FOOTNOTE:

[1] Upon the spread of the Church during the early centuries see

especially Harnack's _Mission und Ausbreitung des Christenthums in

den ersten drei Jahrhunderten_. An interesting parallel to the

spread of Christianity in the Roman empire is afforded by the

contemporary Mithraism. See Cumont's _Les Mystères de Mithra_

(1900), Eng. tr. _The Mysteries of Mithra_ (1903).

CHURCHILL, CHARLES (1731-1764), English poet and satirist, was born in

Vine Street, Westminster, in February 1731. His father, rector of

Rainham, Essex, held the curacy and lectureship of St John's,

Westminster, from 1733, and the son was educated at Westminster school,

where he became a good classical scholar, and formed a close and lasting

intimacy with Robert Lloyd. Churchill was entered at Trinity College,

Cambridge, in 1749, but never resided. He had been refused at Oxford,

ostensibly on the unlikely ground of lack of classical knowledge, but

more probably because of a hasty marriage which he had contracted within

the rules of the Fleet in his eighteenth year. He and his wife lived in

his father's house, and Churchill was afterwards sent to the north of

England to prepare for holy orders. He became curate of South Cadbury,

Somersetshire, and, on receiving priest's orders (1756), began to act as

his father's curate at Rainham. Two years later the elder Churchill

died, and the son was elected to succeed him in his curacy and

lectureship. His emoluments amounted to less than £100 a year, and he

increased his income by teaching in a girls' school. He fulfilled his

various duties with decorum for a while, but his marriage proved

unfortunate, and he spent much of his time in dissipation in the society

of Robert Lloyd. He was separated from his wife in 1761, and would have

been imprisoned for debt but for the timely help of Lloyd's father, who

had been an usher and was now a master of Westminster school.

Churchill had already done some work for the booksellers, and his friend

Lloyd had had some success with a didactic poem, "The Actor." His

intimate knowledge of the theatre was now turned to account in the

_Rosciad_, which appeared in March 1761. This reckless and amusing

satire described with the most disconcerting accuracy the faults of the

various actors and actresses on the London stage. Its immediate

popularity was no doubt largely due to its personal character, but its

real vigour and raciness make it worth reading even now when the objects

of Churchill's wit are many of them forgotten. The first impression was

published anonymously, and in the _Critical Review_, conducted by Tobias

Smollett, it was confidently asserted that the poem was the joint

production of George Colman, Bonnell Thornton and Robert Lloyd.

Churchill owned the authorship and immediately published an _Apology

addressed to the Critical Reviewers_, which, after developing the

subject that it is only the caste of authors that prey on their own

kind, repeats the fierce attack on the stage. Incidentally it contains

an enthusiastic tribute to Dryden, of whom Churchill was a not unworthy

scholar. In the _Rosciad_ he had given warm praise to Mrs Pritchard, Mrs

Cibber and Mrs Clive, but no leading London actor, with the exception of

David Garrick, had escaped censure, and in the _Apology_ Garrick was

clearly threatened. He deprecated criticism by showing every possible

civility to Churchill, who became a terror to the actors. Thomas Davies

wrote to Garrick attributing his blundering in the part of Cymbeline "to

my accidentally seeing Mr Churchill in the pit, it rendering me confused

and unmindful of my business." Churchill's satire made him many enemies,

and inquiries into his way of life provided abundant matter for retort.

In _Night, an Epistle to Robert Lloyd_ (1761), he answered the attacks

made on him, offering by way of defence the argument that any faults

were better than hypocrisy. His scandalous conduct brought down the

censure of the dean of Westminster, and in 1763 the protests of his

parishioners led him to resign his offices, and he was free to wear his

"blue coat with metal buttons" and much gold lace without remonstrance

from the dean. The _Rosciad_ had been refused by several publishers, and

was finally published at Churchill's own expense. He received a

considerable sum from the sale, and paid his old creditors in full,

besides making an allowance to his wife.

He now became a close ally of John Wilkes, whom he regularly assisted

with the _North Briton_. _The Prophecy of Famine: A Scots Pastoral_

(1763), his next poem, was founded on a paper written originally for

that journal. This violent satire on Scottish influence fell in with the

current hatred of Lord Bute, and the Scottish place-hunters were as much

alarmed as the actors had been. When Wilkes was arrested he gave

Churchill a timely hint to retire to the country for a time, the

publisher, Kearsley, having stated that he received part of the profits

from the paper. His _Epistle to William Hogarth_ (1763) was in answer to

the caricature of Wilkes made during the trial. In it Hogarth's vanity

and envy were attacked in an invective which Garrick quoted as "shocking

and barbarous." Hogarth retaliated by a caricature of Churchill as a

bear in torn clerical bands hugging a pot of porter and a club made of

lies and _North Britons_. _The Duellist_ (1763) is a virulent satire on

the most active opponents of Wilkes in the House of Lords, especially on

Bishop Warburton. He attacked Dr Johnson among others in _The Ghost_ as

"Pomposo, insolent and loud, Vain idol of a scribbling crowd." Other

poems are "The Conference" (1763); "The Author" (1763), highly praised

by Churchill's contemporaries; "Gotham" (1764), a poem on the duties of

a king, didactic rather than satiric in tone; "The Candidate" (1764), a

satire on John Montagu, fourth earl of Sandwich, one of Wilkes's

bitterest enemies, whom he had already denounced for his treachery in

the _Duellist_ (Bk. iii.) as "too infamous to have a friend"; "The

Farewell" (1764); "The Times" (1764); "Independence," and an unfinished

"Journey."

In October 1764 he went to Boulogne to join Wilkes. There he was

attacked by a fever of which he died on the 4th of November. He left his

property to his two sons, and made Wilkes his literary executor with

full powers. Wilkes did little. He wrote an epitaph for his friend and

about half a dozen notes on his poems, and Andrew Kippis acknowledges

some slight assistance from him in preparing his life of Churchill for

the _Biographia Britannica_ (1780). There is more than one instance of

Churchill's generosity to his friends. In 1763 he found his friend

Robert Lloyd in prison for debt. He paid a guinea a week for his better

maintenance in the Fleet, and raised a subscription to set him free.

Lloyd fell ill on receipt of the news of Churchill's death, and died

shortly afterwards. Churchill's sister Patty, who was engaged to Lloyd,

did not long survive them. William Cowper was his schoolfellow, and left

many kindly references to him.

A partial collection of Churchill's poems appeared in 1763. They are

included in Chalmers's edition of the English poets, and were edited

(1804) by W. Tooke. This was reprinted in the Aldine edition (1844).

There is a revised edition (1892) in the same series, _The Poetical

Works of Charles Churchill, with a Memoir by J.L. Hannay and copious

notes by W. Tooke_. For Churchill's biography, see _Genuine Memoirs

of Charles Churchill, with an account of and observations on his

writings; together with some Original letters ... between him and the

author_ (1765); A. Kippis, in _Biographia Britannica_ (1780); also

John Forster in the _Edinburgh Review_ (January 1845).

CHURCHILL, LORD RANDOLPH HENRY SPENCER (1840-1895), English statesman,

third son of John, seventh duke of Marlborough, by Frances, daughter of

the third marquess of Londonderry, was born at Blenheim Palace, on the

13th of February 1849. His early education was conducted at home, and at

Mr Tabor's preparatory school at Cheam. In January 1863 he went to Eton,

where he remained till July 1865. He was not specially distinguished

either in school work or games while at Eton; his contemporaries

describe him as a vivacious and rather unruly lad. In October 1867 he

matriculated at Merton College, Oxford. He was fond of amusement, and

had carried to Oxford an early taste for sport which he retained

throughout life. But he read with some industry, and obtained a second

class in jurisprudence and modern history in 1870. In 1874 he was

elected to parliament in the Conservative interest for Woodstock,

defeating Mr George Brodrick, a fellow, and afterwards warden, of Merton

College. His maiden speech, delivered in his first session, made no

impression on the House.

It was not till 1878 that he forced himself into public notice as the

exponent of a species of independent Conservatism. He directed a series

of furious attacks against some of the occupants of the front

ministerial bench, and especially that "old gang" who were distinguished

rather for the respectability of their private characters, and the

unblemished purity of their Toryism, than for striking talent. Mr

Sclater-Booth (afterwards 1st Lord Basing), president of the Local

Government Board, was the especial object of his ire, and that

minister's County Government Bill was fiercely denounced as the

"crowning dishonour to Tory principles," and the "supreme violation of

political honesty." The audacity of Lord Randolph's attitude, and the

vituperative fluency of his invective, made him a parliamentary figure

of some importance before the dissolution of the 1874 parliament, though

he was not as yet taken quite seriously. In the new parliament of 1880

he speedily began to play a more notable rôle. With the assistance of

his devoted adherents, Sir Henry Drummond Wolff, Sir John Gorst and

occasionally of Mr Arthur Balfour, and one or two others, he constituted

himself at once the audacious opponent of the Liberal administration and

the unsparing critic of the Conservative front bench. The "fourth

party," as it was nicknamed, was effective at first not so much in

damaging the government as in awakening the opposition from the apathy

which had fallen upon it after its defeat at the polls. Churchill roused

the Conservatives and gave them a fighting issue, by putting himself at

the head of the resistance to Mr Bradlaugh, the member for Northampton,

who, though an avowed atheist or agnostic, was prepared to take the

parliamentary oath. Sir Stafford Northcote, the Conservative leader in

the Lower House, was forced to take a strong line on this difficult

question by the energy of the fourth party, who in this case clearly

expressed the views of the bulk of the opposition. The long and

acrimonious controversy over Mr Bradlaugh's seat, if it added little to

the reputation of the English legislature, at least showed that Lord

Randolph Churchill was a parliamentary champion who added to his

audacity much tactical skill and shrewdness. He continued to play a

conspicuous part throughout the parliament of 1880-1885, dealing his

blows with almost equal vigour at Mr Gladstone and at the Conservative

front bench, some of whose members, and particularly Sir Richard Cross

and Mr W.H. Smith, he assailed with extreme virulence. From the

beginning of the Egyptian imbroglio Lord Randolph was emphatically

opposed to almost every step taken by the government. He declared that

the suppression of Arabi Pasha's rebellion was an error, and the

restoration of the khedive's authority a crime. He called Mr Gladstone

the "Moloch of Midlothian," for whom torrents of blood had been shed in

Africa. He was equally severe on the domestic policy of the

administration, and was particularly bitter in his criticism of the

Kilmainham treaty and the _rapprochement_ between the Gladstonians and

the Parnellites. It is true that for some time before the fall of the

Liberals in 1885 he had considerably modified his attitude towards the

Irish question, and was himself cultivating friendly relations with the

Home Rule members, and even obtained from them the assistance of the

Irish vote in the English constituencies in the general election. By

this time he had definitely formulated the policy of progressive

Conservatism which was known as "Tory democracy." He declared that the

Conservatives ought to adopt, rather than oppose, reforms of a popular

character, and to challenge the claims of the Liberals to pose as the

champions of the masses. His views were to a large extent accepted by

the official Conservative leaders in the treatment of the Gladstonian

Franchise Bill of 1884. Lord Randolph insisted that the principle of the

bill should be accepted by the opposition, and that resistance should be

focused upon the refusal of the government to combine with it a scheme

of redistribution. The prominent, and on the whole judicious and

successful, part he played in the debates on these questions, still

further increased his influence with the rank and file of the

Conservatives in the constituencies. At the same time he was actively

spreading the gospel of democratic Toryism in a series of platform

campaigns. In 1883 and 1884 he invaded the Radical stronghold of

Birmingham itself, and in the latter year took part in a Conservative

garden party at Aston Manor, at which his opponents paid him the

compliment of raising a serious riot. He gave constant attention to the

party organization, which had fallen into considerable disorder after

1880, and was an active promoter of the Primrose League, which owed its

origin to the happy inspiration of one of his own "fourth party"

colleagues.

In 1884 the struggle between stationary and progressive Toryism came to

a head, and terminated in favour of the latter. At the conference of the

Central Union of Conservative Associations, Lord Randolph was nominated

chairman, notwithstanding the strenuous opposition of the parliamentary

leaders of the party. The split was averted by Lord Randolph's voluntary

resignation; but the episode had confirmed his title to a leading place

in the Tory ranks. It was further strengthened by the prominent part he

played in the events immediately preceding the fall of the Liberal

government in 1885; and when Mr Childers's budget resolutions were

defeated by the Conservatives, aided by about half the Parnellites, Lord

Randolph Churchill's admirers were justified in proclaiming him to have

been the "organizer of victory." His services were, at any rate, far too

important to be refused recognition; and in Lord Salisbury's cabinet of

1885 he was appointed to no less an office than that of secretary of

state for India. During the few months of his tenure of this great post

the young free-lance of Tory democracy surprised the permanent officials

and his own friends by the assiduity with which he attended to his

departmental duties and the rapidity with which he mastered the

complicated questions of Indian administration. In the autumn election

of 1885 he contested Central Birmingham against Mr Bright, and though

defeated here, was at the same time returned by a very large majority

for South Paddington. In the contest which arose over Mr Gladstone's

Home Rule scheme, both in and out of parliament, Lord Randolph again

bore a conspicuous part, and in the electioneering campaign his activity

was only second to that of some of the Liberal Unionists, the marquess

of Hartington, Mr Goschen and Mr Chamberlain. He was now the recognized

Conservative champion in the Lower Chamber, and when the second

Salisbury administration was formed after the general election of 1886

he became chancellor of the exchequer and leader of the House of

Commons. His management of the House was on the whole successful, and

was marked by tact, discretion and temper. But he had never really

reconciled himself with some of his colleagues, and there was a good

deal of friction in his relations with them, which ended with his sudden

resignation on the 20th of December 1886. Various motives influenced him

in taking this surprising step; but the only ostensible cause was that

put forward in his letter to Lord Salisbury, which was read in the House

of Commons on 27th January. In this document he stated that his

resignation was due to his inability, as chancellor of the exchequer, to

concur in the demands made on the treasury by the ministers at the head

of the naval and military establishments. It was commonly supposed that

he expected his resignation to be followed by the unconditional

surrender of the cabinet, and his restoration to office on his own

terms. The sequel, however, was entirely different. The cabinet was

reconstructed with Mr Goschen as chancellor of the exchequer (Lord

Randolph had "forgotten Goschen," as he is said to have remarked), and

Churchill's own career as a Conservative chief was practically closed.

He continued, for some years longer, to take a considerable share in the

proceedings of parliament, giving a general, though decidedly

independent, support to the Unionist administration. On the Irish

question he was a very candid critic of Mr Balfour's measures, and one

of his later speeches, which recalled the acrimonious violence of his

earlier period, was that which he delivered in 1890 on the report of the

Parnell commission. He also fulfilled the promise made on his

resignation by occasionally advocating the principles of economy and

retrenchment in the debates on the naval and military estimates. In

April 1889, on the death of Mr Bright, he was asked to come forward as a

candidate for the vacant seat in Birmingham, and the result was a rather

angry controversy with Mr Chamberlain, terminating in the so-called

"Birmingham compact" for the division of representation of the Midland

capital between Liberal Unionists and Conservatives. But his health was

already precarious, and this, combined with the anomaly of his position,

induced him to relax his devotion to parliament during the later years

of the Salisbury administration. He bestowed much attention on society,

travel and sport. He was an ardent supporter of the turf, and in 1889 he

won the Oaks with a mare named the Abbesse de Jouarre. In 1891 he went

to South Africa, in search both of health and relaxation. He travelled

for some months through Cape Colony, the Transvaal and Rhodesia, making

notes on the politics and economics of the countries, shooting lions,

and recording his impressions in letters to a London newspaper, which

were afterwards republished under the title of _Men, Mines and Animals

in South Africa_. He returned with renewed energy, and in the general

election of 1892 once more flung himself, with his old vigour, into the

strife of parties. His seat at South Paddington was uncontested; but he

was active on the platform, and when parliament met he returned to the

opposition front bench, and again took a leading part in debate,

attacking Mr Gladstone's second Home Rule Bill with especial energy. But

it was soon apparent that his powers were undermined by the inroads of

disease. As the session of 1893 wore on his speeches lost their old

effectiveness, and in 1894 he was listened to not so much with interest

as with pity. His last speech in the House was delivered in the debate

on Uganda in June 1894, and was a painful failure. He was, in fact,

dying of general paralysis. A journey round the world was undertaken as

a forlorn hope. Lord Randolph started in the autumn of 1894, accompanied

by his wife, but the malady made so much progress that he was brought

back in haste from Cairo. He reached England shortly before Christmas

and died in London on the 24th of January 1895.

Lord Randolph Churchill married, in January 1874, Jennie, daughter of Mr

Leonard Jerome of New York, U.S.A., by whom he had two sons. In 1900

Lady Randolph Churchill married Mr G. Cornwallis-West.

His elder son, WINSTON CHURCHILL (1874- ), was educated at Harrow, and

after serving for a few years in the army and acting as a special

correspondent in the South African War (being taken prisoner by the

Boers, Nov. 15, 1899, but escaping on Dec. 12), was elected Unionist

member of parliament for Oldham in October 1900. As the son of his

father, his political future excited much interest. His views, however,

as to the policy of the Conservative party gradually changed, and having

during 1904-1905 taken an active part in assisting the Liberal party in

parliament, he stood for N.W. Manchester at the general election (1906)

and was triumphantly returned as a Liberal and free-trader. He was made

under-secretary for the colonies in the new Liberal government. In this

position he became as conspicuous in parliament as he had already

become on the platform as a brilliant and aggressive orator, and no

politician of the day attracted more interest or excited more

controversy. He was promoted to cabinet rank as president of the Board

of Trade in Mr Asquith's government in April (1908), but was defeated at

the consequent by-election in Manchester after a contest which aroused

the keenest excitement. He was then returned for Dundee, and later in

the year married Miss Clementine Hozier.

An interesting and authoritative biography of Lord Randolph, by his

son Winston (who had already won his spurs as a writer in his _River

War_, 1899, and other books on his military experiences), appeared in

1906; and a brief and intimate appreciation by Lord Rosebery, inspired

by this biography, was published a few months later. Lord Randolph's

earlier speeches were edited, with an introduction and notes, by Louis

Jennings (2 vols., London, 1889). See also T.H.S. Escott, _Randolph

Spencer Churchill_ (1895); H.W. Lucy, _Diary of Two Parliaments_

(1892); and Mrs Cornwallis-West, _The Reminiscences of Lady Randolph

Churchill_ (i.e. of the author) (1908). (S. J. L.)

CHURCHILL (MISSINNIPPI or ENGLISH), the name of a river of the province

of Saskatchewan and district of Keewatin, Canada. It rises in La Loche

(or Methy) lake, a small lake in 56° 30' N. and 109° 30' W., at an

altitude of 1577 ft. above the sea, and flows E.N.E. to Hudson's Bay,

passing through a number of lake expansions. Its principal tributaries

are the Beaver (350 m. long), Sandy and Reindeer rivers. Between Frog

and Methy portages (480 m.) it formed part of the old _voyageur_ route

to the Peace, Athabasca, and Mackenzie. It is still navigated by canoes,

but has many rapids. Its principal affluent, the Reindeer, discharges

the waters of Reindeer Lake (1150 ft. above the sea, with an area of

2490 sq. m.) and Wollaston Lake (altitude, 1300 ft). The Churchill is

925 m. long. Fort Churchill, at its mouth, is the best harbour in the

southern portion of Hudson's Bay. The portage of La Loche (or Methy),

12½ m. in length, connects its head waters with the Clearwater river, a

tributary of the Athabasca, draining into the Arctic Ocean.

CHURCHING OF WOMEN, the Christian ceremony of thanksgiving on the part

of mothers shortly after the birth of their children. It no doubt

originated in the Mosaic regulation as to purification (Lev. xii. 6). In

ancient times the ceremony was usual but not obligatory in England. In

the Greek and Roman Catholic Churches to-day it is imperative. The

custom is first mentioned in the pseudo-Nicene Arabic canons. No ancient

form of service exists, and that which figures in the English

prayer-book of to-day dates only from the middle ages. Custom differs,

but the usual date of churching was the fortieth day after confinement,

in accordance with the Biblical date of the presentment of the Virgin

Mary and the Child Jesus at the Temple. It was formerly regarded as

unlucky for a woman to leave her house to go out at all after

confinement till she went to be churched. It was not unusual for the

churching service to be said in private houses. In Herefordshire it was

not considered proper for the husband to appear in church at the

service, or at all events in the same pew. In some parishes there was a

special pew known as "the churching seat." The words in the rubric

requiring the woman to come "decently apparelled" refer to the times

when it was thought unbecoming for a woman to come to the service with

the elaborate head-dress then the fashion. A veil was usually worn, and

in some parishes this was provided by the church, for an inventory of

goods belonging to St Benet's, Gracechurch Street, in 1560, includes "A

churching cloth, fringed, white damask."

The "convenient place," which, according to the rubric, the woman must

occupy, was in pre-Reformation times the church-door. In the first

prayer-book of Edward VI., she was to be "nigh unto the quire door." In

the second of his books, she was to be "nigh unto the place where the

Table standeth." Bishop Wren's orders for the diocese of Norwich in 1636

are "That women to be churched come and kneel at a side near the

Communion Table without the rail, being veiled according to custom, and

not covered with a hat." In Devonshire churching was sometimes called

"being uprose." Churchings were formerly registered in some parishes. In

pre-Reformation days it was the custom in England for women to carry

lighted tapers when being churched, in allusion to the Feast of the

Purification of the Virgin (February 2nd), the day chosen by the Roman

Catholic church for the blessing of the candles for the whole year (see

CANDLEMAS). At her churching a woman was expected to make some offering

to the church, such as the chrisom or alb thrown over the child at

christening.

CHURCH RATE, the name of a tax formerly levied in each parish in England

and Ireland for the benefit of the parish church. Out of these rates

were defrayed the expenses of carrying on divine service, repairing the

fabric of the church, and paying the salaries of the officials connected

with it. The church rates were made by the churchwardens, together with

the parishioners duly assembled after proper notice in the vestry or the

church. The rates thus made were recoverable in the ecclesiastical

court, or, if the arrears did not exceed £10 and no questions were

raised as to the legal liability, before two justices of the peace. Any

payment not strictly recognized by law made out of the rate destroyed

its validity. The church rate was a personal charge imposed on the

occupier of land or of a house in the parish, and, though it was

compulsory, much difficulty was found in effectually applying the

compulsion. This was especially so in the case of Nonconformists, who

had conscientious objections to supporting the Established Church; and

in Ireland, where the population was preponderatingly Roman Catholic,

the grievance was specially felt and resented. The agitation against

church rates led in 1868 to the passing of the Compulsory Church Rates

Abolition Act. By this act church rates are no longer compulsory on the

person rated, but are merely voluntary, and those who are not willing to

pay them are excluded from inquiring into, objecting to, or voting in

respect of their expenditure (s. 8).

CHURCHWARDEN, in England, the guardian or keeper of a church, and

representative of the body of the parish. The name is derived from the

original duty attached to the office,--that of the custody or

guardianship of the fabric and furniture of the church,--which dates from

the 14th century, when the responsibility of providing for the repairs of

the nave, and of furnishing the utensils for divine service, was settled

on the parishioners. Churchwardens are always lay persons, and as they

may, like "artificial persons," hold goods and chattels and bring actions

for them, they are recognized in law as quasi-corporations. Resident

householders of a parish are those primarily eligible as churchwardens,

but non-resident householders who are habitually occupiers are also

eligible, while there are a few classes of persons who are either

ineligible or exempted. The appointment of churchwardens is regulated by

the 89th canon, which requires that the churchwardens shall be chosen by

the joint consent of the ministers and parishioners, if it may be; but if

they cannot agree upon such a choice, then the minister is to choose one,

and the parishioners another. If, however, there is any special custom of

the place, the custom prevails, and the most common custom is for the

minister to appoint one, and the parishioners another, and this has been

established by English statute, in the case of new parishes, by the

Church Building and New Parishes Acts 1818-1884. There are other special

customs recognized in various localities, e.g. in some of the larger

parishes in the north of England a churchwarden is chosen for each

township of the parish; in the old ecclesiastical parishes of London both

churchwardens are chosen by the parishioners; in some cases they are

appointed by the select vestry, or by the lord of the manor, and in a few

exceptional cases are chosen by the outgoing churchwardens.

In general, churchwardens are appointed in Easter week, usually Easter

Monday or Easter Tuesday, but in new parishes the first appointment must

be within twenty-one days after the consecration of the church, or two

calendar months after the formation of the parish, subsequent

appointments taking place at the usual time for the appointment of

parish officers. Each churchwarden after election subscribes before the

ordinary a declaration that he will execute his office faithfully.

The duties of churchwardens comprise the provision of necessaries for

divine service, so far as the church funds or voluntary subscriptions

permit, the collecting the offertory of the congregation, the keeping

of order during the divine service, and the giving of offenders into

custody; the assignment of seats to parishioners; the guardianship of

the movable goods of the church; the preservation and repair of the

church and churchyard, the fabric and the fixtures; and the presentment

of offences against ecclesiastical law.

In the episcopal church of the United States churchwardens discharge

much the same duties as those performed by the English officials; their

duties, however, are regulated by canons of the diocese, not by canons

general. In the United States, too, the usual practice is for the

parishes to elect both the churchwardens.

See Prideaux's _Churchwarden's Guide_ (16th ed., London, 1895);

Steer's _Parish Law_ (6th ed., London, 1899); Blunt's _Book of Church

Law_ (7th ed., London, 1894).

CHURCHYARD, THOMAS (c. 1520-1604), English author, was born at

Shrewsbury about 1520, the son of a farmer. He received a good

education, and, having speedily dissipated at court the money with which

his father provided him, he entered the household of Henry Howard, earl

of Surrey. There he remained for four years, learning something of the

art of poetry from his patron; some of the poems he contributed later

(1557) to _Songes and Sonettes_ may well date from this early period. In

1541 he began his career as a soldier of fortune, being, he said,

"pressed into the service." He fought his way through nearly every

campaign in Scotland and the Low Countries for thirty years. He served

under the emperor Charles V. in Flanders in 1542, returning to England

after the peace of Crépy (1544). In the Scottish campaign of 1547 he was

present at the barren victory of Pinkie, and in the next year was taken

prisoner at Saint Monance, but aided by his persuasive tongue he escaped

to the English garrison at Lauder, where he was once more besieged, only

returning to England on the conclusion of peace in 1550. A broadside

entitled _Davy Dycars Dreame_, a short and seemingly alliterative poem

in the manner of Piers Plowman, brought him into trouble with the privy

council, but he was dismissed with a reprimand. This tract was the

starting-point of a controversy between Churchyard and a certain Thomas

Camel. The whole of the "flyting" was reprinted in 1560 as _The

Contention betwixte Churchyard and Camell_.

In 1550 he went to Ireland to serve the lord deputy, Sir Anthony St

Leger, who had been sent to pacify the country. Here Churchyard enriched

himself at the expense, it is to be feared, of the unhappy Irish; but in

1552 he was in England again, trying vainly to secure a fortune by

marriage with a rich widow. After this failure he departed once more to

the wars to the siege of Metz (1552), and "trailed a pike" in the

emperor's army, until he joined the forces under William, Lord Grey of

Wilton, with whom he says he served eight years. Grey was in charge of

the fortress of Gaines, which was besieged by the duke of Guise in 1558.

Churchyard arranged the terms of surrender, and was sent with his chief

to Paris as a prisoner. He was not released at the peace of Cateau

Cambrésis for lack of money to pay his ransom, but he was finally set

free on giving his bond for the amount, an engagement which he

repudiated as soon as he was safely in England. He is not to be

identified with the T.C. who wrote for the _Mirror for Magistrates_ (ed.

1559), "How the Lord Mowbray ... was banished ... and after died

miserablie in exile," which is the work of Thomas Chaloner, but "Shore's

Wife," his most popular poem, appeared in the 1563 edition of the same

work, and to that of 1587 he contributed the "Tragedie of Thomas

Wolsey." These are plain manly compositions in the seven-lined

Chaucerian stanza. Repeated petitions to the queen for assistance

produced at first fair words, and then no answer at all. He therefore

returned to active service under Lord Grey, who was in command of an

English army sent (1560) to help the Scottish rebels, and in 1564 he

served in Ireland under Sir Henry Sidney. The religious disturbances in

the Netherlands attracted him to Antwerp, where as the agent of William

of Orange he allowed the insurgents to place him at their head, and was

able to save much property from destruction. This action made him so

hated by the mob that he had to fly for his life in the disguise of a

priest. In the next year he was sent by the earl of Oxford to serve

definitely under the prince of Orange. After a year's service he

obtained leave to return to England, and after many adventures and

narrow escapes in a journey through hostile territory he embarked for

Guernsey, and thence for England. His patron, Lord Oxford, disowned him,

and the poet, whose health was failing, retired to Bath. He appears to

have made a very unhappy marriage at this time, and returned to the Low

Countries. Falling into the hands of the Spaniards he was recognized as

having had a hand in the Antwerp disturbance, and was under sentence to

be executed as a spy when he was saved by the intervention of a noble

lady. This experience did not deter him from joining in the defence of

Zutphen in 1572, but this was his last campaign, and the troubles of the

remaining years of his life were chiefly domestic.

Churchyard was employed to devise a pageant for the queen's reception at

Bristol in 1574, and again at Norwich in 1578. He had published in 1575

_The firste parte of Churchyarde's Chippes_, the modest title which he

gives to his works. No second part appeared, but there was a much

enlarged edition in 1578. A passage in _Churchyarde's Choise_ (1579)

gave offence to Elizabeth, and the author fled to Scotland, where he

remained for three years. He was only restored to favour about 1584, and

in 1593 he received a small pension from the queen. The affectionate

esteem with which he was regarded by the younger Elizabethan writers is

expressed by Thomas Nashe, who says (_Foure Letters Confuted_) that

Churchyard's aged muse might well be "grandmother to our

grandiloquentest poets at this present." Francis Meres (_Palladis

Tamia_, 1598) mentions him in conjunction with many great names among

"the most passionate, among us, to bewail and bemoan the perplexities of

love." Spenser, in "Colin Clout's come home again," calls him with a

spice of raillery "old Palaemon" who "sung so long until quite hoarse he

grew." His writings, with the exception of his contributions to the

_Mirror for Magistrates_, are chiefly autobiographical in character or

deal with the wars in which he had a share. They are very rare, and have

never been completely reprinted. Churchyard lived right through

Elizabeth's reign, and was buried in St Margaret's church, Westminster,

on the 4th of April 1604.

The extant works of Churchyard, exclusive of commendatory and

occasional verses, include:--_A lamentable and pitifull Description of

the wofull warres in Flanders_ (1578); _A general rehearsall of

warres, called Churchyard's Choise_ (1579), really a completion of the

_Chippes_, and containing, like it, a number of detached pieces; _A

light Bondel of livelie Discourses, called Churchyardes Charge_

(1580); _The Worthines of Wales_ (1587), a valuable antiquarian work

in prose and verse, anticipating Michael Drayton; _Churchyard's

Challenge_ (1593); _A Musicall Consort of Heavenly harmonie ... called

Churchyards Charitie_ (1595); _A True Discourse Historicall, of the

succeeding Governors in the Netherlands_ (1602).

The chief authority for Churchyard's biography is his own "Tragicall

Discourse of the unhappy man's life" (_Churchyardes Chippes_). George

Chalmers published (1817) a selection from his works relating to

Scotland, for which he wrote a useful life. See also an edition of the

_Chippes_ (ed. J.P. Collier, 1870), of the _Worthines of Wales_

(Spenser Soc. 1876), and a notice of Churchyard by H.W. Adnitt

(_Transactions_ of the Shropshire Archaeological and Nat. Hist. Soc.,

reprinted separately 1884).

CHURCHYARD, a piece of consecrated ground attached to a parochial

church, and used as a burial place. It is distinguished from a cemetery

(q.v.), which is also a place of burial, but is separate and apart from

any parochial church. A cemetery in England is either the property of a

private company, incorporated by special act of parliament, or of a

local authority, and is subject to the Cemeteries Clauses Act 1847,

incorporated in the Public Health Acts. The practice of burying in

churches or churchyards is said to have been connected with the custom

of praying for the dead, and it would appear that the earlier practice

was burying in the church itself. In England, about the year 750, spaces

of ground adjoining the churches were enclosed and appropriated to the

burial of those who had been entitled to attend divine service in those

churches.

The right to burial in the parish churchyard is a common law right,

controlled in many points by the provisions of the law ecclesiastical.

This double character is sufficient to explain the controversy which has

so long raged round the subject of burials in England. Every man,

according to the common law, has a right to be buried in his own

churchyard, or, as it is sometimes put, in the churchyard of the parish

where he dies. But the churchyard, as well as the church itself, is the

freehold of the parson, who can in many respects deal with it as if it

were a private estate. A statute of Edward I. (35, st. 2) speaks of the

churchyard as the soil of the church, and the trees growing in the

churchyard "as amongst the goods of the church, the which laymen have no

authority to dispose," and prohibits "the parsons from cutting down such

trees unless required for repairs." Notwithstanding the consecration of

the church and churchyard and the fact that they are the parson's

freehold, a right of way may be claimed through them by prescription.

The right to burial may be subject to the payment of a fee to the

incumbent, if such has been the immemorial custom of the parish, but not

otherwise. The spirit of the ancient canons regarded such burial fees as

of a simoniacal complexion, inasmuch as the consecrated grounds were

among the _res sacrae_--a feeling which Lord Stowell says disappeared

after the Reformation. No person can be buried in a church without the

consent of the incumbent, except when the owner of a manor-house

prescribes for a burying-place within the church as belonging to the

manor-house. In the case of _Rex_ v. _Taylor_ it was held that an

information was grantable against a person for opposing the burial of a

parishioner; but the court would not interpose as to the person's

refusal to read the burial service because he never was baptized--that

being matter for the ecclesiastical court. Strangers (or persons not

dying in the parish) should not be buried, it appears, without the

consent of the parishioners or churchwardens, "whose parochial right of

burial is invaded thereby."

In Scotland the obligation of providing and maintaining the churchyard

rests on the heritors of the parish. The guardianship of the churchyard

belongs to the heritors and also to the kirk-session, either by

delegation from the heritors, or in right of its ecclesiastical

character. The right of burial appears to be strictly limited to

parishioners, although an opinion has been expressed that any person

dying in the parish has a right to be buried in the churchyard. The

parishioners have no power of management. The presbytery may interfere

to compel the heritors to provide due accommodation, but has no further

jurisdiction. It is the duty of the heritors to allocate the churchyard.

The Scottish law hesitates to attach the ordinary incidents of real

property to the churchyard, while English law treats the ground as the

parson's freehold. It would be difficult to say who in Scotland is the

legal owner of the soil. Various opinions appear to prevail, e.g. as to

grass growing on the surface and minerals found beneath. The difficulty

as to religious services does not exist. On the other hand, the

religious character of the ground is hostile to many of the legal rights

recognized by the English law.

See also BURIAL AND BURIAL ACTS; CEMETERY.

CHURL (A.S. _ceorl_, cognate with the Ger. _Kerl_ and with similar words

in other Teutonic languages), one of the two main classes, _eorl_ and

_ceorl_, into which in early Anglo-Saxon society the freemen appear to

have been divided. In the course of time the status of the ceorl was

probably reduced; but although his political power was never large, and

in some directions his freedom was restricted, it hardly seems possible

previous to the Norman Conquest to class him among the unfree. Some

authorities, however, accept this view. At all events it is certain that

the ceorl was frequently a holder of land, and a person of some

position, and that he could attain the rank of a thegn. Except in Kent

his wergild was fixed at two hundred shillings, or one-sixth of that of

a thegn, and he is undoubtedly the _twyhynde_ man of Anglo-Saxon law. In

Kent his wergild was considerably higher, and his status probably also,

but his position in this kingdom is a matter of controversy. After the

Norman Conquest the ceorls were reduced to a condition of servitude, and

the word translates the _villanus_ of Domesday Book, although it also

covers classes other than the _villani_. The form _ceorl_ soon became

_cherl_, as in _Havelok the Dane_ (ante 1300) and several times in

Chaucer. and subsequently _churl_. Taking a less technical sense than

the ceorl of Anglo-Saxon law, churl, or cherl was used in general to

mean a "man," and more particularly a "husband." In this sense it was

employed about 1000 in a translation of the New Testament to render the

word [Greek:_anêr_] (John iv. 16, 18). It was then employed to describe

a "peasant," and gradually began to denote undesirable qualities. Hence

comes the modern use of the word for a low-born or vulgar person,

particularly one with an unpleasant, surly or miserly character.

See H.M. Chadwick, _Studies on Anglo-Saxon Institutions_ (Cambridge,

1905); F. Seebohm, _Tribal Custom in Anglo-Saxon Law_ (London, 1902).

CHURN (O. Eng. _cyrin_; found in various forms in most Teutonic

languages, cf. Dutch _karn_; according to the _New English Dictionary_

not connected with "quern," a mill), a vessel in which butter is made,

by shaking or beating the cream so as to separate the fatty particles

which form the butter from the serous parts or buttermilk. Early churns

were upright, and in shape resembled the cans now used in the transport

of milk, to which the name "churn" is also given. The upright churn was

worked by hand by a wooden "plunger"; later came a box-shaped churn with

a "splasher" revolving inside and turned by a handle. The modern type of

churn, in large dairies worked by mechanical means, either revolves or

swings itself, thus reverting to the most primitive method of

butter-making, the shaking or swinging of the cream in a skin-bag or a

gourd. (See DAIRY.)

CHUSAN, the principal island of a group situated off the eastern coast

of China, in 30° N. 122° E., belonging to the province of Cheh-kiang. It

lies N.W. and S.E., and has a circumference of 51 m., the extreme length

being 20, the extreme breadth 10, and the minimum breadth 6 m. The

island is beautifully diversified with hill and dale, and well watered

with numerous small streams, of which the most considerable is the

Tungkiang, falling into the harbour of Tinghai. Most of the surface is

capable of cultivation, and nineteen-twentieths of the inhabitants are

engaged in agriculture. Wherever it is possible to rear rice every other

product is neglected; yet the quantity produced is not sufficient for

the wants of the inhabitants. Millet, wheat, sweet potatoes, yams and

tares are also grown. The tea plant is found almost everywhere, and the

cotton plant is largely cultivated near the sea. The capital, Tinghai,

stands about half a mile from the southern shore, and is surrounded by a

wall nearly 3 m. in circuit. The ditch outside the wall is interrupted

on the N.W. side by a spur from a neighbouring hill, which projects into

the town, and forms an easy access to an attacking force. The town is

traversed by canals, and the harbour, which has from 4 to 8 fathoms

water, is landlocked by several islands. Temple (or Joss-house) Hill,

which commands the town and harbour close to the beach, is 122 ft. high.

The population of the entire island is estimated at 250,000, of which

the capital contains about 40,000. Chusan has but few manufactures; the

chief are coarse cotton stuffs and agricultural implements. There are

salt works on the coast; and the fisheries employ a number of the

inhabitants. In Tinghai a considerable business is carried on in carving

and varnishing, and its silver wares are in high repute. The principal

exports are fish, coarse black tea, cotton, vegetable tallow, sweet

potatoes, and some wheat. Chusan was occupied by the Japanese during the

Ming dynasty, and served as an important commercial entrepot. It was

taken by the British forces in 1840 and 1841, and retained till 1846 as

a guarantee for the fulfilment of the stipulations of the treaty. It was

also occupied by the British in 1860.

CHUTE (Fr. for "fall," of water or the like; pronounced as "shoot," with

which in meaning it is identical), a channel or trough, artificial or

natural, down which objects such as timber, coal or grain may slide from

a higher to a lower level. The word is also used of a channel cut in a

dam or a river for the passage of floating timber, and in Louisiana and

on the Mississippi of a channel at the side of a river, or narrow way

between an island and the shore. The "Water-Chute" or water tobogganing,

is a Canadian pastime, which has been popular in London and elsewhere.

A steep wooden slope terminates in a shallow lake; down this run

flat-bottomed boats which rapidly increase their velocity until at the

end of the "chute" they dash into the water.

CHUTNEY, or CHUTNEE (Hindustani _chatni_), a relish or seasoning of

Indian origin, used as a condiment. It is prepared from sweet fruits

such as mangoes, raisins, &c., with acid flavouring from tamarinds,

lemons, limes and sour herbs, and with a hot seasoning of chillies,

cayenne pepper and spices.

CHUVASHES, or TCHUVASHES, a tribe found in eastern Russia. They form

about one-fourth of the population of the government of Kazan, and live

in scattered communities throughout the governments of Simbirsk, Samara,

Saratov, Orenburg and Perm. They have been identified with the Burtasses

of the Arab geographers, and many authorities think they are the

descendants of the ancient Bolgars. In general they physically resemble

the Finns, being round-headed, flat-featured and light-eyed, but they

have been affected by long association with the Tatar element. In dress

they are thoroughly Russianized, and they are nominally Christians,

though they cling to many of the Old Shamanistic practices. They number

some half a million. Their language belongs to the Tatar or Turkish

group, but has been strongly influenced by the Finno-Ugrian idioms

spoken round it.

See Schott, _De Lingua Tschuwaschorum_ (Berlin, 1841).

CIALDINI, ENRICO (1811-1892), Italian soldier, politician and

diplomatist, was born at Castelvetro, in Modena, on the 10th of August

1811. In 1831 he took part in the insurrection at Modena, fleeing

afterwards to Paris, whence he proceeded to Spain to fight against the

Carlists. Returning to Italy in 1848, he commanded a regiment at the

battle of Novara. In 1859 he organized the Alpine Brigade, fought at

Palestro at the head of the 4th Division, and in the following year

invaded the Marches, won the battle of Castelfidardo, took Ancona, and

subsequently directed the siege of Gaeta. For these services he was

created duke of Gaeta by the king, and was assigned a pension of 10,000

lire by parliament. In 1861 his intervention envenomed the

Cavour-Garibaldi dispute, royal mediation alone preventing a duel

between him and Garibaldi. Placed in command of the troops sent to

oppose the Garibaldian expedition of 1862, he defeated Garibaldi at

Aspromonte. Between 1862 and 1866 he held the position of

lieutenant-royal at Naples, and in 1864 was created senator. On the

outbreak of the war of 1866 he resumed command of an army corps, but

dissensions between him and La Marmora prejudiced the issue of the

campaign and contributed to the defeat of Custozza. After the war he

refused the command of the General Staff, which he wished to render

independent of the war office. In 1867 he attempted unsuccessfully to

form a cabinet sufficiently strong to prevent the threatened Garibaldian

incursion into the papal states, and two years later failed in a similar

attempt, through disagreement with Lanza concerning the army estimates.

On the 3rd of August 1870 he pleaded in favour of Italian intervention

in aid of France, a circumstance which enhanced his influence when in

July 1876 he replaced Nigra as ambassador to the French Republic. This

position he held until 1882, when he resigned on account of the

publication by Mancini of a despatch in which he had complained of

arrogant treatment by M. Waddington. He died at Leghorn, on the 8th of

September 1892. (H. W. S.)

CIBBER (or CIBERT), CAIUS GABRIEL (1630-1700), Danish sculptor, was born

at Flensburg. He was the son of the king's cabinetmaker, and was sent to

Rome at the royal charge while yet a youth. He came to England during

the Protectorate, or during the first years of the Restoration. Besides

the famous statues of Melancholy and Raving Madness ("great Cibber's

brazen brainless brothers"), now at South Kensington, Cibber produced

the bas-reliefs round the monument on Fish Street Hill. The several

kings of England and the Sir Thomas Gresham executed by him for the

Royal Exchange were destroyed with the building itself in 1838. Cibber

was long employed by the fourth earl of Devonshire, and many fine

specimens of his work are to be seen at Chatsworth. Under that nobleman

he took up arms in 1688 for William of Orange, and was appointed in

return carver to the king's closet. He died rich, and, according to

Horace Walpole, built the Danish church in London, where he lies buried

beside his second wife, to whom he erected a monument. She was a Miss

Colley of Glaiston, grand-daughter of Sir Anthony Colley, and the mother

of his son Colley Cibber.

CIBBER, COLLEY (1671-1757), English actor and dramatist, was born in

London on the 6th of November 1671, the eldest son of Caius Gabriel

Cibber, the sculptor. Sent in 1682 to the free school at Grantham,

Lincolnshire, the boy distinguished himself by an aptitude for writing

verse. He produced an "Oration" on the death of Charles II.--whom he had

seen feeding his ducks in St James's Park,--and an "Ode" on the

accession of James II. He was removed from school in 1687 on the chance

of election to Winchester College. His father, however, had not then

presented that institution with his statue of William of Wykeham, and

the son was rejected, although through his mother he claimed to be of

"founder's kin." The boy went to London, and indulged his passion for

the theatre. He was invited to Chatsworth, the seat of William

Cavendish, earl (afterwards duke) of Devonshire, for whom his father was

then executing commissions, and he was on his way when the news of the

landing of William of Orange was received; father and son met at

Nottingham, and Colley Cibber was taken into Devonshire's company of

volunteers. He served in the bloodless campaign that resulted in the

coronation of the Prince of Orange, and on its conclusion presented a

Latin petition to the earl imploring his interest. The earl did nothing

for him, however, and he enrolled himself (1690) as an actor in

Betterton's company at Drury Lane.

After playing "full three-quarters of a year" without salary, as was

then the custom of all apprentice actors, he was paid ten shillings a

week. His rendering of the little part of the chaplain in Otway's

_Orphan_ procured him a rise of five shillings; and a subsequent

impersonation (1694) on an emergency, and at the author's request, of

Lord Touchwood in _The Double Dealer_, advanced him, on Congreve's

recommendation, to a pound a week. On this, supplemented by an allowance

of £20 a year from his father, he contrived to live with his wife and

family--he had married in 1693--and to produce a play, _Love's Last

Shift, or the Fool in Fashion_ (1696). Of this comedy Congreve said that

it had "a great many things that were like wit in it"; and Vanbrugh

honoured it by writing his _Relapse_ as a sequel. Cibber played the part

of Sir Novelty Fashion, and his performance as Lord Foppington, the same

character renamed, in Vanbrugh's piece, established his reputation as an

actor. In 1698 he was assailed, with other dramatists, by Jeremy Collier

in the _Short View_. In November 1702 he produced, at Drury Lane, _She

Wou'd and She Wou'd Not; or the Kind Impostor_, one of his best

comedies; and in 1704, for himself and Mrs Oldfield, _The Careless

Husband_, which Horace Walpole classed, with Cibber's _Apology_, as

"worthy of immortality." In 1706 Cibber left Drury Lane for the

Haymarket, but when the two companies united two years later he rejoined

his old theatre through the influence of his friend Colonel Brett, a

shareholder. Brett made over his share to Wilks, Estcourt and Cibber.

Complaints against the management of Christopher Rich led, in 1709, to

the closing of the theatre by order of the crown, and William Collier

obtained the patent. After a series of intrigues Collier was bought out

by Wilks, Doggett and Cibber, under whose management Drury Lane became

more prosperous than it ever had been. In 1715 a new patent was granted

to Sir Richard Steele, and Barton Booth was also added to the

management. In 1717 Cibber produced the _Nonjuror_, an adaptation from

Molière's _Tartuffe_; the play, for which Nicholas Rowe wrote an abusive

prologue, ran eighteen nights, and the author received from George I.,

to whom it was dedicated, a present of two hundred guineas. Tartuffe

became an English Catholic priest who incited rebellion, and there is

little doubt that the Whig principles expressed in the _Nonjuror_ led to

Cibber's appointment as poet laureate (1730). It also provoked the

animosity of the Jacobite and Catholic factions, and was possibly one of

the causes of Pope's hostility to Cibber. Numerous "keys" to the

_Nonjuror_ appeared in 1718. In 1720 Drury Lane was closed for three

days by order of the duke of Newcastle, ostensibly on account of the

refusal of the patentees to submit to the authority of the lord

chamberlain, but really (it is asserted) because of a quarrel between

Newcastle and Steele, in which the former demanded Cibber's resignation.

In 1726 Cibber pleaded the cause of the patentees against the estate of

Sir Richard Steele before Sir Joseph Jekyll, master of the rolls, and

won his case. In 1730 Mrs Oldfield died, and her loss was followed in

1732 by that of Wilks; Cibber now sold his share in the theatre,

appearing rarely on the stage thereafter. In 1740 he published _An

Apology for the Life of Colley Cibber, Comedian ... with an Historical

View of the Stage during his Own Time_. "There are few," wrote

Goldsmith, "who do not prefer a page of Montaigne or Colley Cibber, who

candidly tell us what they thought of the world, and the world thought

of them, to the more stately memoirs and transactions of Europe." But

beside the personal interest, this book contains criticisms on acting of

enduring value, and gives the best account there is of Cibber's

contemporaries on the London stage. Samuel Johnson, who was no friend of

Cibber, gave it grudging praise (see Boswell's _Life of Johnson_, ed.

Birkbeck Hill, vol. iii. p. 72).

In 1742 Cibber was substituted for Theobald as the hero of Pope's

_Dunciad_. Cibber had introduced some gag into the _Rehearsal_, in which

he played the part of Bayes, referring to the ill-starred farce of

_Three Hours after Marriage_ (1717). This play was nominally by Gay, but

Pope and Arbuthnot were known to have had a hand in it. Cibber refused

to discontinue the offensive passage, and Pope revenged himself in

sarcastic allusions in his printed correspondence, in the _Epistle to Dr

Arbuthnot_ and in the _Dunciad_. To these, Cibber replied with _A Letter

from Mr Cibber to Mr Pope, inquiring into the motives that might induce

him in his satirical works to be so frequently fond of Mr Cibber's name_

(1742). Cibber scored with an "idle story of Pope's behaviour in a

tavern" inserted in this letter, and gives an account of the original

dispute over the _Rehearsal_. By the substitution of Cibber for Theobald

as hero of the _Dunciad_, much of the satire lost its point. Cibber's

faults certainly did not include dullness. A new edition contained a

prefatory discourse, probably the work of Warburton, entitled "Ricardus

Aristarchus, or the Hero of the Poem," in which Cibber is made to look

ridiculous from his own _Apology_. Cibber replied in 1744 with _Another

Occasional Letter ..._, and altogether he had the best of the argument.

When he was seventy-four years old he made his last appearance on the

stage as Pandulph in his own _Papal Tyranny in the Reign of King John_

(Covent Garden, 15th of February 1745), a miserable paraphrase of

Shakespeare's play. He died on the 11th of December 1757.

Cibber's reputation has suffered unduly from the depreciation of Pope

and Johnson. "I could not bear such nonsense," said Johnson of one of

Cibber's odes, "and I would not let him read it to the end." Fielding

attacked Cibber's style and language more than once in _Joseph Andrews_

and elsewhere. Nevertheless, Cibber possessed wit, unusual good sense

and tact; and in the _Apology_ he showed himself the most delicate and

subtle critic of acting of his time. He was frequently accused of

plagiarism, and did not scruple to make use of old plays, but he is said

to have been ashamed of his Shakespearian adaptations, one of which,

however, _Richard III._ (Drury Lane, 1700), kept its place as the acting

version until 1821. Cibber is rebuked for his mutilation of Shakespeare

by Fielding in the _Historical Register for 1736_, where he figures as

Ground Ivy.

If Cibber had not as much wit as his predecessors, he displayed in his

best plays abundant animation and spirit, free from the extreme

coarseness of many of his contemporaries, and a thorough knowledge of

the requirements of the stage. His most successful comedies kept their

place in the acting repertory for a long time. He was an excellent

actor, especially in the rôle of the fashionable coxcomb. Horace Walpole

said that as Bayes in _The Rehearsal_ he made the part what it was

intended to be, the burlesque of a great poet, whereas David Garrick

degraded him to a "garretteer."

The _Apology_ was edited in 1822 by E. Bellchambers and in 1889 by

R.W. Lowe, who printed with it other valuable theatrical books and

pamphlets. It is also included in Hunt and Clarke's _Autobiographies_

(1826, &c). Cibber's _Dramatic Works_ were published in 1760, with an

account of the life and writings of the author, and again in 1777.

Besides the plays already mentioned, he wrote _Woman's Wit, or the

Lady in Fashion_ (1697), which was altered later (1707) into _The

Schoolboy, or the Comical Rivals_; _Xerxes_ (1699), a tragedy acted

only once; _The Provoked Husband_ (acted 1728), completed from

Vanbrugh's unfinished _Journey to London_; _The Rival Queens, with the

Humours of Alexander the Great_ (acted 1710), a comical tragedy;

_Damon and Phyllida_ (acted 1729), a ballad opera; and adaptations

from Beaumont and Fletcher, Dryden, Molière and Corneille. A

bibliography of the numerous skits on Cibber is to be found in Lowe's

_Bibliographical Account of English Theatrical Literature_.

Colley Cibber's son, THEOPHILUS CIBBER (1703-1758), also an actor and

playwright, was born on the 26th of November 1703. In 1734 he was

acting-manager at the Haymarket, and he subsequently played at Drury

Lane, Lincoln's Inn Fields and Covent Garden. His best impersonation was

as Pistol, but he also distinguished himself in some of the

fine-gentleman parts affected by his father. He was one of the

ringleaders in the intrigues against John Highmore, who had bought a

share in the patent of Drury Lane from Colley Cibber. Theophilus Cibber,

with a number of other actors, seceded from Drury Lane, and in thus

depreciating the value of the patent, for which his father had received

a considerable sum, acted with doubtful honesty. He contemplated the

publication of an autobiography, but was effectually dissuaded by the

appearance (1740) of a scathing account of his career by an unknown

author, entitled _An Apology for the Life of Mr T.... C.... supposed to

be written by himself_. In 1753 he began _The Lives and Characters of

the most Eminent Actors and Actresses of Great Britain and Ireland_, but

he went no further than the life of Barton Booth. He wrote some plays of

no great merit. In 1753 appeared _An Account of the Lives of the Poets

of Great Britain and Ireland_, with the name of "Mr Cibber" on the title

page. The five volumes of _Lives_ are chiefly based on the earlier works

of Gerard Langbaine and Giles Jacob, and the MS. collections of Thomas

Coxeter (1689-1747). The book is said to have been largely written by

Robert Shiels, Dr Johnson's amanuensis. Theophilus Cibber perished by

shipwreck on his way to Dublin to play at the Theatre Royal.

SUSANNAH MARIA CIBBER (1714-1766), wife of Theophilus, was an actress of

distinction. She was the daughter of a Covent Garden upholsterer, and

sister of Dr Arne (1710-1778) the composer. Mrs Cibber had a beautiful

voice and began her career in opera. She was the original Galatea in

Handel's _Acis and Galatea_, and the contralto arias in the _Messiah_

are said to have been written for her. She played Zarah in Aaron Hill's

version of Voltaire's _Zaïre_ in 1736, and it was as a tragic actress,

not as a singer, that her greatest triumphs were won. From Colley Cibber

she learned a sing-song method of declamation. Her mannerisms, however,

did not obscure her real genius, and she freed herself from them

entirely when she began to act with Garrick, with whom she was

associated at Drury Lane from 1753. She died on the 30th of January

1766. She married Theopihilus Cibber in 1734, but lived with him but a

short time. Appreciations of Mrs Cibber's fine acting are to be found in

many contemporary writers, one of the most discriminating being in the

_Rosciad_ of Charles Churchill.

Colley Cibber's youngest daughter, CHARLOTTE, married Richard Charke, a

violinist, from whom she was soon separated. She began as an understudy

to actresses in leading parts, but quarrelled with her manager, Charles

Fleetwood, on whom she wrote a one-act skit, _The Art of Management_

(1735). She also wrote two comedies and two novels of small merit, and

an untrustworthy, but amusing _Narrative of Life of ... Charlotte

Charke, ... by herself_ (1755), reprinted in Hunt and Clarke's

_Autobiographies_ (1822).

CIBORIUM, a name in classical Latin for a drinking-vessel. It is the

latinized form of the Gr. [Greek: kibôrion], the cup-shaped seed-vessel

of the Egyptian water-lily, the seeds or nuts of which were known as

"Egyptian beans." In the early Christian Church the _ciborium_ was a

canopy over the altar (q.v.), supported on columns, and from it hung the

receptacle in which was reserved the consecrated wafer of the Eucharist.

The use of the word has probably been much influenced by the early false

connexion with _cibus_, food, cf. Agatio, bishop of Pisa (quoted in Du

Cange, _Gloss._ s.v.), "Ciborium vas esse ad ferendos cibos." In the

Eastern Church the columns rested on the altar itself, in the Western

they reached the ground. The name was early transferred from the canopy

to the vessel containing the reserved sacrament, and in the Western

Church the canopy was known as a "baldaquin," Ital. _baldacchino_, from

_Baldacco_, the Italian name of Bagdad, and hence applied to a rich kind

of embroidered tapestry made there and much used for canopies, &c. At

the present day it is usual in the Roman Church to use the term "pyx"

([Greek: pyxis], properly a vessel made of boxwood) for the receptacle

for the reserved sacrament used in administering the _viaticum_ to the

sick or dying. Medieval pyxes and ciboria are often beautiful examples

of the goldsmith's, enameller's and metal-worker's craft. They take most

usually the shape of a covered chalice or of a cylindrical box with

conical or cylindrical cover surmounted by a cross. An exquisite

ciborium fetched £6000 at the sale of the Jerdone Braikenridge

collection at Christie's in 1908. It is supposed to have come from

Malmesbury Abbey, and is probably of 13th-century English make. It is of

copper-gilt and ornamented with champlevé enamels, apple and chrysoprase

green, scarlet, mauve and white, turquoise and lapis lazuli, the flesh

tints being of a pale jasper. Various subjects from the Old and New

Testament, such as the sacrifice of Abel, the brazen serpent, the

nativity, crucifixion and resurrection are represented on circular

medallions on the outside. It is illustrated in colours in the catalogue

of the exhibition of the Burlington Fine Arts Club, 1897.

CIBRARIO, LUIGI, COUNT (1802-1870), Italian statesman and historian,

descended from a noble but impoverished Piedmontese family, was born in

Usseglia on the 23rd of February 1802. He won a scholarship at the age

of sixteen, and was teaching literature at eighteen. His verses to King

Charles Albert, then prince of Carignano, on the birth of his son Victor

Emmanuel, attracted the prince's attention and proved the beginning of a

long intimacy. He entered the Sardinian civil service, and in 1824 was

appointed lecturer on canon and civil law. His chief interest was the

study of ancient documents, and he was sent to search the archives of

Switzerland, France and Germany for charters relating to the history of

Savoy. During the war of 1848, after the expulsion of the Austrians from

Venice, Cibrario was sent to that city with Colli to negotiate its union

with Piedmont. But the proposal fell through when the news of the

armistice between King Charles Albert and Austria arrived, and the two

delegates were made the objects of a hostile demonstration. In October

1848 Cibrario was made senator, and after the battle of Novara (March

1849), when Charles Albert abdicated and retired to a monastery near

Oporto, Cibrario and Count Giacinto di Collegno were sent as

representatives of the senate to express the sympathy of that body with

the fallen king. He reached Oporto on the 28th of May, and after staying

there for a month returned to Turin, which he reached just before the

news of Charles Albert's death. In May 1852 he became minister of

finance in the reconstructed d'Azeglio cabinet, and later minister of

education in that of Cavour. In the same year he was appointed secretary

to the order of SS. Maurizio and Lazzaro. It was he who in 1853 dictated

the vigorous memorandum of protest against the confiscation by Austria

of the property of Lombard exiles who had been naturalized in Piedmont.

He strongly supported Cavour's Crimean policy (1855), and when General

La Marmora departed in command of the expeditionary force and Cavour

took the war office, Cibrario was made minister for foreign affairs. He

conducted the business of the department with great skill, and ably

seconded Cavour in bringing about the admission of Piedmont to the

congress of Paris on an equal footing with the great powers. On retiring

from the foreign office Cibrario was created count. In 1860 he acted as

mediator between Victor Emmanuel's government and the republic of San

Marino, and arranged a treaty by which the latter's liberties were

guaranteed. After the war of 1866 by which Austria lost Venetia,

Cibrario negotiated with that government for the restitution of state

papers and art treasures removed by it from Lombardy and Venetia to

Vienna. He died in October 1870, near Salò, on the lake of Garda.

His most important work was his _Economia politica del medio evo_

(Turin, 1839), which enjoyed great popularity at the time, but is now of

little value. His _Schiavitù e servaggio_ (Milan, 1868-1869) gave an

account of the development and abolition of slavery and serfdom. Among

his historical writings the following deserve mention:--_Delle

artiglierie dal 1300 al 1700_ (Turin, 1847); _Origini ... della

monarchia di Savoia_ (Turin, 1854); _Degli ordini cavallereschi_ (Turin,

1846); _Degli ordini religiosi_ (Turin, 1845); and the _Memorie Segrete_

of Charles Albert, written by order of Victor Emmanuel but afterwards

withdrawn. Cibrario was a good example of the loyal, industrious, honest

Piedmontese aristocrat of the old school.

His biography has been written by F. Odorici, _Il Conte L. Cibrario_

(Florence, 1872). (L. V.*)

CICADA (_Cicadidae_), insects of the homopterous division of the

Hemiptera, generally of large size, with the femora of the anterior legs

toothed below, two pairs of large clear wings, and prominent compound

eyes. Cicadas are chiefly remarkable for the shrill song of the males,

which in some cases may be heard in concert at a distance of a quarter

of a mile or more. The vocal organs, of which there is a pair in the

thorax, protected by an opercular plate, are quite unlike the sounding

organs of other insects. Each consists in essence of a tightly stretched

membrane or drum which is thrown into a state of rapid vibration by a

powerful muscle attached to its inner surface and passing thence

downwards to the floor of the thoracic cavity. Although no auditory

organs have been found in the females, the song of the males is believed

to serve as a sexual call. Cicadas are also noteworthy for their

longevity, which so far as is known surpasses that of all other insects.

By means of a saw-like ovipositor the female lays her eggs in the

branches of trees. Upon hatching, the young, which differ from the adult

in possessing long antennae and a pair of powerful fossorial anterior

legs, fall to the ground, burrow below the surface, and spend a

prolonged subterranean larval existence feeding upon the roots of

vegetation. After many years the larva is transformed into the pupa or

nymph, which is distinguishable principally by the shortness of its

antennae and the presence of wing pads. After a brief existence the pupa

emerges from the ground, and, holding on to a plant stem by means of its

powerful front legs, sets free the perfect insect through a slit along

the median dorsal line of the thorax. In some cases the pupa upon

emerging constructs a chimney of soil, the use of which is not known. In

one of the best-known species, _Cicada septemdecim_, from North America,

the lifecycle is said to extend over seventeen years. Cicadas are

particularly abundant in the tropics, where the largest forms are found.

They also occur in temperate countries, and were well known to the

ancient Greeks and Romans. One species only is found in England, where

it is restricted to the southern counties but is an insect not commonly

met with.

CICELY, _Myrrhis odorata_ (natural order Umbelliferae), a perennial herb

with a leafy hollow stem, 2 to 3 ft. high, much divided leaves, whitish

beneath, a large sheathing base, and terminal umbels of small white

flowers, the outer ones only of which are fertile. The fruit is dark

brown, long (¾ to 1 in.), narrow and beaked. The plant is a native of

central and southern Europe, and is found in parts of England and

Scotland in pastures, usually near houses. It has aromatic and stimulant

properties and was formerly used as a pot-herb.

CICERO, the name of two families of ancient Rome. It may perhaps be

derived from _cicer_ (pulse), in which case it would be analogous to

such names as _Lentulus, Tubero, Piso_. Of one family, of the plebeian

Claudian _gens_, only a single member, Gaius Claudius Cicero, tribune in

454 B.C., is known. The other family was a branch of the Tullii, settled

from an ancient period at Arpinum. This family, four of whose members

are noticed specially below, did not achieve more than municipal

eminence until the time of M. Tullius Cicero, the great orator.

I. MARCUS TULLIUS CICERO (106-43 B.C.), Roman orator and politician, was

born at Arpinum on the 3rd of January 106 B.C. His mother, Helvia, is

said to have been of good family. His father was by some said to have

been descended from Attius Tullius, the Volscian host of Coriolanus,

while spiteful persons declared him to have been a fuller; in any case

he was a Roman knight with property at Arpinum and a house in Rome. His

health was weak, and he generally lived at Arpinum, where he devoted

himself to literary pursuits. Cicero spent his boyhood partly in his

native town and partly at Rome. The poet Archias, he says, first

inspired him with the love of literature. He was much impressed by the

teaching of Phaedrus, the Epicurean, at a period before he assumed the

_toga virilis_; he studied dialectic under Diodotus the Stoic, and in 88

B.C. attended the lectures of Philo, the head of the Academic school,

whose devoted pupil he became. He studied rhetoric under Molo (Molon) of

Rhodes, and law under the guidance of Q. Mucius Scaevola, the augur and

jurisconsult. After the death of the augur, he transferred himself to

the care of Q. Mucius Scaevola, the _pontifex maximus_, a still more

famous jurisconsult, nephew of the augur. His literary education at this

period consisted largely of verse-writing and making translations from

Greek authors. We hear of an early poem named _Pontius Glaucus_ the

subject of which is uncertain, and of translations of Xenophon's

_Oeconomica_ and the _Phenomena_ of Aratus. Considerable fragments of

the latter work are still extant. To this period also belongs his _de

Inventione rhetorica_, of which he afterwards spoke lightly (_de Orat._

i. 5), but which enjoyed a great vogue in the middle ages. Cicero also,

according to Roman practice, received military training. At the age of

seventeen he served in the social war successively under Pompeius Strabo

and Sulla (89 B.C.). In the war between Marius and Sulla his sympathies

were with Sulla, but he did not take up arms (_Sext. Rosc._ 136, 142).

His forensic life begins in 81 B.C., at the age of twenty-five. A speech

delivered in this year, _pro Quinctio_, is still extant; it is concerned

with a technical point of law and has little literary merit. In the

following year he made his celebrated defence of Sextus Roscius on a

charge of parricide. He subsequently defended a woman of Arretium, whose

freedom was impugned on the ground that Sulla had confiscated the

territory of that town. Cicero then left Rome on account of his health,

and travelled for two years in the East. He studied philosophy at Athens

under various teachers, notably Antiochus of Ascalon, founder of the Old

Academy, a combination of Stoicism, Platonism and Peripateticism. In

Asia he attended the courses of Xenocles, Dionysius and Menippus, and in

Rhodes those of Posidonius, the famous Stoic. In Rhodes also he studied

rhetoric once more under Molo, to whom he ascribes a decisive influence

upon the development of his literary style. He had previously affected

the florid, or Asiatic, style of oratory then current in Rome. The chief

faults of this were excess of ornament, antithesis, alliteration and

assonance, monotony of rhythm, and the insertion of words purely for

rhythmical effect. Molo, he says, rebuked his youthful extravagance and

he came back "a changed man."[1]

He returned to Rome in 77 B.C., and appears to have married at this time

Terentia, a rich woman with a domineering temper, to whom many of his

subsequent embarrassments were due.[2] He engaged at once in forensic

and political life. He was quaestor in 75, and was sent to Lilybaeum to

supervise the corn supply. His connexion with Sicily led him to come

forward in 70 B.C., when curule-aedile elect, to prosecute Gaius Verres,

who had oppressed the island for three years. Cicero seldom prosecuted,

but it was the custom at Rome for a rising politician to win his spurs

by attacking a notable offender (_pro Caelio_, 73). In the following

year he defended Marcus (or Manius) Fonteius on a charge of extortion in

Gaul, using various arguments which might equally well have been

advanced on behalf of Verres himself.

In 68 B.C. his letters begin, from which (and especially those to T.

Pomponius Atticus, his "second self") we obtain wholly unique knowledge

of Roman life and history. In 66 B.C. he was praetor, and was called

upon to hear cases of extortion. In the same year he spoke on behalf of

the proposal of Gaius Manilius to transfer the command against

Mithradates from Lucullus to Pompey (_de Lege Manilia_), and delivered

his clever but disingenuous defence of Aulus Cluentius (_pro Cluentio_).

At this time he was a prospective candidate for the consulship, and was

obliged by the hostility of the nobles towards "new men" to look for

help wherever it was to be found. In 65 B.C. he even thought of

defending Catiline on a charge of extortion, and delivered two brilliant

speeches on behalf of Gaius Cornelius, tribune in 67 B.C., a leader of

the democratic party. In 64 B.C. he lost his father and his son Marcus

was born. The optimates finally decided to support him for the

consulship in order to keep out Catiline, and he eagerly embraced the

"good cause," his affection for which from this time onward never

varied, though his actions were not always consistent.

The public career of Cicero henceforth is largely covered by the general

article on ROME: _History_, II. "The Republic," ad fin. The year of his

consulship (63) was one of amazing activity, both administrative and

oratorical. Besides the three speeches against Publius Rullus and the

four against Catiline, he delivered a number of others, among which that

on behalf of Gaius Rabirius is especially notable. The charge was that

Rabirius (q.v.) had killed Saturninus in 100 B.C., and by bringing it

the democrats challenged the right of the senate to declare a man a

public enemy. Cicero, therefore, was fully aware of the danger which

would threaten himself from his execution of the Catilinarian

conspirators. He trusted, however, to receive the support of the nobles.

In this he was disappointed. They never forgot that he was a "new man,"

and were jealous of the great house upon the Palatine which he acquired

at this time. Caesar had made every possible effort to conciliate

Cicero,[3] but, when all overtures failed, allowed Publius Clodius to

attack him. Cicero found himself deserted, and on the advice of Cato

went into exile to avoid bloodshed. He left Rome at the end of March 58,

and arrived on the 23rd of May at Thessalonica, where he remained in the

deepest dejection until the end of November, when he went to Dyrrhachium

(Durazzo) awaiting his recall. He left for Italy on the 4th of August

57, and on arriving at Brundisium (Brindisi) found that he had been

recalled by a law passed by the _comitia_ on the very day of his

departure. On his arrival at Rome he was received with enthusiasm by all

classes, but did not find the nobles at all eager to give him

compensation for the loss of his house and villas, which had been

destroyed by Clodius. He was soon encouraged by the growing coolness

between Pompey and Caesar to attack the acts of Caesar during his

consulship, and after his successful defence of Publius Sestius on the

10th of March he proposed on the 5th of April that the senate should on

the 15th of May discuss Caesar's distribution of the Campanian land.

This brought about the conference of Luca (Lucca). Cicero was again

deserted by his supporters and threatened with fresh exile. He was

forced to publish a "recantation," probably the speech _de Provinciis

Consularibus_, and in a private letter says frankly, "I know that I have

been a regular ass." His conduct for the next three years teems with

inconsistencies which we may deplore but cannot pass over. He was

obliged to defend in 54 Publius Vatinius, whom he had fiercely attacked

during the trial of Sestius; also Aulus Gabinius, one of the consuls to

whom his exile was due; and Rabirius Postumus, an agent of Gabinius. On

the other hand, he made a violent speech in the senate in 55 against

Lucius Piso, the colleague of Gabinius in 58. We know from his letters

that he accepted financial aid from Caesar, but that he repaid the loan

before the outbreak of the civil war.[4] There is no doubt that he was

easily deceived. He was always an optimist, and thought that he was

bringing good influence to bear upon Caesar as afterwards upon Octavian.

His actions, however, when Caesar's projects became manifest,

sufficiently vindicated his honesty. During these unhappy years he took

refuge in literature. The _de Oratore_ was written in 55 B.C., the _de

Republica_ in 54, and the _de Legibus_ at any rate begun in 52. The

latter year is famous for the murder of Clodius by T. Annius Milo on the

Appian Way (on the 18th of January), which brought about the appointment

of Pompey as sole consul and the passing of the special laws dealing

with rioting and bribery. Cicero took an active part in the trials which

followed, both as a defender of Milo and his adherents and as a

prosecutor of the opposite faction. At the close of the year, greatly to

his annoyance, he was sent to govern Cilicia under the provisions of

Pompey's law (see POMPEY and ROME: _History_). His reluctance to leave

Rome, already shown by his refusal to take a province, after his

praetorship and consulship, was increased by the inclination of his

daughter Tullia, then a widow, to marry again.[5] During his absence she

married the profligate spendthrift, P. Cornelius Dolabella.

The province of Cilicia was a large one. It included, in addition to

Cilicia proper, Isauria, Lycaonia, Pisidia, Pamphylia and Cyprus, as

well as a protectorate over the client kingdoms of Cappadocia and

Galatia. There was also danger of a Parthian inroad. Cicero's legate was

his brother Quintius Cicero (below), an experienced soldier who had

gained great distinction under Caesar in Gaul. The fears of Parthian

invasion were not realized, but Cicero, after suppressing a revolt in

Cappadocia, undertook military operations against the hill-tribes of the

Amanus and captured the town of Pindenissus after a siege of forty-six

days. A _supplicatio_ in his honour was voted by the senate. The early

months of 50 were occupied by the administration of justice, chiefly at

Laodicea, and by various attempts to alleviate the distress in the

province caused by the exactions of his predecessor, Appius Claudius. He

had to withstand pressure from influential persons (e.g. M. Brutus, who

had business interests in his province), and refused to provide his

friends with wild beasts for their games in Rome. Leaving his province

on the earliest opportunity, he reached Brundisium on the 24th of

November, and found civil war inevitable. He went to Rome on the 4th of

January, but did not enter the city, since he aspired to a triumph for

his successes.[6] After the outbreak of war he was placed by Pompey in

charge of the Campanian coast. After much irresolution he refused

Caesar's invitations and resolved to join Pompey's forces in Greece. He

was shocked by the ferocious language of his party, and himself gave

offence by his bitter jests (Plut. _Cic._ 38). Through illness he was

not present at the battle of Pharsalus, but afterwards was offered the

command by Cato the Younger at Corcyra, and was threatened with death by

the young Cn. Pompeius when he refused to accept it. Thinking it useless

to continue the struggle, he sailed to Brundisium, where he remained

until the 12th of August 47, when, after receiving a kind letter from

Caesar, he went to Rome. Under Caesar's dictatorship Cicero abstained

from politics. His voice was raised on three occasions only: once in the

senate in 46 to praise Caesar's clemency to M. Claudius Marcellus (_pro

Marcello_), to plead in the same year before Caesar for Quintus

Ligarius, and in 45 on behalf of Deiotarus, tetrarch of Galatia, also

before Caesar. He suffered greatly from family troubles at this period.

In 46, his patience giving way, he divorced Terentia, and married his

young and wealthy ward Publilia. Then came the greatest grief of his

life, the death of Tullia, his beloved daughter. He shortly afterwards

divorced Publilia, who had been jealous of Tullia's influence and proved

unsympathetic. To solace his troubles he devoted himself wholly to

literature. To this period belong several famous rhetorical and

philosophical works, the _Brutus_, _Orator_, _Partitiones Oratoriae_,

_Paradoxa_, _Academica_, _de Finibus_, _Tusculan Disputations_, together

with other works now lost, such as his _Laus Catonis_, _Consolatio_ and

_Hortensius_.

His repose was broken by Caesar's murder on the 15th of March 44, to

which he was not a party. On the 17th of March he delivered a speech in

the senate urging a general amnesty like that declared in Athens after

the expulsion of the Thirty Tyrants. When it became apparent that the

conspirators had only removed the despot and left the despotism, he

again devoted himself to philosophy, and in an incredibly short space of

time produced the _de Nature Deorum_, _de Divinatione_, _de Fato_, _Cato

maior_ (or _de Senectute_), _Laelius_ (or _de Amicitia_), and began his

treatise _de Officiis_. To this period also belongs his lost work _de

Gloria_. He then projected a journey to Greece in order to see his son

Marcus, then studying at Athens, of whose behaviour he heard

unfavourable reports. He reached Syracuse on the 1st of August, having

during the voyage written from memory a translation of Aristotle's

_Topica_. He was driven back by unfavourable winds to Leucopetra, and

then, hearing better news, returned to Rome on the 21st of August. He

was bitterly attacked by Marcus Antonius (Mark Antony) in the senate on

the 1st of September for not being present there, and on the next day

replied in his First _Philippic_. He then left Rome and devoted himself

to the completion of the _de Officiis_, and to the composition of his

famous Second _Philippic_, which was never delivered, but was

circulated, at first privately, after Antony's departure from Rome to

Cisalpine Gaul on the 28th of November.

Cicero returned to Rome on the 9th of December, and from that time

forward led the republican party in the senate. His policy, stated

briefly, was to make use of Octavian, whose name was all-powerful with

the veterans, until new legions had been raised which would follow the

republican commanders (_Phil._ xi. 39). Cicero pledged his credit for

the loyalty of Octavian, who styled him "father" and affected to take

his advice on all occasions (_Epp. ad Brut._ i. 17. 5). Cicero, an

incurable optimist in politics, may have convinced himself of Octavian's

sincerity. The breach, however, was bound to come, and the saying,

maliciously attributed to Cicero, that Octavian was an "excellent youth

who must be praised and--sent to another place," neatly expresses the

popular view of the situation.[7] Cicero was sharply criticized by M.

Junius Brutus for truckling to Octavian while showing irreconcilable

enmity to Antony and Lepidus (_ad Brut._ i. 16. 4, i. 15. 9); but Brutus

was safe in his province, and it is difficult to see what other course

was open to a politician in Rome. Whether Cicero was right or wrong,

none can question his amazing energy. He delivered his long series of

_Philippics_ at Rome, and kept up a correspondence with the various

provincial governors and commanders, all short-sighted and selfish, and

several of them half-hearted, endeavouring to keep each man in his place

and to elaborate a common plan of operations. He was naturally included

in the list of the proscribed, though it is said that Octavian fought

long on his behalf, and was slain near Formiae on the 7th of December

43. He had a ship near in which he had previously attempted to fly, but

being cast back by unfavourable winds he returned to his villa, saying,

"Let me die in the country which I have often saved." His head and hands

were sent to Rome and nailed to the rostra, after Fulvia, wife of Antony

and widow of Clodius, had thrust a hairpin through the tongue.

_Works._--The literary works of Cicero may be classed as (1) rhetorical;

(2) oratorical; (3) philosophical and political; (4) epistolary.

(i.) _Rhetorical._[8]--His chief works of this kind are: (_a_) _de

Oratore_, a treatise in three books dedicated to his brother Quintus.

The discussion is conducted in the form of a dialogue which is supposed

to have occurred in 91 B.C. chiefly between the two orators L. Crassus

and M. Antonius. The first book deals with the studies necessary for an

orator; the second with the treatment of the subject matter; the third

with the form and delivery of a speech. Cicero says of this work in a

letter (_Fam._ i. 9. 23) that it "does not deal in hackneyed rules and

embraces the whole theory of oratory as laid down by Isocrates and

Aristotle." (_b_) _Brutus_, or _de claris oratoribus_, a history of

Roman eloquence containing much valuable information about his

predecessors, drawn largely from the _Chronicle_ (_liber annalis_) of

Atticus (§§ 14, 15). (_c_) _Orator_, dedicated to M. Brutus, sketching a

portrait of the perfect and ideal orator, Cicero's last word on oratory.

The sum of his conclusion is that the perfect orator must also be a

perfect man. Cicero says of this work that he has "concentrated in it

all his taste" (_Fam._ vi. 18. 4). The three treatises are intended to

form a continuous series containing a complete system of rhetorical

training.

It will be convenient to mention here a feature of Ciceronian prose on

which singular light has been thrown by recent inquiry. In the _de

Oratore_, iii. 173 sqq., he considers the element of rhythm or metre

in prose, and in the _Orator_ (174-226) he returns to the subject and

discusses it at length. His main point is that prose should be

metrical in character, though it should not be entirely metrical,

since this would be poetry (_Orator_, 220). Greek writers relied for

metrical effect in prose on those feet which were not much used in

poetry. Aristotle recommended the paean [uuu-]. Cicero preferred the

cretic [-u-] which he says is the metrical equivalent of the paean.

Demosthenes was especially fond of the cretic. Rhythm pervades the

whole sentence but is most important at the end or _clausula_, where

the swell of the period sinks to rest. The ears of the Romans were

incredibly sensitive to such points. We are told that an assembly was

stirred to wild applause by a double trochee [-u-u].[9] If the order

were changed, Cicero says, the effect would be lost. The same rhythm

should be found in the _membra_ which compose the sentence. He quotes

a passage from one of his own speeches in which any change in the

order would destroy the rhythm. Cicero gives various _clausulae_ which

his ears told him to be good or bad, but his remarks are desultory, as

also are those of Quintilian, whose examples were largely drawn from

Cicero's writings. It was left for modern research to discover rules

of harmony which the Romans obeyed unconsciously. Other investigators

had shown that Cicero's _clausulae_ are generally variations of some

three or four forms in which the rhythm is trochaic. Dr Thaddaeus

Zielinski of St Petersburg, after examining all the _clausulae_ in

Cicero's speeches, finds that they are governed by a law. In every

_clausula_ there is a basis followed by a cadence. The basis consists

of a cretic or its metrical equivalent.[10] This is followed by a

cadence trochaic in character, but varying in length. The three

favourite forms are (i.) [-u--[=u]], (ii.) [-u--u[=u]], (iii.)

[-u--u-[=u]]. These he styles _verae (V)_. Other frequent _clausulae_,

which he terms _licitae (L)_, are those in which a long syllable is

resolved, as in verse, into two shorts, e.g. _[=e]ss[)e]

v[)i]d[)e][=a]t[)u]r_. These two classes, _V_ and _L_, include 86% of

the _clausulae_ in the orations. Some rarer _clausulae_ which he terms

_M (= malae)_ introduce no new principle. There remain two interesting

forms, viz. _S (= selectae)_, in which a spondee is substituted for a

trochee in the cadence, e.g. [-u----], this being done for special

emphasis, and _P (= pessimae)_, where a dactyl is so used, e.g.

[-u--uu-[=u]], this being the _heroica clausula_ condemned by

Quintilian. Similar rules apply to the _membra_ of the sentence,

though in these the _S_ and _P_ forms are more frequent, harmony being

restored in the _clausula_.

These results apply not only to the speeches but also to the

philosophical writings and the more elaborate letters, and with

modifications to other rhythmical prose, e.g. that of Pliny and

Seneca. Rhythm was avoided by Caesar who was an Atticist, and by

Sallust who was an archaist. Livy's practice is exactly opposite to

that of Cicero, since he has a marked preference for the _S_ forms,

thereby exemplifying Cicero's saying that long syllables are more

appropriate to history than to oratory.[11]

(ii.) _Speeches_.--These were generally delivered before the senate or

people, if political in character, and before jurors sitting in a

_quaestio_, if judicial. The speech against Vatinius was an attack upon

a witness under examination; that _de Domo_ was made before the

Pontifices; that _pro C. Rabirio perduellionis reo_ in the course of a

_provocatio_ to the people; and those _pro Ligario_ and _pro rege

Deiotaro_ before Caesar. The five orations composing the _Actio Secunda

in Verrem_ were never spoken, but written after Verres had gone into

exile. The Second _Philippic_ also was not delivered but issued as a

pamphlet. Cicero's speech for Milo at his trial was not a success,

though, as Quintilian (ix. 2. 54) quotes from it, as taken down by

shorthand reporters, an example of a rhetorical figure well used, it

cannot have been such a failure as is alleged by later writers. The

extant speech was written by Cicero at his leisure. None of the other

speeches are in the exact form in which they were delivered. Cicero's

method was to construct a _commentarius_ or skeleton of his speech,

which he used when speaking. If he was pleased with a speech he then

wrote it out for publication. Sometimes he omitted in the written speech

a subject on which he had spoken. A record of this is sometimes

preserved: e.g. "de Postumi criminibus" (_Mur._ 51), "de teste Fufio"

(_Cael._ 19). These _commentarii_ were published by his freedman Tiro

and are quoted by Asconius (_ad Orat. in Toga Candida_, p. 87).

Cicero in his speeches must be given all the privileges of an advocate.

Sometimes he had a bad client; he naïvely confesses the straits to which

he was put when defending Scamander (_Clu._ 51; cf. _Phil._ xiii. 26).

He thought of defending Catiline, though he says that his guilt is clear

as noon-day (_Att._ i. 1-2 and 2. 1). Sometimes the brief which he held

at the moment compelled him to take a view of facts contrary to that

which he had previously advocated. Thus in the _pro Caecina_ he alleges

judicial corruption against a witness, Falcula, while in the _pro

Cluentio_ he contends that the offence was not proved (_Caec._ 28,

_Clu._ 103). He says quite openly that "it is a great mistake to suppose

that statements in his speeches express his real opinions" (_Clu._ 139).

It is therefore idle to reproach him with inconsistencies, though these

are sometimes very singular. Thus in the _pro Cornelio_ he speaks with

praise of Aulus Gabinius, who, when a colleague vetoed his proposal,

proceeded to depose him after the precedent set by Tiberius Gracchus

(Asconius _in Cornel._ p. 71). In the _pro Cluentio_, 111, he contends

that nothing is easier than for a new man to rise at Rome. In the _pro

Caelio_ he says that Catiline had in him undeveloped germs of the

greatest virtues, and that it was the good in him that made him so

dangerous (_Cael._ 12-14). He sometimes deliberately puts the case upon

a wrong issue. In the _pro Milone_ he says that either Milo must have

lain in wait for Clodius or Clodius for Milo, leaving out of sight the

truth, that the encounter was due to chance. He used to boast that he

had cast dust into the eyes of the jury in the case of Cluentius

(Quintil. ii. 17-21).

Cicero had a perfect mastery of all weapons wielded by a pleader in

Rome. He was specially famous for his pathos, and for this reason, when

several counsel were employed, always spoke last (_Orat._ 130). A

splendid specimen of pathos is to be found in his account of the

condemnation and execution of the Sicilian captains (_Verr._ (_Act_.

ii.) v. 106-122). Much exaggeration was permitted to a Roman orator.

Thus Cicero frequently speaks as if his client were to be put to death,

though a criminal could always evade capital consequences by going into

exile. His enemies scoffed at his "tear-drops." He indulged in the more

violent invective, which, though shocking to a modern reader, e.g. in

his speeches against Vatinius and Piso, was not offensive to Roman taste

(_de Orat._ ii. 216-290). He was much criticized for his jokes, and

even Quintilian (ii. 17-21) regrets that he made so many in his

speeches. He could never resist the temptation to make a pun. It must be

remembered, however, that he was the great wit of the period. Caesar

used to have a collection of Cicero's _bon-mots_ brought to him. Cicero

complains that all the jokes of the day were attributed to himself,

including those made by very sorry jesters (_Fam._ vii. 32. 1). A fine

specimen of sustained humour is to be found in his speech _pro Murena_,

where he rallies the jurisconsults and the Stoics. He was also

criticized for his vanity and perpetual references to his own

achievements. His vanity, however, as has been admirably remarked, is

essentially that of "the peacock, not of the gander," and is redeemed by

his willingness to raise a laugh at his own expense (Strachan-Davidson,

p. 192). Some critics have impugned his legal knowledge, but probably

without justice. It is true that he does not claim to be a great expert,

though a pupil of the Scaevolas, and when in doubt would consult a

jurisconsult; also, that he frequently passes lightly over important

points of law, but this was probably because he was conscious of a flaw

in his case.

(iii.) _Political and Philosophical Treatises._--These are generally

written in the form of dialogues, in which the speakers sometimes belong

to bygone times and sometimes to the present. The first method was known

as that of Heraclides, the second as that of Aristotle (_Att._ xiii. 19.

4). There is no reason to suppose that the speakers held the views with

which Cicero credits them, or had such literary powers as would make

them able to express such views (_ib._ xiii. 12. 3). The political works

are _de Republica_ and _de Legibus_. The first was a dialogue in six

books concerning the best form of constitution, in which the speakers

are Scipio Africanus Minor and members of his circle. He tells us that

he drew largely from Plato, Aristotle, Theophrastus and writings of the

Peripatetics. The famous "Dream of Scipio" recalls the "Vision of Er" in

Plato's _Republic_ (Book x. _ad fin._). The _de Legibus_, a sequel to

this work in imitation of Plato's _Laws_, is drawn largely from

Chrysippus.

Cicero as a philosopher belonged to the New Academy. The followers of

this school were free to hear all arguments for and against, and to

accept the conclusion which for the moment appeared most probable

(_Acad._ ii. 131). Thus in the _Tusculan Disputations_ v. he expresses

views which conflict with _de Finibus_ iv., and defends himself on the

ground that as an Academic he is free to change his mind. He was much

fascinated by the Stoic morality, and it has been noticed that the

_Tusculan Disputations_ and _de Officiis_ are largely Stoic in tone. He

has nothing but contempt for the Epicureans, and cannot forgive their

neglect of literary style. As Cicero's philosophical writings have been

severely attacked for want of originality, it is only fair to recollect

that he resorted to philosophy as an anodyne when suffering from mental

anguish, and that he wrote incredibly fast. He issued two editions of

his _Academics_. The first consisted of two books, in which Catulus and

Lucullus were the chief speakers. He then rewrote his treatise in four

books, making himself, Varro and Atticus the speakers. The Romans at

this time had no manuals of philosophy or any philosophical writings in

Latin apart from the poem of Lucretius and some unskilful productions by

obscure Epicureans. Cicero set himself to supply this want. His works

are confessedly in the main translations and compilations (_Att._ xii.

52. 3); all that he does is to turn the discussion into the form of a

dialogue, to adapt it to Roman readers by illustrations from Roman

history, and to invent equivalents for Greek technical terms. This is

equally true of the political treatises. Thus, when Atticus criticized a

strange statement in _de Republ._ ii. 8, that all the cities of the

Peloponnese had access to the sea, he excuses himself by saying that he

found it in Dicaearchus and copied it word for word (_Att._ vi. 2. 3).

In the same passage he used an incorrect adjective, _Phliuntii_ for

_Phliasii_; he says that he had already corrected his own copy, but the

mistake survives in the single palimpsest in which this work has been

preserved. The only merits, therefore, which can be claimed for Cicero

are that he invented a philosophical terminology for the Romans, and

that he produced a series of manuals which from their beauty of style

have had enduring influence upon mankind.