[1] Including Codex [Hebrew: alef]. But this distance is too great
for the conditions of Luke's narrative and the reading (160) is
evidently an attempt to harmonize with the traditional identification
of Emmaus-Nicopolis held by Eusebius and Jerome. For a curious
reading in three old Latin MSS, which makes Emmaus the name of the
second traveller on the journey, see _Expos. Times_, xiii. 429, 477,
561.
EMMENDINGEN, a town of Germany, in the grand-duchy of Baden, close to
the Black Forest, on the Elz and the main line of railway
Mannheim-Constance. Pop. 6200. It has a Protestant church with a fine
spire, a Roman Catholic church, a handsome town-hall, an old castle (now
a hospital), once the residence of the counts of Hochberg, spinning
mills, tanneries and manufactures of photographic instruments, paper,
machinery and cigars. There is also a considerable trade in timber and
cattle. Here the author Johann Georg Schlosser (1739-1799), the husband
of Goethe's sister Cornelia (who died in 1777 and is interred in the old
graveyard), was _Oberamtmann_ (bailiff) for a few years.
Emmendingen was formerly the seat of the counts of Hochberg, a cadet
branch of the margraves of Baden. In 1418 it received market rights from
the emperor, and in 1590 was raised to the status of a town, and walled,
by Margrave Jacob III.
EMMERICH (the ancient _Embrica_), a town of Germany, in the Prussian
Rhine province, on the right bank of the Rhine and the railway from
Cologne to Amsterdam, 5 m. N.E. of Cleves. Pop. (1905) 12,578. It has a
considerable shipping trade, and manufactories of tobacco and cigars,
chocolate, margarine, oil, chemicals, brushes, vinegar, soap, guano and
perfumery. There are also iron foundries and machine factories. The old
minster church, built in the middle of the 11th century, contains some
fine choir stalls.
Emmerich, formerly called Embrika and Emrik, originally a Roman colony,
is mentioned in records so early as the 7th century. St Willibrord
founded a monastery and church here. In 1233 the place came into the
possession of the dukes of Gelderland and received the status of a town
in 1247. In 1371 it fell to the duchy of Cleves, and passed with it in
1609 to Brandenburg. The town joined the Hanseatic League in 1407. In
1794 it was bombarded by the French under General Vandamme, and in 1806
it was assigned to the grand-duchy of Berg. It passed into the
possession of Prussia in 1815.
See A. Dederich, _Annalen der Stadt Emmerich_ (Emmerich, 1867).
EMMET, ROBERT (1778-1803), Irish rebel, youngest son of Robert Emmet,
physician to the lord-lieutenant of Ireland, was born in Dublin in 1778,
and entered Trinity College in October 1793, where he had a
distinguished academic career, showing special aptitude for mathematics
and chemistry, and acquiring a reputation as an orator. Without taking a
degree he removed his name from the college books in April 1798, as a
protest against the inquisitorial examination of the political views of
the students conducted by Lord Clare as chancellor of the university.
Thus cut off from entering a learned profession, he turned towards
political intrigue, being already to some extent in the secrets of the
United Irishmen, of whom his elder brother Thomas Addis Emmet (see
below) was one of the most prominent. In April 1799 a warrant was issued
for his arrest, but was not executed; and in 1800 and the following year
he travelled on the continent of Europe, where he entered into relations
with the leaders of the United Irishmen, exiled since the rebellion of
1798, who were planning a fresh outbreak in Ireland in expectation of
support from France. Emmet went to Paris in October 1802, where he had
an interview with Bonaparte which convinced him that the peace of Amiens
would be of short duration and that a French invasion of England might
be looked for in August 1803. The councils of the conspirators were
weakened by divided opinions as to the ultimate aim of their policy; and
no clearly thought-out scheme of operations appears to have been arrived
at when Emmet left Paris for Ireland in October 1802. Those in his
confidence afterwards denied that Emmet was himself the originator of
the plan on which he acted; and several of the ablest of the United
Irishmen held aloof, believing the project to be impracticable. Among
the latter was Lord Cloncurry, at one time on the executive of the
United Irishmen, with whom Emmet dined the night before he left Paris,
and to whom he spoke of his plans with intense enthusiasm and
excitement. Emmet's lack of discretion was shown by his revealing his
intentions in detail to an Englishman named Lawrence, resident near
Honfleur, with whom he sought shelter when travelling on foot on his way
to Ireland. Arriving in Dublin at the end of October he received
information to the effect that seventeen counties were ready to take up
arms if a successful effort were made in Dublin. For some time he
remained concealed in his father's house near Miltown, making his
preparations. A large number of pikes were collected and stored in
Dublin during the spring of 1803, but fire-arms and ammunition were not
plentiful.
The probability of a French invasion in August was increased by the
renewal of the war in May, Emmet's brother Thomas being then in Paris in
communication with Talleyrand and Bonaparte. But a discovery by the
government of concealed arms, and an explosion at one of Emmet's depots
in Patrick Street on the 16th of July, necessitated immediate action,
and the 23rd of that month was accordingly fixed for the projected
rising. An elaborate plan of operations, which he described in detail in
a letter to his brother after his arrest, had been prepared by Emmet,
the leading feature of which was a simultaneous attack on the castle,
the Pigeon House and the artillery barracks at Island bridge; while
bodies of insurgents from the neighbouring counties were to march on the
capital. But the whole scheme miscarried. Some of Emmet's bolder
proposals, such as a plan for capturing the commander-in-chief, were
vetoed by the timidity of his associates, none of whom were men of any
ability. On the 23rd of July all was confusion at the depots, and the
leaders were divided as to the course to be pursued; orders were not
obeyed; a trusted messenger despatched for arms absconded with the money
committed to him to pay for them; treachery, quite unsuspected by Emmet,
honeycombed the conspiracy; the Wicklow contingent failed to appear; the
Kildare men turned back on hearing that the rising had been postponed; a
signal expected by a contingent at the Broadstone was never given. In
this hopeless state of affairs a false report reached Emmet at one of
his depots at nine o'clock in the evening that the military were
approaching. Without taking any step to verify it, Emmet put on a green
and white uniform and placed himself at the head of some eighty men, who
marched towards the castle, being joined in the streets by a second body
of about equal strength. None of these insurgents had any discipline,
and many of them were drunk. Lord Kilwarden, proceeding to a hastily
summoned meeting of the privy council, was dragged from his carriage by
this rabble and murdered, together with his nephew Richard Wolfe; his
daughter who accompanied him being conveyed to safety by Emmet himself.
Emmet, now seeing that the rising had become a mere street brawl, made
his escape; a detachment of soldiers quickly dispersed his followers.
After hiding for some days in the Wicklow mountains Emmet repaired to
the house of a Mrs Palmer at Harold's Cross, in order to be near the
residence of John Philpot Curran (q.v.), to whose daughter Sarah he had
for some time been secretly attached, and with whom he had carried on a
voluminous correspondence, afterwards seized by the authorities at her
father's house. Attempting without success to persuade this lady to fly
with him to America, Emmet lingered in the neighbourhood till the 25th
of August, when he was apprehended by Major H.C. Sirr, the same officer
who had captured Lord Edward Fitzgerald in 1798. At his trial he was
defended and betrayed by the infamous Leonard MacNally (q.v.), and was
convicted of treason; and after delivering an eloquent speech from the
dock, was hanged on the 20th of September 1803.
By the universal testimony of his friends, Robert Emmet was a youth of
modest character, pure motives and winning personality. But he was
entirely lacking in practical statesmanship. Brought up in a
revolutionary atmosphere, his enthusiasm was uncontrolled by judgment.
Thomas Moore, who warmly eulogizes Emmet, with whom he was a student at
Trinity College, records that one day when he was playing on the piano
the melody "Let Erin remember," Emmet started up exclaiming
passionately, "Oh, that I were at the head of 20,000 men marching to
that air!" He had no knowledge of the world or of men; he trusted every
one with child-like simplicity; except personal courage he had none of
the qualities essential to leadership in such an enterprise as armed
rebellion. The romance of his love affair with Sarah Curran--who
afterwards married Robert Henry Sturgeon, an officer distinguished in
the Peninsular War--has cast a glamour over the memory of Robert Emmet;
and it inspired Thomas Moore's well-known songs, "She is far from the
land where her young hero sleeps," and "Oh, breathe not his name"; it is
also the subject of Washington Irving's "The Broken Heart." Emmet was
short and slight in figure; his face was marked by smallpox, and he was
described in 1803 for the purpose of identification as being "of an
ugly, sour countenance and dirty brown complexion." A few poems by Emmet
of little merit are appended to Madden's biography.
See R.R. Madden, _The United Irishmen, their Lives and Times_ (2nd ed.
4 vols., Dublin, 1858-1860); Charles Phillips, _Recollections of
Curran and Some of his Contemporaries_ (2nd ed., London, 1822); Henry
Grattan, _Memoirs of the Life and Times of the Right Hon. H. Grattan_
(5 vols., London, 1839-1846); W.H. Maxwell, _History of the Irish
Rebellion in 1798; with Memoirs of the Union and Emmet's Insurrection
in 1803_ (London, 1845); W.H. Curran, _Life of J.P. Curran_ (2 vols.,
Edinburgh, 1822); Thomas Moore, _Life and Death of Lord Edward
Fitzgerald_ (2 vols. 3rd ed., London, 1832); and _Memoirs, Journals
and Correspondence of Thomas Moore_, edited by Lord John Russell (8
vols., London, 1853-1856). (R. J. M.)
EMMET, THOMAS ADDIS (1764-1827), Irish lawyer and politician, second son
of Robert Emmet, physician to the lord-lieutenant of Ireland, and elder
brother of Robert Emmet (q.v.), the rebel, was born at Cork on the 24th
of April 1764, and was educated at Trinity College, Dublin, and at
Edinburgh University, where he studied medicine and was a pupil of
Dugald Stewart in philosophy. After visiting the chief medical schools
on the continent, he returned to Ireland in 1788; but the sudden death
of his elder brother, Christopher Temple Emmet (1761-1788), a barrister
of some distinction, induced him to follow the advice of Sir James
Mackintosh to forsake medicine for the law as a profession. He was
called to the Irish bar in 1790, and quickly obtained a practice,
principally as counsel for prisoners charged with political offences,
and became the legal adviser of the leading United Irishmen. When the
Dublin corporation issued a declaration of Protestant ascendancy in
1792, the counter-manifesto of the United Irishmen was drawn up by
Emmet; and in 1795 he took the oath of the society in open court,
becoming secretary in the same year and a member of the executive in
1797. Although Grattan had a profound contempt for Emmet's political
understanding, describing him as a quack in politics who set up his own
crude notions as settled rules, Emmet was among the more prudent of the
United Irishmen on the eve of the rebellion. It was only when convinced
that parliamentary reform and Catholic emancipation were not to be
obtained by constitutional methods, that he reluctantly engaged in
treasonable conspiracy; and in opposition to bolder spirits like Lord
Edward Fitzgerald, he discountenanced the taking up of arms until help
should be obtained from France. Though not among those taken at the
house of Oliver Bond on the 12th of March 1798 (see FITZGERALD, LORD
EDWARD), he was arrested about the same time, and he was one of the
leaders who after the rebellion were imprisoned at Fort George till
1802. Being then released, he went to Brussels, where he was visited by
his brother Robert in October of that year; and he was in the secrets of
those who were preparing for a fresh rising in Ireland in conjunction
with French aid. After the failure of Robert Emmet's rising in July
1803, the news of which reached him in Paris, where he was in
communication with Bonaparte, he emigrated to the United States. Joining
the New York bar he obtained a lucrative practice and in 1812-13 was
attorney-general of New York; his abilities and success being such that
Judge Story declared him to be "by universal consent in the first rank
of American advocates." He died while conducting a case in court on the
14th of November 1827. Thomas Emmet married, in 1791, Jane, daughter of
the Rev. John Patten, of Clonmel.
See authorities under EMMET, ROBERT; also Alfred Webb, _Compendium of
Irish Biography_ (Dublin, 1878); C.S. Haynes, _Memoirs of Thomas Addis
Emmet_ (London, 1829); Theobald Wolfe Tone, _Memoirs_, edited by
W.T.W. Tone (2 vols., London, 1827); W.E.H. Lecky, _Hist. of Ireland
in the Eighteenth Century_, vol. iv. (Cabinet edition, 5 vols.,
London, 1892). (R. J. M.)
EMMETT, DANIEL DECATUR (1815-1904), American songwriter, was born at
Mount Vernon, Ohio. He started the "negro minstrel" performances, which
from 1842 onwards became so popular in America and England, and he
composed a number of songs which had a great temporary vogue. He is
remembered particularly as the writer of the famous Southern war-song
"Dixie," which he composed in 1859.
EMMITSBURG, a town in Frederick county, Maryland, U.S.A., 61 m. by rail
W. by N. of Baltimore, and 1-1/2 m. S. of the northern boundary of the
state. Pop. (1900) 849; (1910) 1054. It is served by the Emmitsburg
railway (7 m. long) to Rocky Ridge on the Western Maryland railway. The
town is in a picturesque region on the eastern slope of the Blue Ridge
Mountains. Two miles S.W. is Mount St. Mary's College (Roman Catholic),
founded in 1808 by the Rev. John du Bois (1764-1842)--its president
until 1826, when he became bishop of New York--and chartered by the
state in 1830. The Ecclesiastical Seminary of the college has been a
great training school, and has been called the "Nursery of Bishops";
among its graduates have been Bishop Hughes, Cardinal McCloskey and
Archbishop Corrigan. In 1908 the college had 25 instructors and 350
students, of whom 57 were in the Ecclesiastical Seminary, and 61 in the
Minim Department. Half a mile S. of the town is St Joseph's College and
Academy (incorporated in 1816), for young women, which is conducted by
the Sisters of Charity--this order was introduced into the United States
at Emmitsburg by Mrs Elizabeth Ann Seton in 1809. The first settlement
at Emmitsburg was made about 1773. It was at first called "Silver
Fancy," and then for a time was known as "Poplar Fields"; but in 1786
the present name was adopted in honour of William Emmitt, one of the
original settlers. The town was incorporated in 1824.
EMMIUS, UBBO (1547-1625), Dutch historian and geographer, was born at
Gretha in East Friesland on the 5th of December 1547. After studying at
Rostock, he spent two years in Geneva, where he became intimate with
Theodore Beza; and returning to the Netherlands was appointed the
principal of a college at Norden, a position which he lost in 1587
because, as a Calvinist, he would not subscribe to the confession of
Augsburg. Subsequently he was head of a college at Leer, and in 1594
became rector of the college at Groningen, and when in 1614 this college
became a university he was chosen principal and professor of history and
Greek, and by his wise guidance and his learning speedily raised the new
university to a position of eminence. He was on friendly terms with
Louis, count of Nassau; corresponded with many of the learned men of his
time; and died at Groningen on the 9th of December 1625. He was twice
married, and left a son and a daughter. The chief works of Emmius are:
_Rerum Frisicarum historiae decades_, in six parts, a complete edition
of which was published at Leiden in 1616; _Opus chronologicum_
(Groningen, 1619); _Vetus Graecia illustrata_ (Leiden, 1626); and
_Historia temporis nostri_, which was first published at Groningen in
1732. An account of his life, written by Nicholas Mulerius, was
published, with the lives of other professors of Groningen, at Groningen
in 1638.
See N.G. van Kampen, _Geschiedenis der letteren en wetenschappen in de
Nederlanden_ (The Hague, 1821-1826).
EMMONS, EBENEZER (1800-1863), American geologist, was born at
Middlefield, Massachusetts, on the 16th of May 1800. He studied medicine
at Albany, and after taking his degree practised for some years in
Berkshire county. His interest in geology was kindled in early life, and
in 1824 he had assisted Prof. Chester Dewey (1784-1867) in preparing a
geological map of Berkshire county, in which the first attempt was made
to classify the rocks of the Taconic area. While thus giving much of his
time to natural science, undertaking professional work in natural
history and geology in Williams College, he also accepted the
professorship of chemistry and afterwards of obstetrics in the Albany
Medical College. The chief work of his life was, however, in geology,
and he has been designated by Jules Marcou as "the founder of American
palaeozoic stratigraphy, and the first discoverer of the primordial
fauna in any country." In 1836 he became attached to the Geological
Survey of the State of New York, and after lengthened study he grouped
the local strata (1842) into the Taconic and overlying New York systems.
The latter system was subdivided into several groups that were by no
means well defined. Emmons had previously described the Potsdam
sandstone (1838), and this was placed at the base of the New York
system. It is now regarded as Upper Cambrian. In 1844 Emmons for the
first time obtained fossils in his Taconic system: a notable discovery
because the species obtained were found to differ from all then-known
Palaeozoic fossils, and they were regarded as representing the
primordial group. Marcou was thus led to advocate that the term Taconic
be generally adopted in place of Cambrian. Nevertheless the Taconic
fauna of Emmons has proved to include only the lower part of Sedgwick's
Cambrian. Considerable discussion has taken place on the question of the
Taconic system, and whether the term should be adopted; and the general
opinion has been adverse. Emmons made contributions on agriculture and
geology to a series of volumes on the natural history of New York. He
also issued a work entitled _American Geology; containing a statement of
the principles of the Science, with full illustrations of the
characteristic American Fossils_ (1855-1857). From 1851 to 1860 he was
state geologist of North Carolina. He died at Brunswick, North Carolina,
on the 1st of October 1863.
See the _Biographical Notice of Ebenezer Emmons_, by J. Marcou; _Amer.
Geologist_, vol. vii. (Jan., 1891), p. 1 (with portrait and list of
publications).
EMMONS, NATHANAEL (1745-1840), American theologian, was born at East
Haddam, Connecticut, on the 20th of April 1745. He graduated at Yale in
1767, studied theology under the Rev. John Smalley (1734-1820) at
Berlin, Connecticut, and was licensed to preach in 1769. After preaching
four years in New York and New Hampshire, he became, in April 1773,
pastor of the Second church at Franklin (until 1778 a part of Wrentham,
Massachusetts), of which he remained in charge until May 1827, when
failing health compelled his relinquishment of active ministerial cares.
He lived, however, for many years thereafter, dying of old age at
Franklin on the 23rd of September 1840. It was as a theologian that Dr
Emmons was best known, and for half a century probably no clergyman in
New England exerted so wide an influence. He developed an original
system of divinity, somewhat on the structural plan of that of Samuel
Hopkins, and, in Emmons's own belief, contained in and evolved from
Hopkinsianism. While by no means abandoning the tenets of the old
Calvinistic faith, he came to be looked upon as the chief representative
of what was then known as the "new school" of theologians. His system
declared that holiness and sin are free voluntary exercises; that men
act freely under the divine agency; that the slightest transgression
deserves eternal punishment; that it is through God's mere grace that
the penitent believer is pardoned and justified; that, in spite of total
depravity, sinners ought to repent; and that regeneration is active, not
passive, with the believer. Emmonsism was spread and perpetuated by more
than a hundred clergymen, whom he personally trained. Politically, he
was an ardent patriot during the War of Independence, and a strong
Federalist afterwards, several of his political discourses attracting
wide attention. He was a founder and the first president of the
Massachusetts Missionary Society, and was influential in the
establishment of Andover Theological Seminary. More than two hundred of
his sermons and addresses were published during his lifetime. His
_Works_ were published in 6 vols. (Boston, 1842; new edition, 1861).
See also the _Memoir_, by Dr E.A. Park (Andover, 1861).
EMPEDOCLES (c. 490-430 B.C.), Greek philosopher and statesman, was
Born at Agrigentum (Acragas, Girgenti) in Sicily of a distinguished
family, then at the height of its glory. His grandfather Empedocles was
victorious in the Olympian chariot race in 496; in 470 his father Meto
was largely instrumental in the overthrow of the tyrant Thrasydaeus. We
know almost nothing of his life. The numerous legends which have grown
up round his name yield very little that can fairly be regarded as
authentic. It seems that he carried on the democratic tradition of his
house by helping to overthrow an oligarchic government which succeeded
the tyranny in Agrigentum, and was invited by the citizens to become
their king. That he refused the honour may have been due to a real
enthusiasm for free institutions or to the prudential recognition of the
peril which in those turbulent times surrounded the royal dignity.
Ultimately a change in the balance of parties compelled him to leave the
city, and he died in the Peloponnese of the results of an accident in
430.
Of his poem on nature ([Greek: physis]) there are left about 400 lines
in unequal fragments out of the original 5000; of the hymns of
purification ([Greek: katharmoi]) less than 100 verses remain; of the
other works, improbably assigned to him, nothing is known. His grand
but obscure hexameters, after the example of Parmenides, delighted
Lucretius. Aristotle, it is said, called him the father of rhetoric. But
it was as at once statesman, prophet, physicist, physician and reformer
that he most impressed the popular imagination. To his contemporaries,
as to himself, he seemed more than a mere man. The Sicilians honoured
his august aspect as he moved amongst them with purple robes and golden
girdle, with long hair bound by a Delphic garland, and brazen sandals on
his feet, and with a retinue of slaves behind him. Stories were told of
the ingenuity and generosity by which he had made the marshes round
Selinus salubrious, of the grotesque device by which he laid the winds
that ruined the harvests of Agrigentum, and of the almost miraculous
restoration to life of a woman who had long lain in a death-like trance.
Legends stranger still told of his disappearance from among men.
Empedocles, according to one story, was one midnight, after a feast held
in his honour, called away in a blaze of glory to the gods; according to
another, he had only thrown himself into the crater of Etna, in the hope
that men, finding no traces of his end, would suppose him translated to
heaven. But his hopes were cheated by the volcano, which cast forth his
brazen sandals and betrayed his secret (Diog. Laert. viii. 67). The
people of Agrigentum have never ceased to honour his name, and even in
modern times he has been celebrated by followers of Mazzini as the
democrat of antiquity _par excellence_.
As his history is uncertain, so his doctrines are hard to put together.
He does not belong to any one definite school. While, on one hand, he
combines much that had been suggested by Parmenides, Pythagoras and the
Ionic schools, he has germs of truth that Plato and Aristotle afterwards
developed; he is at once a firm believer in Orphic mysteries, and a
scientific thinker, precursor of the physical scientists. There are,
according to Empedocles, four ultimate elements, four primal divinities,
of which are made all structures in the world--fire, air, water, earth.
These four elements are eternally brought into union, and eternally
parted from each other, by two divine beings or powers, love and
hatred--an attractive and a repulsive force which the ordinary eye can
see working amongst men, but which really pervade the whole world.
According to the different proportions in which these four
indestructible and unchangeable matters are combined with each other is
the difference of the organic structure produced; e.g. flesh and blood
are made of equal (in weight but not in volume) parts of all four
elements, whereas bones are one-half fire, one-fourth earth, and
one-fourth water. It is in the aggregation and segregation of elements
thus arising that Empedocles, like the atomists, finds the real process
which corresponds to what is popularly termed growth, increase or
decrease. Nothing new comes or can come into being; the only change that
can occur is a change in the juxtaposition of element with element.
Empedocles apparently regarded love ([Greek: philotes]) and discord
([Greek: neikos]) as alternately holding the empire over
things,--neither, however, being ever quite absent. As the best and
original state, he seems to have conceived a period when love was
predominant, and all the elements formed one great sphere or globe.
Since that period discord had gained more sway; and the actual world was
full of contrasts and oppositions, due to the combined action of both
principles. His theory attempted to explain the separation of elements,
the formation of earth and sea, of sun and moon, of atmosphere. But the
most interesting and most matured part of his views dealt with the first
origin of plants and animals, and with the physiology of man. As the
elements (his deities) entered into combinations, there appeared quaint
results--heads without necks, arms without shoulders. Then as these
fragmentary structures met, there were seen horned heads on human
bodies, bodies of oxen with men's heads, and figures of double sex. But
most of these products of natural forces disappeared as suddenly as they
arose; only in those rare cases where the several parts were found
adapted to each other, and casual member fitted into casual member, did
the complex structures thus formed last. Thus from spontaneous
aggregations of casual aggregates, which suited each other as if this
had been intended, did the organic universe originally spring. Soon
various influences reduced the creatures of double sex to a male and a
female, and the world was replenished with organic life. It is
impossible not to see in this theory a crude anticipation of the
"survival of the fittest" theory of modern evolutionists.
As man, animal and plant are composed of the same elements in different
proportions, there is an identity of nature in them all. They all have
sense and understanding; in man, however, and especially in the blood at
his heart, mind has its peculiar seat. But mind is always dependent upon
the body, and varies with its changing constitution. Hence the precepts
of morality are with Empedocles largely dietetic.
Knowledge is explained by the principle that the several elements in the
things outside us are perceived by the corresponding elements in
ourselves. We know only in so far as we have within us a nature cognate
to the object of knowledge. Like is known by like. The whole body is
full of pores, and hence respiration takes place over the whole frame.
But in the organs of sense these pores are specially adapted to receive
the effluxes which are continually rising from bodies around us; and in
this way perception is somewhat obscurely explained. The theory, however
unsatisfactory as an explanation, has one great merit, that it
recognizes between the eye, for instance, and the object seen an
intermediate something. Certain particles go forth from the eye to meet
similar particles given forth from the object, and the resultant contact
constitutes vision. This idea contains within it the germ of the modern
idea of the subjectivity of sense-given data; perception is not merely a
passive reflection of external objects.
It is not easy to harmonize these quasi-scientific theories with the
theory of transmigration of souls which Empedocles seems to expound.
Probably the doctrine that the divinity ([Greek: daimon]) passes from
element to element, nowhere finding a home, is a mystical way of
teaching the continued identity of the principles which are at the
bottom of every phase of development from inorganic nature to man. At
the top of the scale are the prophet and the physician, those who have
best learned the secret of life; they are next to the divine. One law,
an identity of elements, pervades all nature; existence is one from end
to end; the plant and the animal are links in a chain where man is a
link too; and even the distinction between male and female is
transcended. The beasts are kindred with man; he who eats their flesh is
not much better than a cannibal.
Looking at the opposition between these and the ordinary opinions, we
are not surprised that Empedocles notes the limitation and narrowness of
human perceptions. We see, he says, but a part, and fancy that we have
grasped the whole. But the senses cannot lead to truth; thought and
reflection must look at the thing on every side. It is the business of a
philosopher, while he lays bare the fundamental difference of elements,
to display the identity that subsists between what seem unconnected
parts of the universe.
See Diog. Laert. viii. 51-77; Sext. Empiric. _Adv. math._ vii. 123;
Simplicius, _Phys._ f. 24, f. 76. For text Simon Karsten, "Empedoclis
Agrigenti carminum reliquiae," in _Reliq. phil. vet._ (Amsterdam,
1838); F.W.A. Mullach, _Fragmenta philosophorum Graecorum_, vol. i.;
H. Stein, _Empedoclis Agrigenti fragmenta_ (Bonn, 1882); H. Ritter and
L. Preller, _Historia philosophiae_ (4th ed., Gotha, 1869), chap. iii.
ad fin.; A. Fairbanks, _The First Philosophers of Greece_ (1898).
Verse translation, W.E. Leonard (1908). For criticism E. Zeller,
_Phil. der Griechen_ (Eng. trans. S.F. Alleyne, 2 vols., London,
1881); A.W. Benn, _Greek Philosophers_ (1882); J.A. Symonds, _Studies
of the Greek Poets_ (3rd ed., 1893), vol. i. chap. 7; C.B. Renouvier,
_Manuel de philosophie ancienne_ (Paris, 1844); T. Gomperz, _Greek
Thinkers_, vol. i. (Eng. trans. L. Magnus, 1901); W. Windelband,
_Hist. of Phil._ (Eng. trans. 1895); many articles in periodicals (see
Baldwin's _Dict. of Philos._ vol. iii. p. 190). (W. W.; X.)
EMPEROR (Fr. _empereur_, from the Lat. _imperator_), a title formerly
borne by the sovereigns of the Roman empire (see EMPIRE), and since
their time, partly by derivation, partly by imitation, used by a variety
of other sovereigns. Under the Republic, the term _imperator_ applied in
theory to any magistrate vested with _imperium_; but in practice it was
only used of a magistrate who was acting abroad (_militiae_) and was
thus in command of troops. The term _imperator_ was the natural and
regular designation employed by his troops in addressing such a
magistrate; but it was more particularly and specially employed by them
to salute him after a victory; and when he had been thus saluted he
could use the title of imperator in public till the day of his triumph
at Rome, after which it would lapse along with his _imperium_. The
senate itself might, in the later Republic, invite a victorious general
to assume the title; and in these two customs--the salutation of the
troops, and the invitation of the senate--we see in the germ the two
methods by which under the Empire the _princeps_ was designated; while
in the military connotation attaching to the name even under the
Republic we can detect in advance the military character by which the
emperor and the Empire were afterwards distinguished. Julius Caesar was
the first who used the title continuously (from 58 B.C. to his death in
44 B.C.), as well _domi_ as _militiae_; and his nephew Augustus took a
further step when he made the term imperator a _praenomen_, a practice
which after the time of Nero becomes regular. But apart from this
amalgamation of the term with his regular name, and the private right to
its use which that bestowed, every emperor had an additional and double
right to the title on public grounds, possessed as he was of an
_imperium infinitum majus_, and commanding as he did all the troops of
the Empire. From the latter point of view--as _generalissimo_ of the
forces of Rome, he had the right to the insignia of the commander (the
laurel wreath and the fasces), and to the protection of a bodyguard, the
_praetoriani_. This public title of imperator was normally conferred by
the senate; and an emperor normally dates his reign from the day of his
salutation by the senate. But the troops were also regarded as still
retaining the right of saluting an _imperator_; and there were emperors
who regarded themselves as created by such salutation and dated their
reigns accordingly. The military associations of the term thus resulted,
only too often, in making the emperor the nominee of a turbulent
soldiery.
Augustus had been designated (not indeed officially, but none the less
regularly) as _princeps_--the first citizen or foremost man of the
state. The designation suited the early years of the Empire, in which a
dyarchy of _princeps_ and senate had been maintained. But by the 2nd
century the dyarchy is passing into a monarchy: the title of princeps
recedes, and the title of imperator comes into prominence to designate
not merely the possessor of a certain _imperium_, or the general of
troops, but the simple monarch in the fulness of his power as head of
the state. From the days of Diocletian one finds occasionally two
emperors, but not, at any rate in theory, two Empires; the two emperors
are the dual sovereigns of a single realm. But from the time of Arcadius
and Honorius (A.D. 395) there are in reality (though not in theory) two
Empires as well as two emperors, one of the East and one of the West.
When Greek became the sole language of the East Roman Empire,
_imperator_ was rendered sometimes by [Greek: basileus] and sometimes by
[Greek: autokrator], the former word being the usual designation of a
sovereign, the latter specially denoting that despotic power which the
_imperator_ held, and being in fact the official translation of
_imperator_. Justinian uses [Greek: autokrator] as his formal title, and
[Greek: basileus] as the popular term.
On the revival of the Roman empire in the West by Charlemagne in 800,
the title (at first in the form _imperator_, or _imperator_ _Augustus_,
afterwards _Romanorum imperator Augustus_) was taken by him and by his
Frankish, Italian and German successors, heads of the Holy Roman Empire,
down to the abdication of the emperor Francis II. in 1806. The doctrine
had, however, grown up in the earlier middle ages (about the time of the
emperor Henry II., 1002-1024) that although the emperor was chosen in
Germany (at first by the nation, afterwards by a small body of
electors), and entitled from the moment of his election to be crowned in
Rome by the pope, he could not use the title of emperor until that
coronation had actually taken place. The German sovereign, therefore,
though he exercised, as soon as chosen, full imperial powers both in
Germany and Italy, called himself merely "king of the Romans"
(_Romanorum rex semper Augustus_) until he had received the sacred crown
in the sacred city. In 1508 Maximilian I., being refused a passage to
Rome by the Venetians, obtained from Pope Julius II. a bull permitting
him to style himself emperor elect (_imperator electus_, erwahlter
Kaiser). This title was taken by Ferdinand I. (1558) and all succeeding
emperors, immediately upon their coronation in Germany; and it was until
1806 their strict legal designation, and was always employed by them in
proclamations and other official documents. The term "elect" was,
however, omitted even in formal documents when the sovereign was
addressed or was spoken of in the third person.
In medieval times the emperor, conceived as vicegerent of God and
co-regent with the pope in government of the Christian people committed
to his charge, might almost be regarded as an ecclesiastical officer.
Not only was his function regarded as consisting in the defence and
extension of true religion; he was himself arrayed in ecclesiastical
vestments at his coronation; he was ordained a subdeacon; and assisting
the pope in the celebration of the Eucharist, he communicated in both
kinds as a clerk. The same sort of ecclesiastical character came also to
be attached to the tsars[1] of Russia, who--especially in their
relations with the Orthodox Eastern Church--may vindicate for themselves
(though the sultans of Turkey have disputed the claim) the succession to
the East Roman emperors (see Empire). But the title of emperor was also
used in the middle ages, and is still used, in a loose and vague sense,
without any ecclesiastical connotation or hint of connexion with Rome
(the two attributes which should properly distinguish an emperor), and
merely in order to designate a non-European ruler with a large extent of
territory. It was thus applied, and is still applied, to the rulers of
China and Japan; it was attributed to the Mogul sovereigns of India; and
since 1876 it has been used by British monarchs in their capacity of
sovereigns of India (_Kaiser-i-Hind_).[2]
Since the French Revolution and during the course of the 19th century
the term emperor has had an eventful history. In 1804 Napoleon took the
title of "Emperor of the French," and posed as the reviver of the Empire
of Charlemagne. Afraid that Napoleon would next proceed to deprive him
of his title of Holy Roman Emperor, Francis II. first took the step, in
1804, of investing himself with a new title, that of "Hereditary Emperor
of Austria," and then, in 1806, proceeded to the further step of
abdicating his old historical title and dissolving the Holy Roman
Empire. Thus the old and true sense of the term emperor--the sense in
which it was connected with the church in the present and with Rome in
the past--finally perished; and the term became partly an apanage of
Bonapartism (Louis Napoleon resuscitated it as Napoleon III. in 1853),
and partly a personal title of the Habsburgs as rulers of their various
family territories. In 1870, however, a new and most important use of
the title was begun, when the union of Germany was achieved, and the
Prussian king, who became the head of united Germany, received in that
capacity the title of German Emperor. Here the title of emperor
designates the president of a federal state; and here the Holy Roman
emperor of the 17th and 18th centuries, the president of a loose
confederation of German states, may be said to have found his successor.
But the term has been widely and loosely used in the course of the 19th
century. It was the style from 1821 to 1889 of the princes of the house
of Braganza who ruled in Brazil; it has been assumed by usurpers in
Haiti, and in Mexico it was borne by Augustin Iturbide in 1822 and 1823,
and by the ill-fated Archduke Maximilian of Austria from 1864 to 1867.
It can hardly, therefore, be said to have any definite descriptive force
at the present time, such as it had in the middle ages. So far as it has
any such force in Europe, it may be said partly to be connected with
Bonapartism, and to denote a popular but military dictatorship, partly
to be connected with the federal idea, and to denote a precedence over
other kings possessed by a ruler standing at the head of a composite
state which may embrace kings among its members. It is in this latter
sense that it is used of Germany, and of Britain in respect of India; it
is in something approaching this latter sense that it may be said to be
used of Austria.
See J. Selden, _Titles of Honour_ (1672); J. Bryce, _Holy Roman
Empire_ (London, 1904); and Sir E. Colebrooke, "On Imperial and Other
Titles" in the _Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society_ (1877). See also
the articles on "Imperator" and "Princeps" in Smith's _Dictionary of
Greek and Roman Antiquities_ (1890). (E. Br.)