[1] The abrupt introduction of a small poem (iv. 23 seq.) was long
ago regarded as due to the use of separate sources (so the Calvinist
Isaac de la Peyrère, 1654).
[2] The divergences of detail, with corresponding stylistic
variations, were recognized long ago (e.g. by Father Simon in 1682).
[3] As early as 1685 Jean le Clerc observed that Ur of the Chaldees
(_Chasdim_) in xi. 28 anticipates _Chesed_ in xxii. 22, and implied
some knowledge of the land of the Chaldaeans (cf. Ezek. i. 3, xi.
24).
[4] The Catholic priest Andrew du Maes (1570) already pointed to the
names Hebron and Dan as signs of post-Mosaic date.
[5] Note the repetitions in vv. 2 and 3; Abraham's faith, vv. 4-6,
and his request, v. 8; contrast the time of day, v. 5 and v. 12, and
the dates, v. 13 and v. 16. In vv. 12-15 there is a reference to the
bondage in Egypt.
[6] These and other chronological embarrassments, now recognized as
due to the framework of the post-exilic writer (P), have long been
observed--by Spinoza, 1671.
[7] Points of resemblance in xxiii. with Babylonian usage have often
been exaggerated; comparison "shows noteworthy differences" (T.G.
Pinches, _The Old Testament_, p. 238); see Carpenter and
Harford-Battersby, _Hexateuch_, i. 64, Driver, Gen. p. 230, and
_Addenda_.
[8] Note, e.g., the sudden introduction of xxix. 15, the curious
position of v. 24 (due to P), the double play upon the names Zebulun
and Joseph, xxx. 20, 23 seq., the internal intricacies in the
agreement, _ib._ vv. 31-43; the difficulties in the reference to the
latter in xxxi. 6 sqq. (especially v. 10).
[9] See Ed. Meyer (and B. Luther), _Die Israëliten und ihre
Nachbarstämme_ (1906), pp. 238 sqq.; also the shrewd remarks of C.T.
Beke, _Origines biblicae_ (1834), pp. 123 sqq.
[10] It is interesting to find that the Spanish Rabbi Isaac (of
Toledo, A.D. 982-1057), noticing that the royal list must be later
than the time of Saul (also recognized by Martin Luther and others),
proposed to assign the chapter to the age of Jehoshaphat.
[11] But the chronology is hopeless, and only ten years are allowed
according to another and later scheme (xxv. 26, xxxv. 28, xlvii. 9).
[12] Cf. the account of the Israelites in Egypt, where they are in
Goshen, unaffected by the plagues (Ex. viii. 22, ix. 26), or,
according to another view, are living in the midst of the Egyptians
(e.g. xii. 23).
[13] V. 7 breaks the context; there is repetition in vv. 10b and 13b;
interchange of the names Jacob and Israel; v. 12 suggests a blessing
upon Joseph himself; and with vv. 15 seq. (the blessing of the sons,
not of Joseph), contrast vv. 20 sqq. (the singular "in thee," v. 20).
[14] Only the more noticeable peculiarities have been mentioned in
the preceding columns.
[15] On the course of modern criticism and on the various sources: P,
J (Judaean or Yahwist), E (Ephraimite or Elohist), see BIBLE (_Old
Test. Criticism_). The passages usually assigned to P in Genesis are:
i. 1-ii. 4a; v. 1-28, 30-32; vi. 9-22; vii. 6 (and parts of 7-9), 11,
13-16a, 18-21, 24; viii. 1-2a, 3b-5, 13a, 14-19; ix. 1-17, 28-29; x.
1-7, 20, 22-23, 31-32; xi. 10-27, 31-32; xii. 4b-5; xiii. 6, 11b-12a;
xvi. 1a, 3, 15-16; xvii.; xix. 29; xxi. 1b, 2b-5; xxiii.; xxv. 7-11a,
12-17, 19-20, 26b; xxvi. 34-35; xxvii. 46-xxviii. 9; xxix. 24, 28b,
29; xxxi. 18b; xxxiii. 18a; xxxiv. 1-2a, 4, 6, 8-10, 13-18, 20-24,
part of 25, 27-29; xxxv. 9-13, 15, 22b-29; xxxvi. (in the main);
xxxvii. 1-2a; xli. 46; xlvi. 6-27; xlvii. 5-6a, 7-11, 27b-28; xlviii.
3-7; xlix. 1a, 28b-33, l. 12-13.
[16] See on this, especially, S.R. Driver's _Genesis_ in the
"Westminster Commentaries" (seventh ed., 1909).
[17] The above is typical of modern biblical criticism which is
compelled to recognize the human element (and can thus have no a
priori preconceptions in approaching the Old Testament), but at the
same time reveals ever more decisively the presence of purifying
influences, without which the records of Israel would have had no
permanent interest or value. They thus gain a new value which cannot
be impaired when it is realized that their significance is quite
independent of their origins.
[18] See the remarks of W.R. Smith, _Eng. Hist. Rev._ (1888), pp. 128
seq. (from the sociological side), and for general considerations,
A.A. Bevan, _Crit. Rev._ (1893), pp. 138 sqq.; S.R. Driver,
_Genesis_, pp. xliii. sqq.
[19] Cf. Amos i. 11; 1 Chron. ii. iv. (note iv. 10), the Book of
Jubilees (see above), and also Arabian usage (W.R. Smith, _Kinship
and Marriage_, ch. i.). For modern examples, see E. Littmann,
_Orient. Stud. Theodor Nöldeke_ (ed. Bezold, 1906), pp. 942-958.
[20] The Book of Jubilees also enables the student to test the
arguments based upon any study restricted to Genesis alone. Thus it
shows that the "primitive" features of Genesis afford a criterion
which is sociological rather than chronological. This is often
ignored. For example, the conveyance of the field of Machpelah
(xxiii.) is conspicuous for the absence of any reference to a written
contract in contrast to the "business" methods in Jer. xxxii. This
does not prove that Gen. xxiii. is early, because writing was used in
Palestine about 1400 B.C., and, on the other hand, the more simple
forms of agreement are still familiar after the time of Jeremiah
(e.g. Ruth, Proverbs). Similarly, no safe argument can be based upon
the institution of blood-revenge in Gen. iv., when one observes the
undeveloped conditions among the Trachonites of the time of Herod the
Great (Josephus, Ant. xvi. 9, 1), or the varying usages among modern
tribes.
[21] On the Jewish forms, see R.H. Charles, _Book of Jubilees_
(1902), pp. 33 seq.
[22] A.H. Sayce, _Proc. of the Soc. of Bibl. Arch._ (1907), pp.
13-17.
[23] xxvii. 27-29, 39 seq. This is significantly altered in the later
writings (Jub. xxvi. 34 and the Targums). It is worth noticing that
in Jub. xxvi. 35 a new turn is given to Gen. xxvii. 41 by changing
Isaac's approaching death (which raises serious difficulties in the
history of Jacob) into Esau's wish that it may soon come.
[24] See E. Meyer (and B. Luther), _Die Israëliten und ihre
Nachbarstämme_ (1906), pp. 386-389, 442-446.
[25] See PHILISTINES. The covenant with Abimelech may be compared
with the friendship between David and Achish (1 Sam. xxvii.), who is
actually called Abimelech in the heading of Ps. xxxiv. (see 1 Sam.
xxi. 10). If this is a mistake (and not a variant tradition) it is a
very remarkable one. The treatment of the covenant by the author of
Jubilees (xxiv. 28 sqq.), on the other hand, is only intelligible
when one recalls the attitude of Judah to the Philistine cities in
the 2nd century B.C.; see R.H. Charles, ad loc.
[26] In 2 Sam. xix. 43 (original text) the men of Israel claim to be
the first-born rather than Judah; cf. 1 Chron. v. 1 seq., where the
birthright (after Reuben was degraded) is explicitly conferred upon
Joseph (Ephraim and Manasseh).
[27] Cf. Josephus, _Antiq._ ii. 8, 2; _Test. of xii. Patriarchs_;
Acts vii. 16 (where Shechem is an error); Oesterley and Box,
_Religion and Worship of the Synagogue_, pp. 340 seq.; M.G. Dampier,
in _Church and Synagogue_ (1909), p. 78.
[28] See J.P. Peters, _Early Heb. Story_ (1904), pp. 81 sqq.; S.A.
Cook, _Relig. of Anc. Palestine_ (1908), pp. 19 sqq.
[29] In like manner the Babylonian story of the flood has been
revised and adapted to the Hebrew Noah (cf. _Nippur, ad fin._).
[30] The writer in Jub. xxvii. 27 treats the pillar as a "sign."
Another useful example of revision is to be found in Josh. xxii.,
where what was regarded (by a reviser) as an object unworthy of the
religion of Yahweh is now merely commemorative.
[31] For popular religious thought and practice (often described as
pre-prophetical, though non-prophetical would be a safer term), see
HEBREW RELIGION.
[32] Among recent efforts to find and explain mythical elements, see
especially Stucken, _Astralmythen_: H. Winckler, _Geschichte
Israëls_, vol. ii.; and P. Jensen, _Das Gilgamesch-Epos in der
Weltlitteratur_.
[33] Again the analogy of the modern East is instructive. Especially
interesting are the traditions associating the same figure or
incident with widely separated localities.
[34] See EXODUS, THE; LEVITES. On this feature see Luther and Meyer,
_op. cit._ pp. 158 seq., 227 sqq., 259, 279, 305, 386, 443. Their
researches on this subject are indispensable for a critical study of
Genesis.
[35] The notion of an Eve (_hawwah_, "serpent") as the first woman
may be conjecturally associated with (a) the frequent traditions of
the serpent-origin of clans, and (b) with evidence which seems to
connect the Levites and allied families with some kind of
serpent-cult (see Meyer, op. cit. pp. 116, 426 seq., 443, and art.
SERPENT-WORSHIP). The account of mankind as it now reads (ii. seq.)
is in several respects less primitive (contrast vi. 1 seq.), and the
present story of Cain and his murder of Abel really places the former
in an unfavourable light.
[36] See the discussion between B.D. Eerdmans and G.A. Smith in the
_Expositor_ (Aug.-Oct. 1908), and the former's _Alttest. Studien_,
ii. (1908), _passim._
[37] xxxiv. (note v. 9) indicates a possible alliance with
Shechemites, and xxxv. 4 (taken literally) implies a residence long
enough for a religious reform to be necessary. Yet the present aim of
the narratives is to link together the traditions and emphasize
Jacob's return from Laban to his dying father (xxviii. 21; xxxi. 3,
13, 18; xxxii. 9; xxxv. 1, 27).
[38] Cf. Benjamin's descendants in 1 Chron. viii. 6 seq. and see on
the naive and primitive character of these traditions, Kittel,
comment. ad loc.
[39] That there are traditions in Genesis which do not form the
prelude to Exodus is very generally recognized by those who agree
that the Israelites after entering Palestine took over some of the
indigenous lore (whether from the Canaanites or from a presumed
earlier layer of Israelites). This adoption of native tradition by
new settlers, however, cannot be confined to any single period. See
further, Luther and Meyer, op. cit. pp. 108, 110, 156, 227 seq., 254
seq., 414 seq., 433; on traditions related to the descent into Egypt,
_ib._ 122 sqq., 151 seq., 260; and on the story of Joseph (ch. xxxv.,
xxxvii. sqq.), as an independent cycle used to form a connecting
link, Luther, _ib._ pp. 142-154.
[40] Cf. the late "Deuteronomic" form of Judges where a hero of
Kenizzite origin (and therefore closely connected with Caleb) stands
at the head of the Israelite "judges"; also, from another aspect, the
specifically Judaean and anti-Israelite treatment of the history of
the monarchy. But in each case the feature belongs to a relatively
late stage in the literary history of the books; see JUDGES; SAMUEL,
BOOKS OF; KINGS.
[41] Mahalalel (son of Kenan, another form of Cain, v. 12) is also a
prominent ancestor in Perez (Neh. xi. 4), and Zerah claimed the
renowned sages of Solomon's day (1 Chron. ii. 6, 1 Kings iv. 31). The
story implies that Perez surpassed his "brother" clan Zerah (xxxviii.
27-30), and in fact Perez is ultimately reckoned the head of the
Judaean subdivisions (1 Chron. ii. 4 sqq.), and thus is the reputed
ancestor of the Davidic dynasty (Ruth iv. 12, 18 sqq.).
The sympathies of these traditions are as suggestive as their
presence in the canonical history, which, it must be remembered,
ultimately passed through the hands of Judaean compilers.
[42] Neh. iii. 9, 14; see Meyer, pp. 300, 430; S.A. Cook, _Critical
Notes on O. T. History_, p. 58 n. 2. While the evidence points to an
early close relationship among S. Palestinian groups (Edom, Ishmael,
&c.; cf. Meyer, p. 446), there are many allusions to subsequent
treacherous attacks which made Edom execrable. Here again biblical
criticism cannot at present determine precisely when or precisely why
the changed attitude began; see EDOM; JEWS, §§ 20, 22.
[43] Although the movement reflected in 1 Chron. ii. is scarcely
pre-exilic, yet naturally there had always been a close relation
between Judah and the south, as the Assyrian inscriptions of the
latter part of the 8th century B.C. indicate.
[44] The south of Palestine, if less disturbed by these changes, may
well have had access to older authoritative material.
[45] For Orr's other concessions bearing upon Genesis, see _op.
cit_., pp. 9 seq., 87, 93, and (on J, E, P) 196, 335, 340. These,
like the concessions of other apologetic writers, far outweigh the
often hypercritical, irrelevant, and superficial objections brought
against the literary and historical criticism of Genesis.
GENET, typically a south European carnivorous mammal referable to the
_Viverridae_ or family of civets, but also taken to include several
allied species from Africa. The true genet (_Genetta vulgaris_ or
_Genetta genetta_) occurs throughout the south of Europe and in
Palestine, as well as North Africa. The fur is of a dark-grey colour,
thickly spotted with black, and having a dark streak along the back,
while the tail, which is nearly as long as the body, is ringed with
black and white. The genet is rare in the south of France, but commoner
in Spain, where it frequents the banks of streams, and feeds on small
mammals and birds. It differs from the true civets in that the anal
pouch is a mere depression, and contains only a faint trace of the
highly characteristic odour of the former. In south-western Europe and
North Africa it is sought for its soft and beautifully spotted fur. In
some parts of Europe, the genet, which is easily tamed, is kept like a
cat for destroying mice and other vermin.
[Illustration: The Genet (_Genetta vulgaris_).]
GENEVA, a city of Ontario county, New York, U.S.A., at the N. end of
Seneca Lake, about 52 m. S.E. of Rochester. Pop. (1890) 7557; (1900)
10,433 (of whom 1916 were foreign-born); (1910 census) 12,446. It is
served by the New York Central & Hudson River, and the Lehigh Valley
railways, and by the Cayuga & Seneca Canal. It is an attractively built
city, and has good mineral springs. Malt, tinware, flour and grist-mill
products, boilers, stoves and ranges, optical supplies, wall-paper,
cereals, canned goods, cutlery, tin cans and wagons are manufactured,
and there are also extensive nurseries. The total value of the factory
product in 1905 was $4,951,964, an increase of 82.3% since 1900. Geneva
has a public library, a city hospital and hygienic institute. It is the
seat of the New York State Agricultural Experiment Station and of Hobart
College (non-sectarian), which was first planned in 1812, was founded in
1822 (the majority of its incorporators being members of the Protestant
Episcopal church) as successor to Geneva Academy, received a full
charter as Geneva College in 1825, and was renamed Hobart Free College
in 1852 and Hobart College in 1860, in honour of Bishop John Henry
Hobart. The college had in 1908-1909 107 students, 21 instructors, and a
library of 50,000 volumes and 15,000 pamphlets. A co-ordinate woman's
college, the William Smith school for women, opened in 1908, was endowed
in 1906 by William Smith of Geneva, who at the same time provided for a
Hall of Science and for further instruction in science, especially in
biology and psychology. In 1888 the Smith Observatory was built at
Geneva, being maintained by William Smith, and placed in charge of Dr
William Robert Brooks, professor of astronomy in Hobart College. The
municipality owns its water-supply system. Geneva was first settled
about 1787 almost on the site of the Indian village of Kanadasega, which
was destroyed in 1779 during Gen. John Sullivan's expedition against the
Indians in western New York. It was chartered as a city in 1898.
GENEVA (Fr. _Genève_, Ger. _Genf_, Ital. _Ginevra_, Late Lat. _Gebenna_,
though _Genava_ in good Latin), a city and canton of Switzerland,
situated at the extreme south-west corner both of the country and of the
Lake of Geneva or Lake Leman. The canton is, save Zug, the smallest in
the Swiss Confederation, while the city, long the most populous in the
land, is now surpassed by Zürich and by Basel.
The canton.
The canton has an area of 108.9 sq. m., of which 88.5 sq. m. are classed
as "productive" (forests covering 9.9 sq. m. and vineyards 6.8 sq. m.,
the rest being cultivated land). Of the "unproductive" 20.3 sq. m., 11½
are accounted for by that portion of the Lake of Geneva which belongs to
the canton. It is entirely surrounded by French territory (the
department of Haute Savoie lying to the south, and that of the Ain to
the west and the north), save for about 3½ m. on the extreme north,
where it borders on the Swiss canton of Vaud. The Rhone flows through it
from east to west, and then along its south-west edge, the total length
of the river in or within the canton being about 13 m., as it is very
sinuous. The turbid Arve is by far its largest tributary (left), and
flows from the snows of the chain of Mont Blanc, the only other affluent
of any size being the London (right). Market gardens, orchards, and
vineyards occupy a large proportion of the soil (outside the city), the
apparent fertility of which is largely due to the unremitting industry
of the inhabitants. In 1901 there were 6586 cows, 3881 horses, 2468
swine and 2048 bee-hives in the canton. Besides building materials, such
as sandstone, slate, &c., the only mineral to be found within the canton
is bituminous shale, the products of which can be used for petroleum and
asphalt. The broad-gauge railways in the canton have a length of 18¾ m.,
and include bits of the main lines towards Paris and Lausanne (for Bern
or the Simplon), while there are also 72¾ m. of electric tramways. The
canton was admitted into the Swiss Confederation in 1815 only, and ranks
as the junior of the 22 cantons. In 1815-1816 it was created by adding
to the old territory belonging to the city (just around it, with the
outlying districts of Jussy, Genthod, Satigny and Cartigny) 16 communes
(to the south and east, including Carouge and Chêne) ceded by Savoy, and
6 communes (to the north, including Versoix), cut off from the French
district of Gex.
Statistics of canton and city.
In 1900 there were, not counting the city, 27,813 inhabitants in the
canton, or, including the city, 132,609, the city alone having thus a
population of 104,796. (In the following statistics those for the city
are enclosed within brackets.) In 1900 this population was thus divided
in point of religion: Romanists, 67,162 (49,965), Protestants, 62,400
(52,121), and Jews 1119 (1081). In point of language 109,741 (84,259)
were French-speaking, 13,343 (12,004) German-speaking, and 7345 (6574)
Italian-speaking, while there were also 89 (76) Romonsch-speaking
persons. More remarkable are the results as to nationality: 43,550
(31,607) were Genevese citizens, and 36,415 (30,582) Swiss citizens of
other cantons. Of the 52,644 (42,607) foreigners, there were 34,277
(26,018) French, 10,211 (9126) Italians, 4653 (4283) subjects of the
German empire, 583 (468) British subjects, 832 (777) Russians, and 285
(251) citizens of the United States of America. In the canton there were
10,821 (5683) inhabited houses, while the number of separate households
was 35,450 (28,621). Two points as to these statistics deserve to be
noted. The number of foreign residents is steadily rising, for in 1900
there were only 79,965 (62,189) Swiss in all as against 52,644 (42,607)
foreigners. One result of this foreign immigration, particularly from
France and Italy, has been the rapid increase of Romanists, who now form
the majority in the canton, while in the city they were still slightly
less numerous than the Protestants in 1900; later (local) statistics
give in the Canton 75,400 Romanists to 64,200 Protestants, and in the
city 52,638 Romanists to 51,221 Protestants. Geneva has always been a
favourite residence of foreigners, though few can ever have expected to
hear that the "protestant Rome" has now a Romanist majority as regards
its inhabitants. Galiffe (_Genève hist. et archéolog_.) estimates the
population in 1356 at 5800, and in 1404 at 6490, in both cases within
the fortifications. In 1536 the old city acquired the outlying districts
mentioned above, as well as the suburb of St Gervais on the right bank
of the Rhone, so that in 1545 the number is given as 12,500, reduced by
1572 to 11,000. After the revocation of the Edict of Nantes (1685) it
rose, by 1698, to 16,934. Thenceforward the progress was fairly steady:
18,500 (1711); 24,712 (1782); 26,140 (1789). After the creation of the
canton (1815) the numbers were (those for the city are enclosed within
brackets) 48,489 (25,289), the city rising in 1837 to 33,714, and in
1843 to 36,452. The result of the Federal censuses (begun in 1850) are
as follows: in 1850, 64,146 (42,127); in 1860, 82,876 (59,826); in 1870,
88,791 (65,606); in 1880, 99,712 (76,197), and in 1888, 105,509
(81,407).
Government.
The canton comprises 3 administrative districts: the 13 communes on the
right bank and the 34 on the left bank each form one, while the city
proper, on both sides of the river, forms one district and one commune.
From 1815 to 1842 the city and the cantonal government was the same. But
at that date the city obtained its independence, and is now ruled by a
town council of 41 members, and an executive of 5 members, the election
in each case being made direct by the citizens, and the term of office
being 4 years. The existing cantonal constitution dates, in most of its
main features, from 1847. The legislature or _Grand Conseil_ (now
composed of 100 members) is elected (in the proportion of 1 member for
every 1000 inhabitants or fraction over 500) for 3 years by a direct
popular vote, subject (since 1892) to the principles of proportional
representation, while the executive or _conseil d'état_ (7 members) is
elected (no proportional representation) by a popular vote for 3 years.
By the latest enactments (one dating from 1905) 2500 citizens can claim
a vote ("facultative referendum") as to any legislative project, or can
exercise the "right of initiative" as to any such project or as to the
revision of the cantonal constitution. The canton sends 2 members
(elected by a popular vote) to the Federal _Ständerath_, and 7 to the
Federal _Nationalrath_.
Religion.
The Consistory rules the Established Protestant Church, and is now
composed of 31 members, 25 being laymen and 6 (formerly 15) clerics,
while the "venerable company of pastors" (pastors actually holding
cures) has greatly lost its former importance and can now only submit
proposals to the Consistory. The Christian Catholic Church is also
"established" at Geneva (since 1873) and is governed by the _conseil
supérieur_, composed of 25 lay members and 5 clerics. No other religious
denominations are "established" at Geneva. But the Romanists (who form
13% of the electors) are steadily growing in numbers and in influence,
while the Christian Catholics are losing ground rapidly, the highest
number of votes received by a candidate for the _conseil supérieur_
having fallen from 2003 in 1874 to 806 in 1890 and 507 in 1906, while
they are abandoning the country churches (some were lost as early as
1892) which they had taken from the Romanists in the course of the
_Kulturkampf_.
Industry.
The fairs of Geneva (held 4 times a year) are mentioned as early as
1262, and attained the height of their prosperity about 1450, but
declined after Louis XI.'s grants of 1462-1463 in favour of the fairs of
Lyons. Among the chief articles brought to these fairs (which were
largely frequented by Italian, French and Swiss merchants) were cloth,
silk, armour, groceries, wine, timber and salt, this last coming mainly
from Provence. The manufacturers of Geneva formed in 1487 no fewer than
38 gilds, including tailors, hatters, mercers, weavers, tanners,
saddle-makers, furriers, shoe-makers, painters on glass, &c. Goldsmiths
are mentioned as early as 1290. Printing was introduced in 1478 by
Steinschaber of Schweinfurth, and flourished much in the 16th century,
though the rigorous supervision exercised by the Consistory greatly
hampered the Estiennes (Stephanus) in their enterprises. Nowadays the
best known industry at Geneva is that of watchmaking, which was
introduced in 1587 by Charles Cusin of Autun, and two years later
regulations as to the trade were issued. In 1685 there were in Geneva
100 master watchmakers, employing 300 work-people, who turned out 5000
pieces a year, while in 1760 this trade employed 4000 work-people. Of
recent years its prosperity has diminished greatly, so that the
watchmaking and jewelry trades in 1902 numbered respectively but 38 and
32 of the 394 establishments in Geneva which were subject to the factory
laws. Lately, huge establishments have been constructed for the
utilization of the power contained in the Rhone. The local commerce of
Geneva is much aided by the fact that the city is nearly entirely
surrounded by "free zones," in which no customs duties are levied,
though the districts are politically French: this privilege was given to
Gex in 1814, and to the Savoyard districts in 1860, when they were also
neutralized.
Celebrities.
Considering the small size of Geneva, till recently, it is surprising
how many celebrated persons have been connected with it as natives or as
residents. Here are a few of the principal, special articles being
devoted to many of them in this work. In the 16th century, besides
Calvin and Bonivard, we have Isaac Casaubon, the scholar; Robert and
Henri Estienne, the printers, and, from 1572 to 1574, Joseph Scaliger
himself, though but for a short time. J.J. Rousseau is, of course, the
great Genevese of the 18th century. At that period, and in the 19th
century, Geneva was a centre of light, especially in the case of various
of the physical sciences. Among the scientific celebrities were de
Saussure, the most many-sided of all; de Candolle and Boissier, the
botanists; Alphonse Favre and Necker, the geologists; Marignac, the
chemist; Deluc, the physicist, and Plantamour, the astronomer. Charles
Bonnet was both a scientific man and a philosopher, while Amiel belonged
to the latter class only. Pradier and Chaponnière, the sculptors;
Arlaud, Diday and Calame, the artists; Mallet, who revealed Scandinavia
to the literary world; Necker, the minister; Sismondi, the historian of
the Italian republics; General Dufour, author of the great survey which
bears the name of the "Dufour Map," have each a niche in the Temple of
Fame. Of a less severe type were Cherbuliez, the novelist; Töpffer, who
spread a taste for pedestrianism among Swiss youth; Duchosal, the poet;
Marc Monnier, the littérateur; not to mention the names of any persons
still living, or of politicians of any date.
The city and its buildings.
The city of Geneva is situated at the south-western extremity of the
beautiful lake of the same name, whence the "arrowy Rhone" flows
westwards under the seven bridges by which the two halves of the town
communicate with each other. To the south is the valley of the Arve
(descending from the snows of the Mont Blanc chain), which unites with
that of the Rhone a little below the town; while behind the Arve the
grey and barren rocks of the Petit Salève rise like a wall, which in
turn is overtopped by the distant and ethereal snows of Mont Blanc. Yet
the actual site of the town is not as picturesque as that of several
other spots in Switzerland. Though the cathedral crowns the hillock
round which clusters the old part of the town, a large portion of the
newer town is built on the alluvial flats on either bank of the Rhone.
Since the demolition of the fortifications in 1849 the town has extended
in every direction, and particularly on the right bank of the Rhone. It
possesses many edifices, public and private, which are handsome or
elegant, but it has almost nothing to which the memory reverts as a
masterpiece of architectural art. It is possible that this is, in part,
due to the artistic blight of the Calvinism which so long dominated the
town. But, while lacking the medieval appearance of Fribourg or Bern, or
Sion or Coire, the great number of modern fine buildings in Geneva,
hotels, villas, &c., gives it an air of prosperity and comfort that
attracts many visitors, though on others modern French architecture
produces a blinding glare. On the other hand, there are broad quays
along the river, while public gardens afford grateful shade.
The cathedral (Protestant) of St Pierre is the finest of the older
buildings in the city, but is a second-rate building, though as E.A.
Freeman remarks, "it is an excellent example of a small cathedral of its
own style and plan, with unusually little later alteration." The hillock
on which it rises was no doubt the site of earlier churches, but the
present Transitional building dates only from the 12th and 13th
centuries, while its portico was built in the 18th century, after the
model of the Pantheon at Rome. It contains a few sepulchral monuments,
removed from the cloisters (pulled down in 1721), and a fine modern
organ, but the historical old bell _La Clémence_ has been replaced by a
newer and larger one which bears the same name. More interesting than
the church itself is the adjoining chapel of the Maccabees, built in the
15th century, and recently restored. Near the cathedral are the arsenal
(now housing the historical museum, in which are preserved many relics
of the "Escalade" of 1602, including the famous ladders), and the maison
de ville or town hall. The latter building is first mentioned in 1448,
but most of the present building dates from far later times, though the
quaint paved spiral pathway (taking the place of a staircase in the
interior) was made in the middle of the 16th century. In the _Salle du
Conseil d'État_ some curious 15th-century frescoes have lately been
discovered, while the old Salle des Festins is now known as the Salle de
l'Alabama, in memory of the arbitration tribunal of 1872. In the
15th-century Tour Baudet, adjoining the Town Hall, are preserved the
rich archives of the city. Not far away is the palais de justice, built
in 1709 as a hospital, but used as a court house since 1858. On the Île
in the Rhone stands the tower (built c. 1219) of the old castle
belonging to the bishop. Among the modern buildings we may mention the
following: the University (founded in 1559, but raised to the rank of a
University in 1873 only), the Athénée, the Conservatoire de Musique, the
Victoria Hall (a concert hall, presented in 1904 to the city by Mr
Barton, formerly H.B.M.'s Consul), the theatre, the Salle de la
Réformation (for religious lectures and popular concerts), the Bâtiment
Electoral, the Russian church and the new post office. At present the
museums of various kinds at Geneva are widely dispersed, but a huge new
building in course of construction (1906) will ultimately house most of
them. The Musée Rath contains pictures and sculptures; the Musée Fol,
antiquities of various dates; the Musée des Arts Décoratifs, _inter
alia_, a fine collection of prints; the Musée Industriel, industrial
objects and models; the Musée Archéologique, prehistoric and
archaeological remains; the Musée d'Histoire Naturelle, scientific
collections; and the Musée Epigraphique, a considerable number of
inscriptions. Some way out of the town is the Musée Ariana (extensive
art collections), left, with a fine park, in 1890 to the city by a rich
citizen, Gustave Revilliod. The public library is in the university
buildings and contains many valuable MSS. and printed books. Geneva
boasts also of a fine observatory and of a number of technical schools
(watchmaking, chemistry, medicine, commerce, fine arts, &c.), some of
which are really annexes of the university, which in June 1906 was
attended by 1158 matriculated students, of whom 903 were non-Swiss, the
Russians (475 in number) forming the majority of the foreign students.
Geneva is well supplied with charitable institutions, hospitals, &c.
Among other remarkable sights of the city may be mentioned the great
hydraulic establishment (built 1882-1899) of the _Forces Motrices du
Rhône_ (turbines), the singular monument set up to the memory of the
late duke of Brunswick who left his fortune to the city in 1873, and the
Île Jean-Jacques Rousseau now connected with the Pont des Bergues. The
house occupied by Rousseau is No. 40 in the Grand' Rue, while No. 13 in
the same street is on the site of Calvin's house, though not the actual
dwelling inhabited by him.
History.
The real name of the city is _Genava_, that being the form under which
it appears in almost all the known documents up to the 7th century,
A.D., the variation _Genua_ (which has led to great confusion with
Genoa) being also found in the 6th century. But _Geneva_ and _Gebenna_
are of later date. The first mention of the city is made by Caesar
(_Bell. Galli_. i. 6-7) who tells us that it was the last _oppidum_ of
the Allobroges, and the nearest to the territory of the Helvetii, with
which it was connected by a bridge that, for military reasons, he was
forced to destroy. Inscriptions of later date state that it was only a
_vicus_ of the Viennese province, while mentioning the fact that a gild
of boatmen flourished there. But the many Roman remains found on the
original site (in the region of the cathedral) of the city show that it
must have been of some importance, and that it possessed a considerable
commerce. About 400 the _Notitia Galliarum_ calls it a _civitas_ (so
that it then had a municipal administration of its own), and reckons it
as first among those of the Viennese. Probably this rise in dignity was
connected with the establishment of a bishop's see there, the first
bishop certainly known, Isaac, being heard of about 400 in a letter
addressed by St Eucherius to Salvius, while, in 450, a letter of St Leo
states that the see was then a suffragan of the archbishopric of Vienne.
It is possible that there may be some ground for the local tradition
that Christianity was introduced into this region by Dionysius and
Paracodus, who successively occupied the see of Vienne, but another
tradition that the first bishop was named St Nazarius rests on a
confusion, as that saint belongs to Genoa and not to Geneva.
About the middle of the 5th century A.D. it came into the possession of
the Burgundians, who held it as late as 527 (thus leaving no room for
any occupation by the Ostrogoths), and in 534 passed into the hands of
the Franks. The Burgundian kings seem to have made Geneva one of their
principal residences, and the _Notitia_ (above named) tells us that the
city was _restaurata_ by King Gundibald (d. 516) which is generally
supposed to mean that he first surrounded it with a wall, the city then
comprising little more than the hill on which the present cathedral
stands. That building is of course of much later date, but it seems
certain that when (c. 513-516) Sigismund, son of King Gundibald, built a
stone church on the site, it took the place of an earlier wooden church,
constructed on Roman foundations, all three layers being clearly visible
at the present day. We know that St Avitus, archbishop of Vienne (d.
518), preached a sermon (preserved to us) at the dedication of a church
at Geneva which had been built on the site of one burnt by the enemy,
and the bits of half-burnt wood found in the second of the two layers
mentioned above, seem to make it probable that the reference is to
Sigismund's church. But Geneva was in no sense one of the great cities
of the region, though it is mentioned in the _Antonine Itinerary_ and in
the _Peutinger Table_ (both 4th century A.D.), no doubt owing to its
important position on the bank of the Rhone, which then rose to the foot
of the hill on which the original city stood. This is no doubt the
reason why, apart from some passing allusions (for instance, Charles the
Great held a council of war there in 773, on his first journey to
Italy), we hear very little about it.
In 1032, with the rest of the kingdom of Burgundy or Arles, it reverted
to the emperor Conrad II., who was crowned king at Payerne in 1033, and
in 1034 was recognized as such at Geneva by a great assembly of nobles
from Germany, Burgundy and Italy, this rather unwilling surrender
signifying the union of those 3 kingdoms. It is said that Conrad
granted the temporal sovereignty of the city to the bishop, who, in
1162, was raised to the rank of a prince of the Holy Roman Empire, being
elected, from 1215, by the chapter, but, after 1418, named directly by
the pope himself.
Like many other prince-bishops, the ruler of Geneva had to defend his
rights: without against powerful neighbours, and within against the
rising power of the citizens. These struggles constitute the entire
political history of Geneva up to about 1535, when a new epoch of unrest
opens with the adoption of Protestantism. The first foe without was the
family of the counts of the Genevois (the region south of the city and
in the neighbourhood of Annecy), who were also "protectors" (_advocati_)
of the church of Geneva, and are first heard of in the 11th and 12th
centuries. Their influence was probably never stronger than during the
rule as bishop (1118-1119) of Guy, the brother of the reigning count.
But his successor, Humbert de Grammont, resumed the grants made to the
count, and in 1125 by the Accord of Seyssel, the count fully
acknowledged the suzerainty of the bishop. A fresh struggle under Bishop
Ardutius (1135-1185) ended in the confirmation by Frederick Barbarossa,
as emperor, of the position of the bishop as subject to no one but
himself (1153), this declaration being strengthened by the elevation of
the bishop and his successors to the rank of princes of the empire
(1162).
In 1250 the counts of Savoy first appear in connexion with Geneva, being
mortgagees of the Genevois family, and, in 1263, practically their heirs
as "protectors" of the city. It was thus natural that the citizens
should invoke the aid of Savoy against their bishop, Robert of the
Genevois (1276-1287). But Count Amadeus of Savoy not merely seized
(1287) the castle built by the bishops (about 1219) on the Île, but also
(1288) the office of _vicedominus_ [_vidomne_], the official through
whom the bishop exercised his minor judicial rights. The new bishop,
William of Conflans (1287-1295) could recover neither, and in 1290 had
to formally recognize the position of Savoy (which was thus legalized)
in his own cathedral city. It was during this struggle that about 1287
(these privileges were finally sanctioned by the bishop in 1300) the
citizens organized themselves into a commune or corporation, elected 4
syndics, and showed their independent position by causing a seal for the
city to be prepared. The bishop was thus threatened on two sides by foes
of whom the influence was rising, and against whom his struggles were of
no avail. In 1365 the count obtained from the emperor the office of
imperial vicar over Geneva, but the next bishop William of Marcossay
(1366-1377: he began the construction of a new wall round the greatly
extended city, a process not completed till 1428) secured the withdrawal
of this usurpation (1366-1367), which the count finally renounced
(1371). One of that bishop's successors, Adhémar Fabri (1385-1388)
codified and confirmed all the franchises, rights and privileges of the
citizens (1387), this grant being the _Magna Carta_ of the city of
Geneva. In 1401 Amadeus VIII. of Savoy bought the county of the
Genevois, as the dynasty of its rulers had become extinct. Geneva was
now surrounded on all sides by the dominions of the house of Savoy.
Amadeus did homage, in 1405, to the bishop for those of the newly
acquired lands which he held from the bishop. But, after his power had
been strengthened by his elevation (1417) by the emperor to the rank of
a duke, and by his succession to the principality of Piedmont (1418,
long held by a cadet branch of his house), Amadeus tried to purchase
Geneva from its bishop, John of Pierre-Scisé or Rochetaillée
(1418-1422). This offer was refused both by the bishop and by the
citizens, while in 1420 the emperor Sigismund declared that he alone was
the suzerain of the city, and forbade any one to attack it or harm it in
any fashion. Oddly enough Amadeus did in the end get hold of the city,
for, having been elected pope under the name of Felix V., he named
himself to the vacant see of Geneva (1444), and kept it, after his
resignation of the Papacy in 1449, till his death in 1451. For the most
part of this period he resided in Geneva. From 1451 to 1522 the see was
almost continuously held by a cadet of the house of Savoy, which thus
treated it as a kind of appange.
Most probably Geneva would soon have become an integral part of the
realms of the house of Savoy had it not been for the appearance of a new
protector on the scene--the Swiss confederation. In the early 15th
century the town of Fribourg made an alliance with Geneva for commercial
purposes (the cloth warehouses of Fribourg at Geneva being enlarged in
1432 and 1465), as the cloth manufactured at Fribourg found a market in
the fairs of Geneva (which are mentioned as early as 1262, and were at
the height of their prosperity about 1450). The duke, however, was no
better inclined towards the Swiss than towards Geneva. He struck a blow
at both, when, in 1462-1463, he induced his son-in-law, Louis XI. of
France, to forbid French merchants to attend the fairs of Geneva,
altering also the days of the fairs at Lyons (established in 1420 and
increased in number in 1463) so as to make them clash with those fixed
for the fairs of Geneva. This nearly ruined Geneva, which, too, in 1477
had to pay a large indemnity to the Swiss army that, after the defeat of
Charles the Bold, duke of Burgundy, advanced to take vengeance on the
dominions of his ally, Yolande, dowager duchess of Savoy and sister of
Louis XI., as well as on the bishop of Geneva, her brother-in-law. But,
after this payment, the bishop made an alliance with the Swiss. A
prolonged attempt was made (1517-1530) by the reigning duke of Savoy,
Charles III. (1504-1553), to secure Geneva for his family, at first with
the help of his bastard cousin John (1513-1522), the last of his house
to hold the see. In this struggle the syndic, Philibert Berthelier,
succeeded in concluding (1519) an alliance with Fribourg, which,
however, had to be given up almost immediately. It split the citizens
into two parties; the _Eidgenots_ relying on the Swiss, while the
_Mamelus_ (mamelukes) supported the duke. Berthelier was executed in
1519, and Amé Lévrier in 1524, but Bezanson Hugues (d. 1532) took their
place, and in 1526 succeeded in renewing the alliance with Fribourg and
adding to it one with Bern. This much enraged the duke, who took active
steps against the citizens, and tried (1527) to carry off the bishop,
Pierre de la Baume (1522-1544), who soon found it best to make his
submission.
The Genevese, thus abandoned by their natural protector, looked to the
Swiss for help. They sent (October 1530) a considerable army to save the
city. This armed intervention compelled the duke to sign the treaty of
St Julien (19th October) by which he engaged not to trouble the Genevese
any more, agreeing that if he did so the two towns of Fribourg and Bern
should have the right to occupy his barony of Vaud. The two towns also,
by the decision given as arbitrators at Payerne (30th December 1530),
upheld their alliance with Geneva, condemned the duke to pay all the
expenses of the war, and confirmed the clause as to their right to
occupy Vaud; they also surrounding the exercise of the powers of
_vidomne_ by the duke with so many restrictions that in 1532 the duke,
after much resistance, formally agreed to recognize the alliance of
Geneva with the two towns and not to annoy the Genevese any more. Thus a
legal tie between Geneva and two of the Swiss cantons was established,
while the duke did not any longer venture to annoy the Genevese, as he
clung to his fine barony of Vaud. In the course of this struggle (and
especially after the last episcopal _vidomne_ had left the town in 1526)
the municipal authorities of the city greatly developed, a _grand
conseil_ of 200 members being set up in imitation of those at Bern and
at Fribourg, while within the larger assembly there was a _petit
conseil_ of 60 members for more confidential business. Thus 1530 marks
the date at which Geneva became its own mistress within, while allied
externally with the Swiss confederation. But hardly had this settlement
been reached when a fresh element of discord threatened to wholly upset
matters--the adoption of Protestant principles by the city. Just before
this event, however, the fortifications were once more (1534) rebuilt
(bits still remain) and extended so as to take in several new suburbs,
including that of St Gervais on the right bank of the Rhone which, till
then, seems to have been unenclosed (1511-1527).
In 1532 William Farel, a Protestant preacher from Dauphiné, who had
converted Vaud, &c. to the new belief, first came to Geneva and settled
there in 1533. But although Bern supported the Reform, Fribourg did
not, and in 1534 withdrew from its alliance with Geneva, while directly
afterwards the duke of Savoy made a fresh attempt to seize the city. On
the 10th of August 1535 the Protestant faith was formally adopted by
Geneva, but an offer of help from France having been refused, as the
city was unwilling to give up any of its sovereign rights, the duke's
party continued its intrigues. Finally Bern, fearing that Geneva might
fall to France instead of to itself, sent an army to protect the city
(January 1536), but, not being able to persuade the citizens to give up
their freedom, had to content itself with the conquest of the barony of
Vaud and of the bishopric of Lausanne, thus acquiring rich territories,
while becoming close neighbours of Geneva (January and March 1536).
Meanwhile Farel had been advancing the cause of religious reform, which
was definitively adopted on the 21st of May 1536. In July 1536 a French
refugee, John Calvin (q.v.), came to Geneva for a night, but was
detained by Farel who found in him a powerful helper. The opposition
party of the _Libertins_ succeeded in getting them both exiled in 1538,
but, in September 1541, Calvin was recalled (Farel spending the rest of
his life at Neuchâtel, where he died 1565) to Geneva. Born in 1509, he
was then about 32 years of age. He set up this theocracy in Geneva, and
ruled the reorganized republic with a strong hand till his death in
1564, when he was succeeded by the milder Théodore de Beza (1519-1605).
The great blot on Calvin's rule was his intolerance of other thinkers,
as exemplified by his burning of Gruet (1547) and of Servetus (1553).
But, on the other hand, he founded (1559) the Academy, which, originally
meant as a seminary for his preachers, later greatly extended its scope,
and in 1873 assumed the rank of a University. The strict rule of Calvin
drove out many old Genevese families, while he caused to be received as
citizens many French, Italian and English refugees, so that Geneva
became not merely the "Protestant Rome" but also quite a cosmopolitan
little city. The Bernese often interfered with the internal affairs of
Geneva (while Calvin, a Frenchman, naturally looked towards France), and
refused to allow the city to conclude any alliances save with itself.
That alliance was finally renewed in 1558, while in 1560 the Romanist
cantons made one with the duke of Savoy, a zealous supporter of the old
faith. In 1564, after long negotiations, Bern restored to the duke part
of its conquests of 1536, viz. Gex, the Genevois and the Chablais,
Geneva being thus once more placed amid the dominions of the duke;
though by the same treaty (that of Lausanne, October 1564, Calvin having
died the preceding May) the alliance of Bern with Geneva was maintained.
In 1579 Geneva was included in the alliance concluded by France with
Bern and Soleure, while in 1584 Zürich joined Bern in another alliance
with Geneva. The struggle widened as Geneva became a pawn in the great
attempt of the duke of Savoy to bring back his subjects to the old
faith, his efforts being seconded by François de Sales, the "apostle of
the Chablais." But the king of France, for political reasons, opposed
Savoy, with whom, however, he made peace in 1601. In December 1602
François de Sales was consecrated bishop of Geneva (since 1535 the
bishops had lived at Annecy), and a few days later the duke of Savoy
made a final attempt to get hold of the city by a surprise attack in the
night of 11-12th December 1602 (Old Style), known in history as the
"Escalade," as ladders were used to scale the city walls. It was
successfully repelled, over 200 of the foe being slain, while 17
Genevese only perished. Filled with joy at their rescue from this
attack, the citizens crowded to their cathedral, where Beza (then 83
years of age) bid them to sing the 124th Psalm which has ever since been
sung on the anniversary of this great delivery. The peace of St Julien
(21st of July 1603) marked the final defeat of the duke of Savoy in the
long struggle waged (since 1290) by his house against the city of
Geneva.
In the charter of 1387 we hear only of the _conseil général_ (composed
of all male heads of families) which acted as the legislature, and
elected annually the executive of 4 syndics; no doubt this form of rule
existed earlier than 1387. Even before 1387 there was also the _petit
conseil_ or _conseil ordinaire_ or _conseil étroit_, a body not
recognized by the law, though it became very powerful; it was composed
of the 4 syndics, with several other counsellors, and acted originally
as the adviser of the syndics who were legally responsible for the rule
of the city. In 1457 we first hear of the Council of the Fifty
(re-established in 1502 and later known as the Sixty), and in 1526 of
the Council of the Two Hundred (established in imitation of those of
Bern and Fribourg), both being summoned in special cases of urgency. The
members of both were named by the _petit conseil_, of which, in turn,
the members were confirmed or not by the Two Hundred. By the
Constitution of 1543 the _conseil général_ had only the right of
choosing the 4 syndics out of a list of 8 presented by the _petit
conseil_ and the Two Hundred, which therefore really elected them,
subject to a formal approbation on the part of the larger body. This
system was slightly modified in 1568, the constitution of that date
lasting till 1794. The _conseil général_ fell more and more into the
background, the members of the other councils gradually obtained the
privilege of being irremovable, and the system of co-optation resulted
in the creation of a close monopoly of political offices in the hands of
a few leading families.
During the 17th and 18th centuries, while the Romanist majority of the
Swiss cantons steadily refused to accept Geneva as even a subordinate
member of the Confederation, the city itself was distracted on several
occasions by attempts of the citizens, as a whole, to gain some share in
the aristocratic government of the town, though these attempts were only
partially successful. But the last half of the 18th century marks the
most brilliant period in the literary history of Geneva, whether as
regards natives or resident foreigners, while in the succeeding half
century the number of Genevese scientific celebrities is remarkable. In
1794 the effects of the French Revolution were shown in the more liberal
constitution granted by the city government. But in 1798 the city was
annexed to France and became the capital of the French department of
Léman (to be carefully distinguished from the Swiss _canton_ of Léman,
that is Vaud, of the Helvetic Republic, also set up in 1798), while in
1802, by the Concordat, the ancient bishopric of Geneva was suppressed.
On the fall of Napoleon (1813) the city recovered its independence, and
finally, in 1815, was received as the junior member of the Swiss
confederation, several bits of French and Savoyard territory (as pointed
out above) being added to the narrow bounds of the old Genevese Republic
in order to give the town some protection against its non-Swiss
neighbours.
The constitution of 1814 set up a common form of government for the city
and the canton, the city not obtaining its municipal independence till
the constitution of 1842. From 1535 to 1798 public worship according to
the Romanist form had been strictly forbidden. In 1799 already the first
attempts were made to reestablish it, and in 1803 the church of St
Germain was handed over to the Romanists. The constitution of 1814,
looking forward to the annexation of Romanist districts to the city
territory to form the new canton, guaranteed to that body the freedom of
worship, at any rate in these newly gained districts. In 1819 the canton
(the new portions of which were inhabited mainly by Romanists) was
annexed to the bishopric of Lausanne, the bishop in 1821 being
authorized to add "and of Geneva" to his episcopal style. After the
adventure of the "Escalade" the fortifications were once more
strengthened and extended, these works being completed about 1726. But,
in 1822, some of the bastions were converted into promenades, while in
1849 the rest of the fortifications were pulled down so as to allow the
city to expand and gradually assume its present aspect.
When Geneva recovered its political independence in 1814 a new
constitution was drawn up, but it was very reactionary, for there is no
mention in it of the sovereignty of the people. It set up a _conseil
représentatif_ or legislature of 250 members, which named the _conseil
d'état_ or executive, while it was itself elected by a limited class,
for the electoral qualification was the annual payment of direct taxes
to the amount of 20 Swiss livres or about 23 shillings. It was not till
1842 that this system, though much criticized, was modified. In the
early part of 1841 the "Third of March Association" was formed to watch
over the interests of the citizens, and in November of that year the
government was forced by a popular demonstration to summon an _assemblée
constituante_, which in 1842 elaborated a new constitution that was
accepted by the citizens. Besides bestowing on the city a government
distinct from that of the canton, it set up for the latter a _grand
conseil_ or legislature, and a conseil _d'état_ or executive of 13
members, both elected for the term of 4 years. But this constitution did
not seem liberal enough to many citizens, so that in 1846 the government
gave way to the Radicals, led by James Fazy (1794-1878), who drew up a
constitution that was accepted by a popular vote on the 21st of May
1847. It was much more advanced than that of 1842, and in its main
features still prevails. From that date till 1864 the Radicals ruled the
state, their head, Fazy, being an able man, though extravagant and
inclined to absolutism. Under his sway the town was modernized and
developed, but the finances were badly administered, and Fazy became
more and more a radical dictator. "On voudrait faire de Genève," sighed
the conservative, de la Rive, "la plus petite des grandes villes, et
pour moi je préfère qu'elle reste la plus grande des petites villes." In
1861 and in 1864 Fazy failed to secure his re-election to the _conseil
d'état_, riots followed his defeat, and the Federal troops were forced
to intervene so as to restore order.
The Democratic party (liberal-conservative) ruled from 1865 to 1870, and
did much to improve the finances of the state. In 1870 the Radicals
regained the supremacy under their new chief, Antoine Carteret
(1813-1889) and kept it till 1878. This was a period of religious
strife, due to the irritation caused by the Vatican council, and the
pope's attempt to revive the bishopric of Geneva. Gaspard Mermillod
(1824-1891) was named in 1864 _curé_ of Geneva, and made bishop of
Hebron _in partibus_, acting as the helper of the bishop of Lausanne.
Early in 1873 the pope named him "vicar apostolic of Geneva," but he was
expelled a few weeks later from Switzerland, not returning till 1883,
when he became bishop of Lausanne, being made cardinal in 1890. The
Radical government enacted severe laws as to the Romanists in Geneva,
and gave privileges to the Christian Catholic Church, which, organized
in 1874 in Switzerland, had absorbed the community founded at Geneva by
Père Hyacinthe, an ex-Carmelite friar. The Romanists therefore were no
longer recognized by the state, and were persecuted in divers ways,
though the tide afterwards turned in their favour. The Democrats ruled
from 1878 to 1880, and introduced the "Referendum" (1879) into the
cantonal constitution, but, their policy of the separation of church and
state having been rejected by the people at a vote, they gave way to the
Radicals. The Radicals went out in 1889, and the Democrats held the
reins of power till 1897, their leader being Gustave Ador. In 1891 they
introduced the "Initiative" into the cantonal constitution, and in 1892
the principle of proportional representation so far as regards the
_grand conseil_, while Th. Turrettini did much to increase the
economical prosperity of the city. In 1897 the Radicals came in again,
their leaders being first Georges Favon (1843-1902) till his death, and
then Henri Fazy, a distant relative of James and an excellent historian.
They attempted to rule by aid of the Socialists, but their power
fluctuated as the demands of the Socialists became greater. On the 30th
of June 1907 the Genevese, by a popular vote, decided on the separation
of Church and State.
AUTHORITIES.--D. Baud-Bovy, _Peintres genevois, 1702-1807_ (2 vols.,
Geneva, 1903-1904); J.T. de Belloc, _Le Cardinal Mermillod_ (Fribourg,
1892): M. Besson, Recherches _sur les origines des évêchés de Genève,
Lausanne et Sion_ (Fribourg, 1906); J.D. Blavignac, Armorial genevois
(Geneva, 1849), and _Études sur Genève depuis l'antiquité jusqu'à nos
jours_ (2 vols., Geneva, 1872-1874); Fr. Bonivard, _Chroniques de
Genève_ (Reprint) (2 vols., Geneva, 1867); F. Borel, _Les Foires de
Genève au XV^e siècle_ (Geneva, 1892); Ch. Borgeaud, _Histoire de
l'université de Genève, 1559-1798_ (Geneva, 1900); E. Choisy, _La
Théocratie à Genève au temps de Calvin_ (Geneva, 1898), and _L'État
chrétien Calviniste à Genève au temps de Théodore de Bèze_ (Geneva,
1902); F. de Crue, _La Guerre féodale de Genève et l'établissement de
la Commune, 1205-1320_ (Geneva, 1907); H. Denkinger, _Histoire
populaire du canton de Genève_ (Geneva, 1905); E. Doumergue, _La
Genève Calviniste_ (containing a minute topographical description of
16th-century Geneva, and forming vol. iii. of the author's _Jean
Calvin_) (Lausanne, 1905); E. Dunant, _Les Relations politiques de
Genève avec Berne et les Suisses, de 1536 à 1564_ (Geneva, 1894);
_Documents de l'Escalade de Genève_ (Geneva, 1903); G. Fatio and F.
Boissonnas, _La Campagne genevoise d'après nature_ (Geneva, 1899), and
_Genève à travers les siècles_ (Geneva, 1900); H. Fazy, _Histoire de
Genève à l'époque de l'Escalade, 1598-1603_ (Geneva, 1902), and _Les
Constitutions de la République de Genève_ (to 1847) (Geneva, 1890);
J.B.G. Galiffe, _Genève historique et archéologique_ (2 vols., Geneva,
1869-1872); J.A. Gautier, _Histoire de Genève_ (to 1691) (6 vols.,
1896-1903); F. Gribble and J.H. and M.H. Lewis, _Geneva_ (London,
1908); J. Jullien, Histoire de Genève (new ed.; Geneva, 1889); C.
Martin, _La Maison de Ville de Genève_ (Geneva, 1906); _Mémoires et
documents_ (publ. by the local Historical Society since 1821); F.
Mugnier, _Les Évêques de Genève-Annecy, 1535-1870_ (Paris, 1888);
_Pierre de Genève, St_ (monograph on the cathedral), 4 parts (Geneva,
1891-1899); A. de Montet, _Dictionnaire biographique des Genevois,
&c._ (2 vols., Lausanne, 1878); C.L. Perrin, _Les Vieux Quartiers de
Genève_ (Geneva, 1904); A. Pfleghart, _Die schweizerische
Uhrenindustrie_ (Leipzig, 1908); _Régeste genevois avant 1312_
(Geneva, 1866); _Registres du conseil de Genève_, vols. i. and ii.,
1409-1477 (Geneva, 1900-1906); A. Roget, _Histoire du peuple de Genève
depuis la Réforme jusqu'à l'Escalade_ (7 vols., from 1536-1568;
Geneva, 1870-1883); A. Rilliet, _Le Rétablissement du Catholicisme à
Genève il y a deux siècles_ (Geneva, 1880); P. Vaucher, _Luttes de
Genève contre la Savoie_, 1517-1530 (Geneva, 1889); _Recueil
généalogique suisse (Genève)_ (2 vols., Geneva, 1902-1907).
(W. A. B. C.)
GENEVA CONVENTION, an international agreement for the purpose of
improving the condition of wounded soldiers of armies in the field,
originally adopted at an international conference held at Geneva,
Switzerland, in 1864, and afterwards replaced by the convention of July
6, 1906, also adopted at Geneva. This later agreement is the one now
known as the Geneva Convention. The conference of 1864 was the result of
a movement which sprang from the publication in 1862 of a book entitled
_Un Souvenir de Solférino_ by Henri Dunant, a Genevese philanthropist,
in which he described the sufferings of the wounded at the battle of
Solférino with such vivid effect that the subject became forthwith one
of public interest. It was energetically taken up by M. Gustave Moynier,
whose agitation led to an unofficial congress being held at Geneva in
October 1863. This was followed by an official one at Geneva, called by
the Swiss government in 1864. The convention which was there signed
(22nd August 1864) on behalf of the states represented, afterwards
received the adherence of every civilized power.
At a second conference on the same subject, held at Geneva in 1868, a
supplementary convention was drawn up, consisting of fourteen additional
articles, five of which related to war on land and nine to naval
warfare. The additional articles were not, however, ratified by the
chief states, and never became operative. The Brussels International
Conference (1874) for the codification of the law and customs of war
occupied itself with the Geneva Convention and again drew up a number of
articles which were submitted to the interested governments. But, as in
the case of the additional articles of 1868, no effect was ever given to
them.
At the Peace Conference of 1899 Great Britain withdrew her objections to
the application of the convention to maritime warfare, and agreed to the
adoption of a special convention "adapting to Maritime warfare the
principles of the Geneva Convention." A _voeu_ was also adopted by the
conference expressing the wish that a special conference should be held
as soon as possible for the purpose of revising the convention of 1864.
In deference to the above _voeu_ the Swiss government in 1901 sounded
the other parties to the convention of 1864 as to whether the time had
not come to call the proposed special conference, but the replies
received did not give much encouragement and the matter was dropped for
the time being. By a circular note of the 17th of February 1903, the
Swiss government invited all the states which had signed or adhered to
the Geneva Convention to send representatives to a conference to be held
at Geneva in the following September. Some governments did not accept
the invitation in time and the conference had to be postponed. At the
beginning of 1904, there being no apparent obstacle, the Swiss
government again invited the powers to send delegates to a conference in
the following May. Meanwhile war broke out between Russia and Japan and
there was again an adjournment. At length in March 1906 an invitation
was accepted by thirty-five states, only Turkey, Salvador, Bolivia,
Venezuela, Nicaragua and Colombia abstaining and the conference was
held at Geneva in July 1906, when a full revised convention was adopted,
which now takes the place of that of 1864.[1] The adoption of the new
Geneva Convention entailed a revision of the above-mentioned Hague
Convention and a new edition of the latter is one of the documents
adopted at the Peace Conference of 1907.
The new Geneva Convention consists of thirty-three articles divided into
the following chapters, (i.) the wounded and sick; (ii.) medical units
and establishments; (iii.) personnel; (iv.) material; (v.) convoys of
evacuation; (vi.) the distinctive emblem; (vii.) application and
carrying out of the Convention; (viii.) prevention of abuses and
infractions; (ix.) general provisions.
The essential parts of the new Hague Convention of 1907 (18th of
October) adapting the above conventions to maritime warfare as follows:
(N.B. The alterations are in italics. The parts of the older convention
of 1899 which have been suppressed are in brackets).
i. Military hospital-ships, that is to say, ships constructed or
assigned by states specially and solely for the purpose of assisting
the wounded, sick or shipwrecked, and the names of which shall have
been communicated to the belligerent powers at the commencement or
during the course of hostilities, and in any case before they are
employed, shall be respected and cannot be captured while hostilities
last.
These ships, moreover, are not on the same footing as men-of-war as
regards their stay in a neutral port.
ii. Hospital-ships, equipped wholly or in part at the cost of private
individuals or officially-recognized Relief Societies, shall likewise
be respected and exempt from capture, provided the belligerent power
to whom they belong has given them an official commission and has
notified their names to the hostile power at the commencement of or
during hostilities, and in any case before they are employed.
These ships should be furnished with a certificate from the competent
authorities, declaring that they had been under their control while
fitting out and on final departure.
iii. Hospital-ships, equipped wholly or in part at the cost of private
individuals or officially-recognized Societies of neutral countries
shall be respected and exempt from capture [if the neutral power to
whom they belong has given them an official commission and notified
their names to the belligerent powers at the commencement of or during
hostilities, and in any case before they are employed] _on condition
that they are placed under the orders of one of the belligerents, with
the previous consent of their own Government and with the
authorization of the belligerent, and on condition that the latter
shall have notified their names to the enemy at the commencement or
during the course of hostilities, in any event, before they are
employed._
iv. The ships mentioned in Articles i., ii. and iii. shall afford
relief and assistance to the wounded, sick and shipwrecked of the
belligerents independently of their nationality.
The governments engage not to use these ships for any military
purpose.
These ships must not in any way hamper the movements of the
combatants.
During and after an engagement they will act at their own risk and
peril.
The belligerents will have the right to control and visit them; they
can refuse to help them, order them off, make them take a certain
course, and put a commissioner on board; they can even detain them, if
important circumstances require it.
As far as possible the belligerents shall inscribe in the sailing
papers of the hospital-ships the orders they give them.
v. The military hospital-ships shall be distinguished by being painted
white outside with a horizontal band of green about a metre and a half
in breadth.
The ships mentioned in Articles ii. and iii. shall be distinguished by
being painted white outside with a horizontal band of red about a
metre and a half in breadth.
The boats of the ships above mentioned, as also small craft which may
be used for hospital work, shall be distinguished by similar painting.
All hospital-ships shall make themselves known by hoisting, together
with their national flag, the white flag with a red cross provided by
the Geneva Convention, _and, in addition, if they belong to a neutral
State, by hoisting on the mainmast the national flag of the
belligerent under whose direction they are placed._
_Hospital-ships which, under the terms of Article iv., are detained
by the enemy, must lower the national flag of the belligerent under
whom they were acting._
_The above-mentioned vessels and boats, desiring at night-time to
ensure the respect due to them, shall, with the consent of the
belligerent whom they are accompanying, take the necessary steps that
the special painting denoting them shall be sufficiently conspicuous._
vi. [Neutral merchantmen, yachts or vessels, having, or taking on
board, sick, wounded or shipwrecked of the belligerents, cannot be
captured for so doing, but they are liable to capture for any
violation of neutrality they may have committed.]
_The distinctive signs provided by Article v. can only be used,
whether in time of peace or in time of war, to protect ships therein
mentioned._
vii. _In the case of a fight on board a war-ship, the hospitals shall
be respected and shall receive as much consideration as possible._
_These hospitals and their belongings are subject to the laws of war,
but shall not be employed for any other purpose so long as they shall
be necessary for the sick and wounded._
_Nevertheless, the commander who has them under his orders, may make
use of them in case of important military necessity, but he shall
first ensure the safety of the sick and wounded on board._
viii. _The protection due to hospital-ships and to hospitals on board
war-ships shall cease if they are used against the enemy._
_The fact that the crew of hospital-ships, and attached to hospitals
on war-ships, are armed for the maintenance of order and for the
defence of the sick or wounded, and the existence of a
radio-telegraphic installation on board, is not considered as a
justification for withdrawing the above-mentioned protection._
ix. _Belligerents may appeal to the charitable zeal of commanders of
neutral merchant vessels, yachts or other craft, to take on board and
look after the sick and wounded._
_Ships having responded to this appeal, as well as those who have
spontaneously taken on board sick, wounded or shipwrecked men, shall
have the advantage of a special protection and of certain immunities.
In no case shall they be liable to capture on account of such
transport; but subject to any promise made to them they are liable to
capture for any violation of neutrality they may have committed._
[vii.] x. The religious, medical or hospital staff of any captured
ship is inviolable, and its members cannot be made prisoners of war.
On leaving the ship they take with them the objects and surgical
instruments which are their own private property.
This staff shall continue to discharge its duties while necessary, and
can afterwards leave when the commander-in-chief considers it
possible.
The belligerents must guarantee to the staff that has fallen into
their hands [the enjoyment of their salaries intact] _the same
allowances and pay as those of persons of the same rank in their own
navy_.
[viii.] xi. Sailors and soldiers, _and other persons officially
attached to navies or armies_, who are taken on board when sick or
wounded, to whatever nation they belong, shall be [protected]
respected and looked after by the captors.
xii. _Every vessel of war of a belligerent party may claim the return
of the wounded, sick or shipwrecked who are on board military
hospital-ships, hospital-ships of aid societies or of private
individuals, merchant ships, yachts or other craft, whatever be the
nationality of these vessels._
xiii. _If the wounded, sick or shipwrecked are received on board a
neutral ship of war, it shall be provided, as far as possible, that
they may take no further part in war operations._
xiv. The shipwrecked, wounded or sick of one of the belligerents who
fall into the hands of the other, are prisoners of war. The captor
must decide, according to circumstances, if it is best to keep them or
send them to a port of his own country, to a neutral port, or even to
a hostile port. In the last case, prisoners thus repatriated cannot
serve as long as the war lasts.
xv. The shipwrecked, wounded or sick who are landed at a neutral port
with the consent of the local authorities, must, failing a contrary
arrangement between the neutral State and the belligerents, be guarded
by the neutral State, so that they may not be again able to take part
in the military operations.
_The expenses of hospital treatment and internment shall be borne by
the State to which the shipwrecked, wounded or sick belong._
(T. Ba.)