially
the demand--never very great--would almost cease. The only other gems,
therefore, which need be mentioned in connexion with their artificial
formation are those of the corundum or sapphire class, which include all
the most highly prized gems, rivalling, and sometimes exceeding, the
diamond in value. Here a remarkable and little-known fact deserves
notice. Excepting the diamond and sapphire, each of the precious
stones--the emerald, the topaz and amethyst--possesses a more noble, a
harder, and more highly-prized counterpart of itself, alike in colour,
but superior in brilliancy and hardness; still more strange, the
precious stone to which its special name is usually attached is the
variety the least prized. The ruby itself might almost be included in
the same category. The true ruby consists of the earth alumina, in a
clear, crystalline form, having a minute quantity of the element
chromium as the colouring matter. It is often called the "Oriental
Ruby," or red sapphire, and when of a paler colour, the "Pink Sapphire."
But the ruby as met with in jewellers' shops of inferior standing is
usually no true ruby, but a "spinel ruby" or "balas ruby," sometimes
very beautiful in colour, but softer than the Oriental ruby, and
different in chemical composition, consisting essentially of alumina and
magnesia and a little silica, with the colouring matter chromium. The
colourless basis of the true Oriental precious stones being taken as
crystallized alumina or white sapphire, when the colouring matter is red
the stone is called ruby, when blue sapphire, when green Oriental
emerald, when orange-yellow Oriental topaz, and when violet Oriental
amethyst. Clear, colourless crystals are known as white sapphire, and
are very valuable. It is evident, therefore, that whosoever succeeds in
making artificially clear crystals of white sapphire has the power, by
introducing appropriate colouring matter, to make the Oriental ruby,
sapphire, emerald, topaz and amethyst. All of these stones, even when of
small size, are costly and readily saleable, while when they are of fine
quality and large size they are highly prized, a ruby of fine colour,
and free from flaws, a few carats in weight, being of more value than a
diamond of the same weight.
This being the case, it is not surprising that repeated attempts have
been made to effect the crystallization of alumina. This is not a matter
of difficulty, but unfortunately the crystals generally form thin
plates, of good colour, but too thin to be useful as gems. In 1837
M.A.A. Gaudin made true rubies, of microscopic size, by fusing alum in a
carbon crucible at a very high temperature, and adding a little chromium
as colouring matter. In 1847 J.J. Ebelmen produced the white sapphire
and rose-coloured spinel by fusing the constituents at a high
temperature in boracic acid. Shortly afterwards he produced the ruby by
employing borax as the solvent. The boracic acid was found to be too
volatile to allow the alumina to crystallize, but the use of borax made
the necessary difference. But it was not till about the year 1877 that
E. Frémy and C. Feil first published a method whereby it was possible to
produce a crystallized alumina from which small stones could be cut.
They first formed lead aluminate by the fusion together of lead oxide
and alumina. This was kept in a state of fusion in a fireclay crucible
(in the composition of which silica enters largely). Under the influence
of the high temperature the silica of the crucible gradually decomposes
the lead aluminate, forming lead silicate, which remains in the liquid
state, and alumina, which crystallizes as white sapphire. By the
admixture of 2 or 3% of a chromium compound with original materials the
resulting white sapphire became ruby. More recently Edmond Frémy and A.
Verneuil obtained artificial rubies by reacting at a red heat with
barium fluoride on amorphous alumina containing a small quantity of
chromium. The rubies obtained in this manner are thus described by Frémy
and Verneuil: "Their crystalline form is regular; their lustre is
adamantine; they present the beautiful colour of the ruby; they are
perfectly transparent, have the hardness of the ruby, and easily scratch
topaz. They resemble the natural ruby in becoming dark when heated,
resuming their rose-colour on cooling." Des Cloizeaux says of them that
"under the microscope some of the crystals show bubbles. In converging
polarized light the coloured rings and the negative black cross are of a
remarkable regularity."
Other experimentalists have attacked the problem in other directions.
Besides those already mentioned, L. Eisner, H.H. De Senarmont,
Sainte-Claire Deville, and H. Caron and H. Debray have succeeded with
more or less success in producing rubies. The general plan adopted has
been to form a mixture of salts fusible at a red heat, forming a liquid
in which alumina will dissolve. Alumina is now added till the fused mass
will take up no more, and the crucible is left in the furnace for a long
time, sometimes extending over weeks. The solvent slowly volatilizes,
and the alumina is deposited in crystals, coloured by whatever colouring
oxide has been added.
Mention has been made above of a stone frequently substituted for the
true ruby, called the "spinel" or "balas" ruby. The spinel and ruby
occur together in nature, stones from Burma being as often spinel as
true Oriental ruby. In the artificial production of the ruby it
sometimes happens that spinel crystallizes out when true Oriental ruby
is expected. The fusion bath is so arranged that only red-coloured
alumina shall crystallize out, but it is difficult to have all the
materials of such purity as to ensure the complete absence of silica and
magnesia. In this case, when these impurities have accumulated to a
certain point they unite with the alumina, and spinel then separates, as
it crystallizes more easily than ruby. When all the magnesia and silica
have been eliminated in this way the bath resumes its deposition of
crystalline ruby. Rubies of fine colour and of considerable size have
been shown in London, made on the Continent by a secret process. The
writer has seen several cut stones so made weighing over a carat each,
the uncut crystals measuring half an inch along a crystal edge, and
weighing over 70 grains, and a clear plate of ruby cut from a single
crystal weighing over 10 grains. Ruby has been made by Sir W.
Roberts-Austen as a by-product in the production of metallic chromium.
Oxide of chromium and aluminium powder are intimately mixed together in
a refractory crucible, and the mixture is ignited at the upper part. The
aluminium and chromium oxide react with evolution of so much heat that
the reduced chromium is melted. Such is the intensity of the reaction
that the resulting alumina is also completely fused, floating as a
liquid on the molten chromium. Sometimes the alumina takes tip the right
amount of chromium to enable it to assume the ruby colour. On cooling
the melted alumina crystallizes in large flakes, which on examination by
transmitted light are seen to be true ruby. The development of the red
colour is said by C. Greville-Williams only to take place at a white
heat. It is not due to the presence of chromic acid, but to a reaction
between alumina and chromic oxide, which requires an elevated
temperature.
Artificially made but real rubies have been put on the market, prepared
by a process of fusion by A. Verneuil. He finds that certain conditions
have to be fulfilled in order to get the alumina in a transparent form.
The temperature must not be higher than is absolutely necessary for
fusion. The melted product must always be in the same part of the
oxyhydrogen flame, and the point of contact between the melted product
and the support should be reduced to as small an area as possible. M.
Verneuil uses a vertical blowpipe flame directed on a support capable of
movement up and down by means of a screw, so that the fused product may
be removed from the zone of fusion as it gets higher by addition of
fresh material. The material employed is either composed of small,
valueless rubies, or alumina coloured with the right amount of chromium.
It is very finely powdered and fed in through the blowpipe orifice,
whence it is blown in a highly heated condition into the zone of fusion.
The support is a small cylinder of alumina placed in the axis of the
blowpipe. As the operation proceeds the fine grains of powder driven on
to the support in the zone of fusion form a cone which gradually rises
and broadens out until it becomes of sufficient size to be used for
cutting. Rubies prepared in this way have the same specific gravity and
hardness as the natural ruby, and they are also dichroic, and in the
vacuum tube under the influence of the cathode stream they phosphoresce
with a discontinuous spectrum showing the strong alumina line in the
red. When properly cut and mounted it is almost impossible to
distinguish them from natural stones.
_The Sapphire._--Auguste Daubrée has shown that when a full quantity of
chromium is added to the bath from which white sapphire crystallizes the
colour is that of ruby, but when much less chromium is added the colour
is blue, forming the true Oriental sapphire. The real colouring matter
of the Oriental sapphire is not definitely known, some chemists
considering it to be chromium and others cobalt. Artificial sapphires
have been made of a fair size and perfectly transparent by the addition
of cobalt to the igneous bath of alumina, but the writer does not
consider them equal in colour to true Oriental sapphire.
_The Oriental Emerald._--The stone known as emerald consists chemically
of silica, alumina and glucina. Like the ruby, it owes its colour to
chromium, but in a different state of oxidation. As already mentioned,
there is another stone which consists of crystallized alumina coloured
with chromium, but holding the chromium in a different state of
oxidation. This is called the Oriental emerald, and, owing to its beauty
of colour, its hardness and rarity, it is more highly prized than the
emerald itself and commands higher prices. The Oriental emerald has been
produced artificially in the same way as the ruby, by adding a larger
amount of chromium to the alumina bath and regulating the temperature.
_The Oriental Amethyst._--The amethyst is rock crystal (quartz) of a
bluish-violet colour. It is one of the least valuable of the precious
stones. The sapphire, however, is found occasionally of a beautiful
violet colour; it is then called the Oriental amethyst, and, on account
of its beauty and rarity, is of great value. It is evident that if to
the igneous bath of alumina some colouring matter, such as manganese, is
added capable of communicating a violet colour to the crystals of
alumina, the Oriental amethyst will be the result. Oriental amethyst has
been so formed artificially, but the stone being known only as a
curiosity to mineralogists and experts in precious stones, and the
public not being able to discriminate between the violet sapphire and
amethystine quartz, there is no demand for the artificial stone.
_The Oriental Topaz._--The topaz is what is called a semi-precious
stone. It occurs of many colours, from clear white to pink, orange,
yellow and pale green. The usual colour is from straw-yellow to sherry
colour. The exact composition of the colouring matter is not known; it
is not entirely of mineral origin, as it changes colour and sometimes
fades altogether on exposure to light. Chemically the topaz consists of
alumina, silica and fluorine. It is not so hard as the sapphire. There
is also a yellow variety of quartz, which is sometimes called "false
topaz." The Oriental topaz, on the other hand, is a precious stone of
great value. It consists of clear crystalline sapphire coloured with a
small quantity of ferric oxide. It has been produced artificially by
adding iron instead of chromium to the matrix from which the white
sapphire crystallizes.
_The Zircon._--The zircon is a very beautiful stone, varying in colour,
like the topaz, from red and yellow to green and blue. It is sometimes
met with colourless, and such are its refractive powers and brilliancy
that it has been mistaken for diamond. It is a compound of silica and
zirconia. H. Sainte-Claire Deville formed the zircon artificially by
passing silicon fluoride at a red heat over the oxide zirconia in a
porcelain tube. Octahedral crystals of zircon are then produced, which
have the same crystalline form, appearance and optical qualities as the
natural zircon.
BIBLIOGRAPHY.--Sir William Crookes, "A New Formation of Diamond,"
_Proc. Roy. Soc._ vol. lxxvi. p. 458; "Diamonds," a lecture delivered
before the British Association at Kimberley, South Africa, 5th
September, 1905, _Chemical News_, vol. xcii. pp. 135, 147, 159; J.J.
Ebelmen, "Sur la production artificielle des pierres dures," _Comptes
rendus_, vol. xxv. p. 279; "Sur une nouvelle méthode pour obtenir, par
la voie sèche, des combinations crystallisées, et sur ses applications
à la réproduction de plusieurs espèces minérales," _Comptes rendus_,
vol. xxv. p. 661; Edmond Frémy and C. Feil, "Sur la production
artificielle du corindon, du rubis, et de différents silicates
crystallisées," _Comptes rendus_, vol. lxxxv. p. 1029; C. Friedel,
"Sur l'existence du diamant dans le fer météorique de Cañon Diablo,"
_Comptes rendus_, vol. cxv. p. 1037, vol. cxvi. p. 290; H. Moissan,
"Étude de la météorite de Cañon Diablo," _Comptes rendus_, vol. cxvi.
p. 288; "Expériences sur la réproduction du diamant," _Comptes
rendus_, vol. cxviii. p. 320; "Sur quelques expériences relatives à la
préparation du diamant," _Comptes rendus_, vol. cxxiii. p. 206; _Le
Four électrique_ (Paris, 1897); H. Sainte-Claire Deville and H. Caron,
"Sur un nouveau mode de production à l'état cristallisé d'un certain
nombre d'espèces chimiques et minéralogiques," _Comptes rendus_, vol.
xlvi. p. 764; A. Verneuil, "Production artificielle des rubis par
fusion," ibid. vol. cxxxv. p. 791; J. Boyer, _La Synthèse des pierres
précieuses_ (Paris, 1909). (W. C.)
GEMBLOUX, a town in the province of Namur and on the borders of Brabant,
Belgium, 25 m. S.E. of Brussels on the main line to Namur and Luxemburg.
Pop. (1904) 4643. It is a busy place with large railway and engine
works, and the junction for several branch lines. On the 31st of January
1578 Don John of Austria gained here a signal victory over the army of
the provinces led by Antony de Goignies.
GEMINI ("The Twins," i.e. Castor and Pollux), in astronomy, the third
sign in the zodiac, denoted by the symbol II. It is also a
constellation, mentioned by Eudoxus (4th century B.C.) and Aratus (3rd
century B.C.), and catalogued by Ptolemy, 25 stars, Tycho Brahe 25, and
Hevelius 38. By the Egyptians this constellation was symbolized as a
couple of young kids; the Greeks altered this symbol to two children,
variously said to be Castor and Pollux, Hercules and Apollo, or
Triptolemus and Iasion; the Arabians used the symbol of a pair of
peacocks. Interesting objects in this constellation are: [alpha]
Geminorum or Castor, a very fine double star of magnitudes 2.0 and 2.8,
the fainter component is a spectroscopic binary; [eta] Geminorum, a long
period (231 days) variable, the extreme range in magnitude being 3.2 to
4; [zeta] Geminorum, a short period variable, 10.15 days, the extreme
range in magnitude being 3.7 to 4.5; _Nova_ Geminorum, a "new" star
discovered in 1903 by H.H. Turner of Oxford; and the star cluster M.35
Geminorum, a fine and bright, but loose, cluster, with very little
central condensation.
GEMINIANI, FRANCESCO (c. 1680-1762), Italian violinist, was born at
Lucca about 1680. He received lessons in music from Alessandro
Scarlatti, and studied the violin under Lunati (Gobbo) and afterwards
under Corelli. In 1714 he arrived in London, where he was taken under
the special protection of the earl of Essex, and made a living by
teaching and writing music. In 1715 he played his violin concertos with
Handel at the English court. After visiting Paris and residing there for
some time, he returned to England in 1755. In 1761 he went to Dublin,
where a servant robbed him of a musical manuscript on which he had
bestowed much time and labour. His vexation at this loss is said to have
hastened his death on the 17th of September 1762. He appears to have
been a first-rate violinist, but most of his compositions are dry and
deficient in melody. His _Art of Playing the Violin_ is a good work of
its kind, but his _Guida armonica_ is an inferior production. He
published a number of solos for the violin, three sets of violin
concertos, twelve violin trios, _The Art of Accompaniment on the
Harpsichord, Organ_, &c., _Lessons for the Harpsichord_ and some other
works.
GEMISTUS PLETHO [or PLETHON], GEORGIUS (c. 1355-1450), Greek Platonic
philosopher and scholar, one of the chief pioneers of the revival of
learning in Western Europe, was a Byzantine by birth who settled at
Mistra in the Peloponnese, the site of ancient Sparta. He changed his
name from Gemistus to the equivalent Pletho ("the full"), perhaps owing
to the similarity of sound between that name and that of his master
Plato. He invented a religious system founded on the speculative
mysticism of the Neoplatonists, and founded a sect, the members of which
believed that the new creed would supersede all existing forms of
belief. But he is chiefly memorable for having introduced Plato to the
Western world. This took place upon his visit to Florence in 1439, as
one of the deputies from Constantinople on occasion of the general
council. Cardinal Bessarion became his disciple; he produced a great
impression upon Cosimo de' Medici; and though not himself making any
very important contribution to the study of Plato, he effectually shook
the exclusive domination which Aristotle had exercised over European
thought for eight centuries. He promoted the union of the Greek and
Latin Churches as far as possible, but his efforts in this direction
bore no permanent fruit. He probably died before the capture of
Constantinople. The most important of his published works are treatises
on the distinction between Plato and Aristotle as philosophers
(published at Venice in 1540); on the religion of Zoroaster (Paris,
1538); on the condition of the Peloponnese (ed. A. Ellissen in
_Analekten der mittel- und neugriechischen Literatur_, iv.); and the
[Greek: Nomoi] (ed. C. Alexandre, Paris, 1858). In addition to these he
compiled several volumes of excerpts from ancient authors, and wrote a
number of works on geography, music and other subjects, many of which
still exist in MS. in various European libraries.
See especially F. Schultze, _Geschichte der Philosophie der
Renaissance_, i. (1874); also J.A. Symonds, _The Renaissance in Italy_
(1877), ii. p. 198; H.F. Tozer, "A Byzantine Reformer," in _Journal of
Hellenic Studies_, vii. (1886), chiefly on Pletho's scheme of
political and social reform for the Peloponnese, as set forth in the
pamphlets addressed to Manuel II. Palaeologus and his son Theodore,
despot of the Morea; W. Gass, _Gennadius und Pletho_ (1844). Most of
Pletho's works will be found in J.P. Migne, _Patrologia Graeca_, clx.;
for a complete list see Fabricius, _Bibliotheca Graeca_ (ed. Harles),
xii.
GEMMI PASS, a pass (7641 ft.) leading from Frutigen in the Swiss canton
of Bern to Leukerbad in the Swiss canton of the Valais. It is much
frequented by travellers in summer. From Kandersteg (7½ m. by road above
Frutigen, which is 12 m. by rail from Spiez on the Berne-Interlaken
line) a mule path leads to the summit of the pass, passing over the
Spitalmatte plain, where in 1782 and again in 1895 a great avalanche
fell from the Altels (11,930 ft.) to the S.E., causing on both occasions
great loss of life and property. The mule path descends on the south
side of the pass by an extraordinary series of zigzags, made accessible
for mules (though no rider is now allowed to descend on mule-back) by a
band of Tirolese workmen in 1740-1741. They are cut in a very steep wall
of rock, about 1800 ft. in height, and lead down to the village of
Leukerbad, which is 9½ m. by carriage road past Leuk above the Susten
station in the Rhône valley and on the Simplon line. (W. A. B. C.)
GENDARMERIE, originally a body of troops in France composed of
_gendarmes_ or men-at-arms. In the days of chivalry they were mounted
and armed cap-à-pie, exactly as were the lords and knights, with whom
they constituted the most important part of an army. They were attended
each by five soldiers of inferior rank and more lightly armed. In the
later middle ages the men-at-arms were furnished by owners of fiefs. But
after the Hundred Years' War this feudal gendarmerie was replaced by the
_compagnies d'ordonnance_ which Charles VII. formed when the English
were driven out of France, and which were distributed throughout the
whole extent of the kingdom for preserving order and maintaining the
king's authority. These companies, fifteen in number, were composed of
100 lances or gendarmes fully equipped, each of whom was attended by at
least three archers, one _coutillier_ (soldier armed with a cutlass) and
one _varlet_ (soldier's servant). The states-general of Orleans (1439)
had voted a yearly subsidy of 1,200,000 livres in perpetuity to keep up
this national soldiery, which replaced, and in fact was recruited
chiefly amongst, the bands of mercenaries who for about a century had
made France their prey. The number and composition of the _compagnies
d'ordonnance_ were changed more than once before the reign of Louis XIV.
This sovereign on his accession to the throne found only eight companies
of gendarmes surviving out of an original total of more than one
hundred, but after the victory of Fleurus (1690), which had been decided
by their courage, he increased their number to sixteen. The four first
companies (which were practically guard troops) were designated by the
names of _Gendarmes écossais_, _Gendarmes anglais_, _Gendarmes
bourguignons_ and _Gendarmes flamands_, from the nationality of the
soldiers who had originally composed them; but at that time they
consisted entirely of French soldiers and officers. These four companies
had a captain-general, who was the king. The fifth company was that of
the queen; and the others bore the name of the princes who respectively
commanded them. This organization was dissolved in 1788. The Revolution
swept away all these institutions of the monarchy, and, with the
exception of a short revival of the _Gendarmes de la garde_ at the
Restoration, henceforward the word "gendarmerie" possesses an altogether
different significance--viz. military police.
GENEALOGY (from the Gr. [Greek: genos], family, and [Greek: logos],
theory), a pedigree or list of ancestors, or the study of family
history.
1. _Biblical Genealogies._--The aims and methods of ancient genealogists
require to be carefully considered before the value of the numerous
ancestral lists in the Bible can be properly estimated. Many of the old
"genealogies," like those of Greece, have arisen from the desire to
explain the origin of the various groups which they include. Information
relating to the subdivision of tribes, their relation to each other, the
intermingling of populations and the like are thus frequently
represented in the form of genealogies. The "sons" of a "father" often
stand merely for the branches of a family as they existed at some one
period, and since in course of time tribal relations would vary, lists
which have originated at different periods will present discrepancies.
It is obvious that many of the Biblical names are nothing more than
personifications of nations, tribes, towns, &c., which are grouped
together to convey some idea of the bond by which they were believed to
be connected.
For the personification of a people or tribe, cp. Gen. xxxiv. 30
("Jacob said ... I am a few men"), Josh. xvii. 14 ("the children of
Joseph said ... I am a numerous people"), Ex. xiv. 25 ("Egypt said,
let me flee"), Jos. ix. 7, 1 Sam. v. 10, &c.; see G.B. Gray on
Numbers, xx. 14 (_Internat. Crit. Comm._). Thus we find among the
"sons" of Japhet: (the nations) Gomer, Javan, Tubal; Canaan "begat"
Sidon and Heth; the "sons" of Ishmael include the well-known tribes
Kedar and Jetur; Jacob, or the synonym Israel, personifies the
"children of Israel" (cf. use of "I," "thou" of the Israelites in
Deut., and in poetical passages). The recognition of this
characteristic usage often furnishes an ethnological interpretation to
those genealogical stories which obviously do not relate to persons,
but to tribes or peoples personified. The Edomites and Israelites are
regarded as "brothers" (cf. Num. xx. 14, Deut. ii. 4, Am. i. 11), and
since Esau (Edom) was born before Jacob (Israel) it would appear that
the Edomites were held to be the older nation. The union of two clans
is expressed as a marriage, or the wife is the territory which is
dominated by the husband (tribe); see CALEB. If the woman is not of
noble blood, but is a handmaiden or concubine, her children are
naturally not upon the same footing as those of the wife; consequently
the descendants of Ishmael, the son of Hagar (Sarah's maid), are
inferior to Isaac and his descendants, whilst the children of Keturah
("incense"), Abraham's concubine, are still lower--from the Israelite
point of view. This application of the terms of relationship is
characteristic of the Semites. The "father" of the Rechabites is their
head or founder (cf. 1 Sam. x. 12: "who is their father?"), and a
common bond, which is not necessarily physical, unites all "sons,"
whether they are "sons of the prophets" (members of prophetic guilds)
or "sons of Belial" (worthless men).
The interpretation of ethnological or statistical genealogies may easily
be pushed too far. Every case has to be judged upon its own merits, and
due allowance must be made both for the ambition of the weaker to claim
or to strengthen an alliance with the stronger, and for the not
unnatural desire of clans or individuals to magnify the greatness of
their ancestry. The first step must always be the careful comparison of
related lists in order to test the consistency of the tradition. Next,
these must be critically studied in the light of all available
historical material, though indeed such evidence is not necessarily
conclusive. Finally, (a) literary criticism must be employed to
determine if possible the dates of such lists, since obviously a
contemporary register is more trustworthy than one which is centuries
later; (b) a critical estimate of the character of the names and of
their use in various periods of Old Testament history is of importance
in estimating the antiquity of the list[1]--for example, many of the
names in Chronicles attributed to the time of David are indubitably
exilic or post-exilic; and (c) principles of ordinary historical
probability are as necessary here as in dealing with the genealogies of
other ancient peoples, and attention must be paid to such features as
fluctuation in the number of links, representation of theories
inconsistent with the growth of national life, schemes of relationship
not in accordance with sociological conditions, &c.
The Biblical genealogies commence with "the generations of the heaven
and earth," and by a process of elimination pass from Adam and Eve by
successive steps to Jacob and to his sons (the tribes), and finally to
the subdivisions of each tribe (cp. 1 Chron. i.-ix. 1). According to
this theory every Israelite could trace back his descent to Jacob, the
common father of the whole nation (Josh. vii. 17 seq., 1 Sam. x. 21).
Such a scheme, however, is full of manifest improbabilities. It demands
that every tribe and every clan should have been a homogeneous group
which had preserved its unity from the earliest times, that family
records extending back for several centuries were in existence, and that
such a tribe as Simeon was able to maintain its independence in spite of
the tradition that it lost its autonomy in very early times (Gen. xlix.
7). The whole conception of the unity of the tribes cannot be referred
to a date previous to the time of David, and in the older writings a
David or a Jeroboam was sufficiently described as the son of Jesse or of
Nebat. The genealogical zeal as represented in the Old Testament is
chiefly of later growth, and the exceptions are due to interpolation
(Josh. vii. 1 18, contrast v. 24), or to the desire to modify or qualify
an older notice. This, in the case of Saul (1 Sam. ix. 1), has led to
textual corruption; a list of such a length as his should have reached
back to one of the "sons" of Benjamin (cf. e.g. Gen. xlvi. 21), else it
were purposeless. The genealogies, too, are often inconsistent amongst
themselves and in contradiction to their object. They show, for example,
that the population of southern Judah, so far from being "Israelite" was
half-Edomite (see Judah), and several of the clans in this district bear
names which indicate their original affinity with Midian or Edom.
Moreover, there was a free intermixture of races, and many cities had a
Canaanite (i.e. pre-Israelite) population which must have been gradually
absorbed by the Israelites (cf. Judg. 1.). That spirit of religious
exclusiveness which marked later Judaism did not become prominent before
the Deuteronomic reformation (see DEUTERONOMY), and it is under its
influence that the writings begin to emphasize the importance of
maintaining the purity of Israelite blood, although by this time the
fusion was complete (see Judg. iii. 6) and for practical purposes a
distinction between Canaanites and Israelites within the borders of
Palestine could scarcely be discerned.
Many of the genealogical data are intricate. Thus, the interpretation
of Gen. xxxiv. is particularly obscure (see LEVITES _ad fin._;
SIMEON). As regards the sons of Jacob, it is difficult to explain
their division among the four wives of Jacob; viz. (a) the sons of
Leah are Reuben, Simeon, Levi and Judah (S. Palestine), Issachar and
Zebulun (in the north), and Dinah (associated with Shechem); (b) of
Leah's maid Zilpah, Gad and Asher (E. and N. Palestine); (c) of
Rachel, Joseph (Manasseh and Ephraim, i.e. central Palestine) and
Benjamin; (d) of Rachel's maid Bilhah, Dan and Naphtali (N.
Palestine). It has been urged that (b) and (d) stood upon a lower
footing than the rest, or were of later origin; or that Bilhan points
to an old clan associated with Reuben (Gen. xxxv. 22) or Edom (Bilhan,
Gen. xxxvi. 27), whilst Zilpah represents an Aramaean strain.
Tradition may have combined distinct schemes, and the belief that the
wives were Aramaean at least coincides with the circumstance that
Aramaean elements predominated in certain of the twelve tribes. The
number "twelve" is artificial and can be obtained only by counting
Manasseh and Ephraim as one or by omitting Levi, and a careful study
of Old Testament history makes it extremely difficult to recover the
tribes as historical units. See, on these points, the articles on the
several tribes, B. Luther, _Zeit. d. alttest. Wissens_. (1901), pp. 1
sqq.; G.B. Gray, _Expositor_ (March 1902), pp. 225-240, and in _Ency.
Bib._, art. "Tribes"; and H.W. Hogg's thorough treatment of the tribes
in the last-mentioned work.
The ideal of purity of descent shows itself conspicuously in portions of
Deuteronomic law (Deut. vii. 1-3, xxiii. 2-8), and in the reforms of
Nehemiah and Ezra (Ezr. ix. 1-4, 11 sqq.; Neh. xiii. 1-3). The desire to
prove the continuity of the race, enforced by the experience of the
exile, gave the impetus to genealogical zeal, and many of the extant
lists proceed from this age when the true historical succession of names
was a memory of the past. This applies with special force to the lists
in Chronicles which present finished schemes of the Levitical divisions
by the side of earlier attempts, with consequent confusion and
contradiction. Thus the immediate ancestors of Ethan appear in the time
of Hezekiah (2 Chron. xxix. 12), but he with Asaiah and Heman are
contemporaries of David, and their genealogies from Levi downwards
contain a very unequal number of links (1 Chron. vi.). By another
application of genealogical method the account of the institution of
priests and Levites by David (1 Chron. xxiv.) presents many names which
belong solely to post-exilic days, thus suggesting that the scribes
desired to show that the honourable families of their time were not
unknown centuries previously. Everywhere we find the results of much
skill and labour, often in accordance with definite theories, but a
thorough investigation reveals their weakness and often quite
incidentally furnishes valuable evidence of another nature.
The intricate Levitical genealogies betray the result of successive
genealogists who sought to give effect to the development of the
hierarchal system (see LEVITES). The climax is reached when all
Levites are traced back to Gershon, Kehath and Merari, to which are
ascribed respectively Asaph, Heman and Ethan (or Jeduthun). The last
two were not originally Levites in the later accepted sense of the
term (see 1 Kings iv. 31). To Kehath is reckoned an important
subdivision descended from Korah, but in 2 Chron. xx. 19 the two are
distinct groups, and Korah's name is that of an Edomite clan (Gen.
xxxvi. 5, 14, 18) related to Caleb, and thus included among the
descendants of Judah (1 Chron. ii. 43). Cases of adjustment,
redistribution and "Levitizing" of individuals are frequent. There are
traces of varying divisions both of the singers (Neh. xi. 17) and of
the Levites (Num. xxvi. 58; Ezr. ii. 40, iii. 9; 1 Chron. xv. 5-10,
xxiii.), and it is noteworthy that in the case of the latter we have
mention of such families as Hebroni (Hebronite), Libni (from
Libnah)--ethnics of South Judaean towns. In fact, a significant number
of Levitical names find their analogy in the lists of names belonging
to Judah, Simeon and even Edom, or are closely connected with the
family of Moses; e.g. Mushi (i.e. Mosaïte), Gershon and Eleazar (cp.
Gershom and Eliezer, sons of Moses). The Levites bear a class-name,
and the genealogies show that many of them were connected with the
minor clans and families of South Palestine which included among them
Moses and his kin. Hence, it is not unnatural that Obed-edom, for
example, obviously a southerner, should have been reckoned later as a
Levite, and the work ascribed by the chronicler's history to the
closing years of David's life may be influenced by the tradition that
it was through him these mixed populations first attained importance.
See further DAVID; JEWS; LEVITES.
In the time of Josephus every priest was supposed to be able to prove
his descent, and perhaps from the time of Ezra downwards lists were
carefully kept. But when Anna is called an Asherite (Luke ii. 36), or
Paul a Benjamite (Rom. xi. 1), family tradition was probably the sole
support to the claim, although the tribal feeling had not become
entirely extinct. The genealogies of Jesus prefixed to two of the
gospels are intended to prove that He was a son of David. But not that
alone, for in Matt. i. he is traced back to Abraham the father of the
Jews, whilst in Luke iii. He, as the second Adam, is traced back to the
first man. The two lists are hopelessly inconsistent; not because one of
them follows the line of Mary, but because they represent independent
attempts. That in Matthew is characteristically arranged in three
series of fourteen generations each through the kings of Judah, whilst
Luke's passes through an almost unknown son of David; in spite of this,
however, both converge in the person of Zerubbabel.
See further, A.C. Hervey, _Genealogies of Our Lord_; H. von Soden,
_Ency. Bib._ ii. col. 1666 sqq.; B.W. Bacon, Hastings' _Dict. Bib._
ii. pp. 138 seq. On the subject generally see J.F. M'Lennan's
_Studies_ (2nd ser., ch. ix., "fabricated genealogies"); S.A. Cook,
_Ency. Bib._ ii. col. 1657 sqq. (with references); W.R. Smith,
_Kinship and Marriage_ (2nd ed., especially ch. i.). (S. A. C.)
2. _Greek and Roman Genealogies._--A passing reference only is needed to
the intricate genealogies of gods and sons of gods which form so
conspicuous a feature in classical literature.[2] In every one of the
numerous states into which ancient Greece was divided there were
aristocratic families, whose genealogies as a rule went back to
prehistoric times, their first ancestor being some hero of divine
descent, from whom, or from some distinguished younger ancestor, they
derived their names. Many of these families were, as families,
undoubtedly of great antiquity even at the beginning of the historical
period; and in several instances they continued to maintain a
conspicuous and separate existence for centuries. The element of family
pride is prominent in the poetry of the Megarian Theognis; and in an
inscription belonging to the 2nd century B.C. the recipient of certain
honours from the community of Gythium is represented as the thirty-ninth
in direct descent from the Dioscuri and the forty-first from Heracles.
Even in Athens, long after the constitution had become thoroughly
democratic, some of the clans continued to be known as Eupatridae (of
noble family); and Alcibiades, for example, as a member of the phratria
of the Eurysacidae, traced his origin through many generations to
Eurysaces, who was represented as having been the first of the Aeacidae
to settle in Attica. The Corinthian Bacchiadae traced their descent back
to Heracles, but took their name from Bacchis, a younger ancestor. It is
very doubtful, however, whether such pedigrees as this were very
seriously put forward by those who claimed them; and it is certain that,
almost along the whole line, they were unsupported by evidence.[3] We
have the authority of Pollux (viii. 111) for stating that the Athenian
[Greek: genê], of which there were thirty in each [Greek: phratria],
were organized without any exclusive regard being had to
blood-relationship; they were constantly receiving accessions from
without; and the public written registers of births, adoptions and the
like do not appear to have been preserved with such care as would have
made it possible to verify a pedigree for any considerable portion even
of the strictly historical period.[4]
The great antiquity of the early Roman (patrician) _gentes_, who
universally traced themselves back to illustrious ancestors, is
indisputable; and the rigid exclusiveness with which each preserved its
_hereditates gentiliciae_ or _sacra gentilicia_ is sufficiently
illustrated by the fact that towards the close of the republic there
were not more than fifty patrician families (Dion. Halic. i. 85). Yet
even in these it is obvious that, owing to the frequency of resort to
the well-recognized practice of adoption, while there was every
guarantee for the historical identity of the family, there was none
(documents apart) for the personal genealogy of the individual. There is
no evidence that sufficient records of pedigree were kept during the
earlier centuries of the Roman commonwealth, although the leading houses
drew up genealogical tables, and their family pedigree was painted on
the walls of the entrance hall. In later times, it is true, even
plebeian families began to establish a prescriptive right (known as the
_jus imaginum_) to preserve in small wooden shrines in their halls the
busts (or rather, wax portrait masks fastened on to busts) of those of
their members who had attained to curule office, and to exhibit these in
public on appropriate occasions. Under these _imagines majorum_[5] it
became usual to inscribe on the wall their respective _tituli_, the
relationship of each to each being indicated by means of connecting
lines; and thus arose the _stemmata gentilicia_, which at a later time
began to be copied into family records. In the case of plebeian families
(whose stemmata in no case went farther back than 366 B.C.) these
written genealogies were probably trustworthy enough; but in the case of
patricians who went back to Aeneas,[6] so much cannot, it is obvious, be
said; and from a comparatively early period it was clearly recognized
that such records lent themselves too readily to the devices of the
falsifier and the forger to deserve confidence or reverence (Pliny,
_H.N._ xxxv. 2; Juv. viii. 1).
Thus, parvenus were known to place the busts of fictitious ancestors in
the shrines and to engage needy literary men to trace back their descent
even to Aeneas himself.
The many and great social changes which marked the closing centuries of
the Western empire almost invariably militated with great strength
against the maintenance of an aristocracy of birth; and from the time of
Constantine the dignity of patrician ceased to be hereditary.[7]
3. _Modern._--Two forces have combined to give genealogy its importance
during the period of modern history: the laws of inheritance,
particularly those which govern the descent of real estate, and the
desire to assert the privileges of a hereditary aristocracy. But it is
long before genealogies are found in the possession of private families.
The succession of kings and princes are in the chronicle book; the line
of the founders and patrons of abbeys are recorded by the monks with
curious embellishment of legend. But the famous suit of Scrope against
Grosvenor will illustrate the late appearance of private genealogies in
England. In 1385 Sir Richard Scrope, lord of Bolton, displaying his
banner in the host that invaded Scotland, found that his arms of a
golden bend in a blue field were borne by a knight of the Chester
palatinate, one Sir Robert Grosvenor. He carried the dispute to a court
of chivalry, whose decision in his favour was confirmed on appeal to the
king. Grosvenor asserted that he derived his right from an ancestor, Sir
Gilbert Grosvenor, who had come over with the Conqueror, while an
intervening claimant, a Cornish squire named Thomas Carminowe, boasted
that his own ancestors had borne the like arms since the days of King
Arthur's Round Table. It is remarkable that in support of the false
statements made by the claimants no written genealogy is produced. The
evidence of tombs and monuments and the reports of ancient men are
advanced, but no pedigree is exhibited in a case which hangs upon
genealogy. It is possible that the art of pedigree-making had its first
impulse in England from the many genealogies constructed to make men
familiar with the claims of Edward III. to the crown of France, a second
crop of such royal pedigrees being raised in later generations during
the contests of York and Lancaster. But it is not until after the close
of the middle ages that genealogies multiply in men's houses and are
collected into volumes. The medieval baron, knight or squire, although
proud of the nobility of his race, was content to let it rest upon
legend handed down the generations. The exact line of his descent was
sought only when it was demanded for a plea in the king's courts to
support his title to his lands.
From the first the work of the genealogist in England had that taint of
inaccuracy tempered with forgery from which it has not yet been
cleansed. The medieval kings, like the Welsh gentry of later ages,
traced their lines to the household of Eden garden, while lesser men,
even as early as the 14th century, eagerly asserted their descent from a
companion of the Conqueror. Yet beside these false imaginations we find
the law courts, whose business was often a clash of pedigrees, dealing
with genealogies centuries long which, constructed as it would seem from
worthy evidences, will often bear the test of modern criticism.
Genealogies in great plenty are found in manuscripts and printed volumes
from the 16th century onward. Remarkable among these are the descents
recorded in the Visitation Books of the heralds, who, armed with
commissions from the crown, the first of which was issued in 20 Hen.
VIII., perambulated the English counties, viewing arms and registering
pedigrees. The notes in their register books range from the simple
registration of a man's name and arms to entries of pedigrees many
generations long. To the heralds these visitations were rare
opportunities of obtaining fees from the visited, and the value of the
pedigrees registered is notably unequal. Although it has always been the
boast of the College of Arms that Visitation records may be produced as
evidence in the law courts, few of these officially recorded genealogies
are wholly trustworthy. Many of the officers of arms who recorded them
were, even by the testimony of their comrades, of indifferent character,
and even when the visiting herald was an honourable man and an
industrious he had little time to spare for the investigation of any
single genealogy. Deeds and evidences in private hands may have been
hastily examined in some instances--indeed, a herald's summons invites
their production--and monuments were often viewed in the churches, but
for the most part men's memories and the hearsay of the country-side
made the backbone of the pedigree. The further the pedigree is carried
beyond the memory of living men the less trustworthy does it become. The
principal visitations took place in the reigns of Elizabeth, James I.
and Charles II. No commission has been issued since the accession of
William and Mary, but from that time onwards large numbers of
genealogies have been recorded in the registers of the College of Arms,
the modern ones being compiled with a care which contrasts remarkably
with the unsupported statements of the Tudor heralds.
Outside the doors of the College of Arms genealogy has now been for some
centuries a favourite study of antiquaries, whose researches have been
of the utmost value to the historian, the topographer and the
biographer. County histories, following the example of Dugdale's
Warwickshire folios, have given much space to the elucidation of
genealogies and to the amassing of material from which they may be
constructed. Dugdale's great work on the English baronage heads another
host of works occupied with the genealogy of English noble families, and
the second edition of "G.E.C.'s" _Complete Peerage_ shows the mighty
advance of the modern critical spirit. Nevertheless, the 20th century
has not yet seen the abandoning of all the genealogical fables nourished
by the Elizabethan pedigree-mongers, and the ancestry of many noble
houses as recorded in popular works of reference is still derived from
mythical forefathers. Thus the dukes of Norfolk, who, by their office of
earl marshal are patrons of the heralds, are provided with a
10th-century Hereward for an ancestor; the dukes of Bedford, descendants
of a 15th-century burgess of Weymouth, are traced to the knightly house
of Russell of Kingston Russell, and the dukes of Westminster to the
mythical Gilbert le Grosvenor who "came over in the train of the
Conqueror."
Genealogical research has, however, made great advance during the last
generation. The critical spirit shown in such works as Round's _Studies
in Peerage and Family History_ (1901) has assailed with effective
ridicule the methods of dishonest pedigree-makers. Much raw material of
genealogy has been made available for all by the publication of parish
registers, marriage-licence allegations, monumental inscriptions and the
like, and above all by the mass of evidences contained in the volumes
issued by the Public Record Office.
Within a small space it is impossible to set forth in detail the methods
by which an English genealogy may be traced. But those who are setting
out upon the task may be warned at the outset to avoid guesswork based
upon the possession of a surname which may be shared by a dozen families
between whom is no tie of kinship. A man whose family name is Howard may
be presumed to descend from an ancestor for whom Howard was a personal
name: it may not be presumed that this ancestor was he in whom the dukes
of Norfolk have their origin. A genealogy should not be allowed to stray
from facts which can be supported by evidence. A man may know that his
grandfather was John Stiles who died in 1850 at the age of fifty-five.
It does not follow that this John is identical with the John Stiles who
is found as baptized in 1795 at Blackacre, the son of William Stiles.
But if John the grandfather names in his letters a sister named Isabel
Nokes, while the will of William Stiles gives legacies to his son and
daughter John Stiles and Isabel Nokes, we may agree that reasonable
proof has been given of the added generation. A new pedigree should
begin with the carefully tested statements of living members of a
family. The next step should be to collate such family records as bible
entries, letters and diaries, and inscriptions on mourning rings, with
monumental inscriptions of acknowledged members of the family. From such
beginnings the genealogist will continue his search through the
registers of parishes with which the family has been connected; wills
and administrations registered in the various probate courts form, with
parish registers, the backbone of most middle-class family histories.
Court rolls of manors in which members of the family were tenants give,
when existing and accessible, proofs which may carry back a line,
however obscure, through many descents. When these have been exhausted
the records of legal proceedings, and notably those of the court of
chancery, may be searched. Few English households have been able in the
past to avoid an appeal to the chancery court, and the bill and answer
of a chancery plaintiff and defendant will often tell the story of a
family quarrel in which a score of kinsfolk are involved, and the
pleadings may contain the material for a family tree of many branching
generations. Coram Rege and De Banco rolls may even, in the course of a
dispute over a knight's fee or a manor carry a pedigree to the Conquest
of England, although such good fortune can hardly be expected by the
searcher out of an undistinguished line. In proving a genealogy it must
be remembered that in the descent of an estate in land must be sought
the best evidence for a pedigree.
At the present time the study of genealogy grows rapidly in English
estimation. It is no less popular in America, where societies and
private persons have of late years published a vast number of
genealogies, many of which combine the results of laborious research in
American records with extravagant and unfounded claims concerning the
European origin of the families dealt with. A family with the surname of
Cuthbert has been known to hail St Cuthbert of Lindisfarne as its
progenitor, and one surnamed Eberhardt has incorporated in its pedigree
such German princes of old times as were found to have Eberhardt for a
Christian name.
Genealogy in modern France has, with a few honourable exceptions, fallen
into the hands of the popular pedigree-makers, whose concern is to
gratify the vanity of their employers. Italy likewise has not yet shaken
off the influence of those venal genealogists who, three hundred years
ago, sold pedigrees cheaply to all comers. But much laborious
genealogical inquiry had been made in Germany since the days of Hübner,
and even in Russia there has been some attempt to apply modern standards
of criticism to the chronicles of the swarming descendants of the blood
of Rurik.
In no way is the gap made by the Dark Ages between ancient and modern
history more marked than by the fact that no European family makes a
serious claim to bridge it with its genealogy. The unsupported claim of
the Roman house of Massimo to a descent from Fabius Maximus is
respectable beside such legends as that which made Lévis-Mirepoix head
of the priestly tribe of Levi, but even the boast of such remote
ancestry has now become rare. The ancient sovereign houses of Europe
are, for the most part, content to attach themselves to some ancestor
who, when the mist that followed the fall of the Western empire begins
to lift, is seen rallying with his sword some group of spearmen.
AUTHORITIES.--Genealogical works have been published in such abundance
that the bibliographies of the subject are already substantial
volumes. Amongst the earlier books from the press may be noted
Benvenuto de San Georgio's _Montisferrati marchionum et principum
regiae propagium successionumque series_ (1515); Pingonius's _Arbor
gentilitiae Sabaudiae Saxoniaeque domus_ (1521); Gebweiler's _Epitome
regii ac vetustissimi ortus Caroli V. et Ferdinandi I., omniumque
archiducum Austriae et comitum Habsburgiensium_ (1527): Meyer's work
on the counts of Flanders (1531), and Du Boulay's genealogies of the
dukes of Lorraine (1547). Later in the same century Reineck of
Helmstadt put forth many works having a wider genealogical scope, and
we may cite Henninges's _Genealogiae Saxonicae_ (1587) and _Theatrum
genealogicum_ (1598), and Reusner's _Opus genealogicum catholicum_
(1589-1592). For the politically inconvenient falseness of François de
Rosières' _Stemmata Lotharingiae ac Barri ducum_ (1580), wherein the
dukes of Lorraine were deduced from the line of Charlemagne, the
author was sent to the Bastille by the parlement of Paris and his book
suppressed.
The 17th century saw the production in England of Dugdale's great
_Baronage_ (1675-1676), a work which still holds a respectable place
by reason of its citation of authorities, and of Sandford's history of
the royal house. In the same century André Duchesne, the historian of
the Montmorencys, Pierre d'Hozier, the chronicler of the house of La
Rochefoucauld, Rittershusius, Imhoff, Spener, Lohmeier and many others
contribute to the body of continental genealogies. Pierre de Guibours,
known as Père Anselme de Ste Marie, published in 1674 the first
edition of his magnificent _Histoire généalogique de la maison royale
de France, des pairs, grands officiers de la couronne et de la maison
du roy et des anciens barons du royaume_. Of this encyclopaedic work a
third and complete edition appeared in 1726-1733. A modern edition
under the editorship of M. Potier de Courcy began to be issued in
1873, but remains incomplete. Among 18th-century work Johann Hübner's
_Bibliotheca genealogica_ (1729) and _Genealogische Tabellen_
(1725-1733), with Lenzen's commentary on the latter work (c. 1756),
may be signalized, with Gatterer's _Handbuch der Genealogie_ (1761)
and his Abriss der Genealogie (1788), the latter an early manual on
the science of genealogy. Hergott's _Genealogia diplomatica augustae
gentis Habsburgicae_ (1737) is the imperial genealogy compiled by the
emperor's own historiographer.
Modern peerages in England may be said to date from that of Arthur
Collins, whose one-volume first edition was published in 1709. The
fifth edition appeared in 1778, in eight volumes, to be republished in
1812 by Sir Egerton Brydges, the "Baptist Hatton" of Disraeli's novel,
who corrected many legendary pedigrees, besides inserting his own
forged descent from a common ancestor with the dukes of Chandos. From
this work and from the Irish peerage of Lodge (as re-edited by
Archdall) most of the later peerages have quarried their material.
With these may be named the baronetages of Wotton and Betham. Of
modern popular peerages and baronetages that of Burke has been
published since 1822 in many editions and now appears yearly. Most
important for the historian are the _Complete Peerage_ of G.E.
C[ockayne] (2nd ed., 1910), and the _Complete Baronetage_ of the same
author. The _Peerage of Scotland_ (1769) of Sir Robert Douglas of
Glenbervie came to a second edition in 1813, edited by J.P. Wood, and
the whole work has been revised and re-edited by Sir James Balfour
Paul (1904, &c.). Of the popular manuals of English untitled families,
Burke's _Genealogical and Heraldic Dictionary of the Commoners_
(1833-1838) is now brought up to date from time to time and reissued
as the _Landed Gentry_.
Lists of pedigrees in English printed works are supplied by Marshall's
_Genealogist's Guide_ (1903), while pedigrees in the manuscript
collections of the British Museum are indexed in the list of R. Sims
(1849). Valuable genealogical material will be found in such
periodicals as the _Genealogist_, the _Herald and Genealogist_, the
_Topographer and Genealogist_, _Collectanea topographica et
genealogica_, _Miscellanea genealogica et heraldica_ and the
_Ancestor_. In Germany the _Deutscher Herold_ is the organ of the
Berlin Heraldic and Genealogical Society. The _Nederlandsche Leeuw_ is
a similar publication in the Low Countries.
Modern criticism of the older genealogical methods will be found in
J.H. Round's _Peerage and Pedigree_, 2 vols. (London, 1910), and in
other volumes by the same author. The Harleian Society has published
many volumes of the Herald's Visitations; and the British Record
Society's publications, supplying a key to a vast mass of wills,
Chancery suits and marriage licences, are of still greater importance.
The _Victoria History of the Counties of England_ includes
genealogies of the ancient English county families still among the
land-owning classes. English pedigrees of the age before the Conquest
are collected in W.G. Searle's _Anglo-Saxon Bishops, Kings and Nobles_
(1899).
Genealogical dictionaries of noble French families include Victor de
Saint Allais's _Nobiliaire universel_ (21 vols., 1872-1877) and Aubert
de la Chenaye-Desbois' _Dictionnaire de la noblesse_ (15 vols.,
1863-1876). A sumptuous work on the genealogy and heraldry of the
ancient duchy of Savoy by Count Amédée de Foras began to appear in
1863. Spain has Lopez de Haro's _Nobiliario genealogico de los reyes y
títulos de España_. Italy has the _Teatro araldico_ of Tettoni and
Saladini (1841-1848), Litti's _Famiglie celebri_ and an _Annuario
della nobilità_. Such annuals are now published more or less
intermittently in many European countries. Finland has a _Ridderscap
och Adels Kalender_, Belgium the _Annuaire de la noblesse_, the Dutch
Netherlands an _Adelsboek_, Denmark the _Adels-Garbog_ and Russia the
_Annuaire_ of Ermerin. But chief of all such publications is the
ancient _Almanach de Gotha_, containing the modern kinship of royal
and princely houses, and now accompanied by volumes dealing with the
houses of German and Austrian counts and barons, and with houses
ennobled in modern times by patent. A useful modern reference book for
students of history is Stokvis's _Manuel d'histoire et de généalogie
de tous les états du globe_ (1888-1893). The best manual for the
English genealogist is Walter Rye's _Records and Record Searching_
(1897), while an ill-arranged but valuable bibliography of English and
foreign works on the subject is that of George Gatfield (1892).
(O. Ba.)