id
stringlengths 22
22
| texte
stringlengths 3
1.26M
| disclaimer
stringlengths 506
512
| coords
stringlengths 0
25
⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|
kp-eb0924-076103-0810m
|
ZACATECAS, a city of Mexico, capital of the state of the same name, lies 340 miles by rail north-west of Mexico, in 22° 46' N. lat. and 102° W. long. Zacatecas, which had a population of 46,000 in 1886, is the centre of one of the oldest and most productive silver-mining districts in the republic, and the town itself stands on the rich vein discovered here by Juan de Tolosa in 1546. It lies on the great Mexican tableland, 7976 feet above the sea, in a narrow ravine surrounded by rolling hills, all containing almost inexhaustible deposits of the precious metal. Within half an hour’s walk of the centre of the town are situated twelve mines, some of which have been worked with little interruption for over three hundred years. Owing to the irregular nature of the ground and the great value of the land, the city is laid out in narrow tortuous streets, which, unlike most other Mexican towns, are lined by high houses of three and four stories. Noteworthy amongst the public buildings are the cathedral, with a finely sculptured façade, the Government palace, the city hall, the theatre, and the mint; this last, during the period from 1772 to 1865, issued silver money to the value of £41,000,000, besides £110,000 in gold. The streets, although narrow, are well paved and partly lit by electricity. Since the completion of the Central Mexican Railway to this place in 1884 it has increased in population and prosperity. From the Bufa Hill, 500 feet high, lying to the north of the city, an extensive view is commanded of the surrounding district, which is of an extremely rugged character and almost destitute of vegetation. In the neighbourhood are nine small lakes, yielding an abundance of salt and carbonate of soda. Zacatecas, which received the title of city from Philip II. in 1585, is supplied with water by a large, well-constructed aqueduct.
The state of Zacatecas lies between Coahuila and Jalisco north and south respectively, and is elsewhere conterminous with Guanajuato, Durango, and San Luis Potosi. It has an area of 25,227 square miles and a population (1882) of 422,506, of whom a preponderating proportion are Indians or mestizos. It stands at a mean altitude of over 7000 feet above sea-level, and is traversed by the Mazapil, Norillos, Guadaloupe, and other metalliferous ranges, this state ranking among the first in the republic for mineral wealth. Next to the Veta Madre of Guanajuato and the famous Comstock lode, Nevada, the Veta Grande of Zacatecas is held to be the most remarkable silver vein in North America. The chief mining districts are Zacatecas, Espiritu Santo, Chapala, Los Arcos, Norias, Ipala, Santa Lucia, Naranjal, and Santo Martino; and in 1886 about 324 mines were open (21 gold, 67 gold and silver, 167 silver alone, 15 copper, 37 lead, and 16 quicksilver). Besides its minerals the state possesses considerable agricultural resources, the southeastern parts especially being very fertile and well watered by the rivers Tlaltenango and Juchipila. Maize, wheat, fruits—such as peaches, apricots, grapes,—and all kinds of vegetables are extensively cultivated, the annual maize crop being valued at over £1,000,000, wheat at about £250,000, and the remaining crops at about £600,000. Even in the bleak and arid northern districts there are some extensive grazing-grounds, where cattle, horses, mules, sheep, and goats thrive well. Some of the slopes are well timbered, the chief species being the mountain cedar, oak, elm, ash, and cotton-wood. Besides the capital, the chief mining towns are Fresnillo (pop. 15,000), Garcia (8000), Villanueva (7000), Linos (7000), Sombrerete (6000), and Nieves (3000).
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 761 [9:24:761]
|
22 46' N 102 W
|
kp-eb0924-076104-0810m
|
ZACH, Franz Xaver, Baron von (1754-1832), astronomer, was born at Pesth in June 1754. He served for some time in the Austrian army, and afterwards lived in London from 1783 to 1786 as tutor in the house of the Saxon minister, Count Brühl. In 1786 he was appointed by Ernest II. of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha director of the new observatory on the Seeberg at Gotha, which was finished in 1791. From 1806 Zach accompanied the duke’s widow [9:24:762] on her travels in the south of Europe. He died in Paris on 2d September 1832.
Zach published Tables of the Sun (Gotha, 1792; new and improved edition, ibid., 1804), and numerous papers on geographical subjects, particularly on the geographical positions of many towns and places, which he determined on his travels with a sextant. His principal importance is, however, as editor of three scientific journals of great value,— Allgemeine Geographische Ephemeriden (4 vols., Gotha, 1798-99), Monatliche Correspondenz zur Beförderung der Erd-und Himmels-Kunde (28 vols., Gotha, 1800-13, from 1807 edited by Lindenau), and Correspondance Astronomique, Géographique, Hydrographique, et Statistique (Genoa, 1818-26, 14 vols., and one number of the 15th suppressed at the instigation of the Jesuits).
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 761 [9:24:761]
| |
kp-eb0924-076201-0811m
|
ZACHARIAE VON LINGENTHAL, Karl Salomo (1769-1843), German jurist, was born on 14th September 1769 at Meissen in Saxony. His family came from Austria. His father was a lawyer; his mother, a Hessian, was the daughter of a pastor. Of feeble health and long the only child of his parents, Karl did not go to school until the age of fifteen. He afterwards studied philosophy, history, mathematics, and philology at the university of Leipsic. In 1792 he went to Wittenberg as tutor to Count zur Lippe, and whilst there he began to study law. There he came greatly under the influence of Kant, traces of whose teaching remain even in his latest writings. In 1794 Zachariae became a privat-docent, lecturing on canon law, in 1798 extraordinary professor, and in 1802 ordinary professor of feudal law. From that time to his death in 1843, with the exception of a short period in which public affairs occupied him, he poured out a succession of works covering the whole field of jurisprudence and extending into other adjoining regions. He was also indefatigable in the labour of his chair, and he was the editor of, or a copious contributor to, more than one periodical. In 1807 he went to Heidelberg, then beginning its period of splendour as a school of law. There, resisting many calls to Göttingen, Berlin, and other universities, he remained until his death. In 1811 he married under romantic circumstances. His wife died in four years.
In 1820 he was elected representative of the university in the first Baden chamber, and four years later was made a member of the second. From 1825 to 1829 he devoted much time to political affairs and to the preparation of a code. He was a constitutional reformer, averse to great or violent changes. He loved to cite the saying of the Roman emperor to his adopted son,—“Imperaturus es hominibus qui nec totam servitutem pati possent nec totam libertatem,”—“a truth,” he observes in one of his many brochures (Die Souverainetätsrechte der Krone Würtemberg, Ac.), “which no Government and no people should ever forget.” In 1842 he was ennobled with the title of Von Lingenthal. To the last days of his life he toiled with the ardour of a young student. His fame extended beyond Germany. The German universities then enjoyed by tacit consent a jurisdiction in regard to legal questions of international importance which had come down from the Middle Ages; and Zachariae was often consulted as to questions arising in Germany, France, and England. Elaborate “opinions,” some of them forming veritable treatises,— e.g., on Sir Augustus d’Este’s claim to the dukedom of Sussex, Baron de Bode’s claim as an English subject to a share in the French indemnity, the famous dispute as to the debts due to the elector of Hesse-Cassel, confiscated by Napoleon, and the constitutional position of the Mecklenburg landowners,—were composed by Zachariae. He died on 27th March 1843, leaving a son who has worthily continued his father’s labours in jurisprudence.
Zachariae’s true history is in his writings, which are extremely numerous and multifarious. They deal with almost every branch of jurisprudence; they are philosophical, historical, and practical; they relate to Boman, canon, German, and French law; and his curiosity extended to the writings of his contemporaries, Bentham and Austin. A work on Sulla, in whom he sees another Napoleon, and an unpublished translation of his favourite Tacitus were some of the fruits of his restless activity. The first book of much consequence whieh he published was Die Einheit des Staats und der Kirche mit Rücksicht auf die Deutsche Reichsverfassung (1797), one of the most original of his works, displaying the writer’s power of analysis, his skill in making a complicated set of facts appear to be deductions from a few principles,—a study even now well worth reading. His theme is the relation of religion to the state. Zachariae undertakes to show that with Christianity three systems only are possible, — (1) what he calls the system of hierarchy, according to which the state is under the power of the church, the object of the former being subordinated to that of the latter; (2) the territorial system, according to which the church is subject to the power of the state; and (3) what he terms the collegiate system, according to which neither of the two societies is subject to the other, and both have different objects in view. The consequence of the adoption of these various systems—the principles of law which must be accepted according as one or the other of them is supreme—he deduces with much acumen. While much of his work has lost its interest, it remains a luminous example of the application of the deductive process to historical investigation, a proof that legal conceptions may often serve to give unity to the complex facts of history. In 1805 appeared Versuch einer allgemeinen Hermeneutik des Rechts. Neither in English nor in Scotch legal literature is there any book, so far as known to the present writer, covering the field to which it relates. It is an attempt to found on the rules of grammar and logic a system of interpretation applicable to all systems of law. The weak part of the book is that, like so many of Zachariae’s works, it stops short at the point where the inquiry would be most fruitful. Illustrations are taken from Roman law; we miss any adequate treatment of the problems which the forms of modern legislation raise. In 1806 appeared Die Wissenschaft der Gesetzgebung, a fragment, which is a curious outcome of the French Revolution. Impressed by the overthrow or decay of the forces which had hitherto held society together, he looked about for a better substitute for them than politique de circonstance offered. Many of Zachariae’s maxims seem fanciful; there are divisions which do not elucidate, and distinctions made apparently for their own sake. But the work is interesting; it shows that the author was groping after the principle of utility as the guide of the legislator; the study of very different facts had brought him independently to much the same conclusion as Bentham had reached. Zachariae’s last work of importance was Vierzig Bucher vom Staate, published in 1839-42, with the motto non omnis moriar. This was his favourite work, and is the one to which his admirers point as his enduring monument. Undoubtedly it contains much erudition and, what is rarer, many original ideas as to the future of the state and of law. It has been compared to L'Esprit des Lois, and Zachariae, in spite of his pedantry, has some tincture of the discursive brilliancy of Montesquieu. It covers no small part of the field of Buckle’s first volume of the History of Civilisation. The reader will, however, seek in vain for any order or system in some of the chapters of Vierzig Bücher vom Staate. He was recasting many of his ideas as he wrote, and the book ends before the process is completed. Among the most esteemed of the works of Zachariae is that on Staatsrecht, of the originality of which he was proud, and his treatise on the Code Napoléon, a marvellous work, considering it was composed by a German professor who did not much concern himself with this subject till somewhat late in life. There are no fewer than three French editions of his book, and it has been translated into Italian. Zachariae edited with Mittermaier the Kritische Zeitschrift für Rechtswissenschaft und Gesetzgebung des Auslandes, and the introduction which he wrote illustrates his wide reading and his constant desire for new light upon old problems.
Zachariae exhibits the best and the worst sides of German jurisprudence: there is the desire not to base generalizations or conclusions on the peculiarities of any one system, but to master the whole facts. He does not assume a distinction or classification of Roman law to be necessarily scientific. He seeks real reasons; he avoids the English lawyer’s favourite fallacy of proving idem per idem, of seeking to show the reasonableness of anything by saying the same thing again in different language. Though a scholar, Zachariae has not the weakness of exaggerating the importance of whatever is rare or unpublished, and he has no delight in barren erudition. Himself a learned pandectist, he had cast aside his countrymen’s proneness to find all things in the Corpus Juris. His books, however, have the failings of so many German works on law. They want actuality; they have little relation to the facts of life. They are leavened by metaphysics—often very bad metaphysics, and not always by the same system. Nor is he a clear thinker. We are never sure what is his notion of the province of jurisprudence; his favourite idea appears to be that law creates among men an order similar to that which exists in the physical world, and that it is a security for the freedom of man’s will. The influence of Kant is observable in all his works. In his later that of Hegel also appears; [9:24:763] and his mental changes do not end there. He does not indeed say, “Back to Montesquieu; study facts, the simplest and primitive facts above all; adopt his method, and improve upon it;” but that is the wise spirit of some of his later works. Unfortunately he <lid not fulfil the promise which they contain. He had not learned to distinguish sharply between the science and the practical art of jurisprudence, and we are never certain in what capacity he speaks. He had not conceived clearly the truth that society forms one whole, that the phenomena of law at any given time or place are not accidents but the outcome of a long train of events, that, so regarded, they are as much susceptible of scientific treatment as the facts of language, and that a treatise on botany or, still more, one on comparative philology is a better guide to what jurisprudence may yet be than a volume of Hugo or even Austin. It was made a reproach to Zachariae that he changed his opinions. He did so; it was a sign of his single-mindedness and restless curiosity. It is also one of the reasons why his works are now little read. They opened paths, and they were superseded by others which could not have existed without them.
There is no adequate account of Zachariae and his works; the best are Robert von Mohl’s Geschichte u. Literatur der Staatswissenschaften (1855-58) and Charles Brocher’s K. S. Zachariae, sa Vie et ses Oeuvres (1870). (J. M†.)
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 762 [9:24:762]
| |
kp-eb0924-076301-0812m
|
ZACHARIAS, St, pope from 741 to 752, was a Greek by birth, and appears to have been on intimate terms with Gregory III., whom he succeeded (November 741). Contemporary history dwells chiefly on his great personal influence with the Lombard king Luitprand, and with his successor Rachis; it was largely through his tact in dealing with these princes in a variety of emergencies that the exarchate of Ravenna was rescued from becoming part of the Lombard kingdom. A correspondence, of considerable extent and of great interest, between Zacharias and St Boniface, the apostle of Germany, is still extant, and shows how great was the influence of this pope on events then passing in France and Germany: he encouraged the deposition of Childeric, and it was with his sanction that Boniface crowned Pippin as king of the Franks at Soissons in 752. Zacharias is stated to have remonstrated with the emperor Constantine Copronymus on the part he had taken in the iconoclastic controversy. He died 14th March 752, and was succeeded by Stephen II.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 763 [9:24:763]
| |
kp-eb0924-076302-0812m
|
ZAIRE,^[1. Zaire is a Portuguese corruption of a native word. It is doubtful whether Congo was first the name of the kingdom or of the river; according to Janko ( Petermann’s Mitteilungen, 1888), the word probably means originally a “spear.” Stanley called the river the Livingstone; but this designation has not become popular. ] or Congo, designations of the river now generally known under the latter name (see vol. i. pl. II.) This river system occupies a large part of equatorial Africa,— 1,540,000 square miles according to a probable estimate; and in the length of its course (some 2900 miles) and the volume of its discharge (1,500,000 or at least 1,200,000 cubic feet per second) the river ranks among the most important in the world.^[2. Dr Murray of the “Challenger” Expedition estimates the mean annual discharge of the Congo at 419 ∙291 cubic miles, making it in this respect only second to the Amazons ( Scot. Geog. Mag., 1887)∙ The annual rainfall of the basin he puts at 1213∙344 cubic miles. ] The history of the exploration of the Congo basin is a matter of yesterday and to-day; and in several directions the exact limits, with the relations of the affluents to the system, have still to be determined. The mouth of the river lies on the west coast of the continent in 6° S. lat. and 12° 25' E. long. The head-waters of its most eastern stream (Malagarazi) rise only 370 miles from the Indian Ocean. The course of the main river describes a vast bow, the central portion of which lies as far north as 2° N. lat.
To the north of the Lokinga or Mushinga Mountains, a range, reaching about 6000 feet in altitude, which sends its southward drainage to the Zambesi, lies Bangweolo (Bemba, Shuia, or Chama) Lake, at a height of 3700 feet above the sea according to Livingstone, or 4300 according to Giraud. It has a very irregular outline. Nowhere more than 18 or 20 feet deep, it is nevertheless fed by several large rivers, of which the Chambesi or Chasi ranks first. Livingstone, who discovered the Chambesi in 1867
in 10° 34' S. lat., describes it as “flooded with clear water, not more than 40 yards wide, showing abundant animal life in its waters and on its banks.” Its head-streams drain the country between the south end of Lake Tanganyika and the north end of Lake Nyassa.
From the south-west extremity of Lake Bangweolo issues the Luapula, which is generally regarded as the main headstream of the Congo. It is about 20 feet deep and 200 yards wide. Our knowledge of its course is still imperfect, though from Giraud (1883) and Capello and Ivens (1884-85) we learn that it is interrupted by dangerous rapids (at Mambirima, &c.); and there is no doubt that it is gradually deflected northwards and is the main affluent of Lake Moero. This extensive basin is quite different from Lake Bangweolo: its southern end is situated in a low marshy plain and the difference between high and low water level is as much as the whole depth of Bangweolo. From north to south the total length is upwards of 90 miles, though during the rainy season vast additional tracts to the south are under water. Several considerable affluents fall into the lake from the east. The river has not been followed between Lake Moero and Lake Lanji; but near the latter it is known to receive the Kamirondo from the left and the Lukugu from the right.
The basin of the Tanganyika is a “vast chasm enclosed within mountain ranges or cliffs, often rising steeply from the shore and terminating in elevated plateaus,” with depths of 300 or 350 fathoms. The total length is 380 miles; and, while the northern end narrows to about 10 miles, the width towards the centre is from 30 to 50 miles. The islands are few and unimportant, and, except at the great peninsula of Ubwari on the west coast, near the northern end of the lake, the shore line is remarkably regular. The water is perfectly fresh. Of the various settlements on Tanganyika the most important is Ujiji (4° 54' S. lat. on the east coast), which formerly gave its name to the lake. “It is the terminus,” in the words of Captain Hore, “of what for many years was the only safe and well-known route from the East Coast of Africa to the lake, and an important station upon a line of traffic, geographically suited and by common consent adopted as convenient, right across the continent.” Another point of interest is Karema (in 6° 50' S. lat, on the eastern shore), originally a station of the African International Association. A lighthouse has also been erected on Kavala Island.
The connexion of Tanganyika with the system of the Congo is one of the most curious points in Central African hydrography. When Livingstone and Stanley were at Ujiji in 1871 the level of the lake was low. Between that date and 1874 it appears to have risen greatly, as Commander Cameron found that the Lukuga (mouth in 5° 35' S. lat.) was acting as an overflow pipe. In 1876 Stanley obtained further proof of the increase of the lake: three palm-trees which had stood in the market place of Ujiji in 1871 were then 100 feet in the lake, and the sand beach over which he had walked with Livingstone was over 200. But his careful examination of the Lukuga outlet showed (curiously enough) that there was no distinct outflow from the lake, though he thought it pretty certain that the Lukuga had at one time been an effluent and that it was about to resume its old function. In March 1879 Captain Hore placed a gauge on the shore at Ujiji. By the 27th of May he found the waters had fallen 2 feet, and in August 1880 they reached a point 10 feet 4½ inches below the original mark. They were still subsiding in 1886.
The Lukuga outlet seems to be a comparatively modern formation. The portion towards Tanganyika appears to have been originally a stream flowing into the lake, all its affluents still having a lakeward direction, while the section towards the Congo was a minor tributary of that river. At what period and by what circumstances the affluent was turned into an emissary it is hard to determine. Stanley proposed the bold theory that Tanganyika at one time consisted of two divisions, one at a higher level than the other, and that the sudden destruction of the barrier caused the lower lake to rise with such violence as to force a passage up the Lukuga and across the ridges to the Congo. Captain Storms suggests instead that Lake Hikwa or Rikwa (discovered by Joseph Thomson in 1880), which lies 50 miles to the east of Tanganyika, was more probably the source of the inundation. A visit to the plain of Katawi convinced him that this must at one time have formed part of Lake Hikwa, then about three times its present size. About 12 leagues N.N. E. of Karema he says there is a gap in the chain which separates the basin of the smaller from that of the larger lake. Not improbably, however, no such cataclysm as that proposed by Stanley or Storms is really necessary to account for the Lukuga phenomenon[9:24:764]. The very fact that, in the short space of time during which the Tanganyika has been observed by Europeans, its level has undergone such considerable alteration seems to suggest that a series of unusually rainy seasons may have been the source of all the inundation that was requisite.^[3. See Bull. Soc. Roy. Belge de Géog., 1886, or Scot. Geog. Mag., 1886. ]
Below Lake Lanji there is another portion of the stream still unexplored; but from the junction of the Luama, a river 400 yards wide at its mouth (about 5° S. lat.), the whole course of the Congo down to the Atlantic (1800 miles) is known. At Nyangwe the channel is about a mile wide, with (according to Stanley) a volume of 230,000 cubic feet per second. As it flows northward it receives the Elila, the Ulinde, the Lowa, and the Munduku Lilu, all of moderate importance. The first point of much interest is the series of cataracts known as the Stanley Falls, situated at the equator. The first cataract occurs just after the Congo has received the Black river and the Leopold river; about 6 miles farther down follow in somewhat rapid succession the second, third, fourth, and fifth; and then the river is divided into two by the large inhabited island of Asama. The sixth cataract, caused by a broad dyke of greenish shale, does not occur for upwards of 20 miles, and between the sixth and seventh there is a distance of 25 miles. At the last of these the Congo is about 1300 yards broad, of which width 40 yards is occupied by the right branch, 760 yards by the island of Wemya, and 500 yards by the main river. The fall is only about 10 feet; but the enormous mass of water, and the narrow limits to which it is suddenly contracted, make it much more imposing than many a far loftier cataract. After passing the falls the first great left-hand affluent is the Lubilash or Boloko, first ascended by Grenfell in1884 to the neighbourhood of 1° 30'. Next we come to an important right-hand affluent, the Aruwimi, Arawhimi, or Biyerre, which is now recognized as identical with the Nepoko, discovered by Junker in the south of the Monbuttu territory. About 24° 30' E. lat. this stream, which discharges 158,850 cubic feet per second, is interrupted by the Yam-buga Falls; but above the falls Stanley in 1887 found it navigable for his steel boat. Another right-hand affluent of similar rank is the Itimbiri or Loika, ascended in 1884 by Grenfell for 100 miles, as far as the Lubi Falls. No other tributary of equal importance is known to exist till we come to the Lulongo, about 45 miles north of the equator, formed by the junction of the Lopuri and the Masinga, which drain the country to the south of the great bend of the river. The Lopuri is 500 yards wide at the confluence and has a depth of from 7 to 8 feet. The Lulongo is 500 yards wide at its mouth and higher up occupies a channel from one-half to three-quarters of a mile in width. According to Von François, it discharges 494,200 cubic feet per second. It was ascended in 1885 by Grenfell, who describes it as commercially the most important affluent of the Congo, on account of the value of its ivory and slave trade. Just to the north of the equator is the junction of the Juapa or Chuapa, which Grenfell has followed as far east as 23° E. long., a distance of 400 miles. This is Stanley’s Black river. An unusual amount of geographical interest attaches to the next Congo tributary—the Ubangi or Mobangi; if the latest reports are to be trusted, it is the recipient of the waters of the Welle-Makua, the river discovered by Schweinfurth in 1870, which has ever since been one of the hydrographic problems of the time.^[4. For the discussion of the Welle problem, see Mouvement Géographique, 1886, Janko’s resumé of theories in Scot. Geogr. Mag., 1888, and Wills’s criticism of the same. ] Grenfell ascended the Ubangi in for some distance above the rapids of Zongo, which are formed by the river striking athwart a line of hills running north-west and south-east, with peaks from 600 to 700 feet above the level of the stream. At this point the breadth is reduced to about 800 yards. In 1886 M. van Gèle failed in his attempt to surmount the Zongo rapids; but in 1888, according to the latest reports, he succeeded in advancing sufficiently far up the river (which turns eastward at the rapids) to prove its identity with the Welle-Makua. By this discovery the limits of the Congo basin are carried eastward as far as within 40 miles of the Nile at Wadelai—the Welle being mainly formed of the Kibali, a stream about 80 yards wide, whose head-waters rise in that neighbourhood.^[5. See map illustrating the journeys of Dr W. Junker, Proc. Roy. Geogr. Soc., 1887. ] Quite a multitude of secondary streams join the upper course of the Ubangi, and it continues to receive accessories from the north and west till it merges in the longer river, into which it is calculated to pour about 529,500 cubic feet per second. Its last righthand tributary probably drains the Tukki swamp in 13 E. long. The Nghiri Muinda or Loij, a comparatively small river draining the peninsula between the Ubangi and the Congo, joins the former about 30' N. lat., with a current 100 yards wide and from 15 to 20 feet deep. It was ascended by the “Henry Reed” in 1886 as far as Mikutu (1° 20' N. 1at.), where the stream, still 9 feet deep, was found to be formed of a number of small channels issuing from a swampy forest. The Ibangi, a right-hand tributary of the Ubangi, was also navigated for 60 miles, to a spot where the depth was still 10 feet; but the passage was obstructed by a barrier of tree trunks. The ascent of the Lobay, which is about 200 yards wide and 13 feet deep at its junction with the Ubangi in 3° 50' N. lat., was interrupted at a distance of 40 miles by a three-foot fall.
A short distance below the confluence of the Ubangi and Congo there enters from the left the emissary of Mantumba Lake, a considerable basin discovered by Stanley in 1883 and since examined by W. H. Bentley in the missionary ship “Peace.” When the Congo is in flood there is a back-flow into the lake, and, as the whole country is very flat, it is quite possible that there is a connexion both with the Uruki and Bussera, on the one hand, and with Lake Leopold II., on the other. This latter lake is much larger, and is certainly connected southward with the Lukinje or Lukatta, a tributary of the Kassai.
In its further course the Congo is joined by a number of moderate-sized streams from the west. Below Lukolela it spreads out into a kind of river lake 20 to 25 kil. (12½ to 15½ miles) wide, and along its left bank extends a swampy region, the chain of low wood-covered hills which has hitherto confined the valley retiring for a mile or two. In 3° 15' S. lat. it receives its last great affluent—the Kassai or Kwa, which has recently been proved to be the most important of the southern or left-hand, as the Ubangi is the most important of the northern or right-hand, tributaries. The Kassai rises to the south of 12' S. lat. and flows north through Muata Yamvo’s kingdom. In its upper course it possibly receives an emissary from Lake Dilolo, which also sends a branch south to the Zambesi. As it advances northwards it is joined by a large number of streams, all generally flowing northward. The Kassai enters the Congo in 3° 10' S. lat., with a depth of 25 to 80 feet and a breadth of 600 yards, at a height of 942 feet above the sea. The exploration of the system was carried out by Wissmann, Wolf, Von François, and Mueller in 1883-85. The Kassai itself has been ascended as far as the Wissmann Fall in 5° 40' S. lat., and its course has been struck at Digundu in 10° S. lat. The Lulua, which joins it from the right, is known as high up as Kangombe Fall; it is there about 200 yards wide; but it does not become truly navigable till it is joined by the Luebo. The San-kuru, at one time supposed to flow directly into the Congo, [9:24:765] enters the Kassai by two arms, 820 feet and 200 feet in breadth, in 4° 17' S. lat. and 20° 15' E. long., its bright yellow waters forming a strong contrast with the brown of the larger stream. The Kuango, a fine stream, with its head-waters in the same district as those of the Kassai, flows in a wonderfully straight course north to join that river in 17° 30' E. long. It was ascended by Mechow in 1880 as far as the rocky ledge at Kikamshi or Kinganshi; and, though it is only 3 feet high, the same barrier prevented the ascent of Grenfell’s steamer in 1887.
For 87 miles after receiving the Kassai or Kwa the Congo flows in a deep gorge, between banks sometimes 700 feet high. In 4° 5' S. lat. it enters Stanley Pool, an island-studded lake 1147 feet above the sea, expanding southward of the main course of the river. Its rim is “formed by sierras of peaked and picturesque mountains, ranging on the southern side from 1000 feet to 3000 feet in height.” The banks offer considerable variety in character. A striking object on the north bank is the Dover Cliffs, so named by Stanley from their white and glistening appearance, produced, however, not by chalk but by silver sand, the subsidence of which into the water renders approach to the bank sometimes dangerous. Towards the lower end of the lake the country on both sides becomes comparatively low and flat, and at places swampy. On the south side, however, stands the great red cliff of Kallina Point (about 50 feet high), so named after an Austrian lieutenant drowned there in 1882. Round the point rushes a strong current 7½ knots an hour, difficult to stem even for a steamer. On the river, as it leaves the Pool, are situated (south side) Leopoldville, founded by Stanley in 1881, and Brazzaville, a station established by the French explorer De Brazza. Below Stanley Pool the Congo begins to break through the coast ranges, and forms a long series of rapids and falls, often enclosed between rocky shores, and even cliffs. Among the more important falls are those named Mahmey, Zinga, Ntambo, Uataka, Itunzima, Isan-gila, Ngoma, and Yellala. At Yellala, just above Vivi, the river escapes into the lowlands and is navigable for the rest of its journey to the sea (113 miles). Below Borna (5° 48' S. lat.) it widens out and is interrupted by numerous islands; but it does not break up into several channels so as to form a delta, though there are various creeks that appear as if they might yet become deltaic outlets. Between Banana Point on the north and Shark Point on the south the mouth of the Congo has a width of 7 miles. At Banana Point (at which there is not a vestige of the plant whose name it bears) there is fair harbourage for sea-going vessels. Shark Point is also known as Padron Point, from the remains of a stone pillar (padrão) erected by the Portuguese explorer Diogo Cão (visited by Burton, 1863; by Daunett, 1887).
The exploration of the Congo system has been accompanied and followed by one of the most remarkable political movements of modern times. On 15th September 1876 the International African Association was constituted, under the presidency of Leopold II., king of the Belgians, for the purpose of devising the best means of opening up equatorial Africa to civilization. Later on (25th November 1878) was founded under the same auspices a Comité d’Etudes du Haut Congo, which afterwards became known as the International Association of the Congo. It was as an agent of this association that Mr Stanley undertook his epoch-making ascent of the river in 1879. In September the first permanent station of the association was founded at Vivi;^[6. See list of stations—some of which have been since abandoned— in Scot. Geogr. Mag., 1885. ] in December the second at Jangila; and in May 1881 the third at Manyanga. The association was recognized as an independent territorial government by the United States in April 1884 and by Germany in November of the same year. An international conference for the regulation of the relations of the new state and the various European Governments was held at Berlin under the presidency of Prince Bismarck (15th November 1884-26th February 1885). The permanent neu trality of the Congo State territory, freedom of commerce in the Congo basin, and the abolition of the slave trade were among the main points established by the plenipotentiaries. In the close of 1884 and the early part of 1885 the association was recognized by England (16th December 1884), Italy, Austria-Hungary, the Netherlands, France, &c. In April 1885 the Belgian chamber of representatives authorized King Leopold to become sovereign of the new state—the union between Belgium and the Congo to be purely personal. The total area of the Independent State of the Congo, as it is officially designated, is estimated at 807,125 square miles, and its population may be about 40,000,000. It has a very limited coast-line, being hemmed in by French territory on the north and by Portuguese territory on the south. The southern limit is a conventional line from Nokki (on the south bank of the river below Vivi) across the continent to Langi Lake; the northern limit follows the fourth parallel of N. lat. from 17° to 30° E. long. French territory occupies all the north bank of the river from Ngombi (15 E. long.) up to Lukolela. In 1888 the state maintained 146 white officials, and had a force of upwards of 1000 native soldiers (Zanzibaris, Haussas, and Bangalas). It has four steamers on the lower Congo and five on the upper. The value of the commerce is as yet only £560,000, the principal exports being india-rubber, ivory, coffee, palm nuts and oil, copal, and wax. As to the possibility of developing the country into a great consumer of European goods, there has been much and bitter discussion; at the present stage it is admitted that it has no native product of value in sufficient quantity to pay for a large importation. The river, however, has recently been proved navigable for sea-going vessels as far as the capital, Boma, and no serious difficulties have been met by the engineers engaged in surveying a railway from the lower Congo up to Stanley Pool.
See Stanley, The Dark Continent and The Congo ; Johnson, The Congo to Bolobo; Thy, Au Congo et au Kasai, 1888; Coquithat, Sur le Haut Congo, 1888; Wissmann, Wolf, &c., Im Innern Afrikas, 1888.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 763 [9:24:763]
| |
kp-eb0924-076501-0814m
|
ZALEUCUS. See Locri.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 765 [9:24:765]
| |
kp-eb0924-076502-0814m
|
ZAMBESI, the most important river on the East Coast of Africa (see vol. i. pl. II.), and the fourth largest on the continent, drains during its course of about 1200 miles an area of 600,000 square miles. Its head-streams, which have not yet been fully explored, are the Leeambye or Iambaji, rising in Cazembe’s country; the Lungebungo, which descends from the Mossamba Mountains; and the Leeba river, from the marshy Lake Dilolo (4740 feet), situated between 10° and 12° S. lat. and 22° and 23° E. long. These three rivers, reinforced by the Nhengo, unite to form the upper Zambesi (Leeambye), which flows at first southwards and slightly eastwards through the Barotse valley, then turns prominently to the east near its junction with the Chobe (Chuando or Linianti), and passes over the Victoria Falls. Thence, as the middle reach of the Zambesi, the river sweeps north-east towards Zumbo and the Kebrabassa rapids above Tete, and finally forms the lower Zambesi, which curves southwards until it reaches the Indian Ocean at 18° 50' S. lat. Fed chiefly from the highland country which stretches from Lake Nyassa to inner Angola, its chief tributaries are the Loangwa and the Shire, the last an important river draining out of Lake Nyassa, and which in the dry season contains probably as great a volume of water as the Zambesi, and is much more navigable. Except for an interruption of 70 miles at the Murchison cataracts, the Shiré is open throughout its entire length to the lake.
On the whole the Zambesi has a gentle current, and flows through a succession of wide fertile valleys and richly wooded plains; but, owing to the terrace-like structure of the continent, the course of the river is interrupted from point to point by cataracts and rapids. These form serious, and in some cases insurmountable, hindrances to navigation. Those on the lower Zambesi begin with its delta. The bar here was long held to be impassable, except to vessels of the shallowest draught; but the difficulty was exaggerated partly through ignorance and partly in the interests of the Portuguese settlement of Quilimane, which, before the merits of the Kongone entrance were understood, had been already established on the Qua-qua river, 60 miles to the north. The Zambesi is now known to have four mouths, the Milambe to the [9:24:766] west, the Kongone, the Luabo, and the Timbwe. The best of these, the Kongone, has altered and the channel improved recently. There are at least 18 feet of water on the bar at high water neap tides; and steamers drawing 15 feet, and sailing vessels drawing 3 feet less, have no difficulty in entering. The deep water continues only a short distance; and, after Mazaro (60 miles) is reached, where the river has already dwindled to the breadth of a mile, the channel is precariously open in the dry season as far as Senna (120 miles from the mouth) for vessels drawing 4½ feet. Up to this point navigation could only be successfully and continuously carried on by vessels of much lighter draught—stern-wheelers for preference with a draught of little more than 18 inches. About 90 miles from Senna the river enters the Lupata gorge, the impetuous current contracting between walls to a width of scarcely 200 yards. Passing Tete (240 miles from the mouth with a smooth course), the channel becomes dangerous at Kebrabassa, 90 miles farther on. From the Kebra-bassa rapids upwards, and past the Victoria Falls, there are occasional stretches of navigable water extending for considerable distances, while the upper Zambesi with its confluents and their tributaries forms a really fine and extensive waterway. Like the Nile, the Zambesi is visited by annual inundations, during which the whole country is flooded and many of the minor falls and rapids are then obliterated.
The chief physical feature of the Zambesi is the Mosi-oa-tunya (“smoke sounds there”) or Victoria Falls, admitted to be one of the noblest waterfalls in the world. The cataract is bounded on three sides by ridges 300 or 400 feet high, and these, along with the many islands dotted over the stream, are covered with sylvan vegetation. The falls, according to Livingstone, are caused by a stupendous crack or rent, with sharp and almost unbroken edges, stretching right across the river in the hard black basalt which here forms the bed. The cleft is 360 feet in sheer depth and close upon a mile in length. Into this chasm, of more than twice the depth of Niagara, the river rolls with a deafening roar, sending up vast columns of spray, which are visible for a distance of 20 miles. Unlike Niagara, the Mosi-oa-tunya does not terminate in an open gorge, the river immediately below the fall being blocked at 80 yards distance by the opposing side of the (supposed) cleft running parallel to the precipice which forms the waterfall. The only outlet is a narrow channel cut in this barrier at a point 1170 yards from the western end of the chasm and some 600 from its eastern, and through this the Zambesi, now only 20 or 30 yards wide, pours for 120 yards before emerging into the enormous zig-zag trough which conducts the river past the basalt plateau.
The region drained by the Zambesi may be represented as a vast broken-edged plateau 3000 or 4000 feet high, composed in the remote interior of metamorphic beds and fringed with the igneous rocks of the Victoria Falls. At Shupanga, on the lower Zambesi, thin strata of grey and yellow sandstones, with an occasional band of limestone, crop out on the bed of the river in the dry season, and these persist beyond Tete, where they are associated with extensive seams of coal. Gold is also known to occur in several places.
The higher regions of the Zambesi have only been visited by one or two explorers; and the lower, though nominally in possession of the Portuguese since the beginning of the 16th century, are also comparatively little known. The Barotse valley or valley of the upper Zambesi is a vast pastoral plain, 3300 feet above sea-level, about 189 miles in length and 30 to 35 broad. Though inundated in the rainy season, it is covered with villages and supports countless herds of cattle. The Lirinas who inhabit it' are clothed with skins, work neatly in ivory, and live upon milk, maize, and sweet potatoes. In the neighbourhood of the falls the tsetse fly abounds, so that the Batoka people who live there, and who are the only arboriculturists in the country, live upon the products of their gardens. Zumbo, on the north bank, and Chicova, opposite on the southern side (500 miles above the delta), were the farthest inland of the Portuguese East African settlements, and are well placed for commerce with the natives. Founded by Pereira, a native of Goa, these settlements were ultimately allowed to go to ruins; but Zumbo has been recently re-occupied. The once celebrated gold mines of Parda Pemba are in the vicinity. The only other Portuguese settlements on the Zambesi are Tete and Senna. Tete, formerly a large and important place, now nearly in ruins, still possesses a fort and several good tiled stone and mud houses. Thither Portuguese goods, chiefly wines and provisions, are carried by means of canoes. The exports, which include ivory, gold dust, wheat, and groundnuts, are limited owing to the difficulty of transport; but this difficulty is not insurmountable, for Tete has been twice visited by small steam vessels. Senna, farther down the river, a neglected and unhealthy village, has suffered much from political mismanagement, and has ceaseless troubles with the Landeens or Zulus, who own the southern bank of the river and collect in force every year to exact a heavy tribute-money. The industrial possibilities of the lower Zambesi, and indeed of the whole river-system, are enormous. India-rubber, indigo, archil, beeswax, and calumba root are plentiful, and oil seeds and the sugar-cane could be produced in sufficient quantity to supply the whole of Europe.
The Zambesi region was known to the mediaeval geographers as the empire of Monomotapa, and the course of the river, as well as the position of Lakes N’gami and Nyassa, was filled in with a rude approximation to accuracy in the earlier maps. These were probably constructed from Arab information. The first European to visit the upper Zambesi was Livingstone in his exploration from Bechuanaland between 1851 and 1853. Two or three years later he descended the Zambesi to its mouth and in the course of this journey discovered the Victoria Falls. In 1859, accompanied by Dr Kirk (now Sir John Kirk), Livingstone ascended the river as far as the falls, after tracing the course of its main tributary the Shire and discovering Lake Nyassa. The mouths of the Zambesi were long claimed exclusively by the Portuguese, but in 1888 the British Government opened negotiations with Portugal to have the river declared free to all nations. (H. D.)
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 765 [9:24:765]
| |
kp-eb0924-076601-0815m
|
ZAMORA, an inland province of Spain, one of the three into which the former province of Leon has since 1833 been divided, is bounded on the W. by Tras-os-Montes (Portugal) and Orense, on the N. by Leon, on the E. by Valladolid, and on the S. by Salamanca; its area is 4135 square miles. It is traversed from east to west by the Douro, which receives within the province the Valderaduey and the Esla on the right and the Guareña on the left; the Tormes also skirts the south-western boundary for some 25 miles. Except in the north-west and west, where it is entered by spurs from the Cantabrian chain (Sierra de la Culebra and Sierra de Pena Negra), the province is flat; its lowest point is 1070 feet above sea-level. Its plains, especially the “tierra de campo” formed by the valley of the Esla, yield large quantities of grain and pulse; wine and flax are also produced; and on the higher grounds large numbers of merino sheep are fed. The industries of Zamora are unimportant. The province is traversed by no railway except that connecting its capital with Medina del Campo on the northern line. There are eight partidos judiciales and 300 ayuntamientos; besides Zamora (see below), the capital, there is only one town, the historic city of Toro (7754), with a population exceeding 5000. The total population of the province in 1877 was 250,000.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 766 [9:24:766]
| |
kp-eb0924-076602-0815m
|
ZAMORA, capital of the above province, is situated 2000 feet above sea-level, on the right bank of the Douro (here crossed by a bridge of seventeen pointed arches) a little below its junction with the Valderaduey, 57 miles by rail west by north from Medina del Campo and 182 miles north-west from Madrid. The population in 1877 was 13,632. It has a small but fine Romanesque cathedral (completed about 1174) and an ancient castle, as well as several other interesting churches of the 12th century. It is the seat of a seminary and an academy of engineering, and has unimportant linen and woollen manufactures.
In the early period of the Christian re-conquest Zamora, from its position on the north of the Douro, was a place of considerable strategic importance. It was taken from the Arabs by Alonso the [9:24:767] Catholic in 748, but was again held by them for short periods in 813, 939, 963, 984, and 986. It was entirely repaired by Ferdinand I., who in 1061 gave it to his daughter Dona Urraca. After his death in 1065 Sancho disputed possession with his sister and laid siege to the town, but without success, although the famous Ruy Diaz de Bivar was among his warriors, and indeed at this time received his title of El Cid Campeador. The town became subject to Alphonso VI. in 1073.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 766 [9:24:766]
| |
kp-eb0924-076701-0816m
|
ZANESVILLE, a city of the United States, the county seat of Muskingum county, Ohio, is situated on both banks of the Muskingum river, at the mouth of Licking river, 170 miles north-east of Cincinnati and 37 nearly due south of Cleveland. The surrounding country is thickly populated, the inhabitants being engaged in agriculture and in coal and iron mining. Zanesville has railway communication by several lines. The population in 1880 was 18,113, showing a gain of about 80 per cent. since 1870.
Zanesville was founded about the beginning of the 19th century, and in 1804 was made the county seat. From 1810 to 1812 the Ohio legislature met at Zanesville. It was incorporated as a city in 1855. Its growth prior to 1870 was slow.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 767 [9:24:767]
| |
kp-eb0924-076702-0816m
|
ZANTE, the ancient Zacynthus, an island of Greece, one of the Ionian group, in the Ionian Sea, in 37° 40' N. lat. and 21° E. long., is 25 miles long, about 12 broad, and 64 miles round, with an area of 277 square miles, and a population in 1879 of 44,522, and estimated in 1887 at 48,000. Zante lies 8 miles south of Cephalonia, forming with it, Leucas, and Ithaca a crescent-shaped insular group, which represents the crests of a submerged limestone ridge facing the Gulf of Patras. At Ithaca, its northernmost member, the ridge almost touches the adjacent coast of Acarnania, with which it is geologically connected; and at Zante, its southernmost member, it recedes about 15 miles from the coast of Elis in Morea. Zante is of somewhat irregular oval shape, with its main axis disposed in the direction from north-west to south-east, and indented by a deep inlet at its southern extremity. The surface is mainly occupied by an extensive and highly productive central plain, skirted on the west side by a range of bare limestone hills from 1000 to 1200 feet high, which fall gently landwards, but present bold steep cliffs towards the sea, and which culminate northwards in Mount Skopos (1500 feet ?), the highest point in the island. On the east side the plain is also limited by a low ridge, which still justifies the epithet of nemorosa, or the “wooded,” applied by Virgil to Zacynthus. These hills are densely clothed to their summits with an exuberant growth of olives, figs, myrtles, laurels, oranges, aloes, vines, and other sub-tropical plants. Travellers sailing between this coast and the mainland describe in enthusiastic language the charming effect produced by these masses of evergreen vegetation rising in long terraces above the surrounding waters, and everywhere interspersed with pleasant homesteads and hamlets embowered in verdure. Nevertheless Zante, notwithstanding its Italian title of “Fior di Levante,” is inferior in picturesque beauty to Corfu, owing to the less elevation of its hills and the somewhat monotonous character of the great central plain. This plain, however, is highly cultivated, forming an almost continuous stretch of gardens and vineyards, varied here and there with a few patches of cornfields and pasture lands. Here is grown a peculiar dwarf vine, whose fruit, the “currant” (from “Corinth ”) of commerce, forms the chief resource and staple export of Zante, as well as of the neighbouring mainland. In 1886 the currant crop for the whole of Greece was valued at £2,000,000, of which nearly one-fifth was raised in Zante, chiefly for the English market. The vine, which grows to a height of 3 feet, begins to yield in seven years and lasts for over a century. From the grape, which has a pleasant bitter-sweet taste, a wine is also extracted, which is said to excel all others in flavour, fire, and strength. Besides this species, there are nearly forty different kinds of vine and ten of the olive, including the karudolia, which yields the best edible olive berry. For size, vigorous growth, and productiveness the olive tree of Zante is rivalled only by that of Corfu.
The island enjoys a healthy climate; and, although there are no perennial streams, an abundant supply of good water is obtained from the numerous springs, occurring especially in the eastern aud central districts. But earthquakes are frequent and at times disastrous. During recent times the most destructive were those of 1811, 1820, and 1840; and, although the prevailing geological formations are sedimentary, chiefly calcareous, there seems no doubt that these disturbances are of igneous origin. Other indications of volcanic agency are the oil springs occurring on the coast, and even in the bed of the sea near Cape Skinari on the north side, and especially the famous pitch or bituminous wells already mentioned by Herodotus (Hist., bk. iv.). These have been productive throughout the historic period and still yield a considerable supply of pitch. They are situated in a swamp near the coast village of Chieri, and comprise two basins, with alternate layers of water and bitumen, the lower sheet of water apparently communicating with the sea.
Zante, capital of the island, is a considerable seaport on the east side, with a population of 16,250 (1879). It occupies the site of the ancient city of Zacynthus, said to have been founded by Zacynthus, son of a legendary Arcadian chief, Dardanus, to whom was also attributed the neighbouring citadel of Psophis. But of this, as well as of the temple of Diana that formerly crowned the summit of Mount Scopus, no vestiges can now be discovered.
Traditionally the island formed part of the territory of Ulysses, king of Ithaca, and at one time it appears to have also received a colony of Achaeans from Peloponnesus. Later it joined the Athenian hegemony; but after the fall of Athens the democratic party was replaced by an oligarchy, which ruled in the interests of Sparta. Under the Romans Zacynthus was included in the province of Epirus, and passed in mediaeval times successively from Byzantium to the Normans (11th century), the Orsini, counts of Cephalonia (after the 4th crusade), and the Tocco family, who held it with Cephalonia as vassals of the Neapolitan Angevine dynasty. In the 15th century it was occupied by the Venetians, and was held by them till the fall of the republic in 1797. Wrested in 1799 by the Russians from the French, it was soon after seized by the English, and in 1815 constituted with the other Ionian Islands a “septinsular republic” under British protection, till the union with Greece in 1864.
The long Venetian occupation is reflected in the appearance, character, and to some extent even the language and religion of the Zantiots. Nearly all the aristocracy claim Venetian descent; most of the upper classes are bilingual, speaking both Greek and Italian; and a considerable section of the population are Roman Catholics of the Latin rite. Even the bulk of the people, although mainly of Greek stock, form in their social usages a connecting link between the Hellenes, whose language they speak, and the Western nations by whom they were so long ruled. They have the reputation of being industrious and enterprising, but passionate and revengeful. But no more high-minded, enlightened, and courteous people can anywhere be found than in the circle of the Maddalenas, Terzettis, Mercatis, and other families of Venetian lineage.
See Balthazar Raimondini, De Zacynthi Antiquitatibus; C. Parrigopoulo, Histoire de la Civilisation Hellénique; S. de Nolhac, La Dalmatie, les Îles Ioniennes, &c., Paris, 1882.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 767 [9:24:767]
|
37 40' N 21 E
|
kp-eb0924-076703-0816m
|
ZANZIBAR, or, more correctly, Zanguebar, a sultanate of east central Africa, which till recently comprised the four islands of Zanzibar, Pemba, Lamu, and Mafia (Monfia), together with the adjacent seaboard from about 3° N. to 10° S. lat., with undefined limits towards the interior. But by the Anglo-German convention, signed in London on 29th October 1886, the territory on the mainland was restricted to the strip of coastlands ten nautical miles broad, stretching from the mouth of the Miningani river at the bay of Tunghi, just south of Cape Delgado, northwards to Kipini at the mouth of the Tana, together with the isolated stations of Kisimayu (Kismayu), Brava, Merka, and Magdoshu (Magadoxo) on the Somal coast, each with a land circuit of ten nautical miles, and Warsheikh on the same coast, with a land circuit of five nautical miles. Since then, however, further changes have taken place. The sultan’s officers have been replaced in the seaports of Dar-es-Salaam and Pangani on the Zanzibar coast proper by commissioners of the German East African Association, to whom the customs of those places have been farmed; the port of Tunghi below Cape Delgado has been claimed and forcibly occupied (1887) by the Portuguese; the island of Pemba appears to have been ceded (May 1888) to the [9:24:768] recently chartered British East African Company; lastly, the station of Kisimayu on the Somal coast is claimed (June 1888) by Italy in reparation of an affront offered to the Italian consul at Zanzibar. But, as defined by the above-mentioned convention, the reduced dominions of the sultan have areas (in square miles) and estimated populations (1887) as under:— .
[table]
The political and commercial, as well as the geographical, centre of the state is the fertile and densely peopled island of Zanzibar, which lies at a mean distance of 20 miles from the Swahili coast, between 5° 40' and 6° 30' S. lat. With the neighbouring Pemba (to the north) and the more distant Mafia (to the south) it forms an independent geological system, resting on a foundation of coralline reefs, and constituting a sort of outer coast-line, which almost everywhere presents a rocky barrier to the fury of the waves rolling in from the Indian Ocean. All three are disposed parallel to the adjacent seaboard, from which they are separated by shallow waters, mostly under thirty fathoms, and strewn with numerous reefs dangerous to navigation, especially in the Mafia channel opposite the Rufiji delta.
Mafia itself is low and fertile, and extensively planted with cocoa-nut palms. It is continued southwards by an extensive reef, on which stands the chief village, Chobe, the residence of the governor and of a few Arab and Hindu (Banyan) traders. Chobe stands on a shallow creek inaccessible to shipping.
Zanzibar, the Unguya of the natives, is not exclusively of coralline formation, but also presents several heights of a reddish ferruginous clay, rising in gentle slopes above the central plains. In the south these heights nowhere exceed 400 or 450 feet; but on the north-west coast they develop a chain of hills disposed parallel to the shore and attaining an elevation of a little over 1000 feet. The forests by which the island was formerly covered have mostly disappeared, and the greater part of the rich soil is carefully cultivated, yielding two annual crops of corn, and four of manioc, the staple food of the people. There are extensive cocoa-nut groves, and from India and Malaysia have been introduced the mangosteen, guava, durian, cinnamon, nutmeg, and cloves, all of which thrive well. The soil seems specially suited for the clove, which, although nearly destroyed by the terrific cyclone of 1872, has already recovered from that disaster, and the annual export of this spice now exceeds £10,000 in value. Although the fauna is almost exclusively continental, Zanzibar till recently possessed a distinct variety of Colobus (C. kirkii) which appears to be now extinct.^[1. H. H. Johnston, The Kilima-Njarο Expedition, p. 38. ] Some years ago a hippopotamus visited the island from the mainland; but no carnivora are now found larger than the serval and wild cat.
On the east side of the island there still survive a few groups of Wa-Hadimu Bantus, who represent the aboriginal stock. But elsewhere, and especially in the capital (for which, see below), the population is of an extremely heterogeneous character, including full-blood and half-caste Arabs, Indian “Canarians” (that is, half-caste Portuguese from Kanara on the Malabar Coast of India), Swahili of every shade, slaves or freedmen from all parts of East Africa, Europeans, and Americans, (See Swahili.)
The neighbouring island of Pemba, intersected by 5° S. lat., is even more fertile, but much less cultivated, than Zanzibar. From the luxuriant vegetation which everywhere clothes the cliffs to their summits it takes the name of the “Green.” The land is exclusively owned by great Arab proprietors, who work their plantations with scarcely disguised slave labour and export considerable quantities of cloves, which here also find a congenial home. The capital, Shaki-Shaki, which lies at the head of a shallow creek on the west side, is inaccessible to shipping. But at Kishi-Kashi, at the north-west extremity, there is a deep and well-sheltered harbour, though of somewhat difficult approach. Here resides the chief of the Arab landed aristocracy, who has hitherto been more of a vassal than a subject of the sultan, and whose allegiance has lately been transferred to the British East African Association.
Lamu also, the fourth member of the sultan’s former insular possessions, has ceased to fly the Zanzibar flag. It is a small flat island lying close to the mainland above the mouth of the Ozi branch of the Tana delta, and appears to be now incorporated in the adjacent German territory of Vitu land. Lamu, its capital, with a reported population of 15,000, has a fine harbour, formed by a long deep channel separating it from the neighbouring island of Manda.
The Zanzibar seaboard (now more generally known as the Swahili coast) is a low-lying swampy and alluvial region, rising gently from the sea towards the first terraced escarpments of the continental plateau. Owing to the numerous streams reaching the coast along this seaboard —Rovuma, Ukeredi, Umbi-Kuru, Rufiji, Rufu, Wami, Umba, and others—a great part of the surface consists of rich alluvial soil, densely covered with a tropical vegetation. Here the warm currents setting landwards from the Indian Ocean bring both moisture and heat, so that this coast has a higher temperature and heavier rainfall than the Atlantic seaboard under the same parallels of latitude.^[2. Mean temperature of the West and East Coasts 72 and 80 Fahr. respectively; average annual rainfall at Zanzibar 60 inches; at Loanda (Atlantic side) 36 inches; rainfall at Zanzibar in 1859 (exceptional) 170 inches. ] Thanks to these conditions, while the climate is oppressive and malarious, the vegetation is extremely luxuriant, assuming about the marshy deltas the aspect of an impenetrable jungle of mangroves, reeds, and tall grasses, growing to a height of 12 or 14 feet. A characteristic plant is the msandarusi or copal-tree of the lower Rufiji valley, which yields the best gum known to commerce. Other economic plants more or less extensively cultivated are rice, maize, millet, the cocoa-nut and oil palm, besides several European species already acclimatized at Bagamoyo and other stations. But nearly the whole of this region is well suited for raising tropical produce, such as sugar, coffee, cotton, indigo, cinnamon, cloves, and other spices.
Besides Dar-es-Salaam and Pangani, surrendered to the Germans (see above), the chief stations and seaports, going northwards, are Lindi, Kilwa (Quiloa), Bagamoyo, Mombasa (Mombas), and Malindi (Melinda). Of these Bagamoyo is at present the most important, as the starting-point of travellers and traders for the interior. Here are also the headquarters of the French Roman Catholic missions in east equatorial Africa, with training schools, extensive plantations, and gardens of acclimatization. Kilwa, Mombasa, and Malindi, great and flourishing emporiums under the Zenj empire, are now almost abandoned. This remark applies also to Magdoshu, the chief isolated station on the Somal coast belonging to Zanzibar.
From the earliest times of which there is any authentic record the whole of the seaboard from the Somal coast to an unknown distance southwards was comprised within the dominions of the Zenj (Zang) potentates, who for centuries claimed and vindicated the title of “sovereign of the sea.” From them the seaboard [9:24:769] itself took the name of zanguebar, ^[3. Mispronounced Zanzibar by the local Banyans and other Indian traders. ] the Bálíd-ez-Zenj, or “Land of the Zenj” of the Arabs, a term which thus corresponds to the Hindu-bar, or “land of the Hindu,” formerly applied to the west coast of India on the opposite side of the intervening Arabian Sea. By Ibn Batuta and other Arab writers the Zenj people themselves are spoken of in a general way as Mohammedan Negroes; and they are no doubt still represented by the semi-civilized and highly intelligent Mohammedan Bantus now collectively known as the Swahili or “coast people.” Their empire began to decline soon after the appearance of the Portuguese in the eastern waters towards the close of the 15th century. To them fell in rapid succession the great cities of Kilwa with its 300 mosques (1505), Mombasa the “Magnificent” (1505), and soon after Malindi and Magdoshu the “Immense” (Ibn Batuta). On the rains of the Portuguese power in the 17th century was built up that of the imams of Muscat, who ruled over a great part of south Arabia and the whole of the Zanzibar coast for over a century and a half down to 1856. On the death of the imam, or rather the “sayyid,” Said of Muscat in that year his dominions were divided between his two sons, the African section falling to Majid, who was succeeded in 1870 by his younger brother Bargash ibn Said, commonly known as sultan of Zanzibar. He lived long enough to witness the recent dismemberment of his dominions, and in March 1888 left to his son and successor, Sayyid Khalif, a mere fragment of the former powerful Mohammedan empire on the East-African seaboard. The administration of the “ten-mile zone” on the mainland, although reserved to the sultan by the Anglo-German convention of 1886, was practically surrendered to the Germans in August 1888 when the German East African Company hoisted their flag jointly with the sultan’s at fourteen ports along this seaboard.
See J. L. Krapf, Travels, &c., London, 1830; Baron von der Decken, Reisen in Ost-Afrika, Leipsic, 1869; Captain R. F. Burton, The Lake Regions of Central Africa, London, 1860; Keith Johnston and A. H. Keane, Africa (Stanford series), London, 1878; H. Μ. Stanley, Through the Dark Continent, London, 1878; H. H. Johnston, The Kilima-Njaro Expedition, London, 1885; Joseph Thomson, To the Central African Lakes, &c., London, 1881. (A. H. K.)
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 767 [9:24:767]
| |
kp-eb0924-076901-0818m
|
ZANZIBAR, capital of the island and state of the same name, is the largest city on the African seaboard next to Alexandria and Tunis. It lies in sheltered waters, from 30 to 40 feet deep, on the west side of the island, in 6° 10' S. lat., about 25 miles north-east of Bagamoyo, its port on the mainland. It comprises two distinct quarters,—Shangani, the centre of trade and residence of the sultan, and the eastern suburb occupied by the lowest classes (fishermen, porters, slaves, &c.), with a total joint population estimated in 1887 at about 100,000. Viewed from the sea, the place presents a pleasant prospect with its glittering mosques, palace, white houses, barracks, forts, and round towers. But the interior is a labyrinth of narrow filthy streets, winding through a dense mass of hovels, a “cesspool of wickedness Oriental in its appearance, Mohammedan in its religion, Arabian in its morals, . . . a fit capital for the Dark Continent.”^[1. Prof. H. Drummond, Tropical Africa, p. 5. ] Nevertheless Zanzibar, which is now regularly visited by several lines of ocean steamers, is the necessary centre of trade for the eastern seaboard, the focus of all exploring and missionary work for the interior, the portal through which civilizing influences have hitherto penetrated into the eastern section of equatorial Africa. The imports, chiefly raw and bleached cottons and European wares, were valued at £1,220,000 in 1883, the exports at £800,000, of which £215,000 represented ivory, £153,000 caoutchouc, £13,000 sesame seed, £10,600 cloves. In 1885 the port was visited by 124 vessels of 115,500 tons, of which 49 of 60,674 tons were British. There are several Protestant and Roman Catholic missions stationed in Zanzibar, the health of which has been much improved by a recently constructed aqueduct yielding a good supply of pure water.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 769 [9:24:769]
| |
kp-eb0924-076902-0818m
|
ZARA (Slav. Zadar), an Austrian seaport, the capital of Dalmatia, and the seat of a Roman Catholic archbishop and of a Greek bishop, lies on the Adriatic, 130 miles south-east of Trieste, opposite the islands of Ugliano and Pasman, from which it is separated by the narrow Channel of Zara. The promontory on which it stands is separated from the mainland by a deep moat, practically making an island of the site of the city. Down to 1873 Zara was strongly fortified; but its ramparts have now been converted into elevated promenades, which command extensive views to seaward and to landward. Of its four old gates one, the Porta Marina, incorporates the relics of a Roman arch, and another, the Porta di Terraferma, was designed by Sanmichele. The general aspect of the town, which is oval in form, is thoroughly Venetian. The main streets, dividing it into four quarters, are straight and wide, but the side-streets are ill-paved and narrow. The chief interest of Zara lies in its churches, the most remarkable of which is the cathedral of St Anastasia, a fine Romanesque basilica, founded by Doge Enrico Dandolo after the capture of the town in 1202 and finished in 1205. The churches of St Chrysogonus and St Simeon are also in the Romanesque style, and St Mary’s retains a fine Romanesque campanile of 1105. The old octagonal church of St Donatus, traditionally (but in all probability erroneously) said to have been erected in the 9th century on the site of a temple of Juno, has been converted to secular purposes. Most of the Roman remains were used up in the construction of the fortifications. But two squares are embellished with lofty marble columns; a Roman tower stands on the east side of the town; and some remains of a Roman aqueduct may be seen outside the ramparts. Among the other chief buildings are the Loggia del Comune, rebuilt in 1565, containing a public library of 34,000 volumes; the old palace of the priors, now the governor’s residence; and the episcopal palace. The harbour, to the north-east of the town, is safe and spacious, and it is annually entered by about 1200 vessels, of 185,000 tons, mainly engaged in the coasting trade. The chief industry is the preparation of maraschino, made from the marasco, or wild cherry, which covers the hills of Dalmatia. About 340,000 bottles of this liqueur are exported annually. Glass-making and fishing are also carried on. The population of the town in 1881 was 11,861, of the commune 24,536. Almost all of these are of Italian descent, and Italian is practically the only language spoken in the town.
The foundation of Zara is ascribed by tradition to the Liburni. In the early days of the Roman empire it became a flourishing Roman colony under the name of Jadera, subsequently changed to Diadora. It remained united with the Eastern empire down to about the year 1000, when it sought the Venetian protection. For the next four centuries it was a bone of contention between Venice and Hungary, changing hands repeatedly. It was occupied by the Hungarians at the end of the 12th century, but was re-captured by the Venetians in 1202, with the aid of French crusaders on their way to the Holy Land. In 1409 it was finally purchased from Hungary by the island republic for 100,000 ducats. In 1792 it passed, with Venice, into the possession of Austria. From 1809 to 1813 it belonged to France.
About 15 miles to the south-east lies Zara Vecchia, or Old Zara, an insignificant village on the site of Biograd (White Town), formerly the residence of the Croatian kings, but destroyed during the Hungarian-Venetian wars.
Comp. Zara, e suoi Dintorni (Zara, 1878), and Notize Storiche della Città di Zara (Zara, 1883), both by Angelo Nani.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 769 [9:24:769]
| |
kp-eb0924-076903-0818m
|
ZARAGOZA, or Saragossa, an inland province of Spain, one of the three into which Aragon is now divided, is bounded on the N.E. and E. by Huesca, Lerida, and Tarragona, on the S. by Teruel and Guadalajara, and on the W. by Soria and Navarre; the area is 6607 square miles. It belongs wholly to the basin of the Ebro, by which river it is traversed from north-west to south-east. The main valley is bounded on the S.W. by the Sierra de Moncayo, which reaches a maximum elevation—the highest in the province—of 7700 feet, and is continued in a southeasterly direction by the lower sierras of La Virgen and Vicor; on the north-west are the spurs of the Pyrenees. The principal tributaries of the Ebro within the province are the Jalón, Huerva, and Aguas on the right and the Arva and Gállego on the left; the Aragon also, which flows principally through Navarre, has part of its course in the [9:24:770] north of this province. At its lowest point, where the Ebro quits it, Zaragoza is only 105 feet above sea-level. The soil is in its level portions comparatively fertile, the chief productions being wheat, rye, barley, oats, hemp, flax, oil, and wine. Silkworms are bred; and on the higher grounds sheep are reared. There are considerable forests on the lower mountain slopes. Zaragoza has no manufactures of importance. The province is traversed by the Ebro Valley Railway, which connects Miranda on the northern line with Lerida, Barcelona, and Tarragona, and has a branch to Huesca; it also has communication with Madrid; and there are local lines to Cariñena (south-west from Zaragoza) and to Puebla de Hijar (along the right bank of the Ebro). The Aragon Canal, originally intended to connect the Mediterranean with the Atlantic, is open from Tudela (El Bocal) to a point below Zaragoza. There are 13 partidos judiciales and 312 ayuntamientos; of these only Calatayud (11,512) and Zaragoza (see below) have more than 10,000 inhabitants. The total population of the province in 1877 was 400,587.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 769 [9:24:769]
| |
kp-eb0924-077001-0819m
|
ZARAGOZA, capital of the above province, formerly capital of the kingdom of Aragon, lies at a height of 600 feet above sea-level, on a rich plain on the right bank of the Ebro, just above its confluence with the Huerva, 212 miles by rail to the north-east of Madrid. The river is here crossed by a fine stone bridge of seven arches, erected in 1437, and another bridge—of iron—much needed for the convenience of through railway traffic, is projected. Seen from a distance, the city with its numerous domes and towers has an imposing appearance, which it hardly maintains on a nearer approach. The older streets are narrow, gloomy, and ill paved; the massive buildings formerly inhabited by the Aragonese nobility are either in ruins or turned into wood-stores and granaries; and an air of poverty and decay pervades the whole town. By the river side there are public walks and avenues of poplar. The two most important buildings of Zaragoza are its cathedrals, in each of which the chapter resides alternately for six months. La Seo (“The See ”) is the older of the two, dating chiefly from the 14th century; its prevailing style is Gothic, but the oldest portion, the lower portion of the apse, is Byzantine, and the façade is of the Late Pseudo-Classical style, by which so many churches in Spain have been disfigured. The Iglesia Metropolitana del Pilar is the larger and more modern building, dating only from the latter half of the 17th century; it was built after designs by Herrera el Mozo, and owes its name to one of the most venerated objects in Spain, the “pillar” of jasper on which the Virgin is said to have alighted when she manifested herself to Santiago as he passed through Zaragoza. It has no architectural merit; externally its most conspicuous features are its domes, which are decorated with rows of green, yellow, and white glazed tiles. The church of San Pablo dates mainly from the 13th century. Adjoining the church of San Felipe is the Torre Nueva, an octangular clock tower in diapered brickwork, dating from 1504; it leans some 9 or 10 feet from the perpendicular, owing to faulty foundations. Among other conspicuous public buildings are the municipal buildings, the exchange (Lonja), and the civil and military hospitals, which are among the largest in Spain. The university was founded in 1474, but its history has not been brilliant. To the west of the town is the Aljaferia or old citadel, an irregular pile originally built as a palace by the Moors and also used as such by its Christian owners. It was afterwards assigned by Ferdinand and Isabella to the Inquisition, and has since been used as barracks, a military hospital, and a prison; it is now unoccupied and falling into decay. The chief manufactures of Zaragoza are silk, woollen cloth, leather, saltpetre, soap, and chocolate; and there is considerable trade in agricultural produce, and in wine and spirits. The population of the town in 1877 was 84,575.
Zaragoza, the Celtiberian Salduba, was colonized at the close of the Cantabrian War (25 b.c. ) by Augustus, who gave it his own name, Caesarea Augusta, or Caesaraugusta. It was a colonia immunis and the seat of a conventus juridicus. No remains of the ancient city have been preserved. It was taken by the Goths about 466 and in 712 by the Moors. In 1118 it was recovered by Alonso el Batallador of Aragon after a siege of five years, during which the defenders were reduced by famine to the direst straits. In 1710 Stanhope defeated the French under Philip V. not far from the town. The most memorable recent events in the history of Zaragoza are those which took place during the Napoleonic invasion. In 1808 the citizens rose against the French, and, under the command of Palafox ( q.v. ), defended the town for two months. The first siege was raised on 15th August 1808; but the respite then gained was not made use of to strengthen the defences, and, when the enemy renewed their attack in greater force in December, the place was compelled to surrender (20th February 1809), after losing in all nearly 60,000 men.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 770 [9:24:770]
| |
kp-eb0924-077002-0819m
|
ZARLINO, Gioseffe or Giuseppe (1517-1590),^[1. Burney and Hawkins place Zarlino’s birth in 1540, and his death in 1590. Caffi gives the true dates. Zarlino himself tells us that he was ordained deacon in 1541. ] musical theorist, surnamed from his birthplace, Zarlinus Clodiensis, was born at Chioggia, Venetia, in 1517. Studying in his youth for the church, he was admitted to the minor orders in 1539 and ordained deacon in 1541 at Venice; but he soon devoted himself entirely to the study of music under the guidance of Adrian Willaert, then choirmaster at St Mark’s. Willaert, dying in 1562, was succeeded by Cipriano di Rore, on whose removal to Parma in 1565 Zarlino was elected choir-master. Though now remembered chiefly as a theorist, it is evident that he must have been famous both as a practical musician and as a composer; for, notwithstanding the limited number of his printed works, consisting of a volume entitled Modulationes Sex Vocum (Venice, 1566), and a few motets and madrigals scattered through the collections of Scotto and other contemporary publishers, he both produced and superintended the public performance of some important pieces in the service of the republic. First among these was the music written to celebrate the battle of Lepanto (7th October 1571). Again, when Henry III. of France passed through Venice on his return from Poland in 1574, Zarlino directed on board the “Bucentaur” the performance of an ode for which he himself had composed the music, to verses supplied by Rocco Benedetti and Cornelio Frangipani. The ode [9:24:771] was followed by a solemn service in St Mark’s, in which Zarlino’s music formed a prominent feature, and the festival concluded with the representation of a dramatic piece entitled Orfeo composed by Zarlino. When the church of S. Maria della Salute was founded in 1577 to commemorate the plague, he composed a solemn mass for the occasion. Not one of these works is now known to be in existence; the only example we possess of Zarlino’s compositions on a grand scale is a MS. mass for four voices, in the library of the Philharmonic Lyceum at Bologna. He died at Venice on 14th February 1590.
Fortunately for the science of music, Zarlino’s theoretical writings have all been preserved. Though he was by no means free from certain visionary ideas concerning the transcendental powers of music, in which the theorists of the 16th century delighted, Zarlino was, in practical knowledge and intelligent application of scientific truth to the development of art, immeasurably in advance of the age in which he lived. His clear insight into the mathematical foundation of the scale placed him in direct antagonism to the leaders of the school of the Renaissance, which, with Vincenzo Galilei at its head, blindly followed the mistaken reasoning of Boetius (see vol. xvii. p. 80), and adhered as a matter of principle to the Pythagorean section of the canon. This difference of opinion, occurring at a critical period in the development of art, made Zarlino many bitter enemies; but he steadily maintained his principles in temperate and unanswerable argument; and his theory is now accepted as the basis of modern art, while that of his opponents is utterly discarded.
Zarlino’s first theoretical work was the Istitutioni Armoniche (Venice, 1558; reprinted 1562 and 1573). This was followed by the Dimostrationi Armoniche (Venice, 1571; reprinted 1573) and by the Sopplimenti Musicali (Venice, 1588). Finally, in a complete edition of his works published shortly before his death Zarlino reprinted these three treatises, accompanied by a Tract on Patience, a Discourse on the True Date of the Crucifixion of Our Lord, an essay on The Origin of the Capuchins, and the Resolution of Some Doubts Concerning the Correction of the Julian Calendar (Venice, 1589).^[2. Ambros mentions an edition of the Istitutioni dated 1557, and one of the Dimostrationi dated 1562. The present writer has never met with either. ]
The Istitutioni and Dimostrationi Armoniche deal, like most other theoretical works of the period, with the whole science of music as it was understood in the 16th century. The earlier chapters, treating chiefly of the arithmetical foundations of the science, differ but little in their line of argument from the principles laid down by Pietro Aron, Zacconi, and other early writers of the Boetian school; but in bk. ii. of the Istitutioni Zarlino boldly attacks the false system of tonality to which the proportions of the Pythagorean tetrachord, if strictly carried out in practice, must inevitably lead. The fact that, so far as can now be ascertained, they never were strictly carried out in the Italian mediaeval schools, at least after the invention of counterpoint, in no wise diminishes the force of the reformer’s argument. The point at issue was, that neither in the polyphonic school, in which Zarlino was educated, nor in the later monodic school, of which his recalcitrant pupil, Vincenzo Galilei, was the most redoubtable champion, could those proportions be tolerated in practice, however attractive they might be to the theorist in their mathematical aspect. So persistently does the human ear rebel against the division of the tetrachord into two greater tones and a leimma or hemitone, as represented by the fractions 8 / 9 , 8 / 9 , 243 / 256 , that, centuries before the possibility of reconciling the demands of the ear with those of exact science was satisfactorily demonstrated, the Aristoxenian school advocated the use of an empirical scale, sounding pleasant to the sense, in preference to an unpleasing tonality founded upon immutable proportions. Didymus, writing in the year 60, made the first step towards establishing this pleasant-sounding scale upon a mathematical basis, by the discovery of the lesser tone; but unhappily he placed it in a false position below the greater tone. Claudius Ptolemy (130) rectified this error, and in the so-called syntonous or intense diatonic scale reduced the proportions of his tetrachord to 8 / 9 , 9 / 10 , 15 / 16 ,— i.e ., the greater tone, lesser tone, and diatonic semitone of modern music.^[3. We have given the fractions in the order in which they occur in the modern system. Ptolemy, following the invariable Greek method, placed them thus—/,/,/. This, however, made no difference in the actual proportions. ] Ptolemy set forth this system as one of eight possible forms of the diatonic scale. But Zarlino uncompromisingly declared that the syntonous or intense diatonic scale was the only form that could reasonably be sung; and in proof of its perfection he exhibited the exact arrangement of its various diatonic intervals, to the fifth inclusive, in every part of the diapason or octave. The proportions are precisely those now universally accepted in the system called “just intonation.” But this system is practicable only by the voice and instruments of the violin class. For keyed or fretted instruments a compromise is indispensable. To meet this exigency, Zarlino proposed that for the lute the octave should be divided into twelve equal semitones; and after centuries of discussion this system of “equal temperament” has, within the last thirty-five years, been universally adopted as the best attainable for keyed instruments of every description.^[4. It was first used in France, for the organ, in 1835; in England, for the pianoforte in 1846 and for the organ in 1854. Bach had advocated it in Germany a century earlier; but it was not generally adopted. ]
Again, Zarlino was in advance of his age in his classification of the ecclesiastical modes. These scales were not, as is vulgarly supposed, wholly abolished in favour of our modern tonality in the 17th century. Eight of them, it is true, fell into disuse; but the mediaeval Ionian and Hypo-ionian modes are absolutely identical with the modern natural scale of C; and the Aeolian and Hypoaeolian modes differ from our minor scale, not in constitution, but in treatment only. Mediaeval composers, however, regarded the Ionian mode as the least perfect of the series and placed it last in order. Zarlino thought differently and made it the first mode, changing all the others to accord with it. His numerical table, therefore, differs from all others made before or since, prophetically assigning the place of honour to the one ancient scale now recognized as the foundation of the modern tonal system.
These innovations were violently opposed by the apostles of the monodic school. Vincenzo Galilei led the attack in a tract entitled Discorso Intorno alle Opere di Messer Gioseffe Zarlino, and followed it up in his famous Dialogo, defending the Pythagorean system in very unmeasured language. It was in answer to these strictures that Zarlino published his Sopplementi.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 770 [9:24:770]
| |
kp-eb0924-077101-0820m
|
ZEA. See Ceos.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 771 [9:24:771]
| |
kp-eb0924-077102-0820m
|
ZEALAND, or Sjaelland, the largest and most easterly island of Denmark (q.v.), is separated from Fünen on the west by the Great Belt and from Sweden on the east by the Sound; its greatest length from north to south is 81 miles, its breadth 65, and its area 2636 square miles.^[1. The province of Zealand and Möen, which includes the island of Samsö as well as that of Moen, has an area of 2828 square miles and a population of 721,703; the “stift ’’ or bishopric of Zealand includes also the island of Bornholm. ] Its surface is for the most part undulating, but on the whole little above sea-level; the highest elevations are in the south-east, where Cretaceous hills (the oldest geological formation on the island) reach heights of upwards of 350 feet. The coast is indented by numerous deep bays and fjords: the Ise fjord in the north in particular, with its branches the Roeskilde fjord on the east and the Lamme fjord on the west, penetrates inland for about 40 miles. There are no rivers of importance; but several large lakes, the most considerable being Arre and Esrom, occur in the north-east. The soil is fertile and produces grain, especially rye and barley, in great abundance, as well as potatoes and other vegetables, and fruit. Agriculture and cattle-raising, along with some fishing, are the leading occupations of the inhabitants; linen is almost the only article of domestic industry. The population in 1880 was 610,000. The principal towns, besides Copenhagen (q.v.), the capital (234,850 inhabitants in 1880), are Roeskilde (5893), formerly the capital and still the see of the primate; Elsinore (8978); Slagelse (6076), a great agricultural centre; Sorö (1464), formerly the seat of a university and still educationally important; and Korsör (3954), the port for mail steamers to the mainland, connected by rail with Sorö, Roeskilde, and Copenhagen.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 771 [9:24:771]
| |
kp-eb0924-077103-0820m
|
ZEALAND, the most westerly province of Holland, is bounded on the north by South Holland, on the east by North Brabant and Belgium, on the south-east and south by Belgium, and on the west by the North Sea. Its area is 689 square miles, the greater part of which consists of the islands Schouwen, Duiveland, St Philipsland, Tholen, North, South, and East Beveland, Wolfaartsdyk, and Walcheren. The greater part of the surface is below sea-level. The westward coasts of Schouwen and Walcheren are partly sheltered by dunes; but the province is mainly [9:24:772] dependent for protection from the sea on its artificial dykes, which have a total length of 300 miles, and on the repair of which upwards of £80,000 is spent annually. The soil consists of a fertile sea clay (see vol. xii. p. 62), which specially favours the production of wheat; much rye is also cultivated, as well as barley (for malting), beans and pease, flax, and madder. Cattle and swine are reared, and dairy produce is largely exported; but the sheep of the province are small and their wool indifferent. The industries (linen, yarn-spinning, distilling, brewing, salt-refining, shipbuilding) are comparatively unimportant. The inhabitants, who still retain many quaint and archaic peculiarities of manner and dress, speak the variety of Dutch known as Low Frankish (see vol. xii. p. 84). The capital is Middelburg (population 16,378 in 1887), in Walcheren, where also is Flushing (12,005). The total population of the province in 1887 was 198,567.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 771 [9:24:771]
| |
kp-eb0924-077201-0821m
|
ZEBRA. In the article Horse (vol. xii. p. 175) the general zoological and anatomical characters of the genus Equus, and its relationship to other animals, were fully described. Among the existing species mention was made of certain forms distinguished from the rest by the peculiar coloration, being marked by conspicuous dark stripes on a lighter ground, and by their exclusively African habitat. These are the Quagga (see vol. xx. p. 146) and two, if not three, distinct species to which the name zebra is commonly applied. The animal of this group which was first known to Europeans, and was formerly considered the most common, is the True Zebra (Equus zebra, Linn.), sometimes called the Mountain Zebra. It inhabits the mountainous regions of the Cape Colony; but now, owing to the advances of civilized man into its somewhat restricted range, it has become very scarce, and is even, like its ally the quagga, threatened with extermination at no distant date. The second species, Burchell’s Zebra (Equus burch-elli, Gray), still roams in large herds over the plains to the north of the Orange river, but in yearly diminishing numbers. Both species are subject to considerable individual variations in marking, but the following are the principal characters by which they can be distinguished.
Equus zebra is the smaller of the two (about 4 feet high at the shoulders), and has longer ears, a tail more scantily clothed with hair, and a shorter mane. The general ground colour is white, and the stripes are black; the lower part of the face is bright brown. With the exception of the abdomen and the inside of the thighs, the whole of the surface is covered with stripes, the legs having narrow transverse bars reaching quite to the hoofs, and the base of the tail being also barred. The outsides of the ears have a white tip and a broad black mark occupying the greater part of the surface, but are white at the base. Perhaps the most constant and obvious distinction between this species and the next is the arrangement of the stripes on the hinder part of the back, where there are a number of short transverse bands reaching to the median longitudinal dorsal stripe, and unconnected with tho uppermost of the broad stripes which pass obliquely across the haunch from the flanks towards the root of the tail. There is often a median longitudinal stripe under the chest.
Equus burchelli is a rather larger and more robust animal, with smaller ears, a longer mane, and fuller tail. The general ground colour of the body is pale yellowish brown, the limbs nearly white, the stripes dark brown or black. In the typical form they do not extend on to the limbs or the tail; but there is a great variation in this respect, even in animals of the same herd, some being striped quite down to the hoofs (this form has been named E. chapmanni).
There is a strongly marked median longitudinal ventral black stripe, to which the lower ends of the transverse side stripes are usually united, but the dorsal stripe (also strongly marked) is completely isolated in its posterior half, and the uppermost of the broad haunch stripes runs nearly parallel to it. A much larger proportion of the ears is white than in the other species. In the middle of the wide intervals between the broad black stripes of the flanks and haunches fainter stripes are generally seen.
E. grevyi.— Under this name a zebra has lately been described which was sent in 1882 to Paris from the Galla country, lying to the south of Abyssinia, the most northern locality in which zebras have hitherto been met with. In most of its characters it resembles E. zebra, but the stripes are finer and more numerous than in the typical examples of that species, and it has a strong, black, and isolated dorsal stripe. Considering the great variations that are met with in the markings of animals of this group, it is doubtful whether the aberrant characters of this individual are sufficient to separate it specifically from the true zebra of South Africa. The question will be cleared up when any complete scientific examination has been made of other specimens, and also of the zebras which are known to exist in the neighbourhood of Lake Nyanza, and which are apparently of the same form. It is curious that the most northern and the most southern of the districts inhabited by zebras both contain identical or closely allied species, while the intermediate territory is occupied by a totally different form, E. burchelli. It should be mentioned that the last-named animal is generally spoken of as the “quagga” by colonists and hunters. Its flesh is relished by the natives as food, and its hide is very valuable for leather. Although the many attempts that have been made to break in and train zebras for riding or driving have sometimes been rewarded with partial success, the animal has never been domesticated in the true sense of the word. (W. H. F.)
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 772 [9:24:772]
| |
kp-eb0924-077202-0821m
|
ZEBULUN (זבולון), one of the twelve tribes of Israel, derived, according to Gen. xxx. 20, from the sixth son of Leah. The verse offers two etymologies of the name, from the roots ZBD, “give,” and ZBL, “inhabit.” The form Zα βoυλωv (LXX.), with d in the last syllable, agrees with the vocalization of the adjective זבול׳י, “Zebuionite.” The country of Zebulun lay in the fertile hilly country to the north of the plain of Jezreel, which forms the first step towards the mountains of Asher and Naphtali, and included the goodly upland plain of Battauf. The description[9:24:773] of its boundaries in Josh. xix. 10 sq. contains few names that can be identified with any certainty: Chislothtabor is apparently the modern Iksâl, a little to the west of Tabor, Daberath the modern Dabûrîya, at the foot of Tabor, Gath-hepher (A.V. Gittah-hepher) the village of Al-Meshhed, and Remmon Rummâna. Thus the eastern boundary laid down in Conder and Kitchener’s reduced Ordnance Survey map comes too near the Lake of Tiberias. The west boundary is not defined in Josh. xix., but should agree with the somewhat vague east boundary of Asher in verse 27. At one period Zebulun must have reached the sea and bordered on Phoenician territory (Gen. xlix. 13, Deut. xxxiii. 18, 19). In the latter passage allusion is made to a feast upon a sacred mountain (Mount Tabor ?) held by Zebulun and Issachar in common, and to the wealth these tribes derived from commerce by sea. Zebulun had a chief part in the war with Sisera (Jud. iv. 6); it furnished one of the judges, Elon the Zebulonite (Jud. xii. 11, 12); and the prophet Jonah, who foretold the victories of Jeroboam II., came from the town of Gath-hepher (2 Kings xiv. 25). The captivity of the northern tribes under Tiglath Pileser (2 Kings xv. 29) appears to have included Zebulun (Isa. ix. 1 [viii. 23]). Nazareth lay within the territory of Zebulun, but is not mentioned in the Old Testament.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 772 [9:24:772]
| |
kp-eb0924-077301-0822m
|
ZECHARIAH, son of Berechiah, son of Iddo, or by contraction son of Iddo, appeared as a prophet in Jerusalem along with Haggai (q.v.), in the second year of Darius Hystaspes (520 b.c. ), to warn and encourage the Jews to address themselves at length to the restoration of the temple, which, since their return from exile eighteen years before, had lain unaccomplished, less through want of zeal than through the pressure of unfavourable circumstances. Supported by the prophets, Zerubbabel and Joshua set about the work, and the elders of Judah built and the work went forward (Ezra v. 1 sq., vi. 14). The first eight chapters of the book of Zechariah exactly fit into this historical setting. They are divided by precise chronological headings into three sections,— (a) chap. i. 1-6, in the eighth month of the second year of Darius; (ό) chap. i. 7-vi. 15, on the twenty-fourth day of the eleventh month of the same year; (c) chap. vii.-viii., on the fourth day of the ninth month of the fourth year of Darius. The first section is a preface containing exhortation in general terms. The main section is the second, containing a series of night visions, the significant features of which are pointed out by an angel who stands by the prophet and answers his questions.
i. 7-17. The divine chariots and horses that make the round of the world by Jehovah’s orders return to the heavenly palace and report that there is still no movement among the nations, no sign of the Messianic crisis. Seventy years have passed, and Zion and the cities of Judah still mourn. Sad news! but Jehovah gives a comfortable assurance of His gracious return to Jerusalem and the rebuilding of His temple.
i. 18-21 (Heb. ii. 1-4). Four horns, representing the hostile world-power that oppresses Israel and Jerusalem, are routed by four smiths.
ii. 1-13 (Heb. ii. 5-17). The new Jerusalem is laid out with the measuring line. It is to have no walls, that its population may not be limited, and it needs none, for Jehovah is its protection. The catastrophe of the nations is near to come; then the exiles of Zion shall stream back from all quarters, the converted heathen shall join them, Jehovah Himself will dwell in the midst of them, even now He stirs Himself from His holy habitation.
ii. 1-10. The high priest Joshua is accused before Jehovah by Satan, but is acquitted and given rule in Jehovah’s house and courts, with the right of access to Jehovah in priestly intercession. The restoration of the temple and its service is a pledge of still higher things. The promised “branch” (or “shoot,” עמח), the Messiah, will come: i.e., the Persian lordship has an end; the national kingdom is restored in its old splendour; and a time of general felicity dawns, when every man shall sit happy under his vine and under his fig tree. As by rights the Messianic kingdom should follow immediately on the exile, it is probable that the prophet designs to hint in a guarded way that Zerubbabel, who in all other places is mentioned along with Joshua, is on the point of ascending the throne of his ancestor David. The jewel with seven facets is already there, only the inscription has still to be engraved on it (iii. 9). The charges brought against the high priest consist simply in the obstacles that have hitherto impeded the restoration of the temple and its service; and in like manner the guilt of the land (iii. 9) is simply the still continuing domination of foreigners.
1v. 1-14. Beside a lighted golden candlestick of seven branches stand two olive trees—Zerubbabel and Joshua, the two anointed ones—specially watched over by Him whose seven eyes run through the whole earth. This explanation of the vision is separated from the description by an animated dialogue, not quite clear in its expression, in which it is said that the mountain of obstacles shall disappear before Zerubbabel, and that, having begun the building of the temple, he shall also bring it to an end in spite of those who now mock at the day of small beginnings.
v. 1-4. A written roll flies over the Holy Land; this is a concrete representation of the curse which in future will fall of itself on all crime, so that, e.g., no man who has suffered theft will have occasion himself to pronounce a curse against the thief (cf. Jud. xvii. 2).
v. 5-11. Guilt, personified as a woman, is cast into an epha-measure with a heavy lid and carried from Judah to Chaldaea, where it is to have its home for the future.
vi. 1-8. The divine teams, four in number, again traverse the world toward the four winds, to execute Jehovah’s commands. That which goes northward is charged to wreak His anger on the north country. The series of visions has now reached its close, returning to its starting-point in i. 7 sqq.
An appendix follows (vi. 9-15). Jews from Babylon have brought gold and silver to Jerusalem; of these the prophet must make a crown designed for the “branch” who is to build Jehovah’s house and sit king on the throne, but retain a good understanding with the high priest. Zerubbabel is certainly meant here, and, if the received text names Joshua instead of him (vi. 11), this is only a correction, made for reasons easy to understand, but which breaks the context and destroys the sense and the reference of “them both” in verse 13.
The third section (chaps. vii.-viii.), dated from the fourth year of Darius, contains an inquiry whether the fast days that arose in the captivity are still to be observed, with a comforting and encouraging reply of the prophet.
Thus throughout the first eight chapters the scene is Jerusalem in the early part of the reign of Darius. Zerubbabel and Joshua, the prince and the priest, are the leaders of the community. But, while the spiritual head is in office, the authority of the civil head is rather moral than official, and is not so much actual as hoped for. The great concern of the time and the chief practical theme of these chapters is the building of the temple; but its restoration is only the earnest of greater things to follow, viz., the glorious restoration of David’s kingdom. The horizon of these prophecies is everywhere limited by the narrow conditions of the time, and their aim is clearly seen. The visions hardly veil the thought, and the mode of expression is usually simple, except in the Messianic passages, where the tortuousness and obscurity are perhaps intentional. Noteworthy is the affinity between some notions evidently not framed by the prophet himself and the prologue to Job,—the heavenly hosts that wander through the earth and bring back their report to Jehovah’s throne, the figure of Satan, the idea that suffering and calamity are evidences of guilt and of accusations presented before God.
Passing from chaps. i.-viii. to chaps. ix. sq., we at once feel ourselves transported into a different world.
Jehovah’s word is accomplished on Syria-Phoenicia and Philistia; and then the Messianic kingdom begins in Zion, and the Israelites detained among the heathen, Judah and Ephraim combined, receive a part in it. The might of the sons of Javan is broken in battle against this kingdom (ch. ix.). After an intermezzo of three verses (x. 1-3: “Ask rain of Jehovah, not of the diviners ”) a second and quite analogous Messianic prophecy follows. The foreign tyrants fall; the lordship of Assyria and Egypt has an end; the autonomy and martial power of the nation are restored. The scattered exiles return as citizens of the new theocracy, all obstacles in their way parting asunder as when the waves of the Red Sea gave passage to Israel at the founding of the old theocracy (x. 3-12). Again there is an interlude of three verses (xi. 1-3): fire seizes the cedars of Lebanon and the oaks of Bashan, which the rabbins refer to the [9:24:774] burning of the sanctuary of Jerusalem.^[1. See Wagenseil, Sota, p. 927; Lightfoot, on Matt. xxvi. 3. ] The difficult passage about the shepherds follows.
The shepherds (rulers) of the nation make their flock an article of trade aud treat the sheep as sheep for the shambles. Therefore the inhabited world shall fall a sacrifice to the tyranny of its kings, while Israel is delivered to a shepherd who feeds the sheep for those who make a trade of the flock הצאז ײבנענײxi∙ 7, 11 = “they that sell them,” ver. 5) and enters on his office with two staves, “Favour” and “Union.” He destroys “the three shepherds” in one month, but is soon weary of his flock and the flock of him. He breaks the staff “Favour,” i.e., the covenant of peace with the nations, and asks the traders for his hire. Receiving thirty pieces of silver, he casts it into the temple treasury and breaks the staff “Union” i.e., the brotherhood between Judah and Israel. He is succeeded by a foolish shepherd, who neglects his flock and lets it go to ruin. At length Jehovah intervenes; the foolish shepherd falls by the sword; two-thirds of the people perish with him in the Messianic crisis, but the remnant of one-third forms the seed of the new theocracy (xi. 4-17 taken with xiii. 7-9, according to the necessary transposition proposed by Ewald). All this must be an allegory of past events, the time present to the author and his hopes for the future beginning only at xi. 17, xiii. 7-9. The general situation is clear: foreign kings govern Israel through native princes. The details cannot be explained in the absence of information as to the date and historical course of the events described by the prophet in allegorical form. But those who seek to escape this difficulty, by supposing that the word of the prophet was unintelligible to his contemporaries, and gained a true meaning only in its New Testament fulfilment,^[2. Matt. xxvii. 3-10; cp. Jahrbb. f. D. Theol., 1878, p. 471 sq. ] must forget that in Zech. xi. 9 the shepherd wearies of his office and abandons the flock, while in the New Testament the shepherd gives his life for the sheep, and that in Zech. xi. 12, 13 the price is paid to the shepherd, but in the New Testament to the traitor.
Chap. xii. presents a third variation on the Messianic promise. All heathendom is gathered together against Jerusalem and perishes there. Jehovah first gives victory to the countryfolk of Judah and then they rescue the capital. After this triumph the noblest houses of Jerusalem hold, each by itself, a great lamentation over a martyr “whom they have pierced” (or “whom men have pierced ”). In xii. 10 אלי followed by עליו cannot be right. If את be deleted, we may read אלי אשד , but not אליו אשד, which is not Hebrew. Yet it is very doubtful if the deletion of את is justifiable or sufficient. It is taken for granted that the readers will know who the martyr is, and the exegesis of the church applies the passage to our Lord. Chap. xiii. 1-6 is a continuation of chap. xii.; the dawn of the day of salvation is accompanied by a general purging away of idolatry and the enthusiasm of false prophets. Yet a fourth variation of the picture of the incoming of the Messianic deliverance is given in chap. xiv. The heathen gather against Jerusalem and take the city, but do not utterly destroy the inhabitants. Then Jehovah, at a time known only to Himself, shall appear with all His saints on Mount Olivet and destroy the heathen in battle, while the men of Jerusalem take refuge in their terror in the great cleft that opens where Jehovah sets His foot. Now the new era begins, and even the heathen do homage to Jehovah by bringing due tribute to the annual feast of tabernacles. All in Jerusalem is holy down to the bells on the horses and the cooking-pots.
There is a striking contrast between chaps. i.-viii. and chaps. ix.-xiv. The former prophecy is closely tied to the situation and wants of the community of Jerusalem in the second year of Darius I., and all that it aims at arises out of the necessities of the time, and is of a practical and possible kind—the restoration of the temple and perhaps the elevation of Zerubbabel to the throne of David. The latter chapters, on the other hand, soar far above the field of reality; the historical situation from which they start can hardly be recognized; and the future hope has very little connexion with the present. The fundamental difference between the two parts of the book lies, not in the subject but in the nature of the prophecy,—in the first part realistic and almost prosaic, in the second vague and fantastic. There are corresponding differences in style and speech; and it is particularly to be noted that, while the superscriptions in the first part name the author and give the date of each oracle with precision, those in the second part (ix. 1, xii. 1) are without name or date. That both parts do not belong to the same author must be ad mitted. But most recent critics make the second part the older. Chaps. ix.-xi. are ascribed to a contemporary of Amos and Hosea, about the middle of the 8th century b.c., because Ephraim is mentioned as well as Judah, and Assyria along with Egypt (x. 10), while the neighbours of Israel appear in ix. 1 sq. in the same way as in Amos i.-ii. That chaps. xii.-xiv. are also pre-exilic is held to appear especially in the attack on idolatry and lying prophecy (xiii. 1-6); but, as this prophecy speaks only of Judah and Jerusalem, it is dated after the fall of Samaria, and is assigned to the last days of the Judaean kingdom on the strength of xii. 11, where an allusion is seen to the mourning for King Josiah, slain in battle at Megiddo. Some suppose that the author of ix.-xi. is the Zechariah, son of Jeberechiah, of Isa. viii. 2, and Bunsen ascribes xii.-xiv. to the prophet Urijah, son of Shemaiah (Jer. xxvi. 20 sq.). It is more likely that chaps. ix.-xiv. go all together and are of much later date. These vague predictions have no real spiritual affinity either with the prophecy of Amos, Hosea, and Isaiah, or with that of Jeremiah, where we always feel the solid ground of present reality under our feet. It was only after the exile that prophecy lost its close connexion with history and ceased to be built on present realities. The kind of eschatology which we find in Zech. ix.-xiv. was first introduced by Ezekiel, who in particular is the author of the conception that the time of deliverance is to be preceded by a joint attack of all nations on Jerusalem, in which they come to final overthrow (Ezek. xxxviii. sq.·, Isa. lxvi. 18-24; Joel). The importance attached to the temple service, even in Messianic times (Zech. xiv.), implies an author who lived in the ideas of the religious commonwealth of post-exile times. A future king is hoped for; but in the present there is no Davidic king, only a Davidic family standing on the same level with other noble families in Jerusalem (xii. 7, 12). The “bastard” (mixed race) of Ashdod reminds us of Neh. xiii. 23 sqq.; and the words of ix. 12 (“to-day, also, do I declare that I will render double unto thee ”) have no sense unless they refer back to the deliverance from Babylonian exile. But the decisive argument is that in ix. 13 the sons of Javan, i.e., the Greeks, appear as the representatives of the heathen world-power. The prophecy, therefore, is later than Alexander; and indeed the hostility to the Jews implied in the passage just cited dates only from the time when Palestine passed from the hands of the Ptolemies to those of the Seleucids. Assyria and Egypt (x. 11) may well be the Ptolemaic and Seleucid kingdoms, which together made up for the Jews the empire of the sons of Javan. In ix. 1 sq. (imitated from Amos i.-ii.) Seleucid Syria is described as parcelled out into a number of small principalities, some of which were at the time nearly independent. That the Jews had reason enough to hate their neighbours, even in later times, appears, e.g., in 1 Mac. v.; compare especially ix. 6, 7 with 1 Mac. v. 68. The reference in ix. 8 would fit well with the Egyptian campaigns of Antiochus IV. Epiphanes, when Jerusalem suffered so much on the outward march and still more on the return of his troops. That the victory of Judah over the heathens is to precede the deliverance of Jerusalem (xii. 5 sqq.) is a remarkable feature, hardly to be explained except by the history of the Maccabee wars. The complaint about idolatry also fits this period; and that a new kind of prophecy then came up, in an age where it no longer had a legitimate place, is far from unlikely.
If this date is assumed for chaps. ix.-xiv., we must hold that, by the copious use of phrases from older prophets and other means, the author sought to give his oracles an archaic garb. That this is no unfair assumption appears especially in xiv. 5, in the reference to the earthquake in the days of Uzziah, which is natural only if the author addressed [9:24:775] contemporaries of that catastrophe. This passage is indeed a stronger argument for a date in the Assyrian period than anything cited from chaps. ix.-xi. If, notwithstanding this, no commentator dates chap. xiv. less than 150 years after Uzziah, it is illegitimate to protest against the view that in chaps. ix. sq. Ephraim is an archaizing name for the Diaspora (1 Mac. v. 23, 45, 53).
How so late a piece was admitted among the prophetic writings, while Daniel, written about the same time, is placed only among the hagiographa, is a question not yet answered. We know too little about the history of the canon. A similar case is that of Isa. xxiv.-xxvii. But it is not less difficult to explain how a prophecy of the 8th century could have turned up in post-exile times and been appended to the book of Zechariah.
The literature of the book is cited by C. H. H. Wright, Zechariah and his Prophecies, 2d ed., London, 1879. See also Stade, “Deuterozacharja,” in Zeitschr. f. AT. Wiss., 1881, p. 1 sq.; 1882, pp. 151 sq., 275 sq. (J. WE.)
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 773 [9:24:773]
| |
kp-eb0924-077501-0824m
|
ZEITZ, an ancient manufacturing town in the extreme south of the province of Saxony, Prussia, is pleasantly situated on a hill on the White Elster, 22 miles southsouth-west of Leipsic and 29 south-south-east of Halle. The river is here crossed by two iron bridges, and one stone and one timber bridge. The Gothic abbey church dates from the 15th century, but its Romanesque crypt from the 12th. The old Franciscan monastery, now occupied by a seminary, contains a library of 20,000 volumes. Just outside the town rises the Moritzburg, built in 1564 by the dukes of Saxe-Zeitz, on the site of the bishop’s palace; it is now a reformatory and poorhouse. Zeitz has manufactures of cottons and woollens, machinery, waxcloth, musical instruments, vinegar, cigars, &c.; and woodcarving, dyeing, and calico-printing are carried on. In the neighbourhood there are considerable deposits of lignite, and mineral-oil works. In 1885 the population was 21,261 (18,265 in 1880); in 1816 it was 6640.
Zeitz is an ancient place of Slavonic origin. From 968 till 1028 it was the seat of a bishopric, afterwards removed to Naumburg, 15½ miles to the north-west, and styled Naumburg-Zeitz. In 1564 the last Roman Catholic bishop died, and his dominions were thenceforward administered by princes of Saxony. From 1653 till 1718 Zeitz was the capital of the dukes of Saxe-Zeitz or Sachsen-Zeitz. It thereafter remained in the possession of the electors of Saxony until 1815, when it passed to Prussia.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 775 [9:24:775]
| |
kp-eb0924-077502-0824m
|
ZELLE, or more usually Celle, an industrial and commercial town in the district of Lüneburg in Prussia, is situated on the left bank of the navigable Aller, near its junction with the Fuse and the Lachte, 23 miles to the north-east of Hanover. The town, with which three suburbs were incorporated in 1869, is well built. It is the legal and official centre of a “circle,” and contains the usual tribunals and bureaux, besides several schools, benevolent institutions, and a prison. The library of the appeal court-house consists of 60,000 vols. The principal church contains a ducal burial vault, in which is buried Sophia Dorothea, first wife of the elector George of Hanover, afterwards George I. of England. The town-house dates from the 14th century. The most interesting building in Zelle is the former ducal castle, begun in 1485 in the Late Gothic style, but with extensive Renaissance additions of the close of the 17th century. Caroline Matilda, the divorced wife of Christian VII. of Denmark and sister of George III. of England, resided here from 1772 till her death in 1775; she is buried in the above-mentioned church, and a memorial tablet has been erected to her in the “French garden” outside the town. The industries of the place include the manufacture of woollen yarn, cigars, glue, printers’ ink, philosophical instruments, stoves, bricks, &c.; and it carries on trade in wood, wool, honey, wax, cranberries, and other articles. Nursery-gardening flourishes in the fertile environs, where there are also a large paper-mill and a Government stud farm. The population in 1885 was 18,782, almost entirely Protestant.
Zelle received town-rights in 1292. From about 1369 it was the residence of the ducal family of Brunswick-Lüneburg-Zelle, which became extinct in 1705. In the 17th century Zelle was the most strongly-fortified town in Lüneburg. In 1757 it was besieged and partly laid in ashes by Richelieu. At the peace of Zelle (5th February 1679) Sweden gave in her adhesion to the peace of Nimeguen. Zelle is the birthplace of Thaer (1752-1828), the eminent agriculturist, and of Ernst K. F. Schulze (1789-1817), the poet.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 775 [9:24:775]
| |
kp-eb0924-077503-0824m
|
ZEND-AVESTA, the original document of the religion of Zoroaster (q.v.), and still used by the Parsees (q.v.) as their bible and prayer book. The name “Zend-Avesta” has been current in Europe since the time of Anquetil Duperron (c . 1771), but the Parsees themselves call it simply A vesta,— Zend (i.e., “interpretation ”) being specially employed to denote the translation and exposition of a great part of the Avesta which exists in Pahlavi (q.v.). Text and translation are often spoken of together in Pahlavi books as Aνistâk va Zand (“Avesta and Zend”), whence (through a misunderstanding) our word Zend-Avesta. The origin and meaning of the word “Avesta” (or in its older form Avistâk) are alike obscure; it cannot be traced further back than the Sasanian period. The language of the Avesta is still frequently called Zend; but, as already implied, this is a mistake. We possess no other document written in it, and on this account modern Parsee scholars, as well as the older Pahlavi books, speak of the language and the writing indifferently as Avesta. As the original home of the language can only be very doubtfully conjectured, we shall do well to follow the usage sanctioned by old custom and apply the word to both. Although the Avesta is a work of but moderate compass (comparable, say, to the Iliad and Odyssey taken together), there nevertheless exists no single MS. which gives it in its entirety. This circumstance alone is enough to reveal the true nature of the book: it is a composite whole, a collection of writings as the Old Testament is. It consists, as we shall afterwards see, of the last remains of the extensive sacred literature in which the Zoroastrian faith was formerly set forth.
Contents and Character.— As we now have it, the Avesta consists of four parts,—the Yasna, the Vispered, the Vendidad, and the Khordah Avesta.
1. The Yasna, the principal liturgical book of the Parsees, in 72 chapters (hâiti , hâ), contains the texts that are read by the priest at the solemn Yasna (Izeshne) ceremony. The arrangement of the chapters is purely liturgical, although their matter in many cases has nothing to do with the liturgical action. The kernel of the whole book, around which the remaining portions are grouped, consists of the Gâthâs or “hymns” of Zoroaster ( q.v.), the oldest and most sacred portion of the entire canon. The Yasna accordingly falls into three sections of about equal length. (a ) The introduction (chaps. 1-27) for the most part is made up of long-winded, monotonous, reiterated invocations. (b) The Gâthâs (chs. 28-54) contain the discourses, exhortations, and revelations of the prophet, written in a metrical style and an archaic language, different in many respects from that ordinarily used in the Avesta. As to the authenticity of these hymns, see Zoroaster. The Gâthâs proper, arranged according to the metres in which they are written, fall into five subdivisions (28-37, 43-46, 47-50, 51, 53). Between chap. 37 and chap. 43 is inserted the so-called Seven-Chapter Yasna (haptanghâiti), a number of small prose pieces not far behind the Gâthâs in antiquity, (c) The so-called Later Yasna (Aparô Yasnô) (chaps. 54-72) has contents of considerable variety, but consists mainly of invocations.
2. The Vispered, a minor liturgical work in 24 chapters karde), is alike in form and substance completely dependent on the Yasna; it is based upon the arrangement of the Yasna in its present form, a circumstance proving its much later date as a whole. The name Vispered, meaning “all the chiefs” (vispê rataνô) has reference to the spiritual heads of the religion of Ormuzd, invocations to whom form the main contents of the book.
3. The Vendidad ( Vîdaêvô Dâtem), i.e., the law for the “enemies of the devil,” contains in 22 chapters (fargard) a kind of dualistic account of creation (chap. 1), the legend of Yima and the golden age (chap. 2), the praises of agriculture (chap. 3), and in the bulk of the remaining chapters the circumstantial precepts of the religion [9:24:776] with reference to purification and ecclesiastical penance. It may with propriety be called the “priestly code” of the Parsees.
The Yasna, Vispered, and Vendidad together constitute the Avesta in the stricter sense of that word, and the reading of them appertains to the priest alone. For liturgical purposes the separate chapters of the Vendidad and the Vispered are sometimes inserted amongst those of the Yasna so as to form what is known as the Vendidad Sâde, which then, accompanied by certain liturgical actions, is publicly read in the Parsee worship. The reading of the Gâthâs and Vendidad in this case may, when viewed according to the original intention, be taken as corresponding in some sense to the sermon, while that of the Vispered and the rest of the Yasna may be taken as corresponding to the hymns and prayers of Christian worship.
4. In marked contrast to the three already mentioned is the Khordah Avesta, or Little Avesta, which is designed equally for priesthood and laity, and serves rather as a book of private devotion. Besides some short prayers, such as the Nyâishes, the favourite daily prayers of the Parsees, it contains the Yashts or songs of praise, twenty-one in number, addressed to the Yazatas (Izads), the deities and angels of the Ormuzd creed.
Over and above the four books just enumerated there are a considerable number of fragments from other books, as well as quotations, glosses, and glossaries.
In its present form, however, the Avesta is only a fragmentary remnant of the old priestly literature of Zoroastrianism, a fact confessed by the learned tradition of the Parsees themselves, according to which the number of Yashts was originally thirty. The truth is that we possess but a trifling portion of a very much larger original Avesta, if we are to believe native tradition, carrying us back to the Sasanian period, which tells of an original Avesta in twenty-one books called nasks or nosks, as to the names, contents, and chapters of which we have several more or less detailed accounts, particularly in the Pahlavi Dînkard and in the Rivayats. From the same sources we learn that even then a considerable portion of the original Avesta had been lost: we are told that of a number of nosks only a small portion was found to be extant “after Alexander.” For example, of the seventh nosk, which “before Alexander” had as many as fifty chapters, there then remained only thirteen; and similar things are alleged about the eighth, ninth, tenth, and other nosks. But even of the remains of the original Avesta, as these lay before the authors referred to, only a small portion has survived to our time. Of all the nosks one only, the nineteenth, has come down to us unimpaired and intact,—the Vendidad. All the others, with the exception of slight traces, have disappeared in the course of centuries.
It would be rash to treat in an offhand way this old tradition about the twenty-one nosks as pure invention. The number twenty-one indeed points to an artificial arrangement of the material; for twenty-one is a sacred number, and the most sacred prayer of the Parsees, the so-called Ahunô Vairyô (Honovar) contains twenty-one words; and it is also true that in the enumeration of the nosks we miss the names of the books we know—Yasna, Vispered, as well as the Yashts and the Khordah Avesta. But either we must regard them as having been included among the nosks, though under other names, or, what is even more probable, we must assume that even at that early date special liturgical manuals—the Yasna especially—distinct from the nosks had already been compiled for the practical use of the priests. Further, the statements of the Dînkard and other writings leave on one a very distinct impression that the authors actually had before them the text of the nosks, or at all events of a large part of them. And, besides, in other directions there are numerous indications that such books had once really existed. In the Khordah Avesta as we now have it we find two Srôsh Yashts; with regard to the first, it is expressly stated in old MSS. that it was taken from the Hâdôkht nosk (the twentieth, according to the Dinkard). From the same nosk also a considerable fragment (Yt ., 21 and 22 in Westergaard) has been taken. So also the extensive quotations from Avesta texts in the Niringistân, a Pahlavi book, are probably the disjecta membra of the seventeenth (or Hûspâram) nosk. Lastly, the numerous other fragments, the quotations in the Pahlavi translation, the many references in the Bundahish to passages of this Avesta not now known to us, all presuppose the existence in the Sasanian period of a much more extensive Avesta literature than the mere prayer book now in our hands. The existence of an original Avesta is far from being a mere myth. But, even granting that a certain obscurity still hangs undispelled over the problem of the old Avesta, with its twenty-one nosks, we may well believe the Parsees themselves, when they tell us that their sacred literature has passed through successive stages of decay, the last of which is represented by the present Avesta. There is evidence of this in the patchwork and fragmentary character of some portions of the present Avesta; and, moreover, in the MS. evidence of recent centuries we are able to observe with our own eyes the actual process of abridgment gradually going on, and to trace the manner in which certain portions of the present Avesta slowly passed out of currency. This holds good, in particular, of the greater Yashts. The transcribers of the Khordah Avesta satisfied themselves for the most part with those prayers which were currently in use, such as the Nyâishes and one or two of the smaller and intermediate Yashts. The great Yashts are not of very frequent occurrence: some of them indeed are already met with but seldom, and MSS. containing all the Yashts are of great rarity. Of the fifteenth, seventeenth, and nineteenth Yashts we might even venture to predict that some centuries hence they may perhaps be found defying the tooth of time in not more than a single manuscript copy.
Origin and History.— While all that Herodotus (i. 132) has got to say is that the Magi sang “the theogony” at their sacrifices, Pausanias is able to add (v. 27, 3) that they read from a book. Hermippus in the 3d century b.c. affirmed that Zoroaster, the founder of the doctrine of the Magi, was the author of twenty books, each containing 100,000 verses. According to the Arab historian Tabari, these were written on 1200 cowhides, a statement confirmed by Masudi, who writes, “Zartusht gave to the Persians the book called Avesta. It consisted of twenty-one parts, each containing 200 leaves. This book, in the writing which Zartusht invented and which the Magi called the writing of religion, was written on 12,000 cowhides, bound together by golden bands. Its language was the Old Persian, which no one now understands.” These statements sufficiently establish the existence and great bulk of the sacred writings. Parsee tradition adds a number of interesting statements as to their history. According to the Arda-Viraf-Nâma, stated to have been written during the Sasanian period, the religion revealed through Zoroaster had subsisted in its purity for 300 years when Iskander Rumi (Alexander the Great) invaded and devastated Iran, and burnt the Avesta which, written on cowhides with golden ink, was preserved in the archives at Persepolis. According to the Dinkard, there were two copies, of which one was burnt, while the second perished at the hands of the Greeks in some other way. The Rivayats have it that Alexander burnt the greater part of the twenty-one nosks, and go on to say that after his death the Zoroastrian priests met, gathered the scattered fragments which had escaped the ravages of war, and put together the present collection, which is but a small portion of the original book. With regard to this editing the Dinkard gives various details. It tells us that the collecting of the Avesta fragments, so far as these were still extant, whether in writing or in oral tradition, began under the last of the Arsacids at the command of King Vologeses. The first of the Sasanians, [9:24:777] Ardeshîr Bâbagân, and his son Shapûr I. resumed and continued the work, and proclaimed the new Avesta thus produced as canonical. Finally, under Shapûr II. (309-380) a new revision and final redaction were made by Adarbâd Mahraspand
It is possible enough for historical criticism to regard this tradition in many of its features as mere fiction, or as a perversion of facts made for the purpose of transferring the blame for the loss of a sacred literature to other shoulders than those really responsible for it. People may, if they choose, absolve Alexander from the charge of vandalism of which he is accused; but the fact nevertheless remains, that he suffered the palace at Persepolis to be burnt (Diod., xvii. 72; Curt., v. 7). Even the statement as to the one or two complete copies of the Avesta may be given up as the invention of a later day. Nevertheless the essential elements of the tradition remain unshaken, viz., that the original Avesta or old sacred literature, divided on account of its great bulk and heterogeneous contents into many portions and a variety of separate works, had an actual existence in numerous copies and also in the memories of priests, that, although gradually diminishing in bulk, it remained extant during the long period of foreign domination and ecclesiastical decay after the time of Alexander, and that it served as a basis for the redaction subsequently made. The kernel of this native tradition—the fact of a late collection of older fragments—appears indisputable. The character of the book is entirely that of a compilation.
In its outward form the Avesta as we now have it belongs to the Sasanian period, the last survival of the compilers’ work already alluded to. And it need hardly be said that the collecting and arranging of the scattered fragments often rendered necessary, or at least desirable, certain additions by the redactors’ own hands. But, broadly speaking, the materials out of which the compilers reared their building belonged originally to older structures and are of very various dates. Opinions differ greatly as to the precise age of the original texts brought together by subsequent redactors: according to some, they are pre-Achaemenian; according to Darmesteter, they were written in Media under the Achaemenian dynasty; according to Eduard Meyer, they are on the whole of Sasanian origin; according to some, their source must be sought in the east, according to others, in the west, of Iran. But to search for a precise time or exact locality is to deal with the question too narrowly; it is more correct to say that the Avesta was worked at from the time of Zoroaster down to the Sasanian period. Its oldest portions, the Gâthâs, proceed from Zoroaster himself. This conclusion is inevitable for everyone to whom Zoroaster is an historical personality, and who does not shun the labour of an unprejudiced research into the meaning of those difficult texts (comp. Zoroaster). The rest of the Avesta, in spite of the opposite opinion of learned Parsees, does not even claim to come from Zoroaster. As the Gâthâs constitute the kernel of the Later Yasna, so they ultimately proved to be the first nucleus of a religious literature at large. The language in which Zoroaster taught, especially a later development of it,—an idiom indisputably belonging to eastern Iran,—remained as the standard with the followers of Zoroaster, and became the sacred language of the priesthood of the faith which he had founded; as such it became, so to speak, absolved from the ordinary conditions of time and space. Taught and acquired as an ecclesiastical language, it was enabled to live an artificial life long after it had become extinct as a vernacular,—in this respect comparable to the Latin of the Middle Ages or the Hebrew of the rabbinical schools. The various texts themselves enable us to trace its gradual paralysis, decay, and death. It is only from this point of view that the language can be used as a criterion for the relative chronology of these. Any more exact arrangement seems almost impossible; we have practically no other tests to apply. The priests by whom the texts were edited gave them the form intended to be valid once for all and refrained from any allusion to ephemeral relations. The following conclusions may be stated in a general way.
The language of the Avesta travelled with the Zoroastrian religion and with the main body of the priesthood, in all probability, that is to say, from east to west; within the limits of Iran it became international. The Avesta texts must have passed through a long process of development, which did not reach its close till at a comparatively late period. Many portions are the result of repeated redacting and compiling; older texts are removed from their original connexion, and worked into new ones or made use of in these. In these operations the revisers of the Sasanian epoch may be presumed to have had only the smallest share; the texts they had before them were already for the most part in a revised form. They were no longer in a position to give a relatively correct text; what they still had in their power to some extent to perform is approximately exhibited in such passages as Yt., 1, 12 sq. ; Yt ., 2, 11 sq.; Yt., 10, 120 sq.,— perhaps in part translated back from the Pahlavi.
The great Yashts and the Vendidad are the most instructive portions for the history of the text. The original kernel of Yashts 5, 8, 15, 17, 19 consists of the Iranian mythology of gods and heroes which had its origin in the East, and there also was cast into a poetical form. Fragments of it were worked into the framework of the great Yashts at a much later date. The author of Vend., 2 used in a fragmentary way a poetic version of the Yima legend. The redactor of Vend., 3, judging from the monotonous and clumsy style of the opening sections, must have been prosaic enough; yet from the twenty-fourth paragraph onwards we have a bright and pleasant description of the blessings of agriculture, in a poetical form, that contrasts singularly with what immediately precedes it, and must certainly have been borrowed from an older source. In this way alone can we in other instances also account for the numerous verses with which the prose is often interspersed. Their function often was merely to set off and ornament the later prose. Of “genuine” and “spurious” there can be in this connexion no question, but only of “older” and “more recent.” However vague and obscure the question may remain after all has been said, we can at least lay so much down as fundamentally fixed, namely, that all that is metrical in the Avesta bears the stamp of a higher antiquity than does the prose.
As has been already stated, the Avesta now in our hands is but a small portion of the book as edited under the Sasanians. The large part perished under the devastating wave of persecution which broke over Iran with the Mohammedan invasion, or under the still more fatal influences of the apathy and forgetfulness of its proper guardians. The understanding of the older Avesta texts was far from perfect even at the time when they were being edited and revised. The need for a translation and interpretation became evident; and under the later Sasanians the majority of the books, if not the whole of them, were rendered into the current Pahlavi. A thorough use of this translation will not be possible until we have it in good critical editions, and acquaintance with its language ceases to be the monopoly of a few privileged individuals. For the interpretation of the older texts it is of great value. The Parsee priest Neryosangh subsequently translated a portion of the Pahlavi version into Sanskrit.
The MSS. of the Avesta are comparatively speaking of recent date. The oldest is the Pahlavi Vispered in Copenhagen, of date [9:24:778] 1258. Next come the four MSS. of the Herbad Mihirâpân Kaî Khusro at Cambay (1323 and 1324), two Vendidads with Pahlavi in London and Copenhagen, and two Yasnas with Pahlavi in Copenhagen and Bombay, in the possession of Dastur Jamaspji Minocheherji, who of all the Parsees is richest in old and good MSS. Generally speaking, the MSS. fall off in quality and carefulness in proportion to their lateness; an honourable exception must be made in favour of those proceeding from Kirman aud Yazd in Persia, mostly dating from the 17th and 18th centuries.
The first European scholar to direct attention to the Avesta was Hyde of Oxford, in his Historia Religionis Veterum Persarum eorumque Magorum (1700), which, however, failed to awaken any lasting interest in the sacred writings of the Parsees. The merit of achieving this belongs to the enthusiastic Orientalist Anquetil Duperron, the fruit of whose prolonged stay in India (from 1754 to 1761) and his acquaintance with the Parsee priests was a translation (certainly very defective) of the Zend-Avesta. The foundation of a scientific exegesis was laid by Burnouf. The interpretation of the Avesta is one of the most difficult problems of Oriental philology. To this very day no kind of agreement has been reached by conflicting schools even upon some of the most important points. The most salient contributions are those of Westergaard, Spiegel, Darmesteter, Roth, and Bartholomae. Opinion is divided also as to the significance of the Avesta in the literature of the world. The exaggerated enthusiasm of Anquetil Duperron has been followed, especially since Spiegel’s translation, by an excessive reaction. The future will doubtless be more just with regard to the importance of the book for the history of religion in general and even of Christianity.
Editions.— The first complete editions were that by Westergaard (Copenhagen, 1852-54) and that of the Avesta in the stricter sense, along with the Pahlavi translation, by Spiegel (Vienna, 1853-58). A new and complete edition by Geldner has been in course of publication since 1885. The best translation is that by Darmesteter and Mills in Sacred Books of the East (3 vols., Oxford, 1880 sq., with an excellent introduction by the first-named).
Literature.— See Anquetil Duperron, Zend-Avesta, Ouvrage de Zoroastre, &c., (Paris, 1771); Haug, Essays on the Sacred Language, &e., of the Parsis, especially in the new edition by E. W. West (London, 1878); De Harlez, Introduction à l' Étude de l' Avesta (Paris, 1881); Max Duncker, Geschichte des Alterthums, vol. iv.; and Eduard Meyer, Geschichte des Alterthums (Stuttgart, 1884). (K. G.)
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 775 [9:24:775]
| |
kp-eb0924-077801-0827m
|
ZENO, emperor of the East from 474 to 491, was an Isaurian of noble birth, and originally bore the name of Trascalissaeus, which he exchanged for that of Zeno on his marriage with Ariadne, daughter of Leo I., in 468. Of his early life nothing is known; after his marriage (which was designed by Leo to secure the Isaurian support against his ambitious minister Aspar) he became patrician and commander of the imperial guard and of the armies in the East. While on a campaign in Thrace he narrowly escaped assassination; and on his return to the capital he avenged himself by compassing the murder of Aspar, who had instigated the attempt. In 474 Leo I. died after appointing as his successor Leo the son of Zeno and Ariadne; Zeno, however, with the help of his mother-in-law Verina, succeeded in getting himself crowned also, and on the death of his son before the end of the year became sole emperor. In the following year, in consequence of a revolt fomented by Verina in favour of her brother Basiliscus, he was compelled to take refuge in Isauria, whither he was pursued by Illus and Trocundus, two of the usurper’s generals, and where, after sustaining a defeat, he was compelled to shut himself up in a strong castle. Basiliscus, however, soon outstripped Zeno in avarice, cruelty, and self-indulgence, and the vicissitudes of war and intrigue ultimately enabled the latter to re-enter Constantinople unopposed (July 477), while his rival was banished to Phrygia, where he soon afterwards died. The remainder of Zeno’s reign was disturbed by numerous other less formidable revolts, and it was to relieve himself of the pressure of one of these that in 487 he gave Theodoric (q.v.) permission to invade Italy and dethrone Odoacer, which led to the establishment of the Ostrogothic kingdom in Italy. At an earlier period of his reign (476) Zeno had received the deputation from the Roman senate which announced the deposition of Romulus Augustulus. In ecclesiastical history the name of Zeno is associated with the Henoticon or instrument of union, promulgated by him and signed by all the Eastern bishops, with the design of terminating the Monophysite controversy. The document, which is given by Evagrius (H. E ., iii. 14), re-affirms the doctrine of the Nicaeno-Constantinopolitan creed, and renews the condemnation of Nestorius pronounced by the council of Ephesus, but adroitly avoids the crucial point as to the unity or duality of natures in the Incarnate Word, treating this as an open question.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 778 [9:24:778]
| |
kp-eb0924-077802-0827m
|
ZENO of Citium. See Stoics.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 778 [9:24:778]
| |
kp-eb0924-077803-0827m
|
ZENO of Elea, son of Teleutagoras, is supposed to have been born towards the beginning of the 5th century b.c. The pupil and the friend of Parmenides, he sought to recommend his master’s doctrine of the existence of the One by controverting the popular belief in the existence of the Many. In virtue of this method of indirect argumentation he is regarded as the inventor of “dialectic,” that is to say, disputation having for its end not victory but the discovery or the transmission of truth. He is said to have been concerned in a plot against a tyrant, and on its detection to have borne with exemplary constancy the tortures to which he was subjected; but authorities differ both as to the name and the residence of the tyrant and as to the circumstances and the issue of the enterprise.
In Plato’s Parmenides, Socrates, “then very young,” meets Parmenides, “an old man some sixty-five years of age,” and Zeno, “a man of about forty, tall and personable,” and engages them in philosophical discussion. But it may be doubted whether such a meeting was chronologically possible. Plato’s account of Zeno’s teaching (Parmenides, 128 sq.) is, however, presumably as accurate as it is precise. In reply to those who thought that Parmenides’s theory of the existence of the One involved inconsistencies and absurdities, Zeno tried to show that the assumption of the existence of the Many carried with it inconsistencies and absurdities grosser and more numerous. In early youth he collected his arguments in a book, which, according to Plato, was put into circulation without his knowledge.
Of the paradoxes used by Zeno to discredit the belief in plurality and motion, eight survive in the writings of Aristotle and Simplicius. They are commonly stated as follows.^[1. See Zeller, Die Philosophie d. Griechen, I. 540 sq.; Grundriss, 54. ] (1) If the Existent is Many, it must be at once infinitely small and infinitely great,— infinitely small, because the parts of which it consists must be indivisible and therefore without magnitude; infinitely great, because, that any part having magnitude may be separate from any other part, the intervention of a third part having magnitude is necessary, and that this third part may be separate from the other two the intervention of other parts having magnitude is necessary, and so on αd infinitum. (2) In like manner the Many must be numerically both finite and infinite,—numerically finite, because there are as many things as there are, neither more nor less; numerically infinite, because, that any two things may be separate, the intervention of a third thing is necessary, and so on ad infinitum. (3) If all that is is in space, space itself must be in space, and so on ad infinitum. (4) If a bushel of com turned out upon the floor makes a noise, each grain and each part of each grain must make a noise likewise; but, in fact, it is not so. (5) Before a body in motion can reach a given point, it must first traverse the half of the distance; before it can traverse the half of the distance, it must first traverse the quarter; and so on ad infinitum. Hence, that a body may pass from one point to another, it must traverse an infinite number of divisions. But an infinite distance (which Zeno fails to distinguish from a finite distance infinitely divided) cannot be traversed in a finite time. Consequently, the goal can never be reached. (6) If the tortoise has the start of Achilles, Achilles can never come up with the tortoise; for, while Achilles traverses the distance from his starting-point to the starting-point of the tortoise, the tortoise advances a certain distance, and while Achilles traverses this distance the tortoise makes a further advance, and so on ad infinitum. Consequently, Achilles may run ad infinitum without overtaking the tortoise. [This paradox is virtually identical with (5), the only difference being that, whereas in (5) there is one body, in (6) there are two bodies, moving towards a limit. The “infinity” of the premise is an infinity of subdivisions of a distance which is finite; the “infinity” of the conclusion is an infinity of distance. Thus Zeno again confounds a finite distance infinitely divided with an infinite distance. If the tortoise has a start of 1000 feet, Achilles, [9:24:779] on the supposition that his speed is ten times that of the tortoise, must traverse an infinite number of spaces,—1000 feet, 100 feet, 10 feet, &c.,—and the tortoise must traverse an infinite number of spaces,—100 feet, 10 feet, 1 foot, &c.,—before they reach the point, distant from their starting-points 1111 1 / 9 feet and 111 1 / 9 feet respectively, at which the tortoise is overtaken. In a word, 1000, 100, 10, &c., in (6) and ½, ¼, ⅛, &c., in (5) are convergent series, and 1111 1 / 9 and 1 are the limits to which they respectively approximate.] (7) So long as anything is in one and the same space, it is at rest. Hence an arrow is at rest during every moment of its flight, and therefore also during the whole of its flight. (8) Two bodies moving with equal speed traverse equal spaces in equal times. But, when two bodies move with equal speed in opposite directions, the one passes the other in half the time in which it passes it when at rest. These propositions appeared to Zeno to be irreconcilable.
In short, the ordinary belief in plurality and motion seemed to him to involve fatal inconsistencies, whence he inferred that Parmenides was justified in distinguishing the mutable movable Many from the immutable immovable One, which alone is really existent. In other words, Zeno re-affirmed the dogma, “The Ent is, the Nonent is not.” It may seem strange that a reasoner so acute should confound that which is infinitely divisible with that which is infinitely great, as in (1), (2), (5), and (6); that he should identify space and magnitude, as in (3); that he should neglect the imperfection of the organs of sense, as in (4); that he should resolve motion into a senes of states of rest, and on the strength of this analysis deny the reality of motion, as in (7); and that he should ignore the relativity of speed, as in (8). But Zeno’s perplexity was genuine, and his end was positive. He was neither an eristic seeking an argumentative victory, nor a sceptic despairing of truth, but an honest thinker, breaking ground in a new field with indifferent success.
Great as was the importance of these paradoxes of plurality and motion in stimulating speculation about space and time, their direct influence upon Greek thought was less considerable than that of another paradox,— strangely neglected by historians of philosophy,—the paradox of predication. We learn from Plato (Parmenides, 127 D) that “the first hypothesis of the first argument” of Zeno’s book above mentioned ran as follows: “If existences are many, they must be both like and unlike [unlike, inasmuch as they are not one and the same, and like, inasmuch as they agree in not being one and the same, Proclus, On the Parmenides, ii. 143]. But this is impossible; for unlike things cannot be like, nor like things unlike. Therefore existences are not many.” That is to say, not perceiving that the same thing may be at once like and unlike in different relations, Zeno regarded the attribution to the same thing of likeness and unlikeness as a violation of what was afterwards known as the principle of contradiction; and, finding that plurality entailed these attributions, he inferred its unreality. Now, when without qualification he affirmed that the unlike thing cannot be like, nor the like thing unlike, he was on the high road to the doctrine maintained three-quarters of a century later by the Cynics, that no predication which is not identical is legitimate. He was not indeed aware how deeply he had committed himself; otherwise he would have observed that his argument, if valid against the Many of the vulgar, was valid also against the One of Parmenides, with its plurality of attributes, as well as that, in the absence of a theory of predication, it was useless to speculate about knowledge and being. But others were not slow to draw the obvious conclusions; and it may be conjectured that Gorgias’s sceptical development of the Zenonian logic contributed, not less than Protagoras’s sceptical development of the Ionian physics, to the diversion of the intellectual energies of Greece from the pursuit of truth to the pursuit of culture.
For three-quarters of a century, then, philosophy was at a standstill; and, when in the second decade of the 4th century the pursuit of truth was resumed, it was plain that the difficulty raised by Zeno must be met before the problems which had occupied the earlier thinkers—the problem of knowledge and the problem of being—could be so much as attempted. Accordingly, in the seventh book of the Republic, where Plato propounds his scheme of Academic education, he directs the attention of studious youth primarily, if not exclusively, to the concurrence of inconsistent attributes; and in the Phaedo, 102B-103A, taking as an instance the tallness and the shortness simultaneously discoverable in Simmias, he offers his own theory of the immanent idea as the solution of the paradox. Simmias, he says, has in him the ideas of tall and short. Again, when it presently appeared that the theory of the immanent idea was inconsistent with itself, and moreover inapplicable to explain predication except where the subject was a sensible thing, so that reconstruction became necessary, the Zenonian difficulty continued to demand and to receive Plato’s best attention. Thus, in the Parmenides, with the paradox of likeness and unlikeness for his text, he inquires how far the current theories of being (his own included) are capable of providing, not only for knowledge, but also for predication, and in the concluding sentence he suggests that, as likeness and unlikeness, greatness and smallness, &c., are relations, the initial paradox is no longer paradoxical; while in the Sophist, Zeno’s doctrine having been shown to be fatal to reason, thought, speech, and utterance, the principle which in the Parmenides is applied to αύτά καθ' α ύ τά εΐδη and to sensible particulars is extended to include the case of εΐδη which are not αύτά καθ' α ύ τά. It would seem then that, not to Antisthenes only, but to Plato also, Zeno’s paradox of predication was a substantial difficulty; and we shall be disposed to give Zeno credit accordingly for his perception of its importance.
In all probability Zeno did not observe that in his controversial defence of Eleaticism he was interpreting Parmenides’s teaching anew. But so it was. For, while Parmenides had recognized, together with the One, which is, and is the object of knowledge, a Many, which is not, and therefore is not known, but nevertheless becomes, and is the object of opinion, Zeno plainly affirmed that plurality, becoming, and opinion are one and all inconceivable. In a word, the fundamental dogma, “The Ent is, the Nonent is not,” which with Parmenides had been an assertion of the necessity of distinguishing between the Ent, which is, and the Non-ent, which is not, but becomes, was with Zeno a declaration of the Non-ent’s absolute nullity. Thus, just as Empedocles developed Parmenides’s theory of the Many to the neglect of his theory of the One, so Zeno developed the theory of the One to the neglect of the theory of the Many. With the severance of its two members Eleaticism proper, the Eleaticism of Parmenides, ceased to exist.
The first effect of Zeno’s teaching was to complete the discomfiture of philosophy. For the parodox of predication, which he had used to disprove the existence of plurality, was virtually a denial of all speech and all thought, and thus led to a more comprehensive scepticism than that which sprang from the contemporary theories of sensation. Nevertheless, he left an enduring mark upon Greek speculation, inasmuch as he not only recognized the need of a logic, and grappled, however unsuccessfully, with one of the most obvious of logical problems, but also by the invention of dialectic provided a new and powerful instrument against the time when the One and the Many should be reunited in the philosophy of Plato.
Bibliography.— F. W. A. Mullach, Fragmenta Philosophorum Graecorum, Paris, 1860, i. 266 sq. ; Zeller, Die Philosophie d. Griechen, Leipsic, 1876, i. 534-552; P. Tannery, Pour l'Histoire de la Science Hellène, Paris, 1887, pp. 247-261. Ignoring the philosophical aspect of Zeno’s teaching, Tannery supposes him to have maintained in opposition to the Pythagoreans that body is not a sum of points, time not a sum of moments, and motion not a sum of passages from point to point. For histories of philosophy and other works upon Eleaticism, see Parmenides. (H. JA.)
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 778 [9:24:778]
| |
kp-eb0924-077901-0828m
|
ZENOBIA. See Palmyra, vol. xviii. p. 201 sq.
[9:24:780]
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 779 [9:24:779]
| |
kp-eb0924-078001-0829m
|
ZENTA, a market town of Hungary, in the county of Bács-Bodrog, on the right bank of the river Theiss, 20 miles south of Szegedin, is historically known for the decisive victory won in its vicinity by Prince Eugene over the Turks in 1696. The population, which is purely agricultural, numbered 21,200 in 1880, and 16,000 in 1886.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 780 [9:24:780]
| |
kp-eb0924-078002-0829m
|
ZEPHANIAH (Sophonias, Σοϕονίας, Heb. “whom Jehovah hides” or “protects”; compare the Phoenician man’s or woman’s name צפנבעל C. I. S., No. 207, Euting, Pun. Steine, p. 16), son of Cushi, the ninth, according to the order of his book, among the twelve minor prophets, flourished in the reign of Josiah of Judah, and apparently before the great reformation in the eighteenth year of that king (621 b.c.). For various forms of idolatry put down in that year are spoken of by Zephaniah as still prevalent in Judah (chap. i. 4 sq .), and are specified in such a connexion as to imply that they were not the secret sins of individuals, but held the first place among the national backslidings that could, as the prophet teaches, be removed only by a sweeping judgment on the state. Of the person of Zephaniah nothing is known; but it has been conjectured that his great-great-grandfather Hezekiah (chap. i. 1) is the king of that name, and if so he belonged to the highest class of Judaean society.
The genuineness and integrity of the short prophecy ascribed to Zephaniah do not seem to be open to reasonable doubt. Stade (Gesch. Isr., i. 644) raises a question about chap. iii., and if this were a distinct oracle there would be no cogent reason to ascribe it to the author of the two chapters that precede; for the book of the minor prophets is made up of a number of short pieces, some bearing a name and some anonymous, and it is only old usage that ascribes the anonymous pieces to the last preceding prophet whose name is prefixed to his prophecy. But, though the sequence of thought in the book of Zephaniah is not so smooth as a Western reader may desire, a single leading motive runs through the whole, and the first two chapters would be incomplete without the third, which moreover is certainly pre-exilic (verses 1-4), and presents specific points of contact with what precedes as well as a general agreement in style and idea.
The dominating motive of the whole is the approach of a sweeping and world-wide judgment, which the prophet announces as near at hand, and interprets, on the lines laid down by Isaiah in his prophecies about Israel and Assyria, as designed to destroy the wicked and prepare the way for the visible sovereignty of the righteous God of Israel. As regards Judah, which forms the subject of the first and third chapters, the effect of the judgment will be to sift out the idolaters, the men of violence and wrong, the false prophets and profane priests, the hardened men of the world to whom all religion is alike and who deem that the Lord will do neither good nor evil. The men who seek meekness and righteousness will be left, a poor and lowly people, trusting in the name of the Lord and eschewing falsehood. To them a future of gladness is reserved, a peaceful life under Jehovah’s immediate kingship and loving protection. Such an ideal necessarily implies that they shall no longer be threatened by hostility from without, and this condition is satisfied by the prophet’s view of the effect of the impending judgment on the ancient enemies of his nation. The destruction of the Philistines on the west and of Moab and Ammon on the east will enable the Hebrews to extend their settlements from the Mediterranean to the Syrian desert; and their remoter oppressors, the Ethiopians and Assyrians, shall also perish. That Ethiopia appears instead of Egypt is in accordance with the conditions of the time. It was with Ethiopic dynasts holding sway in Egypt that Assyria had to contend during the 7th century b.c., when the petty kingdoms of Palestine were so often crushed between the collision of the two great powers, and even Psammetichus, the contemporary of Josiah, and the restorer of a truly Egyptian kingdom, was nominally the heir of the great Ethiopian sovereigns.
These conceptions are closely modelled on the scheme of Jehovah’s righteous purpose worked out by Isaiah a century before, when Judah first felt the weight of the Assyrian rod, and they afford the most conclusive evidence of the depth and permanence of that great prophet’s influence. But in one point there is an important divergence. In Isaiah’s view Assyria is the rod of God’s anger; and, when the work of judgment is complete and Jehovah returns to the remnant of His people, the theodicea is completed by the fall of the unconscious instrument of the divine decrees before the inviolable walls of the holy mountain. Zephaniah in like manner looks to an all-conquering nation as the instrument of divine judgment on Judah and the rest of the known world. He represents the day of Jehovah, according to the old meaning of that phrase, as a day of battle (not an assize day); he speaks of the guests invited to Jehovah’s sacrifice, i.e., to a great slaughter, of alarm against fenced cities, of blood poured out as dust, of pillage and desolation at the hand of an enemy. But beyond this all is vague; we neither hear who the sword of Jehovah (ii. 12) is, nor what is to become of him when his work is completed. Isaiah’s construction has in all its parts a definite reference to present political facts, and is worked out to a complete conclusion; Zephaniah borrows the ideas of his predecessor without attaining to his clearness of political conception, and so his picture is incomplete. The foreign conqueror, by whom Judah is to be chastised and Nineveh and Ethiopia destroyed, is brought on to the stage, but never taken off it. It is safe to conclude that the principal actor in the prophetic drama, who is thus strangely forgotten at the last, was not as real and prominent a figure in Zephaniah’s political horizon as Assyria was in the horizon of Isaiah. At the same time it is reasonable to think that so complete a reproduction of Isaiah’s ideas in the picture of a new world-judgment was not formed without some stimulus from without, and this stimulus has been sought in the Scythian invasion of western Asia, to which some of Jeremiah’s earlier prophecies also appear to refer; see Israel, vol. xiii. p. 415. But from the analysis given in the article Scythia (vol. xxi. p. 577) it is doubtful whether the Scythians had appeared even on the distant horizon at the date of Zephaniah’s prophecy,^[1. The Scythians appeared in Media about 619 b.c., and, if they were really Sacae and came from the East, their appearance in Palestine would fall still later. ] while, on the other hand, the movements in the far East which preceded the first siege of Nineveh are chronologically suitable, and appear to afford quite sufficient basis for Zephaniah’s undefined anticipation of a general political convulsion. How the danger that threatened Nineveh stirred the mind of the Hebrews appears also from the prophecy of Nahum.
Be this as it may, the comparison between Isaiah and Zephaniah affords an instructive example of the difference between original and reproductive prophecy. All the prophets have certain fundamental ideas in common, and each has learned something from his predecessors. If Zephaniah draws from Isaiah, Isaiah himself drew from Amos and Hosea. But Isaiah goes to his predecessors for general principles, and shapes the application of these principles to the conditions of his own time in a manner altogether fresh and independent. Zephaniah, on the other hand, goes to his predecessor for details; he does not clearly distinguish between the form and the substance of the prophetic ideas, and looks for a final consummation of the divine purpose, not only in accordance with the principles of Isaiah, but on the very lines whieh that prophet had laid down. But these lines were drawn on the assumption that the Assyrian judgment was final and would be directly followed by the reign of righteousness. This assumption was not justified by [9:24:781] the event; the deliverance and reformation were incomplete; and the inbringing of the reign of righteousness was again deferred. Zephaniah sees this, but fails to draw the true inference. He postulates a new crisis in history similar to the Assyrian crisis of which Isaiah wrote, and assumes that it will run such a course as to fulfil Isaiah’s unfulfilled predictions. But the movements of history do not repeat themselves; and the workings of God’s righteous providence take fresh shape in each new scene of the world’s life, so that a prediction not fulfilled under the conditions for which it was given can never again be fulfilled in detail. As it is an essential feature of prophecy that all ideas are not only presented but thought out in concrete form, and with reference to present historical conditions, the distinction between the temporary form and the permanent religious truth embodied in that form is also essential. The tendency to confound the two, to ascribe absolute truth to what is mere embodiment, and therefore to regard unfulfilled predictions as simply deferred, even where the form of the prediction is obviously dependent on mere temporary conditions of the prophet’s own time, gained ground from the time of Zephaniah onwards, and culminated in the Apocalyptic literature. As it grew, the eternal ideas of the great prophets fell into the background, and were at length entirely lost in the crass Jewish conception of a Messianic age, which is little more than an apotheosis of national particularism and self righteousness. Zephaniah’s eschatology is not open to this charge: with him, as with Isaiah, the doctrine of the salvation of the remnant of Israel is inspired by spiritual convictions and instinct with ethical force. The emphasis still lies on the moral idea of the remnant, not on the physical conception Israel. He does not yield to Amos or Isaiah in the courage with which he denounces sin in high places, and he is akin to Hosea in his firm hold of the principle that the divine governance is rooted not only in righteousness but in love, and that the triumph of love is the end of Jehovah’s working. Yet even here we see the difference between the first and second generations of prophecy. The persuasion to which Hosea attains only through an intense inward struggle, which lends a peculiar pathos to his book, appears in Zephaniah, as it were, ready made. There is no mental conflict before he can pass through the anticipation of devastating judgment to the assurance of the victory of divine love, and the sharp transitions that characterize the book are not, as with Hosea, due to sudden revulsion of feeling, but only mark the passage to some new topic in the circle of received prophetic truth. The finest thing in the book—in spite of certain obscurities, which may be partly due to corruptions of the text—is the closing passage; but the description of the day of Jehovah, the dies irae dies illa of chap. i. 15, which furnishes the text of the most striking of mediaeval hymns, has perhaps taken firmer hold of the religious imagination. Least satisfactory is the treatment of the judgment on heathen nations, and of their subsequent conversion to Jehovah. In the scheme of Isaiah it is made clear that the fall of the power that shatters the nations cannot fail to be recognized as Jehovah’s work, for Assyria falls before Jerusalem as soon as it seeks to go beyond the limits of the divine commission, and thus the doctrine “With us is God” is openly vindicated before the nations. But Zephaniah assumes that the convulsions of history are Jehovah’s work, and specially designed for the instruction and amendment of Israel (iii. 6 sq.), and neglects to show how this conviction, which he himself derives from Isaiah, is to be brought home by the coming judgment to the heart of heathen nations. Their own gods indeed will prove helpless (ii. 11), but this is not enough to turn their eyes towards Jehovah. Here, therefore, there is in his eschatology a sensible lacuna, from which Isaiah’s construction is free, and a commencement of the tendency to look at things from a merely Israelite standpoint, which is so notable a feature of the later Apocalyptic.
There is no important separate commentary on Zephaniah; the student must refer to the commentaries on the minor prophets (see Hosea). The relative section in Duhm, Theologie der Propheten, deserves attention. An apocryphal prophecy ascribed to Zephaniah is quoted by Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, v. 11, § 78. (W. R. S.)
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 780 [9:24:780]
| |
kp-eb0924-078101-0830m
|
ZEPHYRINUS, St, bishop of Rome from about 202 to 26th August 217, succeeded Victor I. He is described as a man of little intelligence or strength of character, and the somewhat important controversies on doctrine and discipline that marked his pontificate are more appropriately associated with the name of Hippolytus (q.v.) and of Calixtus, his principal adviser and afterwards his successor (see Popedom, vol. xix. p. 489).
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 781 [9:24:781]
| |
kp-eb0924-078102-0830m
|
ZEPHYRUS, the west wind, brother of Boreas, the north wind, was the son of the Titan Astraeus and Eos, the dawn (Hes., Theog., 579 ), and had his palace in Thrace (Il., ix. 5; Od., v. 295). He was married to Chloris, the goddess of flowers (Ov., Fast., v. 195), by whom he had a son, Carpus; by the harpy Podarge he was also the father of Xanthus and Balius, the horses of Achilles (Il., xvi. 150).
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 781 [9:24:781]
| |
kp-eb0924-078103-0830m
|
ZERAFSHAN, an independent “circle” or province of Russian Turkestan, includes the valley of the river Zerafshan from its sources to Katty-Kurgan, as well as the mountains which bound the valley to the north and south. It is the Sogdiana (q.v.) of the ancients, famed for its fertility, which is due to the waters of the Polytimetus. The present Russian province of Zerafshan, which is densely peopled along the course of the river, has a length of nearly 250 miles from west to east, a width of from 50 to 100 miles, and an area of 19,665 square miles. It is bounded on the W. by Bokhara, on the N. by the Kizil-kum Desert of Syr-Daria and the Russian province of Ferghana, on the E. by the Alai plateau, and on the S. by the vassal khanates of Bokhara,—Karategin, Hissar, Shahri-Syabs, and Karshi. High chains of mountains enclose the province on three sides. To the north are the Turkestan Mountains, which separate the tributaries of the Syr from those of the Amu, rising to 22,000 feet in their highest snow-clad peaks, and crossed by but few passes, which themselves range from 10,000 to 13,000 feet. In the west the Turkestan Mountains are joined by the Nura-tau Mountains, which have a north-westerly direction (see Turkestan). In the south-east the valley of the Zerafshan is separated from that of the Surkhab by the grand snow-clad Hissar Range, which runs from north-east to south-west, and by several chains parallel to it, while farther west a series of mountains, partly running also towards the south-west and partly towards the north-west, separate it from the Bokhara plains of the Amu. The lowest passes across these chains have altitudes of not less than 7000 feet. But the valley of the Zerafshan lies broadly open towards the steppes in the west, and has supplied an easy route for the railway from the Caspian by Merv to Samarkand.
Granites and all kinds of crystalline slates are widely developed in the mountains which enclose Zerafshan. Carboniferous limestones are met with in the west; but the great bulk of the deposits which overlie the crystalline slates, and are raised to the greatest heights in the highlands, belong to a more recent geological time, namely, to the Secondary—chiefly Chalk—and Tertiary periods. The Zerafshan valley owes its fertility to the thick terraces of loess which surround the base of the mountains and sometimes reach a thickness of 100 feet.
The Zerafshan river, which owes its name(“gold-spreading”)probably more to the fertility it brings than to the gold which is found in very small quantities in its sands, rises under the name of Matchi from a large glacier, fed by the high peaks which rise at the junction (improperly called Kok-su) of the Turkestan Mountains with the Alai Range. The altitude of the glacier is about 9000 feet, and thence the Zerafshan flows due west in a narrow valley, with a fall of not less than 40 feet per mile. Several villages are scattered over the slopes of the mountains; and some thirty bridges, made of poplar trees felled across the river and swaying under the weight of the foot passenger, furnish means of communication. After a course of nearly 100 miles in the mountains the Zerafshan receives from the left the Fan, with the Yagnob, which flows in a high longitudinal valley, separated from the main river by the lofty Zerafshan Range. About Pendjakent it enters on its middle course along a broad valley from 20 to 50 miles wide. Large aryks, or irrigation canals, one of which is 50 miles in length and has all the appearance of a river, distribute the waters of the Zerafshan over the valley, while the river itself divides into two great branches, 10 to 12 miles apart, forming a large island, the Miankal, which is the most fertile part of the province. A dam keeps up the water in the southern branch, Kara-Daria, close by which is situated Samarkand (q.v.), and five large aryks distribute its water over the fields. Numberless canals drain off its waters farther west in the neighbourhood of the city of Bokhara, so that, after carrying an insignificant volume of water to the small Lake Kara-kul, it stops its course there, some 30 miles from the Amu-Daria, of which it formerly was an affluent.
The population of Zerafshan was reckoned at 351,900 in 1883. The bulk of the inhabitants are Uzbegs and Tajiks, the remainder consisting of a few thousand Persians, Hindus, and Jews respectively; the Russians are mainly military, civil functionaries, merchants, and a few peasant settlers. Wheat, barley, rice, and other cereals, as also lucerne, are widely cultivated, and the gardens [9:24:782] of Zerafshan are beautiful. A variety of petty trades are carried on in the towns and villages.
Zerafshan is divided into three districts, the chief towns of which are Samarkand (36,000 inhabitants), now connected by rail with Bokhara, Merv, and Mikhailovsk on Krasnovodsk Bay in the Caspian Sea; Katty-Kurgan (4425), close by the frontier of Bokhara; and Pendjakent (1880), chief town of the mountain district of the upper Zerafshan, known as Kohistan.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 781 [9:24:781]
| |
kp-eb0924-078201-0831m
|
ZERBST, a manufacturing town in the duchy of Anhalt, Germany, is situated on the Nuthe, 11 miles northwest of Dessau and 21 south-east of Magdeburg. It contains five churches, one of which (St Nicholas), built in 1446-88, is a good example of the Late Gothic style as developed in Saxony, with its spacious proportions, groined vaulting, and bare simple pillars. The town-house dates from about 1480, but it was disfigured by additions in the beginning of the 17th century. The palace (1681- 1750) has been used as a depository of archives since 1872. There are several quaint old houses, with high gables, in the market-place, in the middle of which stand a Roland column, of about 1445, and a bronze figure known as the “Butterjungfer” (butter-girl), of uncertain origin and meaning, but now regarded as the palladium of the town. The old Franciscan monastery, with fine cloisters, founded in 1250, contains the gymnasium; a nunnery of 1214 has been converted into barracks; and the Augustinian monastery of 1390 has been a hospital since 1525. The site of the old fortifications is occupied by pretty promenades. Gold and silver articles, silk, plush, cloth, leather, soap, starch, chemicals, and carriages are among the chief manufactures. Iron-founding is carried on; and several breweries are engaged in the preparation of Zerbster bitter beer, which enjoys considerable repute. Market-gardening is also a profitable industry at Zerbst. The population, almost entirely Protestant, was 15,069 in 1885; in 1849 it was 9350.
Zerbst is an ancient town, mentioned in 949. In 1307 it came into the possession of the Anhalt family, and from 1603 till 1793 was the capital of the collateral branch of Anhalt-Zerbst. In 1793 it passed to Anhalt-Dessau.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 782 [9:24:782]
| |
kp-eb0924-078202-0831m
|
ZEUS, the chief deity of ancient Greek religion, bears a name which almost certainly means “sky.” His title is identified by etymologists with the Sanskrit Hyaus, the “bright one,” “sky,” though his legend and place in religion are not closely akin to those of the Vedic deity. It seems nearly certain that the peoples who speak Aryan languages had at some remote time a common word for the sky, and nothing can be more probable than that they also worshipped the vault of heaven. In what sense the sky may have been an Aryan deity before the distant and obscure process called the Aryan dispersion, it is not possible with certainty to say. The followers of Mr Herbert Spencer might not inconsistently suppose that there was once an Aryan medicine-man or chief named Sky, and that on his death his ghost was worshipped and his cult finally blended with that of the actual natural phenomenon. Or, again, it might be argued that the sky was originally adored as a symbol of the Infinite, and that men, losing the original conception, and misled by the personal appearance of the name as other words for sky became more familiar, were deceived into the belief that “sky” was a personal deity. Or, once more, theorists might urge that Sky was first worshipped at a stage of early fancy, when all things in nature were looked on as personal and of human parts and passions, while later the sky sank back into the category of lifeless things, leaving Zeus as a distinct personal being and deity. Other hypotheses might, no doubt, be invented, but unhappily we have no means of proving their historical accuracy. It is a common thing among backward races, for example on the Gold Coast, to find Sky worshipped as a god, or regarded as the dwelling-place of gods. How and in what manner such conceptions were attained by the ancestors of the ancient Greeks we can never know as a matter of fact
Coming to historical and documentary evidence, our earliest knowledge of Zeus is derived from the Homeric and Hesiodic poems. It is very probable that in the legend and ritual of remote towns and temples in Greece we have traces of a conception of Zeus much older than that which meets us in Homer. But Homer and Hesiod are the most ancient literary testimonies; next to these come the speculations of the early philosophers and the writings of the lyric poets, Pindar, Herodotus, and the tragedians. Finally, we have the Zeus of the philosophers of the central period,—Plato and Aristotle,—and the Zeus of the later philosophic periods down to the prevalence of Christianity.
By the time that Zeus meets us in Homer he has wandered far from the original conception of him. Whatever that may have been, Zeus cannot have been first imagined in an age of advanced society on the heroic system, that is, in an age of the fully developed monogamous family of city states each governed by a king, and of a general loose confederation, with a kind of upper and lower house,—the prince’s council and the assembly of the people. It is, however, on the model of such a society that the Olympian consistory is organized in Homer, with Zeus for the bretwalda, the principal chief of the gods. Such a position Zeus holds in Homer. The poet represents him as anthropomorphic,—a powerful, humorous, amorous ruler, sometimes troubled by disputes among his younger brethren, —Hades and Poseidon,—his wife, and his children. His claim to supreme authority is based on primogeniture (77., XV. 187), whereas in Hesiod Zeus is the successful youngest son of Cronus. Both poets agree that he has overthrown the paternal dynasty, and established his own power after violent struggles. The legends in Hesiod are full of ugly and puerile fables and conceits, dating doubtless from remote and uncivilized antiquity. Though Zeus be so much of a magnified man in Homer, there are probably traces of the elemental conception, and his union with Hera (Il. , xiv. 152) on the crest of Ida may be a poetic memory of the old story of Heaven wedding Earth, though Hera cannot as a rule be regarded as a form of Gaea or of Demeter. While among the gods Zeus is a father, brother, and emperor, Homeric men sometimes use his name as we might use that of God, in a religious rather than in a mythological sense. Now regarded as subject to Fate, so that he cannot save even his own children from her decree, elsewhere he seems to hold the gifts of Fate in his own hand: from two vast jars he deals out good and evil to mankind. Where morals are concerned, he sanctions the oath (ZZ., iii. 227) both in this world and the next, and he is the friend of strangers and suppliants, the patron of the hospitable hearth. In Homer Zeus does not assume the form of the lower animals, and in the strange passage where he recounts his loves, the Leporello of his own Don Juan, he says nothing of those well-known disguises. In Hesiod the old wild tales revive, and we learn, for example (Theog., 886; compare the scholiast), that Zeus swallowed his own wife, Metis, after inducing her to take the shape of a fly, just as Puss-in-Boots got rid of the ogre who turned himself into a mouse. In Hesiod, too, we have the tale of Prometheus and Pandora, a tale which afforded such an admirable theme for moral handling by Aeschylus. Zeus tempted Epimetheus by the aid of the woman Pandora; hence came death into the world and all our woe. Then Prometheus pitied and aided men, whom Zeus had intended to destroy, and the hero was fixed to a rock in Caucasus by order of the god. The myth may be allegorized in a dozen ways, and perhaps may be taken to mean that man does not increase happiness by increasing [9:24:783] knowledge, science, and the arts of life. Without the gifts of Prometheus, carried to what Horace would have thought a profane pitch of perfection, we should not have reached modern industrialism and the horrors of modern war. In Hesiod Prometheus may stand for humanity vainly struggling to be powerful and happy against that inflexible and ruthless law which is Zeus And what shall the end be? How shall the ways of Zeus be justified to men, and man’s rebellion be justified to Zeus? We no more know how Aeschylus solved the problem mythically than we can discover the actual solution. The idea that another shall voluntarily take the place of Prometheus (Aesch., Prom. Vinct. 1026) naturally recalls the theory of the Atonement. To such mysteries does the Greek mind attain, and in such ultimate perplexities is the conception of Zeus, the Bon Dieu of the Homeric Olympian festivals, involved.
At the opposite pole from the Hesiodic Zeus is the Zeus who practically means the unknown god, as Terpander sings, Zeυ πάντων άρχά, πάντων άγήτωρ, or, as the Orphic hymn (whatever its date) proclaims him, Zeύς κεφαλή, Zeύs μέ σσa, ∆ιός δ' έ κ πάντα τέτυκτaι.
Thus Zeus becomes a shorthand symbol for the pantheistic deity.
The Zeus of pure religion and of speculation is very different from the Zeus of ritual and of local myth. To ritual, and to the local myths treasured by priests, which often tried to explain the ritual, we owe the unbecoming anecdotes of Zeus as the god who, in the form of ant, snake, bull, eagle, and so forth, made love to the daughters of men. On this point reference may be made to the work of the present writer, Myths, Ritual, and Religion (ii. 189). The hypothesis there offered is that the Greeks in their early uncivilized state, dwelling in tribes and in scattered kraals or villages, retained traditions like the totemic and magical beliefs of Red Indians or Australians. When they became more united and more civilized, they did not drop wholly the faith that they were descended from animals, nor wholly forget such tales as the Indians tell of Manibozho and the Australians of Punjel, but they transferred the old anecdotes to Zeus. In place of saying, “We descend from a bull,” they said, “We descend from Zeus, who for purposes of amorous disguise took the shape of a bull,” or a swan, or an ant, as the case might be. Probably some foreign legends, Phoenician or African, were also borrowed and attached to Zeus. If this be a correct, as it seems a possible, hypothesis, then it will be well to be cautious in explaining the myths about Zeus as if they were all of elementary origin, and all expressed in images some natural process or series of natural phenomena. We must regard Zeus as an extremely difficult complex, in which elemental myths, myths of savage fancy, myths of perverted history, theories of early natural philosophy, and the ideas of pantheistic speculation are all confusedly mingled. He is the sum of the religious thought of Hellas, formed in the numberless ages between savagery and complete civilization. He received human sacrifices even after the Christian era; yet long before it he all but corresponded to the Unknown Substance of Spencerian philosophy. (See Plato, Rep., viii. 565 D; Suidas, s.v. “Laphystius.”) A summary of the Zeus myths will be found in Dr William Smith’s Dictionary of Classical Mythology. For a comparison between the character and attributes of Jupiter and Zeus, see the article Jupiter.
Among modern works in which the character and legend of Zeus are discussed may be recommended Welcker’s Griechische Götterlehre (Gottingen, 1857); Preller’s Griechische Mythologic (Berlin, 1872); the Selected Essays of Mr Max Miiller; Le Sentiment Religieux en Grèce of Μ. Jules Girard (3d ed., Paris, 1887); and C. O. Müller’s Introduction to a Scientific System of Mythology (Eng. transl., London, 1844). The subject has not yet been reached (1888) in Rosscher’s great Lexikon. The authorities named will introduce the reader in turn to other authors, their researches and speculations. Heyne’s Apollodorus (Göttingen, 1803) is also useful. (A. L. )
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 782 [9:24:782]
| |
kp-eb0924-078301-0832m
|
ZEUXIS, a Greek painter, who flourished about 420- 390 b.c., and described himself as a native of Heraclea, meaning probably the town in Magna Graecia. To this neighbourhood seem to point the facts of his having painted a figure of Helena for a temple in Croton, of his presenting a picture of Alcmena to the people of Agrigentum, and of his having been, in one account, a pupil of Damophilus of Himera in Sicily, the other statement being that he was a pupil of Neseus of Thasos. Afterwards he appears to have resided in Ephesus. His known works are—
[table]
In ancient records we are told that Zeuxis, following the initiative of Apollodorus, had introduced into the art of painting a method of representing his figures in light and shadow, as opposed to the older method of outline, with large flat masses of colour for draperies, and other details, such as had been practised by Polygnotus and others of the great fresco painters. The new method led to smaller compositions, and often to pictures consisting of only a single figure, on which it was the more easy for the painter to demonstrate the combined effect of the various means by which he obtained perfect roundness of form. The effect would appear strongly realistic, as compared with the older method, and to this was probably due the origin of such stories as the contest in which Zeuxis painted a bunch of grapes so like reality that birds flew towards it, while Parrhasius painted a curtain which even Zeuxis mistook for real. The story reads in Pliny (N. H., XXXV. 65) as if Parrhasius had brought forward a picture with an apparent curtain hung in front to protect the colours from the light, and that Zeuxis had tried to pull the curtain aside. It is perhaps a variation of this story when we are told (Pliny, loc. cit.) that Zeuxis also painted a boy holding grapes, towards which birds flew, the artist remarking that if the boy had been as well painted as the grapes the birds would have kept at a distance. But, if the method of Zeuxis led him to real roundness of form, to natural colouring, and to pictures consisting of single figures or nearly so, it was likely to lead him also to search for striking attitudes or motives, which by the obviousness of their meaning should emulate the plain intelligibility of the larger compositions of older times. Lucian, in his Zeuxis, speaks of him as carrying this search to a novel and strange degree, as illustrated in the group of a Female Centaur with her Young. When the picture was exhibited, the spectators admired its invention and overlooked the skill of the painter, to the vexation of Zeuxis. The pictures of Hercules Strangling the Serpents to the astonishment of his father and mother (7), Penelope (10), and Menelaus Weeping (11) are quoted as instances in which strong motives naturally presented themselves to him. But, in spite of the tendency towards realism inherent in the new method of Zeuxis, he is said to have retained the largeness of form which had characterized his predecessors. Of all his known works it would be expected that this quality would have appeared best in his famous picture of Helena, for this reason, that we cannot conceive any striking or effective incident for him in her career. In addition to this, however, Quintilian.
[9:24:784]
states (Inst. Orat., xii. 10, 4) that in respect of largeness of form Zeuxis had followed Homer, while there is the fact that he had inscribed two verses of the Iliad (iii. 156 sqf) under his figure of Helena. As models for the picture he was allowed the presence of five of the most beautiful maidens of Croton at his own request, in order that he might be able to “transfer the truth of life to a mute image.” Cicero (De Invent., ii. 1, 1) assumed that Zeuxis had found distributed among these five the various elements that went to make up a figure of ideal beauty. It should not, however, be understood that the painter had made up his figure by the process of combining the good points of various models, but rather that he found among those models the points that answered to the ideal Helena in his own mind, and that he merely required the models to guide and correct himself by during the process of transferring his ideal to form and colour. This picture also is said to have been exhibited publicly, with the result that Zeuxis made much profit out of it. By this and other means, we are told, he became so rich as to rather give away his pictures than to sell them. He presented his Alcmena to the Agrigentines, his Pan to King Archelaus of Macedonia, whose palace he is also said to have decorated with paintings. According to Pliny {N. H., XXXV. 62), he made an ostentatious display of his wealth at Olympia in having his name woven in letters of gold on his dress. But, as there would not be much ostentation in that, and as Pliny at times makes mistakes in translating from his Greek sources, it is possible that Zeuxis may merely have presented some piece of tapestry to a temple at Olympia with the customary inscription woven in letters of gold. Under his picture of an Athlete (12) he wrote that “It is easier to revile than to rival” (μωμήσεταί τις μάλλον ἢ μιμήσετaι). A contemporary, Isocrates {De Permut., 2), remarks that no one would say that Zeuxis and Parrhasius had the same profession as those persons who paint pinakia, which is equivalent to the vase-painters of the time. We possess many examples of the vase-painting of the period circa 400 b.c., and it is noticeable on them that there is great freedom and facility in drawing the human form, so as to suggest roundness and perspective. In the absence of fresco paintings of that date we have only these vases to fall back upon. Yet, with their limited resources of colour and perspective, they in a measure show the influence of Zeuxis, while, as would be expected, they retain perhaps more of the largeness of form of older times. It is said that he died of laughter at the quaintness of a picture he had painted of an Old Woman.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 783 [9:24:783]
| |
kp-eb0924-078401-0833m
|
ZHITOMIR, or Jitomir, a town of western Russia, capital of the government of Volhynia, is situated on the Tetereff river, 646 miles to the south-west of Moscow. The railway which connects Riga and Königsberg with Odessa, via Berditcheff, passes within 27 miles of the old Lithuanian city without sending a branch towards it; and the whole place, with its old abandoned mansions of the Polish nobility, has an air of decay. Nor is it rich in historical monuments of its troubled past, its churches and cathedral mostly dating from the 18th century. Its population, however, reached 54,830 in 1884,—Jews constituting more than one-third of the total. Two large printing offices in Zhitomir issue nearly one-half of all the Hebrew books printed in Russia. The Jewish merchants carry on a considerable export trade in the agricultural produce of the plains surrounding the city, as also in timber and wooden wares from the forests to the north.
Zhitomir is a very old city, tradition tracing its foundation as far back as the times of Askold and Dir. The annals, however, mention it chiefly in connexion with invasions of the Tartars, who plundered it in the 13th, 14th, and even the 17th century (1606), or in connexion with destructive conflagrations. It fell under Lithuanian rule in 1320, and during the 15th century was one of the fifteen chief cities of the kingdom. Later on it became part of Poland, and when the Cossacks rose under Khmelnitsky (1648) they sacked the town. It became annexed to Russia along with the rest of the Ukraine.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 784 [9:24:784]
| |
kp-eb0924-078402-0833m
|
ZIMMERMANN, Johann Georg, Ritter von (1728- 1795), a Swiss philosophical writer and physician, was born at Brugg, in the canton of Aargau, on 8th December 1728. He studied at Göttingen, where he took the degree of doctor of medicine. Afterwards he practised as a physician in his native place, and here he wrote Ueber die Einsamkeit (1755) and Vom Nationalstolz (1758). These books made a great impression in Germany, and were translated into almost every European language. They are now only of historical interest. In Zimmermann’s character there was a strange combination of sentimentalism, melancholy, and enthusiasm; and it was by the free and eccentric expression of these qualities that he excited the interest of his contemporaries. Another book by him, written at Brugg, Von der Erfahrung in der Arzneiwissenschaft (1764), also attracted much attention. In 1768 he settled at Hanover as private physician of George III. with the title of Hofrath. Catherine II. invited him to the court of St Petersburg, but this invitation he declined. He attended Frederick the Great during that monarch’s last illness, and afterwards issued various books about him, of which the chief were Ueber Frederick den Grossen und meine Unterredung mit ihm kurz vor seinem Tode (1788) and Fragmente über Friedrich den Grossen (1790). These writings display extraordinary personal vanity, and convey a wholly false impression of Frederick’s character. Zimmermann died at Hanover on 7th October 1795.
See Zimmermann's Briefe an einige seiner Freunde in der Schweiz (1830) and Bodemann’s Johann Georg Zimmermann (1878).
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 784 [9:24:784]
| |
kp-eb0924-078403-0833m
|
ZINC, the name both of an important useful metal and of the element of which the metal consists. Zinc as a component of brass had currency in metallurgy long before it became known as an individual metal. Aristotle refers to the alleged fact that the Mossinecians produced a bright and light-coloured χαλκός, not by addition of tin, but by fusing up with an earth. Pliny explicitly speaks of a mineral cadmia as serving for the conversion of copper into aurichalcum, and says further that the deposit (of ZnO) formed in the brass furnaces could be used instead of the mineral. The same process was used for centuries after Pliny, but its rationale was not understood. Stahl, as late as 1702, quoted the formation of brass as a case of the union of a metal with an earth into a metallic compound; but he subsequently adopted the view propounded by Kunkel in 1677, that cadmia is a metallic caix, and that it dyes the copper yellow by giving its metal up to it. In 1597 Libavius described a “peculiar kind of tin” which was prepared in India, and of which a friend had given him a quantity. From his account it is quite clear that that metal was zinc, but he did not recognize it as the metal of calamine. It is not known to whom the discovery of isolated zinc is due; but we do know that the art of zinc-smelting was practised in England from about 1730. The first Continental zinc-works were erected at Liége in 1807. The atomic weight of zinc is 65∙37 (the mean of the results obtained by Marignac and Baubigny), O = 16.
Zinc Ores.— The following may be named as important.
(1) Red Zine Ore (impure ZnO) occurs in quartz-like crystals, but more frequently presents itself in large-grained and lamellar masses. Sp. gr. 5∙4 to 5∙7. Colour, hyacinth-red to brown. Lustre, adamantine.
(2) Franklinite (RO.M 2 O 3 , where R stands for Zn, Fe, Μη; M for Fe, Mn). The zinc averages about 10 per cent. It crystallizes in regular octahedra, with rounded-off edges and angles. Sp. gr. 5∙1. Colour, black; streak, reddish-brown. Lustre, sub-metallic. This and the preceding occur in association with each other and other things in New Jersey, U.S.
(3) Calamine (ZnCO 3 ). The pure mineral (zinc spar) forms well-defined[9:24:785], though small, rhombohedra. The ordinary ore is massive, and is contaminated, often largely, with clay, silica, oxide of iron, and the like. Sp. gr. 4 to 4∙5. Sometimes colourless, but as a rule light grey, yellow, or buff-coloured. Lustre, vitreous. It is found in association with silicates of zinc, zinc-blende, and lead ores, chiefly in limestone and dolomitic strata, at the Kelmisberg or Vieille Montagne in Belgium, in Derbyshire and Northumberland, and in Silesia; but these last deposits are well nigh exhausted. Irregular deposits occur near Santander and Cartagena in Spain, and in Sardinia. At Wiesloch in Baden a yellow variety is found, which contains as much as 3 per cent. of cadmium. Smaller percentages of cadmium are met with in many other zinc ores.
(4) Electric Calamine, the German Kieselzinkerz (ZnOSiO 2 + H 2 O), is also called hemimorphite on account of the marked hemimorphism in its (ortho-rhombic) crystals. Sp. gr. 3∙35 to 3∙5. Sometimes colourless, but more frequently grey, yellow, red, green, brown, blue,—always, however, light-coloured. Lustre, vitreous. The crystals, when heated, exhibit electric polarity; hence the name. As a rule they are small and united into cuneiform, spheroidal, or kidney-shaped masses; there are also granular, dense, and earthy varieties. It occurs with willemite and calamine at the Altenberg near Aix-la-Chapelle, with blende and lead ore at Raibel and Bleiberg in Carinthia, near Iserlohn in Westphalia, at Matlock in Derbyshire, near Tarnowitz in Silesia, at Olbucs, Rezbanya in Hungary, and Nertchinsk in Siberia. American sources are at Phoenixville and Friedenswille in Pennsylvania and in the Austin mine in Virginia.
(5) Willemite, anhydrous ZnOSiO 2 , occurs in New Jersey and elsewhere; it is a comparatively rare ore.
(6) Zinc-Blende, or shortly Blende (ZnS).—The five ores mentioned above, as indeed all oxidized zinc ores, having become scarce, most of the zinc which now occurs in commerce is derived from zinc-blende. This ore crystallizes in combinations of the two tetrahedra and other forms of the regular system. Sp. gr. 3∙9 to 4∙2. Colour, green, yellow, red, but mostly brown or black. Colourless crystals are scarce. Lustre, fatty or diamond-like. The ordinary ore forms crypto-crystalline or fibrous or granular masses, which sometimes present the form of kidneys, consisting of concentric layers. The finest crystals are found in Franklin, New Jersey, which are colourless and consist of pure ZnS, and in the Penas de Europa, Asturias (Spain), in which liquid enclosures are often met with. The darker varieties, which always include more or less of foreign sulphides, are found in a great number of places. In Cornwall, Wales, Alston Moor in Cumberland, Teesdale in Yorkshire, Derbyshire, and the Isle of Man dark-coloured blende is found in the lead-mining districts with galena, quartz, and limestone. In Belgium and on the Rhine massive blende occurs with iron pyrites and galena; this ore requires a great deal of sorting to become fit for smelting. In Sweden blende is frequently found: at Ammeberg on Lake Wetter a vast deposit occurs in the gneiss. To English miners blende is known as “black Jack,” to the South Americans as “chumbe.” The principal American deposits are in Missouri.
Metallurgy.— Oxide of zinc, like most heavy metallic oxides, is easily reduced to the metallic state by heating it to redness with charcoal; but, as zinc has the exceptional property of being readily volatile at the temperature of its reduction, the operation must be carried out in some kind of retort, and the zinc be recovered as a distillate. To pure red zinc ore the operation of distilling with charcoal might be applied quite directly; and the same might be done with pure calamine of any kind, because the carbonic acid of carbonate of zinc goes off below redness and the silica of silicate of zinc only retards, but does not prevent, the reducing action of the charcoal. Zinc-blende, however, being sulphide of zinc, is not directly reducible by charcoal; but it is easy to convert it into oxide by roasting: the sulphur goes off as sulphurous acid, whilst the zinc remains in the (infusible) form of oxide, ZnO. In practice, however, we never have to deal with pure zinc minerals, but with complex mixtures, which must first of all be subjected to mechanical operations, to remove at least part of the gangue, and if possible also of the heavy metallic impurities (see Metallurgy, vol. xvi. p. 59 sq.). And, supposing this to be done, the ore, even if it is not blende, must be roasted, in order to remove all volatile components as completely as possible, because these, if allowed to remain, would carry away a large proportion of the zinc vapour during the distillation. If the zinc is present as blende, this operation offers considerable difficulties, because in the roasting process the sulphide of zinc passes in the first instance into sulphate, which demands a high temperature for its conversion into oxide. Another point to be considered in this connexion is that the masses of sulphurous acid evolved, being destructive of vegetable life, are an intolerable nuisance to the neighbourhood in which the operations take place.
Hasenclever and Helbig have constructed a furnace by which some two-thirds of the sulphurous acid can be conducted into chambers and condensed into the useful form of oil of vitriol. Figs. 1, 2, and 3 show how the furnace is constructed. k is a Siemens gas furnace, n being the orifice for the introduction of the fuel; the gases go out at m, where they mix with air; the flame travels between the sole g and the bottom of the muffle c , and then goes along the top of the muffle to the flue q; it passes below the slanting canal bb and keeps it at a temperature above the fusing-point of antimony (432° C.). The ore is introduced through the funnel a ; it slides down the slanting canal bb; the partition walls d, d, which follow each other at distances of half a metre, compel it to spread out evenly into a thin layer. The partition walls, as shown by fig. 3, are arranged so that the gases coming from the muffle must travel along an undulating line and lick up as much as possible of the sulphur of the ore. From the last compartment e the gaseous product goes first to a cooling chamber, and thence to the vitriol chamber. The hollow cylinder f, which is cooled internally by air while made to revolve, conveys the ore in instalments from the bottom end of the canal to the muffle. At intervals of two hours it is spread evenly on the bottom of the muffle, and at last it is drawn out through o and transferred to the sole g, to be finally roasted (“todtgerostet”) there. The apparatus works very satisfactorily even with ores poor in sulphur. An ore containing 20 per cent. of sulphur contained at the end f of the inclined canal 10 per cent., at the end o of the muffle 6∙4 per cent., and at last, when “todtgerostet,” only 1∙2. About one-third of the sulphur is lost, i.e., goes out through the chimney, as SO 2 ∙
The distillation process in former times, especially in England, used to be carried out “per descensum.” The bottom of a crucible is perforated by a pipe which projects into the crucible to about two-thirds of its height. The powdery mixture of ore and charcoal is put into the crucible around the pipe, the crucible closed by a luted-on lid, and placed in a furnace constructed so as to permit of the lower end of the pipe projecting into the ash-pit. The zinc vapour produced descends through the pipe and condenses into liquid zinc, which is collected in a ladle held under the outlet end of the pipe. For manufacturing purposes a furnace similar to that used for the making of glass was employed to heat a circulai· row of crucibles standing on a shelf along the wall of the furnace. This system, however, has long been abandoned; at present one or other of the following methods is used as a rule.
[9:24:786]
In the Belgian process the reduction and distillation are carried out in cylindrical retorts of fire-clay, about a metre long and 0∙15 metre wide inside. Some forty-six or more retorts, arranged in eight parallel horizontal rows, are heated in one furnace. The furnaces are square and open in front, to allow the outlet ends of the retorts to project; they are grouped together by fours; and their several chimneys are within the same enclosure. Each retort is provided with two adapters, namely, a conical pipe of fire-clay, about 0∙4 metre long, which fits into the retort end, and a conical tube of black sheet iron, which fits over the end of the fire-clay pipe, and which at its outlet end is only 2 centimetres wide. To start a new furnace, the front side is closed provisionally by a brick wall, a fire lighted inside, and the temperature raised very gradually to a white heat. After four days’ heating the provisional front wall is removed piecemeal, and the retorts, after having been heated to redness, are inserted in corresponding sets. The charge of the retorts consists of a mixture of 1100 lb of roasted calamine and 550 lb of dry powdered coal per furnace. A newly-started furnace, however, is used for a time with smaller charges. Supposing the last of these preliminary distillations to have been completed, the residues left in the retorts are removed and the retorts, as they lie in the hot furnace, are charged by means of semi-cylindrical shovels, and their adapters put on. The charging operation being completed, the temperature is raised, and as a consequence an evolution of carbonic oxide soon begins, and becomes visible by the gas bursting out into the characteristic blue flame. After a time the flame becomes dazzling white, showing that zinc vapour is beginning to escape. The iron adapters are now slipped on without delay, and left on for two hours, when, as a matter of experience, a considerable amount of zinc has gone out of the retort, the greater part into the fire-clay adapter, the rest into the iron cone. The former contains a mixture of semi-solid and molten metal, which is raked out into iron ladles and cast into plates of 66 to 77 lb weight, to be sold as “spelter.” The contents of the iron recipient consist of a powdery mixture of oxide and metal, which is added to the next charge, except what is put aside to be sold as “zinc dust.” This dust may amount to 10 per cent. of the total production. As soon as the adapters have been cleared of their contents, they are replaced, and again left to themselves for two hours, to be once more emptied and replaced, &c. The complete exhaustion of the charge of a furnace takes about 11 hours.
In the Silesian process the distillation is conducted in specially constructed muffles, which are arranged in two parallel rows within a low-vaulted furnace, pretty much like the pots in a glass furnace. As a rule every furnace accommodates ten muffles. Through an orifice in the outlet pipe (which during the distillation is closed by a loose plug) a hot iron rod can be introduced from time to time to clear the canal of any solid zinc that may threaten to obstruct it. As soon as the outlet pipe has become sufficiently hot the zinc flows through it and collects in conveniently placed receptacles. About 6 or 8 hours after starting the distillation is in full swing, and in 24 hours it is completed. A fresh charge is then put in at once, the muffles being cleared only after three successive distillations. The distillate consists of a conglomerate of drops (“drop zinc”). It is fused up in iron basins lined with clay, and cast out into the customary form of cakes. In some modern works the muffles are heated by means of Siemens’s regenerative gas furnace, by which a more uniform heat can be secured and maintained at a less cost.
Of the several metallic impurities in zinc ores iron is at once the most common and the least objectionable, because it is absolutely non-volatile at the temperature of a zinc retort; whenever commercial zinc contains iron, this comes from its having been re-fused in iron vessels after its distillation. Lead, though hardly volatile by itself at a red heat, if present in the ore, is, so to say, carried over by the zinc vapour and passes at least partly into the distillate. Cadmium and arsenic being more volatile than zinc itself, if present, accumulate in the first fractions of the distillate, but may pervade it in traces to the end. Zinc made from oxidized ores is usually free from arsenic; that derived from blende is almost sure to contain it. This in practice is equivalent to saying that, while in former times it was easy, it is now very difficult, to obtain in commerce zinc free from arsenic. Traces of arsenic do not, however, interfere with any of the technical applications of the metal. As for cadmium, it is not (metallurgically speaking) an impurity at all, but, like silver in lead, a rather desirable admixture which it may be worth while to extract.
No reliable method is known by which commercial zinc could be purified so as to render it fit for all the purposes of the analyst; the only way to obtain really pure zinc is to prepare it from pure oxide by distillation with charcoal in a non-metallic retort.
Properties of Pure Zinc.— Zinc, a bluish-white metal, fuses at 415° C. and under ordinary atmospheric pressure boils at 1040° C. (Deville and Troost). The molten metal on cooling deposits crystals, and at last freezes into a compact crystalline solid, which may be brittle or ductile according to circumstances. According to Bolley, if zinc be cast into a mould at a red heat, the ingot produced is laminar and brittle; if cast at just the fusing-point, it is granular and sufficiently ductile to be rolled into sheet at the ordinary temperature. According to some authorities, pure zinc always yields ductile ingots. A clue to the explanation of these anomalous facts is afforded by certain observations of Gustav Rose and others, from which it appears that zinc is dimorphous and may or may not crystallize in the regular system. Supposing a mass of molten zinc to freeze into, say, cubes, the ingot will be ductile; an ingot of, say, rhombohedra, on the other hand, is almost bound to be brittle, because the crystals are orientated in a lawless fashion, and, as they cannot be expected to contract at the same rate in all directions, we must be prepared for a brittle ingot. Commercial “spelter” always breaks under the hammer; but at 100° to 150° C. it is susceptible of being rolled out into even a very thin sheet. Such a sheet, if once produced, remains flexible when cold. At about 200° C., again, the metal becomes so brittle that it can be pounded in a mortar. The specific gravity of zinc cannot be expected to be perfectly constant; according to Karsten, that of pure ingot is 6∙915, and rises to 7Ί91 after rolling. The coefficient of linear expansion is 0∙002,905 for 100° from 0° upwards (Fizeau). The specific heat is 0∙093,93 (Schüller and Wartha). Compact zinc is bluish white; it does not tarnish much in the air. It is pretty soft, and clogs the file. If zinc be heated up to near its boiling-point, it catches fire and burns with a brilliant light into its powdery white oxide, which forms a reek in the air liana philosophica). Boiling water attacks it appreciably, but no more, with evolution of hydrogen and formation of hydroxide, Zn(OH) 2 . A rod of perfectly pure zinc, when immersed in dilute sulphuric acid, is so very slowly attacked that there is no visible evolution of gas; but, if a piece of platinum or other less basilous metal is brought into contact with the zinc, it dissolves readily, with evolution of hydrogen and formation of sulphate. The ordinary impure metal dissolves at once, the more readily the less pure it is. Cold dilute nitric acid dissolves zinc as nitrate, with evolution of nitrous oxide, N 2 O, and formation of nitrate of ammonia. At higher temperatures, or with stronger acid, nitric oxide, NO, is produced besides or instead of nitrous.
Oxide of Zinc, ZnO.—There is only this one oxide. It is prepared chiefly in two ways,—(1) by burning the metal, a method now being carried out industrially, the zinc vapour being sometimes produced extempore from a mixture of roasted ore and carbon, and (2) by heating the basic carbonate (see below). It is an infusible solid, which is intensely yellow at a red heat, but on cooling becomes white. This at least is true of the oxide produced from the metal by combustion; that produced from the carbonate, if once made yellow at a red heat, retains a yellow shade permanently. Oxide of zinc is insoluble in water, and does not combine directly with it; it dissolves readily in all aqueous acids, with formation of “zinc salts.” It also dissolves in aqueous caustic alkalies, including ammonia, forming “zincates” (e.g., ZnO.KHO). Oxide of zinc is used in the arts as a white pigment; it has not by any means the covering power of white lead, but offers the advantage of being non-poisonous and of not becoming discoloured in sulphuretted hydrogen. It is used also in medicine, chiefly externally.
The hydrate, Zn(OH) 2 , is prepared by precipitating a solution of any zinc salt with caustic potash. The alkali must be free from carbonate and an excess of it must be avoided, otherwise the hydrate re-dissolves. It is a white powder, and is insoluble in water. To acids and to alkalies it behaves like the oxide, but dissolves more readily.
[9:24:787]
The basic carbonate, ZnCO 3 .x Zn(OH) 2 , where x is variable, is prepared by precipitation of a solution of the sulphate or chloride with carbonate of soda. To obtain a product free of Cl or SO 4 , there must be an excess of alkali and the zinc salt must be poured into the hot solution of the carbonate. The precipitate, eveu after exhaustive washing with hot water, still contains a trace of alkali; but from the oxide, prepared from it by ignition, the alkali can be washed away. The basic carbonate is, like the oxide, used as a pigment. Normal carbonate of zinc, ZnCO 3 , has never been prepared artificially, but it exists in nature as zinc spar.
The sulphate, ZnSO 4 + 7H 2 O, white vitriol, is prepared by dissolving the ordinary metal in dilute sulphuric acid. If care be taken to keep the zinc in excess, the solution will be free from all foreign metals except iron and perhaps manganese. Both are easily removed by passing chlorine through the cold solution, to produce ferric and manganic salt, and then digesting the liquid with a washed precipitate of basic carbonate, produced from a small portion of the solution by means of carbonate of soda. The iron and manganese are precipitated as hydrated sesquioxides, and are filtered off. The filtrate is acidified with a little sulphuric acid and evaporated to crystallization. The salt crystallizes out on cooling with 7 molecules of water, forming colourless ortho-rhombic prisms, usually small aud needle-shaped. They are permanent in the air. According to Poggiale, 100 parts of water dissolve respectively of (7H 2 O) salt at
[table]
At 100 C. the crystals lose 6 of their 7 H 2 O's; the rest of the water goes off only at a higher temperature, which lies close to that at which the salt begins to decompose. The anhydrous salt, when exposed to a red heat, breaks up into oxide, sulphur dioxide, and oxygen. An impure form of the salt is prepared by roasting zincblende at a low temperature. Sulphate of zinc is used in medicine, chiefly externally. In the arts it is employed in the preparation of varnishes, and as a mordant for the production of colours on calico. A green pigment known as Rinmann’s green is prepared by mixing 100 parts of zinc vitriol with 2∙5 parts of nitrate of cobalt and heating the mixture to redness, to produce a compound of the two oxides. Sulphate of zinc, like sulphate of magnesia, unites with the sulphates of the potassium metals and of ammonium into crystalline double salts, ZnSO 4 .R 2 SO 4 + 6H 2 O, isomorphous with one another and the magnesium salts.
The chloride, ZnCl 2 , is produced by heating the metal in dry chlorine gas, when it distils over as a white translucent mass, easily fusible, and boiling sufficiently low to be distillable from out of a retort of hard Bohemian glass. Its vapour-density at 900° C. is 4∙57, air=1, corresponding to ZnCl 2 (V. and C. Meyer). Chloride of zinc is extremely hygroscopic; it dissolves in a fraction of its weight of even cold water, forming a syrupy solution. A solution of chloride of zinc is easily produced from metal and hydrochloric acid, but it cannot be evaporated to dryness without considerable decomposition of the hydrated salt into oxy-chloride and hydrochloric acid. A concentrated solution of chloride of zinc converts starch, cellulose, and a great many other organic bodies into soluble compounds; hence the application of the fused salt as a caustic in surgery, and the impossibility of filtering a strong ZnCl 2 ley through paper. At a boiling heat chloride of zinc dissolves in any proportion of water, and highly concentrated solutions, of course, boil at high temperatures; hence they afford a convenient medium for the maintenance of high temperatures.
Oxide of zinc unites with the chloride in a great number of proportions, forming oxy-chlorides. A (mixed) compound of this order is used as a cement for stuffing teeth and other purposes. One part of extremely fine glass powder is mixed with three of finely powdered oxide of zinc free from carbonic acid. On the other hand, one part of borax is dissolved in the least sufficiency of hot water and added to fifty parts of solution of chloride of zinc of 1∙5 to 1∙6 sp. gr. Immediately before use the powder is made into a paste with the solution; it hardens in a few minutes, forming a stonelike mass.
For other zinc compounds, the reader is referred to the handbooks of chemistry.
Analysis.— From neutral solutions of its salts zinc is precipitated by sulphuretted hydrogen as sulphide, ZnS,―a white precipitate, soluble, but by no means readily, in dilute mineral acids, but insoluble in acetic acid. In the case of acetate the precipitation is quite complete; from a sulphate or chloride solution the greater part of the metal goes into the precipitate; in the presence of a sufficiency of free HCl the metal remains dissolved; sulphide of ammonium precipitates the metal completely, even in the presence of ammonia salts and free ammonia. The precipitate, when roasted at the end of an asbestos stick over a “bunsen,” passes into oxide, which is yellow in the heat and white after cooling; and, if it be moistened with cobalt solution and re-heated, it exhibits a green colour after cooling. By these tests the precipitate is easily identified with certainty. For further information, see handbooks of analysis. (W. D. )
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 784 [9:24:784]
| |
kp-eb0924-078701-0836m
|
ZINCKEN, or Zinken, the German name of a family of wind instruments now obsolete, known in Italy as cornetti, in France as cornets à bouquin, and in England as “cornets?” but differing entirely from the modern cornetsàpistons; these last will also be noticed here, as bearing the same name.
The old cornets were of two kinds,—the straight and the curved. The straight (Germ. gerade Zincken, stille Zincken; Ital. cornetti diritti, cornetti muti) were usually made with the mouthpiece (a cupped mouthpiece analogous to that of the trumpet) forming part of the tube. The curved (Germ. krumme Zincken ; Ital. cornetti curvi) are formed of two pieces of wood of different lengths, each having half the channel in which the column of air is to vibrate hollowed out, the diameter increasing from the mouthpiece towards the lower end. The two pieces of wood, when thus prepared, are joined together with glue; they are then finished off so as to form a pipe with eight sides, and are finally covered with leather. The mouthpieces are made of wood, horn, or ivory, and are fixed by a tenon to the upper extremity of the pipe. The primitive instrument was an animal’s horn. Pipes of such small length give only, besides the first or fundamental, the second and sometimes the third note of the harmonic series. Thus, a pipe that has for its fundamental note A will, if the pressure of the lips be steadily increased, give the octave A and the twelfth E. To connect diatonically the first and second, the length of the pipe was progressively shortened, by making holes in its substance for the fingers to cover. The opening of these holes successively furnished the instrumentalist with the different intervals of the scale, six holes sufficing for this purpose: The fundamental was thus connected with its octave by all the degrees of a diatonic scale which could become chromatic by the help of cross fingerings and greater or less pressure of the lips within the mouthpiece. The fingering was completed by a seventh hole, which had for its object the production of the octave without the necessity of closing all the holes in order to produce the second note of the harmonic series. The first complete octave, thus obtained by a succession of fundamental notes, is easily octaved by a stronger pressure of the lips against the mouthpiece, and thus the ordinary limits of the compass of a zincke or cornet extend to a fifteenth. Whether straight or curved, it is pierced laterally with seven holes, six through the front and the seventh, that nearest to the mouthpiece, through the back. The first three holes were usually covered with the third, second, and first fingers of the right hand, the next four with the third, second, and first fingers and the thumb of the left hand. But some instrumentalists inverted the position of the hands. Virdung^[1. Musica getutsclιt und auszgezogen, Basel, 1511. ] shows a kind of zincke made of an animal’s horn with only four holes, three at the back of the pipe and one in front. Such an instrument as this had naturally a very limited compass, since with the help of these four holes only the intermediate notes between the second and third proper tones of the harmonic scale could be produced, the lower octave comprised between the first and second remaining incomplete. At the beginning of the 17th century Praetorius^[2. Syntagmatis Musici, vol. ii.; De Organographia, Wolfenbüttel, 1618. ] represents the zincken as a complete family arranged thus :—(1) the little zincke, of which the lowest note was that showm in (i.); (2) the ordinary zincke, with lowest note (ii.); and (3) the cornon, como torto, [9:24:788] or great zincke, with lowest note (iii.). In France the family was composed of the following instruments:—(1) the dessus, with lowest note (a ); (2) the haute-contre, with lowest note (b ); (3) the taille, with lowest note (c); and (4) the basse, with lowest note (d ). Numbers (2), (3), and (4) in this last series were sometimes furnished with an open key, which, when the closed tube was lengthened, augmented the compass downwards by a note.
During the Middle Ages these instruments were in such favour that an important part was given to them in all instrumental combinations. In Germany, in the 18th century, they were used with trombones in the churches to accompany the chorales. There are examples of this employment in the sacred cantatas of J. S. Bach. Monteverde made use of them in his opera Orfeo in 1608, as did Gluck in the opening chorus of his Orfeo, played at Vienna in 1762. The great vogue of the zincke is not to be accounted for by its musical qualities; for it has a hard, hoarse, piercing sound, and it failed utterly in truth of intonation; and these natural defects could only be modified with great difficulty. It is now hard to understand Mersenne’s eulogium of the dessus, then more employed than the other cornets, “because it was used in vocal concerts and to make the treble with the organ, which is ravishing when one knows how to play it to perfection, like the Sieur Quiclet,” and, farther on, “as to the property of its tone, it resembles the brilliancy of a sunbeam piercing the darkness, when it is heard among the voices in churches, cathedrals, or chapels.”
The serpent is another instrument of the cornet family, though not usually classed with it. Its construction and its acoustic principle are the same as those of the old cornet. It is, properly speaking, an enlarged cornet with one hole less, that which is stopped with the thumb. The mouthpiece is fixed to the instrument by means of a long brass crook. A detailed account of the serpent and its congeners is given under Ophicleide (vol. xvii. p. 778). The zincke or cornet has now entirely disappeared, and the rare specimens still met with are eagerly sought by collectors. The serpent has lasted longest, and even within the last twenty years has been used in many churches in the south of France.
Cornet, Cornet À Pistons.
At present the names of cornet, cornet à pistons, and cornopean are given to an instrument that has no analogy whatever to the mediaeval cornet. It is a transformation of the old post-horn, with a shorter tube than that of the trumpet, and improved to such a degree that its quality of tone is intermediate between the brightness of the trumpet and the softness of the flügel-horn or bugle with pistons. The extent of the modern cornet without pistons is comprised within the second and eighth of the harmonic scale The seventh, being too flat, owing to a well-known acoustic phenomenon, is rarely used. The cornet à pistons of the highest pitch is in B♭,, and is used for a trumpet in that key. The notes written therefore sound a major second lower than the notation. It is furnished with three pistons, which lower the principal tube by a whole tone (1st piston), a half tone (2d piston), and a tone and a half (3d piston) respectively. It has already been explained under Trombone how the different pistons are combined to produce the entire chromatic compass of the instrument from the lowest limit
At first the cornet à pistons was supplied with a great many crooks. There were crooks for A, A♭, G, F, E, E♭, and D; but it is easy to understand that, if the additional tubes put in communication with the principal column of air by means of the pistons are adjusted for the key of Bb, the same additional tubes are too short to fulfil the same office for an instrument lowered to the extent of a minor sixth, as it would be for the key of D. Hence nearly all these crooks have disappeared, only those for B♭, A, and A♭ being retained. The invention of the modern comet, or more exactly the application of pistons to the post-horn, is German, and dates from the first quarter of the 19th century, almost immediately after the invention of pistons by Stölzel and Blümel. It was introduced into Great Britain and France about 1830. There were at first only two pistons,—that of the whole tone and that of the half tone,— from which there naturally resulted gaps in the chromatic scale of the instrument. The history of the cornet is that of the improvement brought about by pistons apart from their successive transformations, and it has remained to the present time what it was when first invented. The great favour the cornet meets with is due to the facility with which it speaks, to the little fatigue it causes, and to the simplicity of its mechanism. We may, however, regret, from the point of view of art, that its success has been so great, and that it has ended by usurping in brass bands the place of the bugles, the quality of their tone being infinitely preferable as a foundation for an ensemble composed exclusively of brass instruments. Even the symphonic orchestra has not been secure from its intrusion. In fact, the cornet is taking the place of the trumpet nearly everywhere, and, if care is not taken, the latter will in a few years have completely disappeared, to the great detriment of orchestral tone colour; for the quality of tone of the cornet can never be an adequate substitute for the brilliant and majestic sonorousness so characteristic of the trumpet. (V. Μ.)
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 787 [9:24:787]
| |
kp-eb0924-078801-0837m
|
ZINZENDORF, Nicolaus Ludwig, Count of Zinzendorf and Pottendorf (1700-1760), religious reformer, descended from an ancient family belonging to Lower Austria, was born on 26th May 1700, at Dresden. His family had taken the Protestant side in the Reformation struggle, and in consequence his grandfather, Max Erasmus, had abandoned his Austrian estates to settle near Nuremberg. Max’s second son, George Louis, was a member of the Saxon cabinet and a personal friend of the Pietist Spener. George’s second wife, Charlotte Justine, the mother of Nicolaus, who was an only son, was a daughter of Nicolas and Catherine von Gersdorf, who were also Pietist. The boy was thus born into a Pietist circle; and Spener was his godfather. He never knew his father, who died six weeks after he was born. His mother married again when he was four years old, and he was educated under the charge of his pious and gifted grandmother,^[1. A volume of Spiritual Songs, written by Zinzendorf''s grandmother Catherine, was published in 1729 by Anton. ] Catherine von Gersdorf, to whom more than to any other he was indebted for the absorbing and enthusiastic piety which characterized him from childhood. His school days were spent at the paedagogium at Halle amidst Pietist surroundings, and in 1716 he went to the university of Wittenberg, to study law and fit himself for a diplomatic career. Three years later he was sent to travel in Holland, in France, and in various parts of Germany. These two years of wandering were employed by him in making the personal acquaintance of men distinguished for practical piety and belonging to a variety of churches. On his return he visited the branches of his family settled at Oberbirg and at Castell. During a lengthened visit at Castell he fell in love with his cousin Theodora; but the widowed countess, her mother, objected to the marriage, and the lady afterwards became the wife of Count Henry of Reuss. Zinzendorf seems to have considered this disappointment to be a call in providence to betake himself to some special work for God. He had previously, in deference to his family, who wished him to become a diplomatist, rejected the invitation of Francke to take Count Canstein’s place in the Halle orphanage; and he now resolved to settle down as a Christian landowner, spending his life on behalf of a pious tenantry. He bought Berthelsdorf from his grandmother, and selected John Andrew Rothe for pastor and John George Heiz for factor; he married Erdmute Dorothea, sister of Count Henry of Reuss, and began living on his estate. His intention was to carry out into practice the Pietist ideas of Spener. He did not mean to found a new church or religious organization distinct from the Lutheranism of the land. Hé meant to create a Christian association, the members of which by preaching, by tract [9:24:789] and book distribution, and by practical benevolence might awaken the somewhat torpid religion of the Lutheran Church. The “band of four brothers” (Rothe, pastor at Berthelsdorf; Schäffer, pastor at Görlitz; Francis von Wattewille, a friend from boyhood; and himself) set themselves by sermons, books, journeys, and correspondence to create a revival of religion, and by frequent meetings for prayer to preserve in their own hearts the warmth of personal trust in Christ. From the printing establishment at Ebersdorf large quantities of books and tracts, catechisms, collections of hymns, and cheap Bibles were issued; and a translation of Arndt’s True Christianity was published for circulation in France. Dislike to the high and dry Lutheran orthodoxy of the period gave Zinzendorf some sympathy with that side of the growing rationalism which was attacking dogma, while he at the same time felt its lack of earnestness, and of a true and deep understanding of religion and of Christianity, and endeavoured to counteract its tendency by pointing men to the historical Christ, the revelation of the Father. It is also more than probable that he began to doubt the wisdom of Spener’s plan of not separating from the Lutheran Church, and that he began to think that true Christianity could be best promoted by free association of Christians, who in course of time might grow into churches with no state connexion. These thoughts of his took a practical turn from his connexion with the Bohemian or Moravian Brethren. Zinzendorf offered an asylum to a number of persecuted wanderers from Moravia (see Moravian Brethren), and built for them the village of Herrnhut on a corner of his estate of Berthelsdorf. The refugees who came to this asylum—the first detachment under Christian David in 1722—and continued coming from various regions where persecution raged, for a succession of years (till 1732), belonged to more than one Protestant organization. Persecution had made them cling pertinaciously to the small peculiarities of creed, organization, and worship, and they could scarcely be persuaded to live in peace with each other. Zinzendorf devoted himself to them. He, with his wife and children, lived in Herrnhut and brought Rothe with him. He had hard work to bring order out of the confusion. He had to satisfy the authorities that his religious community could be brought under the conditions of the peace of Augsburg; he had to quiet the suspicions of the Lutheran clergy; and, hardest of all, he had to rule in some fashion men made fanatical by persecution, who, in spite of his unwearied labours for them, on more than one occasion, it is said, combined in his own house to denounce him as the Beast of the Apocalypse, with Pastor Rothe as the False Prophet. Patience had at last its perfect work, and gradually Zinzendorf was able to organize his refugees into something like a militia Christi, based not on monastic but on family life. He was able to establish a common order of worship in 1727, and soon afterwards a common organization, which has been described in the article Moravian Brethren. Zinzendorf took the deepest interest in the wonderful missionary enterprises of the Brethren, and saw with delight the spread of this Protestant family (not monastic) order in Germany, Denmark, Russia, and England. He travelled widely in its interests, visiting America in 1741-42 and spending a long time in London in 1750. Missionary colonies had by this time been settled in the West Indies (1732), in Greenland (1733), amongst the North American Indians (1735); and before Zinzendorf’s death the Brethren had sent from Herrnhut missionary colonies to Livonia and the northern shores of the Baltic, to the slaves of North Carolina, to Surinam, to the Negro slaves in several parts of South America, to Travancore in the East Indies, to the Copts in Egypt, and to the west coast of South Africa. The community in Herrnhut, from which almost all these colonies had been sent out, had no money of its own, and its expenses had been almost exclusively furnished by Zinzendorf. His frequent journeyings from home made it almost impossible for him to look after his private affairs; he was compelled from time to time to raise money by loans, and about 1750 was almost reduced to bankruptcy. This led to the establishment of a financial board among the Brethren, on a plan furnished by a lawyer, John Frederick Köber, which worked well. In 1752 Zinzendorf lost his only son, Christian Renatus, whom he had hoped to make his successor; and four years later he lost his wife Erdmute, who had been his counsellor and confidante in all his work, and without whose wise guidance he could never have accomplished what he achieved. Zinzendorf remained a widower for one year, and then (June 1757) contracted a second marriage with Anna Nitschmann, on the ground that a man in his official position ought to be married. Three years later, overcome with his labours, he fell ill and died (on 9th May), leaving John de Wattewille, who had married his eldest daughter Benigna, to take his place at the head of the community.
See Spangenberg, Leben des Grafen von Zinzendorf, 1772-75; Schrautenbach, Der Graf v. Zinzendorf, 1871 (written in 1782, and interesting because it gives Zinzendorf’s relations to such Pietist rationalists as Dippel); F. Bovet, Le Comte de Zinzendorf, 1860; Becker, Zinzendorf im Verhältniss z. Philosophie u. Kirchenthum seiner Zeit, 1886 (the best account; written by the author of the article “Zinzendorf” in Herzog-Plitt’s Encykl.). . See also the books mentioned under Moravian Brethren. (T. Μ. L.)
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 788 [9:24:788]
| |
kp-eb0924-078901-0838m
|
ZION. See Jerusalem and Temple.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 789 [9:24:789]
| |
kp-eb0924-078902-0838m
|
ZIRCONIUM, a rare element, closely allied to titanium. Klaproth in 1789 analysed zircon and found it to contain a new earth, which he called “zirconia.” Zircon is essentially a silicate of zirconia, ZrO 2 .SiO 2 . For the extraction from it of zirconia the mineral is first of all heated and quenched in water to render it brittle, and then reduced to a fine powder, which is fused up with three to four parts of acid fluoride of potassium at a gentle heat in a platinum crucible. When the mass fuses tranquilly and all the water is expelled, the platinum crucible is placed in a Hessian crucible; the two crucibles are then covered and kept for two hours at the highest temperature producible by means of a wind-furnace. The porcelain-like fuse is powdered, boiled in water, and acidified with hydrofluoric acid, and the residual fluosilicate of potassium is filtered off. The filtrate on cooling deposits crystals of fluozircon-ate of potassium, ZrF 6 K 2 , which are purified by re-crystallization from hot water. The double fluoride is decomposed with hot concentrated sulphuric acid; the mixed sulphate is dissolved in water; and the zirconia is precipitated with ammonia in the cold. The precipitate, being difficult to wash, is (after a preliminary washing) re-dissolved in hydrochloric acid and re-precipitated with ammonia. Hydrated zirconia, Zr(OH) 4 , as thus obtained, is quite appreciably soluble in water and easily in mineral acids, with formation of zirconic salts, e.g., ZrCl 4 , analogous to SnCl 4 . But, if the hydrate is precipitated in the heat, it demands concentrated acids for its solution. The hydrate readily loses its water at a dull red heat and passes into anhydride with vivid incandescence. The anhydrous oxide, ZrO 2 , is with difficulty soluble even in hydrofluoric acid; but a mixture of two parts of concentrated sulphuric acid and one of water dissolves it on continued heating as Zr(SO 4 ) 2 . Zirconia, when heated to whiteness remains unfused, and radiates out abundance of white light. This property has been utilized for the construction of a new kind of gas lamp, in which a colourless flame, produced by the combustion of a mixture of gas and air, serves to heat a hollow cylinder of zirconia suspended over it by means of platinum gauze. Zirconia, like oxide of tin and oxide of titanium, unites not only with acids [9:24:790] but also with basic oxides. For instance, if it be fused up with an excess of carbonate of soda, 2 of CO 2 are expelled by every ZrO 2 , with formation of ortho-zirconate (analogous to ortho-silicate) of soda, ZrO 2 .2Na 2 O. On treating the fuse with water we obtain the salt Na 2 O.8ZrO 2 + 12H 2 O, which crystallizes in hexagonal plates.
Zirconic chloride, ZrCl 4 , is prepared, by igniting a mixture of zirconia and charcoal in a current of chlorine, as a white sublimate. It has the exact vapour-density corresponding to the formula. It dissolves in water with evolution of heat; on evaporation a basic salt, 2ZrOCl 2 + 9H 2 O, separates out in star-shaped aggregates of needles.
Metallic zirconium is obtainable, by heating the double fluoride of zirconium and potassium with metallic potassium, as an iron-grey powder. Troost produced crystallized zirconium by fusing the double fluoride with aluminium in a graphite crucible at the temperature of melting iron, and extracting the aluminium from the fuse with hydrochloric acid. The crystals look like antimony and are brittle; their specific gravity is 4∙15. The powdery metal burns readily in air; the crystalline metal requires to be heated in an oxyhydrogen flame if it is to catch fire. Mineral acids generally attack the crystallized metal very little even in the heat; aqua regia, however, dissolves it readily, and so does hydrofluoric acid. The spark spectrum of zirconium is characterized by five lines, whose wave-lengths are as follows :—6127 in the red, and 4815, 4771, 4738, 4709, and 4686 in the blue. The atomic weight is not known exactly; according to Marignac and Deville, it lies near 90, if O = 16.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 789 [9:24:789]
| |
kp-eb0924-079001-0839m
|
ZITTAU, the centre of the Saxon linen trade and the most populous town in the district of Bautzen, in the kingdom of Saxony, is situated on the left bank of the Mandau, near its confluence with the Neisse, 25 miles south-east of Bautzen and 48 east-south-east of Dresden. The town is built in a regular and modern style. The town-house dates from 1844, and contains a public library of 30,000 volumes. The church of St John was rebuilt in 1834-37; and the church of St Peter and St Paul, with its elegant tower, belonged to an old Franciscan monastery. The latter was restored in 1882 and part of it fitted up as an historical museum. There are five other churches in the town. Zittau is well equipped with schools, including a gymnasium (founded in 1586) and a commercial school, both accommodated in the Johanneum, and several technical institutions. The leading branch of industry is linen and damask weaving; but woollen stuffs, trimmings, &c., are also produced in the factories of the town, and in the surrounding weaving villages, 37 of which, with 70,000 inhabitants, are included in the municipal jurisdiction. The town, which is one of the best endowed in Saxony, also owns valuable forests on the mountains of Upper Lusatia. There are various steam-mills, iron-foundries, brick-fields, and potteries near the town, and extensive deposits of lignite, employing over 1000 hands. Zittau is situated near the border of Bohemia, with which it carries on some trade. In 1885 the population was 23,215, of whom less than one-fifth were Roman Catholics; in 1834 the population was 8508.
Zittau is of Wendish origin (Chytawa is its Wendish name), and was made a town by Ottocar II. of Bohemia. It was one of the six towns of the Lusatian league (1346), at which period it belonged to Bohemia. It suffered severely in the Hussite wars and in the Thirty Years’ War, and was bombarded and burnt by the Austrians in 1757 during the Seven Years’ War. The musical composer Marschner (1795-1861) was born at Zittau.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 790 [9:24:790]
| |
kp-eb0924-079002-0839m
|
ZIZKA, or Ziska, John (c. 1360-1424), leader of the Hussites ( q.v. ) from 1419, was born at Trocznow in the neighbourhood of Budweis in Bohemia about the year 1360. He was of noble descent, and was brought up from an early age at Prague at the court of King Wenceslaus. In 1410 he fought as a volunteer, on the losing side, in the great battle of Grünwald, near Tannenberg in Prussia, in which the knights of the Teutonic Order were completely routed by the Lithuanians and Poles. He afterwards took part in the Hungarian wars against the Turks, and is also said to have fought on the English side in the battle of Agincourt. In the discontents which followed the martyrdom of Huss and Jerome in Bohemia he sided with the liberal party, and ultimately, on the outbreak of hostilities, became its leader. He soon organized a formidable body of infantry, and from his newly fortified stronghold of Tabor as a centre achieved various successes, of which the most signal was the victory over the imperial troops at Deutschbrod (8th January 1422). At an early period of the war,—at the siege of Raby in 1421,—Zizka, who from boyhood had been blind of an eye, completely lost his sight; but his strength of will enabled him almost wholly to overcome this formidable disadvantage, and his extraordinary presence of mind, fertility of resource, and keenness of mental vision, coupled with a zeal that was wholly sincere, though not always free from fanaticism, continued to mark him out as the leader in the cause he had espoused until his death, which was caused by an infectious disorder while he was besieging Przibislaw (11th October 1424).
See Millauer, Diplomatisch-historische Aufsätze uber Johann Ziska (1824). Zizka’s life has been made the subject of an epic by the German poet Meissner (1846; 10th edition 1867), and has also been related in prose by George Sand.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 790 [9:24:790]
| |
kp-eb0924-079003-0839m
|
ZLATOUST, in the Russian government of Ufa, is one of the chief towns and iron-works of the Urals. It is situated on the Ai, a tributary of the Ufa, in a picturesque valley of the middle Urals, at a height of 1200 feet above sea-level. The 270 miles which stretch between Zlatoust and Ufa in the west will soon be covered by rail, while a branch line is projected to connect it with Ekaterinburg in the north. The town is well built, mostly of wood, has a first-class meteorological and magnetic observatory, and is the seat of the mining administration for the Zlatoust district, which includes, besides several iron-works, the rich gold-washings of the basin of the Mias. Its merchants carry on a brisk trade in agricultural produce and cattle, as well as in manufactured wares, imported for the use of the mining villages of the neighbourhood. The Ai and several ponds supply the crown iron-works with motive power, and in 1884 the iron furnaces of Zlatoust yielded 90,800 cwts. of pig-iron, which were used almost entirely for the manufacture of swords, bayonets, and artillery munition. The population of Zlatoust in 1884 was 19,000.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 790 [9:24:790]
| |
kp-eb0924-079004-0839m
|
ZNAIM, or Znaym (Czech Znojmo), an interesting old town of Moravia, is picturesquely situated on the left bank of the Thaya, 45 miles north-north-west of Vienna. The town proper is adjoined by four suburbs, and it contains three fine open squares, while the site of the old fortifications is occupied by a pleasant promenade. The Räuberthurm is a relic of the old castle of the margraves of Moravia; the round castle-chapel, known as the heathen temple (Heiden-Tempel), in the Romanesque style of the 12th century, was at one time considered the most ancient building in Moravia. The Gothic church of St Nicholas was built about 1348 by the emperor Charles IV.; the town-house, with an elegant Gothic tower, 250 feet high, dates from about 1446. The ancient and once powerful Praemonstratensian abbey of Bruck, to the east of the town, is now occupied as barracks. The town is well equipped with technical and other schools, and carries on manufactures of earthenware, leather, chocolate, vinegar, and other articles. Large quantities of cucumbers, grain, and wine are produced in the fertile environs. In 1880 the population, chiefly of German origin, was 12,254.
The present town of Znaim was founded in 1226 by Ottocar I. of [9:24:791] Bohemia on the site of Znojmo, the ancient capital of the tributary margraves of Moravia, which had been destroyed in 1145. Znaim is best known to history for the armistice concluded here in 1809 after the battle of Wagram between Napoleon I. and the archduke Charles. In 1866 the Prussians occupied the town from July 13th till September 3d. The novelist Karl Postel (1793-1864), who wrote under the pseudonym of Charles Sealsfield, was born at Poppitz, 2½ miles to the south-west.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 790 [9:24:790]
| |
kp-eb0924-079101-0840m
|
ZODIAC (ό ζωδιακός κύκλος, from ζ ώδιοv , “a little animal ”), an imaginary zone of the heavens within which lie the paths of the sun, moon, and principal planets. It is bounded by two circles equidistant from the ecliptic, about eighteen degrees apart; and it is divided into twelve signs, and marked by twelve constellations. The signs— the Greek δωδεκaτημόρια— are geometrical divisions thirty degrees in extent, counted from the spring equinox in the direction of the sun’s progress through them. The whole series accordingly shifts westward through the effect of precession by about one degree in seventy-two years. At the moment of crossing the equator towards the north the sun is said to be at the first point of Aries; some thirty days later it enters Taurus, and so on through Gemini, Cancer, Leo, Virgo, Libra, Scorpio, Sagittarius, Capricornus, Aquarius, and Pisces (see Astronomy, vol. ii. p. 771). The constellations bearing the same names coincided approximately in position, when Hipparchus observed them at Rhodes, with the divisions they designate. The discrepancy now, however, amounts to the entire breadth of a sign, the sun’s path in Aries lying among the stars of Pisces, in Taurus among those of Aries, &c.
The twelvefold division of the zodiac was evidently suggested by the occurrence of twelve full moons in successive parts of it in the course of each year. This approximate relation was first systematically developed by the early inhabitants of Mesopotamia, and formed the starting-point for all their divisions of time. As the year separated, as it were of itself, into twelve months, so the day was divided into twelve “double hours,” and the great cosmical period of 43,200 years into twelve “sars.” Each sar, month, and hour was represented at once visibly and symbolically by a twelfth part of the “furrow” drawn by the solar Bull across the heavens. The idea of tracing the sun’s path among the stars was, when it occurred to Chaldaean astronomers, an original and, relatively to their means, a recondite one. We owe to its realization by them the constitution and nomenclature of the twelve signs of the zodiac. Assyrian cylinders and inscriptions indicate for the familiar series of our text-books an antiquity of some four thousand years. Ages before Asurbanipal reigned at Nineveh the eighth month (Marchesvan) was known as “the month of the star of the Scorpion,” the tenth (Tebet) belonged to the “star of the Goat,” the twelfth (Adar) to the “star of the Fish of Hea.”^[1. Lenormant, Origines de l'Histoire, vol. i. p. 236. ] The motive underlying the choice of symbols is in a few cases obvious, but in most remains conjectural. The attributes of the deities appointed to preside over the months and signs were to some extent influential. Two of them, indeed, took direct possession of their respective portions of the sky. The zodiacal Virgo is held to represent the Assyrian Venus, Ishtar, the ruling divinity of the sixth month, and Sagittarius the archer-god Nergal, to whom the ninth month was dedicated. But no uniform system of selection was pursued; or rather perhaps the results of several, adopted at various epochs, and under the influence of varying currents of ideas, became amalgamated in the final series.
This, there is reason to believe, was the upshot of a prehistoric reform. So far as positive records go, Aries was always the first sign. But the arrangement is, on the face of it, a comparatively modern one. None of the brighter stars of the constellation could be said even roughly to mark the equinox much before 1800 b.c.; during a long stretch of previous time the leading position belonged to the stars of Taurus.^[2. The possibility should not, however, be overlooked that the “stars of the months” were determined by their heliacal risings (see Bosanquet and Sayce on Babylonian astronomy, in Monthly Notices Roy. Astr. Soc., vol. xl. p. 117). This would give a further extension backwards of over 1000 years, during which the equinox might have occurred in the month of the Ram. ] Numerous indications accordingly point to a corresponding primitive zodiac. Setting aside as doubtful evidence derived from interpretations of cuneiform inscriptions, we meet, in connexion with Mithraic and Mylittic legends, reminiscences of a zodiac and religious calendar in which the Bull led the way.^[3. Lajard, Recherches sur le Culte de Mithra, p. 605. ] Virgil’s
Candidus auratis aperit cum cornibus annum Taurus perpetuates the tradition. And we shall see presently that the Pleiades, not only were originally, but continued to be until well within historical memory, the first asterism of the lunar zodiac.
In the Chaldaean signs fragments of several distinct strata of thought appear to be embedded. From one point of view, they shadow out the great epic of the destinies of the human race; again, the universal solar myth claims a share in them; hoary traditions were brought into ex. post facto connexion with them; or they served to commemorate simple meteorological and astronomical facts.
The first Babylonian month Nisan, dedicated to Anu and Bel, was that of “sacrifice”; and its association with the Ram as the chief primitive object of sacrifice is thus intelligible.^[4. Sayce, Trans. Society of Biblical Archaeology, vol. iii. p. 162. ] According to an alternative explanation, however, the heavenly Ram, placed as leader in front of the flock of the stars, merely embodied a spontaneous figure of the popular imagination. An antique persuasion, that the grand cycle of creation opened under the first sign, has been transmitted to modern cognizance by Dante (Inf, i. 38). The human race, on the other hand, was supposed to have come into being under Taurus. The solar interpretation of the sign goes back to the far-off time when the year began with Taurus, and the sun was conceived of as a bull entering upon the great furrow of heaven as he ploughed his way among the stars. In the third month and sign the building of the first city and the fratricidal brothers—the Romulus and Remus of Roman legend— were brought to mind. The appropriate symbol was at first indifferently a pile of bricks or two male children, always on early monuments placed feet to feet. The retrograde movement of a crab typified, by an easy association of ideas, the retreat of the sun from his farthest northern excursion, and Cancer was constituted the sign of the summer solstice. The Lion, as the symbol of fire, represented the culmination of the solar heat. In the sixth month, the descent of Ishtar to Hades in search of her lost husband Tammuz was celebrated, and the sign of the Virgin had thus a purely mythological signification.
The history of the seventh sign is somewhat complicated. The earlier Greek writers,—Eudoxus, Eratosthenes, Hipparchus,—knew of only eleven zodiacal symbols, but made one do double duty, extending the Scorpion across the seventh and eighth divisions. The Balance, obviously indicating the equality of day and night, is first mentioned as the sign of the autumnal equinox by Geminus and Varro, and obtained, through Sosigenes of Alexandria, official recognition in the Julian calendar. Nevertheless, Virgil (Georg., i. 32) regarded the space it presided over as so much waste land, provisionally occupied by the “Claws” of the Scorpion, but readily available for the [9:24:792] apotheosis of Augustus. Libra was not of Greek invention. Ptolemy, who himself chiefly used the “Claws” (X ηλαί ), speaks of it as a distinctively Chaldaean sign;^[5. In citing a Chaldaean observation of Mercury dating from 235 B. c. (Almagest, vol. ii. p. 170, ed. Halma). ] and it occurs as an extra-zodiacal asterism in the Chinese sphere. An ancient Chinese law, moreover, prescribed the regularization of weights and measures at the spring equinox.^[6. See Uranographie Chinoise, by Gustav Schlegel, who, however, claims an extravagant antiquity for the Chinese constellational system. ] No representation of the seventh sign has yet been discovered on any Euphratean monument; but it is noticeable that the eighth is frequently doubled,^[7. Lenormant, Origines, vol. i. p. 267. ] and it is difficult to avoid seeing in the pair of zodiacal scorpions carved on Assyrian cylinders the prototype of the Greek scorpion and claws. Both Libra and the sign it eventually superseded thus owned a Chaldaean birthplace. The struggle of rival systems of nomenclature, from which our zodiacal series resulted, is plainly visible in their alternations; and the claims of the competing signs were long sought to be conciliated by representing the Balance as held between the claws of the Scorpion.
The definitive decline of the sun’s power after the autumnal equinox was typified by placing a Scorpion as the symbol of darkness in the eighth sign. Sagittarius, figured later as a Centaur, stood for the Babylonian Mars. Capricornus, the sign of the winter solstice, is plausibly connected with the caprine nurse of the young solar god in Oriental legends, of which that of Zeus and Amalthea is a variant.^[8. Ibid., p. 259. ] The fish-tailed Goat of the zodiac presents a close analogy with the Mexican calendar sign Cipactli, a kind of marine monster resembling a narwhal.^[9. Humboldt, Vues des Cordillères, 1810, p. 157. ] Aquarius is a still more exclusively meteorological sign than Leo. The eleventh month was known in Euphratean regions as that of “want and rain.” The deluge was traditionally associated with it. It was represented in zodiacal symbolism by the god Ramman, crowned with a tiara and pouring water from a vase, or more generally by the vase and water without the god. The resumption of agricultural labours after the deluge was commemorated in the twelfth month, and a mystical association of the fishes, which were its sign, with the life after death is evident in a monument of Assyrian origin described by M. Clermont-Ganneau, showing a corpse guarded by a pair of fish-gods.^[10. Rev. Archéol., 1879, p. 344. ] The doubling of the sign of Pisces still recalls, according to Mr Sayce,^[11. Trans. Soc. Bibl. Archaeol., vol. iii. p. 166. ] the arrangement of the Babylonian calendar, in which a year of 360 days was supplemented once in six years by a thirteenth month, a second Adar. To the double month corresponded the double sign of the “Fishes of Hea.”^[12. The god Hea, the Oannes of Berosus, equivalent to the fish-god Dagon, came to the rescue of the protagonist in the Chaldaean drama of the deluge. ]
The cyclical meaning of the succession of zodiacal signs, though now obscured by interpolations and substitutions, was probably once clear and entire. It is curiously reflected in the adventures of the Babylonian Hercules, the solar hero Izdubar.^[13. Sir H. Rawlinson, Athenaeum, 7th December 1872. ] They were recorded in the comparatively late surviving version of the 7th century b.c., on twelve tablets, with an obvious design of correlation with the twelve divisions of the sun’s annual course. Izdubar’s conquest of the winged bull Heabani was placed under Taurus; his slaying of the tyrant Houmbaba (the prototype of Geryon) in the fifth month typified the victory of light over darkness, represented in plastic art by the group of a lion killing a bull, which is the form ordinarily given to the sign Leo on Ninevite cylinders.^[14. Lenormant, Origines, vol. i. p. 240. ] The wooing of Ishtar by the hero of the epic falls under Virgo, and his encounter with two scorpion men, guardians of the rising and the setting sun, under Scorpio. The eleventh tablet narrates the deluge; the twelfth associates the apotheosis of Heabani (the Babylonian Chiron) with the zodiacal emblems of the resurrection.
In the formation of the constellations of the zodiac very little regard was paid to stellar configurations. The Chaldaeans chose three stars in each sign to be the “councillor gods” of the planets.^[15. Diod. Sic., Hist., ii. 30, where, however, by an obvious mistake the number of “councillor gods” is stated at only thirty. ] These were called by the Greeks “decans,” because ten degrees of the ecliptic and ten days of the year were presided over by each. The college of the decans was conceived as moving, by their annual risings and settings, in an “eternal circuit” between the infernal and supernal regions. Our modern asterisms first appear in the Phaenomena of Eudoxus about 370 b.c. But Eudoxus, there is reason to believe, consulted, not the heavens, but a celestial globe of an anterior epoch, on which the stars and the signs were forced into unnatural agreement. The representation thus handed down to us (in the verses of Aratus) has been thought to tally best with the state of the sky about 2000 b.c.; ^[16. R. Brown, Babylonian Record, No. 3, p. 34. ] and the mention of a pole-star, for which Eudoxus was rebuked by Hipparchus, seems, as Mr W. T. Lynn has pointed out,^[17. Babylonian Record, No. 5, p. 79. ] to refer to the time when α Draconis stood near the pole. The data afforded by Eudoxus, however, are far too vague to serve as the basis of any chronological conclusion.
The Egyptians adopted from the Greeks, with considerable modifications of its attendant symbolism, the twelvefold division of the zodiac. Aries became the Fleece; two Sprouting Plants, typifying equality or resemblance, stood for Gemini; Cancer was re-named Scarabaeus; Leo was converted, from the axe-like configuration of its chief stars, into the Knife; Libra into the Mountain of the Sun, a reminiscence, apparently, of the Euphratean association of the seventh month with a “holy mound,” designating the Biblical tower of Babel. A Serpent was the Egyptian equivalent of Scorpio; the Arrow only of Sagittarius was retained; Capricornus became “Life,” or a Mirror as an image of life; Aquarius survived as Water; Taurus, Virgo, and Pisces remained unchanged.^[18. Brugsch, Z. D. Μ. G., vol. ix. p. 513. ] The motive of some of the substitutions was to avoid the confusion which must have ensued from the duplication of previously existing native asterisms; thus, the Egyptian and Greek Lions were composed of totally different stars. Abstractions in other cases replaced concrete objects, with the general result of effacing the distinctive character of the Greek zodiac as a “circle of living things.”
Early Zoroastrian writings, though impregnated with star-worship, show no traces of an attempt to organize the heavenly array. In the Bundehish, however (9th century), the twelve “Akhtârs,” designated by the same names as our signs, lead the army of Ormuzd, while the seven “Awakhtârs” or planets (including a meteor and a comet) fight for Ahriman. The knowledge of the solar zodiac thus turned to account for dualistic purposes was undoubtedly derived from the Greeks. By them, too, it was introduced into Hindustan. Aryabhata, about the beginning of our era, reckoned by the same signs as Hipparchus. They were transmitted from India by Buddhist missionaries to China, but remained in abeyance until the Jesuit reform of Chinese astronomy in the 17th century.
The native zodiacal system was of unexampled complexity. Besides divisions into twenty-eight and twenty-four [9:24:793] parts, it included two distinct duodenary series. The tse or “stations” were referred by Biot to the date 1111 b.c. Measured from the winter solstice of that epoch, they corresponded, in conformity with the Chinese method of observation by intervals of what we now call right ascension, to equal portions of the celestial equator.^[19. Biot, Journ. des Savans, 1839, p. 729, and 1840, p. 151; Gaubil, Hist. de l'Astr. Chinoise, p. 9. ] Projected upon the ecliptic, these were, of course, considerably unequal, and the tse accordingly differed essentially from the Chaldaean and Greek signs. Their use was chiefly astrological, and their highly figurative names—“Great Splendour,” “Immense Void,” “Fire of the Phoenix,” &c. —had reference to no particular stars. They became virtually merged in the European series, stamped with official recognition upwards of two centuries ago. The twenty-four tsieki or demi- tse were probably invented to mark the course of weather changes throughout the year. Their appellations are purely meteorological.
The characteristic Chinese mode of dividing the “yellow road” of the sun was, however, by the twelve “cyclical animals,”—Rat, Ox, Tiger, Hare, Dragon or Crocodile, Serpent, Horse, Sheep, Monkey, Hen, Dog, Pig. The opening sign corresponds to our Aquarius, and it is remarkable that the rat is, in the far East, frequently used as an ideograph for “water.” But here the agreement ceases. For the Chinese series has the strange peculiarity of proceeding in a retrograde direction or against the course of the sun. Thus, the second sign (of the Ox) occupies the position of Capricorn, the third that of Sagittarius, and so on. The explanation of this seeming anomaly is to be found in the primitive destination of the “animals” to the purposes of an “horary zodiac.” Their succession, established to mark the hours of day and night, was not unnaturally associated with the diurnal revolution of the sphere from east to west.^[20. Humboldt, Vues des Cordillères, p. 168. ] They are unquestionably of native origin. Tradition ascribes their invention to Tajao, minister of the emperor Hwang-te, who reigned c. 2697 b.c., and it can scarcely be placed later than the 7th century b.c.Z ^[21. G. Schlegel, Ur. Chin., pp. 37, 561. ]
The Chinese circle of the “animals” obtained early a wide diffusion. It was adopted by Tartars, Turks, and Mongols, in Tibet and Tong-king, Japan and Corea. It is denominated by Humboldt^[22. Op. cit., p. 219. ] the “zodiac of hunters and shepherds,” and he adds that the presence in it of a tiger gives it an exclusively Asiatic character. It appears never to have been designed for astronomical employment. From the first it served to characterize the divisions of time. The nomenclature not only of the hours of the day and of their minutest intervals was supplied by it, but of the months of the year, of the years in the Oriental sixty-year cycle, and of the days in the “little cycle” of twelve days. Nor has it yet fallen into desuetude. Years “of the Rat,” “of the Tiger,” “of the Pig,” still figure in the almanacs of Central Asia, Cochin China, and Japan.
A large detachment of the “cyclical animals” even found its way to the New World. Seven of the twenty days constituting the Aztec month bore names evidently borrowed from those of the Chinese horary signs. The Hare (or Rabbit), Monkey, Dog, and Serpent reappeared without change; for the Tiger, Crocodile, and Hen, unknown in America, the Ocelot, Lizard, and Eagle were substituted as analogous.^[23. Ibid., p. 152; Prescott, Conquest of Mexico, vol. iii. p. 321 (ed. 1860). ] The Aztec calendar dated from the 7th century; but the zodiacal tradition embodied by it was doubtless much more ancient. Of the zodiac in its true sense of a partitioned belt of the sphere there was no aboriginal knowledge on the American continent. Mexican acquaintance with the signs related only to their secondary function as dies (so to speak) with which to stamp recurring intervals of time.
The synodical revolution of the moon laid down the lines of the solar, its sidereal revolution those of the lunar zodiac. The first was a circlet of “full moons”; the second marked the diurnal stages of the lunar progress round the sky, from and back again to any selected star. The moon was the earliest “measurer” both of time and space; but its services can scarcely have been rendered available until stellar “milestones” were established at suitable points along its path. Such were the Hindu nakshatras, a word originally signifying stars in general, but appropriated to designate certain small stellar groups marking the divisions of the lunar track. They exhibit in an exaggerated form the irregularities of distribution visible in our zodiacal constellations, and present the further anomaly of being frequently reckoned as twenty-eight in number, while the ecliptical arcs they characterize are invariably twenty-seven. Now, since the moon revolves round the earth in 27⅓ days, hesitation between the two full numbers might easily arise; yet the real explanation of the difficulty appears to be different. The superfluous asterism, named Abhijit, included the bright star α Lyrae, under whose influence the gods had vanquished the Asuras. Its invocation with the other nakshatras, remoteness from the ecliptic notwithstanding, was thus due (according to Prof. Max Müller’s plausible conjecture)^[24. Rig-Veda Samhita, vol. iv., 1862, Preface, p. lxii. ] to its being regarded as of especially good omen. Acquaintance with foreign systems of twenty-eight lunar divisions tended doubtless to fix its position, which remained, nevertheless, always equivocal.^[25. Whitney, Journ. Am. Orient. Soc., vol. viii. p. 394. ] Alternately admitted into or rejected from the series, it was finally, some six or seven centuries ago, eliminated by the effects of precession in reversing the order of culmination of its limiting stars.
The notion of a twenty-seven-fold division of the zodiac was deeply rooted in Hindu tradition. The number and the name were in early times almost synonymous. Thus, a nakshatra-mālā denoted a necklace of twenty-seven pearls;^[26. Max Miiller, op. cit., p. lxiv. ] and the fundamental equality of the parts was figured in an ancient legend, by the compulsion laid upon King Soma (the Moon) to share his time impartially between all his wives, the twenty-seven daughters of Pra-jápati. Everything points to a native origin for the system of nakshatras. Some were named after exclusively Vedic deities; they formed the basis of the sacrificial calendar of the Brahmans; the old Indian names of the months were derived from them; their existence was presupposed in the entire structure of Hindu ritual and science.^[27. Ibid., p. 42. ] They do not, however, obtain full recognition in Sanskrit literature until the Brāhmana period (7th or 8th century b.c.). The Rig-Veda contains only one allusion to them, where it is said that “Soma is placed in the lap of the nakshatras ”; and this is in a part including later interpolations.
Positive proof of the high antiquity of the Hindu lunar zodiac is nevertheless afforded by the undoubted fact that the primitive series opened with Krittikā (the Pleiades) as the sign of the vernal equinox. The arrangement would have been correct about 2300 B.c.; it would scarcely have been possible after 1800 B.c.^[28. A. Weber, Indische Studien, vol. x. p. 241. ] We find nowhere else a well-authenticated zodiacal sequence corresponding to so early a date. The reform by which Krittikā, now relegated to the third place, was superseded as the head of the series by “Açvini”^[29. Named from the Acvins, the Hindu Castor and Pollux. It is ] was accomplished under Greek [9:24:794] influence somewhere near the beginning of our era. For purposes of ritual, however, the Pleiades, with Agni or “Fire” as their presiding deity, continued to be the first sign. Hindu astronomy received its first definite organization in the 6th century, with results embodied in the Sūrya-Siddhānta. Here the “signs’’and the “constellations” of the lunar zodiac form two essentially distinct systems. The ecliptic is divided into twenty-seven equal parts, called bhogas or arcs, of 800' each. But the nakshatras are twenty-eight, and are represented by as many “junction stars” (yogātāra), carefully determined by their spherical coordinates. The successive entries of the moon and planets into the nakshatras (the ascertainment of which was of great astrological importance) were fixed by means of their conjunctions with the yogātāras. These, however, soon ceased to be observed, and already in the 11th century Al-Bīrūnī could meet with no Hindu astronomer capable of pointing out to him the complete series. Their successful identification by Colebrooke^[30. As. Res., vol. ix. p. 330. ] in 1807 had a purely archaeological interest. The modern nakshatras are twenty-seven equal ecliptical divisions, the origin of which shifts, like that of the solar signs, with the vernal equinox. They are, in fact, the bhogas of the Sūrya-Siddhānta. The mean place of the moon in them, published in all Hindu almanacs, is found to serve unexceptionally the ends of astral vaticination.^[31. J. B. Biot, Études sur l' Astronomie Indienne, p. 225. ]
The system upon which it is founded is of great antiquity. Belief in the power of the nakshatras evidently inspired the invocations of them in the Atharva-Veda. In the Brāhmana period they were distinguished as “deva” and “yama,” the fourteen lucky asterisms being probably associated with the waxing, the fourteen unlucky with the waning moon.^[32. A. Weber, “Die Vedischen Nachrichten von den Naxatra,” in Berliner Abhandlungen, 1861, p. 309. ] A special nakshatra was appropriated to every occurrence of life. One was propitious to marriage, another to entrance upon school-life, a third to the first ploughing, a fourth to laying the foundation of a house. Festivals for the dead were appointed to be held under those that included but one star. Propitiatory abstinences were recommended when the natal asterism was menaced by unfavourable planetary conjunctions. The various members of the body were parcelled out among the nak-shatras, and a rotation of food was prescribed as a wholesome accompaniment of the moon’s revolution among them.^[33. Ibid., p . 322; H. Kern, Die Yogatara des Varamihira∙, Weber’s Ind. Stud., vol. xv. pp. 174-181. ]
The nomenclature of the Hindu signs of the zodiac, save as regards a few standard asterisms, such as Açvini and Krittikā, was far from uniform. Considerable discrepancies occur in the lists given by different authorities.^[34. Sir William Jones, As. Res., vol. ii. pp. 294-5. ] Hence it is not surprising to meet in them evidence of foreign communications. Reminiscences of the Greek signs of Gemini, Leo, Libra, Sagittarius, Capricornus, and Pisces are obvious severally in the Hindu Two Faces, Lion’s Tail, Beam of a Balance, Arrow, Gazelle’s Head (figured as a marine nondescript), and Fish. The correspondence does not, however, extend to the stars; and some coincidences adverted to by Humboldt between the nakshatras and the zodiacal animals of Central Asia are of the same nominal character.^[35. Humboldt, Vues des Cordillères, p. 154. ] Mexican loans are more remarkable. They were apparently direct as well as indirect. The Aztec calendar includes nakshatra titles borrowed, not only through the medium of the Tartar zodiac, but likewise straight from the Indian scheme, apart from any known intervention. The “three footprints of Vishnu,” for ex ample, unmistakably gave its name to the Mexican day Ollin, signifying the “track of the sun”; and both series further contain a “flint weapon,” a “stick,” and a “house.”^[36. Ibid., p. 152. ] Several houses and couches were ranged along the Hindu zodiac with the naive idea of providing resting-places for the wandering moon.
Relationship of a more intimate kind connects the Hindu lunar mansions with those of the Arabs and Chinese. The resemblance between the three systems is indeed so close that it has been assumed, almost as axiomatic, that they must have been framed from a single model; and the question of their origin has been debated with all the resources of varied erudition by scholars such as Biot, Weber, Whitney, and Max Müller. As the upshot of the controversy it appears nevertheless to have become tolerably clear that the nakshatras were both native to India, and the sieu to China, but that the manāzil were mainly of Indian derivation. The assertion, paradoxical at first sight, that the twenty-eight “hostelries” of the Chinese sphere had nothing to do with the moon’s daily motion seems to convey the actual fact. Their number, as a multiple of four, was prescribed by the quaternary partition of the heavens, fundamental in Chinese astronomy. It was considered by Biot to have been originally twenty-four, but to have been enlarged to twenty-eight about 1100 b.c., by the addition of determinants for the solstices and equinoxes of that period.^[37. Biot, Jour. des Savans, 1845, p. 40. ] The essential difference, however, between the nakshatras and the sieu is that the latter were equatorial, not ecliptical, divisions. They were measured by the meridian-passages of the limiting stars, and varied in amplitude from 2° 42' to 30° 24'.^[38. G. Schlegel, Ur. Chin., p. 77. ] The use of the specially observed stars constituting or representing the sieu was as points of reference for the movements of sun, moon, and planets. They served, in fact, and still serve (though with astrological ends in view), the precise purpose of “fundamental stars” in European astronomy. All that is certainly known about the antiquity of the sieu is that they were well established in the 3d century b.c. Their initial point at the autumnal equinox marked by Kio (Spica Virginis) suits a still later date; and there is no valid evidence that the modern series resulted from the rectification of an older superannuated arrangement, analogous to the Krittikā sequence of nakshatras. The Hindu zodiacal constellations belong then to an earlier epoch than the Chinese “stations,” such as they have been transmitted to our acquaintance. Yet not only were the latter an independent invention, but it is almost demonstrable that the nakshatras, in their more recent organization, were, as far as possible, assimilated to them. The whole system of junction stars was doubtless an imitation of the sieu; the choice of them by the Hindu astronomers of the 6th century a.d. was plainly instigated by a consideration of the Chinese list, compiled with a widely different intent Where they varied from it, some intelligible reason can generally be assigned for the change. Eight junction stars lie quite close to, seven others are actually identical with, Chinese determinants;^[39. Biot, Études, p. 136. ] and many of these coincidences are between insignificant and, for the purposes of ecliptical division, inconveniently situated objects.
The small stellar groups characterizing the Arab “mansions of the moon” (manāzil al-kamār) were more equably distributed than either the Hindu or Chinese series. They presented, nevertheless, striking resemblances to both. Twenty-four out of twenty-eight were formed, at least in part, of nakshatra or sieu stars.^[40. Whitney, Notes to Sûrya-Siddhânta, p. 200. ] That the Arab was essentially a copy of the Hindu lunar zodiac can scarcely admit composed of the stars in the head of Aries, and is figured by a horse’s head.
[9:24:795]
of a doubt. They were divided on the same principle; each opened at the spring equinox; the first Arab sign Sharatān was strictly equivalent to the Hindu Açvini; and eighteen constellations in each were virtually coincident. The model of the sieu was, however, also regarded. Eighteen Chinese determinants were included in the Arab asterisms, and of these five or six were not nakshatra stars; consequently, they must have been taken directly from the Chinese series. Nor were the Greek signs without effect in determining the names of the manāzil, ^[41. Whitney, Notes to Sūrya-Siddhânta, p. 206. ] the late appearance of which, in a complete form, removes all difficulty in accounting for the various foreign influences brought to bear upon them. They were first enumerated by Alfar-ghāni early in the 9th century, when the Arabs were in astronomy the avowed disciples of the Hindus. But, although they then received perhaps their earliest quasi-scientific organization, the mansions of the moon had for ages previously figured in the popular lore of the Bedouin. A set of twenty-eight rhymes associated their heliacal risings with the changes of season and the vicissitudes of nomad life; their settings were of meteorological and astrological import;^[42. A. Sprenger, Z. D. Μ. G., vol. xiii. p. 161; Bīrūnī, Chronology, trans. by Sachau (London, 1879), p. 336 sq . ] in the Koran (x. 5) they are regarded as indispensable for the reckoning of time. Yet even this intimate penetration into the modes of thought of the desert may be explained by prehistoric Indian communication. The alternative view, advocated by Weber, that the lunar zodiac was primitively Chaldaean, rests on a very shadowy foundation. It is true that a word radically identical with manāzil occurs twice in the Bible, under the forms mazzaloth and mazzaroth (2 Kings xxiii. 5; Job xxxviii. 32); but the heavenly halting-places which it seems to designate may be solar rather than lunar. Euphratean exploration has so far brought to light no traces of ecliptical partition by the moon’s diurnal motion, unless, indeed, zodiacal associations be claimed for a set of twenty-eight deprecatory formulae against evil spirits inscribed on a Ninevite tablet.^[43. Lenormant, Chaldean Magic, p. 1. ]
The safest general conclusions regarding this disputed subject appear to be that the sieu, distinctively and unvaryingly Chinese, cannot properly be described as divisions of a lunar zodiac, that the nahshatras, though of purely Indian origin, became modified by the successive adoption of Greek and Chinese rectifications and supposed improvements; while the manazil constituted a frankly eclectic system, in which elements from all quarters were combined. It was adopted by Turks, Tartars, and Persians, and forms part of the astronomical paraphernalia of the Bundehish. The sieu, on the other hand, were early naturalized in Japan.
The refined system of astrological prediction based upon the solar zodiac was invented in Chaldaea, obtained a second home and added elaborations in Egypt, and spread irresistibly westward about the beginning of our era. For genethliacal purposes the signs were divided into six solar and six lunar, the former counted onward from Leo, the “house” of the sun, the latter backward from the moon’s domicile in Cancer. Each planet had two houses—a solar and a lunar—distributed according to the order of their revolutions. Thus Mercury, as the planet nearest the sun, obtained Virgo, the sign adjacent to Leo, with the corresponding lunar house in Gemini; Venus had Libra (solar) and Taurus (lunar); and so for the rest. A ram frequently stamped on coins of Antiochus, with head reverted towards the moon and a star (the planet Mars), signified Aries to be the lunar house of Mars. With the respective and relative positions in the zodiac of the sun, moon, and planets, the character of their action on human destiny varied indefinitely. The influence of the signs, though secondary, was hence overmastering: Julian called them θεoῶv δυvάμεις, ^[44. “Orat. in Solem,” Op., vol. i. p. 148, ed. 1696. ] and they were the objects of a corresponding veneration. Cities and kingdoms were allotted to their several patronage on a system fully expounded by Manilius :— Hos erit in fines orbis pontusque notandus, Quem Deus in partes per singula dividit astra,
Ac sua cuique dedit tutelae regna per orbem, Et proprias gentes atque urbes addidit altas, In quibus exercent praestantia sidera vires.^[45. Astr., bk. iv., ver. 696 sq. ]
Syria was assigned to Aries, and Syrian coins frequently bear the effigy of a rani; Scythia and Arabia fell to Taurus, India to Gemini. Palmyra, judging from numismatic evidence, claimed the favour of Libra, Zeugma that of Capricorn; Leo protected Miletus, Sagittarius Singara.^[46. Eckhel, Descriptio Nummorum Antiochus Syriae, pp. 18, 25. ] The “power of the signs” was similarly distributed among the parts of the human body :—
Et quanquam communis eat tutela per omne Corpus, et in proprium divisis artubus exit: Namque aries capiti, taurus cervicibus haeret; Brachia sub geminis censentur, pectora cancro.^[47. Manilius, Astr., bk. iv. ver. 702-5. ]
Warnings were uttered against surgical treatment of a member through whose sign the moon happened to be passing;^[48. A. J. Peirce, Science of the Stars, p. 84. ] and zodiacal anatomy was an indispensable branch of the healing art in the Middle Ages. Some curious memorials of the superstition have survived in rings and amulets, engraven with the various signs, and worn as a kind of astral defensive armour. Many such, of the 14th and 15th centuries, have been recovered from the Thames.^[49. Journ. Arch. Soc., xiii. pp. 254, 310, and xx. p. 80. ] Individuals, too, adopted zodiacal emblems. Capricornus was impressed upon the coins of Augustus, Libra on those of Pythodoris, queen of Pontus; a sultan of Iconium displayed Leo as his “horoscope” and mark of sovereignty; Stephen of England chose the protection of Sagittarius.
In Egypt celestial influences were considered as emanating mainly from the thirty-six “decans” of the signs. They were called the “media of the whole circle of the zodiac;”^[50. In a fragment of Hermes translated by Th. Taylor at p. 362 of his version of Iamblichus. ] each ten-day period of the Egyptian year was consecrated to the decanal god whose section of the ecliptic rose at its commencement; the body was correspondingly apportioned, and disease was cured by invoking the zodiacal regent of the part affected.^[51. Pettigrew, Superstitions Connected with Hist. of Medicine, p. 30. ] As early as the 14th century b.c. a complete list of the decans was placed among the hieroglyphs adorning the tomb of Sethos I.; they figured again in the temple of Rameses II.,^[52. Lepsius, Chronologie der Aegypter, part i. p. 68. ] and characterize every Egyptian astrological monument. Both the famous zodiacs of Dendera display their symbols, unmistakably identified by Lepsius. The late origin of these interesting representations was established by the detection upon them of the cartouches of Tiberius and Nero. As the date of inception of the circular one now at Paris the year 46 b.c. has, however, been suggested with high probability, from (among other indications) the position among the signs of the emblem of the planet Jupiter.^[53. Ibid., p. 102. ] Its design was most likely to serve as a sort of thema coeli at the time of the birth of Caesarion. The companion rectangular zodiac still in situ on the portico of the temple of Isis at Dendera suits, as to constellational arrangements, the date 29 a.d. It set forth, there is reason to believe, the natal scheme, not of the emperor Tiberius, as had been conjectured by Lauth,^[54. Les Zodiaques de Denderah, p. 78. ] but of the building it served to decorate. The Greek signs of the zodiac, including Libra, are obvious upon both these monuments, which have thrown some useful light upon the calendar system and method of stellar grouping of the ancient Egyptians.^[55. See Riel’s Das feste Jahr von Denderah, 1878. ]
An Egypto-Greek planisphere, first described by Bianchini,^[56. Mém. de l’Acad., Paris, 1708, Hist., p. 110; see also Humboldt, Vues des Cordillères, p. 170; Lepsius, op. cit., p. 83; Fröhner, Sculpture du Louvre, p. 17. ] resembles in its general plan the circular zodiac of Dendera. The decans are ranged on the outermost of its five concentric zones; the planets and the Greek zodiac in duplicate occupy the next three; while the inner circle is unaccountably reserved for the Chinese cyclical animals. The relic was dug up on the Aventine in 1705, and is now in the Louvre. It dates from the 2d or 3d century of our era. The Tartar zodiac is not unfrequently found engraven on Chinese mirrors in polished bronze or steel of the 7th century, and figured on the “plateau of the twelve hours” in the treasury of the emperors of the Tang dynasty.^[57. Schlegel, Ur. Chin., p. 561; Pettigrew, Jour. Arch. Soc., vol. viii. p. 21. ]
Probably the most ancient zodiacal representation in existence is a fragment of a Chaldaean planisphere in the British Museum, once inscribed with the names of the twelve months and their governing signs. Two only now remain.^[58. Fox Talbot, Trans. Soc. Bibl. Archaeol., vol. iv. p. 260. ] A zodiac on the “astrological altar of Gabies” in the Louvre illustrates the apportionment of the signs among the inmates of the Roman Pantheon;^[59. Ménard, La Mythologie dans l'Art, p. 388. ] and they occur [9:24:796] as a classical reminiscence in the mosaic pavements of San Miniato and the baptistery at Florence, the cathedral of Lyons, and the crypt of San Savino at Piacenza.^[60. Fowler, Archaeologia, vol. xliv. p. 172. ] Zodiacal symbolism became conspicuous in mediaeval art. Nearly all the French cathedrals of the 12th and 13th centuries exhibit on their portals a species of rural calendar, in which each month and sign has its corresponding labour. The zodiac of Notre Dame of Paris, opening with Aquarius, is a noted instance.^[61. Viollet-le-Duc, Dict. de l'Arch. Française, vol. ix. p. 551; Le Gentil, Mém. de l'Acad., Paris, 1785, p. 20. ] A similar series, in which sculptured figures of Christ and the Apostles are associated with the signs, is to be seen in perfect preservation on the chief doorway of the abbey church at Vézelay. The cathedrals of Amiens, Sens, and Rheims are decorated in the same way. In Italy the signs and works survive fragmentarily in the baptistery at Parma, completely on the porch of the cathedral of Cremona and on the west doorway of St Mark’s at Venice. They are less common in England; but St Margaret’s, York, and the church of Iffley in Oxfordshire offer good specimens. In the zodiac of Merton College, Oxford, Libra is represented by a judge in his robes and Pisces by the dolphin of Fitzjames, warden of the college, 1482-1507.^[62. Fowler, Archaeologia, vol. xliv. p. 150. ] The great rose-windows of the Early Gothic period were frequently painted with zodiacal emblems; and some frescos in the cathedral of Cologne contain the signs, each with an attendant angel, just as they were depicted on the vault of the church at Mount Athos. Giotto’s zodiac at Padua was remarkable (in its undisturbed condition) for the arrangement of the signs so as to be struck in turns, during the corresponding months, by the sun’s rays.^[63. Ibid., p. 175. ] The “zodiac of labours” was replaced in French castles and hôtels by a “zodiac of pleasures,” in which hunting, hawking, fishing, and dancing were substituted for hoeing, planting, reaping, and ploughing.^[64. Viollet-le-Duc, Dict. de l’Arch., vol. ix. p. 551. ]
It is curious to find the same sequence of symbols employed for the same decorative purposes in India as in Europe. A perfect set of signs was copied in 1764 from a pagoda at Verdapettah near Cape Comorin, and one equally complete existed at the same period on the ceiling of a temple near Mindurah.^[65. John Call, Phil. Trans., vol. lxii. p. 353. Comp. Houzeau, Bibliographie Astronomique, vol. i. pt i. p. 136, where a useful sketch of the general results of zodiacal research will be found. ]
The hieroglyphs representing the signs of the zodiac in astronomical works are of late introduction. They are found in manuscripts of about the 10th century, but in carvings not until the 15th or 16th.^[66. R. Brown, Archaeologia, vol. xlvii. p. 341; Sayce, in Nature, vol. XXV. p. 525. ] Their origin is unknown; but some, if not all of them, have antique associations. The hieroglyph of Leo, for instance, occurs among the symbols of the Mithraic worship.^[67. See Lajard, Culte de Mithra, pl. xxvii. fig. 5, &c. ] (A. Μ. C.)
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 791 [9:24:791]
| |
kp-eb0924-079601-0845m
|
ZODIACAL LIGHT. The zodiacal light is usually described as a cone or lenticularly-shaped glow of nebulous light, seen after sunset or before sunrise, extending upwards from the position of the sun nearly in the direction of the ecliptic or of the sun’s equator. This description, though fairly correct for the higher latitudes, does not represent accurately what is seen in the tropics, where the light is often a very conspicuous object. There, if an observer on a clear, moonless night watches the western sky from soon after sunset till the last trace of twilight has disappeared, he will notice that the twilight seems to linger longer near where the sun sank below the horizon, and that gradually a nebulous whitish band of light, broad towards the horizon and narrowing first rapidly and then more slowly upwards, begins to stand out clearly from the vanishing twilight, which spreads along a much wider and nearly horizontally-topped arc of the horizon. This is the zodiacal light. When seen on a perfectly clear night, it will be noticed that it fades imperceptibly on both borders and towards the vertex, and that its light is distinctly brighter towards the base than at greater altitudes. Its width and brightness, and the height of the vertex, differ very much from time to time, partly on account of actual variations, but much more from differences in the transparency of the atmosphere. In England it is seldom observed except in the months of March, April, and May shortly after sunset, or about October before sunrise. This is due to no change in the light itself, but simply to the circumstance that at other seasons the ecliptic makes so small an angle with the horizon that a light lying in or near it does not rise sufficiently high above the mists of the horizon to be seen after the twilight has vanished. In lower latitudes, where the angle made with the horizon is greater, while the duration of twilight is shorter, it can be easily seen at all seasons when there is a clear sky and no moon, except when Venus is an evening star, in which case the great brightness of that planet often almost completely obliterates the comparatively faint zodiacal light, at least in its neighbourhood. The zodiacal light has frequently been described as having a reddish yellow tint; but this seems to be erroneous, for, when seen under favourable conditions, it is distinctly white and very similar to that of the Milky Way. Any colour that may have been observed is doubtless due to atmospheric causes.
Among the Moslems, to whom it is important on ritual grounds to determine accurately the moment of daybreak, at which during Ramadan the daily fast begins, the morning zodiacal light appears to have been observed from an early period, and is known as the “false dawn” or the “wolf’s tail” (Redhouse, in Journ. R. A. S., July 1878). But in Christian Europe it seems to have been first observed by Kepler, who described its appearance with considerable accuracy and came to the conclusion that it was the atmosphere of the sun. Descartes wrote about it in 1630 and Childrey in 1659; but the attention of astronomers was first prominently called to it by Dominic Cassini, who first saw it on 18th March 1683. It is to him that it owes the name which it now bears. He explained it by supposing the existence of a flat, luminous ring encircling the sun, nearly in the plane of his equator, and accounted for its disappearance on the same principle as that which accounts for the vanishing of Saturn’s ring. Mairan (1731), like Kepler, ascribed the light to the sun’s atmosphere; and this explanation was generally accepted, till Laplace showed that it was untenable, since no real solar atmosphere could extend to anything like the distance from the sun which is reached by the zodiacal light. He further showed that, even if the solar atmosphere did extend far enough, it would not have the lenticular appearance ascribed by observers to the zodiacal light, since the polar axis would be at least two-thirds of the equatorial axis. Since then many observers have made a study of the subject, amongst whom may be mentioned Jones, Piazzi Smyth, Jacob, Brorsen, Schmidt, Backhouse, Liais, and Wright.
Extent.— The way in which the light fades off gradually towards the boundaries makes it extremely difficult to determine accurately the true position of the light or its extent. Various observations show that at times the base, at an elongation of about 20°, may have a width of from 25° to 30°, while at an elongation of 60° the breadth is frequently as much as 20°, but usually much less. The distance of the vertex from the sun frequently exceeds 90°, and Mr Liais and others have recorded cases when the light has been traced completely round from the western to the eastern horizon. This is very uncommon; but it is not at all rare to find the light stretching nearly to the meridian three hours after sunset, and several observers have recorded the existence of a bright patch of light almost opposite to the position of the sun. This is known as the Gegenschein, and though it has been seen comparatively seldom its existence must be accepted as proved; for its position has been determined by actual measurement by several astronomers, and their results agree with quite as great closeness as can be expected in the determination of the position of such an object. A lengthened series of observations was made on the zodiacal light by the Rev. G. Jones, chaplain of the United States steam frigate “Mississippi,” in the China and Japan Seas in 1855. He charted the apparent position of the cone of light on a large number of nights and mornings, and came to the somewhat startling conclusion that his observations could be explained only by supposing the existence of a nebulous ring round the earth within the orbit of the moon. He recorded that twice near 23° 28' N. lat., with the sun at the opposite solstice, he had seen “the extraordinary spectacle of the zodiacal light, simultaneously at both the east and west horizons from 11 to 1 [9:24:797] o’clock for several nights in succession.” On reading this statement, Baron Humboldt communicated to the Monatsberichte d. kön. preuss. Akad. d. Wiss. some unpublished observations of his own on a similar phenomenon. These were to the effect that on the 17th and 18th of March the light was very bright in the west, and “we constantly perceived in the east (and this is beyond doubt a very striking phenomenon) a whitish light which was also of a pyramidal form. The latter augmented the brightness of the sky in a very striking manner.” The light in the west was so conspicuous that “even the sailors were delighted with this double light.” He noted, too, what is a very important fact, that the two lights set at the same time; and there is much to be said in defence of his view that the eastern light was the reflexion of the true zodiacal light in the west, just as the eastern sunset glows are the reflexion of those in the west. The chief obstacle in the way of accepting this view is that it is difficult to believe that a light so faint as the zodiacal light could have a reflexion bright enough to be seen, and even to be seen distinctly. On the other side must be set the circumstance that the simultaneous glow at both horizons seems never to have been observed from great altitudes. This is easily understood if the second glow is a mere reflexion; whereas, if it comes from another source of light, it ought to be more conspicuous at high than at low levels.
Position.— The exact position of the axis of the zodiacal light relatively to the ecliptic has not yet been satisfactorily fixed. The extreme haziness of outline and the excessive faintness of the light near the vertex make it quite impossible to use a telescope for measuring its limits. Most observers have tried to fix its position by tracing its outline on a star chart, while Prof. C. Piazzi Smyth employed two sights mounted equatorially. But even by these means no great accuracy can be attained, for the limits of the light can be traced only when the eye is quite unfatigued and when the light is looked at with averted vision. The difficulty experienced is well illustrated by the wide divergencies between the results of different observers—divergencies not only in the extent of the light, which would be quite natural, but even in the direction of the axis of the cone. Thus, Captain Jacob, who observed in Madras in 1856- 57-58, found that his evening observations placed the vertex of the western cone in from 2° S. lat. to 6° N. lat., with an average of about 3° N. lat. His morning observations were less numerous and gave positions for the vertex of the eastern cone varying from ½ o N. to 8° S., with an average of about 2° S. Mr Backhouse from 418 observations found a mean deviation from the ecliptic of 2°∙06, while Captain Tupman, observing in the Mediterranean in August and September, found an inclination of no less than 20°. He also found that the plane of the light did not pass through the sun. His observations, however, differ somewhat widely from those of most other observers. Mr A. Searle has made a very careful study of all the best published records. In his first paper more than 650 observations by Jones, Heis, Schmidt, and others are discussed, and he concludes that apparent changes in latitude are mainly, if not entirely, produced by the effect of atmospheric absorption, which affects the lower boundary more than the upper and to an extent depending on the inclination of the axis of the light to the horizon. In a second paper he discusses Jones’s observations alone and comes to the conclusion that, after making allowance for the effects of absorption, there is some evidence that the zodiacal light, as seen during the second half of the 19th century, has had a more northern latitude near 180° long. than near 0° long. It seems somewhat doubtful, however, whether the observations hitherto made are sufficiently accurate to justify this conclusion, and all that can be confidently asserted is that the observations made so far point to such a difference as being probable. Similar variations in the greatest elongation, the breadth, and the brightness have been asserted to exist. Thus Mr J. F. Julius Schmidt, as the result of several years’ observations, finds a variation in the inclination of the axis of the cone of light to the ecliptic from 4° 18' at the end of December to 0° towards the end of March, a similar variation in the greatest elongation from the sun from 120° in January to 70° in April, and a further similar variation in breadth at corresponding elongations, with a minimum for all three about 30th March. It may be pointed out that observations regarding the extent of the visible light are absolutely valueless unless accompanied by careful records of the clearness of the sky as evidenced by the visibility of faint objects, for all observers of the zodiacal light must have noticed that a thin film of mist, which hardly affects the colour of the sky or the visibility of the brighter stars, may almost completely obliterate the zodiacal light. No accurate photometric observations seem to have been made on the strength of the light and observers have differed widely in their estimates. Some assert that it is much brighter than the Milky Way, while others—and especially those who have observed in the tropics— say that it is seldom so bright as the brighter parts of the Milky Way. It is certainly often brighter than most of the Milky Way. Mr Searle deduces from Sir W. Herschel’s and Celoria’s observations that the Milky Way is about 2 magnitudes brighter than the mean brightness of the sky, and says that on this estimate the brighter parts of the zodiacal light would be commonly 3 or 4 magnitudes brighter than the surrounding sky. This is almost certainly an over-estimate. There seems to be very little doubt that the brightness undergoes periodic fluctuations, but no estimate can as yet be made of the length of the period. It is probable that the brightness has been below the average for the last few years, but is now increasing. Most observers have also reported rapid changes of brightness, or undulations, such as are seen in the aurora and in the tails of some comets; but, as was pointed out by Others in 1833, these undulations must be produced in the earth’s atmosphere. In this connexion it may be mentioned that in observing the spectrum rapid flickerings, like waves moving along the spectrum, are often very marked.
The Moon’s Zodiacal Light.— Several observers have recorded observations which appeared to show that the moon produced an appearance very similar to that of the zodiacal light. Piazzi Smyth, however, when observing on the Peak of Teneriffe, saw this appearance and showed by actual measurement that the glow seen before moonrise does not lie near the ecliptic, but is nearly vertical, and is due simply to refraction in the earth’s atmosphere. This explanation will hardly account for an interesting observation made by Mr L. Trouvelot, which if repeated would require to be very carefully investigated. On a night when the zodiacal light was very bright and there were magnetic disturbances followed by an auroral display, but when no aurora was actually visible, he saw a conical light rising obliquely from the top of the roof of a building behind which the moon, then about 15° or 20° above the horizon, was concealed. The axis of the light coincided nearly with the ecliptic and the light could be traced on both sides of the moon, when the moon itself was concealed. The whole of the circumstances led Mr Trouvelot to conclude that this light and the zodiacal light were phenomena of the same order, while this and other observations, he considered, rendered it probable that there was some connexion between the zodiacal light and auroras.
Physical Constitution.— As has already been pointed out, it is impossible to see the zodiacal light through a telescope, and this, taken along with the extreme faintness of the light, renders it exceedingly difficult to examine it satisfactorily with either the polariscope or the spectroscope. Many attempts have been made to determine whether or not the light was to any extent polarized, but with questionable results until Prof. A. W. Wright attacked the problem, using a polariscope specially designed for studying very faint lights. With this he was enabled to determine with certainty that the light was partially polarized in a plane passing through the sun, and that the amount of polarization was most probably as much as 15 per cent., but less than 20 per cent. Many attempts have been made to observe the spectrum. In 1867 Ångström, observing at Upsala in March, obtained the bright aurora line (W. L. 5567), and concluded that in the zodiacal light there was the same material as is found in the aurora and in the solar corona, and probably through all space. Upsala, however, is a place where the aurora spectrum can often be observed in the sky even when no aurora is visible, and it has generally been believed that what Ångström really saw was an auroral and not a zodiacal light spectrum. Señor A. T. Acrimiz, observing at Cadiz, obtained a continuous but faint spectrum with two bright lines—a yellowish line, probably an aurora line, and a line in the blue, more refrangible than F, which he could not identify, but which in all probability was another auroral line. The fact that he saw this spectrum with a five-prism spectroscope attached to an equatorial seems conclusive evidence that it was not the zodiacal light spectrum that he was observing. The most satisfactory observations hitherto published seem to be those of Prof: Piazzi Smyth and Prof. A. W. Wright. Both used spectroscopes specially designed for the examination of faint lights, and their results agree completely with each other. Prof. Smyth made his observations at Palermo and found a faint continuous spectrum extending from about W. L. 5550 to W. L. 5000 (British inches scale), with a maximum brightness at about W. L. 5350. In fact, the light was almost exactly similar to that of faint diffused sunlight, such as is got in the last traces of twilight. Prof. Wright’s conclusion was [9:24:798] that the spectrum differs from that of sunlight only in intensity. Some recent unpublished observations made in the tropics indicate that, while the spectrum is usually that described by Prof. Smyth, there are times when a bright line is seen. Too much stress, however, must not be laid on this, as the observations are by no means conclusive, and the apparent line may in reality be only a part of the continuous spectrum which is brighter than usual.
The discussion of the real cause of the zodiacal light is rendered very difficult by the want of agreement in the observations that have been made upon it, and by the existence of a small number of apparently trustworthy observations of a very abnormal extension of the light, as detailed above; but certain conclusions may be safely arrived at. The theory that it is due to a ring of small bodies surrounding the earth seems to be entirely negatived, as pointed out by Proctor and others, by several of its features. The best observations leave no room for the parallactic displacement which would be observed if there were such a ring round the earth, and the absence of a large part of the luminous circle on ordinary occasions would be inexplicable on any such hypothesis. There can therefore be very little doubt that we must look for the cause of the light to the existence of a mass of small bodies moving in orbits round the sun, and that, as shown by the polarization and the spectrum, the light is chiefly, if not entirely, reflected sunlight. To account for all the observations, Proctor has shown that the bodies must travel in orbits of considerable eccentricity, carrying them far beyond the limits of what we may term the zodiacal disk. Under these conditions the constitution of the disk would become variable within exceedingly wide limits, and all the recorded variations might be fairly explained. The appearance of a complete arch, as seen by Liais and others, would indicate an extension far beyond the earth’s orbit; but, at present at least, this must be looked on as very exceptional. The spectroscopic evidence, so far as it goes, confirms this theory, since it indicates that the light is mainly reflected sunlight; and, even if further observations should confirm the opinion that bright lines are sometimes present, this need in no way invalidate the conclusions that have been arrived at. Indeed, it seems highly probable—especially if Mr Lockyer’s views regarding meteorites are confirmed—that bright lines should be seen in such a body of meteorites. Olbers long ago suggested that the corona was the brightest part of the zodiacal light, and there is nothing in recent observations to contradict this view, for all observations go to show that the outer corona has no definite boundary, but shades off imperceptibly and becomes invisible at a great distance from the sun. Dr Huggins, while holding that the corona is most probably due to the ceaseless outflow of extremely minute particles from the sun, thinks it not improbable that the zodiacal light may be in some way connected with this outflow. Dr Siemens, when discussing his theory of the conservation of solar energy, sought for an explanation of the zodiacal light in the dust which he supposed to be ejected from equatorial regions, rendered luminous partly by reflected sunlight, partly by phosphorescence, and partly by electrical action.
With the increasing number of observatories at high altitudes it may fairly be hoped that before long astronomers will be put in possession of such definite measurements as will enable some at least of the points still under discussion to be finally settled, and that far more accurate observations will soon be available on which to construct a satisfactory theory.
Bibliography.— Childrey, Natural History of England (1659) and Britannia Baconica, p. 183 (1661); Cassini (D.), Nouv. Phénom. d'une lumière céleste [zodiacale] (1683) and Découverte de la lumière céleste qui paroist dans le zodiaque (1685); Hooke (R.), Explication of a Glade of Light, &c. (1685); Mairan, Observations de la lumière zodiacale ; Euler (L.), Sur la cause de la lumière zodiacale (1746); Mairan, Sur la cause de la lumière zodiacale (1747); Wolf (R.), Beobachtungen des Zodiacallichtes (1850-52); Brorsen, Geber den Gegenschein des Zodiacallichts (1855) and in Schumacher, 998; Schmidt (J. F. J.), Das Zodiacallicht, Brunswick (1856), and in Astron. Nachr., lxxiii. p. 199; Jacob, Memoirs R. A. S., xxviii. p. 119; Jones (G.), in Gould, No. 84, in Monthly Notices R.A.S., xvi. p. 18, and in U. S. Exploring Expedition Narrative, vol. iii. (1856); Humboldt, in Monatsber. d. k. preuss Akad. d. Wiss., July 1855, also in Μ. Not. R.A.S., xvi. p. 16; Smyth (C. P.), in Trans. R.S.E., xx. p. 489 (1852), and in Μ. Noh R.A.S., xvii. p. 204 and xxxii. p. 277; Backhouse (T. W.), in Μ. Noh R.A.S., xxxvi. p. 1 and xli. p. 333; Tupman, in Μ. Noh R.A.S., xxxii. p. 74; Liais, in Comptes Rendus, lxiv. p. 262 (January 1872); Wright (A. W.), in Amer. Jour. of Science, cvii. p. 451 and cviii. p. 39; Angstrom, in Pogg. Annal., cxxxvii. p. 162; Searle (Arthur), in Proc. Amer. Acad., xix. p. 146 and vol. xi. p. 135; and Trouvelot, in Proc. Amer. Acad., xiii. p, 183 (1877). (C. Μ. S.)
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 796 [9:24:796]
| |
kp-eb0924-079801-0847m
|
ZOHAR. See Kabbalah.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 798 [9:24:798]
| |
kp-eb0924-079802-0847m
|
ZÖLLNER, Johann Carl Friedrich (1834-1882), astronomer and physicist, was born at Berlin on 8th November 1834. From 1872 he held the chair of astrophysics at Leipsic university. He is the author of numerous papers on photometry and spectrum analysis in Poggendorffs Annalen and Berichte der k. sächsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften, of two works on astronomical photometry (Grundzüge einer allgemeinen Photometrie des Himmels, Berlin, 1861, 4to, and Photometrische Untersuchungen, Leipsic, 1865, 8vo), and of a very strange book, Ueber die Natur der Cometen (Leipsic, 1872, 8vo). He died at Leipsic on 25th April 1882.
Zöllner’s “astrophotometer” compares the light of a star as seen in a telescope with that of an artificial star produced by a paraffin lamp. From the latter the light passes through three Nicol’s prisms, of which two can be turned so as to vary the intensity of the light, the latter being proportional to the square of the cosine of the angle through which the prisms are turned, which angle is read off on a small circle. In order to vary the colour of the artificial star, so as to make it resemble the natural star as much as possible, there is inserted between the first and second prisms a plate of left-handed quartz, cut perpendicular to the axis, the rotation of which is read off on another circle. This instrument has been used by Zöllner, Lindemann, Engelmann, J. T. Wolff, and others for photometric observations of stars and planets; but it labours under several defects, among which the difficulty of keeping the flame of the lamp at a constant height is the most serious.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 798 [9:24:798]
| |
kp-eb0924-079803-0847m
|
ZOMBOR, a royal free city of Hungary, the capital of the county of Bács-Bodrog, lies about 120 miles south of Budapest in a fertile plain, on the Francis Canal that connects the Danube and the Theiss. The town has some fine streets and squares, and several handsome buildings, among which may be mentioned the county and town halls, the theatre, and the Roman Catholic and Greek churches. Zombor is a station on the Alföld-Fiume Railway and the centre of the corn and cattle trade of an extensive area. The population numbered 24,693 in 1880 and about 31,000 in 1886.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 798 [9:24:798]
| |
kp-eb0924-079804-0847m
|
ZONARAS, Joannes, historian and theologian, flourished at Constantinople in the 12th century. Under Alexius I. Comnenus he held the offices of commander of the bodyguard and private secretary to the emperor, but in the succeeding reign he retired to Mount Athos, where he spent the rest of his life in writing his books. He is said to have lived to the age of eighty-eight.
His most important work, the Chronicon, is in eighteen books, and extends from the creation of the world to the death of Alexius (1118). The earlier part is largely drawn from Josephus; for Roman history he chiefly followed Dion Cassius, whose first twenty books are only known to us through Zonaras. Of contemporary events which he himself witnessed he writes more briefly and meagrely than might have been expected. His history was continued by Nicetas Acominatus. Among the other works of Zonaras is an Exposition of the Apostolical Canons. The Chronicon or Annals was first printed at Basel in 1557; Du Cange next edited it in 1686; and it also forms part of the Bonn collection of Byzantine writers, having been edited by Pinder (2 vols.) in 1841-44. The latest edition is by Dindorf, with Du Cange’s notes (6 vols. 8vo, Leipsic, 1868-75). The Opera Omnia Historica, Canonica, Dogmatica, were published by Migne in 2 vols. 4to, at Paris in 1865. A lexicon, also attributed to Zonaras, has been edited by Tittmann (Leipsic, 1808).
[9:24:799]
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 798 [9:24:798]
| |
kp-eb0924-079901-0848m
|
ZOOLOGY
THF branch of science to which the name zoology is strictly applicable may be defined as that portion of biology which relates to animals, as distinguished from that portion which is concerned with plants.
The science of biology itself has been placed by Mr Herbert Spencer in the group of concrete sciences, the other groups recognized by that writer being the “abstractconcrete” and the “abstract.” The abstract sciences are logic and mathematics, and treat of the blank forms in which phenomena occur in relation to time, space, and number. The abstract-concrete sciences are mechanics, physics, and chemistry. The title assigned to them is justified by the fact that, whilst their subject-matter is found in a consideration of varied concrete phenomena, they do not aim at the explanation of complex concrete phenomena as such, but at the determination of certain “abstract” quantitative relations and sequences known as the “laws” of mechanics, physics, and chemistry, which never are manifested in a pure form, but always are inferred by observation and experiment upon complex phenomena in which the abstract laws are disguised by their simultaneous interaction. The group of concrete sciences includes astronomy, geology, biology, and sociology. These sciences have for their aim to “explain” the concrete complex phenomena of (a ) the sidereal system, (ό) the earth as a whole, (c) the living matter on the earth’s surface, (d ) human society, by reference to the properties of matter set forth in the generalizations or laws of the abstract-concrete sciences, i.e., of mechanics, physics, and chemistry.
The classification thus sketched exhibits, whatever its practical demerits, the most important fact with regard to biology, namely, that it is the aim or business of those occupied with that branch of science to assign living things, in all their variety of form and activity, to the one set of forces recognized by the physicist and chemist. Just as the astronomer accounts for the heavenly bodies and their movements by the laws of motion and the property of attraction, as the geologist explains the present state of the earth’s crust by the long-continued action of the same forces which at this moment are studied and treated in the form of “laws” by physicists and chemists, so the biologist seeks to explain in all its details the long process of the evolution of the innumerable forms of life now existing, or which have existed in the past, as a necessary outcome, an automatic product, of these same forces.
Science may be defined as the knowledge of causes; and, so long as biology was not a conscious attempt to ascertain the causes of living things, it could not be rightly grouped with other branches of science. For a very long period the two parallel divisions of biology,—botany and zoology,— were actually limited to the accumulation of observations, which were noted, tabulated, and contemplated by the students of these subjects with wonder and delight, but only to a limited extent and in restricted classes of facts with any hope or intention of connecting the phenomena observed with the great nexus of physical sequence or causation. A vague desire to assign the forms and the activities of living things in all their variety to general causes has always been present to thoughtful observers from the earliest times of which we have record, but the earlier attempts in this direction were fantastic in the extreme; and it is the mere truth that, at the time when the phenomena of inorganic nature had been recognized as the outcome of uniform and constant properties capable of analysis and measurement, living things were still left hopelessly out of the domain of explanation, the earlier theories having been rejected and nothing as yet suggested in their place.
The history of zoology as a science is therefore the history of the great biological doctrine of the evolution of living things by the natural selection of varieties in the struggle for existence,—since that doctrine is the one medium whereby all the phenomena of life, whether of form or function, are rendered capable of explanation by the laws of physics and chemistry, and so made the subject-matter of a true science or study of causes. A history of zoology must take account of the growth of those various kinds of information with regard to animal life which have been arrived at in past ages through the labours of a long series of ardent lovers of nature, who in each succeeding period have more and more carefully and accurately tested, proved, arranged, and tabulated their knowledge, until at last the accumulated lore of centuries—almost without the consciousness of its latest heirs and cultivators—took the form of the doctrine of descent and the filiation of the animal series.
History.
There is something almost pathetic in the childish wonder and delight with which mankind in its earlier phases of civilization gathered up and treasured stories of strange animals from distant lands or deep seas, such as are recorded in the Physiologus, in Albertus Magnus, and even at the present day in the popular treatises of Japan and China. That omnivorous universally credulous stage, which may be called the “legendary,” was succeeded by the age of collectors and travellers, when many of the strange stories believed in were actually demonstrated as true by the living or preserved trophies brought to Europe by adventurous navigators. The possibility of verification established verification as a habit; and the collecting of things, instead of the accumulating of reports, developed a new faculty of minute observation. The early collectors of natural curiosities were the founders of zoological science, and to this day the naturalist-traveller and his correlative, the museum curator and systematist, play a most important part in the progress of zoology. Indeed, the historical and present importance of this aspect or branch of zoological science is so great that the name “zoology” has until recently been associated entirely with it, to the exclusion of the study of minute anatomical structure and function which have been distinguished as anatomy and physiology. It is a curious result of the steps of the historical progress of the two divisions of biological science that, whilst the word “botany” has always been understood, and is at the present day understood, as embracing the study, not only of the external forms of plants, their systematic nomenclature and classification, and their geographical distribution, but also the study of their minute structure, their organs of nutrition and reproduction, and the mode of action of the mechanism furnished by those organs, the word “zoology” has been limited to such a knowledge of animals as the travelling sportsman could acquire in making his collections of skins of beasts and birds, of dried insects and molluscs’ shells, and such a knowledge ‘as the museum curator could acquire by the examination and classification of these portable objects. Anatomy and the study of animal mechanism, animal physics, and animal chemistry, all of which form part of a true zoology, have been excluded from the usual definition of the word by the mere accident that the zoologist of the last three centuries has had his museum but has not had his garden of living specimens as the botanist has had;^[1. The mediaeval attitude towards both plants and animals had no ] and, whilst the zoologist has thus [9:24:800] for a long time been deprived of the means of anatomical and physiological study—only supplied within the past century by the method of preserving animal bodies in alcohol—the demands of medicine for a knowledge of the structure of the human animal have in the meantime brought into existence a separate and special study of human anatomy and physiology.
From these special studies of human structure the knowledge of the anatomy of animals has proceeded, the same investigator who had made himself acquainted with the structure of the human body desiring to compare with the standard given by human anatomy the structures of other animals. Thus comparative anatomy came into existence as a branch of inquiry apart from zoology, and it is only now, in the latter part of the 19th century, that the limitation of the word “zoology” to a knowledge of animals which expressly excludes the consideration of their internal structure has been rejected by the general consent of those concerned in the progress of science; it is now generally recognized that it is mere tautology to speak of zoology and comparative anatomy, and that our museum naturalists must give attention as well to the inside as to the outside of animals.
The anatomy and physiology of plants have never been excluded from the attention of botanists, because in contrast to the earlier zoologists they always were in possession of the whole living plant, raised from seed if need be in a hot-house, instead of having only a dried skin, skeleton, or shell. Consequently the study of vegetable anatomy and physiology has grown up naturally and in a healthy way in strict relation to the rest of botanical knowledge, whilst animal anatomy and physiology have been external to zoology in origin, the product of the medical profession and, as a consequence, subjected to a misleading anthropocentric method.
Whilst we may consider the day as gone by in which zoology could be regarded as connoting solely a special museum knowledge of animals (as twenty-five years ago was still the case), it is interesting to observe by the way the curious usurpation of the word “physiology,” which, from having a wide connotation, indicated by its etymology, —the physiologus of the Middle Ages being nothing more nor less than the naturalist or student of nature,—has in these later days acquired a limitation which it is difficult to justify or explain. Physiology to-day means the study of the physical and chemical properties of the animal or vegetable body, and is even distinguished from the study of structure and strictly confined to the study of function. It would hardly be in place here to discuss at length the steps by which physiology became thus limited, any more than to trace those by which the words “physician” and “physicist” (which both mean one who occupies himself with nature) came to signify respectively a medical practitioner and a student of the laws of mechanics, heat, light, and electricity (but not of chemistry), whilst the word “naturalist” is very usually limited to a lover and student of living things, to the exclusion of the so-called physicist, the chemist, and the astronomer. It is probable that physiology acquired its present significance, viz., the study of the properties and functions of the tissues and organs of living things, by a process of external attraction and spoliation which gradually removed from the original physiologus all his belongings and assigned them to newly named and independently constituted sciences, leaving at last, as a residuum to which the word might still be applied, that medical aspect of life which is concerned with the workings of the living organism regarded as a piece of physico-chemical apparatus.
Whatever may be the history of the word “physiology,” we find zoology, which really started in the 16th century with the awakening of the new spirit of observation and exploration, for a long time running a separate course uninfluenced by the progress of the medical studies of anatomy and physiology. The history of every branch of science involves a recognition of the history, not only of other branches of science, but of the progress of human society in every other relation. The century which destroyed the authority of the church, witnessed the discovery of the New World, and in England produced the writings of Francis Bacon is rightly regarded as the starting-point of the modern knowledge of natural causes or science. The true history of zoology as a science lies within the three last centuries; and, whilst the theories and fables which were current in earlier times in regard to animal life and the various kinds of animals form an important subject of study from the point of view of the history of the development of the human mind, they really have no bearing upon the history of scientific zoology. The great awakening of western Europe in the 16th century led to an active search for knowledge by means of observation and experiment, which found its natural home in the universities. Owing to the connexion of medicine with these seats of learning, it was natural that the study of the structure and functions of the human body and of the animals nearest to man should take root there; the spirit of inquiry which now for the first time became general showed itself in the anatomical schools of the Italian universities of the 16th century, and spread fifty years later to Oxford.
In the 17th century the lovers of the new philosophy, the investigators of nature by means of observation and experiment, banded themselves into academies or societies for mutual support and intercourse. It is difficult to exaggerate the importance of the influence which has been exercised by these associations upon the progress of all branches of science and of zoology especially. The essential importance of academies is to be found, as Laplace, the great French astronomer, has said, “in the philosophic spirit which develops itself in them and spreads itself from them as centres over an entire nation and all relations. The isolated man of science can give himself up to dogmatism without restraint; he hears contradictions only from afar. But in a learned society the enunciation of dogmatic views leads rapidly to their destruction, and the desire of each member to convince the others necessarily leads to the agreement to admit nothing excepting what is the result of observation or of mathematical calculation.”
The first founded of surviving European academies, the Academia Naturae Curiosorum (1651),^[2. The Academia Secretorum Naturae was founded at Naples in 1560, but was suppressed by the ecclesiastical authorities. ] especially confined itself to the description and illustration of the structure of plants and animals; eleven years later (1662) the Royal Society of London was incorporated by royal charter, having existed without a name or fixed organization for seventeen years previously (from 1645). A little later the Academy of Sciences of Paris was established by Louis XIV. The influence of these great academies of the 17th century on the progress of zoology was precisely to effect that bringing together of the museum-men and the physicians or anatomists which was needed for further development. Whilst the race of collectors and systematizes culminated in the latter part of the 18th century relation to real knowledge, but was part of a peculiar and in itself highly interesting mysticism. A fantastic and elaborate doctrine of symbolism existed which comprised all nature; witchcraft, alchemy, and medicine were its practical expressions. Animals as well as plants were regarded as “simples” and used in medicine, and a knowledge of them was valued from this point of view. Plants were collected and cultivated for medicinal use; hence the physic gardens and the botanist’s advantage.
[9:24:801]
in Linnaeus, a new type of student made its appearance in such men as John Hunter and other anatomists, who, not satisfied with the superficial observations of the popular “zoologists,” set themselves to work to examine anatomically the whole animal kingdom, and to classify its members by aid of the results of such profound study. From them we pass to the comparative anatomists of the 19th century and the introduction of the microscope as a serious instrument of accurate observation.
The influence of the scientific academies and the spirit in which they worked in the 17th century cannot be better illustrated than by an examination of the early records of the Royal Society of London. The spirit which animated the founders and leaders of that society is clearly indicated in its motto “Nullius in verba.” Marvellous narrations were not permitted at the meetings of the society, but solely demonstrative experiments or the exhibition of actual specimens. Definite rules were laid down by the society for its guidance, designed to ensure the collection of solid facts and the testing of statements embodying novel or remarkable observations. Under the influence of the touchstone of strict inquiry set on foot by the Royal Society, the marvels of witchcraft, sympathetic powders, and other relics of mediaeval superstition disappeared like a mist before the sun, whilst accurate observations and demonstrations of a host of new wonders accumulated, amongst which were numerous contributions to the anatomy of animals, and none perhaps more noteworthy than the observations, made by the aid of microscopes constructed by himself, of Leeuwenhoek, the Dutch naturalist (1683), some of whose instruments were presented by him to the society.
It was not until the 19th century that the microscope, thus early applied by Leeuwenhoek, Malpighi, Hook, and Swammerdam to the study of animal structure, was perfected as an instrument, and accomplished for zoology its final and most important service. The earlier half of the 19th century is remarkable for the rise, growth, and full development of a new current of thought in relation to living things, expressed in the various doctrines of development which were promulgated, whether in relation to the origin of individual animals and plants or in relation to their origin from predecessors in past ages. The perfecting of the microscope led to a full comprehension of the great doctrine of cell-structure and the establishment of the facts—(1) that all organisms are either single corpuscles (so-called cells) of living material (microscopic animalcules, &c.) or are built up of an immense number of such units; (2) that all organisms begin their individual existence as a single unit or corpuscle of living substance, which multiplies by binary fission, the products growing in size and multiplying similarly by binary fission; and (3) that the life of a multicellular organism is the sum of the activities of the corpuscular units of which it consists, and that the processes of life must be studied in and their explanation obtained from an understanding of the chemical and physical changes which go on in each individual corpuscle or unit of living material or protoplasm (cell-theory of Schwann).
On the other hand, the astronomical theories of development of the solar system from a gaseous condition to its present form, put forward by Kant and by Laplace, had impressed men’s minds with the conception of a general movement of spontaneous progress or development in all nature; and, though such ideas were not new but are to be found in some of the ancient Greek philosophers, yet now for the first time they could be considered with a sufficient knowledge and certainty as to the facts, due to the careful observation of the two preceding centuries. The science of geology came into existence, and the whole panorama of successive stages of the earth’s history, each with its distinct population of strange animals and plants, unlike those of the present day and simpler in proportion as they recede into the past, was revealed by Cuvier, Agassiz, and others. The history of the crust of the earth was explained by Lyell as due to a process of slow development, in order to effect which he called in no cataclysmic agencies, no mysterious forces differing from those operating at the present day. Thus he carried on the narrative of orderly development from the point at which it was left by Kant and Laplace,—explaining by reference to the ascertained laws of physics and chemistry the configuration of the earth, its mountains and seas, its igneous and its stratified rocks, just as the astronomers had explained by those same laws the evolution of the sun and planets from diffused gaseous matter of high temperature.
The suggestion that living things must also be included in this great development was obvious. They had been so included by poet-philosophers in past ages; they were so included by many a simple-minded student of nature who, watching the growth of the tree from the seed, formed a true but unverified inference in favour of a general process of growth and development of all things from simpler beginnings. The delay in the establishment of the doctrine of organic evolution was due, not to the ignorant and unobservant, but to the leaders of zoological and botanical science. Knowing as they did the almost endless complexity of organic structures, realizing as they did that man himself with all the mystery of his life and consciousness must be included in any explanation of the origin of living things, they preferred to regard living things as something apart from the rest of nature, specially cared for, specially created by a Divine Being, rather than to indulge in hypotheses which seemed to be beyond all possibility of proof, and were rather of the nature of poets’ dreams than in accordance with the principles of that new philosophy of rigid adherence to fact and demonstration which had hitherto served as the mainsprings of scientific progress. Thus it was that the so-called “Natur-philosophen” of the last decade of the 18th century, and their successors in the first quarter of the 19th, found few adherents among the working zoologists and botanists. Lamarck, Treviranus, Erasmus Darwin, Goethe, and Saint-Hilaire preached to deaf ears, for they advanced the theory that living beings had developed by a slow process of transmutation in successive generations from simpler ancestors, and in the beginning from simplest formless matter, without being able to demonstrate any existing mechanical causes by which such development must necessarily be brought about. They were met in fact by the criticism that possibly such a development had taken place; but, as no one could show as a simple fact of observation that it had taken place, nor as a result of legitimate inference that it must have taken place, it was quite as likely that the past and present species of animals and plants had been separately created or. individually brought into existence by unknown and inscrutable causes, and (it was held) the truly scientific man would refuse to occupy himself with such fancies, whilst ever continuing to concern himself with the observation and record of indisputable facts. The critics did well; for the “Natur-philosophen,” though right in their main conception, were premature.
It was reserved for Charles Darwin, in the year 1859, to place the whole theory of organic evolution on a new footing, and by his discovery of a mechanical cause actually existing and demonstrable by which organic evolution must be brought about to entirely change the attitude in regard to it of even the most rigid exponents of the scientific method. Since its first publication in 1859 the history of Darwin’s theory has been one of continuous and decisive conquest, so that at the present day it is universally accepted[9:24:802] as the central, all-embracing doctrine of zoological and botanical science.
Darwin succeeded in establishing the doctrine of organic evolution by the introduction into the web of the zoological and botanical sciences of a new science. The subjectmatter of this new science, or branch of biological science, had been neglected: it did not form part of the studies of the collector and systematist, nor was it a branch of anatomy, nor of the physiology pursued by medical men, nor again was it included in the field of microscopy and the cell-theory. The area of biological knowledge which Darwin was the first to subject to scientific method and to render, as it were, contributory to the great stream formed by the union of the various branches, the outlines of which we have already traced, is that which relates to the breeding of animals and plants, their congenital variations, and the transmission and perpetuation of those variations. This branch of biological science may be called thremmatology (θρέμμa, “a thing bred”). Outside the scientific world an immense mass of observation and experiment had grown up in relation to this subject. From the earliest times the shepherd, the farmer, the horticulturist, and the “fancier” had for practical purposes made themselves acquainted with a number of biological laws, and successfully applied them without exciting more than an occasional notice from the academic students of biology. It is one of Darwin’s great merits to have made use of these observations and to have formulated their results to a large extent as the laws of variation and heredity. As the breeder selects a congenital variation which suits his requirements, and by breeding from the animals (or plants) exhibiting that variation obtains a new breed specially characterized by that variation, so in nature is there a selection amongst all the congenital variations of each generation of a species. This selection depends on the fact that more young are born than the natural provision of food will support. In consequence of this excess of births there is a struggle for existence and a survival of the fittest, and consequently an ever-present necessarily-acting selection, which either maintains accurately the form of the species from generation to generation or leads to its modification in correspondence with changes in the surrounding circumstances which have relation to its fitness for success in the struggle for life.
Darwin’s introduction of thremmatology into the domain of scientific biology was accompanied by a new and special development of a branch of study which had previously been known as teleology, the study of the adaptation of organic structures to the service of the organisms in which they occur. It cannot be said that previously to Darwin there had been any very profound study of teleology, but it had been the delight of a certain type of mind—that of the lovers of nature or naturalists par excellence, as they were sometimes termed—to watch the habits of living animals and plants, and to point out the remarkable ways in which the structure of each variety of organic life was adapted to the special circumstances of life of the variety or species. The astonishing colours and grotesque forms of some animals and plants which the museum zoologists gravely described without comment were shown by these observers of living nature to have their significance in the economy of the organism possessing them; and a general doctrine was recognized, to the effect that no part or structure of an organism is without definite use and adaptation, being designed by the Creator for the benefit of the creature to which it belongs, or else for the benefit, amusement, or instruction of his highest creature—man. Teleology in this form of the doctrine of design was never very deeply rooted amongst scientific anatomists and systematists. It was considered permissible to speculate somewhat vaguely on the subject of the utility of this or that startling variety of structure; but few attempts, though some of great importance, were made to systematically explain by observation and experiment the adaptation of organic structures to particular purposes in the case of the lower animals and plants. Teleology had, however, an important part in the development of what is called physiology, viz., the knowledge of the mechanism, the physical and chemical properties, of the parts of the body of man and the higher animals allied to him. The doctrine of organs and functions—the organ designed so as to execute the function, and the whole system of organs and functions building up a complex mechanism, the complete animal or plant—was teleological in origin (see Physiology), and led to brilliant discoveries in the hands of the physiologists of the last and the preceding century. As applied to lower and more obscure forms of life, teleology presented almost insurmountable difficulties; and consequently, in place of exact experiment and demonstration, the most reckless though ingenious assumptions were made as to the utility of the parts and organs of lower animals, which tended to bring so-called comparative physiology and teleology generally into disrepute. Darwin’s theory had as one of its results the reformation and rehabilitation of teleology. According to that theory, every organ, every part, colour, and peculiarity of an organism, must either be of benefit to that organism itself or have been so to its ancestors: no peculiarity of structure or general conformation, no habit or instinct in any organism, can be supposed to exist for the benefit or amusement of another organism, not even for the delectation of man himself. Necessarily, according to the theory of natural selection, structures either are present because they are selected as useful or because they are still inherited from ancestors to whom they were useful, though no longer useful to the existing representatives of those ancestors.
The conception thus put forward entirely re-founded teleology. Structures previously inexplicable were explained as survivals from a past age, no longer useful though once of value. Every variety of form and colour was urgently and absolutely called upon to produce its title to existence either as an active useful agent or as a survival. Darwin himself spent a large part of the later years of his life in thus extending the new teleology. A beginning only has as yet been made in the new life of that branch of zoological and botanical study.
The old doctrine of types, which was used by the philosophically-minded zoologists (and botanists) of the first half of the century as a ready means of explaining the failures and difficulties of the doctrine of design, fell into its proper place under the new dispensation. The adherence to type, the favourite conception of the transcendental morphologist, was seen to be nothing more than the expression of one of the laws of thremmatology, the persistence of hereditary transmission of ancestral characters, even when they have ceased to be significant or valuable in the struggle for existence, whilst the so-called evidences of design which was supposed to modify the limitations of types assigned to Himself by the Creator were seen to be adaptations due to the selection and intensification by selective breeding of fortuitous congenital variations, which happened to prove more useful than the many thousand other variations which did not survive in the struggle for existence.
Thus not only did Darwin’s theory give a new basis to the study of organic structure, but, whilst rendering the general theory of organic evolution equally acceptable and necessary, it explained the existence of low and simple forms of life as survivals of the earliest ancestry of more highly complex forms, and revealed the classifications of the [9:24:803] systematist as unconscious attempts to construct the genealogical tree or pedigree of plants and animals. Finally, it brought the simplest living matter or formless protoplasm before the mental vision as the starting-point whence, by the operation of necessary mechanical causes, the highest forms have been evolved, and it rendered unavoidable the conclusion that this earliest living material was itself evolved by gradual processes, the result also of the known and recognized laws of physics and chemistry, from material which we should call not living. It abolished the conception of life as an entity above and beyond the common properties of matter, and led to the conviction that the marvellous and exceptional qualities of that which we call “living” matter are nothing more nor less than an exceptionally complicated development of those chemical and physical properties which we recognize in a gradually ascending scale of evolution in the carbon compounds, containing nitrogen as well as oxygen, sulphur, and hydrogen as constituent atoms of their enormous molecules. Thus mysticism was finally banished from the domain of biology, and zoology became one of the physical sciences, —the science which seeks to arrange and discuss the phenomena of animal life and form as the outcome of the operation of the laws of physics and chemistry.
Nature and Scope of Zoology.
The brief historical outline above given is sufficient to justify us in rejecting, for the purposes of an adequate appreciation of the history and scope of zoology, that simple division of the science into morphology and physiology which is a favourite one at the present day. No doubt the division is a logical one, based as it is upon the distinction of the study of form and structure in themselves (morphology) from the study of what are the activities and functions of the forms and structures (physiology). Such logical divisions are possible upon a variety of bases, but are not necessarily conducive to the ascertainment and remembrance of the historical progress and present significance of the science to which they are applied. As a matter of convenience and as the outcome of historical events it happens that in the universities of Europe, whilst botany in its entirety is usually represented by one chair, the animal side of biology is represented by a chair of so-called zoology, which is understood as the old-fashioned systematic zoology, a chair of human and comparative anatomy, and a chair of physiology (signifying the mechanics, physics, and chemistry of animals especially in relation to man). Fifty years ago the chairs of anatomy and physiology were united in one. No such distinction of mental activities as that involved in the division of the study of animal life into morphology and physiology has ever really existed: the investigator of animal forms has never entirely ignored the functions of the forms studied by him, and the experimental inquirer into the functions and properties of animal tissues and organs has always taken very careful account of the forms of those tissues and organs.
A more instructive subdivision of the science of animal biology or zoology is one which shall correspond to the separate currents of thought and mental preoccupation which have been historically manifested in western Europe in the gradual evolution of what is to-day the great river of zoological doctrine to which they have all been rendered contributory. Such a subdivision of zoology, whilst it enables us to trace the history of thought, corresponds very closely with the actual varieties of mental attitude exhibited at the present day by the devotees of zoological study, though it must be remembered that the gathering together of all the separate currents by Darwin is certain sooner or later to entail new developments and branchings of the stream.
We accordingly recognize the following five branches of zoological study :—
1. Morphography.— The work of the collector and systematist: exemplified by Linnaeus and his predecessors, by Cuvier, Agassiz, Haeckel.
2. Bionomics.— The lore of the farmer, gardener, sportsman, fancier, and field-naturalist, including thremmatology, or the science of breeding, and the allied teleology, or science of organic adaptations: exemplified by the patriarch Jacob, the poet Virgil, Sprengel, Kirby and Spence, Wallace, and Darwin.
3. Zoo-Dynamics, Zoo-Physics, Zoo-Chemistry. — The pursuit of the learned physician,—anatomy and physiology: exemplified by Harvey, Haller, Hunter, Johann Müller.
4. Plasmology.— The study of the ultimate corpuscles of living matter, their structure, development, and properties, by the aid of the microscope; exemplified by Malpighi, Hook, Schwann, Kowalewsky.
5. Philosophical Zoology.— General conceptions with regard to the relations of living things (especially animals) to the universe, to man, and to the Creator, their origin and significance: exemplified in the writings of the philosophers of classical antiquity, and of Linnaeus, Goethe, Lamarck, Cuvier, Lyell, H. Spencer, and Darwin.
It is true that it is impossible to assign the great names of the present century to a single one of the subdivisions of the science thus recognized. With men of an earlier date such special assignment is possible, and there would be no difficulty about thus separating the minor specialists of modern times. But the fact is that as we approach Darwin’s epoch we find the separate streams more and more freely connected with one another by anastomosing branches; and the men who have left their mark on the progress of science have been precisely those who have been instrumental in bringing about such confluence, and have distinguished themselves by the influence of their discoveries or generalizations upon several lines of work. At last, in Darwin we find a name which might appear in each of our subdivisions,—a zoologist to whose doctrine all are contributory, and by whose labours all are united and reformed.
We shall now briefly sketch the history of these streams of thought, premising that one has (so far as the last three centuries are concerned) but little start of another, and that sooner or later the influence of the progress of one branch makes itself felt in the progress of another.
Morphography.
Under this head we include the systematic exploration and tabulation of the facts involved in the recognition of all the recent and extinct kinds of animals and their distribution in space and time. (1) The museum-makers of old days and their modern representatives the curators and describers of zoological collections, (2) early explorers and modern naturalist-travellers and writers on zoo-geography, and (3) collectors of fossils and palaeontologists are the chief varieties of zoological workers coming under this head. Gradually since the time of Hunter and Cuvier anatomical study has associated itself with the more superficial morphography until to-day no one considers a study of animal form of any value which does not include internal structure, histology, and embryology in its scope.
The real dawn of zoology after the legendary period of the Middle Ages is connected with the name of an Englishman, Wotton, born at Oxford in 1492, who practised as a physician in London and died in 1555. He published a treatise De Differentiis Animalium at Paris in 1552. In [9:24:804] many respects Wotton was simply an exponent of Aristotle, whose teaching, with various fanciful additions, constituted the real basis of zoological knowledge throughout the Middle Ages. It was Wotton’s merit that he rejected the legendary and fantastic accretions, and returned to Aristotle and the observation of nature. The most ready means of noting the progress of zoology during the 16th, 17th, and 18th centuries is to compare the classificatory conceptions of successive naturalists with those which are to be found in the works of Aristotle himself. Aristotle did not definitely and in tabular form propound a classification of animals, but from a study of his treatises Historia Animalium, De Generatione Animalium, and De Partibus Animalium the following classification can be arrived at :—
A. ΅Evαιμα, blood-holding animals ( = Vertebrata).
1. Zωoτoκoῠvτα έ v aύτοῖs, viviparous Enaema ( = Mammals, including the Whale).
2. "Oρvιθεs ( = Birds).
3. Τετράποδα ᾔ ᾂποδα ώοτοκοΰντα, four-footed or legless Enaema which lay eggs ( = Reptiles and Amphibia).
4. 'Iχθύϵς ( = Fishes).
B. "Αναιμα, bloodless animals ( = Invertebrata).
1. Μαλάκια, soft-bodied Anaema ( = Cephalopoda).
2. Μαλακόστρακα, soft-shelled Anaema ( = Crustacea).
3. "Εντομα, insected Anaema or Insects (= Arthropoda, exclusive of Crustacea).
4. Όστρακοδέρματα, shell-bearing Anaema (=Echini, Gastropoda, and Lamellibranchia. )
Wotton follows Aristotle in the division of animals into the Enaema and the Anaema, and in fact in the recognition of all the groups above given, adding only one large group to those recognized by Aristotle under the Anaema, namely, the group of Zooρhyta, in which Wotton includes the Holothuriae, Star-Fishes, Medusae, Sea-Anemones, and Sponges. Wotton divides the viviparous quadrupeds into the manytoed, double-hoofed, and single-hoofed. By the introduction of a method of classification which was due to the superficial Pliny,—viz., one depending, not on structure, but on the medium inhabited by an animal, whether earth, air, or water,—Wotton is led to associate Fishes and Whales as aquatic animals. But this is only a momentary lapse, for he broadly distinguishes the two kinds.
Conrad Gesner (1516-1565), who was a physician and held professorial chairs in various Swiss cities, is the most voluminous and instructive of these earliest writers on systematic zoology, and was so highly esteemed that his Historia Animalium was republished a hundred years after his death. His great work appeared in successive parts,— e.g., Vivipara, Ovipara, Aves, Pisces, Serpentes et Scorpio,— and contains descriptions and illustrations of a large number of animal forms with reference to the lands inhabited by them. Gesner’s work, like that of John Johnstone (b. 1603), who was of Scottish descent and studied at St Andrews, and like that of Ulysses Aldrovandi of Bologna (b . 1522), was essentially a compilation, more or less critical, of all such records, pictures, and relations concerning beasts, birds, reptiles, fishes, and monsters as could be gathered together by one reading in the great libraries of Europe, travelling from city to city, and frequenting the company of those who either had themselves passed into distant lands or possessed the letters written and sometimes the specimens brought home by adventurous persons.
The exploration of parts of the New World next brought to hand descriptions and specimens of many novel forms of animal life, and in the latter part of the 16th century and the beginning of the 17th that careful study by “specialists” of the structure and life-history of particular groups of animals was commenced which, directed at first to common and familiar kinds, was gradually extended until it formed a sufficient body of knowledge to serve as an anatomical basis for classification. This minuter study had two origins, one in the researches of the medical anatomists, such as Fabricius (1537-1619), Severinus (1580-1656), Harvey (1578-1657), and Tyson (1649-1708), the other in the careful work of the entomologists and first microscopists, such as Malpighi (1628-1694), Swammerdam (1637-1680), and Hook (1635-1702). The commencement of anatomical investigations deserves notice here as influencing the general accuracy and minuteness with which zoological work was prosecuted, but it was not until a late date that their full influence was brought to bear upon systematic zoology by Georges Cuvier (1769- 1832).
The most prominent name between that of Gesner and Linnaeus in the history of systematic zoology is that of John Ray ( q.v.). Though not so extensive as that of Linnaeus, his work is of the highest importance, and rendered the subsequent labours of the Swedish naturalist far easier than they would otherwise have been. A chief merit of Ray is to have limited the term “species” and to have assigned to it the significance which it has until the Darwinian era borne, whereas previously it was loosely and vaguely applied. He also made considerable use of anatomical characters in his definitions of larger groups, and may thus be considered as the father of modern zoology. Associated with Ray in his work, and more especially occupied with the study of the Worms and Mollusca, was Martin Lister (1638-1712), who is celebrated also as the author of the first geological map.
After Ray’s death in London in 1705 the progress of anatomical knowledge, and of the discovery and illustration of new forms of animal life from distant lands, continued with increasing vigour. We note the names of Vallisnieri (1661-1730) and Alexander Monro (1697-1767); the travellers Tournefort (1656-1708) and Shaw (1692-1751); the collectors Rumphius (1637-1706) and Hans Sloane (1660-1753); the entomologist Réaumur (1683-1757); Lhwyd (1703) and Linck (1674-1734), the students of StarFishes; Peyssonel (b. 1694), the investigator of Polyps and the opponent of Marsigli and Réaumur, who held them to be plants; Woodward, the palaeontologist (1665- 1722),—not to speak of others of less importance.
Two years after Ray’s death Carl Linnaeus ( q.v. ) was born. Unlike Jacob Theodore Klein (1685-1759), whose careful treatises on various groups of plants and animals were published during the period between Ray and Linnaeus, the latter had his career marked out for him in a university, that of Upsala, where he was first professor of medicine and subsequently of natural history. His lectures formed a new departure in the academic treatment of zoology and botany, which, in direct continuity from the Middle Ages, had hitherto been subjected to the traditions of the medical profession and regarded as mere branches of “materia medica.” Linnaeus taught zoology and botany as branches of knowledge to be studied for their own intrinsic interest. His great work, the Systema Naturae, ran through twelve editions during his lifetime (1st ed. 1735, 12th 1768). Apart from his special discoveries in the anatomy of plants and animals, and his descriptions of new species, the great merit of Linnaeus was his introduction of a method of enumeration and classification which may be said to have created systematic zoology and botany in their present form, and establishes his name for ever as the great organizer, the man who recognized a great practical want in the use of language and supplied it. Linnaeus adopted Ray’s conception of species, but he made species a practical reality by insisting that every species shall have a double Latin name,—the first half to be the name of the genus common to several species, and the second half to be the specific name. Previously to Linnaeus long many-worded names had been used, sometimes with [9:24:805] one additional adjective, sometimes with another, so that no true names were fixed and accepted. Linnaeus by his binomial system made it possible to write and speak with accuracy of any given species of plant or animal. He was, in fact, the Adam of zoological science. He proceeded further to introduce into his enumeration of animals and plants a series of groups, viz., genus, order, class, which he compared to the subdivisions of an army or the subdivisions of a territory, the greater containing several of the less, as follows :—
[table]
Linnaeus himself recognized the purely subjective character of his larger groups; for him species were, however, objective: “there are,” he said, “just so many species as in the beginning the Infinite Being created.” It was reserved for a philosophic zoologist of the 19th century (Agassiz, Essay on Classification, 1859) to maintain dogmatically that genus, order, and class were also objective facts capable of precise estimation and valuation. This climax was reached at the very moment when Darwin was publishing the Origin of Species (1859), by which universal opinion has been brought to the position that species, as well as genera, orders, and classes, are the subjective expressions of a vast ramifying pedigree in which the only objective existences are individuals, the apparent species as well as higher groups being marked out, not by any distributive law, but by the purely non-significant operation of human experience, which cannot transcend the results of death and decay.
The classification of Linnaeus (from Syst. Nat., 12th ed., 1766) should be compared with that of Aristotle. It is as follows,—the complete list of Linnaean genera being here reproduced :—
[table]
[table]
[9:24:806]
[table]
The characters of the six classes are thus given by Linnaeus :—
[table]
Between Linnaeus and Cuvier there are no very great names; but under the stimulus given by the admirable method and system of Linnaeus observation and description of new forms from all parts of the world, both recent and fossil, accumulated. We can only cite the names of Charles Bonnet (1720-1793), the entomologist, who described the reproduction of Aphis ; Banks and Solander, who accompanied Captain Cook on his first voyage (1768-1771); Thomas Pennant (1726-1798), the describer of the English fauna; Peter Simon Pallas (1741-1811), who specially extended the knowledge of the Linnaean Vermes, and under the patronage of the empress Catherine explored Russia and Siberia; De Geer (1720-1778), the entomologist; Lyonnet (1707-1789), the author of the monograph of the anatomy of the caterpillar of Cossus ligniperdus ; Cavolini (1756- 1810), the Neapolitan marine zoologist and forerunner of Della Chiaje (fl. 1828); O. F. Müller (1730-1784), the describer of freshwater Oligoehaeta; Abraham Trembley (1700-1784), the student of Hydra ·, and Ledermüller (1719- 1769), the inventor of the term Infusoria. The effect of the Linnaean system upon the general conceptions of zoologists was no less marked than were its results in the way of stimulating the accumulation of accurately observed details. The notion of a scala naturae, which had since the days of classical antiquity been a part of the general philosophy of nature amongst those who occupied themselves with such conceptions, now took a more definite form in the minds of skilled zoologists. The species of Linnaeus were supposed to represent a series of steps in a scale of ascending complexity, and it was thought possible thus to arrange the animal kingdom in a single series,—the orders within the classes succeeding one another in regular gradation, and the classes succeeding one another in a similar rectilinear progression. Lamarck (q.v.) represents most completely, both by his development theory (to be further mentioned below) and by his scheme of classification, the high-water mark of the popular but fallacious conception of a scala naturae. His classification (1801 to 1812) is as follows :—
[table]
The enumeration of orders above given will enable the reader to form some conception of the progress of knowledge relating to the lower forms of life during the fifty years which intervened between Linnaeus and Lamarck. The number of genera recognized by Lamarck is more than ten times as great as that recorded by Linnaeus.
We have mentioned Lamarck before his great contemporary Cuvier because, in spite of his valuable philosophical doctrine of development, he was, as compared with Cuvier and estimated as a systematic zoologist, a mere enlargement and logical outcome of Linnaeus.
The distinctive merit of Cuvier (q.v.) is that he started a new view as to the relationships of animals, which he may be said in a large measure to have demonstrated as true by his own anatomical researches. He opposed the scala naturae theory, and recognized four distinct and divergent branches or embranchemens, as he called them, in each of which he arranged a certain number of the Linnaean classes, or similar classes. The embranchemens were characterized each by a different type of anatomical structure. Cuvier thus laid the foundation of that branching tree-like arrangement of the classes and orders of animals which we now recognize as being the necessary result of attempts to represent what is practically a genealogical tree or pedigree. Apart from this, Cuvier was a keen-sighted and enthusiastic anatomist of great skill and industry. It is astonishing how many good observers it requires to dissect and draw and record over and over again the structure of an animal before an approximately correct account of it is obtained. Cuvier dissected many Molluscs and other animals which had not previously been anatomized; of others he gave more correct accounts than had been given by earlier writers. Skilful as he was, his observations are very frequently erroneous. Great accuracy in work as well as great abundance of production has only distinguished one amongst all the great names of zoology—that of Johann Müller. It certainly did not [9:24:807] distinguish Cuvier. Another special distinction of Cuvier is his remarkable work in comparing extinct with recent organisms, his descriptions of the fossil Mammalia of the Paris basin, and his general application of the knowledge of recent animals to the reconstruction of extinct ones, as indicated by fragments only of their skeletons.
It was in 1812 that Cuvier communicated to the Academy of Sciences of Paris his views on the classification of animals. He says—
"Si l'on considère le règne animal d’après les principes que nous venons de poser, en se debarassant des préjugés établis sur les divisions anciennement admises, en n’ayant égard qu’ à l’organisation et à la nature des animaux, et non pas à leur grandeur, à leur utilité, au plus ou moins de connaissance que nous en avons, ni à toutes les autres circonstances accessoires, on trouvera qu’il existe quatre formes principales, quatre plans généraux, si l’on peut s’exprimer ainsi, d’après lesquels tous les animaux semblent avoir été modelés et dont les divisions ultérieures, de quelque titre que les naturalistes les aient décorées, ne sont que des modifications assez légères, fondées sur le développement, ou l’addition de quelques parties qui ne changent rien à l’essence du plan.”
His classification as finally elaborated in Le Règne Animal (Paris, 1829) is as follows :—
[table]
The leading idea of Cuvier, his four embranchemens, was confirmed by the Russo-German naturalist Von Baer (1792-1876), who adopted Cuvier’s divisions, speaking of them as the peripheric, the longitudinal, the massive, and the vertebrate types of structure. Von Baer, however, has another place in the history of zoology, being the first and most striking figure in the introduction of embryology into the consideration of the relations of animals to one another.
Cuvier may be regarded as the zoologist by whom anatomy was made the one important guide to the understanding of the relations of animals. But it should be noted that the belief, dating from Malpighi (1670), that there is a relationship to be discovered, and not merely a haphazard congregation of varieties of structure to be classified, had previously gained ground. Cuvier was familiar with the speculations of the “Natur-philosophen,” and with the doctrine of transmutation and filiation by which they endeavoured to account for existing animal forms. The noble aim of F. W. J. Schelling, “das ganze System der Naturlehre von dem Gesetze der Schwere bis zu den Bildungstrieben der Organismus als ein organisches Ganze darzustellen,” which has ultimately been realized through Darwin, was a general one among the scientific men of the year 1800. Lamarck accepted the development theory fully, and pushed his speculations far beyond the realm of fact. The more cautious Cuvier adopted a view of the relationships of animals which, whilst denying genetic connexion as the explanation, recognized an essential identity of structure throughout whole groups of animals. This identity was held to be due to an ultimate law of nature or the Creator’s plan. The tracing out of this identity in diversity, whether regarded as evidence of blood-relationship or as a remarkable display of skill on the part of the Creator in varying the details whilst retaining the essential, became at this period a special pursuit, to which Goethe, the poet, who himself contributed importantly to it, gave the name “morphology.” C. F. Wolff, Goethe, and Oken share the credit of having initiated these views, in regard especially to the structure of flowering plants and the Vertebrate skull. Cuvier’s doctrine of four plans of structure was essentially a morphological one, and so was the single-scale doctrine of Buffon and Lamarck, to which it was opposed. Cuvier’s morphological doctrine received its fullest development in the principle of the “correlation of parts,” which he applied to palaeontological investigation, namely, that every animal is a definite whole, and that no part can be varied without entailing correlated and law-abiding variations in other parts, so that from a fragment it should be possible, had we a full knowledge of the laws of animal structure or morphology, to reconstruct the whole. Here Cuvier was imperfectly formulating, without recognizing the real physical basis of the phenomena, the results of the laws of heredity, which were subsequently investigated and brought to bear on the problems of animal structure by Darwin.
Richard Owen^[4. Boni in 1804 in Lancaster; conservator of the Hunterian Museum, London, 1830-56; superintendent Nat. Hist Brit. Mus., 1856∙84. ] may be regarded as the foremost of Cuvier’s disciples. Owen not only occupied himself with the dissection of rare animals, such as the Pearly Nautilus, Lingula, Limulus, Protopterus, Apteryx, &c., and with the description and reconstruction of extinct Reptiles, Birds, and Mammals,—following the Cuvierian tradition,—but gave precision and currency to the morphological doctrines which had taken their rise in the beginning of the century by the introduction of two terms, “homology” and “analogy,” which were defined so as to express two different kinds of agreement in animal structures, which, owing to the want of such “counters of thought,” had been hitherto continually confused. Analogous structures in any two animals compared were by Owen defined as structures performing similar functions, but not necessarily derived from the modification of one and the same part in the “plan” or “archetype” according to which the two animals compared were supposed to be constructed. Homologous structures were such as, though greatly differing in appearance and detail from one another, and though performing widely different functions, yet were [9:24:808] capable of being shown by adequate study of a series of intermediate forms to be derived from one and the same part or organ of the “plan-form” or “archetype.” It is not easy to exaggerate the service rendered by Owen to the study of zoology by the introduction of this apparently small piece of verbal mechanism; it takes place with the classificatory terms of Linnaeus. And, though the conceptions of “archetypal morphology,” to which it had reference, are now abandoned in favour of a genetic morphology, yet we should remember, in estimating the value of this and of other speculations which have given place to new views in the history of science, the words of the great reformer himself. “Erroneous observations are in the highest degree injurious to the progress of science, since they often persist for a long time. But erroneous theories, when they are supported by facts, do little harm, since every one takes a healthy pleasure in proving their falsity” (Darwin). Owen’s definition of analogous structures holds good at the present day. His homologous structures are now spoken of as “homogenetic” structures, the idea of community of representation in an archetype giving place to community of derivation from a single representative structure present in a common ancestor. Darwinian morphology has further rendered necessary the introduction of the terms “homoplasy” and “homoplastic” 1 to express that close agreement in form which may be attained in the course of evolutional changes by organs or parts in two animals which have been subjected to similar moulding conditions of the environment, but have no genetic community of origin, to account for their close similarity in form and structure.
The classification adopted by Owen in his lectures (1855) does not adequately illustrate the progress of zoological knowledge between Cuvier’s death and that date, but, such as it is, it is worth citing here.
[table]
The real centre of progress of systematic zoology was no longer in France nor with the disciples of Cuvier in England, but after his death moved to Germany. The wave of morphological speculation, with its outcome of new systems and new theories of classification, which were as numerous as the professors of zoological science, 2 was necessarily succeeded in the true progress of the science by a period of minuter study in which the microscope, the discovery of embryological histories, and the all-important cell-theory came to swell the stream of exact knowledge.
We have already mentioned Von Baer in this connexion, and given a passing reference to Johann Müller (q.v. ), the greatest of all investigators of animal structure in the present century. Müller (1801-1858) was in Germany the successor of Rathke (1793-1860) and of Meckel (1781-1833) as the leader of anatomical investigation; but his true greatness can only be estimated by a consideration of the fact that he was a great teacher not only of human and comparative anatomy and zoology but also of physiology, and that nearly all the most distinguished German zoologists and physiologists of the period 1850 to 1870 were his pupils and acknowledged his leadership. The most striking feature about Johann Müller’s work, apart from the comprehensiveness of his point of view, in which he added to the anatomical and morphological ideas of Cuvier a consideration of physiology, embryology, and microscopic structure, was the extraordinary accuracy, facility, and completeness of his recorded observations. He could do more with a single specimen of a rare animal (e.g., in his memoir on Amphioxus, Berlin, 1844) in the way of making out its complete structure than the ablest of his contemporaries or successors could do with a plethora. His power of rapid and exhaustive observation and of accurate pictorial reproduction was phenomenal. His most important memoirs, besides that just mentioned, are those on the anatomy and classification of Fishes, on the Coecilians, and on the developmental history of the Echinoderms.
See Lankester, “On the Use of the Term Homology in Modem Zoology and the Distinction between Homogenetic and Homoplastic Agreements,” Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist. 1870.
See Agassiz, Essay on Classification, 1859, for an account of them.
A name which is apt to be forgotten in the period between Cuvier and Darwin, because its possessor occupied an isolated position in England and was not borne up by any great school or university, is that of John Vaughan Thompson, who was an army surgeon, and when past the age of forty, being district medical inspector at Cork (1830), took to the study of marine Invertebrate by the aid of the microscope. Thompson made three great discoveries, which seem to have fallen in his way in the most natural and simple manner, but must be regarded really as the outcome of extraordinary genius. He showed that the organisms like Flustra are not hydroid Polyps, but of a more complex structure resembling Molluscs, and he gave them the name Polyzoa. He discovered the Pentacrinus europaeus, and showed that it was the larval form of the Feather-Star Antedon (Comatula). He upset Cuvier’s retention of the Cirripedes among Mollusca, and his subsequent treatment of them as an isolated class, by showing that they begin life as free-swimming Crustacea identical with the young forms of other Crustacea. Vaughan Thompson is a type of the marine zoologists, such as Dalyell, Michael Sars, P. J. Van Beneden, Claparède, and Allman, who during the present century have approached the study of the lower marine organisms in the same spirit as that in which Trembley and Schäffer in the last century, and Swammerdam in the 17th, gave themselves to the study of the minute freshwater forms of animal life.
It is impossible to enumerate or to give due consideration to all the names in the army of anatomical and embryological students of the middle third of this century whose labours bore fruit in the modification of zoological theories and in the building up of a true classification of animals. Their results are best summed up in the three schemes of classification which follow below—those of Rudolph Leuckart (b. 1823), Henri Milne-Edwards (1800-1884), and T. H. Huxley (b. 1825), all of whom individually contributed very greatly by their special discoveries and researches to the increase of exact knowledge.
Contemporaneous with these were various schemes of classification which were based, not on a consideration of the entire structure of each animal, but on the variations of a single organ, or on the really non-significant fact of the structure of the egg. All such single-fact systems have proved to be useless and in fact departures from the true line of growth of the zoological system which was shaping itself year by year—unknown to those who so shaped it— as a genealogical tree. They were attempts to arrive at a true knowledge of the relationships of animals by “royal roads”; their followers were landed in barren wastes.
[9:24:809]
R. Leuckart’s^[5. Die Morphologie und die Verwandtschaftsverhältnisse der wirbellosen Thiere, Brunswick, 1848. The Protozoa, recognized as a primary group by Siebold and Stannius (Lehrbuch d. vergleich. Anatomie, Berlin, 1845), are not included at all by Leuckart in his scheme. The name Protozoa was first used by Goldfuss (1809) to include microscopic animals and also the Polyps and Medusae, and Siebold and Stannius first used it in its modern signification as comprising and limited to the Infusoria and Rhizopoda. ] classification is as follows :—
[table]
The classification given by Henri Milne-Edwards^[6. Cours Élémentaire d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris, 1855. ] is as follows :—
[table]
[table]
(The orders of the classes which follow are not given in the work quoted. )
[table]
In England T. H. Huxley adopted in his lectures (1869) a classification which was in many respects similar to both of the foregoing, but embodied improvements of his own. It is as follows :—
[table]
We now arrive at the period when the doctrine of organic evolution was established by Darwin, and when naturalists, being convinced by him as they had not been by the transmutationists of fifty years’ earlier date, were compelled to take an entirely new view of the significance of all attempts at framing a “natural” classification.
Many zoologists—prominent among them in Great Britain being Huxley—had been repelled by the airy fancies and assumptions of the “philosophical” morphologists. The efforts of the best minds in zoology had been directed for thirty years or more to ascertaining with increased accuracy and minuteness the structure, microscopic and gross, of all possible forms of animals, and not only of the adult structure but of the steps of development of that structure in the growth of each kind of organism from the egg to maturity. Putting aside fantastic theories, these observers endeavoured to give in their classifications a strictly objective representation of the facts of animal structure and of the structural relationships of animals to one another capable of demonstration. The groups within groups adopted for this purpose were necessarily wanting in symmetry: the whole system presented a strangely irregular character. From time to time efforts were made by those who believed that the Creator must have followed a symmetrical system in his production of animals to force one or other artificial, neatly balanced [9:24:810] scheme of classification upon the zoological world. The last of these was that of Louis Agassiz (Essay on Classification, 1859), who, whilst surveying all previous classifications, propounded a scheme of his own, in which, as well as in the criticisms he applies to other systems, the leading notion is that sub-kingdoms, classes, orders, and families have a real existence, and that it is possible to ascertain and distinguish characters which are of class value, others which are only of ordinal value, and so on, so that the classes of one sub-kingdom should on paper, and in nature actually do, correspond in relative value to those of another sub-kingdom, and the orders of any one class similarly should be so taken as to be of equal value with those of another class, and have been actually so created.
The whole position was changed by the acquiescence, which became universal, in the doctrine of Darwin. That doctrine took some few years to produce its effect, but it became evident at once to those who accepted Darwinism that the natural classification of animals, after which collectors and anatomists, morphologists, philosophers, and embryologists had been so long striving was nothing more nor less than a genealogical tree, with breaks and gaps of various extent in its record. The facts of the relationships of animals to one another, which had been treated as the outcome of an inscrutable law by most zoologists and glibly explained by the transcendental morphologists, were amongst the most powerful arguments in support of Darwin’s theory, since they, together with all other vital phenomena, received a sufficient explanation through it. It is to be noted that, whilst the zoological system took the form of a genealogical tree, with main stem and numerous diverging branches, the actual form of that tree, its limitation to a certain number of branches corresponding to a limited number of divergencies in structure, came to be regarded as the necessary consequence of the operation of the physico-chemical laws of the universe, and it was recognized that the ultimate explanation of that limitation is to be found only in the constitution of matter itself.
The first naturalist to put into practical form the consequences of the new theory, in so far as it affected zoological classification, was Ernst Haeckel of Jena (b. 1834), who in 1866, seven years after the publication of Darwin’s Origin of Species, published his suggestive Generelle Morphologie. Haeckel introduced into classification a number of terms intended to indicate the branchings of a genealogical tree. The whole “system” or scheme of classification was termed a genealogical tree (Stammbaum) ; the main branches were termed “phyla,” their branchings “subphyla”; the great branches of the sub-phyla were termed “cladi,” and the “cladi” divided into “classes,” these into sub-classes, these into legions, legions into orders, orders into sub-orders, sub-orders into tribes, tribes into families, families into genera, genera into species. Additional branchings could be indicated by similar terms where necessary. There was no attempt in Haeckel’s use of these terms to make them exactly or more than approximately equal in significance; such attempts were clearly futile and unimportant where the purpose was the exhibition of lines of descent, and where no natural equality of groups was to be expected ex hypothesi. Haeckel’s classification of 1866 was naturally enough only a first attempt. In the edition of the Natürliche Schöpfungsgeschichte published in 1868, he made a great advance in his genealogical classification, since he now introduced the results of the extraordinary activity in the study of embryology which followed on the publication of the Origin of Species.
The pre-Darwinian systematists since the time of Von Baer had attached very great importance to embryological facts, holding that the stages in an animal’s development were often more significant of its true affinities than its adult structure. Von Baer had gained unanimous support for his dictum, “Die Entwickelungsgeschichte ist der wahre Lichtträger für Untersuchungen über organische Körper.” Thus J. Müller’s studies on the larval forms of Echinoderms and the discoveries of Vaughan Thompson were appreciated. But it was only after Darwin that the cell-theory of Schwann was extended to the embryology of the animal kingdom generally, and that the knowledge of the development of an animal became a knowledge of the way in which the millions of cells of which its body is composed take their origin by fission from a smaller number of cells, and these at last from the single egg-cell. Kölliker {Development of Cephalopods, 1844), Remak {Development of the Frog, 1850), and others had laid the foundations of this knowledge in isolated examples; but it was Kowalewsky, by his accounts of the development of Ascidians and of Amphioxus (1866), who really made zoologists see that a strict and complete cellular embryology of animals was as necessary and feasible a factor in the comprehension of their relationships as at the beginning of the century the coarse anatomy had been shown to be by Cuvier. Kowalewsky’s work appeared between the dates of the Generelle Morphologie and the Schöpfungsgeschichte. Haeckel himself, with his pupil Miklucho-Maclay, had in the meantime made studies on the growth from the egg of Sponges,—studies which resulted in the complete separation of the unicellular or equicellular Protozoa from the Sponges, hitherto confounded with them. It is this introduction of the consideration of cell-structure and celldevelopment which, subsequently to the establishment of Darwinism, has most profoundly modified the views of systematists, and led in conjunction with the genealogical doctrine to the greatest activity in research,—an activity which culminated in the work (1873-82) of F. M. Balfour, and produced the profoundest modifications in classification.
Haeckel’s earlier pedigree is worth comparing with his second effort, as showing the beginning of the influence just noted. The second pedigree is as follows :—
[table]
[9:24:811]
In representing pictorially the groups of the animal kingdom as the branches of a tree, it becomes obvious that a distinction may be drawn, not merely between the individual main branches, but further as to the level at which they are given off from the main stem, so that one branch or set of branches may be marked off as belonging to an earlier or lower level than another set of branches; and the same plan may be adopted with regard to the clades, classes, and smaller branches. The term “grade” was introduced by Lankester^[7. “Notes on Embryology and Classification,” in Quart. Journ. Micr. Sci., 1877. ] to indicate this giving off of branches at a higher or lower, i.e., a later or earlier, level of a main stem. The mechanism for the statement of the genealogical relationships of the groups of the animal kingdom was thus completed. Renewed study of every group was the result of the acceptance of the genealogical idea and of the recognition of the importance of cellular embryology. On the one hand, the true method of arriving at a knowledge of the genealogical tree was recognized as lying chiefly in attacking the problem of the genealogical relationships of the smallest twigs of the tree, and proceeding from them to the larger branches. Special studies of small families or orders of animals with this object in view were taken in hand by many zoologists. On the other hand, a survey of the facts of cellular embryology which were accumulated in regard to a variety of classes within a few years of Kowalewsky’s work led to a generalization, independently arrived at by Haeckel and Lankester, to the effect that a lower grade of animals may be distinguished, the Protozoa or Plastidozoa, which consist either of single cells or colonies of equiformal cells, and a higher grade, the Metazoa or Enterozoa, in which the egg-cell by “cell division” gives rise to two layers of cells, the endoderm and the ectoderm, surrounding a primitive digestive chamber, the archenteron. Of these latter, two grades were further distinguished by Lankester,—those which remain possessed of a single archenteric cavity and of two primary cell-layers (the Coelentera or Diploblastica), and those which by nipping off the archenteron give rise to two cavities, the coelom or body-cavity and the metenteron or gut (Coelomata or Triploblastica). To the primitive two-cell-layered form, the hypothetical ancestor of all Metazoa or Enterozoa, Haeckel gave the name Gastraea; the embryonic form which represents in the individual growth from the egg this ancestral condition he called a “gastrula.” The term “diblastula” has more recently been adopted in England for the gastrula of Haeckel. The tracing of the exact mode of development, cell by cell, of the diblastula, the coelom, and the various tissues of examples of all classes of animals has been pursued during the last twenty years with immense activity and increasing instrumental facilities, and is still in progress.
Two names in connexion with post-Darwinian taxonomy and the ideas connected with it require brief mention here. Fritz Miiller, by his studies on Crustacea (Für Darwin, 1864), showed the way in which genealogical theory may be applied to the minute study of a limited group. He is also responsible for the formulation of an important principle, called by Haeckel “the biogenetic fundamental law,” viz., that an animal in its growth from the egg to the adult condition tends to pass through a series of stages which are recapitulative of the stages through which its ancestry has passed in the historical development of the species from a primitive form; or, more shortly, that the development of the individual (ontogeny) is an epitome of the development of the race (phylogeny). Pre-Darwinian zoologists had been aware of the class of facts thus interpreted by Fritz Müller, but the authoritative view on the subject had been that there is a parallelism between (a) the series of forms which occur in individual development, (δ) the series of existing forms from lower to higher, and (c) the series of forms which succeed one another in the strata of the earth’s crust, whilst an explanation of this parallelism was either not attempted, or was illusively offered in the shape of a doctrine of harmony of plan in creation. It was the application of Fritz Müller’s law of recapitulation which gave the chief stimulus to recent embryological investigations; and, though it is now recognized that “recapitulation” is vastly and bewilderingly modified by special adaptations in every case, yet the principle has served, and still serves, as a guide of great value.
Another important factor in the present condition of zoological knowledge as represented by classification is the doctrine of degeneration propounded by Anton Dohm. Lamarck believed in a single progressive series of forms, whilst Cuvier introduced the conception of branches. The first post-Darwinian systematists naturally and without reflexion accepted the idea that existing simpler forms represent stages in the gradual progress of development,—are in fact survivors from past ages which have retained the exact grade of development which their ancestors had reached in past ages. The assumption made was that (with the rare exception of parasites) all the change of structure through which the successive generations of animals have passed has been one of progressive elaboration. It is Dohrn’s merit to have pointed out^[8. Ursprung der Wïrbelthiere, Leipsic, 1875; and Lankester, Degeneration, London, 1880. ] that this assumption is not warranted, and that degeneration or progressive simplification of structure may have, and in many lines certainly has, taken place, as well as progressive elaboration and continuous maintenance of the status quo. The introduction of this conception necessarily has had most important effect in the attempt to unravel the genealogical affinities of animals. It renders the task a more complicated one; at the same time it removes some serious difficulties and throws a flood of light on every group of the animal kingdom.
One result of the introduction of the new conceptions dating from Darwin has been a healthy reaction from that attitude of mind which led to the regarding of the classes and orders recognized by authoritative zoologists as sacred institutions which were beyond the criticism of ordinary men. That state of mind was due to the fact that the groupings so recognized did not profess to be simply the result of scientific reasoning, but were necessarily regarded as the expressions of the “insight” of some more or less gifted persons into a plan or system which had been arbitrarily chosen by the Creator. Consequently there was a tinge of theological dogmatism about the whole matter. To deny the Linnaean, or later the Cuvierian, classes was very much like denying the Mosaic cosmogony. At the present time systematic zoology is entirely free from any such prejudices, and the Linnaean taint which is annarent [9:24:812] even in Haeckel and Gegenbaur may be considered as finally expunged.
We give below the classification of Ray Lankester as an example of the most recent genealogical classification. It is represented by the above genealogical tree and the tabular statement which follows. The chief points in this classification are the inclusion of Balanoglossus and the Tunicata in the phylum Vertebrata, the association of the Rotifera and the Chaetopoda with the Arthropoda in the phylum Appendiculata, the inclusion of Limulus and the Eurypterina in the class Arachnida, and the total abandoning of the indefinite and indefensible group of “Femes.”
Grade A. PLASTIDOZOA (PROTOZOA).
[table]
[table]
[9:24:813]
[table]
[table]
[9:24:814]
We have now traced the history of the morphography of animals so as to show that increasingly in successive epochs independent branches of knowledge have been brought to bear on the consideration of the main problem, namely, the discrimination of the kinds and the relations to one another of animal forms. Before glancing at the history of the remaining branches of zoological science, which have had an independent history whilst ultimately contributory to taxonomy and morphography, it may be briefly pointed out that the accumulation of knowledge with regard to the distribution of animal forms on the earth’s surface and in the seas has progressed simultaneously with the discrimination of the mere forms of the species themselves, as has also the knowledge derived from fossilized remains as to the characters of former inhabitants of the globe. Both these subdivisions of morphography have contributed to the establishment of Darwinism,—the one (palaeontology) by direct evidence of organic evolution in time, the other (zoo-geography) in a more indirect way.
Alfred Russell Wallace stands prominently forward as a naturalist-traveller who by his observations, chiefly on Lepidopterous Insects, in both South America and the Malay Archipelago, was led to the conclusion that a production of new species is actually going on, and that, too, by means of a process of natural selection of favourable variations. Wallace and Darwin, who each recognized cordially and fully the other’s work, laid their views before the Linnean Society on the same day in 1859.
The facts of the geographical distribution of animals were systematized, and great zoo-geographical provinces first clearly recognized, by P. L. Sclater in 1857. The application of the Darwinian theory to the facts tabulated by Sclater, combined with a knowledge of the distribution of animals in past geological periods, has led to a full explanation of the migrations of terrestrial animals, and has furnished a striking corroboration of the sufficiency of the doctrine of organic evolution, as reformed by Darwin, to account for all the phenomena of zoology.
The study of the marine fauna by means of the dredge and trawl had been enthusiastically prosecuted by British, French, and Scandinavian naturalists in the two decades before Darwin’s book; the collection of forms, the discovery of new species, and the recording of their bathymetrical and local distribution had produced a great mass of knowledge through the labours of E. Forbes, Gwyn-Jeffreys, Sars, Quatrefages, Norman, and others. The post-Darwinian developments of this line of inquiry have been two. In the first place, dredging and trawling have been extended by the aid of steamships of the Norwegian, British, American, French, and Italian navies into greater depths than were previously supposed to contain living things. New species and genera, and a vast extension of knowledge as to distribution, have been the outcome of these expeditions, connected with the names of G. O. Sars and Daniellsen in Norway, of Alex. Agassiz in America, and of Carpenter and Wyville Thomson in Great Britain. It is worthy of note that the practical demand for sounding the Atlantic in connexion with the laying of the first deep-sea telegraphcable is what led to these explorations, the first recognition of life at these great depths in the ocean being due to Dr Wallich, who accompanied a sounding expedition in 1860 to the North Atlantic, and to Prof. Fleeming Jenkin, who in the same year acted as engineer in raising the submarine cable between Sardinia and Africa, upon which living corals were found. In the second place, the study of marine zoology has, since the publication of the Origin of Species, been found to require more complete arrangements in the form of laboratories and aquaria than the isolated vacation student could bring with him to the seaside. Seaside laboratories have come into existence: the first was founded in France by Coste (1859) at Concarneau (Brittany), again with a practical end in view, viz., the study of food-fishes with an aim to pisciculture. The demand for a knowledge of the embryology of all classes of animals, and for further facts as to the structure and lifehistory of the minuter microscopic or very delicate forms of marine life, is what has determined the multiplication of these marine “stations.” The largest and best supported pecuniarily is that founded at Naples by Anton Dohm in 1872; others exist at Trieste, Villefranche, Cette, and at New Haven and Beaufort in the United States, whilst a large laboratory, on a scale to compare with that at Naples, has this year (1888) been opened at Plymouth by the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom.
Another result of the stimulus given to zoological research by Darwin’s work is the undertaking of voyages to distant lands by skilled anatomists for the purpose of studying on the spot, and with all the advantages of abundant and living material, the structure, and especially the embryology, of rare and exceptionally interesting forms of animal life. In the pre-Darwinian period of this century zoologists who were convinced of the importance of anatomical and embryological study were still content to study specimens immersed in spirit and brought home, often imperfectly preserved, by unskilled collectors, or to confine their attention to such species as could be procured in Europe. Before Cuvier, as we have already pointed out, attention was, with rare exceptions, limited to the dried skeletons and external forms of animals. Now, however, the enterprising zoologist goes to the native land of an interesting animal, there to study it as fully as possible. The most important of these voyages has been that of W. H. Caldwell of Cambridge to Australia (1885-86) for the purpose of studying the embryology of the Monotrema and of Ceratodus, the fish-like Dipnoon, which has resulted in the discovery that the Monotrema are oviparous. Similarly Adam Sedgwick proceeded to the Cape in order to study Peripatus, Bateson to the coast of Maryland to study Balanoglossus, and the brothers Sarassin to Ceylon to investigate the embryology of the Coecilia.
The task of the zoologist has changed and developed in every succeeding period. Pure morphography has long ceased to be a chief line of research; and now even the preoccupation produced by the addition to it of the study of cellular embryology is about to undergo a modification by the demand for knowledge of the facts of heredity and adaptation in greatly extended detail.
Zoo-Mechanics, Zoo-Physics, Zoo-Chemistry.
The development of that knowledge of the structure of the human body, and of the chemical and physical processes going on in it, which is necessary for the purposes of the medical art forms a distinct history, which has both influenced and been influenced by that of other branches of zoology. The study of the structure and composition of the body of man and of the animals nearest to him was until fifty years ago one with the inquiry into the activities of those parts, and indeed the separation of anatomy and physiology has never been really carried out. For convenience of teaching, the description of the coarser anatomy of the human body has been in modern universities placed in the hands of a special professor, theoretically condemned to occupy himself with the mere formal details of structure, whilst the professor of physiology has usually retained what is called “microscopic anatomy,” and necessarily occupies himself with as much structural anatomy as is required for a due description of the functions of organs and the properties of tissues. It would seem that in our medical schools and universities these arrangements[9:24:815] should be reconsidered. Anatomy and physiology should be re-united and subdivided as follows,—(1) physiology with anatomy in relation to physiology, (2) anatomy in relation to surgery and medical diagnosis,—the former being a science, the latter a piece of technical training in rule of thumb.
Physiological anatomy or anatomical physiology has its beginnings in Aristotle and other observers of antiquity. The later Graeco-Roman and the Arabian physicians carried on the traditional knowledge and added to it. Galen dominated the Middle Ages. The modern development begins with Harvey and with the Italian school in which he studied. Its great names are Fabricius of Acquapendente (1537-1619), Vesalius (1514-1564), Eustachius (c. 1500- 1574), Riolan (1577-1657), Severino (1580-1656). The history of the discovery of the circulation of the blood and of the controversies connected with it gives an interesting and sufficient presentation of the anatomico-physiological knowledge of the period (see Harvey). The foundation of the scientific academies and the records of their publications furnish thenceforward a picture of the progress in this study. As an early anatomist Willis (1621-1675), professor of physic in Oxford, deserves notice for his work on the anatomy of the human brain, the plates for which were drawn by young Christopher Wren, the prodigy of Oxford common-rooms, who later built St Paul’s Cathedral. The Royal Society, in its early days when Wren was a fellow, met at Gresham College whenever the professor of physic there could obtain a human body for dissection, and amongst its earliest records are the memoirs of Tyson on the anatomy of the Chimpanzee and the experiments on transfusion of blood, extirpation of the spleen, and such like inquiries.
Marcello Malpighi (1628-1694) and Anton van Leeuwenhoek (1632-1723) were the first to introduce the microscope into anatomical research. Malpighi first used the injection of blood-vessels on a large scale, and moreover is to be credited with having first conceived that there is a definite relation of the structure of lower kinds of animals to that of higher and more elaborate kinds, and that this relation is one of gradual transition, so that lower animals are not to be regarded as isolated and arbitrary existences, but are really simpler exhibitions of the same kind of structure and mechanism which occurs in higher animals. It is this conception which later developed into the theory of an actual transmutative development of lower into higher organisms. Leeuwenhoek discovered the red blood corpuscles of Vertebrates, saw the circulation in the capillaries of the Frog’s foot, described the fibrillar structure and cross-striping of muscular fibre, the tubular structure of dentine, the scales of the epidermis, the fibres of the lens, and the spermatozoa, these last having been independently discovered at Leyden in 1677 by Ludwig Ham of Stettin. The spermatozoa were regarded by the “animalculists” as the fully formed but minute young which had to be received in the egg, in order to be nourished and increase in size, and were hailed as a decisive blow to Harvey’s doctrine of epigenesis and his dictum “omne vivum ex ovo.” Albrecht von Haller was the champion of the so-called “evolutionists” in the 18th century, better called “praeformationists.” Haller wrote, “There is no such thing as development! No part of the animal body is made before another; all are simultaneously created.” A corollary of this doctrine was that the germ contains the germs of the next generation, and these of the next, and so ad infinitum. It was calculated that Eve at her creation thus contained within her 200,000 millions of human germs. This was the view of the “ovists,” who regarded the egg as the true germ, whilst the “animalculists,” who regarded the spermatozoon as the essential germ, would have substituted Adam for Eve in the above calculation. These fanciful conceptions —containing as they do a share of important truth—were opposed by Caspar Friedrich Wolff, who in his doctorate dissertation (1759) maintained that the germ is a structureless particle, and acquires its structure by “epigenesis” or gradual development. Wolff has proved to be nearer the truth than Haller; but modern conceptions as to the molecular structure of the egg-protoplasm point to a complexity as great as that imagined by the evolutionists. Later it was maintained that the spermatozoa are parasitic animalcules, and this view prevailed for 150 years, so that in the Physiology of Johann Müller (1842) we read, “Whether the spermatozoa are parasitic animalcules or living parts of the animal in which they occur cannot at present be stated with certainty.”
Physiology in the 18th century could only proceed by means of inferences from purely anatomical observation, aided by imaginative conceptions which had no real basis. The explanation of the processes of life in the animal body was waiting for that progress in the knowledge of physics and chemistry which at last arrived, and gave a new impulse to investigation. Albrecht von Haller (1708-1777) was the first to apply experimental methods to the determination of the functions of the various organs made known by anatomists, and from him we may trace a bifurcation in the tendencies of medical men who occupied themselves with the study of the structure and functions of the animal organism. The one class proceeded more and more in the direction of comparative anatomy, the other in the direction of exact analysis and measurement of both the structure and properties of the organs of Vertebrate animals allied to man and of man himself.
John Hunter (1728-1793) is the most striking figure of this epoch in the relation of medicine to general zoological progress; the preservation of his museum in Lincoln’s Inn Fields, London, by the combined action of the state and the Royal College of Surgeons, is an abiding record of the historical progress of biological science. Hunter collected, dissected, and described not only higher but lower animals, with the view of arriving at a knowledge of the function of organs by the most extensive and systematic survey of their modifications in all kinds of animals. His purpose was that of the physiologist and medical man, but he made great contributions to the general knowledge of animal structure. The same class of investigations, when taken up by Cuvier from the point of view of systematic zoology and morphology, led to a reconstruction of classification and laid the foundation of anatomical zoology. Hunter was the younger brother of William Hunter, who also formed an important museum, still preserved in Glasgow. Hunter classified the organs of animals into those which subserve the preservation of the individual, those which subserve the preservation of the species, and those which are the means of relation with the outer world, and he arranged his museum of dissections and preparations on this plan.
The great progress of chemistry at the end of the 18th and the beginning of the 19th century was followed by an application of chemical laws and chemical methods to the study of animal life. Curiously enough, as showing how deeply interwoven are the various lines of scientific progress, Priestley in his discovery of oxygen was as much concerned in the study of a chlorophyll-bearing Protozoon, Euglena viridis, as in that of the red oxide of mercury; and the interest in “vital spirits” as a physiological factor was an important stimulus to those researches which produced modern chemical knowledge.
The purely anatomical side of physiological progress is marked in the beginning of the 19th century by the work [9:24:816] of Bichat (1771-1802), who distinguished by naked-eye characters the different structural materials of which the organs of man and the higher animals are built, and thus founded in first outline the science of histology. By the end of the first quarter of this century it had become clear to the minds of the anatomico-physiological students of animal life that the animal body was subject to the same physical laws as other matter, although it was still held that some additional and mysterious agent—so-called “vitality ”—was at work in living bodies. It had become clear that animal material could be investigated chemically, and that the processes of digestion, assimilation, respiration, and secretion were chemical processes.
To a considerable extent the chemical composition and properties of the tissues, and the chemical nature of the various changes of life and of putrefaction after death, had been investigated, but one step was yet to be taken which brings the study of ultimate structure, chemical activity, form, and the formation of form to a single focus. This was taken by Theodore Schwann (1810-1881), who in 1839 published his epoch-making cell-theory. Schwann was a pupil of Johann Müller, and there can be little doubt that the ideas of the pupil are to be credited in some measure to the master. Schwann took up the thread of microscopic investigation which had been sedulously pursued by a distinct line of students since the days of Hook and Leeuwenhoek, and had resulted in a general doctrine among botanists of the cellular structure of all the parts of plants. Schwann showed not only that plants are uniformly built up by these corpuscular units (of which Robert Browne in 1833 had described the peculiar nucleated structure), but that all animal tissues are also so built up. That, however, was not Schwann’s chief point. The cell-theory for which he is famous is this, that the substance of the individual cell is the seat of those chemical processes which seen en masse we call life, and that the differences in the properties of the different tissues and organs of animals and plants depend on a difference in the chemical and physical activity of the constituent cells, resulting in a difference in the form of the cells and in a concomitant difference of activity. Schwann thus pointed to the microscopic cell-unit as the thing to be studied in order to arrive at a true knowledge of the processes of life and the significance of form. In founding the study of cell-substance (or protoplasm, as it was subsequently called by Max Schultze in 1861, adopting the name used by botanists for vegetable cell-contents) Schwann united two lines of inquiry, viz., that of minute investigation of structure and development and that of zoochemistry and zoo-physics. He spent a large part of the next forty years in an attempt to penetrate further into the structure of cell-substance; he hoped to be able to find in cell-substance ultimate visible molecules, a knowledge of the arrangement and characters of which would explain the varying properties of protoplasm.
It is not a little remarkable that Schwann, who thus brought about the union of physiological and morphological study by his conception of cell-substance, should also have been the initiator of that special kind of experimental investigation of the physical properties of tissues by the exact methods used by physicists which, by the aid of the kymographion, the thermo-electric pile, and the galvanometer, has been so largely pursued during the last thirty years in our physiological laboratories. It is perhaps less surprising that Schwann, who had so vivid a conception of the activity and potentialities of the cell-unit, should have been the discoverer of the immensely important fact that putrefaction and fermentation are not the consequences of death but of life, and that without the presence of living Bacteria putrefaction does not occur, whilst he also is the discoverer of the fact that the yeast which causes alcoholic fermentation is a mass of unicellular living organisms.
From Schwann’s time onward the cell became more and more the point of observation and experiment in the progress of both morphography and physiology. It was soon shown, chiefly through Kölliker and Remak, that all cells originate by fission from pre-existing cells,—a fact unknown to Schwann,—and the doctrine “omnis cellula e cellula” was established. It was also demonstrated that the Mammalian egg discovered by Von Baer was a typical nucleated cell, and that all animals, and plants also (this generalization took thirty years to establish), take their origin from an egg, which is in essence and in fact a single nucleated cell. The doctrine of Harvey, “omne vivum ex ovo,” thus received its most ample justification. The study of “growth from the egg” became necessarily a study of the multiplication by fission of the egg-cell and its fission-products, their arrangement in layers, and the chemical metamorphosis of their substance and exudations. This study, as well as the allied investigation of the cell-structure of the adult tissues, was immensely facilitated by methods of hardening, staining, section-cutting, and clarifying which grew up after Schwann’s time, and have their present highest development in the automatic microtome of Caldwell, which can be worked by a motor, and delivers consecutive sections of animal tissues or embryos 1 / 4000 th of an inch thick, arranged in the form of ribbons, ready for examination with the microscope, at the rate of one hundred or more per minute. Stricker of Vienna was the first to embed embryos in waxy material for the purpose of cutting thin sections of them, about twenty-five years ago, and R. Leuckart of Leipsic was subsequently the first to employ this method in the study of the structure of small Invertebrata.
The knowledge of the anatomical facts of cellular development and cellular structure necessarily gave immensely increased precision to the notion of gradation of structure in the animal series from simple to complex, and rendered Darwin’s doctrine the more readily accepted. It was not, however, until after Darwin’s date (1859) that the existence of unicellular animals was fully admitted, and the general facts of cellular embryology established throughout the animal kingdom.
Similarly cellular physiology, by establishing the conception of a simple optically homogeneous cell-substance as the seat of the activities which we call “life,” rendered it possible to accept the suggestion of a simple “substance of life” which might have been evolved from simpler nonliving matter by natural processes depending on physical and chemical laws. It is noteworthy that Darwin himself appears not to have been influenced directly by any such physiological or chemico-physical doctrine as to “protoplasm” or cell-substance. Nevertheless the way was prepared for the reception of Darwin’s theory by this state of physiological knowledge.
The word “protoplasm” requires a little further notice. Protoplasm was applied by Von Mohl and by Max Schultze to the slimy substance of the cell, including therein both the general thinner material and the nucleus. It is, as Roscoe remarked at Manchester (Brit. Ass. Address, 1887), a structure and not a chemical body. Nevertheless gradually physiologists have come to use the word “protoplasm” for one of the chemical substances of which Schultze’s protoplasm is a structural mixture—namely, that highest point in the chemical elaboration of the molecule which is attained within the protoplasm, and up to which some of the chemical bodies present are tending, whilst others are degradation products resulting from a downward metamorphosis of portions of it. This intangible, unstable, all-pervading[9:24:817] element of the protoplasm cannot at present be identified with any visibly separable part of the cell-substance, which consists of a hyaline denser network of excessive tenuity, of a less dense hyaline liquid, and of finest and less fine granules of varying chemical nature. This “critical” substance, sometimes called “true protoplasm,” should assuredly be recognized by a distinct name “plasmo-gen,” whilst protoplasm retains its structural connotation.
The study of the process of fertilization and of the significance in that process of the distinct parts of the sperm-cell and egg-cell—the separate fibrillae and granules of the nuclei of those cells—at the present moment forms one of the engrossing subjects of zoological investigation.^[9. See the memoirs of Weismann on Heredity and F. Μ. Balfour’s Embryology. ] Not less important is the descent, as it were, of physiological investigation in relation to every organ into the arena of the cell: digestion, secretion, muscular contraction, nerve action, all are now questions of plasmology, or the study of cell-substance founded by Schwann.^[10. For a fuller and general history of Physiology, see that article. ] General Tendency of Zoology since Darwin.
The serious and broadly-based study of bionomics which was introduced by Darwin, and in his hands gave rise to the doctrine of natural selection, by which the hypothesis of the origin of species by gradual transmutation in the natural process of descent from ancestral forms was established as a scientific doctrine, can hardly be said to have had any history. Buffon (1707-1788) alone among the greater writers of the three past centuries emphasized that view of living things which we call “bionomics.” Buffon deliberately opposed himself to the mere exposition of the structural resemblances and differences of animals, and, disregarding classification, devoted his treatise on natural history to a consideration of the habits of animals and their adaptations to their surroundings, whilst a special volume was devoted by him to the subject of reproduction. In special memoirs on this or that animal, and in a subordinate way in systematic works, material is to be found helping to build up a knowledge of bionomics, but Buffon is the only prominent writer who can be accorded historic rank in this study.^[11. The main literary sources made use of by Darwin are the magazines and treatises of horticulturists, farmers, pigeon-fanciers, and the like, in fact what is comprised in the Field newspaper. ] The special study of man in these relations—such as is concerned with the statistics of population—must be considered as having contributed very importantly to Darwin’s wider study of bionomics in general. The work of Malthus On Population ( 1798 ) exercised the most important influence on Darwin’s thought, as he himself tells us, and led him to give attention to the facts of animal population, and so to discover the great moving cause of natural selection—the struggle for existence. Darwin may be said to have founded the science of bionomics, and at the same time to have given new stimulus and new direction to morphography, physiology, and plasmology, by uniting them as contributories to one common biological doctrine—the doctrine of organic evolution— itself but a part of the wider doctrine of universal evolution based on the laws of physics and chemistry.
The full influence of Darwin’s work upon the progress and direction of zoological study has not yet been seen. The immediate result has been, as pointed out above, a reconstruction of the classification of animals upon a genealogical basis, and an investigation of the individual development of animals in relation to the steps of their gradual building up by cell-division, with a view to obtaining evidence of their genetic relationships. On the other hand, the studies which occupied Darwin himself so largely subsequently to the publication of the Origin of Species, viz., the explanation of animal (and vegetable) mechanism, colouring, habits, &c., as advantageous to the species or to its ancestors—in fact, the new teleology,—has not yet been so vigorously pursued as it must be hereafter. The most important work in this direction has been done by Fritz Müller (Fur Darwin), by Herman Müller (Fertilization of Plants by Insects), and by August Weismann (memoirs translated by Meldola). Here and there observations are from time to time published, but no large progress has yet been made, probably on account of the fact that animals are exceedingly difficult to keep under observation, and that there is no provision in universities and like institutions for the pursuit of these inquiries or even for their academic representation. More has been done with plants than with animals in this way since Darwin, probably owing to the same cause which has, ever since the revival of learning, given botany a real advantage over zoology, namely, the existence of “physick” gardens, now become “botanical” gardens, and the greater ease of management, experiment, and observation in the case of plants than in that of animals. It is true that zoological gardens have existed for the last fifty years in all large European cities, but these have always been conducted with a view to popular exhibition; and, even where scientific influences have been brought to bear on their management, they have been those of the morphographer and systematist rather than of the bionomist. Moreover, zoological gardens have never been part of the equipment of the university professor of zoology, as it may be hoped in future will be the case. The foundation of marine biological laboratories under the control of scientific zoologists offers a prospect of true bionomic observation and experiment on an increased scale in the near future, and, were such laboratories founded in our universities and provided with the necessary appliances for keeping terrestrial and freshwater animals, as well as marine forms, alive and under observation in conditions resembling as nearly as possible those of nature, a step would have been taken towards carrying on the study of bionomics which cannot long be delayed. It seems to be even more important that the academic curriculum of zoology should not, by mere mechanical adhesion to the old lines of morphography, and experimental research on the chemical and physical properties of tissues and organs, confine the attention and training of young students to what are now, comparatively speaking, the less productive lines of research.
If we turn to the other branch of bionomics, that con cerned with the laws of variation and heredity (thremmatology), we find that since Darwin, and independently of his own work, there has been a more obvious progress than in teleology. In the first place, the continued study of human population has thrown additional light on some of the questions involved, whilst the progress of microscopical research in the hands of Bütschli, Hertwig, Balfour, and August Weismann promises to give us a clear foundation as to the structural facts connected with the origin of the egg-cell and sperm-cell and the process of fertilization. This is not the fitting place in which to give a sketch of the doctrines and hypotheses of thremmatology. They may be gathered from Darwin’s writings, more especially the Origin of Species and Animals and Plants under Domestications. ^[12. The reader is also referred to Ribot’s L'Hérédité, and the writings of Charles Darwin’s cousin, Francis Galton. ] They relate to the causes of variation in animals and plants, the laws of the transmission of parental characters, the share of each parent in the production of the characters of the offspring, atavism, and the relations of young to parents as to number, sex, nourishment, and protection.
An important development of Darwin’s conclusions is actually in progress and deserves special notice here, as it [9:24:818] is the most distinct advance in the department of bionomics since Darwin’s own writings, and at the same time touches questions of fundamental interest. The matter strictly relates to the consideration of the “causes of variation,” and is as follows.
The fact of variation is a familiar one. No two animals, even of the same brood, are alike: whilst exhibiting a close similarity to their parents, they yet present differences, sometimes very marked differences, from their parents and from one another. Lamarck had put forward the hypothesis that structural alterations acquired by a parent in the course of its life are transmitted to the offspring, and that, as these structural alterations are acquired by an animal or plant in consequence of the direct action of the environment, the offspring inheriting them would as a consequence not unfrequently start with a greater fitness for those conditions than its parents started with. In its turn, being operated upon by the conditions of life, it would acquire a greater development of the same modification, which it would in turn transmit to its offspring. In the course of several generations, Lamarck argued, a structural alteration amounting to such difference as we call “specific” might be thus acquired. The familiar illustration of Lamarck’s hypothesis is that of the giraffe, whose long neck might, he suggested, have been acquired by the efforts of a primitively short-necked race of herbivores, who stretched their necks to reach the foliage of trees in a land where grass was deficient, the effort producing a distinct elongation in the neck of each generation, which was then transmitted to the next. This process is known as “direct adaptation;” and there is no doubt that such structural adaptations are acquired by an animal in the course of its life. Whether such acquired characters can be transmitted to the next generation is a separate question. It was not proved by Lamarck that they can be, and, indeed, never has been proved by actual observation. Nevertheless it has been assumed, and also indirectly argued, that such acquired characters must be transmitted. Darwin’s great merit was that he excluded from his theory of development any necessary assumption of the transmission of acquired characters. He pointed to the admitted fact of congenital variation, and he showed that these variations to all intents and purposes have nothing to do with any characters acquired by the parents, but are arbitrary and, so to speak, non-significant. Their causes are extremely difficult to trace in detail, but it appears that they are largely due to a “shaking up” of the living matter which constitutes the fertilized germ or embryo-cell, by the process of mixture in it of the substance of two cells,—the germ-cell and the sperm-cell,—derived from two different individuals. Other mechanical disturbances may assist in this production of congenital variation. Whatever its causes, Darwin showed that it is all-important. In some cases a pair of animals produce ten million offspring, and in such a number a large range of congenital variation is possible. Since on the average only two of the young survive in the struggle for existence to take the place of their two parents, there is a selection out of the ten million young, none of which are exactly alike, and the selection is determined in nature by the survival of the congenital variety which is fittest to the conditions of life. Hence there is no necessity for an assumption of the perpetuation of direct adaptations. The selection of the fortuitously (fortuitously, that is to say, so far as the conditions of survival are concerned) produced varieties is sufficient, since it is ascertained that they will tend to transmit those characters with which they themselves were born, although it is not ascertained that they could transmit characters acquired on the way through life. A simple illustration of the difference is this; a man born with four fingers only on his right hand is ascertained to be likely to transmit this peculiarity to some at least of his offspring; on the other hand, there is not the slightest ground for supposing that a man who has had one finger chopped off, or has even lost his arm at any period of his life, will produce offspring who are defective in the slightest degree in regard to fingers, hand, or arm. Darwin himself, apparently influenced not merely by the consideration of certain classes of facts which seem to favour the Lamarckian hypothesis but also by a respect for the general prejudice in its favour and for Mr Herbert Spencer’s authority, was of the opinion that acquired characters are in some cases transmitted. It should be observed, however, that Darwin did not attribute an essential part to this Lamarckian hypothesis of the transmission of acquired characters, but expressly assigned to it an entirely subordinate importance.
The new attitude which has been taken since Darwin on this question is to ask for evidence of this asserted transmission of acquired characters. It is held^[13. Weismann, Vererbung, &c., 1886. ] that the Darwinian doctrine of selection of fortuitous congenital variations is sufficient to account for all cases, that the Lamarckian hypothesis of transmission of acquired characters is not supported by experimental evidence, and that the latter should therefore be dismissed. Weismann has also ingeniously argued from the structure of the egg-cell and sperm-cell, and from the way in which, and the period at which, they are derived in the course of the growth of the embryo from the egg—from the fertilized egg-cell— that it is impossible (it would be better to say highly improbable) that an alteration in parental structure could produce any exactly representative change in the substance of the germ or sperm-cells.
It does not seem improbable that the doctrine of organic evolution will thus become pure Darwinism and be entirely dissociated from the Lamarckian heresy.
The one fact which the Lamarckians can produce in their favour is the account of experiments by Brown-Séquard, in which he produced epilepsy in guinea-pigs by section of the large nerves or spinal cord, and in the course of which he was led to believe that in a few rare instances the artificially produced epilepsy was transmitted. This instance does not stand the test of criticism. It is not clear whether the guinea-pigs operated upon had or had not already a constitutional tendency to epilepsy, and it is not clear in what proportion of cases the supposed transmission took place, and whether any other disease accompanied it. On the other hand, the vast number of experiments in the cropping of the tails and ears of domestic animals, as well as of similar operations on man, are attended with negative results. No case of the transmission of the results of an injury can be produced. Stories of tailless kittens, puppies, and calves, born from parents one of whom had been thus injured, are abundant, but they have hitherto entirely failed to stand before examination.
Experimental researches on this question are most urgently needed, but they are not provided for either in the morphographical or physiological laboratories of our universities.
Whilst simple evidence of the fact of the transmission of an acquired character is wanting, the a priori arguments in its favour break down one after another when discussed. The very cases which are advanced as only to be explained on the Lamarckian assumption are found on examination and experiment to be better explained, or only to be explained, by the Darwinian principle. Thus the occurrence of blind animals in caves and in the deep sea was a fact which Darwin himself regarded as best explained by the atrophy of the organ of vision in successive generations through the absence of light and consequent disuse, and [9:24:819] the transmission (as Lamarck would have supposed) of a more and more weakened and structurally impaired eye to the offspring in successive generations, until the eye finally disappeared. But this instance is really fully explained by the theory of natural selection acting on congenital fortuitous variations. Many animals are thus born with distorted or defective eyes whose parents have not had their eyes submitted to any peculiar conditions. Supposing a number of some species of Arthropod or Fish to be swept into a cavern or to be carried from less to greater depths in the sea,—those individuals with perfect eyes would follow the glimmer of light and eventually escape to the outer air or the shallower depths, leaving behind those with imperfect eyes to breed in the dark place. A natural selection would thus be effected. In every succeeding generation this would be the case, and even those with weak but still seeing eyes would in the course of time escape, until only a pure race of eyeless or blind animals would be left in the cavern or deep sea. Experiments and inquiries with regard to this subject are in progress; amongst those who have occupied themselves with it are August Weismann of Freiburg and E. B. Poulton of Oxford.
It has been argued that the elaborate structural adaptations of the nervous system which are the corporeal correlatives of complicated instincts must have been slowly built up by the transmission to offspring of acquired experience, that is to say, of acquired brain structure. At first sight it appears difficult to understand how the complicated series of actions which are definitely exhibited as so-called “instincts” by a variety of animals can have been due to the selection of congenital variations, or can be otherwise explained than by the transmission of habits acquired by the parent as the result of experience, and continuously elaborated and added to in successive generations. It is, however, to be noted, in the first place, that the imitation of the parent by the young possibly accounts for some part of these complicated actions, and, secondly, that there are cases in which curiously elaborate actions are performed by animals as a characteristic of the species, and as subserving the general advantage of the race or species, which, nevertheless, can not be explained as resulting from the transmission of acquired experience, and must be supposed to be due to the natural selection of a fortuitously developed habit which, like fortuitous colour or form variation, happens to prove beneficial. Mr Poulton has insisted upon the habits of “shamming dead” and the combined posturing and colour peculiarities of certain caterpillars (Lepidopterous larvae) which cause them to resemble dead twigs or similar surrounding objects. The advantage to the animal of this imitation of surrounding objects is that it escapes the pursuit of (say) a bird which would, were it not deceived by the resemblance, attack and eat the caterpillar. Now it is clear that preceding generations of caterpillars cannot have acquired this habit of posturing by experience. Either the caterpillar postures and escapes, or it does not posture and is eaten; it is not half eaten and allowed to profit by experience. We seem to be justified in assuming that there are many movements of stretching and posturing possible to caterpillars, and that some caterpillars had a congenital fortuitous tendency to one position, some to another, and, finally, that among all the variety of habitual movements thus exhibited one has been selected and perpetuated because it coincided with the necessary conditions of safety, since it happened to give the caterpillar an increased resemblance to a twig.
The view that instinct is the hereditarily fixed result of habit derived from experience has hitherto dominated all inquiry into the subject, but we may now expect to see a renewed and careful study of animal instincts carried out with the view of testing the applicability to each instance of the pure Darwinian theory without the aid of Lamarckism.
The whole of this inquiry has special importance in regard to mankind, since the great questions of influence of race and family as opposed to the influence of education are at issue. If pure Darwinism is to be accepted, then education has no value in directly affecting the mental or physical features of the race, but only in affecting those of the individual. Were acquired characters really and fully transmitted, then every child born would inherit the knowledge of both its parents more or less completely, and from birth onwards would be able to add to its inherited stock, so that the progress of the race in mental acquirements would be prodigiously more rapid than it is. On the other hand, peculiarities of mind and body established in a race or a family acquire increased significance, for they cannot be got rid of by training, but are bound to reappear if the stock which exhibits them is allowed to breed. It seems that the laws of thremmatology may eventually give to mankind the most precise directions, not only as to how to improve the breeds of plants and animals, but as to how to improve the human stock. It is not a little remarkable that the latest development of zoological science should favour that respect to breeding which is becoming less popular than it was, and should tend to modify the current estimate of the results of education.
The relation of Darwinism to general philosophy and of the history of zoology to philosophical doctrines is one of the most interesting chapters which might be written on the subject of this article. It belongs, however, rather to the history of philosophy than to that of zoology. Undoubtedly the conceptions of mankind at different periods of history with regard to cosmogony, and the relations of God, nature, and man, have had a very marked influence upon the study of zoology, just as in its turn the study of zoology has reacted upon those conceptions.
In this, as in other phases of mental development, the ancient Greeks stand out in the most striking manner as possessing what is sometimes called the modern spirit. The doctrine of evolution is formulated in unmistakable terms by Heraclitus and other philosophers of antiquity. Not only so, but the direct examination of nature, including the various forms of animal life, was practised by Aristotle and his disciples in a spirit which, though not altogether free from prejudice, was yet far more like that which actuated the founders of the Royal Society less than three hundred years ago than anything which was manifested in the two thousand years intervening between that date and the time of Alexander the Great. The study of zoology in the Middle Ages was simply a fantastic commentary on Aristotle and the records of animals in the various books of the Bible, elaborated as part of a peculiar system of mystic philosophy, which has more analogy with the fetichism and totem worship of savage races than with any Greek or modern conceptions. So far as philosophy affected the study of zoology in the beginning of the modern period, its influence was felt in the general acceptance of what has been called the Miltonic cosmogony,— namely, that interpretation of the Mosaic writings which is set forth by the poet Milton, and of which the characteristic is the conception of the creation of existing things, including living things, nearly or just as they are, by a rapid succession of “fiats” delivered by an anthropomorphic Creator. It was not until the end of the 18th century that Schelling (as quoted above) conceived that unity of nature and general law of development which is now called the doctrine of evolution.
In England Erasmus Darwin (Zoonomia, published in 1794-96), in France Lamarck (Philosophie Zoologique, [9:24:820] 1809) and Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire (Principes de Philosophie Zoologique, 1830), and in Germany Oken (Lehrbuch der Natur-Philosophie, 1809-11), Goethe (Zur Natur Wiss - ensch., Stuttgart, 1817), and Treviranus (Biologie, 1802-5) were the authors of more or less complete systems of a philosophy of nature in which living things were regarded as the outcome of natural law, that is, of the same general processes which had produced the inanimate universe. The “Natur-philosophen,” as they were called in Germany, demand the fullest recognition and esteem. But, just in proportion as the “Natur-philosophen” failed to produce an immediate effect on the study of zoology by their theory of natural development, so was the doctrine of evolution itself deprived of completeness and of the most important demonstration of its laws by the long-continued delay in the final introduction of biology into the area of that doctrine.
Darwin by his discovery of the mechanical principle of organic evolution, namely, the survival of the fittest in the struggle for existence, completed the doctrine of evolution, and gave it that unity and authority which was necessary in order that it should reform the whole range of philosophy. The detailed consequences of that new departure in philosophy have yet to be worked out. Its most important initial conception is the derivation of man by natural processes from ape-like ancestors, and the consequent derivation of his mental and moral qualities by the operation of the struggle for existence and natural selection from the mental and moral qualities of animals. Not the least important of the studies thus initiated is that of the evolution of philosophy itself. Zoology thus finally arrives through Darwin at its crowning development: it touches and may even be said to comprise the history of man, sociology, and psychology.
Bibliography.— Engelmann, Bibliotheca Historico-Naturalis, vol. i., 1846 (being a list of the separate works and academical memoirs relating to zoology published between 1700 and 1846); Carus and Engelmann, Bibl. Zoologica, Leipsic, 1861 (a similar list of works published between 1846 and 1861); J. V. Caius, Gesch. d. Zoologie, Munich, 1872; and L. Agassiz, An Essay on Classification, London, 1859. (E. R. L.)
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 799 [9:24:799]
| |
kp-eb0924-082001-0869m
|
ZOROASTER, one of the great teachers of the East, the founder of what was the national religion of the Perso-Iranian people from the time of the Achaemenidae to the close of the Sasanian period. The name (Zωpoάστρης) is the Greek form of the old Iranian Zarathushtra and the new Persian Zardusht; it seems to mean “possessor of old camels.”
Zoroaster was already famous in classical antiquity as the founder of the widely renowned wisdom of the Magi. The later Greek writers place him with almost one consent in the east of Iran, and more particularly in Bactria. The name is not mentioned by Herodotus in his sketch of the Medo-Persian religion (i. 131 sq.), but it occurs in a fragment (29) of the earlier writer Xanthus. Plato calls Zoroaster the founder of the doctrine of the Magi and a son of Oromazes. According to Hermodorus, one of Plato’s disciples, he was a Persian, the first Magian; according to Hermippus, a Bactrian; according to Trogus Pompeius, even king of the Bactrians and founder of the Magian art and knowledge of the stars; according to Diodorus, an Arian, that is, a native of east Iran. A few details as to his life are also given. Thus, according to Pliny, he laughed on the very day of his birth—a statement found also in the Zardusht-Nâma— and for thirty years he lived in the wilderness upon cheese. Plutarch speaks of his intercourse with the deity and compares him with Lycurgus and Numa. Dio Chrysostom, Plutarch’s contemporary, declares that neither Homer nor Hesiod sang of the chariot and horses of Zeus so worthily as Zoroaster, of whom the Persians tell that out of love to wisdom and righteousness he withdrew himself from men and lived in solitude upon a mountain. The mountain was burnt up, but Zoroaster escaped uninjured and spoke to the multitude. His struggle with Semiramis seems to be an invention of Ctesias. Plutarch, drawing partly on Theopompus, speaks of his religion in his Isis and Osiris (cc. 46 and 47).
Ancient writers differ greatly as to Zoroaster’s date. Ctesias, as we have seen, makes him a contemporary of Semiramis. Hermippus of Smyrna places him 5000 years before the Trojan War, Xanthus 6000 years before Xerxes. Aristotle assigned him a similar antiquity. Agathias remarks (ii. 24) with perfect truth that it is no longer possible to determine with any certainty when he lived and legislated. “The Persians,” he adds, “say that Zoroaster lived under Hystaspes, but do not make it clear whether by this name they mean the father of Darius or another Hystaspes. But, whatever may have been his date, he was their teacher and instructor in the Magian religion.” All classical antiquity, however, without a dissentient voice speaks of Zoroaster as an historical person.
He is nowhere mentioned in the cuneiform inscriptions of the Achaemenidae, although Darius and his successors were without doubt devoted adherents of Zoroastrianism. Very little value can be attached to the fabulous narratives concerning him in the later Persian and Parsee literature, the Shâh-Nâma and the Zardusht-Nâma (13th century); and the information of the Pahlavi books is very scanty. The Zend-Avesta alone gives abundant details, which, in part at least, may be regarded as authentic.
Before proceeding to compile from these a brief sketch of the life and doctrine of Zoroaster it will be well that we should first look at the question whether we are entitled to regard him as an historical character at all. For Zoroaster too, like his great fellowteacher Buddha, has fallen under the ban of modern scepticism. According to Darmesteter and Eduard Meyer, the Parsee saint is a mere myth, a divinity invested with human attributes, an incarnation of the storm-god, who with his divine word, the thunder, comes down from heaven and smites the demons. Darmesteter, however, has failed to realize sufficiently the distinction between the Zoroaster of the later Avesta and the Zoroaster of the Gâthâs. It cannot be denied that in the later Avesta, and still more in writings of more recent date, he is presented in a supernatural light and invested with superhuman powers. At his appearing all nature rejoices ( Yasht 13, 93); he enters into conflict with the demons and rids the earth of their presence (Yasht 17, 19); Satan approaches him as tempter to make him renounce his faith (Vd., 19, 6). The Zar-dusht-Nâma is full of miracles and miraculous deliverances wrought by Zoroaster. But it is quite otherwise in the Gâthâs.
The Gâthâs alone within the Avesta make any claim to be the ipsissima verba of the prophet; in the rest of that work they are put into Zoroaster’s own mouth (Yasna, 9, 1) and are expressly called “the Gâthâs of the holy Zoroaster” (Yasna, 57, 8). The litanies of the Yasna, and the Yashts, refer to him as a personage belonging to a remote antiquity. The Vendidad also merely gives accounts of the dialogues between Ormuzd and Zoroaster. The Gâthâs alone claim to be authentic utterances of Zoroaster, his genuine expressions in presence of the assembled church.
The person too of the Zoroaster whom we meet with in these hymns differs toto caelo from the Zoroaster of the younger Avesta. He is the exact opposite of the miraculous personage of later legend, —a mere man, standing always on the solid ground of reality, whose only arms are trust in his God and the protection of his powerful allies. And at times his position is precarious enough. He whom we hear in the Gâthâs has had to face, not merely all forms of outward opposition and the unbelief and lukewarmness of adherents, but also the inward misgivings of his own heart as to the truth and final victory of his cause. At one time hope, at another despondency, now assured confidence, now doubt and despair, here a firm faith in the speedy coming of the kingdom of heaven, there the thought of taking refuge by flight,—such is the range of the emotions which find their immediate expression in these hymns. And the whole breathes such a genuine originality, all is psychologically so accurate and just, the earliest beginnings of the new religious movement, the childhood of a new community of faith, are reflected so naturally in them all, that it is impossible for [9:24:821] a moment to think of a later period of composition by a priesthood whom we know to have been devoid of any historical sense, and incapable of reconstructing for themselves the spiritual conditions under which Zoroaster lived. As soon as the position has been fully mastered—that in the Gâthâs we have firm historical ground on which Zoroaster and his surroundings may rest, that here we have the beginnings of the Zoroastrian religion—then it becomes impossible to answer otherwise than affirmatively every general question as to the historical character of Zoroaster. On the other hand, we must not expect too much from the Gâthâs in the way of definite detail. They give no historical account of the life and teaching of their prophet, but rather are, so to say, versus memoriales, which recapitulate the main points of interest, often again in an allusive way. It must be remembered too that their extent is but limited.
As to the birthplace of Zoroaster the Avesta is silent. In later tradition two places contended for this honour: the older and more widely spread story made him a native of Rai (Rhagae) in Media, another of Shîz, the capital of Atropatene, also in Media. It is hard to decide whether both traditions rest merely upon priestly pretensions of a later date or whether one of them is not perhaps authentic. According to Yasna, 19, 18, the “zarathushtrotema” or supreme head of the Zoroastrian priesthood had at a later (Median or Sasanian? ) time his residence in Rhagae. But there is a passage in even the Gâthâs (Y ., 53, 9) which seems to contain a lurking allusion to Rhagae; unfortunately, however, both text and meaning are uncertain. However this may be, the activity of Zoroaster as a teacher is certainly to be placed in the east of Iran. On this point also the Gâthâs say nothing. The later Avesta names, as the locality of his advent, “Airyanem vaêjô,” a quite fabulous country, which, according to Vd., 1, 3 and 7, was not identified with Bactria. He taught under the reign of a ruler named Vîshtâspa (later Gushtâsp, the Greek Hystaspes), with whom and with whose court he stood in close and friendly relations. This Vîshtâspa must be carefully distinguished from Hystaspes the father of Darius. According to the epic legend, Vîshtâspa was king of Bactria. Already in the later Avesta he has become a half mythical figure, the last in the series of heroes of east Iranian legend, in the arrangement of which series priestly influence is unmistakably evident. He stands at the meeting-point between the old world and the new era which begins with Zoroaster. In the Gâthâs he appears as a quite historical personage; it is essentially to his power and good example that the prophet is indebted for his success. In Yasna, 53, 2, he is spoken of as a pioneer of the doctrine revealed by Ormuzd. In the relation between Zoroaster and Vîshtâspa already lies the germ of the state church which afterwards became so completely subservient to the interests of the dynasty and sought its protection from it.
Among the grandees of the court of Vîshtâspa mention is made of two brothers Frashaoshtra and Jâmâspa; the latter, according to the later legend, was the minister of Vîshtâspa. Zoroaster was nearly related to both; his wife Hvôvi seems to have been their sister, and the husband of her daughter, Pourucista, was a son of Jâmâspa. Apart from this connexion, the new prophet relies especially upon his own kindred (hvaêtush) and their followers (airy-aman). His first disciple, Maidhyôimâongha, was a relation; his father was, according to the later Avesta, Pouru-shaspa, his great-grandfather Haêcataspa, and the ancestor of the whole family Spitama, for which reason Zarathushtra usually bears this surname. His sons and daughters are repeatedly spoken of. His death is, for reasons easily intelligible, nowhere mentioned in the Avesta; in the Shâh-Nâma he is said to have been murdered at the altar by the Turanians in the storming of Balkh.
We are quite in the dark as to the date of Zoroaster; King Vîshtâspa has no place in any historical chronology, and the Gâthâs give no hint on the subject. But at any rate he must have lived long before Cyrus, by whose time the new religion had already become established in western Iran (Nic. Damasc., fr. 66). Duncker places him about the year 1000 b.c. Merely conjectural also is the opinion once orally expressed by Gutschmid that Zoroaster may have been a contemporary of Moses, thus belonging, according to Gutschmid’s view, to about the 14th century B.c.,—a period of great religious activity throughout western Asia.
It was a new religion that Zoroaster taught. This must not, however, be taken as meaning that everything he taught came, so to say, out of his own head. His doctrine was a product of the time, and had its roots in the nature and history of the people to which he belonged. Usually he is spoken of as a reformer of the old Iranian faith. But in order to be sure of this it would be necessary first to know something about the nature of that faith as it existed before he arose. Was it still essentially the same as that of the nearly-allied ancient Hindus, as found in the RigVeda? To this question no distinct answer is forthcoming; we are ignorant as to how far the way had been prepared for Zoroastrianism or how far it was wholly new. But still there is room for conjecture as to what it was that gave the prophet the first impulse and occasion for his work.
The most striking difference between Zoroaster’s doctrine of God and the old religion of India lies in this, that, while in the Avesta the evil spirits are called daêva (Modern Persian dîv), the Aryans of India, on the other hand, in common with the Italians, Celts, and Letts, gave the name of dêva to their good spirits, the spirits of light. An -alternative designation for deity in the RigVeda is asura. In the more recent hymns of the RigVeda and in later India, on the other hand, only evil spirits are understood by asurâs, while in Iran the corresponding word ahura was, and ever has continued to be, the designation of God the Lord, especially of the supreme God, with the epithet of Mazdâο (the Wise). Thus ahura-daêνa, dêva-asura in Zoroastrian and in later Brahman theology are in their meanings exactly opposed. This difference no one has as yet satisfactorily accounted for, and yet it supplies the key to the doctrine of Zoroaster.
The difference proceeded from an old distinction between the ideas deva and asura. An original ideal difference, a different conception of god associated with the two words, grew in the two lands into a sharp antithesis, a formal conflict, but in opposite senses. In India the development still admits of being traced. In the older RigVeda the difference is latent. Here a god is spoken of as déva, but not every dêva is an asura. Asura is something which is attributed only to certain particular gods as a special attribute, notably to Varuna, though also to others, such as Indra, but only by the so-called “katheno-theism” of the Vedic religion. On the other hand, it is expressly stated that in the case of Indra the dignity of an asura was only a conferred one (Rig-V., 6,10, 2). In RigVeda, 4, 42 Varuna claims as against Indra the priority in the asura dignity. This hymn, like 10, 124, is of importance for the whole question. The contrast there implied between Varuna and Indra, the rivalry between them as to which is the greater, comes to light sometimes more strongly, sometimes less so, throughout the entire RigVeda. The contrast is really in other terms the old contrast between asura and deva, between a more spiritualistic and a more materialistic conception of deity. Asura is ethically the higher conception, deva the lower: deva is the vulgar notion of God, asura is theosophic. The supersensuous figure of Varuna is the type of an asura, the sensuous figure of Indra the type of a deva. In the RigVeda, Varuna, the old king of the gods, is going down, while Indra, the popular national god, is in the ascendant. Along with Varuna, but in a still higher degree, the very [9:24:822] conception of asura goes down; it becomes unmodern, obsolete, and acquires an undesirable flavour. The asuras thus come to form a distinct group of celestial beings mentioned along with the devas (A.- V., 10, 10, 26): they become in rank inferior to the devas (A.- V., 6, 86, 3) and receive the designation of asurâ adevâs—asuras that are no devas; and from this it is but a short step to the “asuras that are opposed to the gods.”
The old contrast between asura and deva was wrought out and accentuated quite differently on Iranian soil. While in India the entire revolution took place in a bloodless manner wholly within the realm of ideas, the old antithesis led to an open quarrel among the Aryans of Iran. In the background of the picture of Zoroaster’s times set before us in the Gâthâs we see the people divided between two opposing and hostile cults, the watchwords of which are ahura on the one hand and daeva on the other. How it is that matters had come to this pass remains obscure, for we have no source of information to take us further back. The opposing parties are not separated by distance in space or by differing nationality, but occur side by side. “Hard by the believer in ahura dwells the worshipper of the daêvas,” complains Zoroaster. The entire people seems broken up by the religious difference.
It is difficult to focus the scattered references in the Gâthâs so as to obtain a clear picture of the time. Only this much is clear, that in Zoroaster’s day not two cults only but two stages of culture are struggling for the mastery. The ahura worshippers represent the higher phase; they are breeders of cattle, and the care of the cow is to them a sacred duty. The worshippers of the daevas maltreat the animal and slaughter it in their sacrifices. We perceive that the higher ethical tendency of the old asura faith is producing its effects in the higher degree of culture of the believers in Ahura, while the worshippers of the daevas stand on a lower grade.
It is to this period of religious ferment that Zoroaster’s appearance on the scene belongs. It is not he who has evoked this religious conflict of parties, as the common assumption is, and just as little is it he who in Ahura with the epithet of Mazdâo offers a new god to his people. He strikes decisively into the existing struggle, mounts to the position of spiritual leader of the ahura party and makes the battle a victory. As zaotâ (Indian hotâ), for so he calls himself, the first in rank of the old Aryan priests, he had all the greater opportunity to make his views known in matters of religion. Mankind had been brought face to face with a critical choice, that of electing between two radically opposed confessions of faith, without having any clearness as to the lasting consequences of the momentous step. He determines to save them, to lead them to a right choice, for he sees further than they, and believes himself to be initiated into the secrets of the godhead and of the life to come. What the other party worship as gods under the name of daêva are in reality powers by whom unwitting mankind are led to their destruction,—evil powers, false gods, devils. Such is the position from which all his teaching starts; and thus the change in the conception of daeva was a natural development. From the daevas proceeds all the evil in the world. But his speculation does not stop here. The daevas themselves anon become manifest to him as being but the instruments of a higher principle, called by him for the most part Druj (falsehood, deception), and more rarely Angrô Mainyush, that is the spirit enemy, Ahriman. This Ahriman or evil principle is the most characteristic product of Zoroastrian speculation. From the schism or religious dualism of his time he derived the idea of that dualistic scheme of the universe which has impressed its character upon the whole of the religion called by his name.
Zoroastrian Doctrine.
The fundamental idea of the Zoroastrian creed is dualistic. At the beginning of things there existed two spirits—Ahurô Mazdâo (Ormuzd) and Angrô Mainyush (Ahriman)—who represented good and evil (Yasna, 30, 3). The existence of evil in the world is thus presupposed from all eternity. Both spirits possess creative power, which manifests itself in the one positively and in the other negatively. Ormuzd is light and life and all that is pure and good,— in the ethical world law, order, and truth; his antithesis is darkness, filth, death, all that is evil in the world, lawlessness, and lies. λVhen the two are spoken of as yêma (“a pair”), this is not to be interpreted as meaning that they are twins:^[1. Later sects sought to rise from the dualism to a higher unity. Thus the Zarvanites represented Ormuzd and Ahriman as twin sons proceeding from the fundamental principle of all, Zrvana Akarana, or limitless time. ] it simply denotes a duality, an opposed couple, a dυandυa. The two spirits had until then counterbalanced one another. The ultimate triumph of the good spirit is an ethical demand of the religious consciousness and the quintessence of Zoroaster’s revelation.
The evil spirit with his wicked hosts appears in the Gâthâs much less endowed with the attributes of personality than does Ahura Mazda. Within the world of the good Ormuzd is Lord and God alone. In this sense Zoroastrianism is often referred to as the faith of Ormuzd or as Mazdaism. Ormuzd in his exalted majesty is the ideal figure of an Oriental king. Of other gods beside him the doctrine of the Gâthâs knows nothing. The natural and symbolical gods of the popular belief have no place in it. Yet Ormuzd is not alone in his doings and conflicts, but has in conjunction with himself a number of genii—for the most part personifications of ethical ideas. These are his creatures, his instruments, servants, and assistants, like the ministers of an autocratic sovereign. They are comprehended under the general name of ameshâ spentâ (“immortal holy ones”) and are the prototypes of the seven amshaspands of a later date. These are—(1) Ashem, afterwards Ashem Vahishtem (Plutarch’s ἀλ ήθϵιa), corresponding to all that is true, good, and right,—ideas practically identical for Zoroaster, and the embodiment of all that is true, good, and right, upright law and rule; (2) Vohu Manô (ϵὒvoια ), good sense, i.e. , the good principle, the idea of the good, the principle that works in man inclining him to what is good; (3) Khshathrem, afterwards Khshathrem Vairîm (εὐvoμία ), the power and kingdom of Ormuzd, which have subsisted from the first but not in integral completeness, the evil having crept in like the tares among the wheat: the time is yet to come when it shall be fully manifested in all its unclouded majesty; (4) Armaiti (σοφία), or the spirit of docility and obedience, spoken of as daughter of Ormuzd and regarded as having her abode upon the earth; (5) Haurvatât (πλ oυτoς ), perfection; (6) Ameretatât, immortality. Other ministering angels are Gêush Tashan (“the creator of the cow ”), Gêush Urvan ( "the genius and defender of animals”), and the holy spirit of Ormuzd, often thought of as having personal existence. Of the elements fire alone ( “the son of Ahura Mazda ”) receives personification and figures as his ally.
As soon as the two at first absolutely separate spirits (comp. Bundahish, 1, 4) encounter one another, their creative activity and at the same time their permanent conflict begin. The history of this conflict is the history of the world. A great cleft runs right through the world: all creation divides itself into that which is Ahura’s and that which is Ahriman’s. Not that the two spirits carry on the struggle in person; they leave it to be fought out by their respective creations and creatures which they send into the field. The field of battle is the present world.
In the centre of battle is man; his soul is the object of the war. Man is a creation of Ormuzd, who therefore has the right to call him to account. But Ormuzd created him free in his determinations and in his actions, wherefore he is accessible to the influences of the evil powers. This freedom of the will is clearly expressed in Yasna, 31, 11: “Since thou, O Mazda, didst at the first create our being and our souls in accordance with thy mind, and didst create our understanding and our life together with the body, and works and words in which man according to his own will can frame his confession, the liar and the truth-speaker alike lay hold of the word, the knowing and the ignorant each after his own heart and understanding. Armaiti searches, following thy spirit, where errors are found.” Man takes part in this conflict by all his life and activity in the world. By a true confession of faith, by every good deed, by continually keeping pure his body and his soul, he impairs the power of Satan and strengthens the might of goodness, and establishes a claim for reward upon Ormuzd; by a false confession, by every evil deed and defilement, he increases the evil and renders service to Satan.
The life of man falls into two parts,—its earthly portion and that which is lived beyond the grave. The lot assigned to him after death is the result and consequence of his life upon earth. No religion has so clearly grasped the ideas of guilt and of merit On the works of men here below a strict reckoning will be held in [9:24:823] heaven (according to later representations by Rashnu and Mithra). All thoughts, words, and deeds of each are entered in the book as separate items (dâthra, V., 31, 14; Vend., 19, 27), all the evil works as debts (ishudô). Wicked actions cannot be undone, but in the heavenly account can be counterbalanced by a surplus of good works. It is only in this sense that an evil deed can be atoned for by a good one. Of a remission of sins the doctrine of Zoroaster knows nothing. After death the soul arrives at the cinvato pere-tush or accountant’s bridge over which lies the way to heaven. Here the statement of his life account is made out. If he has a balance of good works in his favour, he passes forthwith into paradise (Garô demâna) and the blessed life. If his evil works outweigh his good he falls finally under the power of Satan, and the pains of hell are his portion for ever. Should the evil and the good be equally balanced, the soul passes into an intermediate stage of existence (the Hamêstakâns of the Pahlavi books) and his final lot is not decided until the last judgment. This court of reckoning, the judicium particulare, is called âka. The course of inexorable law cannot be turned aside by any sacrifice or offering, nor yet even by the free grace of God.
But man has been smitten with blindness and ignorance: he knows neither the eternal law nor the things which await him after death. He allows himself only too easily to be ensnared by the craft of the evil powers who seek to ruin his future existence. He worships and serves false gods, being unable to distinguish between truth and lies. Therefore it is that Ormuzd in his grace determined to open the eyes of mankind by sending a prophet to lead them by the right way, the way of salvation. According to later legend (Vd., 2, 1), Ormuzd at first wished to entrust this task to Yima (Jemshîd), the ideal of an Iranian king. But Yima, the secular man, felt himself unfitted for it and declined it. He contented himself therefore with establishing in his paradise (vara) a heavenly kingdom in miniature, to serve at the same time as a pattern for the heavenly kingdom that was to come. Zoroaster at last, as being a spiritual man, was found fit for the mission. Zoroaster experienced within himself the inward call to seek the amelioration of mankind and their deliverance from everlasting ruin, and regarded this inward impulse, intensified as it was by means of dreams and visions, as being the call addressed to him by God Himself. Like Mohammed after him he often speaks of his conversations with God. He calls himself most frequently manthran (“prophet”), ratu (“spiritual authority ”), and saoshyant (meaning “he who will deliver,” that is to say, when men come to be judged according to their deeds).
The full contents of his dogmatic and ethical teaching we cannot gather from the Gâthâs. He speaks for the most part only in general references of the divine commands and of good and evil works. Among the former those most inculcated are renunciation of Satan, adoration of Ormuzd, purity of soul and body, and care of the cow. We learn little otherwise regarding the practices connected with his doctrines. A ceremonial worship is hardly mentioned. He speaks more in the character of prophet than in that of lawgiver. The contents of the Gâthâs are essentially eschatological. Revelations concerning the last things and the future lot, whether bliss or woe, of human souls, promises for true believers, threatenings for misbelievers, his firm confidence as to the future triumph of the good—such are the themes continually dwelt on with endless variations.
It was not without special reason, Zoroaster believed, that the calling of a prophet should have taken place precisely when it did. It was, he held, the final appeal of Ormuzd to mankind at large. Like John the Baptist and the Apostles of Jesus, Zoroaster also believed that the fulness of time was near, that the kingdom of heaven was at hand. Through the whole of the Gâthâs runs the pious hope that the end of the present world is not far off. He himself hopes along with his followers to live to see the decisive turn of things, the dawn of the new and better aeon. Ormuzd will summon together all his powers for a final decisive struggle and break the power of evil for ever; by his help the faithful will achieve the victory over their detested enemies, the daêva worshippers, and render them powerless. Thereupon Ormuzd will hold a judicium universale (vîdâiti) upon all mankind and judge strictly according to justice, punish the wicked, and assign to the good the hoped-for reward. Satan will be cast, along with all those who have been delivered over to him to suffer the pains of hell, into the abyss, where he will thenceforward lie powerless. Forthwith begins the one undivided kingdom of God in heaven and on earth. This is called, sometimes the good kingdom, sometimes simply the kingdom. Here the sun will for ever shine, and all the pious and faithful will live a happy life, that no evil power can disturb, in the fellowship of Ormuzd and his angels for ever.
Zoroaster’s teachings show him to have been a man of a highly speculative turn, faithful, however, with all his originality, to the Iranian national character. With zeal for the faith, and boldness and energy, he combined diplomatic skill in his dealings with his exalted protectors. His thinking is consecutive, self-restrained, practical, devoid on the whole of all that might be called fantastic and excessive. His form of expression is tangible and concrete. His system is constructed on a clearly conceived plan.
History and Later Development of Zoroastrianism.— For the great mass of the people Zoroaster’s doctrine was too abstract and spiritualistic. Popular faith instinctively and naturally turns to concrete plastic forms of godhead borrowed from surrounding nature, and thus it came to pass that a number of the old Aryan divinities, whom the new teaching had driven into the background, were again restored to their former rank,—especially Mithra, the sun-god. Besides him, in the younger Avesta, Anâhita (Anâitis), the goddess of the waters, Tishtrya (Sirius), and other heavenly bodies are invoked with special preference. The Gâthâs know nothing of a new belief which afterwards arose in the fravashi, or guardian angels of the faithful. Fravashi properly means “confession of faith,” and when personified comes to be regarded as a protecting spirit. Unbelievers have no fravashi.
On the basis of the new teaching arose a widely spread priesthood (âthravanô) who systematized the doctrines, organized and carried on the worship, and laid down the minutely elaborated laws for the purifying and keeping pure of soul and body which are met with in the Vendidad. To the last-named belong in particular the numerous ablutions, bodily chastisements, love of truth, agriculture, protection of useful animals, as dogs and cattle, the destruction of noxious animals, and the prohibition either to burn or to bury the dead. In the worship the drink prepared from the haoma (Indian soma) plant had a prominent place. The last things and the end of the world are relegated to the close of a long period of time (3000 years after Zoroaster), when a new Saoshyant is to be born of the seed of Zoroaster, the dead are to come to life, and a new incorruptible world to begin.
The religion of Zoroaster, broadly speaking, never spread beyond the limits of Iran, although some isolated Turanian stems can be reckoned among those who profess it. From the East it doubtless passed in the first instance into Media and thence into Persia proper (comp. Persia, vol. xviii. p. 564). In the Persians of Herodotus’s time we still see the new proselytes who have indeed accepted the creed, but not yet without reserve all the religious usages which accompany it, and least of all those which run completely counter to sacred and immemorial traditions of their time-honoured customs. According to Herodotus (i. 140), they still refrained from exposing, at least from openly exposing, their dead to dogs and vultures, but continued to bury them. This was practised by the Magi only, that is, by the priesthood, in conformity with the priestly laws. The Persians, however, made so far a concession to their adopted religion that they enveloped their dead bodies in wax, so that the earth might not be defiled.
After the fall of the Achaemenidae (331 b.c. ) Zoroastrianism lost greatly in power and dignity. It was subsequently rehabilitated, however, by the Sasanians, under whom it reached its highest prosperity. Protected by this dynasty, the priesthood developed into a completely organized state church, which was able to employ the power of the state in enforcing strict compliance with the religious law-book hitherto enjoined by their unaided efforts only. The formation of sects was at this period not infrequent (comp. Manichaeism). The Mohammedan invasion (636), with the terrible persecutions of the following centuries, was the death-blow of Zoroastrianism. In Persia itself only a few followers of Zoroaster are now found (in Kirman and Yazd). The Parsees (q.v .) in and around Bombay hold by Zoroaster as their prophet and by the ancient religious usages, but their doctrine has reached the stage of a pure monotheism.
Literature.— See under Zend-Avesta; also Windischmann, Zoroastrische Studien, Berlin, 1863. (K. G.)
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 820 [9:24:820]
| |
kp-eb0924-082301-0872m
|
ZOSIMUS, a Greek historical writer, held public office (Photius describes him as “comes et exadvocatus fisci”) at Constantinople some time in the first half of the 5th century. His History, which is mainly a compilation from previous authors (Herennius Dexippus, Eunapius, Olympiodorus), consists of six books: the first sketches very briefly the history of the early emperors from Augustus to Diocletian (305); the second, third, and fourth deal more copiously with the period from the accession of Constantius and Galerius to the death of Theodosius; the fifth and sixth cover the period between 395 and 410. The work is apparently unfinished. The style is characterized by Photius as concise, clear, and pure. The historian’s object was to account for the decline of the Roman empire from the pagan point of view, and in this undertaking he has at various points treated the Christians with some unfairness.
A Latin version of the History was published by Leunclavius in 1576 (Basel, fol.), and in 1581 H. Stephanus added the Greek text of the first two books to his edition of Herodian. All the six books were published by Sylburgius in vol. iii. of his Romanae Historiae [9:24:824] Scriptores Graeci Minores (Frankfort, 1590). There have been several subsequent editions; that of Reitemeier (Leipsic, 1784) was re-edited by Bekker for Niebuhr’s Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae (Bonn, 1837). Zosimus was translated into French by Cousin in 1678; into English, anonymously, in 1684; and into German by Seybold and Heyler in 1804-5.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 823 [9:24:823]
| |
kp-eb0924-082401-0873m
|
ZOSIMUS, bishop of Rome from 18th March 417 to 25th December 418, succeeded Innocent I. and was followed by Boniface I. For his attitude in the Pelagian controversy, see Pelagius (vol. xviii. p. 472). He took a decided part in the protracted dispute in Gaul as to the jurisdiction of the see of Arles over that of Vienne, giving energetic decisions in favour of the former, but without settling the controversy.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 824 [9:24:824]
| |
kp-eb0924-082402-0873m
|
ZOSTEROPS,^[1. The derivation is ζωστήρ-ηροs and ὤψ, whence the word should be pronounced with all the vowels long. The allusion is to the ring of white feathers round the eyes, which is very conspicuous in many species. ] originally the scientific name of a genus of birds founded by Vigors and Horsfield (Trans. Linn. Society, XV. p. 235) on an Australian species called by them Z. dorsalis, but subsequently shown to be identical with the Certhia caerulescens, and also with the Sylvia lateralis, previously described by Latham. Latterly the name has been Anglicized in the same sense, and, whether as a scientific or a vernacular term, applied to a great number of species^[2. In 1883 Mr Sharpe ( Cat. B. Brit. Museum, ix. pp. 146-203) admitted 85 species, besides 3 more which he had not been able to examine. ] of little birds which inhabit for the most part the tropical districts of the Old World, from Africa to most of the islands in the Indian and Pacific Oceans, and northwards in Asia through India and China to Amurland and Japan.
The birds of this group are mostly of unpretending appearance, the plumage above being generally either mouse-coloured or greenish olive; but some are sufficiently varied by the white or bright yellow of their throat, breast, or lower parts, and several have the flanks of a more or less lively bay. It is remarkable that several islands are inhabited by two perfectly distinct species, one belonging to the brown and the other to the green section, the former being wholly insular. The greater number of species seem to be confined to single islands, often of very small area, but others have a very wide distribution, and much interest has been excited by the undoubted fact that the type-species, Z. caerulescens, has of late years largely extended its range. First described from New South Wales, where it is very plentiful, it had been long known to inhabit all the eastern part of Australia. In 1856 it was noticed by naturalists as occurring in the South Island of New Zealand, when it became known to the Maories by a name signifying “Stranger,” and to the English settlers as the “Blight-bird,”^[3. By most English-speaking people in various parts of the world the prevalent species of Zosterops is commonly called “White-eye” or “Silver-eye” from the feature before mentioned. ] from its clearing the fruit-trees of a blight by which they had lately been affected. It soon after appeared in the North Island, where it speedily became common, and it has thence not only spread to the Chatham Islands, but, as Sir Walter Buller states (Birds N. Zealand, ed. 2, i. p. 79), it has been met with in considerable numbers 300 miles from land, as though in search of new countries to colonize. Yet this author believes it to be indigenous to the west coast of the South Island, and Sir James Hector joins in that opinion. If they be right, it is, however, pretty certain that until the year before mentioned it must have been confined to an extremely small district, and the only assignable cause of its spreading so rapidly, when it did extend its range, is that of a large surplus population unable to find a living at home. It is known to propagate at a high rate of increase, and at times numbers have been found dead, apparently for want of food. In any case it is obvious that this Zosterops must be a comparatively modern settler in New Zealand.^[4. Sir W. Buller says that he and Mr Gould were able to pick out New-Zealand examples from a series otherwise made up of Australian specimens. Hence it would seem as if a slight amount of differentiation had been set up; but the variation would doubtless have been greater had the species been an ancient colonist. It is a remarkable and, if capable of explanation, would doubtless be an instructive fact that the largest known species of the genus, Z. albigularis, measuring nearly 6 inches in length, is confined to so small a spot as Norfolk Island, where also another, Z. tenuirostris, not much less in size, occurs; while a third, of intermediate stature, Z. strenua, inhabits the still smaller Lord Howe’s Island. A fourth, Z. νatensis, but little inferior in bulk, is found on one of the New Hebrides; but, after these giants of their kind, the rest fall off considerably, being from one-fifth to one-third less in length, and some of the smaller species hardly exceed 3⅜ inches from end to end. The affinities of the genus Zosterops are by no means clear. Placed by some writers, if not systematists, with the Paridae (cf. Titmouse), by others among the Meliphagidae (cf. Honey-Eater), and again by others with the Nectariniidae (cf. Sunbird), the structure of the tongue, as shown by Dr Gadow (Proc. Zool. Society, 1883, pp. 63, 68, pl. xvi. fig. 2), entirely removes it from the first and third, and from most of the forms generally included among the second. On the whole it seems safest to regard the genus, at least provisionally, as the type of a distinct Family— Zosteropidae— as Families go among Passerine birds; but, whether the Australian genera Melithreptus and Plectrorhamphus (otherwise Plectrorhyncha) should be included under that heading, as has been done, remains to be proved, and in the meanwhile may be reasonably doubted. (a. n.) ]
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 824 [9:24:824]
| |
kp-eb0924-082403-0873m
|
ZOUCH, Richard(c. 1590-1661), a distinguished writer on civil and international law, was born at Anstey, Wiltshire, about the year 1590. He was educated at Winchester and afterwards at Oxford, where he became a fellow of New College in 1609. In 1613 he published a poem entitled The Dove, or Passages of Cosmography, which he dedicated to his relative Edward, Lord Zouch, warden of the Cinque Ports. He was admitted at Doctor’s Commons in January 1618, commenced LL.D. in April 1619, and was appointed regius professor of law at Oxford in 1620. In 1625 he became principal of St Alban Hall and chancellor of the diocese of Oxford; in 1641 he was made judge of the High Court of Admiralty. Under the Commonwealth, having submitted to the Parliamentary visitors, he retained his university appointments, though not his judgeship; this last he resumed at the Restoration, dying soon afterwards at his apartments in Doctor’s Commons, London, on 1st March 1661.
He published Elementa jurisprudentiae (1629), Descriptio juris et judicii feudalis, secundum consuetudines Mediolani et Normanniae, pro introductione ad jurisprudentiam Anglicanam (1634), Descriptio juris et judicii temporalis, secundum consuetudines feudales et Nor-mannicas (1636), Descriptio juris et judicii ecclesiastici, secundum canones et consuetudines Anglicanas (1636), Descriptiones juris et judicii sacri, . . . militaris, . . . maritimi (1640), Juris et judicii fecialis sive juris inter gentes . . . explicatio (1650), and Solutio quaestionis de legati delinquentis judice competente (1657). In virtue of the last two he has the distinction of being one of the earliest systematic writers on international law.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 824 [9:24:824]
| |
kp-eb0924-082404-0873m
|
ZSCHOKKE, Johann Heinrich Daniel (1771-1848), German author, was born at Magdeburg on 22d March 1771. He was educated at the cloister school of his native place and at the gymnasium of Altstadt. As a youth he spent some time with a company of strolling players, but afterwards he attended the university of Frankfort-on-the-oder, where, in 1792, he became a privat-docent. He created much sensation by two extravagant plays, Abällino, der grosse Bandit (1794) and Julius von Sassen (1796), the success of which shows how urgent was the need for the elevating influence of the dramatic writings of Goethe and Schiller. The Prussian Government having declined
All the species of Zosterops are sociable, consorting in large flocks, which only separate on the approach of the pairing season. They build nests, described as being variously placed—sometimes suspended from a horizontal fork and sometimes fixed in an upright crotch—and lay (so far as is known) pale blue, spotless eggs, thereby differing wholly from several of the groups of birds to which they have been thought allied. Though mainly insectivorous, the birds of this genus will eat fruits of various kinds and in such quantities as to be at times injurious. The habits of Z. caerulescens have been well described by Sir W. Buller (ut supra), and those of a species peculiar to Ceylon, Z. ceylonensis, by Col. Legge (B. Ceylon, p. 586), while those of the widely-ranging Indian Z. palpebrosa and of the South-African Z. capensis have been succinctly treated by Jerdon (B. India, ii. p. 266) and Mr Layard (B. South Africa, p. 116) respectively.
[9:24:825]
to make him a full professor, Zschokke in 1795, after some time spent in travel, settled in the Grisons, where, in association with the burgomaster Tscharner, he conducted an educational institution in the castle of Reichenau. In recognition of his services the authorities of the Grisons gave him the rights of a citizen, and in 1798 he associated his name permanently with the country by the publication of his Geschichte des Freistaats der drei Bünde in Rhätien. The political disturbances of this year compelled him to close his institution; but, being a man of great resource and energy, he was able, during the revolutionary period which now began in Switzerland, to enter upon a new and more important career. He was sent as a deputy to Aarau, where he was made head of the educational department. Afterwards he was sent as Government commissioner to Unterwalden, and his authority was ultimately extended over the cantons of Uri, Schwyz, and Zug. In this high office Zschokke distinguished himself by the vigour of his administration and by the enthusiasm with which he devoted himself to the promotion of the interests of the poorer classes of the community. In 1800 he reorganized the institutions of the Italian cantons, and then he became lieutenant-governor of the canton of Basel. Zschokke retired for a while from public life when the central Government at Bern proposed to re-establish the federal system, but after the changes effected by Bonaparte he entered the service of the canton of Aargau, with which he remained connected. In 1801 he attracted attention by his Geschichte vom Kampfe und Untergange der schweizerischen Berg-und Wald-Cantone. Through his Schweizerbote, the publication of which began in 1804, he exercised a wholesome influence on public affairs; and the like may be said of his Miscellen der neuesten Weltkunde, issued from 1807 to 1813. In 1811 he also started a monthly periodical, the Erheiterungen. He wrote various historical works, the most important of which is Des Schweizerlandes Geschichte fur das Schweizervolk, published in 1822. He was also the author of Bilder aus der Schweiz, and of a series of popular tales which greatly extended his reputation,— Der Creole, Alamontade, Jonathan Frock, Das Goldmacherdorf, and Meister Jordan. In Stunden der Andacht, which was widely read, he expounded in a rationalistic spirit what seemed to him the fundamental principles of religion and morality. Selbstschau is a kind of autobiography. Zschokke was not a great original writer, but he secured for himself an eminent place in the literature of his time by his enthusiasm for modern ideas in politics and religion, by the sound, practical judgment displayed in his works, and by the energy and lucidity of his style. He died on 27th June 1848.
An edition of his selected works, in forty volumes, was issued in 1824-28. In 1851-54 an edition in thirty-five volumes was published. There are biographies of Zschokke by Münch and by Emil Zschokke.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 824 [9:24:824]
| |
kp-eb0924-082501-0874m
|
ZUCCARO, or Zucchero,^[1. So spelt by Vasari. ] the name of two Italian painters.
I. Taddeo Zuccaro (1529-1566), one of the most popular painters of the so-called Roman mannerist school, was the son of an almost unknown painter at St Angelo in Vado, called Ottaviano Zuccaro, where he was born in 1529. While yet a boy Taddeo found his way to Rome; and, though suffering great hardships from poverty and want of friends, he succeeded at an early age in gaining a knowledge of painting and in finding patrons to employ him. His first start in life, while only seventeen years old, was due to a pupil of Correggio, named Daniele da Parma, who engaged him to assist in painting a series of frescos in a chapel at Vitto near Sora, on the borders of the Abruzzi. After that Taddeo returned to Rome in 1548, and began his career as a fresco painter, by execut ing a series of scenes in monochrome from the life of Furius Camillus on the front of the palace of a wealthy Roman named Jacopo Mattei. From that time his success was assured, and for the rest of his short life he was largely employed by the popes Julius III. and Paul IV., by Della Rovere, duke of Urbino, and by other rich patrons of art in Rome and elsewhere. His best frescos were an historical series painted on the walls of a new palace at Caprarola, built for Cardinal Alessandro Farnese, for which Taddeo also designed a great quantity of rich decorations in stucco relief after the style of Giulio Romano and other pupils of Raphael. Nearly all his paintings were in fresco, very large in scale, and often in chiaroscuro or monochrome; they were more remarkable for rapidity of execution and a certain boldness of style than for any higher qualities. The very great estimation in which Taddeo’s frescos were held is a striking proof of the very rapid degradation of taste which took place during the second half of the 16th century. His work is mannered in style, artificial and pompous in conception, and lacks any close or accurate knowledge of the human form and its movements. The long chapter which Vasari devotes to this painter and his brother Federigo is only one of many examples of the writer’s habit of giving undue prominence to the artists of his own time and school. Taddeo Zuccaro died in Rome in 1566; he is buried in the Pantheon, not far from Raphael.
Taddeo’s easel pictures are less common than his decorative frescos. A small painting on copper of the Adoration of the Shepherds, formerly in the collection of James II., is now at Hampton Court; it is a work of very small merit. The Caprarola frescos were engraved and published by Prenner, Illustri Fatti Farηesiaηi Coloriti nel Real Palazzo di Caprarola, Rome, 1748-50.
II. Federigo Zuccaro (1543-1609), the younger brother and pupil of Taddeo, was born in 1543. In 1550 he was placed under his brother’s charge in Rome, and during his lifetime worked as his assistant; he completed the Caprarola frescos, which were unfinished when Taddeo died in 1566. In a short time Federigo attained to an eminence far beyond his very limited merits as a painter, and was perhaps the most popular artist of his generation. Probably no other painter has ever produced so many enormous frescos crowded with figures on the most colossal scale, all executed under the unfortunate delusion, common in his time, that grandeur of effect could be attained merely by great size combined with extravagance of attitude and exaggeration of every kind. Federigo’s first work of this sort was the completion of the painting of the dome of the cathedral at Florence, under the patronage of the grand-duke Francesco I.; the work had been begun by the art-historian Vasari, who wrote in the most generous language about his more successful rival. The inner surface of this beautiful cupola was disfigured by Federigo in the most tasteless way. Regardless of the injury to the apparent scale of the interior of the church, he painted about 300 figures, each nearly 50 feet high, sprawling with violent contortions all over the surface. Happily age has so dimmed these pictures that their presence is now almost harmless.
After this achievement Federigo was recalled to Rome by Gregory XIII. to continue in the Pauline chapel of the Vatican the scheme of decoration which had been begun by Michelangelo during his failing years. A quarrel which arose between the painter and some members of the papal court led to his departure from Italy. He first visited Brussels, and there made a series of cartoons for the tapestry-weavers. Thence, in 1574, Federigo passed over to England, where his fame was already known, so that he at once received a large number of commissions to paint the portraits of various distinguished persons, among them Queen Elizabeth, Mary Queen of Scots,^[2. Engraved by Vertue. ] Sir Nicholas [9:24:826] Bacon, Sir Francis Walsingham, Lord High Admiral Howard, and others. A curious full-length portrait of Elizabeth in fancy dress, now at Hampton Court, is attributed to this painter, though very doubtfully. Another picture in the same collection appears to be a replica of his painting of the Allegory of Calumny, as suggested by Lucian’s description of a celebrated work by Apelles; it was the satire in this directed against some of his courtier enemies which was the immediate cause of the pope’s displeasure and Federigo’s temporary exile from Rome. His success as a painter of portraits and other works in oil was more reasonable than the admiration expressed for his colossal frescos. A portrait of a Man with Two Dogs in the Pitti Palace at Florence is a work of some real merit, as is also the Dead Christ and Angels in the Borghese Gallery in Rome. After a short exile Federigo was pardoned by the pope and recalled to Rome to finish his work on the vault of the Pauline chapel. In 1585 he was invited by Philip II. of Spain to decorate the new Escorial at a yearly salary of 2000 crowns. He accepted this offer, and worked at the Escorial from January 1586 to the end of 1588, when he returned to Rome. He there founded in 1595, under a charter confirmed by Sixtus V., the Academy of St Luke, of which he was the first president. This is still the chief academy of painters in Italy, and its organization suggested to Sir Joshua Reynolds his scheme for founding the English Royal Academy.
Federigo, like his contemporary Giorgio Vasari, aimed at being an art critic and historian as well as a practical artist, but with very different success. His chief book, L'Idea de' Pittori, Scultori, ed Architetti (Turin, 1607), is a senseless mass of the most turgid bombast. Little can be said in praise of his smaller works, consisting of two volumes printed at Bologna in 1608, describing his visit to Parma and a journey through central Italy.
Federigo was raised to the rank of a Cavaliere not long before his death, which took place at Ancona in 1609.
For both Taddeo and Federigo Zuccaro, see Vasari, pt. iii., and Lanzi, Storia Pittorica, Roman School, epoch iii. (J. H. Μ. )
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 825 [9:24:825]
| |
kp-eb0924-082601-0875m
|
ZUG,^[1. Its name has been rather fancifully derived from “fischzug,” meaning a “haul of fish.” ] a canton of Switzerland, ranking as eighth in the Confederation. It includes the districts round the Lake of Egeri and on both shores of the northern half of the Lake of Zug, and is the smallest undivided canton both in area and in population. Its total area is 92∙3 square miles, 75 of which are classed as productive (forests 12∙5), while of the rest 13 are covered with lakes. The highest point in the canton is the Wildspitz (5191 feet), the culminating peak of the Rossberg ridge. The population was 22,994 in 1880, an increase of 2001 on that of 1870, the numbers of men and women being nearly equal. German is the native tongue of 22,592, and 21,734 are Roman Catholics. Till 1814 Zug was in the diocese of Constance, but on the reconstruction of the diocese of Basel in 1828 it was assigned to it. The capital is Zug (4924 inhabitants in 1880); Baar has a population of 3896. The territory of Zug is very fertile and the population mainly agricultural. Cattle and fruit are among the chief articles of export, much cider and “kirschwasser” being manufactured. The town of Zug is connected by railway with Lucerne and Zurich, and a railway is planned to Arth, which will connect Zug directly with the St Gotthard line. On 5th July 1887 a landslip carried the houses of a small portion of the capital, as in 1435, into the lake.
The town of Zug is first mentioned in 1255. In 1273 it was bought by Rudolph of Hapsburg from Anna, the heiress of Kyburg and wife of Eberhard, head of the cadet line of Hapsburg; and in 1278 part of its territory (the valley of Egeri) was pledged by Rudolph as security for a portion of the marriage gift he promised to Joanna, daughter of Edward I. of England, betrothed to Hart mann (Rudolph’s son), whose death in 1281 prevented the marriage taking place. The town of Zug was governed by a mayor, appointed by the Hapsburgs, and a council, and was much favoured by that family. Several country districts (Baar, Menzingen, and Egeri) had each its own “landsgemeinde,” but were governed by one bailiff, also appointed by the Hapsburgs; these were known as the “Äusser Amt,” and were always favourably disposed to the Confederates. Duke Leopold of Austria was defeated on 15th November 1315 by the Confederates at Morgarten Pass, in the territory of Zug (see Switzerland, vol. xxii. p. 783 sq.). On 27th January 1352 both the town of Zug and the Ausser Amt entered the Confederation, the latter being received on exactly the same terms as the town (and not, as was usual in the case of country districts, as a subject land); but in September 1352 Zug had to acknowledge its own lords again, and in 1355 to break off its connexion with the League. But about 1364 the town and the Ausser Amt were recovered for the League by the men of Schwyz, and from this time Zug took part as a full member in all the acts of the League. In 1379 the emperor Wenceslaus exempted Zug from all external jurisdictions; in 1389 the Hapsburgs renounced their claims, reserving only (in the treaty of 1394) an annual payment of twenty silver marks, which came to an end in 1415. In 1400 Wenceslaus gave all criminal jurisdiction to the town only. The Ausser Amt then, in 1404, claimed that the banner and seal of Zug should be kept in one of the country districts, and were supported in this claim by Schwyz. The matter was finally settled by arbitration: the banner, &c., was to be kept in the town (access being allowed to the others), whilst the Ausser Amt was fined and Schwyz also. Finally in 1415 the right of electing their landammann was given to Zug by the Confederates, and a share in the criminal jurisdiction was granted to the Ausser Amt by Sigismund. In 1385 Zug joined the league of the Swabian cities against Leopold and shared in the victory of Sempach (9th July 1386), as well as in the various Argo-vian (1415) and Thurgovian (1460) conquests of the Confederates, and later in those in Italy (1512), having already taken part in the occupation of the Val d’Ossola (1410-14, 1417-22). Between 1379 and 1470 Zug had acquired various districts in her own neighbourhood, which were ruled till 1778 by the town and the Ausser Amt as subject lands.
At the time of the Reformation Zug clung to the old faith and was a member of the “Christliche Vereinigung” of 1529. In 1586 Zug became a member of the Golden League. From 1729 to 1736 the canton was distracted by violent disputes as to the distribution of the French pensions. In 1798 it opposed the French, formed part of the Tellgau, and later one of the districts of the canton of the Waldstätten (of which in 1799 it became the capital) in the Helvetic republic. In 1803 it regained its independence as a separate canton, and by the constitution of 1815 the “landsgemeinde” or assembly of all the citizens (existing for both districts since 1352) became a body of electors to choose a cantonal council. The reform movement of 1830 did not affect the canton, which in 1843 was a member of the Sonderbund and shared in the war of 1847. Both in 1848 and in 1874 it voted against the acceptance of the Federal constitutions. In 1848 the remaining functions of the “landsgemeinde” were abolished by the Liberals. Its present constitution dates from 1873-76, and was amended in 1881. There is a legislature of seventy-three members, fifty-eight (one to every 400 inhabitants) elected in the communes and fifteen by the whole population, both classes holding office for three years; the executive, of seven members, is elected by the communes for three years. By the “facultative or optional referendum,” in case of a demand by one-third of the members of the legislative assembly or by 500 citizens any law, and any resolution involving a capital expenditure of 40,000 or an annual one of 10,000 francs, must be submitted to a direct popular vote.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 826 [9:24:826]
| |
kp-eb0924-082602-0875m
|
ZULLA, as Salt writes the name, or Zûla (Thulla, Dola), as it is also written, is a village near the head of Annesley Bay on the African coast of the Red Sea. It derives its only interest from ruins in its vicinity which are generally supposed to mark the site of the ancient emporium of Adulis (῎Aδoυλις, ʹΑδoυλ∈ί), the port of Axum and chief outlet in the early centuries of our era for the ivory, hides, slaves, and other exports of the interior. Cosmas Indicopleustes saw here an inscription of Ptolemy Euergetes (247-222 b.c.) ; and hence, as the earliest mention of Adulis is found in the geographers of the first century after Christ, it is conjectured that the town must have previously existed under another name and may have been the Berenice Panchrysus of the Ptolemies. The ruins in question, which are not very extensive or remarkable, are described by Rüppel, Reise in Abyssinien, i. 266 (1838); see also Rohlfs in Zeitschr. d. Gesell. f. Erdkunde in Berlin, [9:24:827] iii. . . . (1868), and, for further references to ancient and modern sources, the editions of the Periplus by C. Müller (Geog. Gr. Min., i. 259) and Fabricius (1883). An Italian protectorate over the district of Zulla was proclaimed in 1888.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 826 [9:24:826]
| |
kp-eb0924-082701-0876m
|
ZULULAND, a territory of South Africa, lying to the north of the colony of Natal, with a coast-line of about 130 miles (see vol. i. pl. II.). It is occupied chiefly by Zulu tribes; but since its conquest by England in 1879 a Boer republic, known as the New Republic, has been carved out of it, which extends into the centre of the country from the Transvaal on its north-west, and comprises an area equal to nearly one-half of the remaining portion of Zululand. This portion is composed of a strip of country adjacent to Natal, lying to the south of the Umhlatuzi river, and the district extending along the coast to the north of that river for a distance inland varying from 50 to 70 miles. The former piece of country has been known since 1882 as the Zulu Reserve. It is bounded on the south-west by the Tugela, Buffalo, and Blood rivers, the last-named being one of the borders of the Transvaal Republic.
Zululand presents very varied physical features: undulating country covered with mimosa “bush,” in some parts very densely, alternates with wild and fantastically broken scenery, and thickly-wooded precipices and ravines, and these again with grass-clad hills. Two considerable forests exist in the country,—one, the Ingome Forest, lying in northern Zululand, just within the territory recently ceded to the Boers, the other upon the Natal border. These produce the varieties of timber mentioned under Natal. The wholesale destruction of woods for domestic purposes, which has robbed that colony of much of its beauty, and is believed to have seriously affected its rainfall, has not proceeded very far at present in Zululand. The mineral resources of the country have yet to be investigated, but gold has been recently found in the Reserve. The rivers, like those in Natal, are rapid streams of small volume, running over rocky beds; the Tugela river is the most considerable. The climate differs but little from that of Natal. The country is very healthy for the most part; but horse sickness prevails in the valleys in the hot season, and the swampy neighbourhood of St Lucia Bay, a lagoon lying at the mouth of the Umfolosi river, is uninhabitable. Like the Natal natives, the Zulus cultivate the ground very superficially, planting maize, gourds of several kinds, and a grain from which a light beer is prepared. Cattle, the sole wealth of the people, were at one time very numerous in the country, and also goats. A few of the chiefs use horses.
Long after big game had become scarce in Natal, Zululand offered excellent opportunities to the sportsman. It still has antelopes of various kinds, including a few koodoo, and, at the mouths of the more northern rivers, hippopotamuses; but the buffalo and rhinoceros are not met with farther south than the densely-wooded hills near the Umfolosi river. The lion is not seen south of the Lebombo Mountains in the north of Zululand, but the leopard and smaller carnivores are plentiful enough in the country. Its natural history is similar to that of Natal; but indications are not wanting in its fauna and flora of its closer proximity to the tropics.
Language.— With the exception of the tongues spoken by the Hottentot-Bushman tribes of the soutli-west, the languages of Africa from about 5° north of the equator southwards are now recognized as forming one great family, for which the designation Bantu has been adopted, the word abantu in Zulu and other members of the group denoting “people” (plural inflex aba, root ntu). The Zulu tongue, as that of a conquering and superior race, extends beyond the river Zambesi, and is often understood even where another language is the vernacular. In the kingdoms of Lobengula and Umzila it is the language of the ruling classes. Philologists speak highly of the beauty and flexibility of the Bantu languages, and of their grammatical structure. To the student of comparative philology they offer a field of inquiry of the highest importance, both on account of the vast domain occupied by them and of the deep insight they afford into the structure and growth of human speech in general. This great linguistic family occupies about one-half of Africa, extending from near the Niger delta in the north-west, and from Lake Albert Nyanza farther east, to the south-eastern extremity of the continent. It thus comprises such widely separated peoples as the Ba-Farami and Ba-Kwiri of the Cameroons region and the Zulu-Kaffres of the south-east coast on the one hand, and on the other the Wa-Ganda of the Somerset Nile and the Ova-Herero of Damaraland on the south-west coast. But, notwithstanding this widespread range, and although none of the dialects have possessed any written standard till quite recent times, being in fact everywhere spoken by peoples of low culture, the Bantu is distinguished above all other great linguistic families, except perhaps the Semitic, for its astonishing homogeneous character. So close is the resemblance the different branches bear to each other that philologists have been able to describe in broad traits the more salient features of the phonetic system, structure, and syntax common alike to all. They speak unconsciously of the Bantu language, as if it were everywhere essentially one, and this surprising uniformity is reflected in the geographical, and especially the ethnological, terminology of the southern half of the continent. Thus the national or tribal place prefix in its various dialectic forms— aba, ba, ama, bua, vua, ova, wa, mu, ap, &c.,—is of constant occurrence throughout the whole of this region.
Their close uniformity is further shown in their common phonetic system, which is at once simple and harmonious, requiring all words to end in a vowel, rejecting all consonantal juxtapositions, except a few characteristic nasal combinations, such as ng, mb, nd, nt, nw, mf, nk, ns, throwing the accent as a rule on the first vowel of the stem (méso ), and lastly repelling all harsh sounds, except the three intruding Hottentot clicks in the Zulu-Kaffre group. Nearly all the consonantal sounds, ranging from about eighteen to twenty, occur in English, while the vowel system everywhere corresponds to that of Italian. But the most marked feature of the Bantu tongues is their so-called alliterative concord, which has been compared both to the gender concordance of Aryan and the progressive vowel harmony of Ural-Altaic. But it differs from the former inasmuch as it is initial and not final, and extends to the verb as well as to noun, adjective, participle, and pronoun, as if we should say in Latin, Domina mea pulchra, ama eum. Thus, in the Kongo dialect, e kintuku kiaku kiavididi ezono kisolokele= " the coat you lost yesterday it turned up.” It differs from the Ural-Altaic system inasmuch as the concordance is regulated, not by the root vowel influencing those of the agglutinated postfixes (see Ural-Altaic), but by the prefixed particle, the true nature of which has not yet been determined. But a comparative study of the Bantu tongues shows that in the archaic language whence all descend each noun had a proper prefix of its own, which prefix determined both the class to which the noun belonged and the concordance of all words in the sentence dependent on that noun. That such is the correct view is evident from the fact that, even where the noun has lost its prefix, as sometimes happens, this prefix nevertheless reappears in the dependent adjective, thus revealing its original form. We see, for instance, that nti= “tree” was originally in the plural mi-nti, because the following adjective still takes mi, as in nti miandwelο = “small trees.” Bleek, the true founder of Bantu philology, has determined in the organic language eighteen such prefixes which still persist to a greater or less extent in the different branches, and have in some even been added to, as fi , for instance, in Kongo (W. H. Bentley). The analogy of this alliterative concord with the so-called Aryan grammatical gender is obvious, showing that the Aryan languages themselves were originally non-gender languages and that their present gender agreement is essentially a question of phonetic harmony and not of sex in any intelligible sense of the term. Hence also the extraordinary phenomenon of sex in this system apparently applied to inanimate objects.
Another remarkable feature of Bantu grammar is the wonderful development of verbal inflexion, which is both final and initial. The final, which in some groups yields as many as 300 distinct forms, each conjugated throughout, belongs to the verb itself in its various active, passive, middle, negative, repetitive, reciprocal, causative, and other meanings. The initial expresses mood, tense, person, number, and alliterative concord, and the whole system is immensely complicated by the fact that, as in Basque, the Caucasian, American, and some Ural-Altaic languages, the verb incorporates the direct pronominal object. Thus: ikuntala= “I-see him tukutala= “ we-see-you;” bekwatala= “they-see-them;” and so on. Hence the form kuntonda= “to-see-her,” for instance, will be conjugated throughout, the result being a luxuriant growth of verbal forms fully comparable to that of the richest Ural-Altaic languages.
Bleek has subjected to a comparative study twenty-five members of the family, selected from almost every region that had been explored up to his time (1862). Since then further geographical discovery, especially in the Congo and Ogoway basins, has revealed [9:24:828] many more Bantu tongues, of which, however, too little is known to determine their mutual relations with any pretence to accuracy. But, although any attempt at a strictly scientific classification would consequently be premature, the subjoined table, based on geographical distribution, will be found convenient for the purpose of reference.^[1. To avoid confusion the names are given with their ethnical instead of their linguistic prefixes. Thus, Ba-Suto, not Se-Suto. ] North-West Group (Cameroons and Ogoway-Gaboon Basins). —Ba-Kisk, Ba-Farami, Ba-Mbuku, Mu-Fundu, Dwalla, Wuri, Ba-Koko, Ba-Kwiri, Ba-Kundu, Mpongwe, Benga, Fernandian, Ba-Kale, Ba-Ngwe, Ivili, Ajuma, Fan (?), A-Shango, Okando, Cabinda, (Ba-Fyot).
Congo Group. —Vua-Nyamezi, Vua-Tuzi, Vua-Hha, Vua-Fipa, Vua-Vinza, Ba-Regga, Ba-Ngala, Wa-Buma, Ba-Bemba, Wa-Biza, Vua-Rua, Ma-Rungu, Ba-Songo, Ka-Lunda, Mboshi, Ba-Mbu, Kioko.
South-West Group (Angola, Damaraland). —Mu-Sorongo, Mu-Shicongo, Kongo proper, (S. Salvador), Bunda, Ba-Nano, Ba-Bwero, Ganguella, Libollo, Mu-Ndombe, Ba-Kwando, Ba-Simba, Ova-Mbo (Ovampo), Ova-Herero.
Zambesi Group. —Amboella, Ba-Lunda, Ba-Viko, Ra-Najoa, Ba-Toana, Ba-Kuba, Ba-Rotse, Ba-Toka, Ba-Shukulompo, Ma-Kalaka, Ma-Shona, Ba-Nyai, Ma-Nyanja.
South Central Group (Bechuana and Basuto Lands). —BaRolong, Ba-Tlapi, Ba-Katla, Ba-Mapela, Ba-Hlokoa, Ba-Soetla, BaSuto, Ma-Kololo.
South-eastern Group (Zululand, Natal, Kaffraria). —See under article Kaffraria. Eastern Group (Gasaland, Mozambique, Zanzibar Coast, Equatorial Lakes). —Chobi, Ma-Kwakwa, Ma-Gwanza, Ma-Long-wa, Ba-Hlengwe, Bila-Kulu, Ma-Ndonda, Gwa-Tevi, Ma-Kua, Ma-Ngwangwara, Ma-Tambwe, Wa-Nindi, Ma-Wa, Wa-Hiyao (Yao or Ajawa), Ma-Ganya, Wa-Swaheli, Wa-Segua, Wa-Sambara, Wa-Zaramo, Wa-Kamba, Wa-Nika, Wa-Pokomo.
The pedigree and affinity of the Zulus, that is, the northern branch of the Zulu-Kaffre group, are given under Kaffraria. Here it will suffice to add that since the establishment of the Zulu military ascendency early in the 19th century various Zulu hordes have successively invaded and overrun a great part of southeast Africa, as far as and even beyond the Lake Nyassa district. Throughout these regions they are variously known as Ma-Zitu, Ma-Ravi, Ma-Ngone (Umgone), Matebele (Ama-Ndebeli), Ma-Viti, and Aba-Zanzi. Such is the terror inspired by these fierce warriors that many of the conquered tribes, such as the Wa-Nindi of Mozambique, have adopted the very name of their conquerors or oppressors. Hence the impression that the true Zulus are far more numerous north of the Limpopo than has ever been the case. In most places they have already become extinct or absorbed in the surrounding populations. But they still hold their ground as the ruling element in the region between the Limpopo and the lower Zambesi, which from them takes the name of Matebeleland, and which, like Zululand itself, has recently (1888) become a British protectorate.
Laws and, Customs. — The Zulus possess an elaborate system of laws regulating the inheritance of personal property (which consists chiefly of cattle), the complexity arising from the practice of polygamy and the exchange of cattle made upon marriage. The giving of cattle in the latter case is generally referred to as a barter and sale of the bride, from which indeed it is not easily distinguishable. But it is regarded in a different light by the natives themselves. The kraal is under the immediate rule of its headman, who is a patriarch responsible for the good behaviour of all its members. Over the headman, whose authority may extend to more than one kraal, is the tribal chief. The exercise by some of the principal chiefs, during the reigns of mPande and his son, of the power of life and death could not always be controlled by the central authority. Several of the Zulu customs resemble those of the Jews, such as the Feast of First Fruits, held upon the ripening of the maize, when the whole nation gathers at the king's kraal, and the custom of raising up seed to a deceased brother. By the custom of ukuh-lonipa a woman carefully avoids the utterance of any word which occurs in the names of the principal members of her husband’s family: e.g., if she have a brother-in-law named uNkomo, she would not use the Zulu for “cow,” inkomo, but would invent some other word for it. The employment of “witch doctors” for “smelling out” criminals or abatagati (usually translated “wizards,” but meaning evildoers of any kind, such as poisoners) is still common in Zululand, as in neighbouring countries, although it was discouraged by Cetshwayo, who established “kraals of refuge” for the reception of persons rescued by him from condemnation as abatagati. Population.— No means exist for estimating the present population of Zululand. The country was at the time of the late war regarded as less densely inhabited than the colony of Natal. The Zulu army was estimated to contain twenty-three regiments, of 40,400 men in all, and, although the enrolment was voluntary, it may be assumed that it comprised nearly all the able-bodied men of the nation. In addition to the heavy mortality sustained by the Zulus in the war many lives have been lost in subsequent conflicts in which they have engaged amongst themselves.
History.— The earliest record of contact between Europeans and the Zulu race is probably the account of the wreck of the “Doddington” in 1756. The survivors met with hospitable treatment at the hands of the natives of Natal, and afterwards proceeded up the coast to St Lucia Bay, where they landed. They describe the natives as “very proud and haughty, and not so accommodating as those lately left.” They differed from the other natives in the superior neatness of their method of preparing their food, and were more cleanly in their persons, bathing every morning, apparently as an act of devotion. Their chief pride seemed to be to keep their hair in order. It is added that they watched strictly over their women.
In 1780 the Zulu tribe inhabited the valley of the White Umfolosi river under the chieftainship of Senzangakona. At that time the Zulus numbered some few thousands only, being subject to the paramount chief Dingiswayo, who ruled over the mTetwa tribe, which inhabited the country to the north-east of the Tugela. Dingiswayo is represented as having been very much in advance of other chiefs in those parts in enlightenment and intelligence. He opened up a trade with the Portuguese, bartering ivory and oxen for beads and brass. He was also very warlike, and introduced a strict military organization among his people, by means of which he obtained the ascendency over neighbouring tribes, including that of the Zulus. Upon the death of Senzangakona at the beginning of the 19th century he was succeeded by a son named Tshaka, who had served as an officer in the army of Dingiswayo, whose favour he won through his force of character and talents. Dingiswayo having been killed in battle, the mTetwa tribe sought the protection of Tshaka, who lost no time in further developing the new military organization, and very soon became master of nearly the whole of south-eastern Africa from the Limpopo to Cape Colony, including the settlement of Natal, Basutoland, a large part of the Orange Free State, and the Transvaal Republic. The terror of the Zulu arms was, moreover, carried far into the interior through the revolt of a Zulu chief, Mzilikazi (Moselekatse), who conquered a vast territory towards the north-west.
Tshaka’s strict discipline and mode of attack, in which the long missile weapon of the other tribes was replaced by a short stabbing assegai, was such that nothing in the mode of warfare of those opposed to him could withstand him. He overran the district of Natal with his armies in 1820; but crowds of the northern tribes driven before his onslaught passed through the country about 1812.
In 1825 an English naval officer, Lieutenant Farewell, visited Tshaka with the object of obtaining leave to establish a settlement in what is now the district of Natal. He found the king at Umgun-gindhlovu, “surrounded by a large number of chiefs, and about 8000 or 9000 armed men, observing a state and ceremony in our introduction that we little expected.” The king showed his visiter much friendliness, making him a grant of land in that neighbourhood. Lieutenant Farewell took formal possession of the territory he had received, which he described as nearly depopulated and not containing more than 300 or 400 inhabitants, on 27th August 1825. The Zulu monarch, being anxious to open a political connexion with the Cape and English Governments, entrusted in 1828 one of his principal chiefs, Sotobi, and a companion to the care of Lieutenant King, to be conducted on an embassage to Cape Town, Sotobi being commissioned to proceed to the king of England. From causes which are not now certainly known these people were not allowed to proceed beyond Port Elizabeth, and were soon sent back to Zululand. On 23d September 1828 Tshaka was murdered by his brother, Mhlangana, and a few days afterwards Mhlangana was killed by another brother, Dingane. Tshaka’s reign had involved an immense sacrifice of human life, but he had set before himself the aim of establishing a great kingdom, and, having succeeded in that, his home rule had been relieved by acts of generosity and statesmanship.
What is recorded of. Dingane’s reign shows him in the light of a bloodthirsty and cruel monster without a redeeming feature. The attempts made by the emigrant Dutch Boers under Piet Retief to establish friendly relations with him, and obtain a cession of the district of Natal, ended in the massacre of the whole party of seventy of their leading men at the king’s kraal (February 1838), and of all members of their families left behind in Natal who could not be collected into fortified camps. Two unsuccessful attempts were made to avenge the deaths of the emigrant Boers. A Dutch command under Pieter Uys invaded the Zulu country, but was compelled to retreat, leaving their leader behind them, while a considerable force, composed of English settlers, Boers, and natives, entered Zululand at the mouth of the Tugela, and was completely annihilated, after inflicting very great loss on the Zulus. A detachment of the Zulu army on this occasion entered Natal and compelled the settlers at the port to take refuge on board a ship. After a further attack by Dingane the emigrant Boers and settlers again invaded Zululand in December 1838, and after a severe [9:24:829] engagement defeated the Zulu army with great slaughter on the banks of the Blood river, which owes its name to the results of the victory. In 1840 the Boers agreed to support Dingane’s brother mPande in rebellion against him. The movement was completely successful, several of Dingane’s regiments going over to mPande. Dingane passed into Swaziland in advance of his retreating forces, and was there murdered, while mPande was crowned king of Zululand by the Boers, who received in exchange for their services the much-coveted district of Natal. During the next sixteen years of mPande’s reign nothing occurred to disturb the peaceful relations between the Zulus and the Natal Government. In 1856 a civil war broke out between two of mPande’s sons, Cetshwayo and Umbulazi, who were rival claimants for the succession. A bloody battle was fought between them on the banks of the Tugela in December 1856, in which Umbulazi and many of his followers were slain. The Zulu country continued, however, excited and disturbed, until the Government of Natal in 1861 obtained the formal nomination of a successor to mPande; and Cetshwayo was appointed. mPande died in October 1872, but practically the government of Zululand had been in Cetshwayo’s hands since the victory of 1856, owing both to political circumstances and the failing health of his father. In 1873 the Zulu nation appealed to the Natal Government to preside over the installation of Cetshwayo as king; and this request was acceded to. The rule of mPande was in earlier years a severe one, the executions ordered by him being so numerous in 1859 as to evoke remonstrances from Cetshwayo, who warned the king that he would drive all the people over into Natal. In 1856 and for some years afterwards a considerable exodus of refugees did take place into the colony, but by 1871 the tide appeared to be turning the other way. In 1854 the native population in Natal was reckoned at from 100,000 to 120,000. By 1873, owing largely to the influx of refugees from Zululand, it had risen to 282,783; but five years later it had not increased to more than 290,035, some hundreds of heads of families having returned to Zululand.
The encroachments of the Transvaal Boers upon the borders of Zululand having for many years exposed the British Government to urgent appeals on the part of the Zulus for its intervention, a second attempt was made by the Government of Natal, and this time with success, to induce the Boers to submit the boundary disputes between them and their neighbours to arbitration. A commission was appointed, composed of three British officers, who in June 1878 pronounced a decision substantially in favour of the Zulus. But the high commissioner, Sir Bartle Frere, had determined upon measures for re-modelling the Zulu nation with a view to the confederation of the South African colonies and states. The invasion of Zululand took place in January 1879, and the war was ended by the capture of the king at the end of August. Cetshwayo having been conveyed to Cape Town, the Zulu country was portioned out among eleven Zulu chiefs, a white adventurer, and a Basuto chief who had done good service in the war. This arrangement was productive of much bloodshed and disturbance, and in 1882 the British Government determined to restore Cetshwayo again to power. In the meantime, however, the deepest blood feuds had been engendered between the chiefs Zibebu and Hamu on the one side and the neighbouring tribes who supported the ex-king and his family on the other. These people suffered severely at the hands of the two chiefs, who were assisted by a band of white freebooters. Zibebu, having created a formidable force of well-armed and trained warriors, was left in independence on the borders of Cetshwayo’s territory, while the latter was restrained by the conditions of his restoration from any military enterprise or defensive measures. A collision very soon took place; but in the conflicts that followed Zibebu’s forces were victorious, and on 22d July 1883, led by a troop of mounted whites, he made a sudden descent upon Cetshwayo’s kraal at Ulundi, which he destroyed, massacring such of the inmates of both sexes as could not save themselves by flight. The king escaped, though wounded, into the Reserve, which had been placed under British rule; there he died in 1884. He left a son, Dinuzulu, who sought the assistance of some of the Transvaal Boers against Zibebu, whom he defeated and drove into the Reserve. These Boers, not a large number, claimed as a stipulated reward for their services the cession of the greater part, and the more valuable part, of central Zululand. The Government of Natal has recently attempted to mediate on behalf of the Zulus and has accepted on their behalf, in spite of their protests, a line which roughly divides central Zululand into two equal portions. Of these the northwestern has been created into the independent Boer state already mentioned. The rest of central Zululand is administered, with the Reserve, as a British protectorate.
See John Chase, A Reprint of Authentic Documents relating to Natal (Grahamstown, 1843); Saxe Bannister, Humane Policy (London, 1830), and authorities collected in Appendix; Delegorgue, Voyage de l'Afrique Australe (Paris, 1847); Allen Francis Gardiner, Narrative of a Journey to the Zoolu Country (London, 1836); Leslie, Among the Zulus (Edinburgh, 1875); Bishop Colenso, Extracts from the Blue Boohs or Digest upon Zulu Affairs (in the British Museum); Cetshwayo’s Dutchman (London, 1880); Frances Colenso, The Ruin of Zululand (London, 1884); R. N. Cust, Sketch of the Modern Languages of Africa (London, 1883). See also authorities cited under Natal. (F. E. C.-A. H. K.)
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 827 [9:24:827]
| |
kp-eb0924-082901-0878m
|
ZURBARAN, Francisco (1598-1662), a distinguished Spanish painter, was born at Fuente de Cantos in Estremadura on 7th November 1598. His father was named Luis Zurbaran, a country labourer, his mother Isabel Marquet. The lot apparently marked out for Francisco was that of tilling the ground, like his father; but his natural faculty had decided otherwise. In mere childhood he set about imitating objects with charcoal; and his father was quick-witted and long-headed enough to take him off, still extremely young, to the school of Juan de Roélas in Seville. Francisco soon became the best pupil in the studio of Roélas, surpassing the master himself; and before leaving him he had achieved a solid reputation, full though Seville then was of able painters. He may probably have had here the opportunity of copying some of the paintings of Michelangelo da Caravaggio; at any rate he gained the name of “the Spanish Caravaggio,” owing to the very forcible realistic style in which he excelled. He constantly painted direct from nature, following but occasionally improving on his model; and he made great use of the lay-figure in the study of draperies, in which he was peculiarly proficient. He had a special gift for white draperies; and, as a natural consequence, Carthusian monks are abundant in his paintings. To these rigidly faithful methods of work Zurbaran is said to have adhered throughout his career, which was always eminent and prosperous, wholly confined to his native Spain, and varied by few incidents beyond those of his daily laborious and continually productive diligence. His subjects were mostly of a severe and ascetic kind,—religious vigils, the flesh chastised into subjection to the spirit,—the compositions seldom thronged, and often reduced to a single figure. The style is more reserved and chastened than Caravaggio’s, the tone of colour often bluish to a morbid excess. Exceptional effects are attained by the precise finish of foregrounds, largely massed out in light and shade. Zurbaran married in Seville Leonor de Jordera, by whom he had several children. Towards 1630 he was appointed painter to Philip IV.; and there is a story that on one occasion the sovereign laid his hand on the artist’s shoulder, saying, “Painter to the king, king of painters.” It was only late in life that Zurbaran made a prolonged stay in Madrid, Seville being the chief scene of his operations. He died in 1662 in Madrid.
In 1627 he painted the great altarpiece of St Thomas Aquinas, now in the Seville museum; it was executed for the church of the college of that saint in the same city. This is Zurbaran’s largest composition, containing figures of Christ and the Madonna, various saints, Charles V. with knights, and Archbishop Deza (founder of the college) with monks and servitors, all the principal personages being beyond the size of life; this work is full of fine portrait-like heads, and it ranks, both in importance and in elevated style, as the painter’s masterpiece. It had been preceded by the numerous pictures of the screen of St Peter Nolasco in the cathedral. In the church of Guadalupe he painted various large pictures, eight of which relate to the history of St Jerome, and in the church of St Paul, Seville, a famous figure of the Crucified Saviour, in grisaille, presenting an illusive effect of marble. In 1633 he finished the paintings of the high altar of the Carthusians in Jerez. In the palace of Buenretiro, Madrid, are four large canvases representing the Labours of Hercules, an unusual instance of non-Christian subjects from the hand of Zurbaran. A very fine specimen is in the London National Gallery, a whole-length life-sized figure of a kneeling Franciscan holding a skull (figured in vol. xxi. p. 440, fig. 36).
The principal scholars of this master, whose style has as much affinity to that of Ribera as to Caravaggio’s, were Bernabe de Ayala and the brothers Polanco.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 829 [9:24:829]
| |
kp-eb0924-082902-0878m
|
ZURICH (Germ. Zürich) ^[1. The name is derived from the Celtic dur (water). The true and accurate Latinized form is Turicum, but the false form Tigurum was given currency to by Glareanus and held its ground from 1512 to 1748. ] , a canton in Switzerland, ranking as the first in dignity. It is of very irregular shape, consisting simply of the conquests made by the city. It extends from the Lake of Zurich to the Rhine, taking in [9:24:830] the district of Eglisau on the right bank of that river. On the east it is, roughly speaking, limited by the ranges of low hills which separate it from the valley of the Thur, and on the west by those (e.g., the Albis) which divide it from the valleys of the Reuss and the Aar. Its total area is 655∙9 square miles, of which 610∙6 are classified as fertile (woods covering 186 and vines 21∙5). Of 45∙2 square miles of non-fertile land 26∙2 are covered by the lake. The highest point in the canton is the Schnebelhorn (4250 feet) in the south-east corner. The population in 1880 was 317,576 (an increase of 32,790 since 1870), and in 1887 was estimated to be 339,163. In 1880 there were 313,762 German-speaking and 283,134 Protestant inhabitants. The number of Roman Catholics nearly doubled from 1870 to 1880 (17,942 and 30,298). Besides Zurich (see below), the capital, the only other town of any size in the canton is Winterthur ( q.v). The land is very highly cultivated and is held by no less than 36,000 proprietors. The canton is well supplied with railways, the first line of any length in Switzerland being that from Zurich to Baden in Aargau (opened 1847). The line from Zurich to the summit of the Uetliberg (2861 feet) was made in 1875. For the history of the canton, see under the town, below.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 829 [9:24:829]
| |
kp-eb0924-083001-0879m
|
ZURICH, chief city of the above canton, and until 1848 practically the capital of the Swiss Confederation, is beautifully situated, at a height of 1506 feet, on the banks of the Limmat where it issues from the Lake of Zurich, and on the river Sihl, which joins the Limmat just above the north end of the lake. That part which lies on the right bank of the Limmat is known as the Large Town, that on the left as the Little Town. The central portion— the “city”—is governed by an executive of seven members and a town council of sixty, both elected by the citizens, and in 1887 had 27,638 inhabitants. The nine outlying townships or “gemeinden” have each a separate organization, distinct from that of the city, and in 1887 had 60,836 inhabitants, of whom 18,527 were in Aussersihl and 10,883 in Riesbach. The total population of the town and its suburbs was thus 88,474 in 1887. These are nearly all Protestants and German-speaking. The number of Roman Catholics has doubled in the last ten years; they are mainly resident in Aussersihl, the workmen’s quarter, where also many Italian-speaking persons dwell. There are in Zurich about 7000 Old Catholics.
Of the old buildings the finest and most important is the Gross Münster (or Propstei) on the right bank of the Limmat. This was originally the church of the king’s tenants, and in one of the chapels the bodies of Felix, Regula, and Exuperantius, the patron saints of the city, were buried, the town treasury being formerly kept above this chapel. The present building was erected at two periods (1090-1150 and 1225-1300), the high altar having been dedicated in 1278. The towers were first raised above the roof at the end of the 15th century and took their present form in 1779. The chapter consisted of twenty-four secular canons; it was reorganized at the Reformation (1526), aud suppressed in 1832. On the site of the canons’ houses stands a girls’ school (opened 1853), but the fine Romanesque cloisters (12th and 13th centuries) still remain. There is a curious figure of Charlemagne in a niche on one of the towers; to him is attributed the founding or reform of the chapter. On the left bank of the Limmat stands the other great church of Zurich, the Frau Munster (or Abtei), founded for nuns in 853 by Louis the German. The high altar was dedicated in 1170; but the greater part of the buildings are of the 13th and 14th centuries. It was in this church that the relics of the three patron saints of the town were preserved till the Reformation, and it was here that the burgomaster Waldmann was buried in 1489. There were only twelve nuns of noble family, comparatively free from the severer monastic vows; the convent was suppressed in 1524. Of the other old churches may be mentioned St Peter’s, the oldest parish church, though the present buildings date from the 13th century only, and formerly the meeting-place of the citizens; the Dominican church (13th century), in the choir of which the cantonal library of 80,000 volumes has been stored since 1873; the church of the Austin friars (14th century), now used by tho Old Catholics; and the Wasserkirche. The last-named church is on the site of an old pagan holy place, where the patron saints of the city were martyred; since 1631 it has housed the city library, the largest in Switzerland, which contains 120,000 printed volumes and 4000 MSS. (among these being letters of Zwingli, Bullinger, and Lady Jane Grey), as well as a splendid collection of objects from the lake dwellings of Switzerland. The building itself was erected 1479 to 1484, and near it is a statue of Zwingli, erected in 1885. The existing council house dates from 1698, and the guild houses were mostly rebuilt in the 18th century. Among the modern buildings the polytechnic school, the cantonal school, the reading rooms (museum), the hospital, and the railway station are the most conspicuous. There are some fine old fountains (the oldest dating back to 1568). The quays along the river and the lake are extensive and afford fine views; and there are several good bridges, Roman traces being still seen in the case of the Niederbrücke. The mound of the Lindenhof was formerly crowned by the king’s house, which disappeared in the 13th century, and the hillock was planted with limes as early as 1422. Zurich possesses a large number of charitable institutions.
The inhabitants are very industrious and of social habits among themselves, the town being noted for its clubs and societies. It is the intellectual capital of German-speaking Switzerland, and has been called “Athens on the Limmat.” Cotton-spinning and the manufacture of machinery are two of the leading industries, but by far the most important of all is the silk trade. This flourished in Zurich in the 12th and 13th centuries, but disappeared about 1420; it was revived by the Protestant exiles from Locarno (1555) and by the Huguenot refugees from France (1682 and 1685). The value of the silk annually exported (mainly to France, the United States, and England) is estimated at £2,916,000 to £3,333,000. The trade employs about 20,000 hand looms and 4500 steam-power looms; but the number of the former is diminishing, while that of the latter is increasing. Poor wine is also made. Zurich is the banking centre of Switzerland. There are a large number of educational establishments, public and private. Besides the excellent primary and secondary schools, there are the cantonal school, including a gymnasium and a technical side (opened 1842), and a high school for girls (opened 1875). The cantonal university and the Federal polytechnic school are housed in the same building, but have no other connexion. The university was founded in 1832-33 (no doubt as a successor to the ancient chapter school at the Gross Münster, said to date back to Charlemagne’s time—hence its name the Carolinum—reorganized at the Reformation, and suppressed in 1832); in 1886 it had 51 professors and 481 matriculated students, besides 65 persons attending special courses of lectures. The polytechnic school, founded in 1854, includes six main sections (industrial chemistry, mechanics, engineering, training of scientific and mathematical teachers, architecture, forestry and agriculture), and a general philosophical, mathematical, and literary department. The numbers of students in the first three sections were, in 1885, 122, 97, and 90—in all the six 412, of whom 192 were foreigners; there were about fifty-four professors. The polytechnic school has good collections of botanical specimens and of engravings. Near it is the observatory (1542 feet). There are also in Zurich many institutions for special branches of education— e.g., veterinary surgery, music, industrial art, silk-weaving, &c.
History.— The earliest inhabitants of the future site of Zurich were the lake dwellers. The Celtic Helvetians had a settlement on the Lindenhof when they were succeeded by the Romans, who established a customs station here for goods going to and coming from Italy; during their rule Christianity was introduced early in the 3d century by Felix and Regula, with whom Exuperantius was afterwards associated. The district was later occupied by the Alemanni, who were conquered by the Franks. It is not till the 9th century that we find the beginnings of the Teutonic town of Zurich, which arose from the union of four elements: — (1 ) the royal house and castle on the Lindenhof, with the king’s tenants around, (2) the Gross Münster, (3) the Frau Münster, (4) the community of “free men” (of Alemannian origin) on the Zürichberg. The Frankish kings had special rights over their tenants, were the protectors of the two churches, and had jurisdiction over the free community. In 870 the sovereign placed his powers over all four in the hands of a single official (the Reichsvogt), and the union was still further strengthened by the wall built round the four settlements in the 10th century as a safeguard against Saracen marauders and feudal barons. The Reichsvogtei passed to the counts of Lenzburg (1063-1172), and then to the dukes of Zäringen (extinct 1218). Meanwhile the abbess of the Frau Münster had been acquiring extensive rights and privileges over all the inhabitants, though she never obtained the criminal jurisdiction. The town flourished greatly in the 12th and 13th centuries, the silk trade being introduced from Italy. In 1218 the Reichsvogtei passed back into the hands of the king, who appointed one of the burghers as his deputy, the town thus becoming a free imperial city under the nominal rule of a distant sovereign. The abbess in 1234 became a princess of the empire, but power rapidly passed from her to the council, which she had originally named to look after police, &c., but which (c. 124C) came to be elected by the burghers, though the abbess [9:24:831] was still “the lady of Zurich.” This council was made up of the representatives of certain knightly and rich mercantile families (the “patricians”), who excluded the craftsmen from all share in the government, though it was to these last that the town was largely indebted for its rising wealth and importance.
In October 1291 the town made an alliance with Uri and Schwyz, and in 1292 failed in a desperate attempt to seize the Hapsburg town of Winterthur. After that Zurich began to display strong Austrian Leanings, which characterize much of its later history. In 1315 the men of Zurich fought against the Swiss Confederates at Morgarten. The year 1336 marks the admission of the craftsmen to a share in the town government, which was brought about by Rudolph Brun, a patrician. Under the new constitution (the main features of which lasted till 1798) the council was made up of thirteen members from the “constafel” (including the old patricians and the wealthiest burghers) and the thirteen masters of the craft guilds, each of the twenty-six holding office for six months. The office of burgomaster was created and given to Brun for life. Out of this change arose a quarrel with one of the branches of the Hapsburg family, in consequence of which Brun was induced to throw in the lot of Zurich with the Swiss Confederation (1st May 1351). The double position of Zurich as a free imperial city and as a member of the Everlasting League was soon found to be embarrassing to both parties (see Switzerland, vol. xxii. p. 784 sq.). Meanwhile the town had been extending its rule far beyond its walls,—a process which began in the 13th century, went on apace in the 14th, and attained its height in the 15th century (1268-1467). This thirst for territorial aggrandizement brought about the first civil war in the Confederation (the “Old Zurich War,” 1436-50), in which, at the fight of St Jacob on the Sihl (1443), under the walls of Zurich, the men of Zurich were completely beaten and their burgomaster Stüssi slain. The purchase of the town of Winterthur from the Hapsburgs (1467) marks the culmination of the territorial power of the city. It was to the men of Zurich and their leader Hans Waldmann that the victory of Morat (1476) was due in the Burgundian War; and Zurich took a leading part in the Italian campaign of 1512-15, the burgomaster Schmid naming the new duke of Milan (1512). No doubt her trade connexions with Italy led her to pursue a southern policy, traces of which are seen as early as 1331 in an attack on the Val Leventina and in 1478, when Zurich men were in the van at the fight of Giornico, won by a handful of Confederates over 12,000 Milanese troops.
In 1400 the town received from the emperor the Reichsvogtei, which carried with it complete immunity from the empire and the right of criminal jurisdiction. As early as 1393 the chief power had practically fallen into the hands of the council of 200 (really 212), composed of the former council and a number of other citizens originally elected by it; and in 1498 this change was formally recognized. This transfer of all power to the guilds had been one of the aims of the burgomaster Hans Waldmann (1483-89), who wished to make Zurich a great commercial centre. He also introduced many financial and moral reforms, and subordinated the interests of the country districts to those of the town. He practically ruled the Confederation, and under him Zurich became the real capital of the League. But such great changes excited opposition, and he was overthrown and executed. His main ideas were embodied, however, in the constitution of 1498, by which the patricians became the first of the guilds, and which remained in force till 1798; some special rights were also given to the subjects in country districts. It was, however, the prominent part taken by Zurich in adopting and propagating the principles of the Reformation which finally secured for it the lead of the Confederation; for a detailed account of its policy and the events in which it shared during this period, see Switzerland (vol. xxii. p. 790 sq.) and Zwingli.
In the 17th and 18th centuries a distinct tendency becomes observable in the city government to limit power to the actual holders. Thus the country districts were consulted for the last time in 1620 and 1640; and a similar breach of the charters of 1489 and 1531 occasioned disturbances in 1777. The council of 200 came to be chosen by a small committee of the members of the guilds actually sitting in the council, and early in the 18th century a determined effort was made to crush by means of heavy duties the flourishing silk trade in Winterthur. In 1655 an attempt was made by Bern and Zurich to set up a central administration in the Confederation, which failed through the jealousy of the other cantons. The first symptoms of active discontent appeared later among the dwellers by the lake, who founded in 1794 a club at Stäfa and claimed the restoration of the liberties of 1489 and 1531, a movement which was put down by force of arms in 1795. The old system of government perished in Zurich, as elsewhere in Switzerland, in 1798, and under the Helvetic constitution the country districts obtained political liberty. But under the cantonal constitution of 1815 the town had 130 representatives in the great council, while the country districts had only 88. A great meeting at Uster on 22d November 1830 demanded that two-thirds of the members in the great council should be chosen by the country districts; and in 1831 a new constitution was drawn up on these lines, though it was not till 1837-38 that the town finally lost the last relics of the privileges which it had so long enjoyed as compared with the country districts. In 1833 Zurich tried hard to secure a revision of the Federal constitution and a strong central Government. The town was the Federal capital for 1839-40, and consequently the victory of the Conservative party there caused a great stir throughout Switzerland. But, when in 1845 the Radicals regained power at Zurich, which was again the Federal capital for 1845-46, that city took the lead in opposing the Sonderbund cantons. In 1869 the cantonal constitution was again thoroughly revised in a very democratic sense; and, with the exception of a few changes made later, it is the existing constitution. There is an executive of seven members and a legislature of 211 (one member to every 1500 inhabitants), each holding office for three years and elected at the same time directly by the vote of the people. The referendum exists in both forms, compulsory and optional: all laws and all money grants of a total sum over 250,000 francs or an annual sum of 20,000 must be submitted to a popular vote, the people meeting for that purpose at least twice in each year, while the executive may submit to a popular vote any other matter, though it fall within its powers as defined by law. One-third of the members of the legislature or 5000 legally qualified voters can force the Government to submit to the people any matter whatsoever (initiative). The constitution provides for the imposition of a graduated and progressive income tax. In 1885 the penalty of death was abolished in the canton. Zurich has sheltered many political refugees of late years, especially Poles and Russians; but its hospitality has been abused by the Socialists, who have given considerable trouble. The Swiss National Agricultural and Industrial Exhibition was held at Zurich in 1883.
For the present state of the town, see Europäische Wanderbilder (Nos. 126- 129), Zurich, 1887. For the local and architectural history the principal work is S. Vögelin, Das alte Zürich (2d ed., 1878), and for general history, J. C. Bluntschli, Staats-und Rechts-Geschichte der Stadt und Landschaft Zurich (2d ed., 1856); G. v. Wyss, Geschichte der Abtei Zürich, 1851-58 (in vol. viii. of Mittheil. d. antiquar. Gesellsch. in Z.); Id., Die Reichsvogtei Zürich, 1870 (in vol. xvii. oi Zeitschr./. Schweiz. Recht'). Many of the recent works on Swiss history, e.g., those of Dändliker, Oechsli, Orelli, Strickler, are by Zurich men and pay special attention to Zurich matters. (W. A. B. C.)
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 830 [9:24:830]
| |
kp-eb0924-083101-0880m
|
ZUTPHEN, a fortified town of Holland, in the province of Guelderland, 20 miles by rail south from Deventer, stands on the right bank of the Yssel, at its junction with the Berkel. Its most important public building is the church of St Walburga, dating from the 12th century, which contains several interesting monuments of the counts of Zutphen, and good examples of old metal-work and sculpture. The place has an active trade, especially in grain and in the timber floated down from the Black Forest by the Rhine and the Yssel; the industries include tanning, weaving, and oil and paper manufactures. The population in 1887 was 16,357. Some 2½ miles to the north of the town is the agricultural colony of Nederlandsch-Mettray, founded by a private benefactor for the education of poor and friendless boys in 1851, and since that date largely extended.
Zutphen at one time belonged to the Hanseatic League and had an extensive foreign trade. It has been more than once besieged, and it was before Zutphen that Sir Philip Sidney received his mortal wound (22d September 1586).
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 831 [9:24:831]
| |
kp-eb0924-083102-0880m
|
ZWEIBRÜCKEN. See Deux Ponts.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 831 [9:24:831]
| |
kp-eb0924-083103-0880m
|
ZWICKAU, one of the busiest towns in the industrial district of the kingdom of Saxony to which it gives its name, is situated in a pleasant valley on the left bank of the Zwickauer Mulde, 41 miles south of Leipsic. The river is here crossed by four bridges, two of which are of iron. The town contains six churches, including the fine Late Gothic church of St Mary (1453-1536, restored 1884), with a tower 278 feet high, and the Gothic church of St Catherine (14th to 15th century), of which Thomas Münzer was pastor in 1520-22. Among the secular buildings are the town-house of 1581, the Gothic “Gewandhaus” (now a theatre) of 1522-24, the Government buildings of 1838, the law-courts, the hospital, and the barracks. The railway station, which with its dependencies covers 81 acres, is said to be one of the largest in Germany. The chateau of Osterstein (1581-91) is now a penitentiary. The manufactures of Zwickau are both extensive and varied: they include machinery, chemicals, porcelain, paper, glass, dyestuffs, tinware, stockings, and curtains. There are also steam saw-mills, brickfields, iron-foundries, and breweries.
[9:24:832]
Though no longer so important as when it lay on the chief trade route from Saxony to Bohemia and the Danube, Zwickau still carries on considerable commerce in grain, linen, and coal. The mainstay of the industrial prosperity of the town is the adjacent coalfield, which in 1885 employed 10,000 hands and yielded coal to the value of £854,900. The mines are mentioned as early as 1348; but they have been actively worked only for the last 65 years, during which time the population of the town has increased more than sixfold. In 1885 the population was 39,245; in 1834 it was 6701.
Zwickau is of Slavonic origin, and is mentioned in 1118 as a trading place. From 1290 till 1348 it was a free imperial city, but about the latter date it was forced to accept the protection of the margrave of Meissen. The Anabaptist movement of 1525 began at Zwickau under the inspiration of the “Zwickau prophets.” Robert Schumann (1810-1856), the musical composer, was born here. The name is sometimes fancifully derived from the Latin cygnea, from a tradition that placed a. “swan lake” here which had the property of renewing the youth of those who bathed in it.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 831 [9:24:831]
| |
kp-eb0924-083201-0881m
|
ZWINGLI, Huldreich (1484-1531), Swiss Reformer, was born on 1st January 1484 at Wildhaus, at the head of the Toggenburg valley, in the canton of St Gall, Switzerland. His father was a well-to-do peasant proprietor, amman of the township; his mother was Margaret Meili, whose brother was abbot of the cloister of Fischingen in Thurgau. The people of Wildhaus were in Zwingli’s time a self-ruled village community. They had also bought from the abbots of St Gall the privilege of electing their own pastor; and the first parish priest chosen by the votes of the parishioners was Bartholomew Zwingli, the uncle of the Reformer, who latterly became dean of Wesen. Zwingli thus came of a free peasant stock, and he carried the marks of his origin all his life. When eight years old he was sent to school at Wesen, where he lived with his uncle, the dean. Two years later he was sent to Basel; and after a three years’ sojourn there he became a pupil in the high school of Bern, where his master was Heinrich Wölflin, an accomplished classical scholar, from whom Zwingli acquired that love of classical literature which never left him. From Bern he went to Vienna (in 1500), and after two years’ study there he returned to Basel. At Basel the celebrated Thomas Wyttenbach was his master and friend, and taught him those Evangelical truths which he afterwards so signally defended.
It is impossible to avoid contrasting the joyous youth of Zwingli with the sad childhood of Luther. Zwingli was full of love of family, of township, of country, and of Christ. He had none of those dark religious experiences which drove Luther to the convent, and which made him miserable there. He had never to struggle alone in despair of soul, one step at a time, towards the gospel of God’s free grace. Wyttenbach was very unlike those nominalist divines from whom Luther learnt mediaeval theology. He foresaw many things which a later generation discovered. Zwingli has assured us that Wyttenbach taught him that the death of Christ, and not priests, masses, and pilgrimages, was a sufficient ransom for the sins of the world; that he pointed out the errors of the schoolmen and of Romish theology; and that he asserted that Holy Scripture, and not ecclesiastical tradition, was the sole rule of faith. It cost Zwingli nothing to break with the mediaeval church. He had been taught independence from childhood, and shown how to think for himself while a student at Basel.
When twenty-two years of age Zwingli was ordained by the bishop of Constance. He preached his first sermon at Rapperswyl, and said his first mass among his own people at Wildhaus. He was appointed (1506) to the parish of Glarus, where he had leisure for study and began to read extensively and carefully in preparation for future work. At Glarus too he gathered the boys of the district about him (Aegidius Tschudi, the historian of Switzerland, among them) to teach them the classics; and he set himself by a study of the masterpieces of ancient and mediaeval rhetoric to learn the art of oratory. He tells us that at this time he foresaw that a man who is called to be a preacher must know many things, two things above all others—God, and how to speak. Meanwhile he tested every doctrine in theology by the Word of God and took his stand firmly upon what it taught him.
The Swiss troops of Zwingli’s day were supposed to be the best in Europe, and neighbouring states were glad to have their assistance in war. The Swiss were accustomed to hire out. their soldiers for large sums of money to those states who paid best. It was their custom also to send the parish priest of the district from which the troops came as chaplain to the regiment. Zwingli went twice, once in 1512 and again in 1515, with the men of Glarus. He saw the demoralizing tendency of such mercenary warfare and ever afterwards denounced the immoral traffic. In 1521 he persuaded the authorities of the canton of Zurich to renounce it altogether.
In 1516 Zwingli was transferred to Einsiedeln. It was then, and is still, resorted to by thousands of pilgrims yearly, who come to visit the famous image of the Virgin and Child which has been preserved there for at least a thousand years. Zwingli denounced the superstition of pilgrimages. His sermons made a great sensation and attracted attention in Rome. The papal curia had no wish to quarrel with the Swiss, who furnished them with troops, and sought to silence the Reformer by offers of promotion, which he refused. Soon afterwards he was elected, after some opposition, to be preacher in the cathedral at Zurich, and accepted the office (1518), having first obtained a pledge that his liberty to preach the truth should not be interfered with. He began the fight almost on his arrival. Bernhardin Samson, a pardon-seller like Tetzel, had been selling indulgences in the Forest Cantons and proposed to come to Zurich. Zwingli prevailed on the council to send the friar out of the country. In the beginning of 1519 he began a series of discourses on the New Testament Scriptures,—on St Matthew’s Gospel, on the Acts of the Apostles, and on the Pauline Epistles. The sermons, preached “in simple Swiss language,” had a great effect. The Reformation in Zurich was begun. The council of the canton was on Zwingli’s side and protected their preacher. He began to preach against fasting and other Roman practices; some of his followers put his precepts in practice and ate flesh in Lent. The bishop of Constance accused them before the council of Zurich. Zwingli was heard in their defence, and the accusation was abandoned. The victory on the subject of fasting was followed by an attack on the doctrine of the celibacy of the clergy. Pope Adrian VI. interfered, and asked the Zurichers to abandon Zwingli. The Reformer persuaded the council to allow a public disputation, which was held in 1523. Zwingli produced sixty-seven theses,^[1. Cf. Schaff’s Creeds of the Evangelical Protestant Churches, p. 197. ] containing a summary of his doctrinal views, and argued in their favour with such power that the council upheld the Reformer and separated the canton from the bishopric of Constance. The Reformation, thus legally established, went forward rapidly. The Latin language was discontinued in the service; the incomes of chapters, convents, and monasteries were applied for education; the celibacy of the clergy was abolished; monks and nuns were freed from their vows; mass and image worship were declared to be idolatrous; and the Eucharist in both kinds was celebrated by a solemn communion of all the Reformed congregations on Maundy Thursday 1525.
[9:24:833]
The progress of the Reformation in Zurich attracted the attention of all Switzerland, and the Confederation became divided into two parties. The Reformers found numerous supporters in the larger towns of Basel, Bern, and Schaffhausen, and in the country districts of Glarus, Appenzell, and the Grisons. The five Forest Cantons—Lucerne, Zug, Schwyz, Uri, and Unterwalden—remained solidly opposed to all reforms. This anti-Reformation party was also strong in the patrician oligarchies which drew papal pensions, and enriched themselves by the nefarious blood traffic denounced by Zwingli. The Zurichers felt it necessary to form a defensive league to prevent their Reformation from being crushed by force. They were especially anxious to gain Bern, and Zwingli challenged the Roman Catholics to a public disputation in that city. No less than 350 ecclesiastics came to Bern from the various cantons to hear the pleadings, which began on 2d January 1528 and lasted nineteen days. Zwingli and his companions undertook to defend against all comers the following ten propositions:— (1) That the Holy Christian Church, of which Christ is the only Head, is born of the Word of God, abides therein, and does not listen to the voice of a stranger; (2) that this church imposes no laws on the conscience of people without the sanction of the Word of God, and that the laws of the church are binding only in so far as they agree with the Word; (3) that Christ alone is our righteousness and our salvation, and that to trust to any other merit or satisfaction is to deny Him; (4) that it cannot be proved from the Holy Scripture that the body and blood of Christ are corporeally present in the bread and in the wine of the Lord’s Supper; (5) that the mass, in which Christ is offered to God the Father for the sins of the living and of the dead, is contrary to Scripture and a gross affront to the sacrifice and death of the Saviour; (6) that we should not pray to dead mediators and intercessors, but to Jesus Christ alone; (7) that there is no trace of purgatory in Scripture; (8) that to set up pictures and to adore them is also contrary to Scripture, and that images and pictures ought to be destroyed where there is danger of giving them adoration; (9) that marriage is lawful to all, to the clergy as well as to the laity; (10) that shameful living is more disgraceful among the clergy than among the laity.
These they defended to such purpose that the Bernese joined heartily in the Reformation, and the enthusiasm of the people was fired by two burning sermons preached by Zwingli from the minster pulpit to overflowing audiences. The two parties henceforward faced each other in Switzerland. The country was in those days a confederacy of republics, and yet was far from being a democracy. Most of the cantons were ruled by aristocratic oligarchies who had pensions from foreign Governments, and Zwingli’s appeal had always been from an oligarchy of pope, bishops, and abbots to the congregation with the Bible in hand. He founded his religious Reformation on the congregation, and this of itself suggested that the state was nothing but the people. It so happened that those cantons which remained firmly attached to Roman Catholicism were the least powerful, and yet from historical position and the long custom of the Confederacy had the largest legal influence in the country. The Forest Cantons had been the earliest to free themselves. Isolated towns and districts after successful revolt had claimed the protection of these little republics, and the Forest Cantons governed by means of prefects a large number of places beyond their boundaries. This gave them votes in the diet or federal council far beyond what they were entitled to by their population and actual resources. These cantons felt that, if the Reformation and the political ideas it suggested spread, their supremacy would be overthrown and their rule confined within their own territories. Nor had they in their upland valleys seen the worst abuses of the mediaeval church. They dreaded the Reformation. They persecuted inquirers after truth, and imprisoned, beheaded, and burnt the followers of Zwingli when they caught them within their borders. Zwingli, alone among Protestant leaders, saw that the religious and the political questions could not be decided separately, but were for practical statesmanship one and the same problem. His policy was to reorganize the Swiss constitution on the principles of representative democracy, to put an end to the unnatural supremacy of the Forest Cantons by abolishing the prefects and their jurisdiction, and by giving the larger cantons the influence in the diet which was due to their resources and population, and to do this at once, and if necessary by war. His counsels were overruled. Bern was anxious to treat the religious question separately, and to negotiate for religious toleration, leaving the political future to take care of itself. The course of history has fully justified Zwingli. The views of the peace party triumphed, and a religious truce was negotiated under the name of the first peace of Cappel, with guarantees on paper that there was to be toleration in religious matters. But no real securities were given. The provisions of the treaty were never carried out in the Roman Catholic cantons, where authorities were secretly preparing for war. Zwingli in vain proclaimed the danger and urged offensive measures. The Protestant cantons remained heedless to the danger. At length the storm burst. The Forest Cantons advanced (1531) secretly and rapidly on Zurich, with the intention of overcoming the Protestant cantons one by one. The Zurichers met their foes at Cappel, were outnumbered, and were defeated. Zwingli, who had accompanied the troops as field chaplain, and had stood among the fighting men to encourage them, had received two wounds on the thigh when a blow on the head knocked him senseless. After the retreat of the Zurichers, when the victors examined the field, Zwingli was found to be still living. He was not recognized, and was asked if he wished a priest; when he refused, a captain standing near gave him a deathstroke on the neck. Next day his body was recognized. “Then there was a wonderful running to the spot the whole morning, for every man wished to see Zwingli.” He had in death the same eager, courageous expression which his hearers were accustomed to see on his face when he preached. A great boulder, roughly squared, standing a little way off the road, marks the place where Zwingli fell. It is inscribed with the words, “ ‘ They may kill the body but not the soul ’: so spoke on this spot Ulrich Zwingli, who for truth and the freedom of the Christian Church died a hero’s death, Oct. 11, 1531.”
Zwingli’s theological views are expressed succinctly in the sixtyseven theses published at Zurich in 1523, and at greater length in the First Helvetic Confession, compiled in 1536 by a number of his disciples.^[2. Schaff, Creeds of the Evangelical Protestant Churches, p. 211. ] They contain the elements of Reformed as distinguished from Lutheran doctrine. As opposed to Luther, Zwingli insisted more firmly on the supreme authority of Scripture, and broke more thoroughly and radically with the mediaeval church. Luther was content with changes in one or two fundamental doctrines; Zwingli aimed at a reformation of government and discipline as well as of theology. Zwingli never faltered in his trust in the people, and was earnest to show that no class of men ought to be called spiritual simply because they were selected to perform certain functions. He thoroughly believed also that it was the duty of all in authority to rule in Christ’s name and to obey His laws. He was led from these ideas to think that there should be no government in the church separate from the civil government which ruled the commonwealth. All rules and regulations about the public worship, doctrines, and discipline of the church were made in Zwingli’s time, and with his consent, by the council of Zurich, which was the supreme civil authority in the state. This was the ground of his quarrel with the Swiss Anabaptists, for the main idea in the minds of these greatly maligned men was the modern thought of a free church in a free state. Like all the Reformers, he was strictly Augustinian in theology, but he dwelt chiefly on the positive side of predestination—the election to salvation—and he insisted upon the salvation of infants and of the pious heathen. His most distinctive doctrine is perhaps his theory of the sacrament, which involved him and his followers in a long and, on Luther’s part, an acrimonious dispute with the German Protestants. His main idea was that the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper [9:24:834] was not the repetition of the sacrifice of Christ, but the faithful remembrance that that sacrifice had been made once for all; and his deeper idea of faith, which included in the act of faith a real union and communion of the faithful soul with Christ, really preserved what was also most valuable in the distinctively Lutheran doctrine. His peculiar theological opinions were set aside in Switzerland for the somewhat profounder views of Calvin. The publication of the Zurich Consensus {Consensus Tigurinus) in 1549 marks the adherence of the Swiss to Calvinist theology.
Zwingli’s most important writings are— Von Erkiesen und Fryheit der Spysen (April 1522); De Canone Missae Epichiresis (September 1523); Commentarius de Vera et Falsa Religione 1525); Vom Touf, vom Wiedertοuf, und vom Kindertouf (1525); Ein klare Unterrichtung vom Nachtmal Christi (1526); De Providentia Dei (1530); and Christianae Fidei Expositio (1531).
For his theology, compare Seegwart, Ulrich Zwingli, der Character seiner Theologie, 1855; especially Hundeshagen, Beiträge zur Kirchenverfassungsgeschichte u. Kirchenpolitik, 1864; Usteri, Ulrich Zwingli, ein Martin Luther ebenbürtiger Zeuge des evangelischen Glaubens, 1883; and A. Baur, Zwingli's Theologie, ihr Werden und ihr System, 1885.
For Zwingli’s life, compare Oswald Myconius, De Huldrichi Zwinglii Fortissimi Herois ac Theologi Doctissimi Vita et Obitu, 1532; Bullinger, Reformationsgeschichte, 1838; Mörikofer, Ulrich Zwingli, 1867; and Stähelin, Huldreich Zwingli und sein Reformationswerk, 1884. Stähelin is also the author of the remarkably good article ou Zwingli in Herzog-Plitt’s Real-Enoykl., vol. xvii. (T. Μ. L.)
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 832 [9:24:832]
| |
kp-eb0924-083401-0883m
|
ZWOLLE, a fortified town of Holland, capital of the province of Overyssel, 55 miles by rail to the north-east of Utrecht, stands on the Zwarte Water, a right-hand tributary of the Yssel, a little above its junction with that river. On the side of the town next the railway station is the Sassen-poort, an old Gothic gateway of brick; but the town has few other historical monuments of interest. The large Gothic church of St Michael in the market place, begun in 1406, contains a fine organ and a richly carved pulpit.
The town has a considerable trade by water, and among its more important industries are shipbuilding, cotton manufacture, dyeing and bleaching, tanning, rope-making, and salt-making. The population in 1887 was 25,005.
Zwolle was first fortified in 1223 by the bishop of Utrecht. It afterwards became a free imperial city and a member of the Hanseatic League, and first joined the United Provinces in 1580. Three miles from the town on a gentle eminence stands the monastery of the Agnetenberg, where Thomas a Kempis lived for the greater part of his life. Terburg the painter was a native of Zwolle.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 834 [9:24:834]
| |
kp-eb0924-083402-0883m
|
ZYMOTIC DISEASES(ζύμη, ferment), a term in medicine applied by some authorities to the class of acute infectious maladies. As originally employed by Dr Farr of the British registrar-general’s department, the term included the diseases which were “epidemic, endemic, and contagious,” and owed their origin to the presence of some morbific principle in the system acting in a manner analogous to, although not identical with, the process of fermentation. A very large number of diseases were accordingly included under this designation. The term, however, has come to be restricted in medical nomenclature to the chief fevers and contagious diseases (e.g., typhus and typhoid fevers, smallpox, scarlet fever, measles, erysipelas, cholera, hooping-cough, diphtheria, &c.). Although the name is held by not a few authorities to be objectionable on account of the theory it suggests, it is still made use of in the registrar-general’s classification of diseases.
|
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, NINTH EDITION: A MACHINE-READABLE TEXT
TRANSCRIPTION (v1.1), The Nineteenth-Century Knowledge Project, 2025
19kp@temple.edu, https://tu-plogan.github.io/.
License: CC-BY-4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences,
and General Literature. 9th ed., 25 vols. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1875-1889. (Authorized edition.) Image scans: Internet Archive.
This entry: 9th edition, volume 24, page 834 [9:24:834]
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.