Produced by Marius Masi, Don Kretz and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net
Transcriber's notes:
(1) Numbers following letters (without space) like C2 were originally
printed in subscript. Letter subscripts are preceded by an
underscore, like C_n.
(2) Characters following a carat (^) were printed in superscript.
(3) Side-notes were relocated to function as titles of their respective
paragraphs.
(4) Macrons and breves above letters and dots below letters were not
inserted.
(5) [root] stands for the root symbol; [alpha], [beta], etc. for greek
letters.
(6) The following typographical errors have been corrected:
ARTICLE EVELYN, JOHN: "He was admitted to the Middle Temple in
February 1637, and in May he became a fellow commoner of Balliol
College, Oxford." 'he' amended from 'be'.
ARTICLE EVOLUTION: "The supposition that sensation thus rests on a
material process of absorption from external bodies naturally led
up to the idea that plants and even inorganic substances are
precipient, and so to an indistinct recognition of organic life as
a scale of intelligence." 'substances' amended from 'subtances'.
ARTICLE EVOLUTION: "The conception of evolution was henceforward
irrepressible, and it incessantly reappears, in one shape or
another, up to the year 1858, when Charles Darwin and A.R. Wallace
published their Theory of Natural Selection." 'irrepressible'
amended from 'irrespressible'.
ARTICLE EVOLUTION: "And those of the eighth group are not only
unintelligible without the assumption of evolution, but can be
proved never to be discordant with that hypothesis, while, in some
cases, they are exactly such as the hypothesis requires."
'unintelligible' amended from 'unin-intelligible'.
ARTICLE EVORA: "From 1663 to 1665 it was held by the Spaniards. In
1832 Dom Miguel, retreating before Dom Pedro, took refuge in Evora;
and here was signed the convention of Evora, by which he was
banished." 'From' amended from 'Fom'.
ARTICLE EWING, JULIANA HORATIA ORR: "From this time until her death
(13th May 1885), previously to which she had been a constant
invalid, Mrs Ewing produced a number of charming children's
stories." 'May' amended from 'may'.
ARTICLE EXAMINATIONS: "In many universities of the United States
there is a definite understanding that emoluments shall only be
accepted by those needing them." 'In' amended from 'It'.
ARTICLE EXECUTION: "There may still be imprisonment in England,
under the writ--rarely used in practice--ne exeat regno, which
issues to prevent a debtor from leaving the kingdom." 'kingdom'
amended from 'kindgom'.
ARTICLE EXECUTION: "Under the German Code of Civil Procedure (Arts.
796 et seq.), both the goods and (if the goods do not offer
adequate security) the person of the debtor may be seized (the
process is called arrest) as a guarantee of payment." 'Procedure'
amended from 'Prodecure'.
ARTICLE EZRA, THIRD BOOK OF: "The Apocalypse is called 1 Esdras,
our author 2 Esdras, and Ezra and Nehemiah 3 Esdras, or 3 and 4
Esdras." 'Apocalypse' amended from 'Apocalyspe'.
ARTICLE EZRA AND NEHEMIAH, BOOKS OF: "It is difficult to follow its
progress clearly, and the account ceases abruptly in. vi. 17-19
with the notice of the conspiracy of Tobiah and the nobles of
Judah." 'progress' amended from 'progrees'.
THE
ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITANNICA
ELEVENTH EDITION
FIRST edition, published in three volumes, 1768-1771.
SECOND " " ten " 1777-1784.
THIRD " " eighteen " 1788-1797.
FOURTH " " twenty " 1801-1810.
FIFTH " " twenty " 1815-1817.
SIXTH " " twenty " 1823-1824.
SEVENTH " " twenty-one " 1830-1842.
EIGHTH " " twenty-two " 1853-1860.
NINTH " " twenty-five " 1875-1889.
TENTH " ninth edition and eleven
supplementary volumes, 1902-1903.
ELEVENTH " published in twenty-nine volumes, 1910-1911.
COPYRIGHT
in all countries subscribing to the Bern Convention
by
THE CHANCELLOR, MASTERS AND SCHOLARS
of the
UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE
_All rights reserved_
THE
ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITANNICA
A DICTIONARY OF
ARTS, SCIENCES, LITERATURE AND GENERAL INFORMATION
ELEVENTH EDITION
VOLUME X
EVANGELICAL CHURCH to FRANCIS JOSEPH
New York
Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc.
342 Madison Avenue
Copyright, in the United States of America, 1910,
by
The Encyclopaedia Britannica Company.
VOLUME X, SLICE I
Evangelical Church Conference to Fairbairn, Sir William
ARTICLES IN THIS SLICE:
EVANGELICAL CHURCH CONFERENCE EXPULSION
EVANGELICAL UNION EXTENSION
EVANS, CHRISTMAS EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES
EVANS, EVAN HERBER EXTERRITORIALITY
EVANS, SIR GEORGE DE LACY EXTORTION
EVANS, SIR JOHN EXTRACT
EVANS, OLIVER EXTRADITION
EVANSON, EDWARD EXTRADOS
EVANSTON EXTREME UNCTION
EVANSVILLE EYBESCHUTZ, JONATHAN
EVARISTUS EYCK, VAN
EVARTS, WILLIAM MAXWELL EYE (English town)
EVE EYE (organ)
EVECTION EYEMOUTH
EVELETH EYLAU
EVELYN, JOHN EYRA
EVERDINGEN, ALLART VAN EYRE, EDWARD JOHN
EVEREST, SIR GEORGE EYRE, SIR JAMES
EVEREST, MOUNT EYRIE
EVERETT, ALEXANDER HILL EZEKIEL
EVERETT, CHARLES CARROLL EZRA
EVERETT, EDWARD EZRA, THIRD BOOK OF
EVERETT (Massachusetts, U.S.A.) EZRA, FOURTH BOOK OF
EVERETT (Washington, U.S.A.) EZRA AND NEHEMIAH, BOOKS OF
EVERGLADES EZZO
EVERGREEN EZZOLIED
EVERLASTING F
EVERSLEY, CHARLES SHAW LEFEVRE FABBRONI, ANGELO
EVESHAM FABER
EVIDENCE FABER, BASIL
EVIL EYE FABER, FREDERICK WILLIAM
EVOLUTION FABER, JACOBUS
EVORA FABER, JOHANN
EVREUX FABERT, ABRAHAM DE
EWALD, GEORG HEINRICH AUGUST VON FABIAN, SAINT
EWALD, JOHANNES FABIUS
EWART, WILLIAM FABIUS PICTOR, QUINTUS
EWE FABLE
EWELL, RICHARD STODDERT FABLIAU
EWING, ALEXANDER FABRE, FERDINAND
EWING, JULIANA HORATIA ORR FABRE D'EGLANTINE, FRANCOIS NAZAIRE
EWING, THOMAS FABRETTI, RAPHAEL
EXAMINATIONS FABRIANI, SEVERINO
EXARCH FABRIANO
EXCAMBION FABRICIUS, GAIUS LUSCINUS
EXCELLENCY FABRICIUS, GEORG
EXCHANGE FABRICIUS, HIERONYMUS
EXCHEQUER FABRICIUS, JOHANN ALBERT
EXCISE FABRICIUS, JOHANN CHRISTIAN
EXCOMMUNICATION FABRIZI, NICOLA
EXCRETION FABROT, CHARLES ANNIBAL
EXECUTION FABYAN, ROBERT
EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS FACADE
EXEDRA FACCIOLATI, JACOPO
EXELMANS, RENE JOSEPH ISIDORE FACE
EXEQUATUR FACTION
EXETER, EARL, MARQUESS & DUKE OF FACTOR
EXETER (England) FACTORY ACTS
EXETER (New Hampshire, U.S.A.) FACULA
EXETER BOOK FACULTY
EXHIBITION FAED, THOMAS
EXHUMATION FAENZA
EXILARCH FAEROE
EXILE FAESULAE
EXILI FAFNIR
EXMOOR FOREST FAGGING
EXMOUTH, EDWARD PELLEW FAGGOT
EXMOUTH FAGNIEZ, GUSTAVE CHARLES
EXODUS, BOOK OF FAGUET, EMILE
EXODUS, THE FA-HIEN
EXOGAMY FAHLCRANTZ, CHRISTIAN ERIK
EXORCISM FAHRENHEIT, GABRIEL DANIEL
EXORCIST FAIDHERBE, LOUIS LEON CESAR
EXOTIC FAIENCE
EXPATRIATION FAILLY, PIERRE LOUIS CHARLES DE
EXPERT FAIN, AGATHON JEAN FRANCOIS
EXPLOSIVES FAIR
EXPRESS FAIRBAIRN, ANDREW MARTIN
EXPROPRIATION FAIRBAIRN, SIR WILLIAM
INITIALS USED IN VOLUME X. TO IDENTIFY INDIVIDUAL CONTRIBUTORS,[1] WITH
THE HEADINGS OF THE ARTICLES IN THIS VOLUME SO SIGNED.
A. B. R.
ALFRED BARTON RENDLE, M.A., D.SC, F.R.S., F.L.S.
Keeper, Department of Botany, British Museum. Author of _Text Book
on Classification of Flowering Plants_; &c.
Flower.
A. D.
AUSTIN DOBSON, LL.D.
See the biographical article: DOBSON, H. AUSTIN.
Fielding, Henry.
A. F. B.
ALDRED FARRER BARKER, M.SC.
Professor of Textile Industries at Bradford Technical College.
Felt.
A. F. P.
ALBERT FREDERICK POLLARD, M.A., F.R.HIST.SOC.
Professor of English History in the University of London. Fellow
of All Souls' College, Oxford. Assistant Editor of the _Dictionary
of National Biography_, 1893-1901. Lothian Prizeman, Oxford, 1892;
Arnold Prizeman, 1898. Author of _England under Protector
Somerset_; _Henry VIII._; _Life of Thomas Cranmer_; &c.
Ferrar, Bishop;
Fox, Edward;
Fox, Richard.
A. G.
MAJOR ARTHUR GEORGE FREDERICK GRIFFITHS (d. 1908).
H.M. Inspector of Prisons, 1878-1896. Author of _The Chronicles of
Newgate_; _Secrets of the Prison House_; &c.
Finger Prints.
A. Go.*
REV. ALEXANDER GORDON, M.A.
Lecturer on Church History in the University of Manchester.
Faber, Basil, Jacobus and Johann;
Familists;
Farel, G.;
Flacius.
A. H.-S.
SIR A. HOUTUM-SCHINDLER, C.I.E.
General in the Persian Army. Author of _Eastern Persian Irak_.
Fars;
Firuzabad.
A. L.
ANDREW LANG.
See the biographical article: LANG, ANDREW.
Fairy;
Family.
A. L. B.
ALFRED LYS BALDRY.
Art Critic of the _Globe_, 1893-1908. Author of _Modern Mural
Decoration_ and biographies of Albert Moore, Sir H. von Herkomer,
R.A., Sir J. E. Millais, P.R.A., Marcus Stone, R.A., and G. H.
Boughton, R.A.
Fortuny.
A. N.
ALFRED NEWTON, F.R.S.
See the biographical article: NEWTON, ALFRED.
Falcon;
Fieldfare;
Finch;
Flycatcher;
Fowl.
A. S.
ARTHUR SMITHELLS, F.R.S.
Professor of Chemistry in the University of Leeds. Author of
Scientific Papers on Flame and Spectrum Analysis.
Flame.
A. M. C.
AGNES MARY CLERKE.
See the biographical article: CLERKE, A. M.
Flamsteed.
A. W.
ARTHUR WATSON.
Secretary in the Academic Department, University of London.
Examinations (_in part_).
A. W. R.
ALEXANDER WOOD RENTON, M.A., LL.B.
Puisne Judge of the Supreme Court of Ceylon. Editor of
_Encyclopaedia of the Laws of England_.
Fixtures;
Flat.
A. W. W.
ADOLPHUS WILLIAM WARD, D.LITT., LL.D.
See the biographical article: WARD, A. W.
Foote, Samuel;
Ford, John.
C. El.
SIR CHARLES NORTON EDGCUMBE ELIOT, K.C.M.G., C.B., M.A., LL.D., D.C.L.
Vice-Chancellor of Sheffield University. Formerly Fellow of
Trinity College, Oxford. H.M.'s Commissioner and
Commander-in-Chief for the British East Africa Protectorate; Agent
and Consul-General at Zanzibar; Consul-General for German East
Africa, 1900-1904.
Finno-Ugrian.
C. F. B.
CHARLES FRANCIS BASTABLE, M.A., LL.D.
Regius Professor of Laws and Professor of Political Economy in the
University of Dublin. Author of _Public Finance_; _Commerce of
Nations_; _Theory of International Trade_; &c.
Finance.
C. F. C.
C. F. CROSS, B.SC. (Lond.), F.C.S. F.I.C.
Analytical and Consulting Chemist.
Fibres.
C. F. R.
CHARLES FRANCIS RICHARDSON, A.M., PH.D.
Professor of English at Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire,
U.S.A. Author of _A Story of English Rhyme_; _A History of
American Literature_; &c.
Fiske, John.
C. H. T.*
CRAWFORD HOWELL TOY, A.M.
See the biographical article: TOY, CRAWFORD HOWELL.
Ezekiel.
C. J.
CHARLES JOHNSON, M.A.
Clerk in H.M. Public Record Office. Joint Editor of the _Domesday
Survey_ for the _Victoria County History: Norfolk_.
Exchequer (_in part_).
C. J. B. M.
CHARLES JOHN BRUCE MARRIOTT, M.A.
Clare College, Cambridge. Secretary of the Rugby Football Union.
Football: _Rugby_ (_in part_).
C. J. N. F.
CHARLES JAMES NICOL FLEMING.
H.M. Inspector of Schools, Scotch Education Department.
Football: _Rugby_ (_in part_).
C. L. K.
CHARLES LETHBRIDGE KINGSFORD, M.A., F.R.HIST.SOC., F.S.A.
Assistant Secretary to the Board of Education. Author of _Life of
Henry V._ Editor of _Chronicles of London_ and Stow's _Survey of
London_.
Fabyan;
Fastolf.
C. P. I.
SIR COURTENAY PEREGRINE ILBERT, K.C.B., K.C.S.I., C.I.E.
Clerk of the House of Commons. Chairman of Statute Law Committee.
Parliamentary Counsel to the Treasury, 1899-1901. Legal Member of
Council of Governor-General of India, 1882-1886; President, 1886.
Fellow of the British Academy. Formerly Fellow and Tutor of
Balliol College, Oxford. Author of _The Government of India_;
_Legislative Method and Forms_.
Evidence.
C. W. A.
CHARLES WILLIAM ALCOCK. (d. 1907).
Formerly Secretary of the Football Association, London.
Football: _Association_ (_in part_).
D. H.
DAVID HANNAY.
Formerly British Vice-Consul at Barcelona. Author of _Short
History of the Royal Navy_; _Life of Emilio Castelar_; &c.
First of June, Battle of the;
Fox, Charles James.
D. Mn.
REV. DUGALD MACFADYEN, M.A.
Minister of South Grove Congregational Church, Highgate. Director
of the London Missionary Society.
Excommunication.
D. N. P.
DIARMID NOEL PATON, M.D., F.R.C.P. (Edin.).
Regius Professor of Physiology in the University of Glasgow.
Formerly Superintendent of Research Laboratory of Royal College of
Physicians, Edinburgh. Biological Fellow of Edinburgh University,
1884. Author of _Essentials of Human Physiology_; &c.
Fever.
D. S. M.*
DAVID SAMUEL MARGOLIOUTH, M.A., D.LITT.
Laudian Professor of Arabic, Oxford. Fellow of New College. Author
of _Arabic _Papyri of the Bodleian Library_; _Mohammed and the
Rise of Islam_; _Cairo, Jerusalem_ and Damascus_.
Fatimites.
E. B.
EDWARD BRECK, M.A., PH.D.
Formerly Foreign Correspondent of the _New York Herald_ and the
_New York Times_. Author of _Fencing_; _Wilderness Pets_;
_Sporting in Nova Scotia_; &c.
Foil-fencing;
Football: _American_ (_in part_).
E. Ca.
EGERTON CASTLE, M.A., F.S.A.
Trinity College, Cambridge. Author of _Schools and Masters of
Fence_; &c.
Fencing.
Ed. C.*
THE HON. EDWARD EVAN CHARTERIS.
Barrister-at-Law, Inner Temple.
Fair (_in part_).
E. C. B.
RT. REV. EDWARD CUTHBERT BUTLER, O.S.B., M.A., D.LITT.
Abbot of Downside Abbey, Bath. Author of "The Lausiac History of
Palladius," in _Cambridge Texts and Studies_, vol. vi.
Fontevrault;
Francis of Assisi, St;
Francis of Paola, St.
E. C. Q.
EDMUND CROSBY QUIGGIN, M.A.
Fellow and Lecturer in Modern Languages and Monro Lecturer in
Celtic, Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge.
Finn mac Cool.
E. D. R.
LIEUT.-COLONEL EMILIUS C. DELME RADCLIFFE.
Author of _Falconry: Notes on the Falconidae used in India in
Falconry_.
Falconry.
E. E. A.
ERNEST E. AUSTEN.
Assistant in Department of Zoology, Natural History Museum, South
Kensington.
Flea.
E. E. H.
REV. EDWARD EVERETT HALE.
See the biographical article: HALE, E. E.
Everett, Edward.
E. G.
EDMUND GOSSE, LL.D.
See the biographical article: GOSSE, EDMUND.
Ewald, Johannes;
Fabliau;
Fabre, Ferdinand;
Feuillet;
Finland: _Literature_;
FitzGerald, Edward;
Flaubert;
Flemish Literature;
Forssell.
E. H. P.
EDWARD HENRY PALMER, M.A.
See the biographical article: PALMER, E. H.
Firdousi (_in part_).
E. K.
EDMUND KNECHT, PH.D., M.SC.TECH. (Manchester), F.I.C.
Professor of Technological Chemistry, Manchester University. Head
of Chemical Department, Municipal School of Technology,
Manchester. Examiner in Dyeing, City and Guilds of London
Institute. Author of _A Manual of Dyeing_; &c. Editor of _Journal
of the Society of Dyers and Colourists_.
Finishing.
E. M. Ha.
ERNEST MAES HARVEY.
Partner in Messrs. Allen Harvey & Ross, Bullion Brokers, London.
Exchange.
E. O.*
EDMUND OWEN, M.B., F.R.C.S., LL.D., D.SC.
Consulting Surgeon to St Mary's Hospital, London, and to the
Children's Hospital, Great Ormond Street, London. Chevalier of the
Legion of Honour. Late Examiner in Surgery at the University of
Cambridge, London and Durham. Author of _A Manual of Anatomy for
Senior Students_.
Fistula.
E. O. S.
EDWIN OTHO SACHS, F.R.S. (Edin.), A.M.INST.M.E.
Chairman of the British Fire Prevention Committee. Vice-President,
National Fire Brigades Union. Vice-President, International Fire
Service Council. Author of _Fires and Public Entertainments_; &c.
Fire and Fire Extinction.
E. Pr.
EDGAR PRESTAGE.
Special Lecturer in Portuguese Literature at the University of
Manchester. Commendador, Portuguese Order of S. Thiago.
Corresponding Member of Lisbon Royal Academy of Sciences and
Lisbon Geographical Society.
Falcao;
Ferreira.
E. Re.
ELISEE RECLUS.
See the biographical article: RECLUS, J. J. E.
Fire.
E. Tn.
REV. ETHELRED LEONARD TAUNTON, (d. 1907).
Author of _The English Black Monks of St Benedict_; _History of
the Jesuits in England_.
Feckenham;
Fisher, John.
E. W. H.
ERNEST WILLIAM HOBSON, M.A., D.SC., F.R.S., F.R.A.S.
Fellow and Tutor in Mathematics, Christ's College, Cambridge.
Stokes Lecturer in Mathematics in the University.
Fourier's Series.
F. C. C.
FREDERICK CORNWALLIS CONYBEARE, M.A., D.TH. (Giessen).
Fellow of the British Academy. Formerly Fellow of University
College, Oxford. Author of _The Ancient Armenian Texts of
Aristotle_; _Myth, Magic and Morals_; &c.
Extreme Unction.
F. G. P.
FREDERICK GYMER PARSONS, F.R.C.S., F.Z.S., F.R.ANTHROP.INST.
Vice-President, Anatomical Society of Great Britain and Ireland.
Lecturer on Anatomy at St Thomas's Hospital and the London School
of Medicine for Women. Formerly Hunterian Professor at the Royal
College of Surgeons.
Eye: _Anatomy_.
F. J. H.
FRANCIS JOHN HAVERFIELD, M.A., LL.D., F.S.A.
Camden Professor of Ancient History in the University of Oxford.
Fellow of Brasenose College. Ford's Lecturer, 1906-1907. Fellow of
the British Academy. Author of Monographs on Roman History,
especially Roman Britain; &c.
Fosse.
F. J. W.
FREDERICK JOSEPH WALL, F.C.S.
Secretary to the Football Association.
Football: _Association_ (_in part_).
F. R. C.
FRANK R. CANA.
Author of _South Africa from the Great Trek to the Union_.
France: _Colonies_.
F. S.
FRANCIS STORR, M.A.
Editor of the _Journal of Education_, London. Officier d'Academie,
Paris.
Fable.
G. A. B.
GEORGE A. BOULENGER, D.SC., PH.D., F.R.S.
In charge of the Collections of Reptiles and Fishes, Department of
Zoology, British Museum. Vice-President of the Zoological Society
of London.
Flat-fish.
G. A. Be.
GEORGE ANDREAS BERRY, M.B., F.R.C.S., F.R.S. (Edin.).
Hon. Surgeon Oculist to His Majesty in Scotland. Formerly Senior
Ophthalmic Surgeon, Edinburgh Royal Infirmary, and Lecturer on
Ophthalmology in the University of Edinburgh. Vice-President,
Ophthalmological Society. Author of _Diseases of the Eye_; _The
Elements of Ophthalmoscopic Diagnosis_; _Subjective Symptoms in
Eye Diseases_; &c.
Eye: _Diseases_.
G. B. A.
GEORGE BURTON ADAMS, A.M., B.D., PH.D., LITT.D.
Professor of History, Yale University. Editor of _American
Historical Review_. Author of _Civilization during the Middle
Ages_; _Political History of England_, 1066-1216; &c.
Feudalism.
G. C. L.
GEORGE COLLINS LEVEY, C.M.G.
Member of Board of Advice to Agent-General of Victoria. Formerly
Editor and Proprietor of the _Melbourne Herald_. Secretary,
Colonial Committee of Royal Commission to Paris Exhibition, 1900.
Secretary, Adelaide Exhibition, 1887. Secretary, Royal Commission,
Hobart Exhibition, 1894-1895. Secretary to Commissioners for
Victoria at the Exhibitions in London, Paris, Vienna, Philadelphia
and Melbourne, 1873, 1876, 1878, 1880-1881.
Exhibition.
G. E.
REV. GEORGE EDMUNDSON, M.A., F.R.HIST.S.
Formerly Fellow and Tutor of Brasenose College, Oxford. Ford's
Lecturer, 1909. Hon. Member, Dutch Historical Society, and Foreign
Member, Netherlands Association of Literature.
Flanders.
G. F. Z.
GEORGE FREDERICK ZIMMER, A.M.INST.C.E.
Author of _Mechanical Handling of Material_.
Flour and Flour Manufacture.
G. G. P.*
GEORGE GRENVILLE PHILLIMORE, M.A., B.C.L.
Christ Church, Oxford. Barrister-at-Law, Middle Temple.
Fishery, Law of.
G. P.
GIFFORD PINCHOT, A.M., D.SC., LL.D.
Professor of Forestry, Yale University. Formerly Chief Forester,
U.S.A. President of the National Conservation Association. Member
of the Society of American Foresters, Royal English Arboricultural
Society, &c. Author of _The White Pine_; _A Primer of Forestry_;
&c.
Forests and Forestry: _United States_.
G. W. T.
REV. GRIFFITHS WHEELER THATCHER, M.A., B.D.
Warden of Camden College, Sydney, N.S.W. Formerly Tutor in Hebrew
and Old Testament History at Mansfield College, Oxford.
Fairuzabadi;
Fakhr ud-Din Razi;
Farabi;
Farazdaq.
H. B. S.
REV. HENRY BARCLAY SWETE, M.A., D.D., LITT.D.
Regius Professor of Divinity, Cambridge University. Fellow of
Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge. Fellow of King's College,
London. Fellow of British Academy. Hon. Canon of Ely Cathedral.
Author of _The Holy Spirit in the New Testament_; &c.
Fathers of the Church.
H. Ch.
HUGH CHISHOLM, M.A.
Formerly Scholar of Corpus Christi College, Oxford. Editor of the
11th Edition of the _Encyclopaedia Britannica_; Co-Editor of the
10th edition.
Forster.
H. De.
HIPPOLYTE DELEHAYE, S.J.
Assistant in the compilation of the Bollandist publications:
_Analecta Bollandiana_ and _Acta Sanctorum_.
Fiacre, Saint;
Florian, Saint.
H. F. G.
HANS FRIEDRICH GADOW, F.R.S., PH.D.
Strickland Curator and Lecturer on Zoology in the University of
Cambridge. Author of "Amphibia and Reptiles," in the _Cambridge
Natural History_.
Flamingo.
H. L. S.
H. LAWRENCE SWINBURNE (d. 1909).
Flag.
H. St.
HENRY STURT, M.A.
Author of _Idola Theatri_; _The Idea of a Free Church_; _Personal
Idealism_.
Fechner;
Feuerbach, Ludwig A.
H. W. C. D.
HENRY WILLIAM CARLESS DAVIS, M.A.
Fellow and Tutor of Balliol College, Oxford. Fellow of All Souls'
College, Oxford, 1895-1902. Author of _England under the Normans
and Angevins_; _Charlemagne_.
Fitz Neal;
Fitz Peter, Geoffrey;
Fitz Stephen, William;
Fitz Thedmar;
Flambard;
Florence of Worcester.
H. W. S.
H. WICKHAM STEED.
Correspondent of _The Times_ at Vienna. Correspondent of _The
Times_ at Rome, 1897-1902.
Fabrizi.
I. A.
ISRAEL ABRAHAMS, M.A.
Reader in Talmudic and Rabbinic Literature, University of
Cambridge. President, Jewish Historical Society of England. Author
of _A Short History of Jewish Literature_; _Jewish Life in the
Middle Ages_.
Exilarch;
Eybeschutz.
J. A. C.
SIR JOSEPH ARCHER CROWE, K.C.M.G.
See the biographical article: CROWE, SIR JOSEPH A.
Eyck, Van.
J. A. H.
JOHN ALLEN HOWE, B.SC.
Curator and Librarian of the Museum of Practical Geology, London.
Author of _The Geology of Building Stones_.
France: _Geology_.
J. A. S.
JOHN ADDINGTON SYMONDS, LL.D.
See the biographical article: SYMONDS, JOHN A.
Ficino;
Filelfo.
J. B.*
JOSEPH BURTON.
Partner in Pilkington's Tile and Pottery Co., Clifton Junction,
Manchester.
Firebrick (_in part_).
J. B. P.
JAMES BELL PETTIGREW, M.D., LL.D., F.R.S., F.R.C.P. (Edin.) (1834-1908).
Chandos Professor of Medicine and Anatomy, University of St
Andrews, 1875-1908. Author of _Animal Locomotion_; &c.
Flight and Flying (_in part_).
J. Bt.
JAMES BARTLETT.
Lecturer on Construction, Architecture, Sanitation, Quantities,
&c., at King's College, London. Member of Society of Architects.
Member of Institute of Junior Engineers.
Foundations.
J. C. M.
JAMES CLERK MAXWELL, LL.D.
See the biographical article: MAXWELL, JAMES CLERK.
Faraday.
J. E. C. B.
JOHN EDWARD COURTENAY BODLEY, M.A.
Balliol College, Oxford. Corresponding Member of the Institute of
France. Author of _France_; _The Coronation of Edward VII._; &c.
France: _History_, 1870-1910.
J. E. P. W.
JOHN EDWARD POWER WALLIS, M.A.
Puisne Judge, Madras. Vice-Chancellor of Madras University. Inns
of Court Reader in Constitutional Law, 1892-1897. Formerly Editor
of _State Trials_.
Extradition.
J. F. St.
JOHN FREDERICK STENNING, M.A.
Dean and Fellow of Wadham College, Oxford. University Lecturer in
Aramaic. Lecturer in Divinity and Hebrew at Wadham College.
Exodus, Book of.
J. G. H.
JOSEPH G. HORNER, A.M.I.MECH.E.
Author of _Plating and Boiler Making_; _Practical Metal Turning_;
&c.
Forging;
Founding.
J. G. R.
JOHN GEORGE ROBERTSON, M.A., PH.D.
Professor of German at the University of London. Formerly Lecturer
on the English Language, Strassburg University. Author of _History
of German Literature_; &c.
Fouque, Baron.
J. H. P.*
JOHN HUNGERFORD POLLEN, M.A. (d. 1908).
Formerly Professor of Fine Arts in Catholic University of Dublin.
Fellow of Merton College, Oxford. Cantor Lecturer, Society of
Arts, 1885. Author of _Ancient and Modern Furniture and Woodwork_;
_Ancient and Modern Gold and Silversmith's Work_; _The Trajan
Column_; &c.
Fan.
J. Hl. R.
JOHN HOLLAND ROSE, M.A., LITT.D.
Lecturer on Modern History to the Cambridge University Local
Lectures Syndicate. Author of _Life of Napoleon I._; _Napoleonic
Studies_; _The Development of the European Nations_; _The Life of
Pitt_; chapters in the _Cambridge Modern History_.
Fouche.
J. H. R.
JOHN HORACE ROUND, M.A., LL.D. (Edin.).
Author of _Feudal England_; _Studies in Peerage and Family
History_; _Peerage and Pedigree_; &c.
Ferrers: _Family_;
Fitzgerald: _Family_.
J. I.
JULES ISAAC.
Professor of History at the Lycee of Lyons.
Francis I. of France.
J. K. L.
SIR JOHN KNOX LAUGHTON, M.A., LITT.D.
Professor of Modern History, King's College, London. Secretary of
the Navy Records Society. Served in the Baltic, 1854-1855; in
China, 1856-1859. Mathematical and Naval Instructor, Royal Naval
College, Portsmouth, 1866-1873; Greenwich, 1873-1885. President,
Royal Meteorological Society, 1882-1884. Honorary Fellow, Gonville
and Caius College, Cambridge. Fellow, King's College, London.
Author of _Physical Geography in its Relation to the Prevailing
Winds and Currents_; _Studies in Naval History_; _Sea Fights and
Adventures_; &c.
Farragut;
Fitzroy.
J. L. B.
JULIAN LEVETT BAKER, F.I.C.
Analytical and Consulting Chemist. Examiner in Brewing to the City
and Guilds of London Institute, Department of Technology. Hon.
Secretary of the Institute of Brewing. Author of _The Brewing
Industry_; &c.
Fermentation.
J. Ma.
JOHN MACDONALD.
Fair (_in part_).
J. M. S.
JAMES MONTGOMERY STUART.
Author of _The History of Free Trade in Tuscany_; _Reminiscences
and Essays_.
Foscolo.
J. Pa.
JAMES PATON, F.L.S.
Superintendent of Museums and Art Galleries of Corporation of
Glasgow. Assistant in Museum of Science and Art, Edinburgh,
1861-1876. President of Museums Association of United Kingdom,
1896. Editor and part-author of _Scottish National Memorials_,
1890.
Feather (_in part_).
J. P. E.
JEAN PAUL HIPPOLYTE EMMANUEL ADHEMAR ESMEIN.
Professor of Law in the University of Paris. Officer of the Legion
of Honour. Member of the Institute of France. Author of _Cours
elementaire d'histoire du droit francais_; &c.
France: _Law and Institutions_.
J. R. C.
JOSEPH ROGERSON COTTER, M.A.
Assistant to the Professor of Natural and Experimental Philosophy,
Trinity College, Dublin. Editor of 2nd edition of Preston's
_Theory of Heat_.
Fluorescence.
J. R. F.*
JOSEPH R. FISHER.
Editor of the _Northern Whig_, Belfast. Author of _Finland and the
Tsars_; _Law of the Press_; &c.
Finland.
J. R. J. J.
JULIAN ROBERT JOHN JOCELYN.
Colonel, R.A. Formerly Commandant, Ordnance College; Member of
Ordnance Committee; Commandant, Schools of Gunnery.
Fireworks: _History_.
J. S. Bl.
REV. JOHN SUTHERLAND BLACK, M.A., LL.D.
Assistant Editor, 9th edition, _Encyclopaedia Britannica_. Joint
Editor of the _Encyclopaedia Biblica_. Translated Ritschl's
_Critical History of the Christian Doctrine of Justification and
Reconciliation_.
Fasting;
Feasts and Festivals.
J. S. F.
JOHN SMITH FLETT, D.SC, F.G.S.
Petrographer to the Geological Survey. Formerly Lecturer on
Petrology in Edinburgh University. Neill Medallist of the Royal
Society of Edinburgh. Bigsby Medallist of the Geological Society
of London.
Felsite;
Flint.
J. S. K.
JOHN SCOTT KELTIE, LL.D., F.S.S.. F.S.A. (Scot.).
Secretary, Royal Geographical Society. Knight of Swedish Order of
North Star. Commander of the Norwegian Order of St Olaf. Hon.
Member, Geographical Societies of Paris, Berlin, Rome, &c. Editor
of _Statesman's Year Book_. Editor of the _Geographical Journal_.
Finland (_in part_);
Flinders.
J. T. Be.
JOHN T. BEALBY.
Joint Author of Stanford's _Europe_. Formerly Editor of the
_Scottish Geographical Magazine_. Translator of Sven Hedin's
_Through Asia, Central Asia and Tibet_; &c.
Fens;
Ferghana (_in part_).
K. S.
KATHLEEN SCHLESINGER.
Author of _The Instruments of the Orchestra_.
Fiddle;
Fife;
Flageolet;
Flute (_in part_).
L. D.*
LOUIS DUCHESNE.
See the biographical article: DUCHESNE, L. M. O.
Formosus.
L. F. S.
LESLIE FREDERIC SCOTT, M.A., K.C.C.
Barrister-at-Law, Inner Temple.
Factor.
L. J.
LIEUT.-COLONEL LOUIS CHARLES JACKSON, R.E., C.M.G.
Assistant Director of Fortifications and Works, War Office.
Formerly Instructor in Fortification, R.M.A., Woolwich. Instructor
in Fortification and Military Engineering, School of Military
Engineering, Chatham
Fortification and Siegecraft.
L. V.*
LUIGI VILLARI.
Italian Foreign Office (Emigration Dept.). Formerly Newspaper
Correspondent in east of Europe. Italian Vice-Consul in New
Orleans, 1906; Philadelphia, 1907; Boston, U.S.A., 1907-1910.
Author of _Italian Life in Town and Country_; _Fire and Sword in
the Caucasus_; &c.
Faliero;
Fanti, Manfredo;
Farini, Luigi Carlo;
Farnese: _Family_;
Ferdinand I. and IV. of Naples;
Ferdinand II. of the Two Sicilies;
Fiesco; Filangieri, C.;
Florence;
Foscari;
Fossombroni;
Francis II. of the Two Sicilies;
Francis IV. and V. of Modena.
M. Ha.
MARCUS HARTOG, M.A., D.SC, F.L.S.
Professor of Zoology, University College, Cork. Author of
"Protozoa," in _Cambridge Natural History_; and papers for various
scientific journals.
Flagellate;
Foraminifera.
N. W. T.
NORTHCOTE WHITBRIDGE THOMAS, M.A.
Government Anthropologist to Southern Nigeria. Corresponding
Member of the Societe d'Anthropologie de Paris. Author of _Thought
Transference_; _Kinship and Marriage in Australia_; &c.
Faith Healing;
Fetishism;
Folklore.
O. H.*
OTTO HEHNER, F.I.C., F.C.S.
Public Analyst. Formerly President of Society of Public Analysts.
Vice-President of Institute of Chemistry of Great Britain and
Ireland. Author of works on Butter Analysis; Alcohol Tables; &c.
Food Preservation.
O. M.
DAVID ORME MASSON, M.A., D.SC, F.R.S.
Professor of Chemistry, Melbourne University. Author of papers on
chemistry in the transactions of various learned societies.
Fireworks: _Modern_.
P. A.
PAUL DANIEL ALPHANDERY.
Professor of the History of Dogma, Ecole Pratique des Hautes
Etudes, Sorbonne, Paris. Author of _Les Idees morales chez les
heterodoxes latines au debut du XIII^e siecle_.
Flagellants.
P. A. K.
PRINCE PETER ALEXEIVITCH KROPOTKIN.
See the biographical article: KROPOTKIN, P. A.
Ferghana (_in part_);
Finland (_in part_).
P. C. Y.
PHILIP CHESNEY YORKE, M.A.
Magdalen College, Oxford.
Falkland;
Fanshaw;
Fawkes, Guy;
Fell, John;
Fortescue, Sir John.
P. C. M.
PETER CHALMERS MITCHELL, F.R.S., F.Z.S., D.SC, LL.D.
Secretary to the Zoological Society of London. University
Demonstrator in Comparative Anatomy and Assistant to Linacre
Professor at Oxford, 1881-1891. Examiner in Zoology to the
University of London, 1903. Author of _Outlines of Biology_; &c.
Evolution.
P. G. K.
PAUL GEORGE KONODY.
Art Critic of the _Observer_ and the _Daily Mail_. Formerly Editor
of _The Artist_. Author of _The Art of Walter Crane_; _Velasquez,
Life and Work_; &c.
Fiorenzo di Lorenzo;
Fragonard.
P. J. H.
PHILIP JOSEPH HARTOG, M.A., L. ES SC. (Paris).
Academic Registrar of the University of London. Author of _The
Writing of English_, and articles in the Special Reports on
educational subjects of the Board of Education.
Examinations (_in part_).
P. W.
PAUL WIRIATH.
Director of the Ecole Superieure Pratique de Commerce et
d'Industrie, Paris.
France: _History to_ 1870.
R. Ad.
ROBERT ADAMSON, LL.D.
See the biographical article: ADAMSON, R.
Fichte;
Fourier, F. C. M.
R. A. S. M.
ROBERT ALEXANDER STEWART MACALISTER, M.A., F.S.A.
St John's College, Cambridge. Director of Excavations for the
Palestine Exploration Fund.
Font.
R. H. C.
REV. ROBERT HENRY CHARLES, M.A., D.D., D.LITT. (Oxon.).
Grinfield Lecturer and Lecturer in Biblical Studies, Oxford.
Fellow of the British Academy. Formerly Senior Moderator of
Trinity College, Dublin. Author and Editor of _Book of Enoch_;
_Book of Jubilees_; _Apocalypse of Baruch_; _Assumption of Moses_;
_Ascension of Isaiah_; _Testaments of the XII. Patriarchs_; &c.
Ezra: _Third and Fourth Books of_.
R. J. M.
RONALD JOHN MCNEILL, M.A.
Christ Church, Oxford. Barrister-at-Law. Formerly Editor of the
_St James's Gazette_, London.
Fenians;
Fitzgerald, Lord Edward;
Flood, Henry.
R. L.*
RICHARD LYDEKKER, F.R.S., F.G.S., F.Z.S.
Member of the Staff of the Geological Survey of India, 1874-1882.
Author of _Catalogue of Fossil Mammals, Reptiles and Birds in
British Museum_; _The Deer of all Lands_; _The Game Animals of
Africa_; &c.
Flying-Squirrel; Fox.
R. N. B.
ROBERT NISBET BAIN (d. 1909).
Assistant Librarian, British Museum, 1883-1909. Author of
_Scandinavia: the Political History of Denmark, Norway and Sweden,
1513-1900_; _The First Romanovs, 1613-1725_; _Slavonic Europe: the
Political History of Poland and Russia from 1469 to 1796_; &c.
Fersen, Counts von.
R. Po.
RENE POUPARDIN, D. ES L.
Secretary of the Ecole des Chartes. Honorary Librarian at the
Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris. Author of _Le Royaume de Provence
sous les Carolingiens_; _Recueil des chartes de Saint-Germain_;
&c.
Franche-Comte.
R. P. S.
R. PHENE SPIERS, F.S.A., F.R.I.B.A.
Formerly Master of the Architectural School, Royal Academy,
London. Past President of Architectural Association. Associate and
Fellow of King's College, London. Corresponding Member of the
Institute of France. Editor of Fergusson's _History of
Architecture_. Author of _Architecture: East and West_; &c.
Flute: _Architecture_.
R. S. C.
ROBERT SEYMOUR CONWAY, M.A., D.LITT. (Cantab.).
Professor of Latin and Indo-European Philology in the University
of Manchester. Formerly Professor of Latin in University College,
Cardiff; and Fellow of Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge.
Author of _The Italic Dialects_.
Falisci.
R. Tr.
ROLAND TRUSLOVE, M.A.
Formerly Scholar of Christ Church, Oxford. Fellow, Dean and
Lecturer in Classics at Worcester College, Oxford.
France: _Statistics_.
S. A. C.
STANLEY ARTHUR COOK, M.A.
Editor for Palestine Exploration Fund. Lecturer in Hebrew and
Syriac, and formerly Fellow, Gonville and Caius College,
Cambridge. Examiner in Hebrew and Aramaic, London University,
1904-1908. Author of _Glossary of Aramaic Inscriptions_; _The Laws
of Moses and the Code of Hammurabi_; _Critical Notes on Old
Testament History_; _Religion of Ancient Palestine_; &c.
Exodus, The;
Ezra and Nehemiah, Books of.
S. C.
SIDNEY COLVIN, LL.D.
See the biographical article: COLVIN, S.
Fine Arts;
Finiguerra;
Flaxman.
St C.
VISCOUNT ST CYRES.
See the biographical article: IDDESLEIGH, 1ST EARL OF
Fenelon.
S. E. B.
HON. SIMEON EBEN BALDWIN, M.A., LL.D.
Professor of Constitutional and Private International Law in Yale
University. Director of the Bureau of Comparative Law of the
American Bar Association. Formerly Chief Justice of Connecticut.
Author of _Modern Political Institutions_; _American Railroad
Law_; &c.
Extradition: U.S.A.
S. E. S.-R.
STEPHEN EDWARD SPRING-RICE, M.A., C.B. (1856-1902).
Formerly Principal Clerk, H.M. Treasury, and Auditor of the Civil
List. Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge.
Exchequer (_in part_).
T. A. I.
THOMAS ALLAN INGRAM, M.A., LL.D.
Trinity College, Dublin.
Explosives: _Law_.
T. As.
THOMAS ASHBY, M.A., D.LITT. (Oxon.), F.S.A.
Director of British School of Archaeology at Rome. Formerly
Scholar of Christ Church, Oxford. Craven Fellow, 1897.
Corresponding Member of the Imperial German Archaeological
Institute. Author of the _Classical Topography of the Roman
Campagna_; &c.
Faesulae;
Falerii;
Falerio;
Fanum Fortunae;
Ferentino;
Fermo;
Flaminia Via;
Florence: _Early History_;
Fondi;
Fonni;
Forum Appii.
T. Ba.
SIR THOMAS BARCLAY, M.P.
Member of the Institute of International Law. Member of the
Supreme Council of the Congo Free State. Officer of the Legion of
Honour. Author of _Problems of International Practice and
Diplomacy_; &c. M.P. for Blackburn, 1910.
Exterritoriality.
T. H. H.*
SIR THOMAS HUNGERFORD HOLDICH, K.C.M.G., K.C.I.E., D.SC., F.R.G.S.
Colonel in the Royal Engineers. Superintendent, Frontier Surveys,
India, 1892-1898. Gold Medallist, R.G.S., London, 1887. H.M.
Commissioner for the Persia-Beluch Boundary, 1896. Author of _The
Indian Borderland_; _The Gates of India_; &c.
Everest, Mount.
T. K. C.
REV. THOMAS KELLY CHEYNE, D.D.
See the biographical article: CHEYNE, T. K.
Eve (_in part_).
T. Se.
THOMAS SECCOMBE, M.A.
Lecturer in History, East London and Birkbeck Colleges, University
of London. Stanhope Prizeman, Oxford, 1887. Formerly Assistant
Editor of _Dictionary of National Biography_, 1891-1901.
Joint-author of _The Bookman History of English Literature_.
Author of _The Age of Johnson_; &c.
Fawcett, Henry.
T. Wo.
THOMAS WOODHOUSE.
Head of Weaving and Textile Designing Department, Technical
College, Dundee.
Flax.
V. M.
VICTOR CHARLES MAHILLON.
Principal of the Conservatoire Royal de Musique at Brussels.
Chevalier of the Legion of Honour.
Flute (_in part_).
W. A. B. C.
REV. WILLIAM AUGUSTUS BREVOORT COOLIDGE, M.A., F.R.G.S., Ph.D. (Bern).
Fellow of Magdalen College, Oxford. Professor of English History,
St David's College, Lampeter, 1880-1881. Author of _Guide to
Switzerland_; _The Alps in Nature and in History_; &c. Editor of
the _Alpine Journal_, 1880-1889.
Feldkirch.
W. A. P.
WALTER ALISON PHILLIPS, M.A.
Formerly Exhibitioner of Merton College and Senior Scholar of St
John's College, Oxford. Author of _Modern Europe_; &c.
Excellency;
Faust;
Febronianism.
W. B.*
WILLIAM BURTON, M.A., F.C.S.
Chairman, Joint Committee of Pottery Manufacturers of Great
Britain. Author of _English Stoneware and Earthenware_; &c.
Firebrick (_in part_).
W. Ca.
WALTER CAMP, A.M.
Member of Yale University Council. Author of _American Football_;
_Football Facts and Figures_; &c.
Football: _American_ (_in part_).
W. Ga.
WALTER GARSTANG, M.A., D.SC.
Professor of Zoology at the University of Leeds. Scientific
Adviser to H.M. Delegates on the International Council for the
Exploration of the Sea, 1901-1907. Formerly Fellow of Lincoln
College, Oxford. Author of _The Races and Migrations of the
Mackerel_; _The Impoverishment of the Sea_; &c.
Fisheries.
W. He.
WALTER HEPWORTH.
Formerly Commissioner of the Council of Education, Science and Art
Department, South Kensington.
Fool.
W. M. R.
WILLIAM MICHAEL ROSSETTI.
See the biographical article: ROSSETTI, DANTE G.
Ferrari, Gaudenzio;
Fielding, Copley;
Franceschi, Piero;
Francia.
W. P. P.
WILLIAM PLANE PYCRAFT, F.Z.S.
Assistant in the Zoological Department, British Museum. Formerly
Assistant Linacre Professor of Comparative Anatomy, Oxford.
Vice-President of the Selborne Society. Author of _A History of
Birds_; &c.
Feather (_in part_).
W. N. S.
WILLIAM NAPIER SHAW, M.A., LL.D., D.SC, F.R.S.
Director of the Meteorological Office. Reader in Meteorology in
the University of London. President of Permanent International
Meteorological Committee. Member of Meteorological Council,
1897-1905. Hon. Fellow of Emmanuel College, Cambridge. Fellow of
Emmanuel College, 1877-1899; Senior Tutor, 1890-1899. Joint Author
of _Text Book of Practical Physics_; &c.
Fog.
W. P. R.
HON. WILLIAM PEMBER REEVES.
Director of London School of Economics. Agent-General and High
Commissioner for New Zealand, 1896-1909. Minister of Education,
Labour and Justice, New Zealand, 1891-1896. Author of _The Long
White Cloud, a History of New Zealand_; &c.
Fox, Sir William.
W. R. S.
WILLIAM ROBERTSON SMITH, LL.D.
See the biographical article: SMITH, W. R.
Eve (_in part_).
W. R. E. H.
WILLIAM RICHARD EATON HODGKINSON, PH.D., F.R.S.
Professor of Chemistry and Physics, Ordnance College, Woolwich.
Formerly Professor of Chemistry and Physics, R.M.A., Woolwich.
Part Author of Valentin-Hodgkinson's _Practical Chemistry_; &c.
Explosives.
W. Sch.
SIR WILHELM SCHLICH, K.C.I.E., M.A., PH.D., F.R.S., F.L.S.
Professor of Forestry at the University of Oxford. Hon. Fellow of
St John's College. Author of _A Manual of Forestry_; _Forestry in
the United Kingdom_; _The Outlook of the World's Timber Supply_;
&c.
Forests and Forestry.
W. W. F.*
WILLIAM WARDE FOWLER, M.A.
Fellow of Lincoln College, Oxford. Sub-rector, 1881-1904. Gifford
Lecturer, Edinburgh University, 1908. Author of _The City-State of
the Greeks and Romans_; _The Roman Festivals of the Republican
Period_; &c.
Fortuna.
W. W. R.*
WILLIAM WALKER ROCKWELL, LIC. THEOL.
Assistant Professor of Church History, Union Theological Seminary,
New York. Author of _Die Doppelehe des Landgrafen Philipp von
Hessen_.
Ferrara-Florence, Council of.
Principal Unsigned Articles
Evil Eye. Fault. Fig. Fontenoy.
Excise. Federal Government. Filigree. Foot and Mouth
Execution. Federalist Party. Fir. Disease.
Executors and Fehmic Courts. Fives. Forest Laws.
Administrators. Felony. Fleurus. Forfarshire.
Exeter. Fez. Florida. Forgery.
Exile. Fezzan. Foix. Formosa.
Eylau. Fictions. Fold. Foundling
Famine. Fife. Fontenelle. Hospitals.
Fountain.
FOOTNOTE:
[1] A complete list, showing all individual contributors, appears in
the final volume.
ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITANNICA
ELEVENTH EDITION
VOLUME X
EVANGELICAL CHURCH CONFERENCE, a convention of delegates from the
different Protestant churches of Germany. The conference originated in
1848, when the general desire for political unity made itself felt in
the ecclesiastical sphere as well. A preliminary meeting was held at
Sandhof near Frankfort in June of that year, and on the 21st of
September some five hundred delegates representing the Lutheran, the
Reformed, the United and the Moravian churches assembled at Wittenberg.
The gathering was known as _Kirchentag_ (church diet), and, while
leaving each denomination free in respect of constitution, ritual,
doctrine and attitude towards the state, agreed to act unitedly in
bearing witness against the non-evangelical churches and in defending
the rights and liberties of the churches in the federation. The
organization thus closely resembles that of the Free Church Federation
in England. The movement exercised considerable influence during the
middle of the 19th century. Though no _Kirchentag_, as such, has been
convened since 1871, its place has been taken by the _Kongress fur
innere Mission_, which holds annual meetings in different towns. There
is also a biennial conference of the evangelical churches held at
Eisenach to discuss matters of general interest. Its decisions have no
legislative force.
EVANGELICAL UNION, a religious denomination which originated in the
suspension of the Rev. James Morison (1816-1893), minister of a United
Secession congregation in Kilmarnock, Scotland, for certain views
regarding faith, the work of the Holy Spirit in salvation, and the
extent of the atonement, which were regarded by the supreme court of his
church as anti-Calvinistic and heretical. Morison was suspended by the
presbytery in 1841 and thereupon definitely withdrew from the Secession
Church. His father, who was minister at Bathgate, and two other
ministers, being deposed not long afterwards for similar opinions, the
four met at Kilmarnock on the 16th of May 1843 (two days before the
"Disruption" of the Free Church), and, on the basis of certain doctrinal
principles, formed themselves into an association under the name of the
Evangelical Union, "for the purpose of countenancing, counselling and
otherwise aiding one another, and also for the purpose of training up
spiritual and devoted young men to carry forward the work and 'pleasure
of the Lord.'" The doctrinal views of the new denomination gradually
assumed a more decidedly anti-Calvinistic form, and they began also to
find many sympathizers among the Congregationalists of Scotland. Nine
students were expelled from the Congregational Academy for holding
"Morisonian" doctrines, and in 1845 eight churches were disjoined from
the Congregational Union of Scotland and formed a connexion with the
Evangelical Union. The Union exercised no jurisdiction over the
individual churches connected with it, and in this respect adhered to
the Independent or Congregational form of church government; but those
congregations which originally were Presbyterian vested their government
in a body of elders. In 1889 the denomination numbered 93 churches; and
in 1896, after prolonged negotiation, the Evangelical Union was
incorporated with the Congregational Union of Scotland.
See _The Evangelical Union Annual; History of the Evangelical Union_,
by F. Ferguson (Glasgow, 1876); _The Worthies of the E. U._ (1883); W.
Adamson, _Life of Dr James Morison_ (1898).
EVANS, CHRISTMAS (1766-1838), Welsh Nonconformist divine, was born near
the village of Llandyssul, Cardiganshire, on the 25th of December 1766.
His father, a shoemaker, died early, and the boy grew up as an
illiterate farm labourer. At the age of seventeen, becoming servant to a
Presbyterian minister, David Davies, he was affected by a religious
revival and learned to read and write in English and Welsh. The
itinerant Calvinistic Methodist preachers and the members of the Baptist
church at Llandyssul further influenced him, and he soon joined the
latter denomination. In 1789 he went into North Wales as a preacher and
settled for two years in the desolate peninsula of Lleyn,
Carnarvonshire, whence he removed to Llangefni in Anglesey. Here, on a
stipend of L17 a year, supplemented by a little tract-selling, he built
up a strong Baptist community, modelling his organization to some extent
on that of the Calvinistic Methodists. Many new chapels were built, the
money being collected on preaching tours which Evans undertook in South
Wales.
In 1826 Evans accepted an invitation to Caerphilly, where he remained
for two years, removing in 1828 to Cardiff. In 1832, in response to
urgent calls from the north, he settled in Carnarvon and again undertook
the old work of building and collecting. He was taken ill on a tour in
South Wales, and died at Swansea on the 19th of July 1838. In spite of
his early disadvantages and personal disfigurement (he had lost an eye
in a youthful brawl), Christmas Evans was a remarkably powerful
preacher. To a natural aptitude for this calling he united a nimble mind
and an inquiring spirit; his character was simple, his piety humble and
his faith fervently evangelical. For a time he came under Sandemanian
influence, and when the Wesleyans entered Wales he took the Calvinist
side in the bitter controversies that were frequent from 1800 to 1810.
His chief characteristic was a vivid and affluent imagination, which
absorbed and controlled all his other powers, and earned for him the
name of "the Bunyan of Wales."
His works were edited by Owen Davies in 3 vols. (Carnarvon,
1895-1897). See the _Lives_ by D.R. Stephens (1847) and Paxton Hood
(1883).
EVANS, EVAN HERBER (1836-1896), Welsh Nonconformist divine, was born on
the 5th of July 1836, at Pant yr Onen near Newcastle Emlyn,
Cardiganshire. As a boy he saw something of the "Rebecca Riots," and
went to school at the neighbouring village of Llechryd. In 1853 he went
into business, first at Pontypridd and then at Merthyr, but next year
made his way to Liverpool. He decided to enter the ministry, and studied
arts and theology respectively at the Normal College, Swansea, and the
Memorial College, Brecon, his convictions being deepened by the
religious revival of 1858-1859. In 1862 he succeeded Thomas Jones as
minister of the Congregational church at Morriston near Swansea. In 1865
he became pastor of Salem church, Carnarvon, a charge which he occupied
for nearly thirty years despite many invitations to English pastorates.
In 1894 he became principal of the Congregational college at Bangor. He
died on the 30th of December 1896. He was chairman of the Welsh
Congregational Union in 1886 and of the Congregational Union of England
and Wales in 1892; and by his earnest ministry, his eloquence and his
literary work, especially in the denominational paper _Y Dysgedydd_, he
achieved a position of great influence in his country.
See _Life_ by H. Elvet Lewis.
EVANS, SIR GEORGE DE LACY (1787-1870), British soldier, was born at
Moig, Limerick, in 1787. He was educated at Woolwich Academy, and
entered the army in 1806 as a volunteer, obtaining an ensigncy in the
22nd regiment in 1807. His early service was spent in India, but he
exchanged into the 3rd Light Dragoons in order to take part in the
Peninsular War, and was present in the retreat from Burgos in 1812. In
1813 he was at Vittoria, and was afterwards employed in making a
military survey of the passes of the Pyrenees. He took part in the
campaign of 1814, and was present at Pampeluna, the Nive and Toulouse;
and later in the year he served with great distinction on the staff in
General Ross's Bladensburg campaign, and took part in the capture of
Washington and of Baltimore and the operations before New Orleans. He
returned to England in the spring of 1815, in time to take part in the
Waterloo campaign as assistant quartermaster-general on Sir T. Picton's
staff. As a member of the staff of the duke of Wellington he accompanied
the English army to Paris, and remained there during the occupation of
the city by the allies. He was still a substantive captain in the 5th
West India regiment, though a lieutenant-colonel by brevet, when he went
on half-pay in 1818. In 1830 he was elected M.P. for Rye in the Liberal
interest; but in the election of 1832 he was an unsuccessful candidate
both for that borough and for Westminster. For the latter constituency
he was, however, returned in 1833, and, except in the parliament of
1841-1846, he continued to represent it till 1865, when he retired from
political life. His parliamentary duties did not, however, interfere
with his career as a soldier. In 1835 he went out to Spain in command of
the Spanish Legion, recruited in England, and 9600 strong, which served
for two years in the Carlist War on the side of the queen of Spain. In
spite of great difficulties the legion won great distinction on the
battlefields of northern Spain, and Evans was able to say that no
prisoners had been taken from it in action, that it had never lost a gun
or an equipage, and that it had taken 27 guns and 1100 prisoners from
the enemy. He received several Spanish orders, and on his return in 1839
was made a colonel and K.C.B. In 1846 he became major-general; and in
1854, on the breaking-out of the Crimean War, he was made
lieutenant-general and appointed to command the 2nd division of the Army
of the East. At the battle of the Alma, where he received a severe
wound, his quick comprehension of the features of the combat largely
contributed to the victory. On the 26th of October he defeated a large
Russian force which attacked his position on Mount Inkerman. Illness and
fatigue compelled him a few days after this to leave the command of his
division in the hands of General Pennefather; but he rose from his
sick-bed on the day of the battle of Inkerman, the 5th of November, and,
declining to take the command of his division from Pennefather, aided
him in the long-protracted struggle by his advice. On his return
invalided to England in the following February, Evans received the
thanks of the House of Commons. He was made a G.C.B., and the university
of Oxford conferred on him the degree of D.C.L. In 1861 he was promoted
to the full rank of general. He died in London on the 9th of January
1870.
EVANS, SIR JOHN (1823-1908), English archaeologist and geologist, son of
the Rev. Dr A.B. Evans, head master of Market Bosworth grammar school,
was born at Britwell Court, Bucks, on the 17th of November 1823. He was
for many years head of the extensive paper manufactory of Messrs John
Dickinson at Nash Mills, Hemel Hempstead, but was especially
distinguished as an antiquary and numismatist. He was the author of
three books, standard in their respective departments: _The Coins of the
Ancient Britons_ (1864); _The Ancient Stone Implements, Weapons and
Ornaments of Great Britain_ (1872, 2nd ed. 1897); and _The Ancient
Bronze Implements, Weapons and Ornaments of Great Britain and Ireland_
(1881). He also wrote a number of separate papers on archaeological and
geological subjects--notably the papers on "Flint Implements in the
Drift" communicated in 1860 and 1862 to _Archaeologia_, the organ of the
Society of Antiquaries. Of that society he was president from 1885 to
1892, and he was president of the Numismatic Society from 1874 to the
time of his death. He also presided over the Geological Society,
1874-1876; the Anthropological Institute, 1877-1879; the Society of
Chemical Industry, 1892-1893; the British Association, 1897-1898; and
for twenty years (1878-1898) he was treasurer of the Royal Society. As
president of the Society of Antiquaries he was an _ex officio_ trustee
of the British Museum, and subsequently he became a permanent trustee.
His academic honours included honorary degrees from several
universities, and he was a corresponding member of the Institut de
France. He was created a K.C.B. in 1892. He died at Berkhamsted on the
31st of May 1908.
His eldest son, ARTHUR JOHN EVANS, born in 1851, was educated at
Brasenose College, Oxford, and Gottingen. He became fellow of Brasenose
and in 1884 keeper of the Ashmolean Museum at Oxford. He travelled in
Finland and Lapland in 1873-1874, and in 1875 made a special study of
archaeology and ethnology in the Balkan States. In 1893 he began his
investigations in Crete, which have resulted in discoveries of the
utmost importance concerning the early history of Greece and the eastern
Mediterranean (see AEGEAN CIVILIZATION AND CRETE). He is a member of all
the chief archaeological societies in Europe, holds honorary degrees at
Oxford, Edinburgh and Dublin, and is a fellow of the Royal Society. His
chief publications are: _Cretan Pictographs and Prae-Phoenician Script_
(1896); _Further Discoveries of Cretan and Aegean Script_ (1898); _The
Mycenaean Tree and Pillar Cult_ (1901); _Scripta Minoa_ (1909 foll.);
and reports on the excavations. He also edited with additions Freeman's
_History of Sicily_, vol. iv.
EVANS, OLIVER (1755-1819), American mechanician, was born at Newport,
Delaware, in 1755. He was apprenticed to a wheelwright, and at the age
of twenty-two he invented a machine for making the card-teeth used in
carding wool and cotton. In 1780 he became partner with his brothers,
who were practical millers, and soon introduced various labour-saving
appliances which both cheapened and improved the processes of
flour-milling. Turning his attention to the steam engine, he employed
steam at a relatively high pressure, and the plans of his invention
which he sent over to England in 1787 and in 1794-1795 are said to have
been seen by R. Trevithick, whom in that case he anticipated in the
adoption of the high-pressure principle. He made use of his engine for
driving mill machinery; and in 1803 he constructed a steam dredging
machine, which also propelled itself on land. In 1819 a disastrous fire
broke out in his factory at Pittsburg, and he did not long survive it,
dying at New York on the 21st of April 1819.
EVANSON, EDWARD (1731-1805), English divine, was born on the 21st of
April 1731 at Warrington, Lancashire. After graduating at Cambridge
(Emmanuel College) and taking holy orders, he officiated for several
years as curate at Mitcham. In 1768 he became vicar of South Mimms near
Barnet; and in November 1769 he was presented to the rectory of
Tewkesbury, with which he held also the vicarage of Longdon in
Worcestershire. In the course of his studies he discovered what he
thought important variance between the teaching of the Church of England
and that of the Bible, and he did not conceal his convictions. In
reading the service he altered or omitted phrases which seemed to him
untrue, and in reading the Scriptures pointed out errors in the
translation. A crisis was brought on by his sermon on the resurrection,
preached at Easter 1771; and in November 1773 a prosecution was
instituted against him in the consistory court of Gloucester. He was
charged with "depraving the public worship of God contained in the
liturgy of the Church of England, asserting the same to be superstitious
and unchristian, preaching, writing and conversing against the creeds
and the divinity of our Saviour, and assuming to himself the power of
making arbitrary alterations in his performance of the public worship."
A protest was at once signed and published by a large number of his
parishioners against the prosecution. The case was dismissed on
technical grounds, but appeals were made to the court of arches and the
court of delegates. Meanwhile Evanson had made his views generally known
by several publications. In 1772 appeared anonymously his _Doctrines of
a Trinity and the Incarnation of God, examined upon the Principles of
Reason and Common Sense_. This was followed in 1777 by _A Letter to Dr
Hurd, Bishop of Worcester, wherein the Importance of the Prophecies of
the New Testament and the Nature of the Grand Apostasy predicted in them
are particularly and impartially considered_. He also wrote some papers
on the Sabbath, which brought him into controversy with Joseph
Priestley, who published the whole discussion (1792). In the same year
appeared Evanson's work entitled _The Dissonance of the four generally
received Evangelists_, to which replies were published by Priestley and
David Simpson (1793). Evanson rejected most of the books of the New
Testament as forgeries, and of the four gospels he accepted only that of
St Luke. In his later years he ministered to a Unitarian congregation at
Lympston, Devonshire. In 1802 he published _Reflections upon the State
of Religion in Christendom_, in which he attempted to explain and
illustrate the mysterious foreshadowings of the Apocalypse. This he
considered the most important of his writings. Shortly before his death
at Colford, near Crediton, Devonshire, on the 25th of September 1805, he
completed his _Second Thoughts on the Trinity_, in reply to a work of
the bishop of Gloucester.
His sermons (prefaced by a Life by G. Rogers) were published in two
volumes in 1807, and were the occasion of T. Falconer's _Bampton
Lectures_ in 1811. A narrative of the circumstances which led to the
prosecution of Evanson was published by N. Havard, the town-clerk of
Tewkesbury, in 1778.
EVANSTON, a city of Cook county, Illinois, U.S.A., on the shore of Lake
Michigan, 12 m. N. of Chicago. Pop. (1900) 19,259, of whom 4441 were
foreign-born; (1910 U.S. census) 24,978. It is served by the Chicago &
North-Western, and the Chicago, Milwaukee & St Paul railways, and by two
electric lines. The city is an important residential suburb of Chicago.
In 1908 the Evanston public library had 41,430 volumes. In the city are
the College of Liberal Arts (1855), the Academy (1860), and the schools
of music (1895) and engineering (1908) of Northwestern University,
co-educational, chartered in 1851, opened in 1855, the largest school of
the Methodist Episcopal Church in America. In 1909-1910 it had
productive funds amounting to about $7,500,000, and, including all the
allied schools, a faculty of 418 instructors and 4487 students; its
schools of medicine (1869), law (1859), pharmacy (1886), commerce (1908)
and dentistry (1887) are in Chicago. In 1909 its library had 114,869
volumes and 79,000 pamphlets (exclusive of the libraries of the
professional schools in Chicago); and the Garrett Biblical Institute had
a library of 25,671 volumes and 4500 pamphlets. The university maintains
the Grand Prairie Seminary at Onarga, Iroquois county, and the Elgin
Academy at Elgin, Kane county. Enjoying the privileges of the
university, though actually independent of it, are the Garrett Biblical
Institute (Evanston Theological Seminary), founded in 1855, situated on
the university campus, and probably the best-endowed Methodist Episcopal
theological seminary in the United States, and affiliated with the
Institute, the Norwegian Danish Theological school; and the Swedish
Theological Seminary, founded at Galesburg in 1870, removed to Evanston
in 1882, and occupying buildings on the university campus until 1907,
when it removed to Orrington Avenue and Noyes Street. The Cumnock School
of Oratory, at Evanston, also co-operates with the university. By the
charter of the university the sale of intoxicating liquors is forbidden
within 4 m. of the university campus. The manufacturing importance of
the city is slight, but is rapidly increasing. The principal
manufactures are wrought iron and steel pipe, bakers' machinery and
bricks. In 1905 the value of the factory products was $2,550,529, being
an increase of 207.3% since 1900. In Evanston are the publishing offices
of the National Woman's Christian Temperance Union. Evanston was
incorporated as a town in 1863 and as a village in 1872, and was
chartered as a city in 1892. The villages of North Evanston and South
Evanston were annexed to Evanston in 1874 and 1892 respectively.
EVANSVILLE, a city and the county-seat of Vanderburg county, Indiana,
U.S.A., and a port of entry, on the N. bank of the Ohio river, 200 m.
below Louisville, Kentucky--measuring by the windings of the river,
which double the direct distance. Pop. (1890) 50,756; (1900) 59,007;
(1910 census) 69,647. Of the total population in 1900, 5518 were
negroes, 5626 were foreign-born (including 4380 from Germany and 384
from England), and 17,419 were of foreign parentage (both parents
foreign-born), and of these 13,910 were of German parentage. Evansville
is served by the Evansville & Terre Haute, the Evansville &
Indianapolis, the Illinois Central, the Louisville & Nashville, the
Louisville, Henderson & St Louis, and the Southern railways, by several
interurban electric lines, and by river steamboats. The city is situated
on a plateau above the river, and has a number of fine business and
public buildings, including the court house and city hall, the Southern
Indiana hospital for the insane, the United States marine hospital, and
the Willard library and art gallery, containing in 1908 about 30,000
volumes. The city's numerous railway connexions and its situation in a
coal-producing region (there are five mines within the city limits) and
on the Ohio river, which is navigable nearly all the year, combine to
make it the principal commercial and manufacturing centre of Southern
Indiana. It is in a tobacco-growing region, is one of the largest
hardwood lumber markets in the country, and has an important shipping
trade in pork, agricultural products, dried fruits, lime and limestone,
flour and tobacco. Among its manufactures in 1905 were flour and grist
mill products (value, $2,638,914), furniture ($1,655,246), lumber and
timber products ($1,229,533), railway cars ($1,118,376), packed meats
($998,428), woollen and cotton goods, cigars and cigarettes, malt
liquors, carriages and wagons, leather and canned goods. The value of
the factory products increased from $12,167,524 in 1900 to $19,201,716
in 1905, or 57.8%, and in the latter year Evansville ranked third among
the manufacturing cities in the state. The waterworks are owned and
operated by the city. First settled about 1812, Evansville was laid out
in 1817, and was named in honour of Robert Morgan Evans (1783-1844), one
of its founders, who was an officer under General W.H. Harrison in the
war of 1812. It soon became a thriving commercial town with an extensive
river trade, was incorporated in 1819, and received a city charter in
1847. The completion of the Wabash & Erie Canal, in 1853, from
Evansville to Toledo, Ohio, a distance of 400 m., greatly accelerated
the city's growth.
EVARISTUS, fourth pope (c. 98-105), was the immediate successor of
Clement.
EVARTS, WILLIAM MAXWELL (1818-1901), American lawyer, was born in Boston
on the 6th of February 1818. He graduated at Yale in 1837, was admitted
to the bar in New York in 1841, and soon took high rank in his
profession. In 1860 he was chairman of the New York delegation to the
Republican national convention. In 1861 he was an unsuccessful candidate
for the United States senatorship from New York. He was chief counsel
for President Johnson during the impeachment trial, and from July 1868
until March 1869 he was attorney-general of the United States. In 1872
he was counsel for the United States in the "Alabama" arbitration.
During President Hayes's administration (1877-1881) he was secretary of
state; and from 1885 to 1891 he was one of the senators from New York.
As an orator Senator Evarts stood in the foremost rank, and some of his
best speeches were published. He died in New York on the 28th of
February 1901.
EVE, the English transcription, through Lat. _Eva_ and Gr. [Greek: Eua],
of the Hebrew name [Hebrew: Hava] Havvah, given by Adam to his wife
because she was "mother of all living," or perhaps more strictly, "of
every group of those connected by female kinship" (see W.R. Smith,
_Kinship_, 2nd ed., p. 208), as if Eve were the personification of
mother-kinship, just as Adam ("man") is the personification of mankind.
[The abstract meaning "life" (LXX. [Greek: Zoe]), once favoured by
Robertson Smith, is at any rate unsuitable in a popular story.
Wellhausen and Noldeke would compare the Ar. _hayyatun_, "serpent," and
the former remarks that, if this is right, the Israelites received their
first ancestress from the Hivvites (Hivites), who were originally the
serpent-tribe (_Composition des Hexateuchs_, p. 343; cf. _Reste
arabischen Heidentums_, 2nd ed., p. 154). Cheyne, too, assumes a common
origin for Havvah and the Hivvites.]
Creation of Eve.
[The account of the origin of Eve (Gen. iii. 21-23) runs thus: "And
Yahweh-Elohim caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept.
And he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh in its stead, and
the rib which Yahweh-Elohim had taken from the man he built up into a
woman, and he brought her to the man." Enchanted at the sight, the man
now burst out into elevated, rhythmic speech: "This one," he said, "at
length is bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh," &c.; to which the
narrator adds the comment, "Therefore doth a man forsake his father and
his mother, and cleave to his wife, and they become one flesh (body)."
Whether this comment implies the existence of the custom of _beena_,
marriage (W.R. Smith, _Kinship_, 2nd ed., p. 208), seems doubtful. It is
at least equally possible that the expression "his wife" simply reflects
the fact that among ordinary Israelites circumstances had quite
naturally brought about the prevalence of monogamy.[1] What the narrator
gives is not a doctrine of marriage, much less a precept, but an
explanation of a simple and natural phenomenon. How is it, he asks, that
a man is so irresistibly drawn towards a woman? And he answers: Because
the first woman was built up out of a rib of the first man. At the same
time it is plain that the already existing tendency towards monogamy
must have been powerfully assisted by this presentation of Eve's story
as well as by the prophetic descriptions of Yahweh's relation to Israel
under the figure of a monogamous union.]
New Testament application.
[The narrator is no rhetorician, and spares us a description of the
ideal woman. But we know that, for Adam, his strangely produced wife was
a "help (or helper) matching or corresponding to him"; or, as the
Authorized Version puts it, "a help meet for him" (ii. 18b). This does
not, of course, exclude subordination on the part of the woman; what is
excluded is that exaggeration of natural subordination which the
narrator may have found both in his own and in the neighbouring
countries, and which he may have regarded as (together with the pains of
parturition) the punishment of the woman's transgression (Gen. iii. 16).
His own ideal of woman seems to have made its way in Palestine by slow
degrees. An apocryphal book (Tobit viii. 6, 7) seems to contain the only
reference to the section till we come to the time of Christ, to whom the
comment in Gen. ii. 24 supplies the text for an authoritative
prohibition of divorce, which presupposes and sanctifies monogamy (Matt.
x. 7, 8; Matt. xix. 5). For other New Testament applications of the
story of Eve see 1 Cor. xi. 8, 9 (especially); 2 Cor. xi. 3; 1 Tim. ii.
13, 14; and in general cf. ADAM, and _Ency. Biblica_, "Adam and Eve."]
Imaginative or legendary developments.
[The seeming omissions in the Biblical narrative have been filled up by
imaginative Jewish writers.] The earliest source which remains to us is
the Book of Jubilees, or Leptogenesis, a Palestinian work (referred by
R.H. Charles to the century immediately preceding the Christian era; see
APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE). In this book, which was largely used by
Christian writers, we find a chronology of the lives of Adam and Eve and
the names of their daughters--Avan and Azura.[2] The Targum of Jonathan
informs us that Eve was created from the thirteenth rib of Adam's right
side, thus taking the view that Adam had a rib more than his
descendants. Some of the Jewish legends show clear marks of foreign
influence. Thus the notion that the first man was a double being,
afterwards separated into the two persons of Adam and Eve (_Berachot_,
61; _Erubin_, 18), may be traced back to Philo (_De mundi opif._ S53;
cf. _Quaest. in Gen._ lib. i. S25), who borrows the idea, and almost the
words, of the myth related by Aristophanes in the Platonic _Symposium_
(189 D, 190 A), which, in extravagant form, explains the passion of love
by the legend that male and female originally formed one body.
[A recent critic[3] (F. Schwally) even holds that this notion was
originally expressed in the account of the creation of man in Gen. i.
27. This involves a textual emendation, and one must at least admit that
the present text is not without difficulty, and that Berossus refers to
the existence of primeval monstrous androgynous beings according to
Babylonian mythology.] There is an analogous Iranian legend of the true
man, which parted into man and woman in the Bundahish[4] (the Parsi
Genesis), and an Indian legend, which, according to Spiegel, has
presumably an Iranian source.[5]
Course of Jewish and Christian interpretation.
[It has been remarked elsewhere (ADAM, S16) that though the later Jews
gathered material for thought very widely, such guidance as they
required in theological reflection was mainly derived from Greek
culture. What, for instance, was to be made of such a story as that in
Gen. ii.-iv.? To "minds trained under the influence of the Jewish
Haggada, in which the whole Biblical history is freely intermixed with
legendary and parabolic matter," the question as to the literal truth of
that story could hardly be formulated. It is otherwise when the Greek
leaven begins to work.]
Josephus, in the prologue to his _Archaeology_, reserves the problem of
the true meaning of the Mosaic narrative, but does not regard everything
as strictly literal. Philo, the great representative of Alexandrian
allegory, expressly argues that in the nature of things the trees of
life and knowledge cannot be taken otherwise than symbolically. His
interpretation of the creation of Eve is, as has been already observed,
plainly suggested by a Platonic myth. The longing for reunion which love
implants in the divided halves of the original dual man is the source of
sensual pleasure (symbolized by the serpent), which in turn is the
beginning of all transgression. Eve represents the sensuous or
perceptive part of man's nature, Adam the reason. The serpent,
therefore, does not venture to attack Adam directly. It is sense which
yields to pleasure, and in turn enslaves the reason and destroys its
immortal virtue. This exposition, in which the elements of the Bible
narrative become mere symbols of the abstract notions of Greek
philosophy, and are adapted to Greek conceptions of the origin of evil
in the material and sensuous part of man, was adopted into Christian
theology by Clement and Origen, notwithstanding its obvious
inconsistency with the Pauline anthropology, and the difficulty which
its supporters felt in reconciling it with the Christian doctrine of the
excellence of the married state (Clemens Alex. _Stromata_, p. 174).
These difficulties had more weight with the Western church, which, less
devoted to speculative abstractions and more deeply influenced by the
Pauline anthropology, refused, especially since Augustine, to reduce
Paradise and the fall to the region of pure _intelligibilia_; though a
spiritual sense was admitted along with the literal (Aug. _Civ. Dei_,
xiii. 21).[6]
The history of Adam and Eve became the basis of anthropological
discussions which acquired more than speculative importance from their
connexion with the doctrine of original sin and the meaning of the
sacrament of baptism. One or two points in Augustinian teaching may be
here mentioned as having to do particularly with Eve. The question
whether the soul of Eve was derived from Adam or directly infused by the
Creator is raised as an element in the great problem of traducianism and
creationism (_De Gen. ad lit._ lib. x.). And it is from Augustine that
Milton derives the idea that Adam sinned, not from desire for the
forbidden fruit, but because love forbade him to dissociate his fate
from Eve's (_ibid._ lib. xi. _sub fin._). Medieval discussion moved
mainly in the lines laid down by Augustine. A sufficient sample of the
way in which the subject was treated by the schoolmen may be found in
the _Summa_ of Thomas, pars i. qu. xcii. _De productione mulieris_.
The Reformers, always hostile to allegory, and in this matter especially
influenced by the Augustinian anthropology, adhered strictly to the
literal interpretation of the history of the Protoplasts, which has
continued to be generally identified with Protestant orthodoxy. The
disintegration of the confessional doctrine of sin in last century was
naturally associated with new theories of the meaning of the biblical
narrative; but neither renewed forms of the allegorical interpretation,
in which everything is reduced to abstract ideas about reason and
sensuality, nor the attempts of Eichhorn and others to extract a kernel
of simple history by allowing largely for the influence of poetical form
in so early a narrative, have found lasting acceptance. On the other
hand, the strict historical interpretation is beset with difficulties
which modern interpreters have felt with increasing force, and which
there is a growing disposition to solve by adopting in one or other form
what is called the _mythical_ theory of the narrative. But
interpretations pass under this now popular title which have no real
claim to be so designated. What is common to the "mythical"
interpretations is to find the real value of the narrative, not in the
form of the story, but in the thoughts which it embodies. But the story
cannot be called a myth in the strict sense of the word, unless we are
prepared to place it on one line with the myths of heathenism, produced
by the unconscious play of plastic fancy, giving shape to the
impressions of natural phenomena on primitive observers. Such a theory
does no justice to a narrative which embodies profound truths peculiar
to the religion of revelation. Other forms of the so-called mythical
interpretation are little more than abstract allegory in a new guise,
ignoring the fact that the biblical story does not teach general truths
which repeat themselves in every individual, but gives a view of the
purpose of man's creation, and of the origin of sin, in connexion with
the divine plan of redemption. Among his other services in refutation of
the unhistorical rationalism of last century, Kant has the merit of
having forcibly recalled attention to the fact that the narrative of
Genesis, even if we do not take it literally, must be regarded as
presenting a view of the beginnings of the history of the human race
(_Muthmasslicher Anfang der Menschengeschichte_, 1786) Those who
recognize this fact ought not to call themselves or be called by others
adherents of the mythical theory, although they also recognize that in
the nature of things the divine truths brought out in the history of the
creation and fall could not have been expressed either in the form of
literal history or in the shape of abstract metaphysical doctrine; or
even although they may hold--as is done by many who accept the narrative
as a part of supernatural revelation--that the specific biblical truths
which the narrative conveys are presented through the vehicle of a story
which, at least in some of its parts, may possibly be shaped by the
influence of legends common to the Hebrews with their heathen
neighbours. (W. R. S.; [T. K. C.])
FOOTNOTES:
[1] That polygamy had not become morally objectionable is shown by
the stories of Lamech, Abraham and Jacob.
[2] See West's authoritative translation in _Pahlavi Texts_ (Sacred
Books of the East).
[3] "Die bibl. Schopfungsberichte" (_Archiv fur
Religionswissenschaft_, ix. 171 ff.).
[4] Spiegel, _Eranische Alterthumskunde_, i. 511.
[5] Muir, _Sanscrit Texts_, vol. i. p. 25; cf. Spiegel, vol. i. p.
458.
[6] Thus in medieval theology Eve is a type of the church, and her
formation from the rib has a mystic reason, inasmuch as blood and
water (the sacraments of the church) flowed from the side of Christ
on the cross (Thomas, _Summa_, par. i. qu. xcii.).
EVECTION (Latin for "carrying away"), in astronomy, the largest
inequality produced by the action of the sun in the monthly revolution
of the moon around the earth. The deviation expressed by it has a
maximum amount of about 1 deg. 15' in either direction. It may be
considered as arising from a semi-annual variation in the eccentricity
of the moon's orbit and the position of its perigee. It was discovered
by Ptolemy.
EVELETH, a city of St Louis county, Minnesota, U.S.A., about 71 m.
N.N.W. of Duluth. Pop. (1900) 2752; (1905, state census) 5332, of whom
2975 were foreign-born (1145 Finns, 676 Austrians and 325 Swedes);
(1910) 7036. Eveleth is served by the Duluth, Missabe & Northern and the
Duluth & Iron Range railways. It lies in the midst of the great red and
brown hematite iron-ore deposits of the Mesabi Range--the richest in the
Lake Superior district--and the mining and shipping of this ore are its
principal industries. The municipality owns and operates the
water-works, the water being obtained from Lake Saint Mary, one of a
chain of small lakes lying S. of the city. Eveleth was first chartered
as a city in 1902.
EVELYN, JOHN (1620-1706), English diarist, was born at Wotton House,
near Dorking, Surrey, on the 31st of October 1620. He was the younger
son of Richard Evelyn, who owned large estates in the county, and was in
1633 high sheriff of Surrey and Sussex. When John Evelyn was five years
old he went to live with his mother's parents at Cliffe, near Lewes. He
refused to leave his "too indulgent" grandmother for Eton, and when on
her husband's death she married again, the boy went with her to
Southover, where he attended the free school of the place. He was
admitted to the Middle Temple in February 1637, and in May he became a
fellow commoner of Balliol College, Oxford. He left the university
without taking a degree, and in 1640 was residing in the Middle Temple.
In that year his father died, and in July 1641 he crossed to Holland. He
was enrolled as a volunteer in Apsley's company, then encamped before
Genep on the Waal, but his commission was apparently complimentary, his
military experience being limited to six days of camp life, during
which, however, he took his turn at "trailing a pike." He returned in
the autumn to find England on the verge of civil war. Evelyn's part in
the conflict is best told in his own words:--
"12th November was the battle of Brentford, surprisingly fought.... I
came in with my horse and arms just at the retreat; but was not
permitted to stay longer than the 15th by reason of the army marching
to Gloucester; which would have left both me and my brothers exposed
to ruin, without any advantage to his Majesty ... and on the 10th
[December] returned to Wotton, nobody knowing of my having been in his
Majesty's army."
At Wotton he employed himself in improving his brother's property,
making a fishpond, an island and other alterations in the gardens. But
he found it difficult to avoid taking a side; he was importuned to sign
the Covenant, and "finding it impossible to evade doing very unhandsome
things," he obtained leave in October 1643 from the king to travel
abroad. From this date his _Diary_ becomes full and interesting. He
travelled in France and visited the cities of Italy, returning in the
autumn of 1646 to Paris, where he became intimate with Sir Richard
Browne, the English resident at the court of France. In June of the
following year he married Browne's daughter and heiress, Mary, then a
child of not more than twelve years of age. Leaving his wife in the
care of her parents, he returned to England to settle his affairs. He
visited Charles I. at Hampton Court in 1647, and during the next two
years maintained a cipher correspondence with his father-in-law in the
royal interest. In 1649 he obtained a pass to return to Paris, but in
1650 paid a short visit to England. The defeat of Charles II. at
Worcester in 1651 convinced him that the royalist cause was hopeless,
and he decided to return to England. He went in 1652 to Sayes Court at
Deptford, a house which Sir Richard Browne had held on a lease from the
crown. This had been seized by the parliament, but Evelyn was able to
compound with the occupiers for L3500, and after the Restoration his
possession was secured. Here his wife joined him, their eldest son,
Richard, being born in August 1652. Under the Commonwealth Evelyn amused
himself with his favourite occupation of gardening, and made many
friends among the scientific inquirers of the time. He was one of the
promoters of the scheme for the Royal Society, and in the king's charter
in 1662 was nominated a member of its directing council. Meanwhile he
had refused employment from the government of the Commonwealth, and had
maintained a cipher correspondence with Charles. In 1659 he published an
_Apology for the Royal Party_, and in December of that year he vainly
tried to persuade Colonel Herbert Morley, then lieutenant of the Tower,
to forestall General Monk by declaring for the king. From the
Restoration onwards Evelyn enjoyed unbroken court favour till his death
in 1706; but he never held any important political office, although he
filled many useful and often laborious minor posts. He was commissioner
for improving the streets and buildings of London, for examining into
the affairs of charitable foundations, commissioner of the Mint, and of
foreign plantations. In 1664 he accepted the responsibility for the care
of the sick and wounded and the prisoners in the Dutch war. He stuck to
his post throughout the plague year, contenting himself with sending his
family away to Wotton. He found it impossible to secure sufficient money
for the proper discharge of his functions, and in 1688 he was still
petitioning for payment of his accounts in this business. Evelyn was
secretary of the Royal Society in 1672, and as an enthusiastic promoter
of its interests was twice (in 1682 and 1691) offered the presidency.
Through his influence Henry Howard, duke of Norfolk, was induced to
present the Arundel marbles to the university of Oxford (1667) and the
valuable Arundel library to Gresham College (1678). In the reign of
James II., during the earl of Clarendon's absence in Ireland, he acted
as one of the commissioners of the privy seal. He was seriously alarmed
by the king's attacks on the English Church, and refused on two
occasions to license the illegal sale of Roman Catholic literature. He
concurred in the revolution of 1688, in 1695 was entrusted with the
office of treasurer of Greenwich hospital for old sailors, and laid the
first stone of the new building on the 30th of June 1696. In 1694 he
left Sayes Court to live at Wotton with his brother, whose heir he had
become, and whom he actually succeeded in 1699. He spent the rest of his
life there, dying on the 27th of February 1706. Evelyn's house at Sayes
Court had been let to Captain, afterwards Admiral John Benbow, who was
not a "polite" tenant. He sublet it to Peter the Great, who was then
visiting the dockyard at Deptford. The tsar did great damage to Evelyn's
beautiful gardens, and, it is said, made it one of his amusements to
ride in a wheelbarrow along a thick holly hedge planted especially by
the owner. The house was subsequently used as a workhouse, and is now
alms-houses, the grounds having been converted into public gardens by Mr
Evelyn in 1886.
It will be seen that Evelyn's politics were not of the heroic order. But
he was honourable and consistent in his adherence to the monarchical
principle throughout his life. With the court of Charles II. he could
have had no sympathy, his dignified domestic life and his serious
attention to religion standing in the strongest contrast with the
profligacy of the royal surroundings. His _Diary_ is therefore a
valuable chronicle of contemporary events from the standpoint of a
moderate politician and a devout adherent of the Church of England. He
had none of Pepys's love of gossip, and was devoid of his all-embracing
curiosity, as of his diverting frankness of self-revelation. Both were
admirable civil servants, and they had a mutual admiration for each
other's sterling qualities. Evelyn's _Diary_ covers more than half a
century (1640-1706) crowded with remarkable events, while Pepys only
deals with a few years of Charles II.'s reign.
Evelyn was a generous art patron, and Grinling Gibbons was introduced by
him to the notice of Charles II. His domestic affections were very
strong. He had six sons, of whom John (1655-1699), the author of some
translations, alone reached manhood. He has left a pathetic account of
the extraordinary accomplishments of his son Richard, who died before he
was six years old, and of a daughter Mary, who lived to be twenty, and
probably wrote most of her father's _Mundus muliebris_ (1690). Of his
two other daughters, Susannah, who married William Draper of Addiscombe,
Surrey, survived him.
Evelyn's _Diary_ remained in MS. until 1818. It is in a quarto volume
containing 700 pages, covering the years between 1641 and 1697, and is
continued in a smaller book which brings the narrative down to within
three weeks of its author's death. A selection from this was edited by
William Bray, with the permission of the Evelyn family, in 1818, under
the title of _Memoirs illustrative of the Life and Writings of John
Evelyn, comprising his Diary from 1641 to 1705/6, and a Selection of
his Familiar Letters_. Other editions followed, the most notable being
those of Mr H.B. Wheatley (1879) and Mr Austin Dobson (3 vols., 1906).
Evelyn's active mind produced many other works, and although these
have been overshadowed by the famous _Diary_ they are of considerable
interest. They include: _Of Liberty and Servitude_ ... (1649), a
translation from the French of Francois de la Mothe le Vayer, Evelyn's
own copy of which contains a note that he was "like to be call'd in
question by the Rebells for this booke"; _The State of France, as it
stood in the IXth year of ... Louis XIII._ (1652); _An Essay on the
First Book of T. Lucretius Carus de Rerum Natura_. _Interpreted and
made English verse by J. Evelyn_ (1656); _The Golden Book of St John
Chrysostom, concerning the Education of Children_. _Translated out of
the Greek by J.E._ (printed 1658, dated 1659); _The French Gardener:
instructing how to cultivate all sorts of Fruit-trees_ ... (1658),
translated from the French of N. de Bonnefons; _A Character of
England_ ... (1659), describing the customs of the country as they
would appear to a foreign observer, reprinted in _Somers' Tracts_ (ed.
Scott, 1812), and in the _Harleian Miscellany_ (ed. Park, 1813); _The
Late News from Brussels unmasked_ ... (1660), in answer to a libellous
pamphlet on Charles I. by Marchmont Needham; _Fumifugium, or the
inconvenience of the Aer and Smoak of London dissipated_ (1661), in
which he suggested that sweet-smelling trees should be planted in
London to purify the air; _Instructions concerning erecting of a
Library_ ... (1661), from the French of Gabriel Naude; _Tyrannus or
the Mode, in a Discourse of Sumptuary Laws_ (1661); _Sculptura: or the
History and Art of Chalcography and Engraving in Copper_ ... (1662);
_Sylva, or a Discourse of Forest Trees ... to which is annexed Pomona
... Also Kalendarium Hortense_ ... (1664); _A Parallel of the Ancient
Architecture with the Modern_ ... (1664), from the French of Roland
Freart; _The History of the three late famous Imposters, viz. Padre
Ottomano, Mahomed Bei, and Sabatei Sevi_ ... (1669); _Navigation and
Commerce ... in which his Majesties title to the Dominion of the Sea
is asserted against the Novel and later Pretenders_ (1674), which is a
preface to a projected history of the Dutch wars undertaken at the
request of Charles II., but countermanded on the conclusion of peace;
_A Philosophical Discourse of Earth_ ... (1676), a treatise on
horticulture, better known by its later title of _Terra_; _The
Compleat Gardener_ ... (1693), from the French of J. de la Quintinie;
_Numismata_ ... (1697). Some of these were reprinted in _The
Miscellaneous Writings of John Evelyn_, edited (1825) by William
Upcott. Evelyn's friendship with Mary Blagge, afterwards Mrs
Godolphin, is recorded in the diary, when he says he designed "to
consecrate her worthy life to posterity." This he effectually did in a
little masterpiece of religious biography which remained in MS. in the
possession of the Harcourt family until it was edited by Samuel
Wilberforce, bishop of Oxford, as the _Life of Mrs Godolphin_ (1847),
reprinted in the "King's Classics" (1904). The picture of Mistress
Blagge's saintly life at court is heightened in interest when read in
connexion with the scandalous memoirs of the comte de Gramont, or
contemporary political satires on the court. Numerous other papers and
letters of Evelyn on scientific subjects and matters of public
interest are preserved, a collection of private and official letters
and papers (1642-1712) by, or addressed to, Sir Richard Browne and his
son-in-law being in the British Museum (_Add. MSS._ 15857 and 15858).
Next to the _Diary_ Evelyn's most valuable work is _Sylva_. By the
glass factories and iron furnaces the country was being rapidly
depleted of wood, while no attempt was being made to replace the
damage by planting. Evelyn put in a plea for afforestation, and
besides producing a valuable work on arboriculture, he was able to
assert in his preface to the king that he had really induced
landowners to plant many millions of trees.
EVERDINGEN, ALLART VAN (1621-?1675), Dutch painter and engraver, the son
of a government clerk at Alkmaar, was born, it is said, in 1621, and
educated, if we believe an old tradition, under Roeland Savery at
Utrecht. He wandered in 1645 to Haarlem, where he studied under Peter de
Molyn, and finally settled about 1657 at Amsterdam, where he remained
till his death. It would be difficult to find a greater contrast than
that which is presented by the works of Savery and Everdingen. Savery
inherited the gaudy style of the Breughels, which he carried into the
17th century; whilst Everdingen realized the large and effective system
of coloured and powerfully shaded landscape which marks the precursors
of Rembrandt. It is not easy on this account to believe that Savery was
Everdingen's master, while it is quite within the range of probability
that he acquired the elements of landscape painting from de Molyn.
Pieter de Molyn, by birth a Londoner, lived from 1624 till 1661 in
Haarlem. He went periodically on visits to Norway, and his works, though
scarce, exhibit a broad and sweeping mode of execution, differing but
slightly from that transferred at the opening of the 17th century from
Jan van Goyen to Solomon Ruysdael. His etchings have nearly the breadth
and effect of those of Everdingen. It is still an open question when de
Molyn wielded influence on his clever disciple. Alkmaar, a busy trading
place near the Texel, had little of the picturesque for an artist except
polders and downs or waves and sky. Accordingly we find Allart at first
a painter of coast scenery. But on one of his expeditions he is said to
have been cast ashore in Norway, and during the repairs of his ship he
visited the inland valleys, and thus gave a new course to his art. In
early pieces he cleverly represents the sea in motion under varied, but
mostly clouded, aspects of sky. Their general intonation is strong and
brown, and effects are rendered in a powerful key, but the execution is
much more uniform than that of Jacob Ruysdael. A dark scud lowering on a
rolling sea near the walls of Flushing characterizes Everdingen's "Mouth
of the Schelde" in the Hermitage at St Petersburg. Storm is the marked
feature of sea-pieces in the Staedel or Robartes collections; and a
strand with wreckers at the foot of a cliff in the Munich Pinakothek may
be a reminiscence of personal adventure in Norway. But the Norwegian
coast was studied in calms as well as in gales; and a fine canvas at
Munich shows fishermen on a still and sunny day taking herrings to a
smoking hut at the foot of a Norwegian crag. The earliest of
Everdingen's sea-pieces bears the date of 1640. After 1645 we meet with
nothing but representations of inland scenery, and particularly of
Norwegian valleys, remarkable alike for wildness and a decisive depth of
tone. The master's favourite theme is a fall in a glen, with mournful
fringes of pines interspersed with birch, and log-huts at the base of
rocks and craggy slopes. The water tumbles over the foreground, so as to
entitle the painter to the name of "inventor of cascades." It gives
Everdingen his character as a precursor of Jacob Ruysdael in a certain
form of landscape composition; but though very skilful in arrangement
and clever in effects, Everdingen remains much more simple in execution;
he is much less subtle in feeling or varied in touch than his great and
incomparable countryman. Five of Everdingen's cascades are in the museum
of Copenhagen alone: of these, one is dated 1647, another 1649. In the
Hermitage at St Petersburg is a fine example of 1647; another in the
Pinakothek at Munich was finished in 1656. English public galleries
ignore Everdingen; but one of his best-known masterpieces is the
Norwegian glen belonging to Lord Listowel. Of his etchings and drawings
there are much larger and more numerous specimens in England than
elsewhere. Being a collector as well as an engraver and painter, he
brought together a large number of works of all kinds and masters; and
the sale of these by his heirs at Amsterdam on the 11th of March 1676
gives an approximate clue to the date of the painter's death.
His two brothers, Jan and Caesar, were both painters. CAESAR VAN
EVERDINGEN (1606-1679), mainly known as a portrait painter, enjoyed some
vogue during his life, and many of his pictures are to be seen in the
museums and private houses of Holland. They show a certain cleverness,
but are far from entitling him to rank as a master.
EVEREST, SIR GEORGE (1790-1866), British surveyor and geographer, was
the son of Tristram Everest of Gwerndale, Brecknockshire, and was born
there on the 4th of July 1790. From school at Marlow he proceeded to the
military academy at Woolwich, where he attracted the special notice of
the mathematical master, and passed so well in his examinations that he
was declared fit for a commission before attaining the necessary age.
Having gone to India in 1806 as a cadet in the Bengal Artillery, he was
selected by Sir Stamford Raffles to take part in the reconnaissance of
Java (1814-1816); and after being employed in various engineering works
throughout India, he was appointed in 1818 assistant to Colonel Lambton,
the founder of the great trigonometrical survey of that country. In
1823, on Colonel Lambton's death, he succeeded to the post of
superintendent of the survey; in 1830 he was appointed by the court of
directors of the East India Company surveyor-general of India; and from
that date till his retirement from the service in 1843 he continued to
discharge the laborious duties of both offices. During the rest of his
life he resided in England, where he became fellow of the Royal Society
and an active member of several other scientific associations. In 1861
he was made a C.B. and received the honour of knighthood, and in 1862 he
was chosen vice-president of the Royal Geographical Society. He died at
Greenwich on the 1st of December 1866. The geodetical labours of Sir
George Everest rank among the finest achievements of their kind; and
more especially his measurement of the meridional arc of India, 11-1/2
deg. in length, is accounted as unrivalled in the annals of the science.
In
great part the Indian survey is what he made it.
His works are purely professional:--A paper in vol. i. of the _Memoirs
of the Royal Astronomical Society_, pointing out a mistake in La
Caille's measurement of an arc of the meridian which he had discovered
during sick-leave at the Cape of Good Hope; _An account of the
measurement of the arc of the meridian between the parallels of 18
deg. 3' and 24 deg. 7', being a continuation of the Grand Meridional
Arc of India, as detailed by Lieut.-Col. Lambton in the volumes of the
Asiatic Society of Calcutta_ (London, 1830); _An account of the
measurement of two sections of the Meridional Arc of India bounded by
the parallels of 18 deg. 3' 15", 24 deg. 7' 11", and 20 deg. 30' 48"_
(London, 1847).
EVEREST, MOUNT, the highest mountain in the world. It is a peak of the
Himalayas situated in Nepal almost precisely on the intersection of the
meridian 87 E. long. with the parallel 28 N. lat. Its elevation as at
present determined by trigonometrical observation is 29,002 ft., but it
is possible that further investigation into the value of refraction at
such altitudes will result in placing the summit even higher. It has
been confused with a peak to the west of it called Gaurisankar (by
Schlagintweit), which is more than 5000 ft. lower; but the observations
of Captain Wood from peaks near Khatmandu, in Nepal, and those of the
same officer, and of Major Ryder, from the route between Lhasa and the
sources of the Brahmaputra in 1904, have definitely fixed the relative
position of the two mountain masses, and conclusively proved that there
is no higher peak than Everest in the Himalayan system. The peak
possesses no distinctive native name and has been called Everest after
Sir George Everest (q.v.), who completed the trigonometrical survey of
the Himalayas in 1841 and first fixed its position and altitude.
(T. H. H.*)
EVERETT, ALEXANDER HILL (1790-1847), American author and diplomatist,
was born in Boston, Massachusetts, on the 19th of March 1790. He was the
son of Rev. Oliver Everett (1753-1802), a Congregational minister in
Boston, and the brother of Edward Everett. He graduated at Harvard in
1806, taking the highest honours of his year, though the youngest member
of his class. He spent one year as a teacher in Phillips Academy,
Exeter, New Hampshire, and then began the study of law in the office of
John Quincy Adams. In 1809 Adams was appointed minister to Russia, and
Everett accompanied him as his private secretary, remaining attached to
the American legation in Russia until 1811. He was secretary of the
American legation at The Hague in 1815-1816, and _charge d'affaires_
there from 1818 to 1824. From 1825 to 1829, during the presidency of
John Quincy Adams, he was the United States minister to Spain. At that
time Spain recognized none of the governments established by her
revolted colonies, and Everett became the medium of all communications
between the Spanish government and the several nations of Spanish origin
which had been established, by successful revolutions, on the other side
of the ocean. Everett was a member of the Massachusetts legislature in
1830-1835, was president of Jefferson College in Louisiana in 1842-1844,
and was appointed commissioner of the United States to China in 1845,
but did not go to that country until the following year, and died on the
29th of May 1847 at Canton, China. Everett, however, is known rather as
a man of letters than as a diplomat. In addition to numerous articles,
published chiefly in the _North American Review_, of which he was the
editor from 1829 to 1835, he wrote: _Europe, or a General Survey of the
Political Situation of the Principal Powers, with Conjectures on their
Future Prospects_ (1822), which attracted considerable attention in
Europe and was translated into German, French and Spanish; _New Ideas on
Population_ (1822); _America, or a General Survey of the Political
Situation of the Several Powers of the Western Continent, with
Conjectures on their Future Prospects_ (1827), which was translated into
several European languages; a volume of _Poems_ (1845); and _Critical
and Miscellaneous Essays_ (first series, 1845; second series, 1847).
EVERETT, CHARLES CARROLL (1829-1900), American divine and philosopher,
was born on the 19th of June 1829, at Brunswick, Maine. He studied at
Bowdoin College, where he graduated in 1850, after which he proceeded to
Berlin. Subsequently he took a degree in divinity at the Harvard
Divinity School. From 1859 to 1869 he was pastor of the Independent
Congregational (Unitarian) church at Bangor, Maine. This charge he
resigned to take the Bussey professorship of theology at Harvard
University, and, in 1878, became dean of the faculty of theology.
Interested in a variety of subjects, he devoted himself chiefly to the
philosophy of religion, and published _The Science of Thought_ (Boston,
1869; revised 1891). He also wrote _Fichte's Science of Knowledge_
(1884); _Poetry, Comedy and Duty_ (1888); _Religions before
Christianity_ (1883); _Ethics for Young People_ (1891); _The Gospel of
Paul_ (1892). He died at Cambridge on the 16th of October 1900.
EVERETT, EDWARD (1794-1865), American statesman and orator, was born in
Dorchester, Massachusetts, on the 11th of April 1794. He was the son of
Rev. Oliver Everett and the brother of Alexander Hill Everett (q.v.).
His father died in 1802, and his mother removed to Boston with her
family after her husband's death. At seventeen Edward Everett graduated
from Harvard College, taking first honours in his class. While at
college he was the chief editor of _The Lyceum_, the earliest in the
series of college journals published at the American Cambridge. His
earlier predilections were for the study of law, but the advice of
Joseph Stevens Buckminster, a distinguished preacher in Boston, led him
to prepare for the pulpit, and as a preacher he at once distinguished
himself. He was called to the ministry of the Brattle Street church
(Unitarian) in Boston before he was twenty years old. His sermons
attracted wide attention in that community, and he gained a considerable
reputation as a theologian and a controversialist by his publication in
1814 of a volume entitled _Defence of Christianity_, written in answer
to a work, _The Grounds of Christianity Examined_ (1813), by George
Bethune English (1787-1828), an adventurer, who, born in Cambridge,
Massachusetts, was in turn a student of law and of theology, an editor
of a newspaper, and a soldier of fortune in Egypt. Everett's tastes,
however, were then, as always, those of a scholar; and in 1815, after a
service of little more than a year in the pulpit, he resigned his charge
to accept a professorship of Greek literature in Harvard College.
After nearly five years spent in Europe in preparation, he entered with
enthusiasm on his duties, and, for five years more, gave a vigorous
impulse, not only to the study of Greek, but to all the work of the
college. In January 1820 he assumed the charge of the _North American
Review_, which now became a quarterly; and he was indefatigable during
the four years of his editorship in contributing on a great variety of
subjects. From 1825 to 1835 he was a member of the National House of
Representatives, supporting generally the administration of President
J.Q. Adams and opposing that of Jackson, which succeeded it. He bore a
part in almost every important debate, and was a member of the committee
of foreign affairs during the whole time of his service in Congress.
Everett was a member of nearly all the most important select committees,
such as those on the Indian relations of the state of Georgia, the
Apportionment Bill, and the Bank of the United States, and drew the
report either of the majority or the minority. The report on the
congress of Panama, the leading measure of the first session of the
Nineteenth Congress, was drawn up by Everett, although he was the
youngest member of the committee and had just entered Congress. He led
the unsuccessful opposition to the Indian policy of General Jackson (the
removal of the Cherokee and other Indians, without their consent, from
lands guaranteed to them by treaty).
In 1835 he was elected governor of Massachusetts. He brought to the
duties of the office the untiring diligence which was the characteristic
of his public life. We can only allude to a few of the measures which
received his efficient support, e.g. the establishment of the board of
education (the first of such boards in the United States), the
scientific surveys of the state (the first of such public surveys), the
criminal law commission, and the preservation of a sound currency during
the panic of 1837.
Everett filled the office of governor for four years, and was then
defeated by a single vote, out of more than one hundred thousand. The
election is of interest historically as being the first important
American election where the issue turned on the question of the
prohibition of the retail sale of intoxicating liquors. In the following
spring he made a visit with his family to Europe. In 1841, while
residing in Florence, he was named United States minister to Great
Britain, and arrived in London to enter upon the duties of his mission
at the close of that year. Great questions were at that time open
between the two countries--the north-eastern boundary, the affair of
M'Leod, the seizure of American vessels on the coast of Africa, in the
course of a few months the affair of the "Creole," to which was soon
added the Oregon question. His position was more difficult by reason of
the frequent changes that took place in the department at home, which,
in the course of four years, was occupied successively by Messrs
Webster, Legare, Upshur, Calhoun and Buchanan. From all these gentlemen
Everett received marks of approbation and confidence.
By the institution of the special mission of Lord Ashburton, however,
the direct negotiations between the two governments were, about the time
of Everett's arrival in London, transferred to Washington, though much
business was transacted at the American legation in London.
Immediately after the accession of Polk to the presidency Everett was
recalled. From January 1846 to 1849, as the successor of Josiah Quincy,
he was president of Harvard College. On the death, in October 1852, of
his friend Daniel Webster, to whom he had always been closely attached,
and of whom he was always a confidential adviser, he succeeded him as
secretary of state, which post he held for the remaining months of
Fillmore's administration, leaving it to go into the Senate in 1853, as
one of the representatives of Massachusetts. Under the work of the long
session of 1853-1854 his health gave way. In May 1854 he resigned his
seat, on the orders of his physician, and retired to what was called
private life.
But, as it proved, the remaining ten years of his life most widely
established his reputation and influence throughout America. As early as
1820 he had established a reputation as an orator, such as few men in
later days have enjoyed. He was frequently invited to deliver an
"oration" on some topic of historical or other interest. With him these
"orations," instead of being the ephemeral entertainments of an hour,
became careful studies of some important theme. Eager to avert, if
possible, the impending conflict of arms between the North and South,
Everett prepared an "oration" on George Washington, which he delivered
in every part of America. In this way, too, he raised more than one
hundred thousand dollars, for the purchase of the old home of Washington
at Mount Vernon. Everett also prepared for the _Encyclopaedia
Britannica_ a biographical sketch of Washington, which was published
separately in 1860. In 1860 Everett was the candidate of the short-lived
Constitutional-Union party for the vice-presidency, on the ticket with
John Bell (q.v.), but received only 39 electoral votes. During the Civil
War he zealously supported the national government and was called upon
in every quarter to speak at public meetings. He delivered the last of
his great orations at Gettysburg, after the battle, on the consecration
of the national cemetery there. On the 9th of January 1865 he spoke at a
public meeting in Boston to raise funds for the southern poor in
Savannah. At that meeting he caught cold, and the immediate result was
his death on the 15th of January 1865.
In Everett's life and career was a combination of the results of
diligent training, unflinching industry, delicate literary tastes and
unequalled acquaintance with modern international politics. This
combination made him in America an entirely exceptional person. He was
never loved by the political managers; he was always enthusiastically
received by assemblies of the people. He would have said himself that
the most eager wish of his life had been for the higher education of his
countrymen. His orations have been collected in four volumes
(1850-1859). A work on international law, on which he was engaged at his
death, was never finished. Allibone records 84 titles of his books and
published addresses. (E. E. H.)
EVERETT, a city of Middlesex county, Massachusetts, U.S.A., adjoining
Chelsea and 3 m. N. of Boston, of which it is a residential suburb. Pop.
(1880) 4159; (1890) 11,068; (1900) 24,336, of whom 6882 were
foreign-born; (1910 census) 33,484. It covers an area of about 3 sq. m.
and is served by the Boston & Maine railway and by interurban electric
lines. Everett has the Frederick E. Parlin memorial library (1878), the
Shute memorial library (1898), the Whidden memorial hospital and
Woodlawn cemetery (176 acres). The principal manufactures are coke,
chemicals and boots and shoes; among others are iron and structural
steel. According to the U.S. Census of Manufactures (1905), "the coke
industry in Everett is unique, inasmuch as illuminating gas is the
primary product and coke really a by-product, while the coal used is
brought from mines located in Nova Scotia." The value of the city's
total factory product increased from $4,437,180 in 1900 to $6,135,650 in
1905 or 38.3%. Everett was first settled about 1630, remaining a part of
Malden (and being known as South Malden) until 1870, when it was
incorporated as a township. It was chartered as a city in 1892.
EVERETT, a city, a sub-port of entry, and the county-seat of Snohomish
county, Washington, U.S.A., on Puget Sound, at the mouth of the
Snohomish river, about 35 m. N. of Seattle. Pop. (1900) 7838; (1910 U.S.
census) 24,814. The city is served by the Northern Pacific and the Great
Northern railways, being the western terminus of the latter's main
transcontinental line, by interurban electric railway, and by several
lines of Sound and coasting freight and passenger steamboats. Everett
has a fine harbour with several large iron piers. Among its principal
buildings are a Carnegie library, a Y.M.C.A. building and two hospitals.
The buildings of the Pacific College were erected here by the United
Norwegian Lutheran Church in 1908. The city is in a rich lumbering,
gardening, farming, and copper-, gold- and silver-mining district. There
is a U.S. assayer's office here, and there are extensive shipyards, a
large paper mill, iron works, and, just outside the city limits, the
smelters of the American Smelters Securities Company, in connexion with
which is one of the two plants in the United States for saving arsenic
from smelter fumes. Lumber interests, however, are of most importance,
and here are some of the largest lumber plants in the Pacific Northwest.
Red-cedar shingles are an important product. Everett was settled in 1891
and was incorporated in 1893. Its rapid growth is due to its favourable
situation as a commercial port, its transportation facilities, and its
nearness to extensive forests whence the material for its chief
industries is obtained.
EVERGLADES, an American lake, about 8000 sq. m. in area, in which are
numerous half-submerged islands; situated in the southern part of
Florida, U.S.A., in Lee, De Soto, Dade and St Lucie counties. West of it
is the Big Cypress Swamp. The floor of the lake is a limestone basin,
extending from Lake Okechobee in the N. to the extreme S. part of the
state, and the lake varies in depth from 1 to 12 ft., its water being
pure and clear. The surface is above tide level, and the lake is
enclosed, probably on all sides, within an outcropping limestone rim,
averaging about 10 ft. above mean low tide, and approaching much nearer
to the Atlantic on the E. than to the gulf on the W. There are several
small outlets, such as the Miami river and the New river on the E. and
the Shark river on the S.W., but no streams empty into the Everglades,
and the water-supply is furnished by springs and precipitation. There is
a general south-easterly movement of the water. The soil of the islands
is very fertile and is subject to frequent inundations, but gradually
the water area is being replaced by land. The vegetation is luxuriant,
the live oak, wild lemon, wild orange, cucumber, papaw, custard apple
and wild rubber trees being among the indigenous species; there are,
besides, many varieties of wild flowers, the orchids being especially
noteworthy. The fauna is also varied; the otter, alligator and crocodile
are found, also the deer and panther, and among the native birds are the
ibis, egret, heron and limpkin. There are two seasons, wet and dry, but
the climate is equable.
Systematic exploration has been prevented by the dense growth of saw
grass (_Cladium effusum_), a kind of sedge, with sharp, saw-toothed
leaves, which grows everywhere on the muck-covered rock basin and
extends several feet above the shallow water. The first white man to
enter the region was Escalente de Fontenada, a Spanish captive of an
Indian chief, who named the lake Laguno del Espiritu Santo and the
islands Cayos del Espiritu Santo. Between 1841 and 1856 various United
States military forces penetrated the Everglades for the purpose of
attacking and driving out the Seminoles, who took refuge here. The most
important explorations during the later years of the 19th century were
those of Major Archie P. Williams in 1883, James E. Ingraham in 1892 and
Hugh L. Willoughby in 1897. The Seminole Indians were in 1909
practically the only inhabitants. In 1850 under the "Arkansas Bill," or
Swamp and Overflow Act, practically all of the Everglades, which the
state had been urging the federal government to drain and reclaim, were
turned over to the state for that purpose, with the provision that all
proceeds from such lands be applied to their reclamation. A board of
trustees for the Internal Improvement Fund, created in 1855 and having
as members _ex officio_ the governor, comptroller, treasurer,
attorney-general and commissioner-general, sold and allowed to railway
companies much of the grant. Between 1881 and 1896 a private company
owning 4,000,000 acres of the Everglades attempted to dig a canal from
Lake Okechobee through Lake Hicpochee and along the Caloosahatchee river
to the Gulf of Mexico; the canal was closed in 1902 by overflows. Six
canals were begun under state control in 1905 from the lake to the
Atlantic, the northernmost at Jensen, the southernmost at Ft.
Lauderdale; the total cost, estimated at $1,035,000 for the reclamation
of 12,500 sq. m., is raised by a drainage tax (not to exceed 10 cents
per acre) levied by the trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund and
Board of Drainage commissioners. The small area reclaimed prior to that
year (1905) was found very fertile and particularly adapted to raising
sugar-cane, oranges and garden truck.
See Hugh L. Willoughby's _Across the Everglades_ (Philadelphia, 1898),
and especially an article "The Everglades of Florida" by Edwin A. Dix
and John M. MacGonigle, in the _Century Magazine_ for February 1905.
EVERGREEN, a general term applied to plants which are always in leaf, as
contrasted with deciduous trees which are bare for some part of the year
(see HORTICULTURE). In temperate or colder zones where a season
favourable to vegetation is succeeded by an unfavourable or winter
season, leaves of evergreens must be protected from the frost and cold
drying winds, and are therefore tougher or more leathery in texture than
those of deciduous trees, and frequently, as in pines, firs and other
conifers, are needle-like, thus exposing a much smaller surface to the
drying action of cold winds. The number of seasons for which the leaves
last varies in different plants; every season some of the older leaves
fall, while new ones are regularly produced. The common English bramble
is practically evergreen, the leaves lasting through winter and until
the new leaves are developed next spring. In privet also the leaves fall
after the production of new ones in the next year. In other cases the
leaves last several years, as in conifers, and may sometimes be found on
eleven-year-old shoots.
EVERLASTING, or IMMORTELLE, a plant belonging to the division
_Tubuliflorae_ of the natural order Compositae, known botanically as
_Helichrysum orientale_. It is a native of North Africa, Crete, and the
parts of Asia bordering on the Mediterranean; and it is cultivated in
many parts of Europe. It first became known in Europe about the year
1629, and has been cultivated since 1815. In common with several other
plants of the same group, known as "everlastings," the immortelle plant
possesses a large involucre of dry scale-like or scarious bracts, which
preserve their appearance when dried, provided the plant be gathered in
proper condition. The chief supplies of _Helichrysum orientale_ come
from lower Provence, where it is cultivated in large quantities on the
ground sloping to the Mediterranean, in positions well exposed to the
sun, and usually in plots surrounded by dry stone walls. The finest
flowers are grown on the slopes of Bandols and Ciotat, where the plant
begins to flower in June. It requires a light sandy or stony soil, and
is very readily injured by rain or heavy dews. It can be propagated in
quantity by means of offsets from the older stems. The flowering stems
are gathered in June, when the bracts are fully developed, all the
fully-expanded and immature flowers being pulled off and rejected. A
well-managed plantation is productive for eight or ten years. The plant
is tufted in its growth, each plant producing 60 or 70 stems, while each
stem produces an average of 20 flowers. About 400 such stems weigh a
kilogramme. A hectare of ground will produce 40,000 plants, bearing from
2,400,000 to 2,800,000 stems, and weighing from 5-1/2 to 6-1/2 tons, or
from 2 to 3 tons per acre. The colour of the bracts is a deep yellow.
The natural flowers are commonly used for garlands for the dead, or
plants dyed black are mixed with the yellow ones. The plant is also dyed
green or orange-red, and thus employed for bouquets or other ornamental
purposes.
Other species of _Helichrysum_ and species of allied genera with
scarious heads of flowers are also known as "everlastings." One of the
best known is the Australian species _H. bracteatum_, with several
varieties, including double forms, of different colours; _H. vestitum_
(Cape of Good Hope) has white satiny heads. Others are species of
_Helipterum_ (West Australia and South Africa), _Ammobium_ and _Waitzia_
(Australia) and _Xeranthemum_ (south Europe). Several members of the
natural order Amarantaceae have also "everlasting" flowers; such are
_Gomphrena globosa_, with rounded or oval heads of white, orange, rose
or violet, scarious bracts, and _Celosia pyramidalis_, with its elegant,
loose, pyramidal inflorescences. Frequently these everlastings are mixed
with bleached grasses, as _Lagurus ovatus_, _Briza maxima_, _Bromus
brizaeformis_, or with the leaves of the Cape silver tree (_Leucadendron
argenteum_), to form bouquets or ornamental groups.
EVERSLEY, CHARLES SHAW LEFEVRE, VISCOUNT (1794-1888), speaker of the
British House of Commons, eldest son of Mr Charles Shaw (who assumed his
wife's name of Lefevre in addition to his own on his marriage), was born
in London on the 22nd of February 1794, and educated at Winchester and
at Trinity College, Cambridge. He was called to the bar in 1819, and
though a diligent student was also a keen sportsman. Marrying a daughter
of Mr Samuel Whitbread, whose wife was the sister of Earl Grey,
afterwards premier, he thus became connected with two influential
political families, and in 1830 he entered the House of Commons as
member for Downton, in the Liberal interest. In 1831 he was returned,
after a severe contest, as one of the county members for Hampshire, in
which he resided; and after the passing of the Reform Act of 1832 he was
elected for the Northern Division of the county. For some years Mr Shaw
Lefevre was chairman of a committee on petitions for private bills. In
1835 he was chairman of a committee on agricultural distress, but as his
report was not accepted by the House, he published it as a pamphlet
addressed to his constituents. He acquired a high reputation in the
House of Commons for his judicial fairness, combined with singular tact
and courtesy, and when Mr James Abercromby retired in 1839, he was
nominated as the Liberal candidate for the chair. The Conservatives put
forward Henry Goulburn, but Mr Shaw Lefevre was elected by 317 votes to
299. The period was one of fierce party conflict, and the debates were
frequently very acrimonious; but the dignity, temper and firmness of the
new speaker were never at fault. In 1857 he had served longer than any
of his predecessors, except the celebrated Arthur Onslow (1691-1768),
who was speaker for more than 33 years in five successive parliaments.
Retiring on a pension, he was raised to the peerage as Viscount Eversley
of Heckfield, in the county of Southampton. His appearances in the House
of Lords were very infrequent, but in his own county he was active in
the public service. From 1859 he was an ecclesiastical commissioner, and
he was also appointed a trustee of the British Museum. He died on the
28th of December 1888, the viscountcy becoming extinct.
His younger brother, SIR JOHN GEORGE SHAW LEFEVRE (1797-1879), who was
senior wrangler at Cambridge in 1818, had a long and distinguished
career as a public official. He was under-secretary for the colonies,
and had much to do with the introduction of the new poor law in 1834,
and with the foundation of the colony of South Australia; then having
served on several important commissions he was made clerk of the
parliaments in 1855, and in the same year became one of the first civil
service commissioners. He helped to found the university of London, of
which he was vice-chancellor for twenty years, and also the Athenaeum
Club. He died on the 20th of August 1879.
The latter's son, GEORGE JOHN SHAW LEFEVRE (b. 1832), was created Baron
Eversley in 1906, in recognition of long and prominent services to the
Liberal party. He had filled the following offices:--civil lord of the
admiralty, 1856; secretary to the board of trade, 1869-1871;
under-secretary, home office, 1871; secretary to the admiralty,
1871-1874; first commissioner of works, 1881-1883; postmaster-general,
1883-1884; first commissioner of works, 1892-1893; president of local
government board, 1894-1895; chairman of royal commission on
agriculture, 1893-1896.
EVESHAM, a market-town and municipal borough in the Evesham
parliamentary division of Worcestershire, England, 107 m. W.N.W. of
London by the Great Western railway, and 15 m. S.E. by E. of Worcester,
with a station on the Redditch-Ashchurch branch of the Midland railway.
Pop. (1901) 7101. It lies on the right (north) bank of the Avon, in the
rich and beautiful Vale of Evesham. The district is devoted to
market-gardening and orchards, and the trade of the town is mainly
agricultural. Evesham is a place of considerable antiquity, a
Benedictine house having been founded here by St Egwin in the 8th
century. It became a wealthy abbey, but was almost wholly destroyed at
the Dissolution. The churchyard, however, is entered by a Norman
gateway, and there survives also a magnificent isolated bell-tower
dating from 1533, of the best ornate Perpendicular workmanship. The
abbey walls surround the churchyard, but almost the only other remnant
is a single Decorated arch. Close to the bell-tower, however, are the
two parish churches of St Lawrence and of All Saints, the former of the
16th century, the latter containing Early English work, and the ornate
chapel of Abbot Lichfield, who erected the bell-tower. Other buildings
include an Elizabethan town hall, the grammar school, founded by Abbot
Lichfield, and the picturesque almonry. The borough includes the parish
of Bengeworth St Peter, on the left bank of the river. Evesham is
governed by a mayor, 4 aldermen and 12 councillors. Area, 2265 acres.
Evesham (_Homme_, _Ethomme_) grew up around the Benedictine abbey, and
had evidently become of some importance as a trading centre in 1055,
when Edward the Confessor gave it a market and the privileges of a
commercial town. It is uncertain when the town first became a borough,
but the Domesday statement that the men paid 20s. may indicate the
existence of a more or less organized body of tradesmen. Before 1482 the
burgesses were holding the town at a fee farm rent of twenty marks, but
the abbot still had practical control of the town, and his steward
presided over the court at which the bailiffs were chosen. After the
Dissolution the manor with the markets and fairs and other privileges
was granted to Sir Philip Hoby, who increased his power over the town by
persuading the burgesses to agree that, after they had nominated six
candidates for the office of bailiff, the steward of the court
instructed by him should indicate the two to be chosen. This privilege
was contested by Queen Elizabeth, but when the case was taken before the
court of the exchequer it was decided in favour of Sir Philip's heir,
Sir Edward Hoby. In 1604 James I. granted the burgesses their first
charter, but in the following year, by a second charter, he incorporated
Evesham with the village of Bengeworth, and granted that the borough
should be governed by a mayor and seven aldermen, to whom he gave the
power of holding markets and fairs and several other privileges which
had formerly belonged to the lord of the manor. Evesham received two
later charters, but in 1688 that of 1605 was restored and still remains
the governing charter of the borough. Evesham returned two members to
parliament in 1295 and again in 1337, after which date the privilege
lapsed until 1604. Its two members were reduced to one by the act of
1867, and the borough was disfranchised in 1885.
Evesham gave its name to the famous battle, fought on the 4th of August
1265, between the forces of Simon de Montfort, earl of Leicester, and
the royalist army under Prince Edward. After a masterly campaign, in
which the prince had succeeded in defeating Leicester in the valleys of
the Severn and Usk, and had destroyed the forces of the younger Montfort
at Kenilworth before he could effect a junction with the main body, the
royalist forces approached Evesham in the morning of the 4th of August
in time to intercept Leicester's march towards Kenilworth. Caught in the
bend of the river Avon by the converging columns, and surrounded on all
sides, the old earl attempted to cut his way out of the town to the
northward. At first the fury of his assault forced back the superior
numbers of the prince; but Simon's Welsh levies melted away and his
enemies closed the last avenue of escape. The final struggle took place
on Green Hill, a little to the north-west of the town, where the devoted
friends of de Montfort formed a ring round their leader, and died with
him. The spot is marked with an obelisk.
EVIDENCE (Lat. _evidentia_, _evideri_, to appear clearly), a term which
may be defined briefly as denoting the facts presented to the mind of a
person for the purpose of enabling him to decide a disputed question.
Evidence in the widest sense includes all such facts, and reference may
be made to the article LOGIC for the science or art of dealing with the
proper way of drawing correct conclusions and the nature of proof. In a
narrower sense, however, evidence includes in English law only such
facts as are allowed to be so presented in the course of judicial
proceedings. Thus we say that a fact is not evidence, meaning thereby
that it is not admissible as evidence in accordance with the rules of
English law. The law of legal evidence is part of the law of procedure.
It determines the kinds of evidence which may be produced in judicial
proceedings, and regulates the mode in which, and the conditions under
which, evidence may be produced and tested.
History.
The English law of evidence is of comparatively modern growth. It
enshrines certain maxims, some derived from Roman law, some invented by
Coke, who, as J.B. Thayer says, "spawned Latin maxims freely." But for
the most part it was built up by English judges in the course of the
18th century, and consists of this judge-made law, as modified by
statutory enactments of the 19th century. Early Teutonic procedure knew
nothing of evidence in the modern sense, just as it knew nothing of
trials in the modern sense. What it knew was "proofs." There were two
modes of proof, ordeals and oaths. Both were appeals to the
supernatural. The judicial combat was a bilateral ordeal. Proof
followed, instead of preceding, judgment. A judgment of the court,
called by German writers the _Beweisurteil_, and by M.M. Bigelow the
"medial judgment," awarded that one of the two litigants must prove his
case, by his body in battle, or by a one-sided ordeal, or by an oath
with oath-helpers, or by the oaths of witnesses. The court had no desire
to hear or weigh conflicting testimony. To do so would have been to
exercise critical faculties, which the court did not possess, and the
exercise of which would have been foreign to the whole spirit of the
age. The litigant upon whom the burden of furnishing proof was imposed
had a certain task to perform. If he performed it, he won; if he failed,
he lost. The number of oath-helpers varied in different cases, and was
determined by the law or by the court. They were probably, at the
outset, kinsmen, who would have had to take up the blood-feud. At a
later stage they became witnesses to character. In the cases,
comparatively rare, where the oaths of witnesses were admitted as proof,
their oaths differed materially from the sworn testimony of modern
courts. As a rule no one could testify to a fact unless, when the fact
happened, he was solemnly "taken to witness." Then, when the witness was
adduced, he came merely to swear to a set formula. He did not make a
promissory oath to answer questions truly. He merely made an assertory
oath in a prescribed form.
In the course of the 12th and 13th centuries the old formal accusatory
procedure began to break down, and to be superseded by another form of
procedure known as _inquisitio_, inquest, or _enquete_. Its decay was
hastened by the decree of the fourth Lateran Council in 1215, which
forbade ecclesiastics to take part in ordeals. The Norman administrative
system introduced into England by the Conquest was familiar with a
method of ascertaining and determining facts by means of a verdict,
return or finding made on oath by a body of men drawn from the locality.
The system may be traced to Carolingian, and even earlier, sources.
Henry II., by instituting the grand assize and the four petty assizes,
placed at the disposal of litigants in certain actions the opportunity
of giving proof by the verdict of a sworn inquest of neighbours, proof
"by the country." The system was gradually extended to other cases,
criminal as well as civil. The verdict given was that of persons having
a general, but not necessarily a particular, acquaintance with the
persons, places and facts to which the inquiry related. It was, in fact,
a finding by local popular opinion. Had the finding of such an inquest
been treated as final and conclusive in criminal cases, English criminal
procedure might, like the continental inquisition, the French _enquete_,
have taken the path which, in the forcible language of Fortescue (_De
laudibus_, &c.) "leads to hell" (_semita ipsa est ad gehennam_).
Fortunately English criminal procedure took a different course. The
spirit of the old accusatory procedure was applied to the new procedure
by inquest. In serious cases the words of the jurors, the accusing
jurors, were treated not as testimony, but as accusation, the new
indictment was treated as corresponding to the old appeal, and the
preliminary finding by the accusing jury had to be supplemented by the
verdict of another jury. In course of time the second jury were required
to base their findings not on their own knowledge, but on evidence
submitted to them. Thus the modern system of inquiry by grand jury and
trial by petty jury was gradually developed.
A few words may here be said about the parallel development of criminal
procedure on the continent of Europe. The tendency in the 12th and 13th
centuries to abolish the old formal methods of procedure, and to give
the new procedure the name of inquisition or inquest, was not peculiar
to England. Elsewhere the old procedure was breaking down at the same
time, and for similar reasons. It was the great pope Innocent III., the
pope of the fourth Lateran Council, who introduced the new
inquisitorial procedure into the canon law. The procedure was applied to
cases of heresy, and, as so applied, especially by the Dominicans,
speedily assumed the features which made it infamous. "Every safeguard
of innocence was abolished or disregarded; torture was freely used.
Everything seems to have been done to secure a conviction." Yet, in
spite of its monstrous defects, the inquisitorial procedure of the
ecclesiastical courts, secret in its methods, unfair to the accused,
having torture as an integral element, gradually forced its way into the
temporal courts, and may almost be said to have been adopted by the
common law of western Europe. In connexion with this inquisitorial
procedure continental jurists elaborated a theory of evidence, or
judicial proofs, which formed the subject of an extensive literature.
Under the rules thus evolved full proof (_plena probatio_) was essential
for conviction, in the absence of confession, and the standard of full
proof was fixed so high that it was in most cases unattainable. It
therefore became material to obtain confession by some means or other.
The most effective means was torture, and thus torture became an
essential feature in criminal procedure. The rules of evidence attempted
to graduate the weight to be attached to different kinds of testimony
and almost to estimate that weight in numerical terms. "Le parlement de
Toulouse," said Voltaire, "a un usage tres singulier dans les preuves
par temoins. On admet ailleurs des demi-preuves, ... mais a Toulouse on
admet des quarts et des huitiemes de preuves." Modern continental
procedure, as embodied in the most recent codes, has removed the worst
features of inquisitorial procedure, and has shaken itself free from the
trammels imposed by the old theory and technical rules of proof. But in
this, as in other branches of law, France seems to have paid the penalty
for having been first in the field with codification by lagging behind
in material reforms. The French Code of Criminal Procedure was largely
based on Colbert's Ordonnance of 1670, and though embodying some
reforms, and since amended on certain points, still retains some of the
features of the unreformed procedure which was condemned in the 18th
century by Voltaire and the _philosophes_. Military procedure is in the
rear of civil procedure, and the trial of Captain Dreyfus at Rennes in
1899 presented some interesting archaisms. Among these were the weight
attached to the rank and position of witnesses as compared with the
intrinsic character of their evidence, and the extraordinary importance
attributed to confession even when made under suspicious circumstances
and supported by flimsy evidence.
The history of criminal procedure in England has been traced by Sir
James Stephen. The modern rules and practice as to evidence and
witnesses in the common law courts, both in civil and in criminal cases,
appear to have taken shape in the course of the 18th century. The first
systematic treatise on the English law of evidence appears to have been
written by Chief Baron Gilbert, who died in 1726, but whose _Law of
Evidence_ was not published until 1761. In writing it he is said to have
been much influenced by Locke.[1] It is highly praised by Blackstone as
"a work which it is impossible to abstract or abridge without losing
some beauty and destroying the charm of the whole"; but Bentham, who
rarely agrees with Blackstone, speaks of it as running throughout "in
the same strain of anility, garrulity, narrow-mindedness, absurdity,
perpetual misrepresentation and indefatigable self-contradiction." In
any case it remained the standard authority on the law of evidence
throughout the remainder of the 18th century. Bentham wrote his
_Rationale of Judicial Evidence, specially applied to English Practice_,
at various times between the years 1802 and 1812. By this time he had
lost the nervous and simple style of his youth, and required an editor
to make him readable. His great interpreter, Dumont, condensed his views
on evidence into the _Traite des preuves judiciaires_, which was
published in 1823. The manuscript of the _Rationale_ was edited for
English reading, and to a great extent rewritten, by J.S. Mill, and was
published in five volumes in 1827. The book had a great effect both in
England and on the continent. The English version, though crabbed and
artificial in style, and unmeasured in its invective, is a storehouse of
comments and criticisms on the principles of evidence and the practice
of the courts, which are always shrewd and often profound. Bentham
examined the practice of the courts by the light of practical utility.
Starting from the principle that the object of judicial evidence is the
discovery of truth, he condemned the rules which excluded some of the
best sources of evidence. The most characteristic feature of the
common-law rules of evidence was, as Bentham pointed out, and, indeed,
still is, their exclusionary character. They excluded and prohibited the
use of certain kinds of evidence which would be used in ordinary
inquiries. In particular, they disqualified certain classes of witnesses
on the ground of interest in the subject-matter of the inquiry, instead
of treating the interest of the witness as a matter affecting his
credibility. It was against this confusion between competency and
credibility that Bentham directed his principal attack. He also attacked
the system of paper evidence, evidence by means of affidavits instead of
by oral testimony in court, which prevailed in the court of chancery,
and in ecclesiastical courts. Subsequent legislation has endorsed his
criticisms. The Judicature Acts have reduced the use of affidavits in
chancery proceedings within reasonable limits. A series of acts of
parliament have removed, step by step, almost all the disqualifications
which formerly made certain witnesses incompetent to testify.
Before Bentham's work appeared, an act of 1814 had removed the
incompetency of ratepayers as witnesses in certain cases relating to
parishes. The Civil Procedure Act 1833 enacted that a witness should not
be objected to as incompetent, solely on the ground that the verdict or
judgment would be admissible in evidence for or against him. An act of
1840 removed some doubts as to the competency of ratepayers to give
evidence in matters relating to their parish. The Evidence Act 1843
enacted broadly that witnesses should not be excluded from giving
evidence by reason of incapacity from crime or interest. The Evidence
Act 1851 made parties to legal proceedings admissible witnesses subject
to a proviso that "nothing herein contained shall render any person who
in any criminal proceeding is charged with the commission of any
indictable offence, or any offence punishable on summary conviction,
competent or compellable to give evidence for or against himself or
herself, or shall render any person compellable to answer any question
tending to criminate himself or herself, or shall in any criminal
proceeding render any husband competent or compellable to give evidence
for or against his wife, or any wife competent or compellable to give
evidence for or against her husband." The Evidence (Scotland) Act 1853
made a similar provision for Scotland. The Evidence Amendment Act 1853
made the husbands and wives of parties admissible witnesses, except that
husbands and wives could not give evidence for or against each other in
criminal proceedings or in proceedings for adultery, and could not be
compelled to disclose communications made to each other during marriage.
Under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1857 the petitioner can be examined and
cross-examined on oath at the hearing, but is not bound to answer any
question tending to show that he or she has been guilty of adultery.
Under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1859, on a wife's petition for
dissolution of marriage on the ground of adultery coupled with cruelty
or desertion, husband and wife are competent and compellable to give
evidence as to the cruelty or desertion. The Crown Suits &c. Act 1865
declared that revenue proceedings were not to be treated as criminal
proceedings for the purposes of the acts of 1851 and 1853. The Evidence
Further Amendment Act 1869 declared that parties to actions for breach
of promise of marriage were competent to give evidence in the action,
subject to a proviso that the plaintiff should not recover unless his or
her testimony was corroborated by some other material evidence. It also
made the parties to proceedings instituted in consequence of adultery,
and their husbands and wives, competent to give evidence, but a witness
in any such proceeding, whether a party or not, is not to be liable to
be asked or bound to answer any question tending to show that he or she
has been guilty of adultery, unless the witness has already given
evidence in the same proceeding in disproof of the alleged adultery.
There are similar provisions applying to Scotland in the Conjugal Rights
(Scotland) Amendment Act 1861, and the Evidence Further Amendment
(Scotland) Act 1874. The Evidence Act 1877 enacts that "on the trial of
any indictment or other proceeding for the non-repair of any public
highway or bridge, or for a nuisance to any public highway, river, or
bridge, and of any other indictment or proceeding instituted for the
purpose of trying or enforcing a civil right only, every defendant to
such indictment or proceeding, and the wife or husband of any such
defendant shall be admissible witnesses and compellable to give
evidence." From 1872 onwards numerous enactments were passed making
persons charged with particular offences, and their husbands and wives,
competent witnesses. The language and effect of these enactments were
not always the same, but the insertion of some provision to this effect
in an act creating a new offence, especially if it was punishable by
summary proceedings, gradually became almost a common form in
legislation. In the year 1874 a bill to generalize these particular
provisions, and to make the evidence of persons charged with criminal
offences admissible in all cases was introduced by Mr Gladstone's
government, and was passed by the standing committee of the House of
Commons. During the next fourteen years bills for the same purpose were
repeatedly introduced, either by the government of the day, or by Lord
Bramwell as an independent member of the House of Lords. Finally the
Criminal Evidence Act 1898, introduced by Lord Halsbury, has enacted in
general terms that "every person charged with an offence, and the wife
or husband, as the case may be, of the person so charged, shall be a
competent witness for the defence at every stage of the proceedings,
whether the person so charged is charged solely or jointly with any
other person." But this general enactment is qualified by some special
restrictions, the nature of which will be noticed below. The act applies
to Scotland but not to Ireland. It was not to apply to proceedings in
courts-martial unless so applied by general orders or rules made under
statutory authority. The provisions of the act have been applied by
rules to military courts-martial, but have not yet been applied to naval
courts-martial. The removal of disqualifications for want of religious
belief is referred to below under the head of "Witnesses."
Literature.
The act of 1898 finishes for the present the history of English
legislation on evidence. For a view of the legal literature on the
subject it is necessary to take a step backwards. Early in the 19th
century Chief Baron Gilbert was superseded as an authority on the
English law of evidence by the books of Phillips (1814) and Starkie
(1824), who were followed by Roscoe (_Nisi Prius_, 1827; Criminal
Cases, 1835), Greenleaf (American, 1842), Taylor (based on Greenleaf,
1848), and Best (1849). In 1876 Sir James FitzJames Stephen brought
out his _Digest of the Law of Evidence_, based upon the Indian
Evidence Act 1872, which he had prepared and passed as law member of
the council of the governor-general of India. This Digest obtained a
rapid and well-deserved success, and has materially influenced the
form of subsequent writings on the English law of evidence. It sifted
out what Stephen conceived to be the main rules of evidence from the
mass of extraneous matter in which they had been embedded. Roscoe's
Digests told the lawyer what things must be proved in order to sustain
particular actions or criminal charges, and related as much to
pleadings and to substantive law as to evidence proper. Taylor's two
large volumes were a vast storehouse of useful information, but his
book was one to consult, not to master. Stephen eliminated much of
this extraneous matter, and summed up his rules in a series of
succinct propositions, supplemented by apt illustrations, and couched
in such a form that they could be easily read and remembered. Hence
the English Digest, like the Indian Act, has been of much educational
value. Its most original feature, but unfortunately also its weakest
point, is its theory of relevancy. Pondering the multitude of
"exclusionary" rules which had been laid down by the English courts,
Stephen thought that he had discovered the general principle on which
those rules reposed, and could devise a formula by which the principle
could be expressed. "My study of the subject," he says, "both
practically and in books has convinced me that the doctrine that all
facts in issue and relevant to the issue, and no others, may be
proved, is the unexpressed principle which forms the centre of and
gives unity to all the express negative rules which form the great
mass of the law." The result was the chapter on the relevancy of facts
in the Indian Evidence Act, and the definition of relevancy in s. 7 of
that act. This definition was based on the view that a distinction
could be drawn between things which were and things which were not
causally connected with each other, and that relevancy depended on
causal connexion. Subsequent criticism convinced Stephen that his
definition was in some respects too narrow and in others too wide, and
eventually he adopted a definition out of which all reference to
causality was dropped. But even in their amended form the provisions
about relevancy are open to serious criticism. The doctrine of
relevancy, i.e. of the probative effect of facts, is a branch of
logic, not of law, and is out of place both in an enactment of the
legislature and in a compendium of legal rules. The necessity under
which Stephen found himself of extending the range of relevant facts
by making it include facts "deemed to be relevant," and then narrowing
it by enabling the judge to exclude evidence of facts which are
relevant, illustrates the difference between the rules of logic and
the rules of law. Relevancy is one thing; admissibility is another;
and the confusion between them, which is much older than Stephen, is
to be regretted. Rightly or wrongly English judges have, on practical
grounds, declared inadmissible evidence of facts, which are relevant
in the ordinary sense of the term, and which are so treated in
non-judicial inquiries. Under these circumstances the attempt so to
define relevancy as to make it conterminous with admissibility is
misleading, and most readers of Stephen's Act and Digest would find
them more intelligible and more useful if "admissible" were
substituted for "relevant" throughout. Indeed it is hardly too much to
say that Stephen's doctrine of relevancy is theoretically unsound and
practically useless. The other parts of the work contain terse and
vigorous statements of the law, but a Procrustean attempt to make
legal rules square with a preconceived theory has often made the
language and arrangement artificial, and the work, in spite of its
compression, still contains rules which, under a more scientific
treatment, would find their appropriate place in other branches of the
law. These defects are characteristic of a strong and able man, who
saw clearly, and expressed forcibly what he did see, but was apt to
ignore or to deny the existence of what he did not see, whose mind was
vigorous rather than subtle or accurate, and who, in spite of his
learning, was somewhat deficient in the historical sense. But
notwithstanding these defects, the conspicuous ability of the author,
his learning, and his practical experience, especially in criminal
cases, attach greater weight to FitzJames Stephen's statements than to
those of any other English writer on the law of evidence.
Rules.
The object of every trial is, or may be, to determine two classes of
questions or issues, which are usually distinguished as questions of
law, and questions of fact, although the distinction between them is not
so clear as might appear on a superficial view. In a trial by jury these
two classes of questions are answered by different persons. The judge
lays down the law. The jury, under the guidance of the judge, find the
facts. It was with reference to trial by jury that the English rules of
evidence were originally framed; it is by the peculiarities of this form
of trial that many of them are to be explained; it is to this form of
trial alone that some of the most important of them are exclusively
applicable. The negative, exclusive, or exclusionary rules which form
the characteristic features of the English law of evidence, are the
rules in accordance with which the judge guides the jury. There is no
difference of principle between the method of inquiry in judicial and in
non-judicial proceedings. In either case a person who wishes to find out
whether a particular event did or did not happen, tries, in the first
place, to obtain information from persons who were present and saw what
happened (direct evidence), and, failing this, to obtain information
from persons who can tell him about facts from which he can draw an
inference as to whether the event did or did not happen (indirect
evidence). But in judicial inquiries the information given must be given
on oath, and be liable to be tested by cross-examination. And there are
rules of law which exclude from the consideration of the jury certain
classes of facts which, in an ordinary inquiry, would, or might, be
taken into consideration. Facts so excluded are said to be "not
admissible as evidence," or "not evidence," according as the word is
used in the wider or in the narrower sense. And the easiest way of
determining whether a fact is or is not evidence in the narrower sense,
is first to consider whether it has any bearing on the question to be
tried, and, if it has, to consider whether it falls within any one or
more of the rules of exclusion laid down by English law. These rules of
exclusion are peculiar to English law and to systems derived from
English law. They have been much criticized, and some of them have been
repealed or materially modified by legislation. Most of them may be
traced to directions given by a judge in the course of trying a
particular case, given with special reference to the circumstances of
that case, but expressed in general language, and, partly through the
influence of text-writers, eventually hardened into general rules. In
some cases their origin is only intelligible by reference to obsolete
forms of pleading or practice. But in most cases they were originally
rules of convenience laid down by the judge for the assistance of the
jury. The judge is a man of trained experience, who has to arrive at a
conclusion with the help of twelve untrained men, and who is naturally
anxious to keep them straight, and give them every assistance in his
power. The exclusion of certain forms of evidence assists the jury by
concentrating their attention on the questions immediately before them,
and by preventing them from being distracted or bewildered by facts
which either have no bearing on the question before them, or have so
remote a bearing on those questions as to be practically useless as
guides to the truth. It also prevents a jury from being misled by
statements the effect of which, through the prejudice they excite, is
out of all proportion to their true weight. In this respect the rules of
exclusion may be compared to blinkers, which keep a horse's eyes on the
road before him. In criminal cases the rules of exclusion secure fair
play to the accused, because he comes to the trial prepared to meet a
specific charge, and ought not to be suddenly confronted by statements
which he had no reason to expect would be made against him. They protect
absent persons against statements affecting their character. And lastly
they prevent the infinite waste of time which would ensue in the
discussion of a question of fact if an inquiry were allowed to branch
out into all the subjects with which that fact is more or less
connected. The purely practical grounds on which the rules are based,
according to the view of a great judge, may be illustrated by some
remarks of Mr Justice Willes (1814-1872). In discussing the question
whether evidence of the plaintiff's conduct on other occasions ought to
be admitted, he said:--
"It is not easy in all cases to draw the line and to define with
accuracy where probability ceases and speculation begins; but we are
bound to lay down the rule to the best of our ability. No doubt the
rule as to confining the evidence to that which is relevant and
pertinent to the issue is one of great importance, not only as regards
the particular case, but also with reference to saving the time of the
court, and preventing the minds of the jury from being drawn away from
the real point they have to decide.... Now it appears to me that the
evidence proposed to be given in this case, if admitted, would not
have shown that it was more probable that the contract was subject to
the condition insisted upon by the defendant. The question may be put
thus, Does the fact of a person having once or many times in his life
done a particular act in a particular way make it more probable that
he has done the same thing in the same way upon another and different
occasion? To admit such speculative evidence would, I think, be
fraught with great danger.... If such evidence were held admissible it
would be difficult to say that the defendant might not in any case,
where the question was whether or not there had been a sale of goods
on credit, call witnesses to prove that the plaintiff had dealt with
other persons upon a certain credit; or, in an action for an assault,
that the plaintiff might not give evidence of former assaults
committed by the defendant upon other persons, or upon other persons
of a particular class, for the purpose of showing that he was a
quarrelsome individual, and therefore that it was highly probable that
the particular charge of assault was well founded. The extent to which
this sort of thing might be carried is inconceivable.... To obviate
the prejudices, the injustice, and the waste of time to which the
admission of such evidence would lead, and bearing in mind the extent
to which it might be carried, and that litigants are mortal, it is
necessary not only to adhere to the rule, but to lay it down strictly.
I think, therefore, the fact that the plaintiff had entered into
contracts of a particular kind with other persons on other occasions
could not be properly admitted in evidence where no custom of trade
to make such contracts, and no connexion between such and the one in
question, was shown to exist" (_Hollingham v. Head_, 1858, 4 C.B. N.S.
388).
There is no difference between the principles of evidence in civil and
in criminal cases, although there are a few special rules, such as those
relating to confessions and to dying declarations, which are only
applicable to criminal proceedings. But in civil proceedings the issues
are narrowed by mutual admissions of the parties, more use is made of
evidence taken out of court, such as affidavits, and, generally, the
rules of evidence are less strictly applied. It is often impolitic to
object to the admission of evidence, even when the objection may be
sustained by previous rulings. The general tendency of modern procedure
is to place a more liberal and less technical construction on rules of
evidence, especially in civil cases. In recent volumes of law reports
cases turning on the admissibility of evidence are conspicuous by their
rarity. Various causes have operated in this direction. One of them has
been the change in the system of pleading, under which each party now
knows before the actual trial the main facts on which his opponent
relies. Another is the interaction of chancery and common-law practice
and traditions since the Judicature Acts. In the chancery courts the
rules of evidence were always less carefully observed, or, as
Westminster would have said, less understood, than in the courts of
common law. A judge trying questions of fact alone might naturally think
that blinkers, though useful for a jury, are unnecessary for a judge.
And the chancery judge was apt to read his affidavits first, and to
determine their admissibility afterwards. In the meantime they had
affected his mind.
The tendency of modern text-writers, among whom Professor J.B. Thayer
(1831-1902), of Harvard, was perhaps the most independent, instructive
and suggestive, is to restrict materially the field occupied by the law
of evidence, and to relegate to other branches of the law topics
traditionally treated under the head of evidence. Thus in every way the
law of evidence, though still embodying some principles of great
importance, is of less comparative importance as a branch of English law
than it was half a century ago. Legal rules, like dogmas, have their
growth and decay. First comes the judge who gives a ruling in a
particular case. Then comes the text-writer who collects the scattered
rulings, throws them into the form of general propositions, connects
them together by some theory, sound or unsound, and often ignores or
obscures their historical origin. After him comes the legislator who
crystallizes the propositions into enactments, not always to the
advantage of mankind. So also with decay. Legal rules fall into the
background, are explained away, are ignored, are denied, are overruled.
Much of the English law of evidence is in a stage of decay.
The subject-matter of the law of evidence may be arranged differently
according to the taste or point of view of the writer. It will be
arranged here under the following heads:--I. Preliminary Matter; II.
Classes of Evidence; III. Rules of Exclusion; IV. Documentary Evidence;
V. Witnesses.
I. PRELIMINARY MATTER
Under this head may be grouped certain principles and considerations
which limit the range of matters to which evidence relates.
1. _Law and Fact._--Evidence relates only to facts. It is therefore
necessary to touch on the distinction between law and facts. _Ad
quaestionem facti non respondent judices; ad quaestionem juris non
respondent juratores._ Thus Coke, attributing, after his wont, to
Bracton a maxim which may have been invented by himself. The maxim
became the subject of political controversy, and the two rival views are
represented by Pulteney's lines--
"For twelve honest men have decided the cause
Who are judges alike of the facts and the laws,"
and by Lord Mansfield's variant--
"Who are judges of facts, but not judges of laws."
The particular question raised with respect to the law of libel was
settled by Fox's Libel Act 1792. Coke's maxim describes in a broad
general way the distinction between the functions of the judge and of
the jury, but is only true subject to important qualifications. Judges
in jury cases constantly decide what may be properly called questions of
fact, though their action is often disguised by the language applied or
the procedure employed. Juries, in giving a general verdict, often
practically take the law into their own hands. The border-line between
the two classes of questions is indicated by the "mixed questions of law
and fact," to use a common phrase, which arise in such cases as those
relating to "necessaries," "due diligence," "negligence,"
"reasonableness," "reasonable and probable cause." In the treatment of
these cases the line has been drawn differently at different times, and
two conflicting tendencies are discernible. On the one hand, there is
the natural tendency to generalize common inferences into legal rules,
and to fix legal standards of duty. On the other hand, there is the
sound instinct that it is a mistake to define and refine too much in
these cases, and that the better course is to leave broadly to the jury,
under the general guidance of the judge, the question what would be done
by the "reasonable" or "prudent" man in particular cases. The latter
tendency predominates in modern English law, and is reflected by the
enactments in the recent acts codifying the law on bills of exchange and
sale of goods, that certain questions of reasonableness are to be
treated as questions of fact. On the same ground rests the dislike to
limit the right of a jury to give a general verdict in criminal cases.
Questions of custom begin by being questions of fact, but as the custom
obtains general recognition it becomes law. Many of the rules of the
English mercantile law were "found" as customs by Lord Mansfield's
special juries. Generally, it must be remembered that the jury act in
subordinate co-operation with the judge, and that the extent to which
the judge limits or encroaches on the province of the jury is apt to
depend on the personal idiosyncrasy of the judge.
2. _Judicial Notice._--It may be doubted whether the subject of judicial
notice belongs properly to the law of evidence, and whether it does not
belong rather to the general topic of legal or judicial reasoning.
Matters which are the subject of judicial notice are part of the
equipment of the judicial mind. It would be absurd to require evidence
of every fact; many facts must be assumed to be known. The judge, like
the juryman, is supposed to bring with him to the consideration of the
question which he has to try common sense, a general knowledge of human
nature and the ways of the world, and also knowledge of things that
"everybody is supposed to know." Of such matters judicial notice is said
to be taken. But the range of general knowledge is indefinite, and the
range of judicial notice has, for reasons of convenience, been fixed or
extended, both by rulings of the judges and by numerous enactments of
the legislature. It would be impossible to enumerate here the matters of
which judicial notice must or may be taken. These are to be found in the
text-books. For present purposes it must suffice to say that they
include not only matters of fact of common and certain knowledge, but
the law and practice of the courts, and many matters connected with the
government of the country.
3. _Presumptions._--A presumption in the ordinary sense is an inference.
It is an argument, based on observation, that what has happened in some
cases will probably happen in others of the like nature. The subject of
presumptions, so far as they are mere inferences or arguments, belongs,
not to the law of evidence, or to law at all, but to rules of reasoning.
But a legal presumption, or, as it is sometimes called, a presumption of
law, as distinguished from a presumption of fact, is something more. It
may be described, in Stephen's language, as "a rule of law that courts
and judges shall draw a particular inference from a particular fact, or
from particular evidence, unless and until the truth" (perhaps it would
be better to say 'soundness') "of the inference is disproved." Courts
and legislatures have laid down such rules on grounds of public policy
or general convenience, and the rules have then to be observed as rules
of positive law, not merely used as part of the ordinary process of
reasoning or argument. Some so-called presumptions are rules of
substantive law under a disguise. To this class appear to belong
"conclusive presumptions of law," such as the common-law presumption
that a child under seven years of age cannot commit a felony. So again
the presumption that every one knows the law is merely an awkward way of
saying that ignorance of the law is not a legal excuse for breaking it.
Of true legal presumptions, the majority may be dealt with most
appropriately under different branches of the substantive law, such as
the law of crime, of property, or of contract, and accordingly Stephen
has included in his _Digest of the Law of Evidence_ only some which are
common to more than one branch of the law. The effect of a presumption
is to impute to certain facts or groups of facts a prima facie
significance or operation, and thus, in legal proceedings, to throw upon
the party against whom it works the duty of bringing forward evidence to
meet it. Accordingly the subject of presumptions is intimately connected
with the subject of the burden of proof, and the same legal rule may be
expressed in different forms, either as throwing the advantage of a
presumption on one side, or as throwing the burden of proof on the
other. Thus the rule in Stephen's Digest, which says that the burden of
proving that any person has been guilty of a crime or wrongful act is on
the person who asserts it, appears in the article entitled "Presumption
of Innocence." Among the more ordinary and more important legal
presumptions are the presumption of regularity in proceedings, described
generally as a presumption _omnia esse rite acta_, and including the
presumption that the holder of a public office has been duly appointed,
and has duly performed his official duties, the presumption of the
legitimacy of a child born during the mother's marriage, or within the
period of gestation after her husband's death, and the presumptions as
to life and death. "A person shown not to have been heard of for seven
years by those (if any) who, if he had been alive, would naturally have
heard of him, is presumed to be dead unless the circumstances of the
case are such as to account for his not being heard of without assuming
his death; but there is no presumption as to the time when he died, and
the burden of proving his death at any particular time is upon the
person who asserts it. There is no presumption" (i.e. legal presumption)
"as to the age at which a person died who is shown to have been alive at
a given time, or as to the order in which two or more persons died who
are shown to have died in the same accident, shipwreck or battle"
(Stephen, _Dig._, art. 99). A document proved or purporting to be thirty
years old is presumed to be genuine, and to have been properly executed
and (if necessary) attested if produced from the proper custody. And the
legal presumption of a "lost grant," i.e. the presumption that a right
or alleged right which has been long enjoyed without interruption had a
legal origin, still survives in addition to the common law and statutory
rules of prescription.
4. _Burden of Proof._--The expression _onus probandi_ has come down from
the classical Roman law, and both it and the Roman maxims, _Agenti
incumbit probatio_, _Necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui dicit non ei
qui negat_, and _Reus excipiendo fit actor_, must be read with reference
to the Roman system of actions, under which nothing was admitted, but
the plaintiff's case was tried first; then, unless that failed, the
defendant's on his _exceptio_; then, unless that failed, the plaintiff's
on his _replicatio_, and so on. Under such a system the burden was
always on the "actor." In modern law the phrase "burden of proof" may
mean one of two things, which are often confused--the burden of
establishing the proposition or issue on which the case depends, and the
burden of producing evidence on any particular point either at the
beginning or at a later stage of the case. The burden in the former
sense ordinarily rests on the plaintiff or prosecutor. The burden in the
latter sense, that of going forward with evidence on a particular point,
may shift from side to side as the case proceeds. The general rule is
that he who alleges a fact must prove it, whether the allegation is
couched in affirmative or negative terms. But this rule is subject to
the effect of presumptions in particular cases, to the principle that in
considering the amount of evidence necessary to shift the burden of
proof regard must be had to the opportunities of knowledge possessed by
the parties respectively, and to the express provisions of statutes
directing where the burden of proof is to lie in particular cases. Thus
many statutes expressly direct that the proof of lawful excuse or
authority, or the absence of fraudulent intent, is to lie on the person
charged with an offence. And the Summary Jurisdiction Act 1848 provides
that if the information or complaint in summary proceedings negatives
any exemption, exception, proviso, or condition in the statute on which
it is founded, the prosecutor or complainant need not prove the
negative, but the defendant may prove the affirmative in his defence.
II. CLASSES OF EVIDENCE
Evidence is often described as being either oral or documentary. To
these two classes should be added a third, called by Bentham real
evidence, and consisting of things presented immediately to the senses
of the judge or the jury. Thus the judge or jury may go to view any
place the sight of which may help to an understanding of the evidence,
and may inspect anything sufficiently identified and produced in court
as material to the decision. Weapons, clothes and things alleged to have
been stolen or damaged are often brought into court for this purpose.
Oral evidence consists of the statements of witnesses. Documentary
evidence consists of documents submitted to the judge or jury by way of
proof. The distinction between primary and secondary evidence relates
only to documentary evidence, and will be noticed in the section under
that head. A division of evidence from another point of view is that
into direct and indirect, or, as it is sometimes called, circumstantial
evidence. By direct evidence is meant the statement of a person who saw,
or otherwise observed with his senses, the fact in question. By indirect
or circumstantial evidence is meant evidence of facts from which the
fact in question may be inferred. The difference between direct and
indirect evidence is a difference of kind, not of degree, and therefore
the rule or maxim as to "best evidence" has no application to it. Juries
naturally attach more weight to direct evidence, and in some legal
systems it is only this class of evidence which is allowed to have full
probative force. In some respects indirect evidence is superior to
direct evidence, because, as Paley puts it, "facts cannot lie," whilst
witnesses can and do. On the other hand facts often deceive; that is to
say, the inferences drawn from them are often erroneous. The
circumstances in which crimes are ordinarily committed are such that
direct evidence of their commission is usually not obtainable, and when
criminality depends on a state of mind, such as intention, that state
must necessarily be inferred by means of indirect evidence.
III. RULES OF EXCLUSION
It seems desirable to state the leading rules of exclusion in their
crude form instead of obscuring their historical origin by attempting to
force them into the shape of precise technical propositions forming
parts of a logically connected system. The judges who laid the
foundations of our modern law of evidence, like those who first
discoursed on the duties of trustees, little dreamt of the elaborate and
artificial system which was to be based upon their remarks. The rules
will be found, as might be expected, to be vague, to overlap each other,
to require much explanation, and to be subject to many exceptions. They
may be stated as follows:--(1) Facts not relevant to the issue cannot be
admitted as evidence. (2) The evidence produced must be the best
obtainable under the circumstances. (3) Hearsay is not evidence. (4)
Opinion is not evidence.
1. _Rule of Relevancy._--The so-called rule of relevancy is sometimes
stated by text-writers in the form in which it was laid down by Baron
Parke in 1837 (_Wright_ v. _Doe and Tatham_, 7 A. and E. 384), when he
described "one great principle" in the law of evidence as being that
"all facts which are relevant to the issue may be proved." Stated in
different forms, the rule has been made by FitzJames Stephen the central
point of his theory of evidence. But relevancy, in the proper and
natural sense, as we have said, is a matter not of law, but of logic. If
Baron Parke's dictum relates to relevancy in its natural sense it is
not true; if it relates to relevancy in a narrow and artificial sense,
as equivalent to admissible, it is tautological. Such practical
importance as the rule of relevancy possesses consists, not in what it
includes, but in what it excludes, and for that reason it seems better
to state the rule in a negative or exclusive form. But whether the rule
is stated in a positive or in a negative form its vagueness is apparent.
No precise line can be drawn between "relevant" and "irrelevant" facts.
The two classes shade into each other by imperceptible degrees. The
broad truth is that the courts have excluded from consideration certain
matters which have some bearing on the question to be decided, and
which, in that sense, are relevant, and that they have done so on
grounds of policy and convenience. Among the matters so excluded are
matters which are likely to mislead the jury, or to complicate the case
unnecessarily, or which are of slight, remote, or merely conjectural
importance. Instances of the classes of matters so excluded can be
given, but it seems difficult to refer their exclusion to any more
general principle than this. Rules as to evidence of character and
conduct appear to fall under this principle. Evidence is not admissible
to show that the person who is alleged to have done a thing was of a
disposition or character which makes it probable that he would or would
not have done it. This rule excludes the biographical accounts of the
prisoner which are so familiar in French trials, and is an important
principle in English trials. It is subject to three exceptions: first,
that evidence of good character is admissible in favour of the prisoner
in all criminal cases; secondly, that a prisoner indicted for rape is
entitled to call evidence as to the immoral character of the
prosecutrix; and thirdly, that a witness may be called to say that he
would not believe a previous witness on his oath. The exception allowing
the good character of a prisoner to influence the verdict, as
distinguished from the sentence, is more humane than logical, and seems
to have been at first admitted in capital cases only. The exception in
rape cases does not allow evidence to be given of specific acts of
immorality with persons other than the prisoner, doubtless on the ground
that such evidence would affect the reputations of third parties. Where
the character of a person is expressly in issue, as in actions of libel
and slander, the rule of exclusion, as stated above, does not apply. Nor
does it prevent evidence of bad character from being given in mitigation
of damages, where the amount of damages virtually depends on character,
as in cases of defamation and seduction. As to conduct there is a
similar general rule, that evidence of the conduct of a person on other
occasions is not to be used merely for the purpose of showing the
likelihood of his having acted in a similar way on a particular
occasion. Thus, on a charge of murder, the prosecutor cannot give
evidence of the prisoner's conduct to other persons for the purpose of
proving a bloodthirsty and murderous disposition. And in a civil case a
defendant was not allowed to show that the plaintiff had sold goods on
particular terms to other persons for the purpose of proving that he had
sold similar goods on the same terms to the defendant. But this general
rule must be carefully construed. Where several offences are so
connected with each other as to form parts of an entire transaction,
evidence of one is admissible as proof of another. Thus, where a
prisoner is charged with stealing particular goods from a particular
place, evidence may be given that other goods, taken from the same place
at the same time, were found in his possession. And where it is proved
or admitted that a person did a particular act, and the question is as
to his state of mind, that is to say, whether he did the act knowingly,
intentionally, fraudulently, or the like, evidence may be given of the
commission by him of similar acts on other occasions for the purpose of
proving his state of mind on the occasion. This principle is most
commonly applied in charges for uttering false documents or base coin,
and not uncommonly in charges for false pretences, embezzlement or
murder. In proceedings for the receipt or possession of stolen property,
the legislature has expressly authorized evidence to be given of the
possession by the prisoner of other stolen property, or of his previous
conviction of an offence involving fraud or dishonesty (Prevention of
Crimes Act 1871). Again, where there is a question whether a person
committed an offence, evidence may be given of any fact supplying a
motive or constituting preparation for the offence, of any subsequent
conduct of the person accused, which is apparently influenced by the
commission of the offence, and of any act done by him, or by his
authority, in consequence of the offence. Thus, evidence may be given
that, after the commission of the alleged offence, the prisoner
absconded, or was in possession of the property, or the proceeds of the
property, acquired by the offence, or that he attempted to conceal
things which were or might have been used in committing the offence, or
as to the manner in which he conducted himself when statements were made
in his presence and hearing. Statements made to or in the presence of a
person charged with an offence are admitted as evidence, not of the
facts stated, but of the conduct or demeanour of the person to whom or
in whose presence they are made, or of the general character of the
transaction of which they form part (under the _res gestae_ rule
mentioned below).
2. _Best Evidence Rule._--Statements to the effect of the best evidence
rule were often made by Chief Justice Holt about the beginning of the
18th century, and became familiar in the courts. Chief Baron Gilbert, in
his book on evidence, which must have been written before 1726, says
that "the first and most signal rule in relation to evidence is this,
that a man must have the utmost evidence the nature of the fact is
capable of." And in the great case of _Omichund_ v. _Barker_ (1744),
Lord Hardwicke went so far as to say, "The judges and sages of the law
have laid down that there is but one general rule of evidence, the best
that the nature of the case will admit" (1 Atkyns 49). It is no wonder
that a rule thus solemnly stated should have found a prominent place in
text-books on the law of evidence. But, apart from its application to
documentary evidence, it does not seem to be more than a useful guiding
principle which underlies, or may be used in support of, several rules.
It is to documentary evidence that the principle is usually applied, in
the form of the narrower rule excluding, subject to exceptions,
secondary evidence of the contents of a document where primary evidence
is obtainable. In this form the rule is a rule of exclusion, but may be
most conveniently dealt with in connexion with the special subject of
documentary evidence. As noticed above, the general rule does not apply
to the difference between direct and indirect evidence. And, doubtless
on account of its vague character, it finds no place in Stephen's
Digest.
3. _Hearsay._--The term "hearsay" primarily applies to what a witness
has heard another person say in respect to a fact in dispute. But it is
extended to any statement, whether reduced to writing or not, which is
brought before the court, not by the author of the statement, but by a
person to whose knowledge the statement has been brought. Thus the
hearsay rule excludes statements, oral or written, made in the first
instance by a person who is not called as a witness in the case.
Historically this rule may be traced to the time when the functions of
the witnesses were first distinguished from the functions of the jury,
and when the witnesses were required by their formula to testify _de
visu suo et auditu_, to state what they knew about facts from the direct
evidence of their senses, not from the information of others. The rule
excludes statements the effect of which is liable to be altered by the
narrator, and which purport to have been made by persons who did not
necessarily speak under the sanction of an oath, and whose accuracy or
veracity is not tested by cross-examination. It is therefore of
practical utility in shutting out many loose statements and much
irresponsible gossip. On the other hand, it excludes statements which
are of some value as evidence, and may indeed be the only available
evidence. Thus, a statement has been excluded as hearsay, even though it
can be proved that the author of the statement made it on oath, or that
it was against his interest when he made it, or that he is prevented by
insanity or other illness from giving evidence himself, or that he has
left the country and disappeared, or that he is dead.
Owing to the inconveniences which would be caused by a strict
application of the rule, it has been so much eaten into by exceptions
that some persons doubt whether the rule and the exceptions ought not
to change places. Among the exceptions the following may be noticed:
(a) _Certain sworn statements_.--In many cases statements made by a
person whose evidence is material, but who cannot come before the
court, or could not come before it without serious difficulty, delay
or expense, may be admitted as evidence under proper safeguards. Under
the Indictable Offences Act 1848, where a person has made a deposition
before a justice at a preliminary inquiry into an offence, his
deposition may be read in evidence on proof that the deponent is dead,
or too ill to travel, that the deposition was taken in the presence of
the accused person, and that the accused then had a full opportunity
of cross-examining the deponent. The deposition must appear to be
signed by the justice before whom it purports to have been taken.
Depositions taken before a coroner are admissible under the same
principle. And the principle probably extends to cases where the
deponent is insane, or kept away by the person accused. There are
other statutory provisions for the admission of depositions, as in the
Criminal Law Amendment Act 1867; the Foreign Jurisdiction Act 1890;
and the Children Act 1908, incorporating an act of 1894. In civil
cases the rule excluding statements not made in court at the trial is
much less strictly applied. Frequent use is made of evidence taken
before an examiner, or under a commission. Affidavits are freely used
for subordinate issues or under an arrangement between the parties,
and leave may be given to use evidence taken in other proceedings. The
old chancery practice, under which evidence, both at the trial and at
other stages of a proceeding, was normally taken by affidavit,
irrespectively of consent, was altered by the Judicature Acts. Under
the existing rules of the supreme court evidence may be given by
affidavit upon any motion, petition or summons, but the court or a
judge may, on the application of either party, order the attendance
for cross-examination of the person making the affidavit. (b) _Dying
declarations._--In a trial for murder or manslaughter a declaration by
the person killed as to the cause of his death, or as to any of the
circumstances of the transaction which resulted in his death, is
admissible as evidence. But this exception is very strictly construed.
It must be proved that the declarant, at the time of making the
declaration, was in actual danger of death, and had given up all hope
of recovery. (c) _Statements in pedigree cases._--On a question of
pedigree the statement of a deceased person, whether based on his own
personal knowledge or on family tradition, is admissible as evidence,
if it is proved that the person who made the statement was related to
the person about whose family relations the statement was made, and
that the statement was made before the question with respect to which
the evidence is required had arisen. (d) _Statements as to matters of
public or general interest._--Statements by deceased persons are
admissible as evidence of reputation or general belief in questions
relating to the existence of any public or general right or custom, or
matter of public and general interest. Statements of this kind are
constantly admitted in questions relating to right of way, or rights
of common, or manorial or other local customs. Maps, copies of court
rolls, leases and other deeds, and verdicts, judgments, and orders of
court fall within the exception in cases of this kind. (e) _Statements
in course of duty or business._--A statement with respect to a
particular fact made by a deceased person in pursuance of his duty in
connexion with any office, employment or business, whether public or
private, is admissible as evidence of that fact, if the statement
appears to have been made from personal knowledge, and at or about the
time when the fact occurred. This exception covers entries by clerks
and other employees. (f) _Statements against interest._--A statement
made by a deceased person against his pecuniary or proprietary
interest is admissible as evidence, without reference to the time at
which it was made. Where such a statement is admissible the whole of
it becomes admissible, though it may contain matters not against the
interest of the person who made it, and though the total effect may be
in his favour. Thus, where there was a question whether a particular
sum was a gift or a loan, entries in an account book of receipt of
interest on the sum were admitted, and a statement in the book that
the alleged debtor had on a particular date acknowledged the loan was
also admitted. (g) _Public documents._--Under this head may be placed
recitals in public acts of parliament, notices in the _London_,
_Edinburgh_, or _Dublin Gazette_ (which are made evidence by statute
in a large number of cases), and entries made in the performance of
duty in official registers or records, such as registers of births,
deaths or marriages, registers of companies, records in judicial
proceedings, and the like. An entry in a public document may be
treated as a statement made in the course of duty, but it is
admissible whether the person who made the statement is alive or dead,
and without any evidence as to personal knowledge, or the time at
which the statement is made. (h) _Admissions._--By the term
"admission," as here used, is meant a statement made out of the
witness-box by a party to the proceedings, whether civil or criminal,
or by some person whose statements are binding on that party, against
the interest of that party. The term includes admissions made in
answer to interrogatories, or to a notice to admit facts, but not
admissions made on the pleadings. Admissions, in this sense of the
term, are admissible as evidence against the person by whom they are
made, or on whom they are binding, without reference to the life or
death of the person who made them. A person is bound by the statements
of his agent, acting within the scope of his authority, and barristers
and solicitors are agents for their clients in the conduct of legal
proceedings. Conversely, a person suing or defending on behalf of
another, e.g. as agent or trustee, is bound by the statements of the
person whom he represents. Statements respecting property made by a
predecessor in title bind the successor. Where a statement is put in
evidence as an admission by, or binding on, any person, that person is
entitled to have the whole statement given in evidence. The principle
of this rule is obviously sound, because it would be unfair to pick
out from a man's statement what tells against him, and to suppress
what is in his favour. But the application of the rule is sometimes
attended with difficulty. An admission will not be allowed to be used
as evidence if it was made under a stipulation, express or implied,
that it should not be so used. Such admissions are said to be made
"without prejudice." (i) _Confessions._--A confession is an admission
by a person accused of an offence that he has committed the offence of
which he is accused. But the rules about admitting as evidence
confessions in criminal proceedings are much more strict than the
rules about admissions in civil proceedings. The general rule is, that
a confession is not admissible as evidence against any person except
the person who makes it. But a confession made by one accomplice in
the presence of another is admissible against the latter to this
extent, that, if it implicates him, his silence under the charge may
be used against him, whilst on the other hand his prompt repudiation
of the charge might tell in his favour. In other words, the confession
may be used as evidence of the conduct of the person in whose presence
it was made. A confession cannot be admitted as evidence unless proved
to be voluntary. A confession is not treated as being voluntary if it
appears to the court to have been caused by any inducement, threat or
promise which proceeded from a magistrate or other person in authority
concerned in the charge, and which, in the opinion of the court, gave
the accused person reasonable ground for supposing that by making a
confession he would gain some advantage or avoid some evil in
reference to the proceedings against him. This applies to any
inducement, threat or promise having reference to the charge, whether
it is addressed directly to the accused person or is brought to his
knowledge indirectly. But a confession is not involuntary merely
because it appears to have been caused by the exhortations of a person
in authority to make it as a matter of religious duty, or by an
inducement collateral to the proceedings, or by an inducement held out
by a person having nothing to do with the apprehension, prosecution or
examination of the prisoner. Thus, a confession made to a gaol
chaplain in consequence of religious exhortation has been admitted as
evidence. So also has a confession made by a prisoner to a gaoler in
consequence of a promise by the gaoler, that if the prisoner confessed
he should be allowed to see his wife. To make a confession
involuntary, the inducement must have reference to the prisoner's
escape from the charge against him, and must be made by some person
having power to relieve him, wholly or partially, from the
consequences of the charge. A confession is treated as voluntary if,
in the opinion of the court, it was made after the complete removal of
the impression produced by any inducement, threat or promise which
would have made it involuntary. Where a confession was made under an
inducement which makes the confession involuntary, evidence may be
given of facts discovered in consequence of the confession, and of so
much of the confession as distinctly relates to those facts. Thus, A.
under circumstances which make the confession involuntary, tells a
policeman that he, A., had thrown a lantern into the pond. Evidence
may be given that the lantern was found in the pond, and that A. said
he had thrown it there. It is of course improper to try to extort a
confession by fraud or under the promise of secrecy. But if a
confession is otherwise admissible as evidence, it does not become
inadmissible _merely_ because it was made under a promise of secrecy,
or in consequence of a deception practised on the accused person for
the purpose of obtaining it, or when he was drunk, or because it was
made in answer to questions, whether put by a magistrate or by a
private person, or because he was not warned that he was not bound to
make the confession, and that it might be used against him. If a
confession is given in evidence, the whole of it must be given, and
not merely the parts disadvantageous to the accused person. Evidence
amounting to a confession may be used as such against the person who
gave it, though it was given on oath, and though the proceeding in
which it was given had reference to the same subject-matter as the
proceeding in which it is to be used, and though the witness might
have refused to answer the questions put to him. But if, after
refusing to answer such questions, the witness is improperly compelled
to answer, his answers are not a voluntary confession. The grave
jealousy and suspicion with which the English law regards confessions
offer a marked contrast to the importance attached to this form of
evidence in other systems of procedure, such as the inquisitorial
system which long prevailed, and still to some extent prevails, on the
continent. (j) _Res gestae._--Statements are often admitted as
evidence on the ground that they form part of what is called the
"transaction," or _res gestae_, the occurrence or nature of which is
in question. For instance, where an act may be proved, statements
accompanying and explaining the act made by or to the person doing it,
may be given in evidence. There is no difficulty in understanding the
principle on which this exception from the hearsay rule rests, but
there is often practical difficulty in applying it, and the practice
has varied. How long is the "transaction" to be treated as lasting?
What ought to be treated as "the immediate and natural effect of
continuing action," and, for that reason, as part of the _res gestae_?
When an act of violence is committed, to what extent are the terms of
the complaint made by the sufferer, as distinguished from the fact of
a complaint having been made, admissible as evidence? These are some
of the questions raised. The cases in which statements by a person as
to his bodily or mental condition may be put in evidence may perhaps
be treated as falling under the same principle. In the Rugeley
poisoning case, statements by the deceased person before his illness
as to his state of health, and as to his symptoms during illness, were
admitted as evidence for the prosecution. Under the same principle may
also be brought the rule as to statements in conspiracy cases. In
charges of conspiracy, after evidence has been given of the existence
of the plot, and of the connexion of the accused with it, the charge
against one conspirator may be supported by evidence of anything done,
written, or said, not only by him, but by any other of the
conspirators, in furtherance of the common purpose. On the other hand,
a statement made by one conspirator, not in execution of the common
purpose, but in narration of some event forming part of the
conspiracy, would be treated, not as part of the "transaction," but as
a statement excluded by the hearsay rule. Thus the admissibility of
writings in conspiracy cases may depend on the time when they can be
shown to have been in the possession of a fellow-conspirator, whether
before or after the prisoner's apprehension. (k) _Complaints in rape
cases, &c._--In trials for rape and similar offences, the fact that
shortly after the commission of the alleged offence a complaint was
made by the person against whom the offence was committed, and also
the terms of the complaint, have been admitted as evidence, not of the
facts complained of, but of the consistency of the complainant's
conduct with the story told by her in the witness-box, and as
negativing consent on her part.
4. _Opinion._--The rule excluding expressions of opinion also dates from
the first distinction between the functions of witnesses and jury. It
was for the witnesses to state facts, for the jury to form conclusions.
Of course every statement of fact involves inference, and implies a
judgment on phenomena observed by the senses. And the inference is often
erroneous, as in the answer to the question, "Was he drunk?" A prudent
witness will often guard himself, and is allowed to guard himself, by
answering to the best of his belief. But, for practical purposes, it is
possible to draw a distinction between a statement of facts observed and
an expression of opinion as to the inference to be drawn from these
facts, and the rule telling witnesses to state facts and not express
opinions is of great value in keeping their statements out of the region
of argument and conjecture. The evidence of "experts," that is to say,
of persons having a special knowledge of some particular subject, is
generally described as constituting the chief exception to the rule. But
perhaps it would be more accurate to say that experts are allowed a much
wider range than ordinary witnesses in the expression of their opinions,
and in the statement of facts on which their opinions are based. Thus,
in a poisoning case, a doctor may be asked as an expert whether, in his
opinion, a particular poison produces particular symptoms. And, where
lunacy is set up as a defence, an expert may be asked whether, in his
opinion, the symptoms exhibited by the alleged lunatic commonly show
unsoundness of mind, and whether such unsoundness of mind usually
renders persons incapable of knowing the nature of their acts, or of
knowing that what they do is either wrong or contrary to the law.
Similar principles are applied to the evidence of engineers, and in
numerous other cases. In cases of disputed handwriting the evidence of
experts in handwriting is expressly recognized by statute (Evidence and
Practice on Criminal Trials 1865).
IV. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
Charters and other writings were exhibited to the jury at a very early
date, and it is to writings so exhibited that the term "evidence" or
"evidences" seems to have been originally applied _par excellence_. The
oral evidence of witnesses came later. Where a document is to be used as
evidence the first question is how its contents are to be proved. To
this question the principle of "best evidence" applies, in the form of
the rule that primary evidence must be given except in the cases where
secondary evidence is allowed. By primary evidence is meant the document
itself produced for inspection. By secondary evidence is meant a copy
of the document, or verbal accounts of its contents.
The rule as to the inadmissibility of a copy of a document is applied
much more strictly to private than to public or official documents.
Secondary evidence may be given of the contents of a private document
in the following cases:
(a) Where the original is shown or appears to be in the possession of
the adverse party, and he, after having been served with reasonable
notice to produce it, does not do so.
(b) Where the original is shown or appears to be in the possession or
power of a stranger not legally bound to produce it, and he, after
having been served with a writ of _subpoena duces tecum_, or after
having been sworn as a witness and asked for the document, and having
admitted that it is in court, refuses to produce it.
(c) Where it is shown that proper search has been made for the
original, and there is reason for believing that it is destroyed or
lost.
(d) Where the original is of such a nature as not to be easily
movable, as in the case of a placard posted on a wall, or of a
tombstone, or is in a country from which it is not permitted to be
removed.
(e) Where the original is a document for the proof of which special
provision is made by any act of parliament, or any law in force for
the time being. Documents of that kind are practically treated on the
same footing as private documents.
(f) Where the document is an entry in a banker's book, provable
according to the special provisions of the Bankers' Books Evidence Act
1879.
Secondary evidence of a private document is usually given either by
producing a copy and calling a witness who can prove the copy to be
correct, or, when there is no copy obtainable, by calling a witness
who has seen the document, and can give an account of its contents. No
general definition of public document is possible, but the rules of
evidence applicable to public documents are expressly applied by
statute to many classes of documents. Primary evidence of any public
document may be given by producing the document from proper custody,
and by a witness identifying it as being what it professes to be.
Public documents may always be proved by secondary evidence, but the
particular kind of secondary evidence required is in many cases
defined by statute. Where a document is of such a public nature as to
be admissible in evidence on its mere production from the proper
custody, and no statute exists which renders its contents provable by
means of a copy, any copy thereof or extract therefrom is admissible
as proof of its contents, if it is proved to be an examined copy or
extract, or purports to be signed or certified as a true copy or
extract by the officer to whose custody the original is entrusted.
Many statutes provide that various certificates, official and public
documents, documents and proceedings of corporations and of joint
stock and other companies, and certified copies of documents, by-laws,
entries in registers and other books, shall be receivable as evidence
of certain particulars in courts of justice, if they are authenticated
in the manner prescribed by the statutes. Whenever, by virtue of any
such provision, any such certificate or certified copy is receivable
as proof of any particular in any court of justice, it is admissible
as evidence, if it purports to be authenticated in the manner
prescribed by law, without calling any witness to prove any stamp,
seal, or signature required for its authentication, or the official
character of the person who appears to have signed it. The Documentary
Evidence Acts 1868, 1882 and 1895, provide modes of proving the
contents of several classes of proclamations, orders and regulations.
If a document is of a kind which is required by law to be attested,
but not otherwise, an attesting witness must be called to prove its
due execution. But this rule is subject to the following exceptions:
(a) If it is proved that there is no attesting witness alive, and
capable of giving evidence, then it is sufficient to prove that the
attestation of at least one attesting witness is in his handwriting,
and that the signature of the person executing the document is in the
handwriting of that person.
(b) If the document is proved, or purports to be, more than thirty
years old, and is produced from what the court considers to be its
proper custody, an attesting witness need not be called, and it will
be presumed without evidence that the instrument was duly executed and
attested.
Where a document embodies a judgment, a contract, a grant, or
disposition of property, or any other legal transaction or "act in the
law," on which rights depend, the validity of the transaction may be
impugned on the ground of fraud, incapacity, want of consideration, or
other legal ground. But this seems outside the law of evidence. In this
class of cases a question often arises whether extrinsic evidence can be
produced to vary the nature of the transaction embodied in the document.
The answer to this question seems to depend on whether the document was
or was not intended to be a complete and final statement of the
transaction which it embodies. If it was, you cannot go outside the
document for the purpose of ascertaining the nature of the transaction.
If it was not, you may. But the mere statement of this test shows the
difficulty of formulating precise rules, and of applying them when
formulated. FitzJames Stephen mentions, among the facts which may be
proved in these cases, the existence of separate and consistent oral
agreements as to matters on which the document is silent, if there is
reason to believe that the document is not a complete and final
statement of the transaction, and the existence of any usage or custom
with reference to which a contract may be presumed to have been made.
But he admits that the rules on the subject are "by no means easy to
apply, inasmuch as from the nature of the case an enormous number of
transactions fall close on one side or the other of most of them." The
underlying principle appears to be a rule of substantive law rather than
of evidence. When parties to an arrangement have reduced the terms of
the arrangement to a definite, complete, and final written form, they
should be bound exclusively by the terms embodied in that form. The
question in each case is under what circumstances they ought to be
treated as having done so.
The expression "parol evidence," which includes written as well as
verbal evidence, has often been applied to the extrinsic evidence
produced for the purpose of varying the nature of the transaction
embodied in a document. It is also applied to extrinsic evidence used
for another purpose, namely, that of explaining the meaning of the terms
used in a document. The two questions, What is the real nature of the
transaction referred to in a document? and, What is the meaning of a
document? are often confused, but are really distinct from each other.
The rules bearing on the latter question are rules of construction or
interpretation rather than of evidence, but are ordinarily treated as
part of the law of evidence, and are for that reason included by
FitzJames Stephen in his Digest. In stating these rules he adopts, with
verbal modifications, the six propositions laid down by Vice-Chancellor
Wigram in his _Examinations of the Rules of Law respecting the admission
of Extrinsic Evidence in Aid of the Interpretation of Wills_. The
substance of these propositions appears to be this, that wherever the
meaning of a document cannot be satisfactorily ascertained from the
document itself, use may be made of any other evidence for the purpose
of elucidating the meaning, subject to one restriction, that, except in
cases of equivocation, i.e. where a person or thing is described in
terms applicable equally to more than one, resort cannot be had to
extrinsic expressions of the author's intention.
V. WITNESSES
1. _Attendance._--If a witness does not attend voluntarily he can be
required to attend by a writ of _subpoena_.
2. _Competency._--As a general rule every person is a competent witness.
Formerly persons were disqualified by crime or interest, or by being
parties to the proceedings, but these disqualifications have now been
removed by statute, and the circumstances which formerly created them do
not affect the competency, though they may often affect the credibility,
of a witness.
Under the general law as it stood before the Criminal Evidence Act 1898
came into force, a person charged with an offence was not competent to
give evidence on his own behalf. But many exceptions had been made to
this rule by legislation, and the rule itself was finally abolished by
the act of 1898. Under that law a person charged is a competent witness,
but he can only give evidence for the defence, and can only give
evidence if he himself applies to do so. Under the law as it stood
before 1898, persons jointly charged and being tried together were not
competent to give evidence either for or against each other. Under the
act of 1898 a person charged jointly with another is a competent
witness, but only for the defence, and not for the prosecution. If,
therefore, one of the persons charged applies to give evidence his
cross-examination must not be conducted with a view to establish the
guilt of the other. Consequently, if it is thought desirable to use
against one prisoner the evidence of another who is being tried with
him, the latter should be released, or a separate verdict of not guilty
taken against him. A prisoner so giving evidence is popularly said to
turn king's evidence. It follows that, subject to what has been said
above as to persons tried together, the evidence of an accomplice is
admissible against his principal, and _vice versa_. The evidence of an
accomplice is, however, always received with great jealousy and caution.
A conviction on the unsupported testimony of an accomplice may, in some
cases, be strictly legal, but the practice is to require it to be
confirmed by unimpeachable testimony in some material part, and more
especially as to his identification of the person or persons against
whom his evidence may be received. The wife of a person charged is now a
competent witness, but, except in certain special cases, she can only
give evidence for the defence, and can only give evidence if her husband
applies that she should do so. The special cases in which a wife can be
called as a witness either for the prosecution or for the defence, and
without the consent of the person charged, are cases arising under
particular enactments scheduled to the act of 1898, and relating mainly
to offences against wives and children, and cases in which the wife is
by common law a competent witness against her husband, i.e. where the
proceeding is against the husband for bodily injury or violence
inflicted on his wife. The rule of exclusion extends only to a lawful
wife. There is no ground for supposing that the wife of a prosecutor is
an incompetent witness. A witness is incompetent if, in the opinion of
the court, he is prevented by extreme youth, disease affecting his mind,
or any other cause of the same kind, from recollecting the matter on
which he is to testify, from understanding the questions put to him,
from giving rational answers to those questions, or from knowing that he
ought to speak the truth. A witness unable to speak or hear is not
incompetent, but may give his evidence by writing or by signs, or in any
other manner in which he can make it intelligible. The particular form
of the religious belief of a witness, or his want of religious belief,
does not affect his competency. This ground of incompetency has now been
finally removed by the Oaths Act 1888. It will be seen that the effect
of the successive enactments which have gradually removed the
disqualifications attaching to various classes of witnesses has been to
draw a distinction between the _competency_ of a witness and his
_credibility_. No person is disqualified on moral or religious grounds,
but his character may be such as to throw grave doubts on the value of
his evidence. No relationship, except to a limited extent that of
husband and wife, excludes from giving evidence. The parent may be
examined on the trial of the child, the child on that of the parent,
master for or against servant, and servant for or against master. The
relationship of the witness to the prosecutor or the prisoner in such
cases may affect the credibility of the witness, but does not exclude
his evidence.
3. _Privilege._--It does not follow that, because a person is
_competent_ to give evidence, he can therefore be compelled to do so.
No one, except a person charged with an offence when giving evidence on
his own application, and as to the offence wherewith he is charged, is
bound to answer a question if the answer would, in the opinion of the
court, have a tendency to expose the witness, or the wife or husband of
the witness, to any criminal charge, penalty, or forfeiture, which the
court regards as reasonably likely to be preferred or sued for.
Accordingly, an accomplice cannot be examined without his consent, but
if an accomplice who has come forward to give evidence on a promise of
pardon, or favourable consideration, refuses to give full and fair
information, he renders himself liable to be convicted on his own
confession. However, even accomplices in such circumstances are not
required to answer on their cross-examination as to other offences.
Where, under the new law, a person charged with an offence offers
himself as a witness, he may be asked any question in cross-examination,
notwithstanding that it would tend to criminate him as to the offence
charged. But he may not be asked, and if he is asked must not be
required to answer, any question tending to show that he has committed,
or been convicted of, or been charged with, any other offence, or is of
bad character, unless:--
(i.) The proof that he has committed, or been convicted of, the other
offence is admissible evidence to show that he is guilty of the
offence with which he is then charged; or,
(ii.) He has personally, or by his advocate, asked questions of the
witnesses for the prosecution, with a view to establish his own good
character, or has given evidence of his good character, or the nature
or conduct of the defence is such as to involve imputations on the
character of the prosecutor or the witnesses for the prosecution; or,
(iii.) He has given evidence against any other person charged with the
same offence.
He may not be asked questions tending to criminate his wife.
The privilege as to criminating answers does not cover answers merely
tending to establish a civil liability. No one is excused from answering
a question or producing a document only because the answer or document
may establish or tend to establish that he owes a debt, or is otherwise
liable to any civil proceeding. It is a privilege for the protection of
the witness, and therefore may be waived by him. But there are other
privileges which cannot be so waived. Thus, on grounds of public policy,
no one can be compelled, or is allowed, to give evidence relating to any
affairs of state, or as to official communications between public
officers upon public affairs, except with the consent of the head of the
department concerned, and this consent is refused if the production of
the information asked for is considered detrimental to the public
service.
Again, in cases in which the government is immediately concerned, no
witness can be compelled to answer any question the answer to which
would tend to discover the names of persons by or to whom information
was given as to the commission of offences. It is, as a rule, for the
court to decide whether the permission of any such question would or
would not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be injurious
to the administration of justice.
A husband is not compellable to disclose any communication made to him
by his wife during the marriage; and a wife is not compellable to
disclose any communication made to her by her husband during the
marriage.
A legal adviser is not permitted, whether during or after the
termination of his employment as such, unless with his client's express
consent, to disclose any communication, oral or documentary, made to him
_as such legal adviser_, by or on behalf of his client, during, in the
course of, and for the purpose of his employment, or to disclose any
advice given by him to his client during, in the course of, and for the
purpose of such employment. But this protection does not extend to--
(a) Any such communication if made in furtherance of any criminal
purpose; nor
(b) Any fact observed by a legal adviser in the course of his employment
as such, showing that any crime or fraud has been committed since the
commencement of his employment, whether his attention was directed to
such fact by or on behalf of his client or not; nor
(c) Any fact with which the legal adviser became acquainted otherwise
than in his character as such.
Medical men and clergymen are not privileged from the disclosure of
communications made to them in professional confidence, but it is not
usual to press for the disclosures of communications made to clergymen.
4. _Oaths._--A witness must give his evidence under the sanction of an
oath, or of what is equivalent to an oath, that is to say, of a solemn
promise to speak the truth. The ordinary form of oath is adapted to
Christians, but a person belonging to a non-Christian religion may be
sworn in any form prescribed or recognized by the custom of his
religion. (See the article OATH.)
5. _Publicity._--The evidence of a witness at a trial must, as a general
rule, be given in open court in the course of the trial. The secrecy
which was such a characteristic feature of the "inquisition" procedure
is abhorrent to English law, and, even where publicity conflicts with
decency, English courts are very reluctant to dispense with or relax the
safeguards for justice which publicity involves.
6. _Examination._--The normal course of procedure is this. The party who
begins, i.e. ordinarily the plaintiff or prosecutor, calls his witnesses
in order. Each witness is first examined on behalf of the party for whom
he is called. This is called the examination in chief. Then he is liable
to be cross-examined on behalf of the other side. And, finally, he may
be re-examined on behalf of his own side. After the case for the other
side has been opened, the same procedure is adopted with the witnesses
for that side. In some cases the party who began is allowed to adduce
further evidence in reply to his opponent's evidence. The examination is
conducted, not by the court, but by or on behalf of the contending
parties. It will be seen that the principle underlying this procedure is
that of the duel, or conflict between two contending parties, each
relying on and using his own evidence, and trying to break down the
evidence of his opponent. It differs from the principle of the
"inquisition" procedure, in which the court takes a more active part,
and in which the cases for the two sides are not so sharply
distinguished. In a continental trial it is often difficult to determine
whether the case for the prosecution or the case for the defence is
proceeding. Conflicting witnesses stand up together and are "confronted"
with each other. In the examination in chief questions must be confined
to matters bearing on the main question at issue, and a witness must not
be asked leading questions, i.e. questions suggesting the answer which
the person putting the question wishes or expects to receive, or
suggesting disputed facts about which the witness is to testify. But the
rule about leading questions is not applied where the questions asked
are simply introductory, and form no part of the real substance of the
inquiry, or where they relate to matters which, though material, are not
disputed. And if the witness called by a person appears to be directly
hostile to him, or interested on the other side, or unwilling to reply,
the reason for the rules applying to examination in chief breaks down,
and the witness may be asked leading questions and cross-examined, and
treated in every respect as though he was a witness called on the other
side, except that a party producing a witness must not impeach his
credit by general evidence of bad character (Evidence and Practice on
Criminal Trials Act 1865). In cross-examination questions not bearing on
the main issue and leading questions may be put and (subject to the
rules as to privilege) must be answered, as the cross-examiner is
entitled to test the examination in chief by every means in his power.
Questions not bearing on the main issue are often asked in
cross-examination merely for the purpose of putting off his guard a
witness who is supposed to have learnt up his story. In
cross-examination questions may also be asked which tend either to test
the accuracy or credibility of the witness, or to shake his credit by
impeaching his motives or injuring his character. The licence allowed in
cross-examination has often been seriously abused, and the power of the
court to check it is recognized by one of the rules of the supreme court
(R.S.C. xxxvi. 39, added in 1883). It is considered wrong to put
questions which assume that facts have been proved which have not been
proved, or that answers have been given contrary to the fact. A witness
ought not to be pressed in cross-examination as to any facts which, if
admitted, would not affect the question at issue or the credibility of
the witness. If the cross-examiner intends to adduce evidence contrary
to the evidence given by the witness, he ought to put to the witness in
cross-examination the substance of the evidence which he proposes to
adduce, in order to give the witness an opportunity of retracting or
explaining. Where a witness has answered a question which only tends to
affect his credibility by injuring his character, it is only in a
limited number of cases that evidence can be given to contradict his
answer. Where he is asked whether he has ever been convicted of any
felony or misdemeanour, and denies or refuses to answer, proof may be
given of the truth of the facts suggested (28 & 29 Vict. c. 15, s. 6).
The same rule is observed where he is asked a question tending to show
that he is not impartial. Where a witness has previously made a
statement inconsistent with his evidence, proof may be given that he did
in fact make it. But before such proof is given the circumstances of the
alleged statement, sufficient to designate the particular occasion,
must be mentioned to the witness, and he must be asked whether he did or
did not make the statement. And if the statement was made in, or has
been reduced to, writing, the attention of the witness must, before the
writing is used against him, be called to those parts of the writing
which are to be used for the purpose of contradicting him (Evidence and
Practice on Criminal Trials Act 1865, ss. 4, 5). The credibility of a
witness may be impeached by the evidence of persons who swear that they,
from their knowledge of the witness, believe him to be unworthy of
credit on his oath. These persons may not on their examination in chief
give reasons for their belief, but they may be asked their reasons in
cross-examination, and their answers cannot be contradicted. When the
credit of a witness is so impeached, the party who called the witness
may give evidence in reply to show that the witness is worthy of credit.
Re-examination must be directed exclusively to the explanation of
matters referred to in cross-examination, and if new matter is, by the
permission of the court, introduced in re-examination, the other side
may further cross-examine upon it. A witness under examination may
refresh his memory by referring to any writing made by himself at or
about the time of the occurrence to which the writing relates, or made
by any other person, and read and found accurate by the witness at or
about the time. An expert may refresh his memory by reference to
professional treatises.
For the history of the English law of evidence, see Brunner,
_Entstehung der Schwurgerichte_; Bigelow, _History of Procedure in
England_; Stephen (Sir J.F.), _History of the Criminal Law of
England_; Pollock and Maitland, _History of English Law_, bk. ii. ch.
ix.; Thayer, Preliminary Treatise on Evidence at the Common Law. The
principal text-books now in use are--Roscoe, _Digest of the Law of
Evidence on the Trial of Actions at Nisi Prius_ (18th ed., 1907);
Roscoe, _Digest of the Law of Evidence in Criminal Cases_ (13th ed.,
1908); Taylor, _Treatise on the Law of Evidence_ (10th ed., 1906);
Best, _Principles of the Law of Evidence_ (10th ed., 1906); Powell,
_Principles and Practice of the Law of Evidence_ (8th ed., 1904);
Stephen, _Digest of the Law of Evidence_ (8th ed., 1907); Wills,
_Theory and Practice of the Law of Evidence_ (1907). For the history
of the law of criminal evidence in France, see Esmein, _Hist. de la
procedure criminelle en France_. For Germany, see Holtzendorff,
_Encyclopadie der Rechtswissenschaft_ (passages indexed under head
"Beweis"); Holtzendorff, _Rechtslexikon_ ("Beweis"). (C. P. I.)
FOOTNOTE:
[1] Reference may be made to a well-known passage in the _Essay
concerning Human Understanding_ (Book iv. ch. xv.): "The grounds of
probability are--First, the conformity of anything with our own
knowledge, observation and experience. Second, the testimony of
others touching their observation and experience. In the testimony of
others is to be considered (1) the number, (2) the integrity, (3) the
skill of the witnesses. (4) The design of the author, where it is a
testimony out of a book cited. (5) The consistency of the parts and
circumstances of the relation. (6) Contrary testimonies."
EVIL EYE. The terror of the arts of "fascination," i.e. that certain
persons can bewitch, injure and even kill with a glance, has been and is
still very widely spread. The power was not thought to be always
maliciously cultivated. It was as often supposed to be involuntary (cf.
Deuteronomy xxviii. 54); and a story is told of a Slav who, afflicted
with the evil eye, at last blinded himself in order that he might not be
the means of injuring his children (Woyciki, _Polish Folklore_, trans.
by Lewenstein, p. 25). Few of the old classic writers fail to refer to
the dread power. In Rome the "evil eye" was so well recognized that
Pliny states that special laws were enacted against injury to crops by
incantation, excantation or fascination. The power was styled [Greek:
baskania] by the Greeks and _fascinatio_ by the Latins. Children and
young animals of all kinds were thought to be specially susceptible.
Charms were worn against the evil eye both by man and beast, and in
Judges viii. 21 it is thought there is a reference to this custom in the
allusion to the "ornaments" on the necks of camels. In classic times the
wearing of amulets was universal. They were of three classes: (1) those
the intention of which was to attract on to themselves, as the
lightning-rod the lightning, the malignant glance; (2) charms hidden in
the bosom of the dress; (3) written words from sacred writings. Of these
three types the first was most numerous. They were oftenest of a
grotesque and generally grossly obscene nature. They were also made in
the form of frogs, beetles and so on. But the ancients did not wholly
rely on amulets. Spitting was among the Greeks and Romans a most common
antidote to the poison of the evil eye. According to Theocritus it is
necessary to spit three times into the breast of the person who fears
fascination. Gestures, too, often intentionally obscene, were regarded
as prophylactics on meeting the dreaded individual. The evil eye was
believed to have its impulse in envy, and thus it came to be regarded
as unlucky to have any of your possessions praised. Among the Romans,
therefore, it was customary when praising anything to add _Praefiscini
dixerim_ (Fain Evil! I should say). This custom survives in modern
Italy, where in like circumstances is said _Si mal occhio non ci fosse_
(May the evil eye not strike it). The object of these conventional
phrases was to prove that the speaker was sincere and had no evil
designs in his praise. Though there is no set formula, traces of the
custom are found in English rural sayings, e.g. the Somersetshire "I
don't wish ee no harm, so I on't zay no more." This is what the Scots
call "fore-speaking," when praise beyond measure is likely to be
followed by disease or accident. A Manxman will never say he is very
well: he usually admits that he is "middling," or qualifies his
admission of good health by adding "now" or "just now." The belief led
in many countries to the saying, when one heard anybody or anything
praised superabundantly, "God preserve him or it." So in Ireland, to
avoid being suspected of having the evil eye, it is advisable when
looking at a child to say "God bless it"; and when passing a farm-yard
where cows are collected at milking time it is usual for the peasant to
say, "The blessing of God be on you and all your labour." Bacon writes:
"It seems some have been so curious as to note that the times when the
stroke ... of an envious eye does most hurt are particularly when the
party envied is beheld in glory and triumph."
The powers of the evil eye seem indeed to have been most feared by the
prosperous. Its powers are often quoted as almost limitless. Thus one
record solemnly declares that in a town of Africa a fascinator called
Elzanar killed by his evil art no less than 80 people in two years (W.W.
Story, _Castle St Angelo_, 1877, p. 149). The belief as affecting cattle
was universal in the Scottish Highlands as late as the 18th century and
still lingers. Thus if a stranger looks admiringly on a cow the peasants
still think she will waste away, and they offer the visitor some of her
milk to drink in the belief that in this manner the spell is broken. The
modern Turks and Arabs also think that their horses and camels are
subject to the evil eye. But the people of Italy, especially the
Neapolitans, are the best modern instances of implicit believers. The
_jettatore_, as the owner of the evil eye is called, is so feared that
at his approach it is scarcely an exaggeration to say that a street will
clear: everybody will rush into doorways or up alleys to avoid the
dreaded glance. The _jettatore di bambini_ (fascinator of children) is
the most dreaded of all. The evil eye is still much feared for horses in
India, China, Turkey, Greece and almost everywhere where horses are
found. In rural England the pig is of all animals oftenest "overlooked."
While the Italians are perhaps the greatest believers in the evil eye as
affecting persons, the superstition is rife in the East. In India the
belief is universal. In Bombay the blast of the evil eye is supposed to
be a form of spirit-possession. In western India all witches and wizards
are said to be evil-eyed. Modern Egyptian mothers thus account for the
sickly appearance of their babies. In Turkey passages from the Koran are
painted on the outside of houses to save the inmates, and texts as
amulets are worn upon the person, or hung upon camels and horses by
Arabs, Abyssinians and other peoples. The superstition is universal
among savage races.
For a full discussion see _Evil Eye_ by F.T. Elworthy (London, 1895);
also W.W. Story, _Castle St Angelo and the Evil Eye_ (1877); E.N.
Rolfe and H. Ingleby, _Naples in 1888_ (1888); Johannes Christian
Frommann, _Tractatus de fascinatione novus et singularis_, &c., &c.
(Nuremburg, 1675); R.C. Maclagan, _Evil Eye in the Western Highlands_
(1902).
EVOLUTION. The modern doctrine of evolution or "evolving," as opposed to
that of simple creation, has been defined by Prof. James Sully in the
9th edition of this encyclopaedia as a "natural history of the cosmos
including organic beings, expressed in physical terms as a mechanical
process." The following exposition of the historical development of the
doctrine is taken from Sully's article, and for the most part is in his
own words.
In the modern doctrine of evolution the cosmic system appears as a
natural product of elementary matter and its laws. The various grades of
life on our planet are the natural consequences of certain physical
processes involved in the gradual transformations of the earth.
Conscious life is viewed as conditioned by physical (organic and more
especially nervous) processes, and as evolving itself in close
correlation with organic evolution. Finally, human development, as
exhibited in historical and prehistorical records, is regarded as the
highest and most complex result of organic and physical evolution. This
modern doctrine of evolution is but an expansion and completion of those
physical theories (see below) which opened the history of speculation.
It differs from them in being grounded on exact and verified research.
As such, moreover, it is a much more limited theory of evolution than
the ancient. It does not necessarily concern itself about the question
of the infinitude of worlds in space and in time. It is content to
explain the origin and course of development of the world, the solar or,
at most, the sidereal system which falls under our own observation. It
would be difficult to say what branches of science had done most towards
the establishment of this doctrine. We must content ourselves by
referring to the progress of physical (including chemical) theory, which
has led to the great generalization of the conservation of energy; to
the discovery of the fundamental chemical identity of the matter of our
planet and of other celestial bodies, and of the chemical relations of
organic and inorganic bodies; to the advance of astronomical speculation
respecting the origin of the solar system, &c.; to the growth of the
science of geology which has necessitated the conception of vast and
unimaginable periods of time in the past history of our globe, and to
the rapid march of the biological sciences which has made us familiar
with the simplest types and elements of organism; finally, to the
development of the science of anthropology (including comparative
psychology, philology, &c.), and to the vast extension and improvement
of all branches of historical study.
_History of the Idea of Evolution._--The doctrine of evolution in its
finished and definite form is a modern product. It required for its
formation an amount of scientific knowledge which could only be very
gradually acquired. It is vain, therefore, to look for clearly defined
and systematic presentations of the idea among ancient writers. On the
other hand, nearly all systems of philosophy have discussed the
underlying problems. Such questions as the origin of the cosmos as a
whole, the production of organic beings and of conscious minds, and the
meaning of the observable grades of creation, have from the dawn of
speculation occupied men's minds; and the answers to these questions
often imply a vague recognition of the idea of a gradual evolution of
things. Accordingly, in tracing the antecedents of the modern
philosophic doctrine we shall have to glance at most of the principal
systems of cosmology, ancient and modern. Yet since in these systems
inquiries into the _esse_ and _fieri_ of the world are rarely
distinguished with any precision, it will be necessary to indicate very
briefly the general outlines of the system so far as they are necessary
for understanding their bearing on the problems of evolution.
_Mythological Interpretation._--The problem of the origin of the world
was the first to engage man's speculative activity. Nor was this line of
inquiry pursued simply as a step in the more practical problem of man's
final destiny. The order of ideas observable in children suggests the
reflection that man began to discuss the "whence" of existence before
the "whither." At first, as in the case of the child, the problem of the
genesis of things was conceived anthropomorphically: the question "How
did the world arise?" first shaped itself to the human mind under the
form "Who made the world?" As long as the problem was conceived in this
simple manner there was, of course, no room for the idea of a necessary
self-conditioned evolution. Yet the first indistinct germ of such an
idea appears to emerge in combination with that of creation in some of
the ancient systems of theogony. Thus, for example, in the myth of the
ancient Parsees, the gods Ormuzd and Ahriman are said to evolve
themselves out of a primordial matter. It may be supposed that these
crude fancies embody a dim recognition of the physical forces and
objects personified under the forms of deities, and a rude attempt to
account for their genesis as a natural process. These first
unscientific ideas of a genesis of the permanent objects of nature took
as their pattern the process of organic reproduction and development,
and this, not only because these objects were regarded as personalities,
but also because this particular mode of becoming would most impress
these early observers. This same way of looking at the origin of the
material world is illustrated in the Egyptian notion of a cosmic egg out
of which issues the god (Phta) who creates the world.
_Indian Philosophy._--Passing from mythology to speculation properly so
called, we find in the early systems of philosophy of India theories of
emanation which approach in some respects the idea of evolution. Brahma
is conceived as the eternal self-existent being, which on its material
side unfolds itself to the world by gradually condensing itself to
material objects through the gradations of ether, fire, water, earth and
the elements. At the same time this eternal being is conceived as the
all-embracing world-soul from which emanates the hierarchy of individual
souls. In the later system of emanation of Sankhya there is a more
marked approach to a materialistic doctrine of evolution. If, we are
told, we follow the chain of causes far enough back we reach unlimited
eternal creative nature or matter. Out of this "principal thing" or
"original nature" all material and spiritual existence issues, and into
it will return. Yet this primordial creative nature is endowed with
volition with regard to its own development. Its first emanation as
plastic nature contains the original soul or deity out of which all
individual souls issue.
_Early Greek Physicists._--Passing by Buddhism, which, though teaching
the periodic destruction of our world by fire, &c., does not seek to
determine the ultimate origin of the cosmos, we come to those early
Greek physical philosophers who distinctly set themselves to eliminate
the idea of divine interference with the world by representing its
origin and changes as a natural process. The early Ionian physicists,
including Thales, Anaximander and Anaximenes, seek to explain the world
as generated out of a primordial matter (Gr. [Greek: hyle]; hence the
name "Hylozoists"), which is at the same time the universal support of
things. This substance is endowed with a generative or transmutative
force by virtue of which it passes into a succession of forms. They thus
resemble modern evolutionists, since they regard the world with its
infinite variety of forms as issuing from a simple mode of matter. More
especially the cosmology of Anaximander resembles the modern doctrine of
evolution in its conception of the indeterminate ([Greek: to apeiron])
out of which the particular forms of the cosmos are differentiated.
Again, Anaximander may be said to prepare the way for more modern
conceptions of material evolution by regarding his primordial substance
as eternal, and by looking on all generation as alternating with
destruction, each step of the process being of course simply a
transformation of the indestructible substance. Once more, the notion
that this indeterminate body contains potentially in itself the
fundamental contraries--hot, cold, &c.--by the excretion or evolution of
which definite substances were generated, is clearly a forecasting of
that antithesis of potentiality and actuality which from Aristotle
downwards has been made the basis of so many theories of development. In
conclusion, it is noteworthy that though resorting to utterly fanciful
hypotheses respecting the order of the development of the world,
Anaximander agrees with modern evolutionists in conceiving the heavenly
bodies as arising out of an aggregation of diffused matter, and in
assigning to organic life an origin in the inorganic materials of the
primitive earth (pristine mud). The doctrine of Anaximenes, who unites
the conceptions of a determinate and indeterminate original substance
adopted by Thales and Anaximander in the hypothesis of a primordial and
all-generating air, is a clear advance on these theories, inasmuch as it
introduces the scientific idea of condensation and rarefaction as the
great generating or transforming agencies. For the rest, his theory is
chiefly important as emphasizing the vital character of the original
substance. The primordial air is conceived as animated. Anaximenes seems
to have inclined to a view of cosmic evolution as throughout involving
a quasi-spiritual factor. This idea of the air as the original principle
and source of life and intelligence is much more clearly expressed by a
later writer, Diogenes of Apollonia. Diogenes made this conception of a
vital and intelligent air the ground of a teleological view of climatic
and atmospheric phenomena. It is noteworthy that he sought to establish
the identity of organic and inorganic matter by help of the facts of
vegetal and animal nutrition. Diogenes distinctly taught that the world
is of finite duration, and will be renewed out of the primitive
substance.
Heraclitus again deserves a prominent place in a history of the idea of
evolution. Heraclitus conceives of the incessant process of flux in
which all things are involved as consisting of two sides or
moments--generation and decay--which are regarded as a confluence of
opposite streams. In thus making transition or change, viewed as the
identity of existence and non-existence, the leading idea of his system,
Heraclitus anticipated in some measure Hegel's peculiar doctrine of
evolution as a dialectic process.[1] At the same time we may find
expressed in figurative language the germs of thoughts which enter into
still newer doctrines of evolution. For example, the notion of conflict
([Greek: polemos]) as the father of all things and of harmony as arising
out of a union of discords, and again of an endeavour by individual
things to maintain themselves in permanence against the universal
process of destruction and renovation, cannot but remind one of certain
fundamental ideas in Darwin's theory of evolution.
_Empedocles._--Empedocles took an important step in the direction of
modern conceptions of physical evolution by teaching that all things
arise, not by transformations of some primitive form of matter, but by
various combinations of a number of permanent elements. Further, by
maintaining that the elements are continually being combined and
separated by the two forces love and hatred, which appear to represent
in a figurative way the physical forces of attraction and repulsion,
Empedocles may be said to have made a considerable advance in the
construction of the idea of evolution as a strictly mechanical process.
It may be observed, too, that the hypothesis of a primitive compact mass
(_sphaerus_), in which love (attraction) is supreme, has some curious
points of similarity to, and contrast with, that notion of a primitive
nebulous matter with which the modern doctrine of cosmic evolution
usually sets out. Empedocles tries to explain the genesis of organic
beings, and, according to Lange, anticipates the idea of Darwin that
adaptations abound, because it is their nature to perpetuate themselves.
He further recognizes a progress in the production of vegetable and
animal forms, though this part of his theory is essentially crude and
unscientific. More important in relation to the modern problems of
evolution is his thoroughly materialistic way of explaining the origin
of sensation and knowledge by help of his peculiar hypothesis of
effluvia and pores. The supposition that sensation thus rests on a
material process of absorption from external bodies naturally led up to
the idea that plants and even inorganic substances are precipient, and
so to an indistinct recognition of organic life as a scale of
intelligence.
_Atomists._--In the theory of Atomism taught by Leucippus and Democritus
we have the basis of the modern mechanical conceptions of cosmic
evolution. Here the endless harmonious diversity of our cosmos, as well
as of other worlds supposed to coexist with our own, is said to arise
through the various combination of indivisible material elements
differing in figure and magnitude only. The force which brings the atoms
together in the forms of objects is inherent in the elements, and all
their motions are necessary. The origin of things, which is also their
substance, is thus laid in the simplest and most homogeneous elements or
principles. The real world thus arising consists only of diverse
combinations of atoms, having the properties of magnitude, figure,
weight and hardness, all other qualities being relative only to the
sentient organism. The problem of the genesis of mind is practically
solved by identifying the soul, or vital principle, with heat or fire
which pervades in unequal proportions, not only man and animals, but
plants and nature as a whole, and through the agitation of which by
incoming effluvia all sensation arises.
_Aristotle._--Aristotle is much nearer a conception of evolution than
his master Plato. It is true he sets out with a transcendent Deity, and
follows Plato in viewing the creation of the cosmos as a process of
descent from the more to the less perfect according to the distance from
the original self-moving agency. Yet on the whole Aristotle leans to a
teleological theory of evolution, which he interprets dualistually by
means of certain metaphysical distinctions. Thus even his idea of the
relation of the divine activity to the world shows a tendency to a
pantheistic notion of a divine thought which gradually realizes itself
in the process of becoming. Aristotle's distinction of form and matter,
and his conception of becoming as a transition from actuality to
potentiality, provides a new ontological way of conceiving the process
of material and organic evolution.[2] To Aristotle the whole of nature
is instinct with a vital impulse towards some higher manifestation.
Organic life presents itself to him as a progressive scale of complexity
determined by its final end, namely, man.[3] In some respects Aristotle
approaches the modern view of evolution. Thus, though he looked on
species as fixed, being the realization of an unchanging formative
principle ([Greek: physis]), he seems, as Ueberweg observes, to have
inclined to entertain the possibility of a spontaneous generation in the
case of the lowest organisms. Aristotle's teleological conception of
organic evolution often approaches modern mechanical conceptions. Thus
he says that nature fashions organs in the order of their necessity, the
first being those essential to life. So, too, in his psychology he
speaks of the several degrees of mind as arising according to a
progressive necessity.[4] In his view of touch and taste, as the two
fundamental and essential senses, he may remind one of Herbert Spencer's
doctrine. At the same time Aristotle precludes the idea of a natural
development of the mental series by the supposition that man contains,
over and above a natural finite soul inseparable from the body, a
substantial and eternal principle ([Greek: nous]) which enters into the
individual from without. Aristotle's brief suggestions respecting the
origin of society and governments in the _Politics_ show a leaning to a
naturalistic interpretation of human history as a development
conditioned by growing necessities.
_Strato._--Of Aristotle's immediate successors one deserves to be
noticed here, namely, Strato of Lampsacus, who developed his master's
cosmology into a system of naturalism. Strato appears to reject
Aristotle's idea of an original source of movement and life extraneous
to the world in favour of an immanent principle. All parts of matter
have an inward plastic life whereby they can fashion themselves to the
best advantage, according to their capability, though not with
consciousness.
_The Stoics._--In the cosmology of the Stoics we have the germ of a
monistic and pantheistic conception of evolution. All things are said to
be developed out of an original being, which is at once material (fire)
and spiritual (the Deity), and in turn they will dissolve back into this
primordial source. At the same time the world as a developed whole is
regarded as an organism which is permeated with the divine Spirit, and
so we may say that the world-process is a self-realization of the divine
Being. The formative principle or force of the world is said to contain
the several rational germinal forms of things. Individual things are
supposed to arise out of the original being, as animals and plants out
of seeds. Individual souls are an efflux from the all-compassing
world-soul. The necessity in the world's order is regarded by the Stoics
as identical with the divine reason, and this idea is used as the basis
of a teleological and optimistic view of nature. Very curious, in
relation to modern evolutional ideas, is the Stoical doctrine that our
world is but one of a series of exactly identical ones, all of which
are destined to be burnt up and destroyed.
_The Epicureans--Lucretius._--The Epicureans differed from the Stoics by
adopting a purely mechanical view of the world-process. Their
fundamental conception is that of Democritus; they seek to account for
the formation of the cosmos, with its order and regularity, by setting
out with the idea of an original (vertical) motion of the atoms, which
somehow or other results in movements towards and from one another. Our
world is but one of an infinite number of others, and all the harmonies
and adaptations of the universe are regarded as a special case of the
infinite possibilities of mechanical events. Lucretius regards the
primitive atoms (first beginnings or first bodies) as seeds out of which
individual things are developed. All living and sentient things are
formed out of insentient atoms (e.g. worms spring out of dung). The
peculiarity of organic and sentient bodies is due to the minuteness and
shape of their particles, and to their special motions and combinations.
So, too, mind consists but of extremely fine particles of matter, and
dissolves into air when the body dies. Lucretius traces, in the fifth
book of his poem, the progressive genesis of vegetal and animal forms
out of the mother-earth. He vaguely anticipates the modern idea of the
world as a survival of the fittest when he says that many races may have
lived and died out, and that those which still exist have been protected
either by craft, courage or speed. Lucretius touches on the development
of man out of a primitive, hardy, beast-like condition. Pregnant hints
are given respecting a natural development of language which has its
germs in sounds of quadrupeds and birds, of religious ideas out of
dreams and waking hallucinations, and of the art of music by help of the
suggestion of natural sounds. Lucretius thus recognizes the whole range
of existence to which the doctrine of evolution may be applied.
_Neoplatonists._--In the doctrines of the Neoplatonists, of whom
Plotinus is the most important, we have the world-process represented
after the example of Plato as a series of descending steps, each being
less perfect than its predecessors, since it is further removed from the
first cause.[5] The system of Plotinus, Zellar remarks, is not strictly
speaking one of emanation, since there is no communication of the divine
essence to the created world; yet it resembles emanation inasmuch as the
genesis of the world is conceived as a necessary physical effect, and
not as the result of volition. In Proclus we find this conception of an
emanation of the world out of the Deity, or the absolute, made more
exact, the process being regarded as threefold--(1) persistence of cause
in effect, (2) the departure of effect from cause, and (3) the tendency
of effect to revert to its cause.
_The Fathers._--The speculations of the fathers respecting the origin
and course of the world seek to combine Christian ideas of the Deity
with doctrines of Greek philosophy. The common idea of the origin of
things is that of an absolute creation of matter and mind alike. The
course of human history is regarded by those writers who are most
concerned to refute Judaism as a progressive divine education. Among the
Gnostics we meet with the hypothesis of emanation, as, for example, in
the curious cosmic theory of Valentinus.
_Middle Ages--Early Schoolmen._--In the speculative writings of the
middle ages, including those of the schoolmen, we find no progress
towards a more accurate and scientific view of nature. The cosmology of
this period consists for the most part of the Aristotelian teleological
view of nature combined with the Christian idea of the Deity and His
relation to the world. In certain writers, however, there appears a more
elaborate transformation of the doctrine of creation into a system of
emanation. According to John Scotus Erigena, the nothing out of which
the world is created is the divine essence. Creation is the act by which
God passes through the primordial causes, or universal ideas, into the
region of particular things (_processio_), in order finally to return to
himself (_reversio_). The transition from the universal to the
particular is of course conceived as a descent or degradation. A similar
doctrine of emanation is to be found in the writings of Bernhard of
Chartres, who conceives the process of the unfolding of the world as a
movement in a circle from the most general to the individual, and from
this back to the most general. This movement is said to go forth from
God to the animated heaven, stars, visible world and man, which
represent decreasing degrees of cognition.
_Arab Philosophers._--Elaborate doctrines of emanation, largely based on
Neoplatonic ideas, are also propounded by some of the Arabic
philosophers, as by Farabi and Avicenna. The leading thought is that of
a descending series of intelligences, each emanating from its
predecessor, and having its appropriate region in the universe.
_Jewish Philosophy._--In the Jewish speculations of the middle ages may
be found curious forms of the doctrine of emanations uniting the
Biblical idea of creation with elements drawn from the Persians and the
Greeks. In the later and developed form of the Kabbala, the origin of
the world is represented as a gradually descending emanation of the
lower out of the higher. Among the philosophic Jews, the Spanish
Avicebron, in his _Fons Vitae_, expounds a curious doctrine of
emanation. Here the divine will is viewed as an efflux from the divine
wisdom, as the intermediate link between God, the first substance, and
all things, and as the fountain out of which all forms emanate. At the
same time all forms, including the higher intelligible ones, are said to
have their existence only in matter. Matter is the one universal
substance, body and mind being merely specifications of this. Thus
Avicebron approaches, as Salomon Munk observes,[6] a pantheistic
conception of the world, though he distinctly denies both matter and
form to God.
_Later Scholastics._--Passing now to the later schoolmen, a bare mention
must be made of Thomas Aquinas, who elaborately argues for the absolute
creation of the world out of nothing, and of Albertus Magnus, who
reasons against the Aristotelian idea of the past eternity of the world.
More importance attaches to Duns Scotus, who brings prominently forward
the idea of a progressive development in nature by means of a process of
determination. The original substance of the world is the _materia
primo-prima_, which is the immediate creation of the Deity. This serves
Duns Scotus as the most universal basis of existence, all angels having
material bodies. This matter is differentiated into particular things
(which are not privations but perfections) through the addition of an
individualizing principle (_haecceitas_) to the universal (_quidditas_).
The whole world is represented by the figure of a tree, of which the
seeds and roots are the first indeterminate matter, the leaves the
accidents, the twigs and branches corruptible creatures, the blossoms
the rational soul, and the fruit pure spirits or angels. It is also
described as a bifurcation of two twigs, mental and bodily creation out
of a common root. One might almost say that Duns Scotus recognizes the
principle of a gradual physical evolution, only that he chooses to
represent the mechanism by which the process is brought about by means
of quaint scholastic fictions.
_Revival of Learning._--The period of the revival of learning, which was
also that of a renewed study of nature, is marked by a considerable
amount of speculation respecting the origin of the universe. In some of
these we see a return to Greek theories, though the influence of
physical discoveries, more especially those of Copernicus, Kepler and
Galileo, is distinctly traceable.
_Telesio._--An example of a return to early Greek speculation is to be
met with in Bernardino Telesio. By this writer the world is explained as
a product of three principles--dead matter, and two active forces, heat
and cold. Terrestrial things arise through a confluence of heat, which
issues from the heavens, and cold, which comes from the earth. Both
principles have sensibility, and thus all products of their collision
are sentient, that is, feel pleasure and pain. The superiority of
animals to plants and metals in the possession of special organs of
sense is connected with the greater complexity and heterogeneity of
their structure.
_Giordano Bruno._--In the system of Giordano Bruno, who sought to
construct a philosophy of nature on the basis of new scientific ideas,
more particularly the doctrine of Copernicus, we find the outlines of a
theory of cosmic evolution conceived as an essentially vital process.
Matter and form are here identified, and the evolution of the world is
presented as the unfolding of the world-spirit to its perfect forms
according to the plastic substratum (matter) which is but one of its
sides. This process of change is conceived as a transformation, in
appearance only, of the real unchanging substance (matter and form). All
parts of matter are capable of developing into all forms; thus the
materials of the table and chair may under proper circumstances be
developed to the life of the plant or of the animal. The elementary
parts of existence are the _minima_, or monads, which are at once
material and mental. On their material side they are not absolutely
unextended, but spherical. Bruno looked on our solar system as but one
out of an infinite number of worlds. His theory of evolution is
essentially pantheistic, and he does not employ his hypothesis of monads
in order to work out a more mechanical conception.
_Campanella._--A word must be given to one of Bruno's contemporary
compatriots, namely Campanella, who gave poetic expression to that
system of universal vitalism which Bruno developed. He argues, from the
principle _quicquid est in effectibus esse et in causis_, that the
elements and the whole world have sensation, and thus he appears to
derive the organic part of nature out of the so-called "inorganic."
_Boehme._--Another writer of this transition period deserves a passing
reference here, namely, Jacob Boehme the mystic, who by his conception
of a process of inner diremption as the essential character of all mind,
and so of God, prepared the way for later German theories of the origin
of the world as the self-differentiation and self-externalization of the
absolute spirit.
_Hobbes and Gassendi._--The influence of an advancing study of nature,
which was stimulated if not guided by Bacon's writings, is seen in the
more careful doctrines of materialism worked out almost simultaneously
by Hobbes and Gassendi. These theories, however, contain little that
bears directly on the hypothesis of a natural evolution of things. In
the view of Hobbes, the difficulty of the genesis of conscious minds is
solved by saying that sensation and thought are part of the reaction of
the organism on external movement. Yet Hobbes appears (as Clarke points
out) to have vaguely felt the difficulty; and in a passage of his
_Physics_ (chap. 25, sect. 5) he says that the universal existence of
sensation in matter cannot be disproved, though he shows that when there
are no organic arrangements the mental side of the movement
(_phantasma_) is evanescent. The theory of the origin of society put
forth by Hobbes, though directly opposed in most respects to modern
ideas of social evolution, deserves mention here by reason of its
enforcing that principle of struggle (_bellum omnium contra omnes_)
which has played so conspicuous a part in the modern doctrine of
evolution. Gassendi, with some deviations, follows Epicurus in his
theory of the formation of the world. The world consists of a finite
number of atoms, which have in their own nature a self-moving force or
principle. These atoms, which are the seeds of all things, are, however,
not eternal but created by God. Gassendi distinctly argues against the
existence of a world-soul or a principle of life in nature.
_Descartes._--In the philosophy of Descartes we meet with a dualism of
mind and matter which does not easily lend itself to the conception of
evolution. His doctrine that consciousness is confined to man, the lower
animals being unconscious machines (_automata_), excludes all idea of a
progressive development of mind. Yet Descartes, in his _Principia
Philosophiae_, laid the foundation of the modern mechanical conception
of nature and of physical evolution. In the third part of this work he
inclines to a thoroughly natural hypothesis respecting the genesis of
the physical world, and adds in the fourth part that the same kind of
explanation might be applied to the nature and formation of plants and
animals. He is indeed careful to keep right with the orthodox doctrine
of creation by saying that he does not believe the world actually arose
in this mechanical way out of the three kinds of elements which he here
supposes, but that he simply puts out his hypothesis as a mode of
conceiving how it might have arisen. Descartes's account of the mind and
its passions is thoroughly materialistic, and to this extent he works in
the direction of a materialistic explanation of the origin of mental
life.
_Spinoza._--In Spinoza's pantheistic theory of the world, which regards
thought and extension as but two sides of one substance, the problem of
becoming is submerged in that of being. Although Spinoza's theory
attributes a mental side to all physical events, he rejects all
teleological conceptions and explains the order of things as the result
of an inherent necessity. He recognizes gradations of things according
to the degree of complexity of their movements and that of their
conceptions. To Spinoza (as Kuno Fischer observes) man differs from the
rest of nature in the degree only and not in the kind of his powers. So
far Spinoza approaches the conception of evolution. He may be said to
furnish a further contribution to a metaphysical conception of evolution
in his view of all finite individual things as the infinite variety to
which the unlimited productive power of the universal substance gives
birth. Sir F. Pollock has taken pains to show how nearly Spinoza
approaches certain ideas contained in the modern doctrine of evolution,
as for example that of self-preservation as the determining force in
things.
_Locke._--In Locke we find, with a retention of certain
anti-evolutionist ideas, a marked tendency to this mode of viewing the
world. To Locke the universe is the result of a direct act of creation,
even matter being limited in duration and created. Even if matter were
eternal it would, he thinks, be incapable of producing motion; and if
motion is itself conceived as eternal, thought can never begin to be.
The first eternal being is thus spiritual or "cogitative," and contains
in itself all the perfections that can ever after exist. He repeatedly
insists on the impossibility of senseless matter putting on sense.[7]
Yet while thus placing himself at a point of view opposed to that of a
gradual evolution of the organic world, Locke prepared the way for this
doctrine in more ways than one. First of all, his genetic method as
applied to the mind's ideas--which laid the foundations of English
analytical psychology--was a step in the direction of a conception of
mental life as a gradual evolution. Again he works towards the same end
in his celebrated refutation of the scholastic theory of real specific
essences. In this argument he emphasizes the vagueness of the boundaries
which mark off organic species with a view to show that these do not
correspond to absolutely fixed divisions in the objective world, that
they are made by the mind, not by nature.[8] This idea of the continuity
of species is developed more fully in a remarkable passage (_Essay_, bk.
iii. ch. vi. S 12), where he is arguing in favour of the hypothesis,
afterwards elaborated by Leibnitz, of a graduated series of minds
(species of spirits) from the Deity down to the lowest animal
intelligence. He here observes that "all quite down from us the descent
is by easy steps, and a continued series of things, that in each remove
differ very little from one another." Thus man approaches the beasts,
and the animal kingdom is nearly joined with the vegetable, and so on
down to the lowest and "most inorganical parts of matter." Finally, it
is to be observed that Locke had a singularly clear view of organic
arrangements (which of course he explained according to a theistic
teleology) as an adaptation to the circumstances of the environment or
to "the neighbourhood of the bodies that surround us." Thus he suggests
that man has not eyes of a microscopic delicacy, because he would
receive no great advantage from such acute organs, since though adding
indefinitely to his speculative knowledge of the physical world they
would not practically benefit their possessor (e.g. by enabling him to
avoid things at a convenient distance).[9]
_Idea of Progress in History._--Before leaving the 17th century we must
just refer to the writers who laid the foundations of the essentially
modern conception of human history as a gradual upward progress.
According to Flint,[10] there were four men who in this and the
preceding century seized and made prominent this idea, namely, Bodin,
Bacon, Descartes and Pascal. The former distinctly argues against the
idea of a deterioration of man in the past. In this way we see that just
as advancing natural science was preparing the way for a doctrine of
physical evolution, so advancing historical research was leading to the
application of a similar idea to the collective human life.
_English Writers of the 18th Century--Hume._--The theological
discussions which make up so large a part of the English speculation of
the 18th century cannot detain us here. There is, however, one writer
who sets forth so clearly the alternative suppositions respecting the
origin of the world that he claims a brief notice. We refer to David
Hume. In his _Dialogues concerning Natural Religion_ he puts forward
tentatively, in the person of one of his interlocutors, the ancient
hypothesis that since the world resembles an animal or vegetal organism
rather than a machine, it might more easily be accounted for by a
process of generation than by an act of creation. Later on he develops
the materialistic view of Epicurus, only modifying it so far as to
conceive of matter as finite. Since a finite number of particles is only
susceptible of finite transpositions, it must happen (he says), in an
eternal duration that every possible order or position will be tried an
infinite number of times, and hence this world is to be regarded (as the
Stoics maintained) as an exact reproduction of previous worlds. The
speaker seeks to make intelligible the appearance of art and contrivance
in the world as a result of a natural settlement of the universe (which
passes through a succession of chaotic conditions) into a stable
condition, having a constancy in its forms, yet without its several
parts losing their motion and fluctuation.
_French Writers of the 18th Century._--Let us now pass to the French
writers of the 18th century. Here we are first struck by the results of
advancing physical speculation in their bearing on the conception of the
world. Careful attempts, based on new scientific truths, are made to
explain the genesis of the world as a natural process. Maupertuis, who,
together with Voltaire, introduced the new idea of the universe as based
on Newton's discoveries, sought to account for the origin of organic
things by the hypothesis of sentient atoms. Buffon the naturalist
speculated, not only on the structure and genesis of organic beings, but
also on the course of formation of the earth and solar system, which he
conceived after the analogy of the development of organic beings out of
seed. Diderot, too, in his varied intellectual activity, found time to
speculate on the genesis of sensation and thought out of a combination
of matter endowed with an elementary kind of sentience. De la Mettrie
worked out a materialistic doctrine of the origin of things, according
to which sensation and consciousness are nothing but a development out
of matter. He sought (_L'Homme-machine_) to connect man in his original
condition with the lower animals, and emphasized (_L'Homme-plante_) the
essential unity of plan of all living things. Helvetius, in his work on
man, referred all differences between our species and the lower animals
to certain peculiarities of organization, and so prepared the way for a
conception of human development out of lower forms as a process of
physical evolution. Charles Bonnet met the difficulty of the origin of
conscious beings much in the same way as Leibnitz, by the supposition of
eternal minute organic bodies to which are attached immortal souls. Yet
though in this way opposing himself to the method of the modern doctrine
of evolution, he aided the development of this doctrine by his view of
the organic world as an ascending scale from the simple to the complex.
Robinet, in his treatise _De la nature_, worked out the same conception
of a gradation in organic existence, connecting this with a general view
of nature as a progress from the lowest inorganic forms of matter up to
man. The process is conceived as an infinite series of variations or
specifications of one primitive and common type. Man is the
_chef-d'oeuvre_ of nature, which the gradual progression of beings was
to have as its last term, and all lower creations are regarded as
pre-conditions of man's existence, since nature "could only realize the
human form by combining in all imaginable ways each of the traits which
was to enter into it." The formative force in this process of evolution
(or "metamorphosis") is conceived as an intellectual principle (_idee
generatrice_). Robinet thus laid the foundation of that view of the
world as wholly vital, and as a progressive unfolding of a spiritual
formative principle, which was afterwards worked out by Schelling. It is
to be added that Robinet adopted a thorough-going materialistic view of
the dependence of mind on body, going even to the length of assigning
special nerve-fibres to the moral sense. The system of Holbach seeks to
provide a consistent materialistic view of the world and its processes.
Mental operations are identified with physical movements, the three
conditions of physical movement, inertia, attraction and repulsion,
being in the moral world self-love, love and hate. He left open the
question whether the capability of sensation belongs to all matter, or
is confined to the combinations of certain materials. He looked on the
actions of the individual organism and of society as determined by the
needs of self-preservation. He conceived of man as a product of nature
that had gradually developed itself from a low condition, though he
relinquished the problem of the exact mode of his first genesis and
advance as not soluble by data of experience. Holbach thus worked out
the basis of a rigorously materialistic conception of evolution.
The question of human development which Holbach touched on was one which
occupied many minds both in and out of France during the 18th century,
and more especially towards its close. The foundations of this theory of
history as an upward progress of man out of a barbaric and animal
condition were laid by Vico in his celebrated work _Principii di scienza
nuova_. In France the doctrine was represented by Turgot and Condorcet.
_German Writers of the 18th Century--Leibnitz._--In Leibnitz we find, if
not a doctrine of evolution in the strict sense, a theory of the world
which is curiously related to the modern doctrine. The chief aim of
Leibnitz is no doubt to account for the world in its static aspect as a
co-existent whole, to conceive the ultimate reality of things in such a
way as to solve the mystery of mind and matter. Yet by his very mode of
solving the problem he is led on to consider the nature of the
world-process. By placing substantial reality in an infinite number of
monads whose essential nature is force or activity, which is conceived
as mental (representation), Leibnitz was carried on to the explanation
of the successive order of the world. He prepares the way, too, for a
doctrine of evolution by his monistic idea of the substantial similarity
of all things, inorganic and organic, bodily and spiritual, and still
more by his conception of a perfect gradation of existence from the
lowest "inanimate" objects, whose essential activity is confused
representation, up to the highest organized being--man--with his clear
intelligence.[11] Turning now to Leibnitz's conception of the world as a
process, we see first that he supplies, in his notion of the underlying
reality as force which is represented as spiritual (_quelque chose
d'analogique au sentiment et a l'appetit_), both a mechanical and a
teleological explanation of its order. More than this, Leibnitz supposes
that the activity of the monads takes the form of a self-evolution. It
is the following out of an inherent tendency or impulse to a series of
changes, all of which were virtually pre-existent, and this process
cannot be interfered with from without. As the individual monad, so the
whole system which makes up the world is a gradual development. In this
case, however, we cannot say that each step goes out of the other as in
that of individual development. Each monad is an original independent
being, and is determined to take this particular point in the universe,
this place in the scale of beings. We see how different this
metaphysical conception is from that scientific notion of cosmic
evolution in which the lower stages are the antecedents and conditions
of the higher. It is probable that Leibnitz's notion of time and space,
which approaches Kant's theory, led him to attach but little importance
to the successive order of the world. Leibnitz, in fact, presents to us
an infinite system of perfectly distinct though parallel developments,
which on their mental side assume the aspect of a scale, not through any
mutual action, but solely through the determination of the Deity. Even
this idea, however, is incomplete, for Leibnitz fails to explain the
physical aspect of development. Thus he does not account for the fact
that organic beings--which have always existed as preformations (in the
case of animals as _animaux spermatiques_)--come to be developed under
given conditions. Yet Leibnitz prepared the way for a new conception of
organic evolution. The modern monistic doctrine, that all material
things consist of sentient elements, and that consciousness arises
through a combination of these, was a natural transformation of
Leibnitz's theory.[12]
_Lessing._--Of Leibnitz's immediate followers we may mention Lessing,
who in his _Education of the Human Race_ brought out the truth of the
process of gradual development underlying human history, even though he
expressed this in a form inconsistent with the idea of a spontaneous
evolution.
_Herder._--Herder, on the other hand, Lessing's contemporary, treated
the subject of man's development in a thoroughly naturalistic spirit. In
his I_deen zur Philosophie der Geschichte_, Herder adopts Leibnitz's
idea of a graduated scale of beings, at the same time conceiving of the
lower stages as the conditions of the higher. Thus man is said to be the
highest product of nature, and as such to be dependent on all lower
products. All material things are assimilated to one another as organic,
the vitalizing principle being inherent in all matter. The development
of man is explained in connexion with that of the earth, and in relation
to climatic variations, &c. Man's mental faculties are viewed as related
to his organization, and as developed under the pressure of the
necessities of life.[13]
_Kant._--Kant's relation to the doctrine of evolution is a many-sided
one. In the first place, his peculiar system of subjective idealism,
involving the idea that time is but a mental form to which there
corresponds nothing in the sphere of noumenal reality, serves to give a
peculiar philosophical interpretation to every doctrine of cosmic
evolution. Kant, like Leibnitz, seeks to reconcile the mechanical and
teleological views of nature, only he assigns to these different
spheres. The order of the inorganic world is explained by properly
physical causes. In his _Naturgeschichte des Himmels_, in which he
anticipated the nebular theory afterwards more fully developed by
Laplace, Kant sought to explain the genesis of the cosmos as a product
of physical forces and laws. The worlds, or systems of worlds, which
fill infinite space are continually being formed and destroyed. Chaos
passes by a process of evolution into a cosmos, and this again into
chaos. So far as the evolution of the solar system is concerned, Kant
held these mechanical causes as adequate. For the world as a whole,
however, he postulated a beginning in time (whence his use of the word
creation), and further supposed that the impulse of organization which
was conveyed to chaotic matter by the Creator issued from a central
point in the infinite space spreading gradually outwards.[14] While in
his cosmology Kant thus relies on mechanical conceptions, in his
treatment of organic life his mind is, on the contrary, dominated by
teleological ideas. An organism was to him something controlled by a
formative organizing principle. It was natural, therefore, that he
rejected the idea of a spontaneous generation of organisms (which was
just then being advocated by his friend Forster), not only as
unsupported by experience but as an inadequate hypothesis. Experience
forbids our excluding organic activity from natural causes, also our
excluding intelligence from purposeful (_zwecktatigen_) causes; hence
experience forbids our defining the fundamental force or first cause out
of which living creatures arose.[15] Just as Kant thus sharply marks off
the regions of the inorganic and the organic, so he sets man in strong
opposition to the lower animals. His ascription to man of a unique
faculty, free-will, forbade his conceiving our species as a link in a
graduated series of organic developments. In his doctrine of human
development he does indeed recognize an early stage of existence in
which our species was dominated by sensuous enjoyment and instinct. He
further conceives of this stage as itself a process of (natural)
development, namely, of the natural disposition of the species to vary
in the greatest possible manner so as to preserve its unity through a
process of self-adaptation (_Anarten_) to climate. This, he says, must
not be conceived as resulting from the action of external causes, but is
due to a natural disposition (_Anlage_). From this capability of natural
development (which already involves a teleological idea) Kant
distinguishes the power of moral self-development or self-liberation
from the dominion of nature, the gradual realization of which
constitutes human history or progress. This moral development is
regarded as a gradual approach to that rational, social and political
state in which will be realized the greatest possible quantity of
liberty. Thus Kant, though he appropriated and gave new form to the idea
of human progress, conceived of this as wholly distinct from a natural
(mechanical) process. In this particular, as in his view of organic
actions, Kant distinctly opposed the idea of evolution as one universal
process swaying alike the physical and the moral world.
_Schelling._--In the earlier writings of Schelling, containing the
philosophy of identity, existence is represented as a becoming, or
process of evolution. Nature and mind (which are the two sides, or polar
directions, of the one absolute) are each viewed as an activity
advancing by an uninterrupted succession of stages. The side of this
process which Schelling worked out most completely is the negative side,
that is, nature. Nature is essentially a process of organic
self-evolution. It can only be understood by subordinating the
mechanical conception to the vital, by conceiving the world as one
organism animated by a spiritual principle or intelligence
(_Weltseele_). From this point of view the processes of nature from the
inorganic up to the most complex of the organic become stages in the
self-realization of nature. All organic forms are at bottom but one
organization, and the inorganic world shows the same formative activity
in various degrees or potences. Schelling conceives of the gradual
self-evolution of nature in a succession of higher and higher forms as
brought about by a limitation of her infinite productivity, showing
itself in a series of points of arrest. The detailed exhibition of the
organizing activity of nature in the several processes of the organic
and inorganic world rests on a number of fanciful and unscientific
ideas. Schelling's theory is a bold attempt to revitalize nature in the
light of growing physical and physiological science, and by so doing to
comprehend the unity of the world under the idea of one principle of
organic development. His highly figurative language might leave us in
doubt how far he conceived the higher stages of this evolution of nature
as following the lower in time. In the introduction to his work _Von der
Weltseele_, however, he argues in favour of the possibility of a
transmutation of species in periods incommensurable with ours. The
evolution of mind (the positive pole) proceeds by way of three
stages--theoretic, practical and aesthetical activity. Schelling's later
theosophic speculations do not specially concern us here.
_Followers of Schelling._--Of the followers of Schelling a word or two
must be said. Heinrich Steffens, in his _Anthropologie_, seeks to trace
out the origin and history of man in connexion with a general theory of
the development of the earth, and this again as related to the formation
of the solar system. All these processes are regarded as a series of
manifestations of a vital principle in higher and higher forms. Oken,
again, who carries Schelling's ideas into the region of biological
science, seeks to reconstruct the gradual evolution of the material
world out of original matter, which is the first immediate appearance of
God, or the absolute. This process is an upward one, through the
formation of the solar system and of our earth with its inorganic
bodies, up to the production of man. The process is essentially a polar
linear action, or differentiation from a common centre. By means of this
process the bodies of the solar system separate themselves, and the
order of cosmic evolution is repeated in that of terrestrial evolution.
The organic world (like the world as a whole) arises out of a primitive
chaos, namely, the infusorial slime. A somewhat similar working out of
Schelling's idea is to be found in H.C. Oersted's work entitled _The
Soul in Nature_ (Eng. trans.). Of later works based on Schelling's
doctrine of evolution mention may be made of the volume entitled _Natur
und Idee_, by G.F. Carus. According to this writer, existence is nothing
but a becoming, and matter is simply the momentary product of the
process of becoming, while force is this process constantly revealing
itself in these products.
_Hegel._--Like Schelling, Hegel conceives the problem of existence as
one of becoming. He differs from him with respect to the ultimate motive
of that process of gradual evolution which reveals itself alike in
nature and in mind. With Hegel the absolute is itself a dialectic
process which contains within itself a principle of progress from
difference to difference and from unity to unity. "This process (W.
Wallace remarks) knows nothing of the distinctions between past and
future, because it implies an eternal present." This conception of an
immanent spontaneous evolution is applied alike both to nature and to
mind and history. Nature to Hegel is the idea in the form of hetereity;
and finding itself here it has to remove this exteriority in a
progressive evolution towards an existence for itself in life and mind.
Nature (says Zeller) is to Hegel a system of gradations, of which one
arises necessarily out of the other, and is the proximate truth of that
out of which it results. There are three stadia, or moments, in this
process of nature--(1) the mechanical moment, or matter devoid of
individuality; (2) the physical moment, or matter which has
particularized itself in bodies--the solar system; and (3) the organic
moment, or organic beings, beginning with the geological organism--or
the mineral kingdom, plants and animals. Yet this process of development
is not to be conceived as if one stage is naturally produced out of the
other, and not even as if the one followed the other in time. Only
spirit has a history; in nature all forms are contemporaneous.[16]
Hegel's interpretation of mind and history as a process of evolution has
more scientific interest than his conception of nature. His theory of
the development of free-will (the objective spirit), which takes its
start from Kant's conception of history, with its three stages of legal
right, morality as determined by motive and instinctive goodness
(_Sittlichkeit_), might almost as well be expressed in terms of a
thoroughly naturalistic doctrine of human development. So, too, some of
his conceptions respecting the development of art and religion (the
absolute spirit) lend themselves to a similar interpretation. Yet while,
in its application to history, Hegel's theory of evolution has points of
resemblance with those doctrines which seek to explain the world-process
as one unbroken progress occurring in time, it constitutes on the whole
a theory apart and _sui generis_. It does not conceive of the organic as
succeeding on the inorganic, or of conscious life as conditioned in
time by lower forms. In this respect it resembles Leibnitz's idea of the
world as a development; the idea of evolution is in each case a
metaphysical as distinguished from a scientific one. Hegel gives a place
in his metaphysical system to the mechanical and the teleological views;
yet in his treatment of the world as an evolution the idea of end or
purpose is the predominant one.
Of the followers of Hegel who have worked out his peculiar idea of
evolution it is hardly necessary to speak. A bare reference may be made
to J.K. F. Rosenkranz, who in his work _Hegel's Naturphilosophie_ seeks
to develop Hegel's idea of an earth-organism in the light of modern
science, recognizing in crystallization the morphological element.
_Schopenhauer._--Of the other German philosophers immediately following
Kant, there is only one who calls for notice here, namely, Arthur
Schopenhauer. This writer, by his conception of the world as will which
objectifies itself in a series of gradations from the lowest
manifestations of matter up to conscious man, gives a slightly new shape
to the evolutional view of Schelling, though he deprives this view of
its optimistic character by denying any co-operation of intelligence in
the world-process. In truth, Schopenhauer's conception of the world as
the activity of a blind force is at bottom a materialistic and
mechanical rather than a spiritualistic and teleological theory.
Moreover, Schopenhauer's subjective idealism, and his view of time as
something illusory, hindered him from viewing this process as a sequence
of events in time. Thus he ascribes eternity of existence to species
under the form of the "Platonic ideas." As Ludwig Noire observes,
Schopenhauer has no feeling for the problem of the origin of organic
beings. He says Lamarck's original animal is something metaphysical, not
physical, namely, the will to live. "Every species (according to
Schopenhauer) has of its own will, and according to the circumstances
under which it would live, determined its form and organization,--yet
not as something physical in time, but as something metaphysical out of
time."
_Von Baer._--Before leaving the German speculation of the first half of
the century, a word must be said of von Baer, to whose biological
contributions we shall refer later in this article, who recognized in
the law of development the law of the universe as a whole. In his
_Entwickelungsgeschichte der Thiere_ (p. 264) he distinctly tells us
that the law of growing individuality is "the fundamental thought which
goes through all forms and degrees of animal development and all single
relations. It is the same thought which collected in the cosmic space
the divided masses into spheres, and combined these to solar systems;
the same which caused the weather-beaten dust on the surface of our
metallic planet to spring forth into living forms." Von Baer thus
prepared the way for Herbert Spencer's generalization of the law of
organic evolution as the law of all evolution.
_Comte._--As we arrive at the 19th century, though yet before the days
of Darwin, biology is already beginning to affect the general aspect of
thought. It might suffice to single out the influence of Auguste Comte,
as the last great thinker who wrote before Darwinism began to permeate
philosophic speculation. Though Comte did not actually contribute to a
theory of cosmic organic evolution, he helped to lay the foundations of
a scientific conception of human history as a natural process of
development determined by general laws of human nature together with the
accumulating influences of the past. Comte does not recognize that this
process is aided by any increase of innate capacity; on the contrary,
progress is to him the unfolding of fundamental faculties of human
nature which always pre-existed in a latent condition; yet he may
perhaps be said to have prepared the way for the new conception of human
progress by his inclusion of mental laws under biology.
_Development of the Biological Doctrine._--In the 19th century the
doctrine of evolution received new biological contents and became
transformed from a vague, partly metaphysical theory to the dominant
modern conception. At this point it is convenient to leave the guidance
of Professor J. Sully and to follow closely T.H. Huxley, who in the 9th
edition of this encyclopaedia traced the history of the growth of the
biological idea of evolution from its philosophical beginnings to its
efflorescence in Charles Darwin.
In the earlier half of the 18th century the term "evolution" was
introduced into biological writings in order to denote the mode in which
some of the most eminent physiologists of that time conceived that the
generation of living things took place; in opposition to the hypothesis
advocated, in the preceding century, by W. Harvey in that remarkable
work[17] which would give him a claim to rank among the founders of
biological science, even had he not been the discoverer of the
circulation of the blood.
One of Harvey's prime objects is to defend and establish, on the basis
of direct observation, the opinion already held by Aristotle, that, in
the higher animals at any rate, the formation of the new organism by the
process of generation takes place, not suddenly, by simultaneous
accretion of rudiments of all or the most important of the organs of the
adult, nor by sudden metamorphosis of a formative substance into a
miniature of the whole, which subsequently grows, but by _epigenesis_,
or successive differentiation of a relatively homogeneous rudiment into
the parts and structures which are characteristic of the adult.
"Et primo, quidem, quoniam per _epigenesin_ sive partium
superexorientium additamentum pullum fabricari certum est: quaenam
pars ante alias omnes exstruatur, et quid de illa ejusque generandi
modo observandum veniat, dispiciemus. Ratum sane est et in ovo
manifeste apparet quod _Aristoteles_ de perfectorum animalium
generatione enuntiat: nimirum, non omnes partes simul fieri, sed
ordine aliam post aliam; primumque existere particulam genitalem,
cujus virtute postea (tanquam ex principio quodam) reliquae omnes
partes prosiliant. Qualem in plantarum seminibus (fabis, puta, aut
glandibus) gemmam sive apicem protuberantem cernimus, totius futurae
arboris principium. _Estque haec particula velut filius emancipatus
seorsumque collocatus, et principium per se vivens; unde postea
membrorum ordo describitur; et quaecunque ad absolvendum animal
pertinent, disponuntur._[18] Quoniam enim _nulla pars se ipsam
generat; sed postquam generata est, se ipsam jam auget; ideo eam
primum oriri necesse est, quae principium augendi contineat_ (_sive
enim planta, sive animal est, aeque omnibus inest quod vim habeat
vegetandi, sive nutriendi_),[19] simulque reliquas omnes partes suo
quamque ordine distinguat et formet; proindeque in eadem primogenita
particula anima primario inest, sensus, motusque, et totius vitae
auctor et principium." (_Exercitatio_ 51.)
Harvey proceeds to contrast this view with that of the "Medici," or
followers of Hippocrates and Galen, who, "badly philosophizing,"
imagined that the brain, the heart, and the liver were simultaneously
first generated in the form of vesicles; and, at the same time, while
expressing his agreement with Aristotle in the principle of epigenesis,
he maintains that it is the blood which is the primal generative part,
and not, as Aristotle thought, the heart.
In the latter part of the 17th century the doctrine of epigenesis thus
advocated by Harvey was controverted on the ground of direct observation
by M. Malpighi, who affirmed that the body of the chick is to be seen in
the egg before the _punctum sanguineum_ makes it appearance. But from
this perfectly correct observation a conclusion which is by no means
warranted was drawn, namely, that the chick as a whole really exists in
the egg antecedently to incubation; and that what happens in the course
of the latter process is no addition of new parts, "alias post alias
natas," as Harvey puts it, but a simple expansion or unfolding of the
organs which already exist, though they are too small and inconspicuous
to be discovered. The weight of Malpighi's observations therefore fell
into the scale of that doctrine which Harvey terms metamorphosis, in
contradistinction to epigenesis.
The views of Malpighi were warmly welcomed on philosophical grounds by
Leibnitz,[20] who found in them a support to his hypothesis of monads,
and by Nicholas Malebranche;[21] while, in the middle of the 18th
century, not only speculative considerations, but a great number of new
and interesting observations on the phenomena of generation, led the
ingenious Charles Bonnet and A. von Haller, the first physiologist of
the age, to adopt, advocate and extend them.
Bonnet affirms that, before fecundation, the hen's egg contains an
excessively minute but complete chick; and that fecundation and
incubation simply cause this germ to absorb nutritious matters, which
are deposited in the interstices of the elementary structures of which
the miniature chick, or germ, is made up. The consequence of this
intussusceptive growth is the "development" or "evolution" of the germ
into the visible bird. Thus an organized individual (_tout organise_)
"is a composite body consisting of the original, or _elementary_, parts
and of the matters which have been associated with them by the aid of
nutrition"; so that, if these matters could be extracted from the
individual (_tout_), it would, so to speak, become concentrated in a
point, and would thus be restored to its primitive condition of a
_germ_; "just as, by extracting from a bone the calcareous substance
which is the source of its hardness, it is reduced to its primitive
state of gristle or membrane."[22]
"Evolution" and "development" are, for Bonnet, synonymous terms; and
since by "evolution" he means simply the expansion of that which was
invisible into visibility, he was naturally led to the conclusion, at
which Leibnitz had arrived by a different line of reasoning, that no
such thing as generation, in the proper sense of the word exists in
nature. The growth of an organic being is simply a process of
enlargement, as a particle of dry gelatine may be swelled up by the
intussusception of water; its death is a shrinkage, such as the swelled
jelly might undergo on desiccation. Nothing really new is produced in
the living world, but the germs which develop have existed since the
beginning of things; and nothing really dies, but, when what we call
death takes place, the living thing shrinks back into its germ
state.[23]
The two parts of Bonnet's hypothesis, namely, the doctrine that all
living things proceed from pre-existing germs, and that these contain,
one enclosed within the other, the germs of all future living things,
which is the hypothesis of "emboitement," and the doctrine that every
germ contains in miniature all the organs of the adult, which is the
hypothesis of evolution or development, in the primary senses of these
words, must be carefully distinguished. In fact, while holding firmly by
the former, Bonnet more or less modified the latter in his later
writings, and, at length, he admits that a "germ" need not be an actual
miniature of the organism, but that it may be merely an "original
preformation" capable of producing the latter.[24]
But, thus defined, the germ is neither more nor less than the "particula
genitalis" of Aristotle, or the "primordium vegetale" or "ovum" of
Harvey; and the "evolution" of such a germ would not be distinguishable
from "epigenesis."
Supported by the great authority of Haller, the doctrine of evolution,
or development, prevailed throughout the whole of the 18th century, and
Cuvier appears to have substantially adopted Bonnet's later views,
though probably he would not have gone all lengths in the direction of
"emboitement." In a well-known note to Charles Leopold Laurillard's
_Eloge_, prefixed to the last edition of the _Ossemens fossiles_, the
"radical de l'etre" is much the same thing as Aristotle's "particula
genitalis" and Harvey's "ovum."[25]
Bonnet's eminent contemporary, Buffon, held nearly the same views with
respect to the nature of the germ, and expresses them even more
confidently.
"Ceux qui ont cru que le coeur etoit le premier forme, se sont
trompes; ceux qui disent que c'est le sang se trompent aussi: tout est
forme en meme temps. Si l'on ne consulte que l'observation, le poulet
se voit dans l'oeuf avant qu'il ait ete couve."[26]
"J'ai ouvert une grande quantite d'oeufs a differens temps avant et
apres l'incubation, et je me suis convaincu par mes yeux que le poulet
existe en entier dans le milieu de la cicatrule au moment qu'il sort
du corps de la poule."[27]
The "moule interieur" of Buffon is the aggregate of elementary parts
which constitute the individual, and is thus the equivalent of Bonnet's
germ,[28] as defined in the passage cited above. But Buffon further
imagined that innumerable "molecules organiques" are dispersed
throughout the world, and that alimentation consists in the
appropriation by the parts of an organism of those molecules which are
analogous to them. Growth, therefore, was, on this hypothesis, partly a
process of simple evolution, and partly of what has been termed
syngenesis. Buffon's opinion is, in fact, a sort of combination of
views, essentially similar to those of Bonnet, with others, somewhat
similar to those of the "Medici" whom Harvey condemns. The "molecules
organiques" are physical equivalents of Leibnitz's "monads."
It is a striking example of the difficulty of getting people to use
their own powers of investigation accurately, that this form of the
doctrine of evolution should have held its ground so long; for it was
thoroughly and completely exploded, not long after its enunciation, by
Caspar Frederick Wolff, who in his _Theoria generationis_, published in
1759, placed the opposite theory of epigenesis upon the secure
foundation of fact, from which it has never been displaced. But Wolff
had no immediate successors. The school of Cuvier was lamentably
deficient in embryologists; and it was only in the course of the first
thirty years of the 19th century that Prevost and Dumas in France, and,
later on, Dollinger, Pander, von Bar, Rathke, and Remak in Germany,
founded modern embryology; and, at the same time, proved the utter
incompatibility of the hypothesis of evolution as formulated by Bonnet
and Haller with easily demonstrable facts.
Nevertheless, though the conceptions originally denoted by "evolution"
and "development" were shown to be untenable, the words retained their
application to the process by which the embryos of living beings
gradually make their appearance; and the terms "development,"
"Entwickelung," and "evolutio" are now indiscriminately used for the
series of genetic changes exhibited by living beings, by writers who
would emphatically deny that "development" or "Entwickelung" or
"evolutio," in the sense in which these words were usually employed by
Bonnet or Haller, ever occurs.
Evolution, or development, is, in fact, at present employed in biology
as a general name for the history of the steps by which any living being
has acquired the morphological and the physiological characters which
distinguish it. As civil history may be divided into biography, which is
the history of individuals, and universal history, which is the history
of the human race, so evolution falls naturally into two categories--the
evolution of the individual (see EMBRYOLOGY) and the evolution of the
sum of living beings.
_The Evolution of the Sum of Living Beings._--The notion that all the
kinds of animals and plants may have come into existence by the growth
and modification of primordial germs is as old as speculative thought;
but the modern scientific form of the doctrine can be traced
historically to the influence of several converging lines of
philosophical speculation and of physical observation, none of which go
further back than the 17th century. These are:--
1. The enunciation by Descartes of the conception that the physical
universe, whether living or not living, is a mechanism, and that, as
such, it is explicable on physical principles.
2. The observation of the gradations of structure, from extreme
simplicity to very great complexity, presented by living things, and of
the relation of these graduated forms to one another.
3. The observation of the existence of an analogy between the series of
gradations presented by the species which compose any great group of
animals or plants, and the series of embryonic conditions of the highest
members of that group.
4. The observation that large groups of species of widely different
habits present the same fundamental plan of structure; and that parts of
the same animal or plant, the functions of which are very different,
likewise exhibit modifications of a common plan.
5. The observation of the existence of structures, in a rudimentary and
apparently useless condition, in one species of a group, which are fully
developed and have definite functions in other species of the same
group.
6. The observation of the effects of varying conditions in modifying
living organisms.
7. The observation of the facts of geographical distribution.
8. The observation of the facts of the geological succession of the
forms of life.
1. Notwithstanding the elaborate disguise which fear of the powers that
were led Descartes to throw over his real opinions, it is impossible to
read the _Principes de la philosophie_ without acquiring the conviction
that this great philosopher held that the physical world and all things
in it, whether living or not living, have originated by a process of
evolution, due to the continuous operation of purely physical causes,
out of a primitive relatively formless matter.[29]
The following passage is especially instructive:--
"Et tant s'en faut que je veuille que l'on croie toutes les choses que
j'ecrirai, que meme je pretends en proposer ici quelques-unes que je
crois absolument etre fausses; a savoir, je ne doute point que le
monde n'ait ete cree au commencement avec autant de perfection qu'il
en a; en sorte que le soleil, la terre, la lune, et les etoiles ont
ete des lors; et que la terre n'a pas eu seulement en soi les semences
des plantes, mais que les plantes meme en ont couvert une partie; et
qu'Adam et Eve n'ont pas ete crees enfans mais en age d'hommes
parfaits. La religion chretienne veut que nous le croyons ainsi, et la
raison naturelle nous persuade entierement cette verite; car si nous
considerons la toute puissance de Dieu, nous devons juger que tout ce
qu'il a fait a eu des le commencement toute la perfection qu'il devoit
avoir. Mais neanmoins, comme on connoitroit beaucoup mieux quelle a
ete la nature d'Adam et celle des arbres de Paradis si on avoit
examine comment les enfants se forment peu a peu dans le ventre de
leurs meres et comment les plantes sortent de leurs semences, que si
on avoit seulement considere quels ils ont ete quand Dieu les a crees:
tout de meme, nous ferons mieux entendre quelle est generalement la
nature de toutes les choses qui sont au monde si nous pouvons imaginer
quelques principes qui soient fort intelligibles et fort simples,
desquels nous puissions voir clairement que les astres et la terre et
enfin tout ce monde visible auroit pu etre produit ainsi que de
quelques semences (bien que nous sachions qu'il n'a pas ete produit en
cette facon) que si nous la decrivions seulement comme il est, ou bien
comme nous croyons qu'il a ete cree. Et parceque je pense avoir trouve
des principes qui sont tels, je tacherai ici de les expliquer."[30]
If we read between the lines of this singular exhibition of force of one
kind and weakness of another, it is clear that Descartes believed that
he had divined the mode in which the physical universe had been evolved;
and the _Traite de l'homme_ and the essay _Sur les passions_ afford
abundant additional evidence that he sought for, and thought he had
found, an explanation of the phenomena of physical life by deduction
from purely physical laws.
Spinoza abounds in the same sense, and is as usual perfectly candid--
"Naturae leges et regulae, secundum quas omnia fiunt et ex unis formis
in alias mutantur, sunt ubique et semper eadem."[31]
Leibnitz's doctrine of continuity necessarily led him in the same
direction; and, of the infinite multitude of monads with which he
peopled the world, each is supposed to be the focus of an endless
process of evolution and involution. In the _Protogaea_, xxvi., Leibnitz
distinctly suggests the mutability of species--
"Alii mirantur in saxis passim species videri quas vel in orbe
cognito, vel saltem in vicinis locis frustra quaeras. Ita _Cornua
Ammonis_, quae ex nautilorum numero habeantur, passim et forma et
magnitudine (nam et pedali diametro aliquando reperiuntur) ab omnibus
illis naturis discrepare dicunt, quas praebet mare. Sed quis
absconditos ejus recessus aut subterraneas abyssos pervestigavit? quam
multa nobis animalia antea ignota offert novus orbis? Et credibile est
per magnas illas conversiones etiam animalium species plurimum
immutatas."
Thus in the end of the 17th century the seed was sown which has at
intervals brought forth recurrent crops of evolutional hypotheses,
based, more or less completely, on general reasonings.
Among the earliest of these speculations is that put forward by Benoit
de Maillet in his _Telliamed_, which, though printed in 1735, was not
published until twenty-three years later. Considering that this book was
written before the time of Haller, or Bonnet, or Linnaeus, or Hutton, it
surely deserves more respectful consideration than it usually receives.
For De Maillet not only has a definite conception of the plasticity of
living things, and of the production of existing species by the
modification of their predecessors, but he clearly apprehends the
cardinal maxim of modern geological science, that the explanation of the
structure of the globe is to be sought in the deductive application to
geological phenomena of the principles established inductively by the
study of the present course of nature. Somewhat later, P.L.M. de
Maupertuis[32] suggested a curious hypothesis as to the causes of
variation, which he thinks may be sufficient to account for the origin
of all animals from a single pair. Jean Baptiste Rene Robinet[33]
followed out much the same line of thought as De Maillet, but less
soberly; and Bonnet's speculations in the _Palingenesie_, which appeared
in 1769, have already been mentioned. Buffon (1753-1778), at first a
partisan of the absolute immutability of species, subsequently appears
to have believed that larger or smaller groups of species have been
produced by the modification of a primitive stock; but he contributed
nothing to the general doctrine of evolution.
Erasmus Darwin (_Zoonomia_, 1794), though a zealous evolutionist, can
hardly be said to have made any real advance on his predecessors; and,
notwithstanding the fact that Goethe had the advantage of a wide
knowledge of morphological facts, and a true insight into their
signification, while he threw all the power of a great poet into the
expression of his conceptions, it may be questioned whether he supplied
the doctrine of evolution with a firmer scientific basis than it already
possessed. Moreover, whatever the value of Goethe's labours in that
field, they were not published before 1820, long after evolutionism had
taken a new departure from the works of Treviranus and Lamarck--the
first of its advocates who were equipped for their task with the needful
large and accurate knowledge of the phenomena of life as a whole. It is
remarkable that each of these writers seems to have been led,
independently and contemporaneously, to invent the same name of
"biology" for the science of the phenomena of life; and thus, following
Buffon, to have recognized the essential unity of these phenomena, and
their contradistinction from those of inanimate nature. And it is hard
to say whether Lamarck or Treviranus has the priority in propounding the
main thesis of the doctrine of evolution; for though the first volume of
Treviranus's _Biologie_ appeared only in 1802, he says, in the preface
to his later work, the _Erscheinungen und Gesetze des organischen
Lebens_, dated 1831, that he wrote the first volume of the _Biologie_
"nearly five-and-thirty years ago," or about 1796.
Now, in 1794, there is evidence that Lamarck held doctrines which
present a striking contrast to those which are to be found in the
_Philosophie zoologique_, as the following passages show:--
"685. Quoique mon unique objet dans cet article n'ait ete que de
traiter de la cause physique de l'entretien de la vie des etres
organiques, malgre cela j'ai ose avancer en debutant, que l'existence
de ces etres etonnants n'appartiennent nullement a la nature; que tout
ce qu'on peut entendre par le mot _nature_, ne pouvoit donner la vie,
c'est-a-dire, que toutes les qualites de la matiere, jointes a toutes
les circonstances possibles, et meme a l'activite repandue dans
l'univers, ne pouvaient point produire un etre muni du mouvement
organique, capable de reproduire son semblable, et sujet a la mort.
"686. Tous les individus de cette nature, qui existent, proviennent
d'individus semblables qui tous ensemble constituent l'espece entiere.
Or, je crois qu'il est aussi impossible a l'homme de connoitre la
cause physique du premier individu de chaque espece, que d'assigner
aussi physiquement la cause de l'existence de la matiere ou de
l'univers entier. C'est au moins ce que le resultat de mes
connaissances et de mes reflexions me portent a penser. S'il existe
beaucoup de varietes produites par l'effet des circonstances, ces
varietes ne denaturent point les especes; mais on se trompe, sans
doute souvent, en indiquant comme espece, ce qui n'est que variete; et
alors je sens que cette erreur peut tirer a consequence dans les
raisonnements que l'on fait sur cette matiere."[34]
The first three volumes of Treviranus's Biologie, which contains his
general views of evolution, appeared between 1802 and 1805. The
_Recherches sur l'organisation des corps vivants_, which sketches out
Lamarck's doctrines, was published in 1802; but the full development of
his views in the _Philosophie zoologique_ did not take place until
1809.
The _Biologie_ and the _Philosophie zoologique_ are both very remarkable
productions, and are still worthy of attentive study, but they fell upon
evil times. The vast authority of Cuvier was employed in support of the
traditionally respectable hypotheses of special creation and of
catastrophism; and the wild speculations of the _Discours sur les
revolutions de la surface du globe_ were held to be models of sound
scientific thinking, while the really much more sober and philosophical
hypotheses of the _Hydrogeologie_ were scouted. For many years it was
the fashion to speak of Lamarck with ridicule, while Treviranus was
altogether ignored.
Nevertheless, the work had been done. The conception of evolution was
henceforward irrepressible, and it incessantly reappears, in one shape
or another,[35] up to the year 1858, when Charles Darwin and A.R.
Wallace published their _Theory of Natural Selection_. The _Origin of
Species_ appeared in 1859; and thenceforward the doctrine of evolution
assumed a position and acquired an importance which it never before
possessed. In the _Origin of Species_, and in his other numerous and
important contributions to the solution of the problem of biological
evolution, Darwin confined himself to the discussion of the causes which
have brought about the present condition of living matter, assuming such
matter to have once come into existence. On the other hand, Spencer[36]
and E. Haeckel[37] dealt with the whole problem of evolution. The
profound and vigorous writings of Spencer embody the spirit of Descartes
in the knowledge of our own day, and may be regarded as the _Principes
de la philosophie_ of the 19th century; while, whatever hesitation may
not unfrequently be felt by less daring minds in following Haeckel in
many of his speculations, his attempt to systematize the doctrine of
evolution and to exhibit its influence as the central thought of modern
biology, cannot fail to have a far-reaching influence on the progress of
science.
If we seek for the reason of the difference between the scientific
position of the doctrine of evolution in the days of Lamarck and that
which it occupies now, we shall find it in the great accumulation of
facts, the several classes of which have been enumerated above, under
the second to the eighth heads. For those which are grouped under the
second to the seventh of these classes, respectively, have a clear
significance on the hypothesis of evolution, while they are
unintelligible if that hypothesis be denied. And those of the eighth
group are not only unintelligible without the assumption of evolution,
but can be proved never to be discordant with that hypothesis, while, in
some cases, they are exactly such as the hypothesis requires. The
demonstration of these assertions would require a volume, but the
general nature of the evidence on which they rest may be briefly
indicated.
2. The accurate investigation of the lowest forms of animal life,
commenced by Leeuwenhoek and Swammerdam, and continued by the remarkable
labours of Reaumur, Abraham Trembley, Bonnet, and a host of other
observers in the latter part of the 17th and the first half of the 18th
centuries, drew the attention of biologists to the gradation in the
complexity of organization which is presented by living beings, and
culminated in the doctrine of the _echelle des etres_, so powerfully and
clearly stated by Bonnet, and, before him, adumbrated by Locke and by
Leibnitz. In the then state of knowledge, it appeared that all the
species of animals and plants could be arranged in one series, in such a
manner that, by insensible gradations, the mineral passed into the
plant, the plant into the polype, the polype into the worm, and so,
through gradually higher forms of life, to man, at the summit of the
animated world.
But, as knowledge advanced, this conception ceased to be tenable in the
crude form in which it was first put forward. Taking into account
existing animals and plants alone, it became obvious that they fell into
groups which were more or less sharply separated from one another; and,
moreover, that even the species of a genus can hardly ever be arranged
in linear series. Their natural resemblances and differences are only to
be expressed by disposing them as if they were branches springing from a
common hypothetical centre.
Lamarck, while affirming the verbal proposition that animals form a
single series, was forced by his vast acquaintance with the details of
zoology to limit the assertion to such a series as may be formed out of
the abstractions constituted by the common characters of each group.[38]
Cuvier on anatomical, and Von Baer on embryological grounds, made the
further step of proving that, even in this limited sense, animals cannot
be arranged in a single series, but that there are several distinct
plans of organization to be observed among them, no one of which, in its
highest and most complicated modification, leads to any of the others.
The conclusions enunciated by Cuvier and Von Baer have been confirmed in
principle by all subsequent research into the structure of animals and
plants. But the effect of the adoption of these conclusions has been
rather to substitute a new metaphor for that of Bonnet than to abolish
the conception expressed by it. Instead of regarding living things as
capable of arrangement in one series like the steps of a ladder, the
results of modern investigation compel us to dispose them as if they
were the twigs and branches of a tree. The ends of the twigs represent
individuals, the smallest groups of twigs species, larger groups genera,
and so on, until we arrive at the source of all these ramifications of
the main branch, which is represented by a common plan of structure. At
the present moment it is impossible to draw up any definition, based on
broad anatomical or developmental characters, by which any one of
Cuvier's great groups shall be separated from all the rest. On the
contrary, the lower members of each tend to converge towards the lower
members of all the others. The same may be said of the vegetable world.
The apparently clear distinction between flowering and flowerless plants
has been broken down by the series of gradations between the two
exhibited by the _Lycopodiaceae_, _Rhizocarpeae_, and _Gymnospermeae_.
The groups of _Fungi_, _Licheneae_ and _Algae_ have completely run into
one another, and, when the lowest forms of each are alone considered,
even the animal and vegetable kingdoms cease to have a definite
frontier.
If it is permissible to speak of the relations of living forms to one
another metaphorically, the similitude chosen must undoubtedly be that
of a common root, whence two main trunks, one representing the vegetable
and one the animal world, spring; and, each dividing into a few main
branches, these subdivide into multitudes of branchlets and these into
smaller groups of twigs.
As Lamarck has well said:--[39]
"Il n'y a que ceux qui se sont longtemps et fortement occupes de la
determination des especes, et qui ont consulte de riches collections,
qui peuvent savoir jusqu'a quel point les _especes_, parmi les corps
vivants, se fondent les unes dans les autres, et qui ont pu se
convaincre que, dans les parties ou nous voyons des _especes_ isolees,
cela n'est ainsi que parcequ'il nous en manque d'autres qui en sont
plus voisines et que nous n'avons pas encore recueillies.
"Je ne veux pas dire pour cela que les animaux qui existent forment
une serie tres-simple et partout egalement nuancee; mais je dis qu'ils
forment une serie rameuse, irregulierement graduee et qui n'a point de
discontinuite dans ses parties, ou qui, du moins, n'en a toujours pas
eu, s'il est vrai que, par suite de quelques especes perdues, il s'en
trouve quelque part. Il en resulte que les _especes_ qui terminent
chaque rameau de la serie generale tiennent, au moins d'un cote, a
d'autres especes voisines qui se nuancent avec elles. Voila ce que
l'etat bien connu des choses me met maintenant a portee de demontrer.
Je n'ai besoin d'aucune hypothese ni d'aucune supposition pour cela:
j'en atteste tous les naturalistes observateurs."
3. In a remarkable essay[40] Meckel remarks:--
"There is no good physiologist who has not been struck by the
observation that the original form of all organisms is one and the
same, and that out of this one form, all, the lowest as well as the
highest, are developed in such a manner that the latter pass through the
permanent forms of the former as transitory stages. Aristotle, Haller,
Harvey, Kielmeyer, Autenrieth, and many others have either made this
observation incidentally, or, especially the latter, have drawn
particular attention to it, and drawn therefrom results of permanent
importance for physiology."
Meckel proceeds to exemplify the thesis, that the lower forms of animals
represent stages in the course of the development of the higher, with a
large series of illustrations.
After comparing the salamanders and the perenni-branchiate _Urodela_
with the tadpoles and the frogs, and enunciating the law that the more
highly any animal is organized the more quickly does it pass through the
lower stages, Meckel goes on to say:--
"From these lowest Vertebrata to the highest, and to the highest forms
among these, the comparison between the embryonic conditions of the
higher animals and the adult states of the lower can be more
completely and thoroughly instituted than if the survey is extended to
the Invertebrata, inasmuch as the latter are in many respects
constructed upon an altogether too dissimilar type; indeed they often
differ from one another far more than the lowest vertebrate does from
the highest mammal; yet the following pages will show that the
comparison may be also extended to them with interest. In fact, there
is a period when, as Aristotle long ago said, the embryo of the
highest animal has the form of a mere worm, and, devoid of internal
and external organization, is merely an almost structureless lump of
polype-substance. Notwithstanding the origin of organs, it still for a
certain time, by reason of its want of an internal bony skeleton,
remains worm and mollusk, and only later enters into the series of the
Vertebrata, although traces of the vertebral column even in the
earliest periods testify its claim to a place in that series."--Op.
cit. pp. 4, 5.
If Meckel's proposition is so far qualified, that the comparison of
adult with embryonic forms is restricted within the limits of one type
of organization; and if it is further recollected, that the resemblance
between the permanent lower form and the embryonic stage of a higher
form is not special but general, it is in entire accordance with modern
embryology; although there is no branch of biology which has grown so
largely, and improved its methods so much since Meckel's time, as this.
In its original form, the doctrine of "arrest of development," as
advocated by Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire and Serres, was no doubt an
over-statement of the case. It is not true, for example, that a fish is
a reptile arrested in its development, or that a reptile was ever a
fish; but it is true that the reptile embryo, at one stage of its
development, is an organism which, if it had an independent existence,
must be classified among fishes; and all the organs of the reptile pass,
in the course of their development, through conditions which are closely
analogous to those which are permanent in some fishes.
4. That branch of biology which is termed morphology is a commentary
upon, and expansion of, the proposition that widely different animals or
plants, and widely different parts of animals or plants, are constructed
upon the same plan. From the rough comparison of the skeleton of a bird
with that of a man by Pierre Delon, in the 16th century (to go no
further back), down to the theory of the limbs and the theory of the
skull at the present day; or, from the first demonstration of the
homologies of the parts of a flower by C.F. Wolff, to the present
elaborate analysis of the floral organs, morphology exhibits a continual
advance towards the demonstration of a fundamental unity among the
seeming diversities of living structures. And this demonstration has
been completed by the final establishment of the cell theory (see
CYTOLOGY), which involves the admission of a primitive conformity, not
only of all the elementary structures in animals and plants
respectively, but of those in the one of these great divisions of living
things with those in the other. No _a priori_ difficulty can be said to
stand in the way of evolution, when it can be shown that all animals and
all plants proceed by modes of development, which are similar in
principle, from a fundamental protoplasmic material.
5. The innumerable cases of structures, which are rudimentary and
apparently useless, in species, the close allies of which possess
well-developed and functionally important homologous structures, are
readily intelligible on the theory of evolution, while it is hard to
conceive their _raison d'etre_ on any other hypothesis. However, a
cautious reasoner will probably rather explain such cases deductively
from the doctrine of evolution than endeavour to support the doctrine of
evolution by them. For it is almost impossible to prove that any
structure, however rudimentary, is useless--that is to say, that it
plays no part whatever in the economy; and, if it is in the slightest
degree useful, there is no reason why, on the hypothesis of direct
creation, it should not have been created. Nevertheless; double-edged as
is the argument from rudimentary organs, there is probably none which
has produced a greater effect in promoting the general acceptance of the
theory of evolution.
6. The older advocates of evolution sought for the causes of the process
exclusively in the influence of varying conditions, such as climate and
station, or hybridization, upon living forms. Even Treviranus has got no
further than this point. Lamarck introduced the conception of the action
of an animal on itself as a factor in producing modification. Starting
from the well-known fact that the habitual use of a limb tends to
develop the muscles of the limb, and to produce a greater and greater
facility in using it, he made the general assumption that the effort of
an animal to exert an organ in a given direction tends to develop the
organ in that direction. But a little consideration showed that, though
Lamarck had seized what, as far as it goes, is a true cause of
modification, it is a cause the actual effects of which are wholly
inadequate to account for any considerable modification in animals, and
which can have no influence at all in the vegetable world; and probably
nothing contributed so much to discredit evolution, in the early part of
the 19th century, as the floods of easy ridicule which were poured upon
this part of Lamarck's speculation. The theory of natural selection, or
survival of the fittest, was suggested by William Charles Wells in 1813,
and further elaborated by Patrick Matthew in 1831. But the pregnant
suggestions of these writers remained practically unnoticed and
forgotten, until the theory was independently devised and promulgated by
Charles Robert Darwin and Alfred Russell Wallace in 1858, and the effect
of its publication was immediate and profound.
Those who were unwilling to accept evolution, without better grounds
than such as are offered by Lamarck, and who therefore preferred to
suspend their judgment on the question, found in the principle of
selective breeding, pursued in all its applications with marvellous
knowledge and skill by Darwin, a valid explanation of the occurrence of
varieties and races; and they saw clearly that, if the explanation would
apply to species, it would not only solve the problem of their
evolution, but that it would account for the facts of teleology, as well
as for those of morphology; and for the persistence of some forms of
life unchanged through long epochs of time, while others undergo
comparatively rapid metamorphosis.
How far "natural selection" suffices for the production of species
remains to be seen. Few can doubt that, if not the whole cause, it is a
very important factor in that operation; and that it must play a great
part in the sorting out of varieties into those which are transitory and
those which are permanent.
But the causes and conditions of variation have yet to be thoroughly
explored; and the importance of natural selection will not be impaired,
even if further inquiries should prove that variability is definite, and
is determined in certain directions rather than in others, by conditions
inherent in that which varies. It is quite conceivable that every
species tends to produce varieties of a limited number and kind, and
that the effect of natural selection is to favour the development of
some of these, while it opposes the development of others along their
predetermined lines of modification.
7. No truths brought to light by biological investigation were better
calculated to inspire distrust of the dogmas intruded upon science in
the name of theology than those which relate to the distribution of
animals and plants on the surface of the earth. Very skilful
accommodation was needful, if the limitation of sloths to South America,
and of the _Ornithorhynchus_ to Australia, was to be reconciled with
the literal interpretation of the history of the Deluge; and, with the
establishment of the existence of distinct provinces of distribution,
any serious belief in the peopling of the world by migration from Mount
Ararat came to an end.
Under these circumstances, only one alternative was left for those who
denied the occurrence of evolution; namely, the supposition that the
characteristic animals and plants of each great province were created,
as such, within the limits in which, we find them. And as the hypothesis
of "specific centres," thus formulated, was heterodox from the
theological point of view, and unintelligible under its scientific
aspect, it may be passed over without further notice, as a phase of
transition from the creational to the evolutional hypothesis.
8. In fact, the strongest and most conclusive arguments in favour of
evolution are those which are based upon the facts of geographical,
taken in conjunction with those of geological, distribution.
Both Darwin and Wallace lay great stress on the close relation which
obtains between the existing fauna of any region and that of the
immediately antecedent geological epoch in the same region; and rightly,
for it is in truth inconceivable that there should be no genetic
connexion between the two. It is possible to put into words the
proposition, that all the animals and plants of each geological epoch
were annihilated, and that a new set of very similar forms was created
for the next epoch, but it may be doubted if any one who ever tried to
form a distinct mental image of this process of spontaneous generation
on the grandest scale ever really succeeded in realizing it.
In later years the attention of the best palaeontologists has been
withdrawn from the hodman's work of making "new species" of fossils, to
the scientific task of completing our knowledge of individual species,
and tracing out the succession of the forms presented by any given type
in time.
_Evolution at the Beginning of the 20th century._--Since Huxley and
Sully wrote their masterly essays in the 9th edition of this
encyclopaedia, the doctrine of evolution has outgrown the trammels of
controversy and has been accepted as a fundamental principle. Writers on
biological subjects no longer have to waste space in weighing evolution
against this or that philosophical theory or religious tradition;
philosophical writers have frankly accepted it, and the supporters of
religious tradition have made broad their phylacteries to write on them
the new words. A closer scrutiny of the writers of all ages who preceded
Charles Darwin, and, in particular, the light thrown back from Darwin on
the earlier writings of Herbert Spencer, have made plain that without
Darwin the world by this time might have come to a general acceptance of
evolution; but it seems established as a historical fact that the world
has come to accept evolution, first, because of Darwin's theory of
natural selection, and second, because of Darwin's exposition of the
evidence for the actual occurrence of organic evolution. The evidence as
set out by Darwin has been added to enormously; new knowledge has in
many cases altered our conceptions of the mode of the actual process of
evolution, and from time to time a varying stress has been laid on what
are known as the purely Darwinian factors in the theory. The balance of
these tendencies has been against the attachment of great importance to
sexual selection, and in favour of attaching a great importance to
natural selection; but the dominant feature in the recent history of the
theory has been its universal acceptance and the recognition that this
general acceptance has come from the stimulus given by Darwin.
Ontogeny.
A change has taken place in the use of the word evolution. Huxley,
following historical custom, devoted one section of his article to the
"Evolution of the Individual." The facts and theories respecting this
are now discussed under such headings as EMBRYOLOGY; HEREDITY; VARIATION
AND SELECTION; under these headings must be sought information on the
important recent modifications with regard to the theory of the relation
between the development of the individual and the development of the
race, the part played by the environment on the individual, and the
modern developments of the old quarrel between evolution and
epigenesis. The most striking general change has been against seeing in
the facts of ontogeny any direct evidence as to phylogeny. The general
proposition as to a parallelism between individual and ancestral
development is no doubt indisputable, but extended knowledge of the very
different ontogenetic histories of closely allied forms has led us to a
much fuller conception of the mode in which stages in embryonic and
larval history have been modified in relation to their surroundings, and
to a consequent reluctance to attach detailed importance to the
embryological argument for evolution.
Phylogeny.
The vast bulk of botanical and zoological work on living and extinct
forms published during the last quarter of the 19th century increased
almost beyond all expectation the evidence for the fact of evolution.
The discovery of a single fossil creature in a geological stratum of a
wrong period, the detection of a single anatomical or physiological fact
irreconcilable with origin by descent with modification, would have been
destructive of the theory and would have made the reputation of the
observer. But in the prodigious number of supporting discoveries that
have been made no single negative factor has appeared, and the evolution
from their predecessors of the forms of life existing now or at any
other period must be taken as proved. It is necessary to notice,
however, that although the general course of the stream of life is
certain, there is not the same certainty as to the actual individual
pedigrees of the existing forms. In the attempts to place existing
creatures in approximately phylogenetic order, a striking change, due to
a more logical consideration of the process of evolution, has become
established and is already resolving many of the earlier difficulties
and banishing from the more recent tables the numerous hypothetical
intermediate forms so familiar in the older phylogenetic trees. The
older method was to attempt the comparison between the highest member of
a lower group and the lowest member of a higher group--to suppose, for
example, that the gorilla and the chimpanzee, the highest members of the
apes, were the existing representatives of the ancestors of man and to
compare these forms with the lowest members of the human race. Such a
comparison is necessarily illogical, as the existing apes are separated
from the common ancestor by at least as large a number of generations as
separate it from any of the forms of existing man. In the natural
process of growth, the gap must necessarily be wider between the summits
of the twigs than lower down, and, instead of imagining "missing links,"
it is necessary to trace each separate branch as low down as possible,
and to institute the comparisons between the lowest points that can be
reached. The method is simply the logical result of the fact that every
existing form of life stands at the summit of a long branch of the whole
tree of life. A due consideration of it leads to the curious paradox
that if any two animals be compared, the zoologically lower will be
separated from the common ancestor by a larger number of generations,
since, on the average, sexual maturity is reached more quickly by the
lower form. Naturally very many other factors have to be considered, but
this alone is a sufficient reason to restrain attempts to place existing
forms in linear phylogenetic series. In embryology the method finds its
expression in the limitation of comparisons to the corresponding stages
of low and high forms and the exclusion of the comparisons between the
adult stages of low forms and the embryonic stages of higher forms.
Another expression of the same method, due to Cope, and specially
valuable to the taxonomist, is that when the relationship between orders
is being considered, characters of subordinal rank must be neglected. It
must not be supposed that earlier writers all neglected this method, or
still less that all writers now employ it, but merely that formerly it
was frequently overlooked by the best writers, and now is neglected only
by the worst. The result is, on the one hand, a clearing away of much
fantastic phylogeny, on the other, an enormous reduction of the supposed
gaps between groups.
Comparative anatomy.
There has been a renewed activity in the study of existing forms from
the point of view of obtaining evidence as to the nature and origin of
species. Comparative anatomists have been learning to refrain from
basing the diagnosis of a species, or the description of the condition
of an organ, on the evidence of a single specimen. Naturalists who deal
specially with museum collections have been compelled, it is true, for
other reasons to attach an increasing importance to what is called the
type specimen, but they find that this insistence on the individual,
although invaluable from the point of view of recording species, is
unsatisfactory from the point of view of scientific zoology; and
propositions for the amelioration of this condition of affairs range
from a refusal of Linnaean nomenclature in such cases, to the
institution of a division between _master species_ for such species as
have been properly revised by the comparative morphologist, and
_provisional species_ for such species as have been provisionally
registered by those working at collections. Those who work with living
forms of which it is possible to obtain a large number of specimens, and
those who make revisions of the provisional species of palaeontologists,
are slowly coming to some such conception as that a species is the
abstract central point around which a group of variations oscillate, and
that the peripheral oscillations of one species may even overlap those
of an allied species. It is plain that we have moved far from the
connotation and denotation of the word _species_ at the time when Darwin
began to discuss the origin of species, and that the movement, on the
one hand, tends to simplify the problem philosophically, and, on the
other, to make it difficult for the amateur theorist.
The conception of evolution is being applied more rigidly to the
comparative anatomy of organs and systems of organs. When a series of
the modifications of an anatomical structure has been sufficiently
examined, it is frequently possible to decide that one particular
condition is primitive, ancestral or central, and that the other
conditions have been derived from it. Such a condition has been termed,
with regard to the group of animals or plants the organs of which are
being studied, _archecentric_. The possession of the character in the
archecentric condition in (say) two of the members of the group does not
indicate that these two members are more nearly related to one another
than they are to other members of the group; the archecentric condition
is part of the common heritage of all the members of the group, and may
be retained by any. On the other hand, when the ancestral condition is
modified, it may be regarded as having moved outwards along some radius
from the archecentric condition. Such modified conditions have been
termed _apocentric_. It is obvious that the mere apocentricity of a
character can be no guide to the affinities of its possessor. It is
necessary to determine if the modification be a simple change that might
have occurred in independent cases, in fact if it be a multiradial
apocentricity, or if it involved intricate and precisely combined
anatomical changes that we could not expect to occur twice
independently; that is to say, if it be a uniradial apocentricity.
Multiradial apocentricities lie at the root of many of the phenomena
that have been grouped under the designation _convergence_. Especially
in the case of manifest adaptations, organs possessed by creatures far
apart genealogically may be moulded into conditions that are extremely
alike. Sir E. Ray Lankester's term, _homoplasy_, has passed into
currency as designating such cases where different genetic material has
been pressed by similar conditions into similar moulds. These may be
called heterogeneous homoplasies, but it is necessary to recognize the
existence of homogeneous homoplasies, here called multiradial
apocentricities. A complex apocentric modification of a kind which we
cannot imagine to have been repeated independently, and which is to be
designated as uniradial, frequently forms a new centre around which new
diverging modifications are produced. With reference to any particular
group of forms such a new centre of modification may be termed a
_metacentre_, and it is plain that the archecentre of the whole group is
a metacentre of the larger group of which the group under consideration
is a branch. Thus, for instance, the archecentric condition of any Avian
structure is a metacentre of the Sauropsidan stem. A form of
apocentricity extremely common and often perplexing may be termed
_pseudocentric_; in such a condition there is an apparent simplicity
that reveals its secondary nature by some small and apparently
meaningless complexity.
Bionomics.
Another group of investigations that seems to play an important part in
the future development of the theory of evolution relates to the study
of what is known as organic symmetry. The differentiations of structure
that characterize animals and plants are being shown to be orderly and
definite in many respects; the relations of the various parts to one
another and to the whole, the modes of repetition of parts, and the
series of changes that occur in groups of repeated parts appear to be to
a certain extent inevitable, to depend on the nature of the living
material itself and on the necessary conditions of its growth. Closely
allied to the study of symmetry is the study of the direct effect of the
circumambient media on embryonic young and adult stages of living beings
(see EMBRYOLOGY: _Physiology_; HEREDITY; and VARIATION AND SELECTION),
and a still larger number of observers have added to our knowledge of
these. It is impossible here to give even a list of the names of the
many observers who in recent times have made empirical study of the
effects of growth-forces and of the symmetrical limitations and
definitions of growth. It is to be noticed, however, that, even after
such phenomena have been properly grouped and designated under Greek
names as laws of organic growth, they have not become explanations of
the series of facts they correlate. Their importance in the theory of
evolution is none the less very great. In the first place, they lessen
the number of separate facts to be explained; in the second, they limit
the field within which explanation must be sought, since, for instance,
if a particular mode of repetition of parts occur in mosses, in
flowering-plants, in beetles and in elephants, the seeker of ultimate
explanations may exclude from the field of his inquiry all the
conditions individual to these different organic forms, and confine
himself only to what is common to all of them; that is to say,
practically only the living material and its environment. The
prosecution of such inquiries is beginning to make unnecessary much
ingenious speculation of a kind that was prominent from 1880 to 1900;
much futile effort has been wasted in the endeavour to find on Darwinian
principles special "selection-values" for phenomena the universality of
which places them outside the possibility of having relations with the
particular conditions of particular organisms. On the other hand, many
of those who have been specially successful in grouping diverse
phenomena under empirical generalizations have erred logically in posing
their generalizations against such a _vera causa_ as the preservation of
favoured individuals and races. The thirty years which followed the
publication of the _Origin of Species_ were characterized chiefly by
anatomical and embryological work; since then there has been no
diminution in anatomical and embryological enthusiasm, but many of the
continually increasing body of investigators have turned again to
bionomical work. Inasmuch as Lamarck attempted to frame a theory of
evolution in which the principle of natural selection had no part, the
interpretation placed on their work by many bionomical investigators
recalls the theories of Lamarck, and the name _Neo-Lamarckism_ has been
used of such a school of biologists, particularly active in America. The
weakness of the Neo-Lamarckian view lies in its interpretation of
heredity; its strength lies in its zealous study of the living world and
the detection therein of proximate empirical laws, a strength shared by
very many bionomical investigations, the authors of which would prefer
to call themselves Darwinians, or to leave themselves without sectarian
designation.
Biometrics.
Statistical inquiry into the facts of life has long been employed, and
in particular Francis Galton, within the Darwinian period, has advocated
its employment and developed its methods. Within quite recent years,
however, a special school has arisen with the main object of treating
the processes of evolution quantitatively. Here it is right to speak of
Karl Pearson as a pioneer of notable importance. It has been the habit
of biologists to use the terms variation, selection, elimination,
correlation and so forth, vaguely; the new school, which has been
strongly reinforced from the side of physical science, insists on
quantitative measurements of the terms. When the anatomist says that one
race is characterized by long heads, another by round heads, the
biometricist demands numbers and percentages. When an organ is stated to
be variable, the biometricist demands statistics to show the range of
the variations and the mode of their distribution. When a character is
said to be favoured by natural selection, the biometricist demands
investigation of the death-rate of individuals with or without the
character. When a character is said to be transmitted, or to be
correlated with another character, the biometricist declares the
statement valueless without numerical estimations of the inheritance or
correlation. The subject is still so new, and its technical methods (see
VARIATION AND SELECTION) have as yet spread so little beyond the group
which is formulating and defining them, that it is difficult to do more
than guess at the importance of the results likely to be gained. Enough,
however, has already been done to show the vast importance of the method
in grouping and codifying the empirical facts of life, and in so
preparing the way for the investigation of ultimate "causes." The chief
pitfall appears to be the tendency to attach more meaning to the results
than from their nature they can bear. The ultimate value of numerical
inquiries must depend on the equivalence of the units on which they are
based. Many of the characters that up to the present have been dealt
with by biometrical inquiry are obviously composite. The height or
length of the arm of a human being, for instance, is the result of many
factors, some inherent, some due to environment, and until these have
been sifted out, numerical laws of inheritance or of correlation can
have no more than an empirical value. The analysis of composite
characters into their indivisible units and statistical inquiry into the
behaviour of the units would seem to be a necessary part of biometric
investigation, and one to which much further attention will have to be
paid.
Segregation.
It is well known that Darwin was deeply impressed by differences in
flora and fauna, which seemed to be functions of locality, and not the
result of obvious dissimilarities of environment. A.R. Wallace's studies
of island life, and the work of many different observers on local races
of animals and plants, marine, fluviatile and terrestrial, have brought
about a conception of segregation as apart from differences of
environment as being one of the factors in the differentiation of living
forms. The segregation may be geographical, or may be the result of
preferential mating, or of seasonal mating, and its effects plainly can
be made no more of than proximate or empirical laws of differentiation,
of great importance in codifying and simplifying the facts to be
explained. The minute attention paid by modern systematists to the exact
localities of subspecies and races is bringing together a vast store of
facts which will throw further light on the problem of segregation, but
the difficulty of utilizing these facts is increased by an unfortunate
tendency to make locality itself one of the diagnostic characters.
Bathmism.
Consideration of phylogenetic series, especially from the
palaeontological side, has led many writers to the conception that there
is something of the nature of a growth-force inherent in organisms and
tending inevitably towards divergent evolution. It is suggested that
even in the absence of modification produced by any possible Darwinian
or Lamarckian factors, that even in a neutral environment, divergent
evolution of some kind would have occurred. The conception is
necessarily somewhat hazy, but the words _bathmism_ and _bathmic
Evolution_ have been employed by a number of writers for some such
conception. Closely connected with it, and probably underlying many of
the facts which have led to it, is a more definite group of ideas that
may be brought together under the phrase "phylogenetic limitation of
variation." In its simplest form, this phrase implies such an obvious
fact as that whatever be the future development of, say, existing
cockroaches, it will be on lines determined by the present structure of
these creatures. In a more general way, the phrase implies that at each
successive branching of the tree of life, the branches become more
specialized, more defined, and, in a sense, more limited. The full
implications of the group of ideas require, and are likely to receive,
much attention in the immediate future of biological investigation, but
it is enough at present to point out that until the more obvious lines
of inquiry have been opened out much more fully, we cannot be in a
position to guess at the existence of a residuum, for which such a
metaphysical conception as bathmism would serve even as a convenient
disguise for ignorance.
Almost every side of zoology has contributed to the theory of evolution,
but of special importance are the facts and theories associated with the
names of Gregor Mendel, A. Weismann and Hugo de Vries. These are
discussed under the headings HEREDITY; MENDELISM; and VARIATION AND
SELECTION. It has been a feature of great promise in recent
contributions to the theory of evolution, that such contributions have
received attention almost directly in proportion to the new methods of
observation and the new series of facts with which they have come. Those
have found little favour who brought to the debate only formal
criticisms or amplifications of the Darwinian arguments, or
re-marshallings of the Darwinian facts, however ably conducted. The time
has not yet come for the attempt to synthesize the results of the many
different and often apparently antagonistic groups of workers. The great
work that is going on is the simplification of the facts to be explained
by grouping them under empirical laws; and the most general statement
relating to these that can yet be made is that no single one of these
laws has as yet shown signs of taking rank as a _vera causa_ comparable
with the Darwinian principle of natural selection.
For evolution in relation to society see SOCIOLOGY.
REFERENCES.--Practically, every botanical and zoological publication
of recent date has its bearing on evolution. The following are a few
of the more general works: Bateson, _Materials for the Study of
Variation_; Bunge, _Vitalismus und Mechanismus_; Cope, _Origin of the
Fittest_, _Primary Factors of Organic Evolution_, _Darwin's Life and
Letters_; H. de Vries, _Species and Varieties and their Origin by
Mutation_; Eimer, _Organic Evolution_; Gulick, "Divergent Evolution
through Cumulative Segregation," _Jour. Linn. Soc._ xx.; Haacke,
_Schopfung des Menschen_; Mitchell, "Valuation of Zoological
Characters," _Trans. Linn. Soc._ viii. pt. 7; Pearson, _Grammar of
Science_; Romanes, _Darwin and after Darwin_; Sedgwick, Presidential
Address to Section Zoology, _Brit. Ass. Rep. 1899_; Wallace,
_Darwinism_; Weismann, _The Germ-Plasm_. Further references of great
value will be found in the works of Bateson and Pearson referred to
above, and in the annual volumes of the _Zoological Record_,
particularly under the head "General Subject." (P. C. M.)
FOOTNOTES:
[1] This is brought out by F. Lassalle, _Die Philosophie
Herakleitos_, p. 126.
[2] Zeller says that through this distinction Aristotle first made
possible the idea of development.
[3] See this well brought out in G.H. Lewes's _Aristotle_, p. 187.
[4] Grote calls attention to the contrast between Plato's and
Aristotle's way of conceiving the gradations of mind (_Aristotle_,
ii. 171).
[5] Zeller observes that this scale of decreasing perfection is a
necessary consequence of the idea of a transcendent deity.
[6] Melanges de philosophie juive et arabe, p. 225.
[7] Yet he leaves open the question whether the Deity has annexed
thought to matter as a faculty, or whether it rests on a distinct
spiritual principle.
[8] Locke half playfully touches on certain monsters, with respect to
which it is difficult to determine whether they ought to be called
men. (_Essay_, book iii. ch. vi. sect. 26, 27.)
[9] A similar coincidence between the teleological and the modern
evolutional way of viewing things is to be met with in Locke's
account of the use of pain in relation to the preservation of our
being (bk. ii. ch. vii. sect. 4).
[10] _Philosophy of History_ (1893), p. 103, where an interesting
sketch of the growth of the idea of progress is to be found.
[11] G.H. Lewes points out that Leibnitz is inconsistent in his
account of the intelligence of man in relation to that of lower
animals, since when answering Locke he no longer regards these as
differing in degree only.
[12] Both Lewes and du Bois Reymond have brought out the points of
contact between Leibnitz's theory of monads and modern biological
speculations (_Hist. of Phil._ ii. 287, and _Leibnitzsche Gedanken in
der modernen Naturwissenschaft_, p. 23 seq.).
[13] For Herder's position in relation to the modern doctrine of
evolution see F. von Barenbach's _Herder als Vorganger Darwins_, a
work which tends to exaggerate the proximity of the two writers.
[14] Kant held it probable that other planets besides our earth are
inhabited, and that their inhabitants form a scale of beings, their
perfection increasing with the distance of the planet which they
inhabit from the sun.
[15] Kant calls the doctrine of the transmutation of species "a
hazardous fancy of the reason." Yet, as Strauss and others have
shown, Kant's mind betrayed a decided leaning at times to a more
mechanical conception of organic forms as related by descent.
[16] Hegel somewhere says that the question of the eternal duration
of the world is unanswerable: time as well as space can be predicated
of finitudes only.
[17] _The Exercitationes de generatione animalium_, which Dr George
Ent extracted from him and published in 1651.
[18] _De generatione animalium_, lib. ii. cap. x.
[19] _De generatione animalium_, lib. ii. cap. iv.
[20] "Cependant, pour revenir aux formes ordinaires ou aux ames
materielles, cette duree qu'il leur faut attribuer, a la place de
celle qu'on avoit attribuee aux atomes pourroit faire douter si elles
ne vont pas de corps en corps; ce qui seroit la metempsychose, a peu
pres comme quelques philosophes ont cru la transmission du mouvement
et celle des especes. Mais cette imagination est bien eloignee de la
nature des choses. Il n'y a point de tel passage; et c'est ici ou les
transformations de Messieurs Swammerdam, Malpighi, et Leewenhoek, qui
sont des plus excellens observateurs de notre tems, sont venues a mon
secours et m'ont fait admettre plus aisement, que l'animal, et toute
autre substance organisee ne commence point lorsque nous le croyons,
et que sa generation apparente n'est qu'un developpement et une
espece d'augmentation. Aussi ai-je remarque que l'auteur de la
_Recherche de la verite_, M. Regis, M. Hartsoeker, et d'autres
habiles hommes n'ont pas ete fort eloignes de ce sentiment."
Leibnitz, _Systeme nouveau de la nature_ (1695). The doctrine of
"Emboitement" is contained in the _Considerations sur le principe de
vie_ (1705); the preface to the _Theodicee_ (1710); and the
_Principes de la nature et de la grace_ (S 6) (1718).
[21] "Il est vrai que la pensee la plus raisonnable et la plus
conforme a l'experience sur cette question tres difficile de la
formation du foetus; c'est que les enfans sont deja presque tout
formes avant meme l'action par laquelle ils sont concus; et que leurs
meres ne font que leur donner l'accroissement ordinaire dans le temps
de la grossesse." _De la recherche de la verite_, livre ii. chap.
vii. p. 334 (7th ed., 1721).
[22] _Considerations sur les corps organises_, chap. x.
[23] Bonnet had the courage of his opinions, and in the _Palingenesie
philosophique_, part vi. chap, iv., he develops a hypothesis which he
terms "evolution naturelle"; and which, making allowance for his
peculiar views of the nature of generation, bears no small
resemblance to what is understood by "evolution" at the present
day:--
"Si la volonte divine a cree par un seul Acte l'Universalite des
etres, d'ou venoient ces plantes et ces animaux dont Moyse nous
decrit la Production au troisieme et au cinquieme jour du
renouvellement de notre monde?
"Abuserois-je de la liberte de conjectures si je disois, que les
Plantes et les Animaux qui existent aujourd'hui sont parvenus par une
sorte d'evolution naturelle des Etres organises qui peuplaient ce
premier Monde, sorti immediatement des MAINS du CREATEUR?...
"Ne supposons que trois revolutions. La Terre vient de sortir des
MAINS du CREATEUR. Des causes preparees par sa Sagesse font
developper de toutes parts les Germes. Les Etres organises commencent
a jouir de l'existence. Ils etoient probablement alors bien differens
de ce qu'ils sont aujourd'hui. Ils l'etoient autant que ce premier
Monde differoit de celui que nous habitons. Nous manquons de moyens
pour juger de ces dissemblances, et peut-etre que le plus habile
Naturaliste qui auroit ete place dans ce premier Monde y auroit
entierement meconnu nos Plantes et nos Animaux."
[24] "Ce mot (germe) ne designera pas seulement un corps organise
_reduit en petit_; il designera encore toute espece de _preformation
originelle dont un Tout organique peut resulter comme de son principe
immediat."--Palingenesie philosophique_, part. x. chap. ii.
[25] "M. Cuvier considerant que tous les etres organises sont derives
de parens, et ne voyant dans la nature aucune force capable de
produire l'organisation, croyait a la pre-existence des germes; non
pas a la pre-existence d'un etre tout forme, puisqu'il est bien
evident que ce n'est que par des developpemens successifs que l'etre
acquiert sa forme; mais, si l'on peut s'exprimer ainsi, a la
pre-existence du radical de l'etre, radical qui existe avant que la
serie des evolutions ne commence, et qui remonte certainement,
suivant la belle observation de Bonnet, a plusieurs
generations."--Laurillard, _Eloge de Cuvier_, note 12.
[26] _Histoire naturelle_, tom. ii. ed. ii. (1750), p. 350.
[27] _Ibid._ p. 351.
[28] See particularly Buffon, l.c. p. 41.
[29] As Buffon has well said:--"L'idee de ramener l'explication de
tous les phenomenes a des principes mecaniques est assurement grande
et belle, ce pas est le plus hardi qu'on peut faire en philosophie,
et c'est Descartes qui l'a fait."--l.c. p. 50.
[30] _Principes de la philosophie_, Troisieme partie, S 45.
[31] _Ethices_, Pars tertia, Praefatio.
[32] _Systeme de la Nature. Essai sur la formation des corps
organises_, 1751, xiv.
[33] _Considerations philosophiques sur la gradation naturelle des
formes de l'etre; ou les essais de la nature qui apprend a faire
l'homme_ (1768).
[34] _Recherches sur les causes des principaux faits physiques_, par
J.B. Lamarck. Paris. Seconde annee de la Republique. In the preface,
Lamarck says that the work was written in 1776, and presented to the
Academy in 1780; but it was not published before 1794, and at that
time it presumably expressed Lamarck's mature views. It would be
interesting to know what brought about the change of opinion
manifested in the _Recherches sur l'organisation des corps vivants_,
published only seven years later.
[35] See the "Historical Sketch" prefixed to the last edition of the
_Origin of Species_.
[36] _First Principles and Principles of Biology_ (1860-1864).
[37] _Generelle Morphologie_ (1866).
[38] "Il s'agit donc de prouver que la serie qui constitute l'echelle
animale reside essentiellement dans la distribution des masses
principals qui la composent et non dans celle des especes ni meme
toujours dans celle des genres."--_Phil. zoologique_, chap. v.
[39] _Philosophie zoologique_, premiere partie, chap. iii.
[40] "Entwurf einer Darstellung der zwischen dem Embryozustande der
hoheren Thiere und dem per manenten der niederen stattfindenden
Parallele," _Beytrage zur vergleichenden Anatomie_, Bd. ii. 1811.
EVORA, the capital of an administrative district in the province of
Alemtejo, Portugal; 72 m. E. by S. of Lisbon, on the Casa
Branca-Evora-Elvas railway. Pop. (1900) 16,020. Evora occupies a fertile
valley enclosed by low hills. It is surrounded by ramparts flanked with
towers, and is further defended by two forts; but the neglected
condition of these, combined with the narrow arcaded streets and
crumbling walls of Roman or Moorish masonry, gives the city an
appearance corresponding with its real antiquity. Evora is the see of an
archbishop, and has several churches, convents and hospitals, barracks,
a diocesan school and a museum. A university, founded in 1550, was
abolished on the expulsion of the Jesuits in the 18th century. The
cathedral, originally a Romanesque building erected 1186-1204, was
restored in Gothic style about 1400; its richly decorated chancel was
added in 1761. The church of Sao Francisco (1507-1525) is a good example
of the blended Moorish and Gothic architecture known as Manoellian. The
art gallery, formerly the archbishop's palace, contains a collection of
Portuguese and early Flemish paintings. An ancient tower, and the
so-called aqueduct of Sertorius, 9 m. long, have been partly demolished
to make room for the market-square, in which one of the largest fairs in
Portugal is held at midsummer. Both tower and aqueduct were long
believed to have been of Roman origin, but are now known to have been
constructed about 1540-1555 in the reign of John III., at the instance
of an antiquary named Resende. The aqueduct was probably constructed on
the site of the old Roman one. A small Roman temple is used as a public
library; it is usually known as the temple of Diana, a name for which no
valid authority exists. Evora is of little commercial importance,
except as an agricultural centre, but its neighbourhood is famous for
its mules and abounds in cork-woods; there are also mines of iron,
copper, and asbestos and marble quarries.
Under its original name of _Ebora_, the city was from 80 to 72 B.C. the
headquarters of Sertorius, and it long remained an important Roman
military station. It was called _Liberalitas Juliae_ on account of
certain municipal privileges bestowed on it by Julius Caesar (c. 100-44
B.C.). Its bishopric, founded in the 5th century, was raised to an
archbishopric in the 16th. In 712 Evora was conquered by the Moors, who
named it _Jabura_; and it was only retaken in 1166. From 1663 to 1665 it
was held by the Spaniards. In 1832 Dom Miguel, retreating before Dom
Pedro, took refuge in Evora; and here was signed the convention of
Evora, by which he was banished. (See PORTUGAL.)
The administrative district of Evora coincides with the central part of
Alemtejo (q.v.); pop. (1900) 128,062; area, 2856 sq. m.
EVREUX, a town of north-western France, capital of the department of
Eure, 67 m. W.N.W. of Paris on the Western railway to Cherbourg. Pop.
(1906) town, 13,773; commune, 18,971. Situated in the pleasant valley of
the Iton, arms of which traverse it, the town, on the south, slopes up
toward the public gardens and the railway station. It is the seat of a
bishop, and its cathedral is one of the largest and finest in France.
Part of the lower portion of the nave dates from the 11th century; the
west facade with its two ungainly towers is, for the most part, the work
of the late Renaissance, and various styles of the intervening period
are represented in the rest of the church. A thorough restoration was
completed in 1896. The elaborate north transept and portal are in the
flamboyant Gothic; the choir, the finest part of the interior, is in an
earlier Gothic style. Cardinal de la Balue, bishop of Evreux in the
latter half of the 15th century, constructed the octagonal central
tower, with its elegant spire; to him is also due the Lady chapel, which
is remarkable for some finely preserved stained glass. Two rose windows
in the transepts and the carved wooden screens of the side chapels are
masterpieces of 16th-century workmanship. The episcopal palace, a
building of the 15th century, adjoins the south side of the cathedral.
An interesting belfry, facing the handsome modern town hall, dates from
the 15th century. The church of St Taurin, in part Romanesque, has a
choir of the 14th century and other portions of later date; it contains
the shrine of St Taurin, a work of the 13th century. At Vieil Evreux,
3-1/2 m. south-east of the town, the remains of a Roman theatre, a
palace, baths and an aqueduct have been discovered, as well as various
relics which are now deposited in the museum of Evreux. Evreux is the
seat of a prefect, a court of assizes, of tribunals of first instance
and commerce, a chamber of commerce and a board of trade arbitrators,
and has a branch of the Bank of France, a lycee and training colleges
for teachers. The making of ticking, boots and shoes, agricultural
implements and gas motors, and metal-founding and bleaching are carried
on.
Vieil-Evreux (_Mediolanum Aulercorum_) was the capital of the Gallic
tribe of the _Aulerci Eburovices_ and a flourishing city during the
Gallo-Roman period. Its bishopric dates from the 4th century.
The first family of the counts of Evreux which is known was descended
from an illegitimate son of Richard I., duke of Normandy, and became
extinct in the male line with the death of Count William in 1118. The
countship passed in right of Agnes, William's sister, wife of Simon de
Montfort-l'Amaury (d. 1087) to the house of the lords of
Montfort-l'Amaury. Amaury III. of Montfort ceded it in 1200 to King
Philip Augustus. Philip the Fair presented it (1307) to his brother
Louis, for whose benefit Philip the Long raised the countship of Evreux
into a peerage of France (1317). Philip of Evreux, son of Louis, became
king of Navarre by his marriage with Jeanne, daughter of Louis the
Headstrong (Hutin), and their son Charles the Bad and their grandson
Charles the Noble were also kings of Navarre. The latter ceded his
countships of Evreux, Champagne and Brie to King Charles VI. (1404). In
1427 the countship of Evreux was bestowed by King Charles VII. on Sir
John Stuart of Darnley (c. 1365-1429), the commander of his Scottish
bodyguard, who in 1423 had received the seigniory of Aubigny and in
February 1427/8 was granted the right to quarter the royal arms of
France for his victories over the English (see Lady Elizabeth Cust,
_Account of the Stuarts of Aubigny in France, 1422-1672_, 1891). On
Stuart's death (before Orleans during an attack on an English convoy)
the countship reverted to the crown. It was again temporarily alienated
(1569-1584) as an appanage for Francis, duke of Anjou, and in 1651 was
finally made over to Frederic Maurice de la Tour d'Auvergne, duke of
Bouillon, in exchange for the principality of Sedan.
EWALD, GEORG HEINRICH AUGUST VON (1803-1875), German Orientalist and
theologian, was born on the 16th of November 1803 at Gottingen, where
his father was a linen-weaver. In 1815 he was sent to the gymnasium, and
in 1820 he entered the university of his native town, where under J.G.
Eichhorn and T.C. Tychsen he devoted himself specially to the study of
Oriental languages. At the close of his academical career in 1823 he was
appointed to a mastership in the gymnasium at Wolfenbuttel, and made a
study of the Oriental manuscripts in the Wolfenbuttel library. But in
the spring of 1824 he was recalled to Gottingen as _repetent_, or
theological tutor, and in 1827 (the year of Eichhorn's death) he became
professor _extraordinarius_ in philosophy and lecturer in Old Testament
exegesis. In 1831 he was promoted to the position of professor
_ordinarius_ in philosophy; in 1833 he became a member of the Royal
Scientific Society, and in 1835, after Tychsen's death, he entered the
faculty of theology, taking the chair of Oriental languages.
Two years later occurred the first important episode in his studious
life. In 1837, on the 18th of November, along with six of his colleagues
he signed a formal protest against the action of King Ernst August (duke
of Cumberland) in abolishing the liberal constitution of 1833, which had
been granted to the Hanoverians by his predecessor William IV. This bold
procedure of the seven professors led to their speedy expulsion from the
university (14th December). Early in 1838 Ewald received a call to
Tubingen, and there for upwards of ten years he held a chair as
professor _ordinarius_, first in philosophy and afterwards, from 1841,
in theology. To this period belong some of his most important works, and
also the commencement of his bitter feud with F.C. Baur and the Tubingen
school. In 1847, "the great shipwreck-year in Germany," as he has called
it, he was invited back to Gottingen on honourable terms--the liberal
constitution having been restored. He gladly accepted the invitation. In
1862-1863 he took an active part in a movement for reform within the
Hanoverian Church, and he was a member of the synod which passed the new
constitution. He had an important share also in the formation of the
Protestantenverein, or Protestant association, in September 1863. But
the chief crisis in his life arose out of the political events of 1866.
His loyalty to King George (son of Ernst August) would not permit him to
take the oath of allegiance to the victorious king of Prussia, and he
was therefore placed on the retired list, though with the full amount of
his salary as pension. Perhaps even this degree of severity might have
been held by the Prussian authorities to be unnecessary, had Ewald been
less exasperating in his language. The violent tone of some of his
printed manifestoes about this time, especially of his _Lob des Konigs
u. des Volkes_, led to his being deprived of the _venia legendi_ (1868)
and also to a criminal process, which, however, resulted in his
acquittal (May 1869). Then, and on two subsequent occasions, he was
returned by the city of Hanover as a member of the North German and
German parliaments. In June 1874 he was found guilty of a libel on
Prince Bismarck, whom he had compared to Frederick II. in "his
unrighteous war with Austria and his ruination of religion and
morality," to Napoleon III. in his way of "picking out the best time
possible for robbery and plunder." For this offence he was sentenced to
undergo three weeks' imprisonment. He died in his 72nd year of heart
disease on the 4th of May 1875.
Ewald was no common man. In his public life he displayed many noble
characteristics,--perfect simplicity and sincerity, intense moral
earnestness, sturdy independence, absolute fearlessness. As a teacher
he had a remarkable power of kindling enthusiasm; and he sent out many
distinguished pupils, among whom may be mentioned Hitzig, Schrader,
Noldeke, Diestel and Dillmann. His disciples were not all of one school,
but many eminent scholars who apparently have been untouched by his
influence have in fact developed some of the many ideas which he
suggested. His numerous writings, from 1823 onwards, were the reservoirs
in which the entire energy of a life was stored. His _Hebrew Grammar_
inaugurated a new era in biblical philology. All subsequent works in
that department have been avowedly based on his, and to him will always
belong the honour of having been, as Hitzig has called him, "the second
founder of the science of the Hebrew language." As an exegete and
biblical critic no less than as a grammarian he has left his abiding
mark. His _Geschichte des Volkes Israel_, the result of thirty years'
labour, was epoch-making in that branch of research. While in every line
it bears the marks of intense individuality, it is at the same time a
product highly characteristic of the age, and even of the decade, in
which it appeared. If it is obviously the outcome of immense learning on
the part of its author, it is no less manifestly the result of the
speculations and researches of many laborious predecessors in all
departments of history, theology and philosophy. Taking up the idea of a
divine education of the human race, which Lessing and Herder had made so
familiar to the modern mind, and firmly believing that to each of the
leading nations of antiquity a special task had been providentially
assigned, Ewald felt no difficulty about Israel's place in universal
history, or about the problem which that race had been called upon to
solve. The history of Israel, according to him, is simply the history of
the manner in which the one true religion really and truly came into the
possession of mankind. Other nations, indeed, had attempted the highest
problems in religion; but Israel alone, in the providence of God, had
succeeded, for Israel alone had been inspired. Such is the supreme
meaning of that national history which began with the exodus and
culminated (at the same time virtually terminating) in the appearing of
Christ. The historical interval that separated these two events is
treated as naturally dividing itself into three great periods,--those of
Moses, David and Ezra. The periods are externally indicated by the
successive names by which the chosen people were called--Hebrews,
Israelites, Jews. The events prior to the exodus are relegated by Ewald
to a preliminary chapter of primitive history; and the events of the
apostolic and post-apostolic age are treated as a kind of appendix. The
entire construction of the history is based, as has already been said,
on a critical examination and chronological arrangement of the available
documents. So far as the results of criticism are still uncertain with
regard to the age and authorship of any of these, Ewald's conclusions
must of course be regarded as unsatisfactory. But his work remains a
storehouse of learning and is increasingly recognized as a work of rare
genius.
Of his works the more important are:--_Die Composition der Genesis
kritisch untersucht_ (1823), an acute and able attempt to account for
the use of the two names of God without recourse to the
document-hypothesis; he was not himself, however, permanently
convinced by it; _De metris carminum Arabicorum_ (1825); _Das Hohelied
Salomo's ubersetzt u. erklart_ (1826; 3rd ed., 1866); _Kritische
Grammatik der hebr. Sprache_ (1827)--this afterwards became the
_Ausfuhrliches Lehrbuch der hebr. Sprache_ (8th ed., 1870); and it was
followed by the _Hebr. Sprachlehre fur Anfanger_ (4th ed., 1874);
_Uber einige altere Sanskritmetra_ (1827); _Liber Vakedii de
Mesopotamiae expugnatae historia_ (1827); _Commentarius in Apocalypsin
Johannis_ (1828); _Abhandlungen zur biblischen u. orientalischen
Literatur_ (1832); _Grammatica critica linguae Arabicae_ (1831-1833);
_Die poetischen Bucher des alten Bundes_ (1835-1837, 3rd ed.,
1866-1867); _Die Propheten des alten Bundes_ (1840-1841, 2nd ed.,
1867-1868); _Geschichte des Volkes Israel_ (1843-1859, 3rd ed.,
1864-1868); _Alterthumer Israels_ (1848); _Die drei ersten Evangelien
ubersetzt u. erklart_ (1850); _Uber das athiopische Buch Henoch_
(1854); _Die Sendschreiben des Apostels Paulus ubersetzt u. erklart_
(1857); _Die Johanneischen Schriften ubersetzt u. erklart_
(1861-1862); _Uber das vierte Esrabuch_ (1863); _Sieben Sendschreiben
des neuen Bundes_ (1870); _Das Sendschreiben an die Hebraer u.
Jakobos' Rundschreiben_ (1870); _Die Lehre der Bibel von Gott, oder
Theologie des alten u. neuen Bundes_ (1871-1875). The _Jahrbucher der
biblischen Wissenschaft_ (1849-1865) were edited, and for the most
part written, by him. He was the chief promoter of the _Zeitschrift
fur die Kunde des Morgenlandes_, begun in 1837; and he frequently
contributed on various subjects to the _Gotting. gelehrte Anzeigen_.
He was also the author of many pamphlets of an occasional character.
The following have been translated into English:--_Hebrew Grammar_, by
John Nicholson (from 2nd German edition) (London 1836); _Introductory
Hebrew Grammar_ (from 3rd German edition) (London, 1870); _History of
Israel_, 5 vols. (corresponding to vols. i.-iv. of the German), by
Russell Martineau and J. Estlin Carpenter (London, 1867-1874);
_Antiquities of Israel_, by H.S. Solly (London, 1876); _Commentary on
the Prophets of the Old Testament_, by J. Frederick Smith (2 vols.,
London, 1876-1877); _Isaiah the Prophet_, chaps. i.-xxxiii., by O.
Glover (London, 1869); _Life of Jesus Christ_, also by O. Glover
(London, 1865).
See the article in Herzog-Hauck; T. Witton Davies, _Heinrich Ewald_
(1903); and cf. T.K. Cheyne, _Founders of Old Testament Criticism_
(1893); F. Lichtenberger, _History of German Theology in the
Nineteenth Century_ (1889).
EWALD, JOHANNES (1743-1781), the greatest lyrical poet of Denmark, was
the son of a melancholy and sickly chaplain at Copenhagen, where he was
born on the 18th of November 1743. At the age of eleven he was sent to
school at Schleswig, his father's birthplace, and returned to the
capital only to enter the university in 1758. His father was by that
time dead, and in his mother, a frivolous and foolish woman, he found
neither sympathy nor moral support. At fifteen he fell passionately in
love with Arense Hulegaard, a girl whose father afterwards married the
poet's mother; and the romantic boy resolved on various modes of making
himself admired by the young lady. He began to learn Abyssinian, for the
purpose of going out as a missionary to Africa, but this scheme was soon
given up, and he persuaded a brother, four years older than himself, to
run away that they might enlist as hussars in the Prussian army. They
managed to reach Hamburg just when the Seven Years' War was commencing
and were allowed to enter a regiment. But the elder brother soon got
tired and ran away, while the poet, after a series of extraordinary
adventures, deserted to the Austrian army, where from being drummer he
rose to being sergeant, and was only not made an officer because he was
a Protestant. In 1760 he was weary of a soldier's life and deserted
again, getting safe back to Denmark. For the next two years he worked
with great diligence at the university, but the Arense for whom he had
gone through so much hardship and taken so much pains married another
man almost immediately after Ewald's final and very successful
examination. The disappointment was one from which he never recovered,
but his own weakness of will was largely to blame for it. He plunged
into dissipation of every kind, and gave his serious thoughts only to
poetry.
In 1763 his first work, a perfunctory dissertation, _De pyrologia
sacra_, first saw the light. In 1764 he made a considerable success with
a short prose story in the popular manner of Sneedorf, _Lykkens Tempel_
(The Temple of Fortune), which was translated into German and Icelandic.
On the death of Frederick V., however, Ewald first appeared prominently
as a poet; he published in 1766 three _Elegies_ over the dead king,
which were received with universal acclamation, and of which one, at
least, is a veritable masterpiece. But his dramatic poem _Adam og Eva_
(Adam and Eve), by far the finest imaginative work produced in Denmark
up to that time, was rejected by the Society of Arts in 1767 and was not
published until 1769. At the latter date, however, its merits were
perceived. In 1770 Ewald attained success with _Philet_, a narrative and
lyrical poem, and still more with his splendid _Rolf Krage_, the first
original Danish tragedy. For the next ten years Ewald was occupied in
producing one brilliant poetical work after another, in rapid
succession. In 1771 he published _De brutale Klappers_ (The Brutal
Clappers), a tragi-comedy or parody satirizing the dispute then raging
between the critics and the manager of the Royal Theatre; in 1772 he
translated from the German the lyrical drama of _Philemon and Baucis_,
and brought out his versified comedy of _Harlequin Patriot_, a satire on
the passion for political scribbling created by Struensee's introduction
of the liberty of the press. In 1773 he published _Pebersvendene_ (Old
Bachelors), a prose comedy. In 1771 he had already collected some of his
lyrical poems under the title of _Adskilligt af Johannes Ewald_
(Miscellanies). In 1774 appeared the heroic opera of _Balder's Dod_
(Balder's Death), and in 1779 the finest of his works, the lyrical drama
_Fiskerne_ (The Fishers), which contains the Danish National Song, "King
Christian stood by the high Mast," his most famous lyric. In the two
poems last mentioned, however, Ewald passed beyond contemporary taste,
and these great works, the pride of Danish literature, were coldly
received. But while the new poetry was slowly winning its way into
popular esteem, the poet did not lack admirers, and at the head of these
he founded in 1775 the Danish Literary Society, a body which became
influential, and which made the study of Ewald a cultus. But the poet's
health had broken; when he was writing _Rolf Krage_ he was already an
inmate of the consumptive hospital, and when he seemed to be recovering,
his health was shattered again by a night spent in the frosty streets.
He embittered his existence by the recklessness of his private life, and
finally, through a fall from a horse, he ended by becoming a complete
invalid. His last ten years were full of acute suffering; his mother
treated him with cruelty, his family with neglect, and but few even of
his friends showed any manliness or generosity towards him. In 1774 he
was placed in the house of an inspector of fisheries at Rungsted, where
Anna Hedevig Jacobsen, the daughter of the house, tended the wasted poet
with infinite tenderness and skill. He stayed in this house for three
years, and wrote there some of his finest later lyrics. Meanwhile he had
fallen deeply in love with the charming solace of his sufferings and won
her consent to a marriage. This step, however, was prevented by his
family, who roughly removed him to their own keeping near Kronborg. Here
he was treated so infamously that he insisted on being taken back to
Copenhagen in 1777, where he found an older, but no less tender nurse,
in Ane Kirstine Skou. Here he wrote _Fiskerne_ with his imagination full
of the familiar shore at Hornbaek, near Rungsted. In 1780 he was a
little better, and managed to be present at the theatre at the first
performance of his poem. But this excitement hastened his end, and after
months of extreme agony he died on the 17th of March 1781, and was
carried to the grave by a large assembly of his admirers, since he was
now just recognized by the public for the first time as the greatest
national poet. Among his papers were found fragments of three dramas,
two on old Scandinavian subjects, entitled _Frode_ and _Helgo_, and the
third a tragedy on the story of _Hamlet_, which he meant to treat in a
way wholly distinct from Shakespeare's.
Ewald belongs to the race of poetical reformers who appeared in all
countries of Europe at the end of the 18th century; but it is
interesting to observe that in point of time he preceded all of them. He
was born six years earlier than Goethe and Alfieri, sixteen years before
Schiller, nine years before Andre Chenier, and twenty-seven years
earlier than Wordsworth, but he did for Denmark what each of these poets
did for his own country. Ewald found Danish literature given over to
tasteless rhetoric, and without art or vigour. He introduced vivacity of
style, freshness and brevity of form, and an imaginative study of nature
which was then unprecedented. But perhaps his greatest claim to notice
is the fact that he was the first person to call the attention of the
Scandinavian peoples to the treasuries of their ancient history and
mythology, and to suggest the use of these in imaginative writing. With
a colouring more distinctly modern than that of Collins and Gray, his
lyrics yet resemble the odes of these his English contemporaries more
closely than those of any continental poet; from another point of view
his ballads remind us of those of Schiller, which they preceded. His
dramas, which had an immense influence on the Danish stage, are now
chiefly of antiquarian interest, with the exception of "The Fishers," a
work that must always live as a great national poem. In personal
character and in fate Ewald seems to have been not unlike Heinrich
Heine.
The first collected edition of Ewald's works began to appear in his
lifetime. It is in four volumes, 1780-1784. His works have constantly
been reprinted, but the standard edition is that by Liebenberg, in 8
vols., 1850-1855. The best biographies of him are those by C. Molbech
(1831), Hammerich (1860) and Andreas Dolleris (1900). (E. G.)
EWART, WILLIAM (1798-1869), English politician, was born in Liverpool on
the 1st of May 1798. He was educated at Eton and Christ Church, Oxford,
gaining the Newdigate prize for English verse. He was called to the bar
at the Middle Temple in 1827, and the next year entered parliament for
the borough of Bletchingley in Surrey. He subsequently sat for Liverpool
from 1830 to 1837, for Wigan in 1839, and for Dumfries Burghs from 1841
until his retirement from public life in 1868. He died at Broadleas,
near Devizes, on the 23rd of January 1869, Ewart, who was an advanced
liberal in politics, was responsible during his long political career
for many useful measures. In 1834 he carried a bill for the abolition of
hanging in chains, and in 1837 he was successful in getting an act
passed for abolishing capital punishment for cattle-stealing and other
offences. In 1850 he carried a bill for establishing free libraries
supported out of the rates, and in 1864 he was instrumental in getting
an act passed for legalizing the use of the metric system of weights and
measures. He was always a strong advocate for the abolition of capital
punishment, and on his motion in 1864 a select committee was appointed
to consider the subject. Other reforms which he advocated and which have
since been carried out were an annual statement on education, and the
examination of candidates for the civil service and army.
EWE, a group of Negro peoples of the Slave Coast, West Africa. By the
natives their country is called _Ewe-me_, "Land of the Ewe." The Ewe
family forms five linguistic groups: the Anlo or Anglawa on the Gold
Coast frontier, the Krepi of Anfueh speech, the Jeji, the Dahomeyans and
the Mahi.
See further Dahomey, and A.B. Ellis, _The Ewe-Speaking Peoples of the
Slave Coast_ ... (London, 1890).
EWELL, RICHARD STODDERT (1817-1872), American soldier,
lieutenant-general in the Confederate army, was born in Georgetown, now
a part of Washington, D.C., on the 2nd of February 1817, and graduated
at West Point in 1840. As a cavalry officer he saw much active service
in the Mexican War and later in Indian warfare in New Mexico. He
resigned his commission at the outbreak of the Civil War, and entered
the Confederate service. He commanded a brigade in the first Bull Run
campaign, and a division in the famous Valley Campaign of "Stonewall"
Jackson, to whom he was next in rank. At Cross Keys he was in command of
the forces which defeated General Fremont. Ewell's division served with
Jackson in the Seven Days and in the campaign of Second Bull Run. At the
action of Groveton Ewell lost a leg, but did not on that account retire
from active service, though other generals led his men in the sanguinary
battles of Antietam (where they lost 47% of their numbers) and
Fredericksburg. After the death of "Stonewall" Jackson, Ewell was
promoted lieutenant-general and appointed to command the 2nd Corps, with
which he had served from the beginning of the Valley Campaign. His
promotion set aside General J.E.B. Stuart, the temporary commander of
Jackson's corps; that Ewell, crippled as he was, was preferred to the
brilliant cavalry leader was a marked testimony to his sterling
qualities as a soldier. The invasion of Pennsylvania soon followed,
Ewell's corps leading the advance of Lee's army. A federal force was
skilfully cut off and destroyed near Winchester, Va., and Ewell's corps
then raided Maryland and southern Pennsylvania unchecked. At the battle
of Gettysburg, the 2nd Corps decided the fighting of the first day in
favour of the Confederates, driving the enemy before them; on the second
day it fought a desperate action on Lee's left wing. Ewell took part in
the closing operations of 1863 and in all the battles of the Wilderness
and Petersburg campaigns. In the final campaign of 1865 he and the
remnant of his corps were cut off and forced to surrender at Sailor's
Creek, a few days before his chief capitulated to Grant at Appomattox.
After the war General Ewell lived in retirement. He died near Spring
Hill, Maury County, Tennessee, on the 25th of January 1872.
EWING, ALEXANDER (1814-1873), Scottish divine, was born of an old
Highland family in Aberdeen on the 25th of March 1814. In October 1838
he was admitted to deacon's orders, and after his return from Italy he
took charge of the episcopal congregation at Forres, and was ordained a
presbyter in the autumn of 1841. In 1846 he was elected first bishop of
the newly restored diocese of Argyll and the Isles, the duties of which
position he discharged till his death on the 22nd of May 1873. In 1851
he received the degree of D.C.L. from the university of Oxford. Though
hampered by a delicate bodily constitution, he worked in a spirit of
buoyant cheerfulness. By the charm of his personal manner and his
catholic sympathies he gradually attained a prominent position. In
theological discussion he contended for the exercise of a wide
tolerance, and attached little importance to ecclesiastical authority
and organization. His own theological position had close affinity with
that of Thomas Erskine of Linlathen and Frederick Denison Maurice; but
his opinions were the fruit of his own meditation, and were coloured by
his own individuality. The trend of his teaching is only to be gathered
from fragmentary publications--letters to the newspapers, pamphlets,
special sermons, essays contributed to the series of _Present Day
Papers_, of which he was the editor, and a volume of sermons entitled
_Revelation considered as Light_.
Besides his strictly theological writings, Ewing was the author of the
_Cathedral or Abbey Church of Iona_ (1865), the first part of which
contains drawings and descriptive letterpress of the ruins, and the
second a history of the early Celtic church and the mission of St
Columba. See _Memoir of Alexander Ewing, D.C.L._, by A.J. Ross (1877).
EWING, JULIANA HORATIA ORR (1841-1885), English writer of books for
children, daughter of the Rev. Alfred Gatty and of Margaret Gatty
(q.v.), was born at Ecclesfield, Yorkshire, in 1841. One of a large
family, she was accustomed to act as nursery story-teller to her
brothers and sisters, and her brother Alfred Scott Gatty provided music
to accompany her plays. She was well educated in classics and modern
languages, and at an early age began to publish verses, being a
contributor to _Aunt Judy's Magazine_, which her mother started in 1866.
_The Land of Lost Toys_ and many other of Juliana's stories appeared in
this magazine. In 1867 she married Major Alexander Ewing, himself an
author, and the composer of the well-known hymn "Jerusalem the Golden."
From this time until her death (13th May 1885), previously to which she
had been a constant invalid, Mrs Ewing produced a number of charming
children's stories. The best of these are: _The Brownies_ (1870), _A
Flat-Iron for a Farthing_ (1873), _Lob-lie-by the Fire_ (1874), _The
Story of a Short Life_ (1885) and _Jackanapes_ (1884), the two
last-named, in particular, obtaining great success; among others may be
mentioned _Mrs Over-the-Way's Remembrances_ (1869), _Six to Sixteen, Jan
of the Windmill_ (1876), _A Great Emergency_ (1877), _We and the World_
(1881), _Old-Fashioned Fairy Tales, Brothers of Pity_ (1882), _The
Doll's Wash_, _Master Fritz_, _Our Garden_, _A Soldier's Children_,
_Three Little Nest-Birds_, _A Week Spent in a Glass-House_, _A Sweet
Little Dear_, and _Blue-Red_ (1883). Many of these were published by the
S.P.C.K. Simple and unaffected in style, and sound and wholesome in
matter, with quiet touches of humour and bright sketches of scenery and
character, Mrs Ewing's best stories have never been surpassed in the
style of literature to which they belong.
EWING, THOMAS (1789-1871), American lawyer and statesman, was born near
the present West Liberty, West Virginia, on the 28th of December 1789.
His father, George Ewing, settled at Lancaster, Fairfield county, Ohio,
in 1792. Thomas graduated at Ohio University, Athens, Ohio, in 1815, and
in August 1816 was admitted to the bar at Lancaster, where he won high
rank as an advocate. He was a Whig member of the United States senate in
1831-1837, and as such took a prominent part in the legislative struggle
over the United States Bank, whose rechartering he favoured and which he
resolutely defended against President Jackson's attack, opposing in able
speeches the withdrawal of deposits and Secretary Woodbury's "Specie
Circular" of 1836. In March 1841 he became secretary of the treasury in
President W.H. Harrison's cabinet. When, however, after President
Tyler's accession, the relations between the President and the Whig
Party became strained, he retired (September 1841) and was succeeded by
Walter Forward (1786-1852). Subsequently from March 1849 to July 1850
he was a member of President Taylor's cabinet as the first secretary of
the newly established department of the interior. He thoroughly
organized the department, and in his able annual report advocated the
construction by government aid of a railroad to the Pacific Coast. In
1850-1851 he filled the unexpired term of Thomas Corwin in the U.S.
Senate, strenuously opposing Clay's compromise measures and advocating
the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia. He was
subsequently a delegate to the Peace Congress in 1861, and was a loyal
supporter of President Lincoln's war policy. He died at Lancaster, Ohio,
on the 26th of October 1871.
His daughter was the wife of General William T. Sherman. His son, Hugh
Boyle Ewing (1826-1905), served throughout the Civil War in the Federal
armies, rising from the rank of colonel (1861) to that of
brigadier-general (1862) and brevet major-general (1865), and commanding
brigades at Antietam and Vicksburg and a division at Chickamauga; and
was minister of the United States to the Netherlands in 1866-1870.
Another son, Thomas Ewing (1829-1896), studied at Brown University in
1852-1854 (in 1894, by a special vote, he was placed on the list of
graduates in the class of 1856); he was a lawyer and a free-state
politician in Kansas in 1857-1861, and was the first chief-justice of
the Kansas supreme court (1861-1862). In the Civil War he attained the
rank of brigadier-general (March 1863) and received the brevet of
major-general (1865). He was subsequently a representative in Congress
from Ohio in 1877-1881; and from 1882 to 1896 practised law in New York
City, where he was long one of the recognized leaders of the bar.
EXAMINATIONS. The term "examination" (i.e. inspecting, weighing and
testing; from Lat. _examen_, the tongue of a balance) is used in the
following article to denote a systematic test of knowledge, and of
either special or general capacity or fitness, carried out under the
authority of some public body.
1. _History._--The oldest known system of examinations in history is
that used in China for the selection of officers for the public service
(c. 1115 B.C.), and the periodic tests which they undergo after entry
(c. 2200 B.C.). See CHINA; also W.A.P. Martin, _The Lore of Cathay_
(1901), p. 311 et seq.; T.L. Bullock, "Competitive Examinations in
China" (_Nineteenth Century_, July 1894); and Etienne Zi, _Pratique des
examens litteraires en Chine_ (Shanghai, 1894). The abolition of this
system was announced in 1906, and, as a partial substitute, it was
decided to hold an annual examination in Peking of Chinese graduates
educated abroad (_Times_, 22nd of October 1906).
The majority of examinations in western countries are derived from the
university examinations of the middle ages. The first universities of
Europe consisted of corporations of teachers and of students analogous
to the trade gilds and merchant gilds of the time. In the trade gilds
there were apprentices, companions, and masters. No one was admitted to
mastership until he had served his apprenticeship (q.v.), nor, as a
rule, until he had shown that he could accomplish a piece of work to the
satisfaction of the gild.
The object of the universities was to teach; and to the three classes
established by the gild correspond roughly the _scholar_, the _bachelor_
or pupil-teacher (see Rashdall i. 209, note 2, and 221, note 5), and the
_master_ or _doctor_ (two terms at first equivalent) who, having served
his apprenticeship and passed a definite technical test, had received
permission to teach. The early universities of Europe, being under the
same religious authority and animated by the same philosophy, resembled
each other very closely in curriculum and general organization and
examinations, and by the authority of the emperor, or of the pope in
most cases, the permission to teach granted by one university was valid
in all (_jus ubicunque docendi_).
The earliest university examinations of which a description is available
are those in civil and in canon law held at Bologna at a period
subsequent to 1219. The student was admitted without examination as
bachelor after from four to six years' study, and after from six to
eight years' study became qualified as a candidate for the doctorate. He
might obtain the doctorate in both branches of law in ten years
(Rashdall i. 221-222).
The doctoral examination at Bologna in the 13th-14th centuries consisted
of two parts--a private examination which was the real test, and a
public one of a ceremonial character (_conventus_). The candidate first
took an "oath that he had complied with all the statutable conditions,
that he would give no more than the statutable fees or entertainments to
the rector himself, the doctor or his fellow-students, and that he would
obey the rector." He was then presented to the archdeacon of Bologna by
one or more doctors, who were required to have satisfied themselves of
his fitness by private examination. On the morning of the examination,
after attending mass, he was assigned by one of the doctors of the
assembled college two passages (_puncta_) in the civil or canon law,
which he retired to his house to study, possibly with the assistance of
the presenting doctor. Later in the day he gave a lecture on, or
exposition of, the prepared passages, and was examined on them by two of
the doctors appointed by the college. Other doctors might then put
supplementary questions on law arising out of the passages, or might
suggest objections to his answers. The vote of the doctors present was
taken by ballot, and the fate of the candidate was determined by the
majority. The successful candidate, who received the title of
licentiate, was, on payment of a heavy fee and other expenses, permitted
to proceed to the _conventus_ or final public examination. This
consisted in the delivery of a speech and the defence of a thesis on
some point of law, selected by the candidate, against opponents selected
from among the students. The successful candidate received from the
archdeacon the formal "licence to teach" by the authority of the pope in
the name of the Trinity, and was invested with the insignia of office.
At Bologna, though not at Paris, the "permission to teach" soon became
fictitious, only a small number of doctors being allowed to exercise the
right of teaching in that university (Rashdall).
In the faculty of arts of Paris, towards the end of the 13th century,
the system was already more complicated than at Bologna. The
baccalaureate, licentiateship, and mastership formed three distinct
degrees. For admission to the baccalaureate a preliminary test or
"Responsions" was first required, at which the candidate had to dispute
in grammar or logic with a master. The examiners then inspected the
certificates (_schedulae_) of residence and of having attended lectures
in the prescribed subjects, and examined him in the contents of his
books. The successful candidate was admitted to maintain a thesis
against an opponent, a process called "determination" (see Rashdall i.
443 et seq.), and as bachelor was then permitted to give "cursory"
lectures. After five or six years from the date of beginning his studies
(matriculation) and being twenty years of age (these conditions varied
at different periods), a bachelor was permitted to present himself for
the examination for the licentiateship, which was divided into two
parts. The first part was conducted in private by the chancellor and
four examiners (_temptatores in cameris_), and included an inquiry into
the candidate's residence, attendance at lectures, and performance of
exercises, as well as examination in prescribed books; those candidates
adjudged worthy were admitted to the more important examination before
the faculty, and the names of successful candidates were sent to the
chancellor in batches of eight or more at a time, arranged in order of
merit. (The order of merit at the examination for the licentiateship
existed in Paris till quite recently.) Each successful candidate was
then required to maintain a thesis chosen by himself (_quodlibetica_) in
St Julian's church, and was finally submitted to a purely formal public
examination (_collatio_) at either the episcopal palace or the abbey of
Ste Genevieve, before receiving from the chancellor, in the name of the
Trinity, the licence to incept or begin to teach in the faculty of arts.
After some six months more the licentiate took part "in a peculiarly
solemn disputation known as his 'Vespers,'" then gave his formal
inaugural lecture or disputation before the faculty, and was received
into the faculty as master. This last process was called "inception."
In discussing the value of medieval examinations of the kind described,
Paulsen (_The German Universities_ (1906), p. 25) asserts that they were
well adapted to increase a student's alertness, his power of
comprehending new ideas, and his ability quickly and surely to
assimilate them to his own, and that "they did more to enable [students]
to grasp a subject than the mute and solitary reviewing and cramming of
our modern examinations can possibly do." At their best they fulfilled
precisely the technical purpose for which they were intended; they fully
tested the capacity of the candidate to teach the subjects which he was
required to teach in accordance with the methods which he was required
to use. The limitations of the test were the limitations of the
educational and philosophic ideals of the time, in which a dogmatic
basis was presupposed to all knowledge and criticism was limited to the
superstructure. At their worst, even with venal examiners (and
additional fees were often offered as a bribe), Rashdall regards these
examinations (at the end of the 13th century) as probably "less of a
farce than the pass examinations of Oxford and Cambridge almost within
the memory of persons now living." It is, however, to be pointed out
that the standard in Paris and elsewhere at a later date became
scandalously low in some cases. In some universities the sons of nobles
were regularly excused certain examinations. At Cambridge in 1774 Fellow
Commoners were examined with such precipitation to fulfil the formal
requirements of the statutes that the ceremony was termed "huddling for
a degree" (Jebb, _Remarks upon the Present Mode of Education in the
University of Cambridge_, 4th ed., 1774, p. 32). The last privileges of
this kind were abolished at Cambridge by a grace passed on the 20th of
March 1884.
In the medieval examinations described above we find most of the
elements of our present examinations: certificates of previous study and
good conduct, preparation of set-books, questioning on subjects not
specially prepared, division of examinations into various parts,
classification in order of merit, payment of fees, the presentation of a
dissertation, and the defence and publication of a thesis (a term of
which the meaning has now become extended).
The requirement to write answers to questions written or dictated, to
satisfy a practical test (other than in teaching), and a clinical test
in medicine, appear to be of later date.[1] The medieval candidate for
the doctorate in medicine, although required to have attended practice
before presenting himself, discussed as his thesis a purely theoretical
question, often semi-theological in character, of which as an extreme
example may be quoted "whether Adam had a navel."
The competitive system was developed considerably at Louvain, and in the
15th century the candidates for the mastership of arts were divided into
three classes (_rigorosi_, honour-men; _transibiles_, pass-men;
_gratiosi_, charity-passes), while a fourth, which was not published,
contained the names of those who failed. In the 17th century the first
class comprised the names of twelve, and the second, of twenty-four,
candidates, who were divided on the report of their teachers into
classes before the examination, and finally arranged in order of merit
by the examiners (Vernulaeus, quoted by Sir W. Hamilton, _Discussions_,
1852; p. 647; Rashdall, loc. cit. ii. 262). At the Cambridge tripos (as
described by Jebb in 1774, _Remarks_, &c., pp. 20-31) the first
twenty-four candidates were also selected by a preliminary test; they
were then divided further into "wranglers" (the disputants, _par
excellence_) and _Senior Optimes_, the next twelve on the list being
called the _Junior Optimes_. These names have in the mathematics tripos
survived the procedure. (The name _Tripos_ is derived from the
three-legged stool on which "an old bachilour," selected for the
purpose, sat during his disputation with the senior bachelor of the
year, who was required to propound two questions to him.)
The subjects in which the medieval universities examined were (i.) those
of the trivium and quadrivium in the faculty of arts; (ii.) theology;
(iii.) medicine; and (iv.) civil and canon law. The number of subjects
in which examinations are held has since grown immensely. We can only
sketch in outline the transformations of certain typical university
systems of examinations.
At Oxford there is no record of a process of formal examination on books
similar to that of Paris (Rashdall, ii. 442 et seq.), disputations being
apparently the only test applied in its early history. Examinations were
definitely introduced for the B.A. and M.A. degrees by Laud in 1636-1638
(Brodrick, _History of Oxford_, p. 114), but the standard prescribed was
so much beyond the actual requirements of later times that it may be
doubted if it was enforced. The studies fell in the 18th century into an
"abject state," from which they were first raised by a statute passed in
1800 (_Report of Oxford University Commission of 1850-1852_, p. 60 et
seq.), under which distinctions were first allotted to the ablest
candidates for the bachelor's degree. Further changes were made in 1807
and 1825; and in 1830 a distinction was made between honours
examinations of a more difficult character, at which successful
candidates were divided into four classes, and pass examinations of an
easier character. By the statutes of 1849 and 1858 an intermediate
"Moderations" examination was instituted between the preliminary
examination called "Responsions" and the final examination. Since 1850,
although fresh subjects of examination have been introduced, no
considerable change of system has been made.
The bachelor's degree at Oxford tended from an early period to be
postponed to an advanced stage of studies, while the requirements for
the master's degree diminished until, in 1807, the examination for the
M.A. was abolished. It is now awarded to bachelors of three years'
standing on payment of a fee.
Cambridge in early times followed the example of Oxford, and here also
the bachelor's degree became more and more important (Bass Mullinger,
_History of the University of Cambridge from 1535_..., p. 414), and the
M.A. has been finally reduced to a mere formality, awarded on terms
similar to those of the sister university. The standard of examinations
was raised in Cambridge at an earlier date than at Oxford, and in the
18th century the tripos "established the reputation of Cambridge as a
School of Mathematical Science." The school, however, produced few, if
any, great mathematicians between Newton and George Green. It was only
between 1830 and 1840 that the standard of the tripos became a high one.
At Cambridge there is no intermediate examination between the "Previous
Examination" (commonly called "Little-go"), which corresponds to Oxford
"Responsions" or "Smalls" and the triposes and examinations for the
"Poll" degree, which correspond to the Oxford final honours and pass
examinations respectively. But most of the triposes have been divided
into two parts, of which the second is not obligatory in order to obtain
a degree. The "senior wrangler" was the first candidate in order of
merit in the first part of the mathematical tripos. The abolition of
order of merit at this examination was decided on in 1906, and names of
candidates appeared in this order for the last time in 1909.
At the Scottish universities the B.A. degree has become extinct, and the
M.A., awarded on the results of examination, is the first degree in the
faculty of arts.
The incorporation of the university of London in 1836 marks an era in
the history of examinations; the teaching and examining functions of a
university were dissociated for the first time. Until 1858 the London
examinations were open only to students in affiliated colleges, and the
teachers had no share in the appointment of the examiners or in
determining the curricula for examinations; in 1858 the examinations
were thrown open to all comers, and no requirements were insisted on
with regard to courses of study except for degrees in the faculty of
medicine. The sole function of the university was to examine, and its
examinations for matriculation and for degrees in arts and science were
carried on by means of written papers not only in London but in many
centres in the United Kingdom and the colonies. From the first the
degrees were (unlike those of Oxford and Cambridge until 1871) open to
all male persons without religious distinctions; and in 1878 they were
opened to women. (Tripos examinations were thrown open to women at
Cambridge by the grace of 24th Feb. 1881, and at Oxford women were
admitted to examinations for honours by statute of 29th April 1884.
Proposals to admit women to university degrees were rejected by Oxford
and Cambridge in 1896 and 1897 respectively.)
The standard of difficulty set by the university of London was a high
one, very much higher for its pass degrees than the corresponding
standards at Oxford and Cambridge, while the standard for honours was
equally high. In medicine the examinations were made both wider in range
and more searching than those of any other examining body. But, for
reasons dealt with below, great discontent was roused by the new system.
In 1880 the Victoria University, Manchester, was established, in which
teaching and examining were again united; and in the universities since
established, with the exception of the Royal University of Ireland
(which was created in 1880 as an examining body on the model of London,
but which was dissolved under the Irish Universities Act 1908, and
replaced by the National University of Ireland and the Queen's
University of Belfast), the precedent of Victoria has been followed. By
an act passed in 1898, of which the provisions came into force in 1900,
the university of London was reconstituted as a teaching university,
although provision was made for the continuance of the system of
examinations by "external examiners" for "external students," together
with "internal examinations" for "internal students," in which the
teachers and the external examiners of the university are associated.
The examinations in music and the final examinations in law and medicine
are carried on [1910] both for "internal" and "external" students by
"external" examiners only, who are, however, appointed on the
recommendation of boards of studies consisting mainly of London
teachers.
At the university of Dublin, examinations have been maintained both for
the B.A. and M.A. degrees, and students may be admitted to the
examinations in subjects other than divinity, law, medicine, and
engineering without attendance at university courses.
The examinations of the newer universities, the Victoria University of
Manchester, Birmingham, Liverpool, Leeds, Sheffield and Wales, are open
only to students at these universities, and are conducted by the
teachers in association with one or more external examiners for each
subject. In some universities, e.g. Manchester, the M.A. degree is given
after examination to students who have taken a pass, and without
examination to those who have taken an honours degree.
The universities which have departed furthest from the medieval system
of examinations, at any rate in appearance, are those of Germany. The
baccalaureate has disappeared, but students cannot be matriculated
without having passed the _Abiturienten-examen_ (see below), probably
the most severe of all entrance examinations (foreign students may be
exempted under certain conditions). The student desiring to proceed to
the doctorate is free from examinations thereafter until he presents his
thesis for the doctor's degree,[2] when, if it is accepted, he is
submitted to a public oral examination not only in his principal subject
(_Hauptfach_), but also as a rule in two or more collateral subjects
(_Nebenfacher_). The doctor's degree does not give the right to teach in
a faculty (_venia legendi_). To acquire this a doctor must present a
further thesis (_Habilitationsschrift_), and must deliver two lectures,
one before the faculty, followed by a discussion (_colloquium_), the
other in public; but these lectures "seem to be merely secondary and are
tending to become so more and more"; "scientific productiveness is so
sharply emphasized among the conditions for admission that it
overshadows all the rest" (Paulsen, loc. cit. p. 165).
In France the examination for the baccalaureate, though conducted in
part by university examiners, has become a school-leaving examination
(see below). The licentiateship has been preserved in the faculties of
arts, science and laws, and is in point of difficulty about equal to the
pass degree examinations of the university of London, though differing
in the nature of the tests. In the faculty of sciences, the three
subjects of examination selected may, under a recent regulation, be
taken separately. Until a few years ago the successful candidates at the
licentiateship were arranged in order of merit. For the doctorate in the
faculty of letters two theses must be submitted, of which the subject
and plan must be approved by the faculty (until recently one of them was
required to be written in Latin). Permission to print the theses is
given by the rector or vice-rector after report from one or more
professors, and they are then discussed publicly by the faculty and the
candidate (_soutenance de these_). In this public discussion the
"disputation" of the middle ages survives in its least changed form. The
literary theses required by French universities are, as a rule, volumes
of several hundred pages, and more important in character even than the
German _Habilitationsschrift_. The possession of the doctorate is a
_sine qua non_ for eligibility to a university chair, and to a
lectureship in the university of Paris.
In the faculty of sciences a candidate for the doctorate may submit two
theses, or else submit one thesis and undergo an oral examination.
For the doctorate in law, a thesis and two oral examinations are
required.
In the faculty of medicine there is no licentiateship, but for the
doctorate six examinations must be passed and a thesis submitted.
There is also a special doctorate, the "_doctorat d'Universite_,"
awarded on a thesis and an oral examination; and there are diplomas
(_Diplomes d'Etudes superieures_) awarded on dissertations and
examinations on subjects in philosophy, history and geography, classics
or modern languages, selected mainly by the candidate and approved by
the faculty.
2. _Professional Examinations._ (a) _Teaching._--University examinations
for degrees having ceased to be used as technical tests of teaching
capacity, new examinations have been devised for this purpose. The test
for German university teachers has been described above. For secondary
teachers, W. von Humboldt instituted a special examination in 1810
(Paulsen, _Gesch. des gelehrten Unterrichts_, ii. pp. 283 and 393), and
an examination for primary teachers was instituted in Prussia in 1794.
In France there is a competitive examination for secondary teachers, the
_agregation_, originally established in 1766. _Agreges_ have a right to
state employment and they alone can occupy the highest teaching post
(_chaire de professeur_) in a state secondary school, other posts being
open to licentiates. There are also examinations for primary teachers.
The tests for teachers are different for the two sexes.
In England there is no obligatory test for secondary teachers. The
universities and the College of Preceptors conduct examinations for
teaching diplomas. The Board of Education holds special examinations
(Preliminary Certificate examination and Certificate examination, &c.)
for primary teachers.
(b) _Medicine._--See MEDICAL EDUCATION.
(c) _Other Professions._--A system of professional examinations carried
on by professional bodies, in some cases with legal sanction, was
developed in England during the 19th century. Those in the following
subjects are the most important: Accountancy (Institute of Chartered
Accountants and Society of Accountants and Auditors), actuarial work
(Institute of Actuaries), music (Royal Academy of Music, Royal College
of Music, Trinity College of Music, Royal College of Organists, and the
Incorporated Society of Musicians), pharmacy (Pharmaceutical Society),
plumbing (the Plumbers' Company), surveying (Surveyors' Institution),
veterinary medicine (Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons), technical
subjects, e.g. cotton-spinning, dyeing, motor-manufacture (City & Guilds
of London Institute), architecture (Royal Institute of British
Architects), commercial subjects, shorthand (the Society of Arts and
London Chamber of Commerce), engineering (Institutions of Civil
Engineers, of Mechanical Engineers, and of Electrical Engineers).
3. _School-leaving Examinations._--The faculty of arts in medieval
universities covered secondary as well as higher education in the
subjects concerned. The division in arts subjects between secondary and
university education has been drawn at different levels in different
countries. Thus the first two years of the arts curriculum in English
and American universities correspond, roughly speaking, to the last two
years spent in a secondary school of Germany or France, and the
continental "school-leaving examinations" correspond to the intermediate
examinations of the newer English universities and to the pass
examinations for the degree at Oxford and Cambridge (Mark Pattison,
_Suggestions on Academical Organization_, 1868, p. 238, and Matthew
Arnold, _Higher Schools and Universities in Germany_, 1892, p. 209).
A tabular summary is given (see Tables I., II., III., IV.) of the
requirements of the secondary school-leaving examinations of France,
Prussia (for the nine-year secondary schools) and Scotland, and of the
university of London.
There are in England a number of school examinations which, under
prescribed conditions, also serve as school-leaving examinations, and
give entrance to certain universities, especially the Oxford and
Cambridge local examinations (both established in 1858), and the
examinations of the Oxford and Cambridge "Joint Board." A movement to
reduce the number of entrance examinations and to secure uniformity in
their standard was set on foot in 1901. In that year the General Medical
Council communicated to the Board of Education a memorial on the subject
from the Headmasters' Conference. The memorial was further communicated
to various professional bodies concerned. Conferences were held by the
consultative committee of the Board of Education in 1903, with
representatives of the universities, the Headmasters' Conference, the
Association of Head-Masters, the Association of Head-Mistresses, the
College of Preceptors, the Private Schools' Association, and with
representatives of professional bodies. The committee were of opinion
that a central board, consisting of representatives of the Board of
Education and the different examining bodies, should be established, to
co-ordinate and control the standards of the examinations, and to secure
interchangeability of certificates, &c., as soon as a sufficient number
of such bodies signified their willingness to be represented on the
board. They recommended that the examination should be conducted by
external and internal examiners, representing in each case the examining
body and the school staff respectively, and that reports on the school
work of candidates should be available for reference by the examiners
(circular of the Board of Education of 12th of July 1904).
The "accrediting" system in the United States was started by the
university of Michigan in 1871. A school desiring to be accredited is
submitted to inspection without previous notice. If the inspection is
satisfactory, the school is accredited by a university for from one to
three years, and upon the favourable report of its principal any of its
students are admitted to the university by which it has been accredited
without any entrance examination. In practice it is found that many
students whom their teachers refuse to certify are able to pass the
university entrance examination. The statistics of nine years show that
the standard of the certified students is higher than that of
non-certified students. Two hundred and fifty schools are accredited by
the university of Michigan. In 1904 it was stated that the system was
gaining favour in the east,[3] and that it had been adopted more or less
by all the eastern colleges and universities with the exception of
Harvard, Yale, Princeton and Columbia.
4. _Methods of Examination._--Examinations may test (i.) knowledge, or,
more exactly, the power of restating facts and arguments of a kind that
may be learnt by rote; (ii.) the power of doing something, e.g. of
making a _precis_ of a written document, of writing a letter or a report
on a particular subject with a particular object in view, of translating
from or into a foreign language, of solving a mathematical problem, of
criticizing a passage from a literary work, of writing an essay on an
historical or literary subject with the aid of books in a library, of
diagnosing the malady of a patient, of analysing a chemical mixture or
compound; and (the highest form under the rubric) of making an original
contribution to learning or science as the result of personal
investigation or experiment. Examinations are carried out at present by
means of (1) written papers; (2) oral examinations; (3) practical,
including in medicine clinical, tests; (4) theses; or a combination of
these.
Written.
In written examinations the candidates are, as a rule, supplied with a
number of printed questions, of which they must answer all, or a certain
proportion, within a given time, varying, as a rule, from 1-1/2 to 3
hours, the latter being the duration most generally adopted for higher
examinations in England. Whereas in France and Germany the questions are
generally few in number and require long answers, showing constructive
skill and mastery of the mother-tongue on the part of the candidates,
such "essay-papers" are comparatively rare in England. In many subjects,
the written examinations test memory rather than capacity. It has been
suggested that sets of questions to be answered in writing should as a
rule be divided into two parts: (i.) a number of questions requiring
short answers and intended to test the range of the candidate's
knowledge; (ii.) questions requiring long answers, intended to test its
depth, and the candidate's powers of co-ordination and reflection. A
necessary condition for the application of the second kind of test is
that time should be given for reflection and for rewriting, say
one-third or one-quarter of the whole time allowed. A further
distinction is important, especially in such subjects as mathematics or
foreign languages, in which it is legitimate to ask what precise power
on the part of a candidate the passing of an examination shall signify.
Owing to a prevailing confusion between tests of memory and tests of
capacity, the allowance for chance fairly applied to the former is apt
to be unduly extended to the latter. In applying tests of memory, it may
be legitimate to allow a candidate to pass who answers correctly from 30
to 50% of the questions; such an allowance if applied to a test of
capacity, such as the performance of a sum in addition, the solution of
triangles by means of trigonometrical tables, or the translation of an
easy passage from a foreign language, appears to be irrational. A
candidate who obtains only 50% of the marks in performing such
operations cannot be regarded as being able to perform them; and, if the
examination is to be treated as a test of his capacity to perform them,
he should be rejected unless he obtains full marks, less a certain
allowance (say 10, or at most 20%) in view of the more or less
artificial conditions inherent in all examinations.
Oral.
The oral examination is better suited than the written to discover the
range of a candidate's knowledge; it also serves as a test of his powers
of expression in his mother-tongue, or in a foreign language, and may be
used (as in the examination for entrance to the Osborne Naval College)
to test the important qualities (hardly tested in any other examinations
at present), readiness of wit, common-sense and nerve. It may be
objected that candidates are heavily handicapped by nervousness in oral
examinations, but this objection does not afford sufficient ground for
rejecting the test, provided that it is supplemented by others. Oral
tests are used almost invariably in medical examinations; and there is a
growing tendency to make them compulsory in dealing with modern
languages. Oral examinations are much more used abroad than in England,
where the pupils during their school years receive but little exercise
in the art of consecutive speaking.
TABLE I.--PRUSSIA: ABITURIENTEN EXAMEN
I. Name of Examination.
_Abiturienten Examen_ (established in 1788).
II. Minimum Age for Entry.
Age only limited by condition of length of school course. The usual
age is 17-18.
III. Length of Course of Study.
9 years.
Candidates who have not attended the 9 years' school course may be
admitted to the examination on special application.
IV. Subjects.
In _Gymnasium_.
Written. Oral.
German essay. Latin.
Mathematics. Greek.
Translation into Latin. English or French.
Translation from Greek into Religion.
German. History.
Mathematics.
In _Real-Gymnasium_.
Written. Oral.
German essay. Latin.
Mathematics. English.
Translation from Latin. French.
Translation from German into Physics or Chemistry.
or essay in English or Religion.
French. History.
Physics. Mathematics.
In _Ober-Realschule_.
Written. Oral.
German essay. English.
Mathematics. French.
An exercise in French and in Physics.
English (an essay in one Chemistry.
language and a translation Religion.
from the other into German). History.
Physics or Chemistry. Mathematics.
V. Co-ordination with Teaching.
The object of the examination is defined as being a test of whether
the candidate has fulfilled the aims laid down in the curricula,
&c., prescribed for a _Gymnasium_, _Real-gymnasium_, or
_Ober-realschule_, as the case may be, and the subjects of
examination are those prescribed in the curricula for the kind of
school concerned.
The report on the school work of each candidate in his various
subjects is laid before the Examining Board before the beginning of
the examination.
VI. Examiners.
The Examining Board consists of a government inspector (_der
Konigliche Kommissar_) acting as chairman, the headmaster of the
school, and the teachers of the highest classes in the school. The
inspector may nominate a deputy, who is as a rule, the headmaster of
the school.
Each teacher concerned selects for the written examination three
alternative subjects in his branch, from which, after receiving a
report thereon from the headmaster, the inspector makes a final
choice.
The papers are marked by the teachers concerned and circulated the
the whole Board of Examiners, who then decide whether individual
candidates shall be (i.) rejected, (ii.) admitted with (ii.)
admitted with oral examination, or (iii.) submitted to the oral
examination.
VII. Nature of Examination and General Remarks.
The written examination extends over four or five days. Only one
paper is given each day, for which 3 to 5-1/2 hours are allowed
(5-1/2 hours for the German essay). For essays in foreign languages
dictionaries may be used.
TABLE II.--FRANCE: BACCALAUREAT
I. Name of Examination.
_Baccalaureat de l'enseignement secondaire._
This examination has been carried on under different forms since
1808. The regulations summarized here date from 1902, when the
_baccalaureat_ described replaced the _baccalaureat-es-lettres,
baccalaureat-es-sciences_, and _baccalaureat de l'enseignement
moderne._
II. Minimum Age for Entry.
Part I., 16, or, with special permission, 15.
Part II. may not be taken within an academic year after passing Part
I.
III. Length of Course of Study.
There is no requirement of attendance. Part I. of the examination
corresponds exactly to the subjects taken in the "second cycle" of
secondary education, and Part II. to the _classe de philosophie_ and
_classe de mathematiques._
See also under V.
IV. Subjects.
Part I. is divided into four Branches, viz.:--
(1) Latin-Greek.
(2) Latin-modern languages.
(3) Latin-science.
(4) Science-modern languages.
In each Branch the examination is divided into two parts, viz.,
written and oral. The nature of the examination may be indicated by
the following requirements in Branch (1):--
Written
(i.) French composition.
(ii.) Translation from Latin.
(iii.) Translation from Greek.
Oral
(i.) Explanation of a Greek text.
(ii.) Explanation of a Latin text.
(iii.) Explanation of a French text.
(iv.) Text in a modern foreign language.
(v.) Interrogation on ancient history.
(vi.) Interrogation on modern history.
(vii.) Interrogation on geography.
(viii.) Interrogation on mathematics.
(ix.) Interrogation on physics.