| By Author | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Title | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Language |
|
Download this book: [ ASCII | HTML | PDF ] Look for this book on Amazon Tweet |
Title: Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, Volume 15, Slice 3 - "Japan" (part) to "Jeveros"
Author: Various
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, Volume 15, Slice 3 - "Japan" (part) to "Jeveros"" ***
Transcriber's notes:
(1) Numbers following letters (without space) like C2 were originally
printed in subscript. Letter subscripts are preceded by an
underscore, like C_n.
(2) Characters following a carat (^) were printed in superscript.
(3) Side-notes were relocated to function as titles of their respective
paragraphs.
(4) Macrons and breves above letters and dots below letters were not
inserted.
(5) [root] stands for the root symbol; [alpha], [beta], etc. for greek
letters.
(6) The following typographical errors have been corrected:
ARTICLE JAPAN: "Moreover, Korean history mentions twenty-five raids
made by the Japanese against Silla during the first five centuries
of the Christian era, but not one of them can be identified with
Jingo's alleged expedition." 'identified' amended from
'indentified'.
ARTICLE JAPAN: "Where these representatives of centralized power
found themselves impotent, it may well be supposed that the
comparatively petty chieftains who fought each for his own hand in
the 15th and 16th centuries were incapable of accomplishing
anything." 'chieftains' amended from 'chieftans'.
ARTICLE JAPAN: "The survivors fled pell-mell to Osaka, where in a
colossal fortress, built by Hideyoshi, his son, Hideyori, and the
latter's mother, Yodo, were sheltered behind ramparts held by
80,000 men." Added 'by'.
ARTICLE JAPAN: "Thus in the interval between 1873 and 1877 there
were two centres of disturbance in Japan: one in Satsuma, where
Saigo figured as leader; the other in Tosa, under Itagaki's
guidance." 'between' amended from 'betweeen'.
ARTICLE JAPAN: "... legislated consistently with that theory, and
entrusted to the police large powers of control over the press and
the platform." 'control' amended from 'conrol'.
ARTICLE JAVA: "Snipe-shooting is a favourite sport." 'favourite'
amended from 'favourtie'.
ARTICLE JAVA: "See R. Verbeek, 'Liget der oudheden van Java,' in
Verhand. v. h. Bat. Gen., xlvi., and his Oudheidkundige kaart van
Java." 'Oudheidkundige' amended from 'Oudreidkundige'.
ARTICLE JEFFERSON CITY: "Employment is furnished for the convicts
on the penitentiary premises by incorporated companies."
'penitentiary' amended from 'pentitentiary'.
ARTICLE JENGHIZ KHAN: "On examining the child he observed in its
clenched fist a clot of coagulated blood like a red stone." 'he'
amended from 'be'.
ARTICLE JENNER, EDWARD: "In the autumn of the same year, Jenner met
with the first opposition to vaccination; and this was the more
formidable because it proceeded from J. Ingenhousz, a celebrated
physician and man of science." 'proceeded' amended from 'proceded'.
ARTICLE JERUSALEM: "According to this theory, the part of Jerusalem
known as Jebus was situated on the western hill, and the outlying
fort of Zion on the eastern hill. The men of Judah and Benjamin did
not succeed in getting full possession of the place ..." 'this'
amended from 'his'.
ARTICLE JESUS CHRIST: "In the light of the coming kingdom it
proclaims the blessedness of the poor, the hungry, the sad and the
maligned; and the woefulness of the rich, the full, the merry and
the popular." 'woefulness' amended from 'wofulness'.
ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITANNICA
A DICTIONARY OF ARTS, SCIENCES, LITERATURE
AND GENERAL INFORMATION
ELEVENTH EDITION
VOLUME XV, SLICE III
Japan (part) to Jeveros
ARTICLES IN THIS SLICE:
JAPAN (part) JEHOIACHIN
JAPANNING JEHOIAKIM
JAPHETH JEHOL
JAR JEHORAM
JARGON JEHOSHAPHAT
JARGOON JEHOVAH
JARIR IBN 'ATIYYA UL-KHATFI JEHU
JARKENT JEKYLL, SIR JOSEPH
JARNAC JELLACHICH, JOSEF
JARO JELLINEK, ADOLF
JAROSITE JEMAPPES
JARRAH WOOD JENA
JARROW JENATSCH, GEORG
JARRY, NICOLAS JENGHIZ KHAN
JARVIS, JOHN WESLEY JENKIN, HENRY CHARLES FLEEMING
JASHAR, BOOK OF JENKINS, SIR LEOLINE
JASHPUR JENKINS, ROBERT
JASMIN, JACQUES JENKS, JEREMIAH WHIPPLE
JASMINE JENNÉ
JASON JENNER, EDWARD
JASON OF CYRENE JENNER, SIR WILLIAM
JASPER JENNET
JASSY JENOLAN CAVES
JATAKA JENSEN, WILHELM
JATH JENYNS, SOAME
JÁTIVA JEOPARDY
JATS JEPHSON, ROBERT
JAUBERT, PIERRE AMÉDÉE PROBE JEPHTHAH
JAUCOURT, ARNAIL FRANÇOIS JERAHMEEL
JAUER JERBA
JAUHARI JERBOA
JAUNDICE JERDAN, WILLIAM
JAUNPUR JEREMIAH
JAUNTING-CAR JEREMY, EPISTLE OF
JAUREGUI, JUAN JERÉZ DE LA FRONTERA
JAURÉGUIBERRY, JEAN BERNARD JERÉZ DE LOS CABALLEROS
JÁUREGUI Y AGUILAR, JUAN MARTÍNEZ DE JERICHO
JAURÈS, JEAN LÉON JERKIN
JAVA JEROBOAM
JAVELIN JEROME, ST
JAW JEROME, JEROME KLAPKA
JAWALIQI JEROME OF PRAGUE
JAWHAR JERROLD, DOUGLAS WILLIAM
JAWORÓW JERRY
JAY, JOHN JERSEY, EARLS OF
JAY, WILLIAM JERSEY
JAY JERSEY CITY
JEALOUSY JERUSALEM
JEAN D'ARRAS JERUSALEM, SYNOD OF
JEAN DE MEUN JESI
JEANNETTE JESSE
JEANNIN, PIERRE JESSE, EDWARD
JEBB, JOHN JESSE, JOHN HENEAGE
JEBB, SIR RICHARD CLAVERHOUSE JESSEL, SIR GEORGE
JEBEIL JESSORE
JEBEL JESTER
JEDBURGH JESUATI
JEEJEEBHOY, SIR JAMSETJEE JESUITS
JEFFERIES, RICHARD JESUP, MORRIS KETCHUM
JEFFERSON, JOSEPH JESUS CHRIST
JEFFERSON, THOMAS JET
JEFFERSON CITY JETHRO
JEFFERSONVILLE JETTY
JEFFREY, FRANCIS JEFFREY JEVER
JEFFREYS, GEORGE JEFFREYS JEVEROS
JAPAN, [_Continued from volume XV slice II._]
Japan's Claim for Judicial Autonomy.
After the abolition of the shogunate and the resumption of
administrative functions by the Throne, one of the first acts of the
newly organized government was to invite the foreign representatives to
Kioto, where they had audience of the mikado. Subsequently a decree was
issued, announcing the emperor's resolve to establish amicable relations
with foreign countries, and "declaring that any Japanese subject
thereafter guilty of violent behaviour towards a foreigner would not
only act in opposition to the Imperial command, but would also be guilty
of impairing the dignity and good faith of the nation in the eyes of the
powers with which his majesty had pledged himself to maintain
friendship." From that time the relations between Japan and foreign
states grew yearly more amicable; the nation adopted the products of
Western civilization with notable thoroughness, and the provisions of
the treaties were carefully observed. Those treaties, however, presented
one feature which very soon became exceedingly irksome to Japan. They
exempted foreigners residing within her borders from the operation of
her criminal laws, and secured to them the privilege of being arraigned
solely before tribunals of their own nationality. That system had always
been considered necessary where the subjects of Christian states visited
or sojourned in non-Christian countries, and, for the purpose of giving
effect to it, consular courts were established. This necessitated the
confinement of foreign residents to settlements in the neighbourhood of
the consular courts, since it would have been imprudent to allow
foreigners to have free access to districts remote from the only
tribunals competent to control them. The Japanese raised no objection to
the embodiment of this system in the treaties. They recognized its
necessity and even its expediency, for if, on the one hand, it infringed
their country's sovereign rights, on the other, it prevented
complications which must have ensued had they been entrusted with
jurisdiction which they were not prepared to discharge satisfactorily.
But the consular courts were not free from defects. A few of the powers
organized competent tribunals presided over by judicial experts, but a
majority of the treaty states, not having sufficiently large interests
at stake, were content to delegate consular duties to merchants, not
only deficient in legal training, but also themselves engaged in the
very commercial transactions upon which they might at any moment be
required to adjudicate in a magisterial capacity. In any circumstances
the dual functions of consul and judge could not be discharged without
anomaly by the same official, for he was obliged to act as advocate in
the preliminary stages of complications about which, in his position as
judge, he might ultimately have to deliver an impartial verdict. In
practice, however, the system worked with tolerable smoothness, and
might have remained long in force had not the patriotism of the Japanese
rebelled bitterly against the implication that their country was unfit
to exercise one of the fundamental attributes of every sovereign state,
judicial autonomy. From the very outset they spared no effort to qualify
for the recovery of this attribute. Revision of the country's laws and
reorganization of its law courts would necessarily have been an
essential feature of the general reforms suggested by contact with the
Occident, but the question of consular jurisdiction certainly
constituted a special incentive. Expert assistance was obtained from
France and Germany; the best features of European jurisprudence were
adapted to the conditions and usages of Japan; the law courts were
remodelled, and steps were taken to educate a competent judiciary. In
criminal law the example of France was chiefly followed; in commercial
law that of Germany; and in civil law that of the Occident generally,
with due regard to the customs of the country. The jury system was not
adopted, collegiate courts being regarded as more conducive to justice,
and the order of procedure went from tribunals of first instance to
appeal courts and finally to the court of cassation. Schools of law were
quickly opened, and a well-equipped bar soon came into existence. Twelve
years after the inception of these great works, Japan made formal
application for revision of the treaties on the basis of abolishing
consular jurisdiction. She had asked for revision in 1871, sending to
Europe and America an important embassy to raise the question. But at
that time the conditions originally calling for consular jurisdiction
had not undergone any change such as would have justified its abolition,
and the Japanese government, though very anxious to recover tariff
autonomy as well as judicial, shrank from separating the two questions,
lest by prematurely solving one the solution of the other might be
unduly deferred. Thus the embassy failed, and though the problem
attracted great academical interest from the first, it did not re-enter
the field of practical politics until 1883. The negotiations were long
protracted. Never previously had an Oriental state received at the hands
of the Occident recognition such as that now demanded by Japan, and the
West naturally felt deep reluctance to try a wholly novel experiment.
The United States had set a generous example by concluding a new treaty
(1878) on the lines desired by Japan. But its operation was conditional
on a similar act of compliance by the other treaty powers. Ill-informed
European publicists ridiculed the Washington statesmen's attitude on
this occasion, claiming that what had been given with one hand was taken
back with the other. The truth is that the conditional provision was
inserted at the request of Japan herself, who appreciated her own
unpreparedness for the concession. From 1883, however, she was ready to
accept full responsibility, and she therefore asked that all foreigners
within her borders should thenceforth be subject to her laws and
judiciable by her law-courts, supplementing her application by
promising that its favourable reception should be followed by the
complete opening of the country and the removal of all restrictions
hitherto imposed on foreign trade, travel and residence in her realm.
"From the first it had been the habit of Occidental peoples to upbraid
Japan on account of the barriers opposed by her to full and free foreign
intercourse, and she was now able to claim that these barriers were no
longer maintained by her desire, but that they existed because of a
system which theoretically proclaimed her unfitness for free association
with Western nations, and practically made it impossible for her to
throw open her territories completely for the ingress of foreigners."
She had a strong case, but on the side of the European powers extreme
reluctance was manifested to try the unprecedented experiment of placing
their people under the jurisdiction of an Oriental country. Still
greater was the reluctance of those upon whom the experiment would be
tried. Foreigners residing in Japan naturally clung to consular
jurisdiction as a privilege of inestimable value. They saw, indeed, that
such a system could not be permanently imposed on a country where the
conditions justifying it had nominally disappeared. But they saw, also,
that the legal and judicial reforms effected by Japan had been crowded
into an extraordinarily brief period, and that, as tyros experimenting
with alien systems, the Japanese might be betrayed into many errors.
Recognition by the Powers.
The negotiations lasted for eleven years. They were begun in 1883 and a
solution was not reached until 1894. Finally European governments
conceded the justice of Japan's case, and it was agreed that from July
1899 Japanese tribunals should assume jurisdiction over every person, of
whatever nationality, within the confines of Japan, and the whole
country should be thrown open to foreigners, all limitations upon trade,
travel and residence being removed. Great Britain took the lead in thus
releasing Japan from the fetters of the old system. The initiative came
from her with special grace, for the system and all its irksome
consequences had been originally imposed on Japan by a combination of
powers with Great Britain in the van. As a matter of historical sequence
the United States dictated the terms of the first treaty providing for
consular jurisdiction. But from a very early period the Washington
government showed its willingness to remove all limitations of Japan's
sovereignty, whereas Europe, headed by Great Britain, whose
preponderating interests entitled her to lead, resolutely refused to
make any substantial concession. In Japanese eyes, therefore, British
conservatism seemed to be the one serious obstacle, and since the
British residents in the settlements far outnumbered all other
nationalities, and since they alone had newspaper organs to ventilate
their grievances--it was certainly fortunate for the popularity of her
people in the Far East that Great Britain saw her way finally to set a
liberal example. Nearly five years were required to bring the other
Occidental powers into line with Great Britain and America. It should be
stated, however, that neither reluctance to make the necessary
concessions nor want of sympathy with Japan caused the delay. The
explanation is, first, that each set of negotiators sought to improve
either the terms or the terminology of the treaties already concluded,
and, secondly, that the tariff arrangements for the different countries
required elaborate discussion.
Reception given to the Revised Treaties.
Until the last of the revised treaties was ratified, voices of protest
against revision continued to be vehemently raised by a large section of
the foreign community in the settlements. Some were honestly
apprehensive as to the issue of the experiment. Others were swayed by
racial prejudice. A few had fallen into an insuperable habit of
grumbling, or found their account in advocating conservatism under
pretence of championing foreign interests; and all were naturally
reluctant to forfeit the immunity from taxation hitherto enjoyed. It
seemed as though the inauguration of the new system would find the
foreign community in a mood which must greatly diminish the chances of a
happy result, for where a captious and aggrieved disposition exists,
opportunities to discover causes of complaint cannot be wanting. But at
the eleventh hour this unfavourable demeanour underwent a marked change.
So soon as it became evident that the old system was hopelessly doomed,
the sound common sense of the European and American business man
asserted itself. The foreign residents let it be seen that they intended
to bow cheerfully to the inevitable, and that no obstacles would be
willingly placed by them in the path of Japanese jurisdiction. The
Japanese, on their side, took some promising steps. An Imperial rescript
declared in unequivocal terms that it was the sovereign's policy and
desire to abolish all distinctions between natives and foreigners, and
that by fully carrying out the friendly purpose of the treaties his
people would best consult his wishes, maintain the character of the
nation, and promote its prestige. The premier and other ministers of
state issued instructions to the effect that the responsibility now
devolved on the government, and the duty on the people, of enabling
foreigners to reside confidently and contentedly in every part of the
country. Even the chief Buddhist prelates addressed to the priests and
parishioners in their dioceses injunctions pointing out that, freedom of
conscience being now guaranteed by the constitution, men professing
alien creeds must be treated as courteously as the followers of
Buddhism, and must enjoy the same rights and privileges.
Thus the great change was effected in circumstances of happy augury. Its
results were successful on the whole. Foreigners residing in Japan now
enjoy immunity of domicile, personal and religious liberty, freedom from
official interference, and security of life and property as fully as
though they were living in their own countries, and they have gradually
learned to look with greatly increased respect upon Japanese law and its
administrators.
Anglo-Japanese Alliance.
Next to the revision of the treaties and to the result of the great wars
waged by Japan since the resumption of foreign intercourse, the most
memorable incident in her modern career was the conclusion, first, of an
_entente_, and, secondly, of an offensive and defensive alliance with
Great Britain in January 1902 and September 1905, respectively. The
_entente_ set out by disavowing on the part of each of the contracting
parties any aggressive tendency in either China or Korea, the
independence of which two countries was explicitly recognized; and went
on to declare that Great Britain in China and Japan in China and Korea
might take indispensable means to safeguard their interests; while, if
such measures involved one of the signatories in war with a third power,
the other signatory would not only remain neutral but would also
endeavour to prevent other powers from joining in hostilities against
its ally, and would come to the assistance of the latter in the event of
its being faced by two or more powers. The _entente_ further recognized
that Japan possessed, in a peculiar degree, political, commercial and
industrial interests in Korea. This agreement, equally novel for each of
the contracting parties, evidently tended to the benefit of Japan more
than to that of Great Britain, inasmuch as the interests in question
were vital from the former power's point of view but merely local from
the latter's. The inequality was corrected by an offensive and defensive
alliance in 1905. For the scope of the agreement was then extended to
India and eastern Asia generally, and while the signatories pledged
themselves, on the one hand, to preserve the common interests of all
powers in China by insuring her integrity and independence as well as
the principle of equal opportunities for the commerce and industry of
all nations within her borders, they agreed, on the other, to maintain
their own territorial rights in eastern Asia and India, and to come to
each other's armed assistance in the event of those rights being
assailed by any other power or powers. These agreements have, of course,
a close relation to the events which accompanied or immediately preceded
them, but they also present a vivid and radical contrast between a
country which, less than half a century previously, had struggled
vehemently to remain secluded from the world, and a country which now
allied itself with one of the most liberal and progressive nations for
the purposes of a policy extending over the whole of eastern Asia and
India. This contrast was accentuated two years later (1907) when France
and Russia concluded _ententes_ with Japan, recognizing the independence
and integrity of the Chinese Empire, as well as the principle of equal
opportunity for all nations in that country, and engaging to support
each other for assuring peace and security there. Japan thus became a
world power in the most unequivocal sense.
War with Korea.
_Japan's Foreign Wars and Complications._--The earliest foreign war
conducted by Japan is said to have taken place at the beginning of the
3rd century, when the empress Jingo led an army to the conquest of
Korea. But as the event is supposed to have happened more than 500 years
before the first Japanese record was written, its traditional details
cannot be seriously discussed. There is, however, no room to doubt that
from time to time in early ages Japanese troops were seen in Korea,
though they made no permanent impression on the country. It was reserved
for Hideyoshi, the taiko, to make the Korean peninsula the scene of a
great over-sea campaign. Hideyoshi, the Napoleon of Japan, having
brought the whole empire under his sway as the sequel of many years of
incomparable generalship and statecraft, conceived the project of
subjugating China. By some historians his motive has been described as a
desire to find employment for the immense mob of armed men whom four
centuries of almost continuous fighting had called into existence in
Japan: he felt that domestic peace could not be permanently restored
unless these restless spirits were occupied abroad. But although that
object may have reinforced his purpose, his ambition aimed at nothing
less than the conquest of China, and he regarded Korea merely as a
stepping-stone to that aim. Had Korea consented to be put to such a use,
she need not have fought or suffered. The Koreans, however, counted
China invincible. They considered that Japan would be shattered by the
first contact with the great empire, and therefore although, in the 13th
century, they had given the use of their harbours to the Mongol invaders
of Japan, they flatly refused in the 16th to allow their territory to be
used for a Japanese invasion of China. On the 24th of May 1592 the wave
of invasion rolled against Korea's southern coast. Hideyoshi had chosen
Nagoya in the province of Hizen as the home-base of his operations.
There the sea separating Japan from the Korean peninsula narrows to a
strait divided into two channels of almost equal width by the island of
Tsushima. To reach this island from the Japanese side was an easy and
safe task, but in the 56-mile channel that separated Tsushima from the
peninsula an invading flotilla had to run the risk of attack by Korean
war-ships. At Nagoya Hideyoshi assembled an army of over 300,000 men, of
whom some 70,000 constituted the first fighting line, 87,000 the second,
and the remainder formed a reserve to be subsequently drawn on as
occasion demanded. The question of transport presented some difficulty,
but it was solved by the simple expedient of ordering every feudatory to
furnish two ships for each 100,000 _koku_ of his fief's revenue. These
were not fighting vessels but mere transports. As for the plan of
campaign, it was precisely in accord with modern principles of strategy,
and bore witness to the daring genius of Hideyoshi. The van, consisting
of three army corps and mustering in all 51,000 men, was to cross
rapidly to Fusan, on the south coast of the peninsula, and immediately
commence a movement northward towards the capital, Seoul, one corps
moving by the eastern coast-road, one by the central route, and one by
the western coast-line. Thereafter the other four corps, which formed
the first fighting line, together with the corps under the direct orders
of the commander-in-chief, Ukida Hideiye, were to cross, for the purpose
of effectually subduing the regions through which the van had passed;
and, finally, the two remaining corps of the second line were to be
transported by sea up the west coast of the peninsula, to form a
junction with the van which, by that time, should be preparing to pass
into China over the northern boundary of Korea, namely, the Yalu River.
For the landing place of these reinforcements the town of Phyong-yang
was adopted, being easily accessible by the Taidong River from the
coast. In later ages Japanese armies were destined to move twice over
these same regions, once to the invasion of China, once to the attack of
Russia, and they adopted almost the same strategical plan as that mapped
out by Hideyoshi in the year 1592. The forecast was that the Koreans
would offer their chief resistance, first, at the capital, Seoul; next
at Phyong-yang, and finally at the Yalu, as the approaches to all these
places offered positions capable of being utilized to great advantage
for defensive purposes.
Landing In Korea and Advance of the Invaders.
On the 24th of May 1592 the first army corps, under the command of
Konishi Yukinaga, crossed unmolested to the peninsula; next day the
castle of Fusan was carried by storm, which same fate befell, on the
27th, another and stronger fortress lying 3 miles inland and garrisoned
by 20,000 picked soldiers. The invaders were irresistible. From the
landing-place at Fusan to the gates of Seoul the distance is 267 miles.
Konishi's corps covered that interval in 19 days, storming two forts,
carrying two positions and fighting one pitched battle _en route_. On
the 12th of June the Korean capital was in Japanese hands, and by the
16th four army corps had assembled there, while four others had effected
a landing at Fusan. After a rest of 15 days the northward advance was
resumed, and July 15th saw Phyong-yang in Japanese possession. The
distance of 130 miles from Seoul to the Taidong had been traversed in 18
days, 10 having been occupied in forcing the passage of a river which,
if held with moderate resolution and skill, should have stopped the
Japanese altogether. At this point, however, the invasion suffered a
check owing to a cause which in modern times has received much
attention, though in Hideyoshi's days it had been little considered; the
Japanese lost the command of the sea.
Fighting at Sea.
The Japanese idea of sea-fighting in those times was to use open boats
propelled chiefly by oars. They closed as quickly as possible with the
enemy, and then fell on with the trenchant swords which they used so
skilfully. Now during the 15th century and part of the 16th the Chinese
had been so harassed by Japanese piratical raids that their inventive
genius, quickened by suffering, suggested a device for coping with these
formidable adversaries. Once allow the Japanese swordsman to come to
close quarters and he carried all before him. To keep him at a distance,
then, was the great desideratum, and the Chinese compassed this in
maritime warfare by completely covering their boats with roofs of solid
timber, so that those within were protected against missiles, while
loop-holes and ports enabled them to pour bullets and arrows on a foe.
The Koreans learned this device from the Chinese and were the first to
employ it in actual warfare. Their own history alleges that they
improved upon the Chinese model by nailing sheet iron over the roofs and
sides of the "turtle-shell" craft and studding the whole surface with
_chevaux de frise_, but Japanese annals indicate that in the great
majority of cases solid timber alone was used. It seems strange that the
Japanese should have been without any clear perception of the immense
fighting superiority possessed by such protected war-vessels over small
open boats. But certainly they were either ignorant or indifferent. The
fleet which they provided to hold the command of Korean waters did not
include one vessel of any magnitude; it consisted simply of some
hundreds of row-boats manned by 7000 men. Hideyoshi himself was perhaps
not without misgivings. Six years previously he had endeavoured to
obtain two war-galleons from the Portuguese, and had he succeeded, the
history of the Far East might have been radically different. Evidently,
however, he committed a blunder which his countrymen in modern times
have conspicuously avoided; he drew the sword without having fully
investigated his adversary's resources. Just about the time when the van
of the Japanese army was entering Seoul, the Korean admiral, Yi Sun-sin,
at the head of a fleet of 80 vessels, attacked the Japanese squadron
which lay at anchor near the entrance to Fusan harbour, set 26 of the
vessels on fire and dispersed the rest. Four other engagements ensued in
rapid succession. The last and most important took place shortly after
the Japanese troops had seized Phyong-yang. It resulted in the sinking
of over 70 Japanese vessels, transports and fighting ships combined,
which formed the main part of a flotilla carrying reinforcements by sea
to the van of the invading army. This despatch of troops and supplies by
water had been a leading feature of Hideyoshi's plan of campaign, and
the destruction of the flotilla to which the duty was entrusted may be
said to have sealed the fate of the war by isolating the army in Korea
from its home base. It is true that Konishi Yukinaga, who commanded the
first division, would have continued his northward march from
Phyong-yang without delay. He argued that China was wholly unprepared,
and that the best hope of ultimate victory lay in not giving her time to
collect her forces. But the commander-in-chief, Ukida Hideiye, refused
to endorse this plan. He took the view that since the Korean provinces
were still offering desperate resistance, supplies could not be drawn
from them, neither could the troops engaged in subjugating them be freed
for service at the front. Therefore it was essential to await the
consummation of the second phase of Hideyoshi's plan, namely, the
despatch of reinforcements and munitions by water to Phyong-yang. The
reader has seen how that second phase fared. The Japanese commander at
Phyong-yang never received any accession of strength. His force suffered
constant diminution from casualties, and the question of commissariat
became daily more difficult. It is further plain to any reader of
history--and Japanese historians themselves admit the fact--that no wise
effort was made to conciliate the Korean people. They were treated so
harshly that even the humble peasant took up arms, and thus the
peninsula, instead of serving as a basis of supplies, had to be
garrisoned perpetually by a strong army.
Chinese Intervention.
The Koreans, having suffered for their loyalty to China, naturally
looked to her for succour. Again and again appeals were made to Peking,
and at length a force of 5000 men, which had been mobilized in the
Liaotung peninsula, crossed the Yalu and moved south to Phyong-yang,
where the Japanese van had been lying idle for over two months. This was
early in October 1592. Memorable as the first encounter between Japanese
and Chinese, the incident also illustrated China's supreme confidence in
her own ineffable superiority. The whole of the Korean forces had been
driven northward throughout the entire length of the peninsula by the
Japanese armies, yet Peking considered that 5000 Chinese "braves" would
suffice to roll back this tide of invasion. Three thousand of the
Chinese were killed and the remainder fled pell-mell across the Yalu.
China now began to be seriously alarmed. She collected an army variously
estimated at from 51,000 to 200,000 men, and marching it across
Manchuria in the dead of winter, hurled it against Phyong-yang during
the first week of February 1593. The Japanese garrison did not exceed
20,000, nearly one-half of its original number having been detached to
hold a line of forts which guarded the communications with Seoul.
Moreover, the Chinese, though their swords were much inferior to the
Japanese weapon, possessed great superiority in artillery and cavalry,
as well as in the fact that their troopers wore iron mail which defied
the keenest blade. Thus, after a severe fight, the Japanese had to
evacuate Phyong-yang and fall back upon Seoul. But this one victory
alone stands to China's credit. In all subsequent encounters of any
magnitude her army suffered heavy defeats, losing on one occasion some
10,000 men, on another 4000, and on a third 39,000. But the presence of
her forces and the determined resistance offered by the Koreans
effectually saved China from invasion. Indeed, after the evacuation of
Seoul, on the 9th of May 1593, Hideyoshi abandoned all idea of carrying
the war into Chinese territory, and devoted his attention to obtaining
honourable terms of peace, the Japanese troops meanwhile holding a line
of forts along the southern coast of Korea. He died before that end had
been accomplished. Had he lived a few days longer, he would have learned
of a crushing defeat inflicted on the Chinese forces (at Sö-chhön,
October 30, 1598), when the Satsuma men under Shimazu Yoshihiro took
38,700 Chinese heads and sent the noses and ears to Japan, where they
now lie buried under a tumulus (_mimizuka_, ear-mound) near the temple
of Daibutsu in Kioto. Thereafter the statesmen to whom the regent on his
death-bed had entrusted the duty of terminating the struggle and
recalling the troops, intimated to the enemy that the evacuation of the
peninsula might be obtained if a Korean prince repaired to Japan as
envoy, and if some tiger-skins and _ginseng_ were sent to Kioto in token
of amity. So ended one of the greatest over-sea campaigns recorded in
history. It had lasted 6½ years, had seen 200,000 Japanese troops at one
time on Korean soil, and had cost something like a quarter of a million
lives.
Contrast between Foreign Relations in Medieval and Modern Times.
From the recall of the Korea expedition in 1598 to the resumption of
intercourse with the Occident in modern times, Japan enjoyed
uninterrupted peace with foreign nations. Thereafter she had to engage
in four wars. It is a striking contrast. During the first eleven
centuries of her historical existence she was involved in only one
contest abroad; during the next half century she fought four times
beyond the sea and was confronted by many complications. Whatever
material or moral advantages her association with the West conferred on
her, it did not bring peace.
The "Maria Luz" Complication.
The first menacing foreign complication with which the Japanese
government of the Meiji era had to deal was connected with the traffic
in Chinese labour, an abuse not yet wholly eradicated. In 1872, a
Peruvian ship, the "Maria Luz," put into port at Yokohama, carrying 200
contract labourers. One of the unfortunate men succeeded in reaching the
shore and made a piteous appeal to the Japanese authorities, who at once
seized the vessel and released her freight of slaves, for they were
little better. The Japanese had not always been so particular. In the
days of early foreign intercourse, before England's attitude towards
slavery had established a new code of ethics, Portuguese ships had been
permitted to carry away from Hirado, as they did from Macao, cargoes of
men and women, doomed to a life of enforced toil if they survived the
horrors of the voyage. But modern Japan followed the tenets of modern
morality in such matters. Of course the Peruvian government protested,
and for a time relations were strained almost to the point of rupture;
but it was finally agreed that the question should be submitted to the
arbitration of the tsar, who decided in Japan's favour. Japan's attitude
in this affair elicited applause, not merely from the point of view of
humanity, but also because of the confidence she showed in Occidental
justice.
The Sakhalin Complication.
Another complication which occupied the attention of the Tokyo
government from the beginning of the Meiji era was in truth a legacy
from the days of feudalism. In those days the island of Yezo, as well as
Sakhalin on its north-west and the Kurile group on its north, could
scarcely be said to be in effective Japanese occupation. It is true that
the feudal chief of Matsumae (now Fuku-yama), the remains of whose
castle may still be seen on the coast at the southern extremity of the
island of Yezo, exercised nominal jurisdiction; but his functions did
not greatly exceed the levying of taxes on the aboriginal inhabitants of
Yezo, the Kuriles and southern Sakhalin. Thus from the beginning of the
18th century Russian fishermen began to settle in the Kuriles and
Russian ships menaced Sakhalin. There can be no doubt that the first
explorers of Sakhalin were Japanese. As early as 1620, some vassals of
the feudal chief of Matsumae visited the place and passed a winter
there. It was then supposed to be a peninsula forming part of the
Asiatic mainland, but in 1806 a daring Japanese traveller, by name
Mamiya Rinzo, made his way to Manchuria, voyaged up and down the Amur,
and, crossing to Sakhalin, discovered that a narrow strait separated it
from the mainland. There still prevails in the minds of many Occidentals
a belief that the discovery of Sakhalin's insular character was reserved
for Captain Nevelskoy, a Russian, who visited the place in 1849, but in
Japan the fact had then been known for 43 years. Muravief, the great
Russian empire-builder in East Asia, under whose orders Nevelskoy acted,
quickly appreciated the necessity of acquiring Sakhalin, which commands
the estuary of the Amur. After the conclusion of the treaty of Aigun
(1857) he visited Japan with a squadron, and required that the strait of
La Pérouse, which separates Sakhalin from Yezo, should be regarded as
the frontier between Russia and Japan. This would have given the whole
of Sakhalin to Russia. Japan refused, and Muravief immediately resorted
to the policy he had already pursued with signal success in the Usuri
region: he sent emigrants to settle in Sakhalin. Twice the shogunate
attempted to frustrate this process of gradual absorption by proposing a
division of the island along the 50th parallel of north latitude, and
finally, in 1872, the Meiji government offered to purchase the Russian
portion for 2,000,000 dollars (then equivalent to about £400,000). St
Petersburg, having by that time discovered the comparative worthlessness
of the island as a wealth-earning possession, showed some signs of
acquiescence, and possibly an agreement might have been reached had not
a leading Japanese statesman--afterwards Count Kuroda--opposed the
bargain as disadvantageous to Japan. Finally St Petersburg's
perseverance won the day. In 1875 Japan agreed to recognize Russia's
title to the whole island on condition that Russia similarly recognized
Japan's title to the Kuriles. It was a singular compact. Russia
purchased a Japanese property and paid for it with a part of Japan's
belongings. These details form a curious preface to the fact that
Sakhalin was destined, 30 years later, to be the scene of a Japanese
invasion, in the sequel of which it was divided along the 50th parallel
as the shogun's administration had originally proposed.
Military Expedition to Formosa.
The first of Japan's four conflicts was an expedition to Formosa in
1874. Insignificant from a military point of view, this affair derives
vicarious interest from its effect upon the relations between China and
Japan, and upon the question of the ownership of the Riukiu islands.
These islands, which lie at a little distance south of Japan, had for
centuries been regarded as an apanage of the Satsuma fief. The language
and customs of their inhabitants showed unmistakable traces of
relationship to the Japanese, and the possibility of the islands being
included among the dominions of China had probably never occurred to any
Japanese statesman. When therefore, in 1873, the crew of a wrecked
Riukiuan junk were barbarously treated by the inhabitants of northern
Formosa, the Japanese government unhesitatingly assumed the
responsibility of seeking redress for their outrage. Formosa being a
part of the Chinese Empire, complaint was duly preferred in Peking. But
the Chinese authorities showed such resolute indifference to Japan's
representations that the latter finally took the law into her own hands,
and sent a small force to punish the Formosan murderers, who, of course,
were found quite unable to offer any serious resistance. The Chinese
government, now recognizing the fact that its territories had been
invaded, lodged a protest which, but for the intervention of the British
minister in Peking, might have involved the two empires in war. The
final terms of arrangement were that, in consideration of Japan
withdrawing her troops from Formosa, China should indemnify her to the
extent of the expenses of the expedition. In sending this expedition to
Formosa the government sought to placate the Satsuma samurai, who were
beginning to show much opposition to certain features of the
administrative reforms just inaugurated, and who claimed special
interest in the affairs of the Riukiu islands.
The Riukiu Complication.
Had Japan needed any confirmation of her belief that the Riukiu islands
belonged to her, the incidents and settlement of the Formosan
complication would have constituted conclusive evidence. Thus in 1876
she did not hesitate to extend her newly organized system of prefectural
government to Riukiu, which thenceforth became the Okinawa prefecture,
the former ruler of the islands being pensioned, according to the system
followed in the case of the feudal chiefs in Japan proper. China at once
entered an objection. She claimed that Riukiu had always been a
tributary of her empire, and she was doubtless perfectly sincere in the
contention. But China's interpretation of tribute did not seem
reducible to a working theory. So long as her own advantage could be
promoted, she regarded as a token of vassalage the presents periodically
carried to her court from neighbouring states. So soon, however, as
there arose any question of discharging a suzerain's duties, she classed
these offerings as insignificant interchanges of neighbourly courtesy.
It was true that Riukiu had followed the custom of despatching
gift-bearing envoys to China from time to time, just as Japan herself
had done, though with less regularity. But it was also true that Riukiu
had been subdued by Satsuma without China stretching out a hand to help
her; that for two centuries the islands had been included in the Satsuma
fief, and that China, in the sequel to the Formosan affair, had made a
practical acknowledgment of Japan's superior title to protect the
islanders. Each empire positively asserted its claims; but whereas Japan
put hers into practice, China confined herself to remonstrances. Things
remained in that state until 1880, when General Grant, visiting the
East, suggested the advisability of a compromise. A conference met in
Peking, and the plenipotentiaries agreed that the islands should be
divided, Japan taking the northern group, China the southern. But on the
eve of signature the Chinese plenipotentiary drew back, pleading that he
had no authority to conclude an agreement without previously referring
it to certain other dignitaries. Japan, sensible that she had been
flouted, retired from the discussion and retained the islands, China's
share in them being reduced to a grievance.
The Korean Complication.
From the 16th century, when the Korean peninsula was overrun by Japanese
troops, its rulers made a habit of sending a present-bearing embassy to
Japan to felicitate the accession of each shogun. But after the fall of
the Tokugawa shogunate, the Korean court desisted from this custom,
declared a determination to have no further relations with a country
embracing Western civilization, and refused even to receive a Japanese
embassy. This conduct caused deep umbrage in Japan. Several prominent
politicians cast their votes for war, and undoubtedly the sword would
have been drawn had not the leading statesmen felt that a struggle with
Korea, involving probably a rupture with China, must fatally check the
progress of the administrative reforms then (1873) in their infancy. Two
years later, however, the Koreans crowned their defiance by firing on
the boats of a Japanese war-vessel engaged in the operation of
coast-surveying. No choice now remained except to despatch an armed
expedition against the truculent kingdom. But Japan did not want to
fight. In this matter she showed herself an apt pupil of Occidental
methods such as had been practised against herself in former years. She
assembled an imposing force of war-ships and transports, but instead of
proceeding to extremities, she employed the squadron--which was by no
means so strong as it seemed--to intimidate Korea into signing a treaty
of amity and commerce, and opening three ports to foreign trade (1876).
That was the beginning of Korea's friendly relations with the outer
world, and Japan naturally took credit for the fact that, thus early in
her new career, she had become an instrument for extending the principle
of universal intercourse opposed so strenuously by herself in the past.
War with China.
From time immemorial China's policy towards the petty states on her
frontiers had been to utilize them as buffers for softening the shock of
foreign contact, while contriving, at the same time, that her relations
with them should involve no inconvenient responsibilities for herself.
The aggressive impulses of the outside world were to be checked by an
unproclaimed understanding that the territories of these states partook
of the inviolability of China, while the states, on their side, must
never expect their suzerain to bear the consequences of their acts. This
arrangement, depending largely on sentiment and prestige, retained its
validity in the atmosphere of Oriental seclusion, but quickly failed to
endure the test of modern Occidental practicality. Tongking, Annam, Siam
and Burma were withdrawn, one by one, from the fiction of dependence on
China and independence towards all other countries. But with regard to
Korea, China proved more tenacious. The possession of the peninsula by
a foreign power would have threatened the maritime route to the Chinese
capital and given easy access to Manchuria, the cradle of the dynasty
which ruled China. Therefore Peking statesmen endeavoured to preserve
the old-time relations with the little kingdom. But they could never
persuade themselves to modify the indirect methods sanctioned by
tradition. Instead of boldly declaring Korea a dependency of China, they
sought to keep up the romance of ultimate dependency and intermediate
sovereignty. Thus in 1876 Korea was suffered to conclude with Japan a
treaty of which the first article declared her "an independent state
enjoying the same rights as Japan," and subsequently to make with the
United States (1882), Great Britain (1883) and other powers, treaties in
which her independence was constructively admitted. China, however, did
not intend that Korea should exercise the independence thus
conventionally recognized. A Chinese resident was placed in Seoul, and a
system of steady though covert interference in Korea's affairs was
inaugurated. The chief sufferer from these anomalous conditions was
Japan. In all her dealings with Korea, in all complications that arose
out of her comparatively large trade with the peninsula, in all
questions connected with her numerous settlers there, she found herself
negotiating with a dependency of China, and with officials who took
their orders from the Chinese representative. China had long entertained
a rooted apprehension of Japanese aggression in Korea--an apprehension
not unwarranted by history--and that distrust tinged all the influence
exerted by her agents there. On many occasions Japan was made sensible
of the discrimination thus exercised against her. Little by little the
consciousness roused her indignation, and although no single instance
constituted a ground for strong international protest, the Japanese
people gradually acquired a sense of being perpetually baffled, thwarted
and humiliated by China's interference in Korean affairs. For thirty
years China had treated Japan as a contemptible deserter from the
Oriental standard, and had regarded her progressive efforts with openly
disdainful aversion; while Japan, on her side, had chafed more and more
to furnish some striking evidence of the wisdom of her preference for
Western civilization. Even more serious were the consequences of Chinese
interference from the point of view of Korean administration. The rulers
of the country lost all sense of national responsibility, and gave
unrestrained sway to selfish ambition. The functions of the judiciary
and of the executive alike came to be discharged by bribery only. Family
interests predominated over those of the state. Taxes were imposed in
proportion to the greed of local officials. No thought whatever was
taken for the welfare of the people or for the development of the
country's resources. Personal responsibility was unknown among
officials. To be a member of the Min family, to which the queen
belonged, was to possess a passport to office and an indemnity against
the consequences of abuse of power. From time to time the advocates of
progress or the victims of oppression rose in arms. They effected
nothing except to recall to the world's recollection the miserable
condition into which Korea had fallen. Chinese military aid was always
furnished readily for the suppression of these risings, and thus the Min
family learned to base its tenure of power on ability to conciliate
China and on readiness to obey Chinese dictation, while the people at
large fell into the apathetic condition of men who possess neither
security of property nor national ambition.
As a matter of state policy the Korean problem caused much anxiety to
Japan. Her own security being deeply concerned in preserving Korea from
the grasp of a Western power, she could not suffer the little kingdom to
drift into a condition of such administrative incompetence and national
debility that a strong aggressor might find at any moment a pretext for
interference. On two occasions (1882 and 1884) when China's armed
intervention was employed in the interests of the Min to suppress
movements of reform, the partisans of the victors, regarding Japan as
the fountain of progressive tendencies, destroyed her legation in Seoul
and compelled its inmates to fly from the city. Japan behaved with
forbearance at these crises, but in the consequent negotiations she
acquired conventional titles that touched the core of China's alleged
suzerainty. In 1882 her right to maintain troops in Seoul for the
protection of her legation was admitted; in 1885 she concluded with
China a convention by which each power pledged itself not to send troops
to Korea without notifying the other.
The Rupture with China.
In the spring of 1894 a serious insurrection broke out in Korea, and the
Min family appealed for China's aid. On the 6th of July 2500 Chinese
troops embarked at Tientsin and were transported to the peninsula, where
they went into camp at Ya-shan (Asan), on the south-west coast, notice
of the measure being given by the Chinese government to the Japanese
representative at Peking, according to treaty. During the interval
immediately preceding these events, Japan had been rendered acutely
sensible of China's arbitrary and unfriendly interference in Korea.
Twice the efforts of the Japanese government to obtain redress for
unlawful and ruinous commercial prohibitions had been thwarted by the
Chinese representative in Seoul; and an ultimatum addressed from Tokyo
to the Korean government had elicited from the viceroy Li in Tientsin a
thinly veiled threat of Chinese armed opposition. Still more provocative
of national indignation was China's procedure with regard to the murder
of Kim Ok-kyun, the leader of progress in Korea, who had been for some
years a refugee in Japan. Inveigled from Japan to China by a
fellow-countryman sent from Seoul to assassinate him, Kim was shot in a
Japanese hotel in Shanghai; and China, instead of punishing the
murderer, conveyed him in a war-ship of her own to Korea to be publicly
honoured. When, therefore, the Korean insurrection of 1894 induced the
Min family again to solicit China's armed intervention, the Tokyo
government concluded that, in the interests of Japan's security and of
civilization in the Orient, steps must be taken to put an end to the
misrule which offered incessant invitations to foreign aggression, and
checked Korea's capacity to maintain its own independence. Japan did not
claim for herself any rights or interests in the peninsula superior to
those possessed there by China. But there was not the remotest
probability that China, whose face had been contemptuously set against
all the progressive measures adopted by Japan during the preceding
twenty-five years, would join in forcing upon a neighbouring kingdom the
very reforms she herself despised, were her co-operation invited through
ordinary diplomatic channels only. It was necessary to contrive a
situation which would not only furnish clear proof of Japan's
resolution, but also enable her to pursue her programme independently of
Chinese endorsement, should the latter be finally unobtainable. She
therefore met China's notice of a despatch of troops with a
corresponding notice of her own, and the month of July 1894 found a
Chinese force assembled at Asan and a Japanese force occupying positions
in the neighbourhood of Seoul. China's motive for sending troops was
nominally to quell the Tonghak insurrection, but really to re-affirm her
own domination in the peninsula. Japan's motive was to secure such a
position as would enable her to insist upon the radically curative
treatment of Korea's malady. Up to this point the two empires were
strictly within their conventional rights. Each was entitled by treaty
to send troops to Korea, provided that notice was given to the other.
But China, in giving notice, described Korea as her "tributary state,"
thus thrusting into the forefront of the discussion a contention which
Japan, from conciliatory motives, would have kept out of sight. Once
formally advanced, however, the claim had to be challenged. In the
treaty of amity and commerce concluded in 1876 between Japan and Korea,
the two high contracting parties were explicitly declared to possess the
same national status. Japan could not agree that a power which for
nearly two decades she had acknowledged and treated as her equal should
be openly classed as a tributary of China. She protested, but the
Chinese statesmen took no notice of her protest. They continued to apply
the disputed appellation to Korea, and they further asserted their
assumption of sovereignty in the peninsula by seeking to set limits to
the number of troops sent by Japan, as well as to the sphere of their
employment. Japan then proposed that the two empires should unite their
efforts for the suppression of disturbances in Korea, and for the
subsequent improvement of that kingdom's administration, the latter
purpose to be pursued by the despatch of a joint commission of
investigation. But China refused everything. Ready at all times to
interfere by force of arms between the Korean people and the dominant
political faction, she declined to interfere in any way for the
promotion of reform. She even expressed supercilious surprise that
Japan, while asserting Korea's independence, should suggest the idea of
peremptorily reforming its administration. In short, for Chinese
purposes the Peking statesmen openly declared Korea a tributary state;
but for Japanese purposes they insisted that it must be held
independent. They believed that their island neighbour aimed at the
absorption of Korea into the Japanese empire. Viewed in the light of
that suspicion, China's attitude became comprehensible, but her
procedure was inconsistent, illogical and unpractical. The Tokyo cabinet
now declared its resolve not to withdraw the Japanese troops without
"some understanding that would guarantee the future peace, order, and
good government of Korea," and since China still declined to come to
such an understanding, Japan undertook the work of reform single-handed.
Outbreak of Hostilities.
The Chinese representative in Seoul threw his whole weight into the
scale against the success of these reforms. But the determining cause of
rupture was in itself a belligerent operation. China's troops had been
sent originally for the purpose of quelling the Tonghak rebellion. But
the rebellion having died of inanition before the landing of the troops,
their services were not required. Nevertheless China kept them in Korea,
her declared reason for doing so being the presence of a Japanese
military force. Throughout the subsequent negotiations the Chinese
forces lay in an entrenched camp at Asan, while the Japanese occupied
Seoul. An attempt on China's part to send reinforcements could be
construed only as an unequivocal declaration of resolve to oppose
Japan's proceedings by force of arms. Nevertheless China not only
despatched troops by sea to strengthen the camp at Asan, but also sent
an army overland across Korea's northern frontier. At this stage an act
of war occurred. Three Chinese men-of-war, convoying a transport with
1200 men encountered and fired on three Japanese cruisers. One of the
Chinese ships was taken; another was so shattered that she had to be
beached and abandoned; the third escaped in a dilapidated condition; and
the transport, refusing to surrender, was sunk. This happened on the
25th of July 1894, and an open declaration of war was made by each
empire six days later.
Remote Origin of the Conflict.
From the moment when Japan applied herself to break away from Oriental
traditions, and to remove from her limbs the fetters of Eastern
conservatism, it was inevitable that a widening gulf should gradually
grow between herself and China. The war of 1894 was really a contest
between Japanese progress and Chinese stagnation. To secure Korean
immunity from foreign--especially Russian--aggression was of capital
importance to both empires. Japan believed that such security could be
attained by introducing into Korea the civilization which had
contributed so signally to the development of her own strength and
resources. China thought that she could guarantee it without any
departure from old-fashioned methods, and by the same process of
capricious protection which had failed so signally in the cases of
Annam, Tongking, Burma and Siam. The issue really at stake was whether
Japan should be suffered to act as the Eastern propagandist of Western
progress, or whether her efforts in that cause should be held in check
by Chinese conservatism.
Events of the War.
The war itself was a succession of triumphs for Japan. Four days after
the first naval encounter she sent from Seoul a column of troops who
routed the Chinese entrenched at Asan. Many of the fugitives effected
their escape to Phyong-yang, a town on the Taidong River, offering
excellent facilities for defence, and historically interesting as the
place where a Japanese army of invasion had its first encounter with
Chinese troops in 1592. There the Chinese assembled a force of 17,000
men, and made leisurely preparations for a decisive contest. Forty days
elapsed before the Japanese columns converged upon Phyong-yang, and that
interval was utilized by the Chinese to throw up parapets, mount Krupp
guns and otherwise strengthen their position. Moreover, they were armed
with repeating rifles, whereas the Japanese had only single-loaders, and
the ground offered little cover for an attacking force. In such
circumstances, the advantages possessed by the defence ought to have
been well-nigh insuperable; yet a day's fighting sufficed to carry all
the positions, the assailants' casualties amounting to less than 700 and
the defenders losing 6000 in killed and wounded. This brilliant victory
was the prelude to an equally conspicuous success at sea. For on the
17th of September, the very day after the battle at Phyong-yang, a great
naval fight took place near the mouth of the Yalu River, which forms the
northern boundary of Korea. Fourteen Chinese war-ships and six
torpedo-boats were returning to home ports after convoying a fleet of
transports to the Yalu, when they encountered eleven Japanese men-of-war
cruising in the Yellow Sea. Hitherto the Chinese had sedulously avoided
a contest at sea. Their fleet included two armoured battleships of over
7000 tons displacement, whereas the biggest vessels on the Japanese side
were belted cruisers of only 4000 tons. In the hands of an admiral
appreciating the value of sea power, China's naval force would certainly
have been led against Japan's maritime communications, for a successful
blow struck there must have put an end to the Korean campaign. The
Chinese, however, failed to read history. They employed their
war-vessels as convoys only, and, when not using them for that purpose,
hid them in port. Everything goes to show that they would have avoided
the battle off the Yalu had choice been possible, though when forced to
fight they fought bravely. Four of their ships were sunk, and the
remainder escaped to Wei-hai-wei, the vigour of the Japanese pursuit
being greatly impaired by the presence of torpedo-boats in the
retreating squadron.
The Yalu victory opened the over-sea route to China. Japan could now
strike at Talien, Port Arthur, and Wei-hai-wei, naval stations on the
Liaotung and Shantung peninsulas, where powerful permanent
fortifications, built after plans prepared by European experts and armed
with the best modern weapons, were regarded as almost impregnable; They
fell before the assaults of the Japanese troops as easily as the
comparatively rude fortifications at Phyong-yang had fallen. The only
resistance of a stubborn character was made by the Chinese fleet at
Wei-hai-wei; but after the whole squadron of torpedo-craft had been
destroyed or captured as they attempted to escape, and after three of
the largest vessels had been sunk at their moorings by Japanese
torpedoes, and one by gun-fire, the remaining ships surrendered, and
their brave commander, Admiral Ting, committed suicide. This ended the
war. It had lasted seven and a half months, during which time Japan put
into the field five columns, aggregating about 120,000 of all arms. One
of these columns marched northward from Seoul, won the battle of
Phyong-yang, advanced to the Yalu, forced its way into Manchuria, and
moved towards Mukden by Feng-hwang, fighting several minor engagements,
and conducting the greater part of its operations amid deep snow in
midwinter. The second column diverged westwards from the Yalu, and,
marching through southern Manchuria, reached Hai-cheng, whence it
advanced to the capture of Niuchwang and Ying-tse-kow. The third landed
on the Liaotung peninsula, and, turning southwards, carried Talien and
Port Arthur by assault. The fourth moved up the Liaotung peninsula, and,
having seized Kaiping, advanced against Ying-tse-kow, where it joined
hands with the second column. The fifth crossed from Port Arthur to
Wei-hai-wei, and captured the latter. In all these operations the total
Japanese casualties were 1005 killed and 4922 wounded--figures which
sufficiently indicate the inefficiency of the Chinese fighting. The
deaths from disease totalled 16,866, and the total monetary expenditure
was £20,000,000 sterling.
Conclusion of Peace.
The Chinese government sent Li Hung-chang, viceroy of Pechili and senior
grand secretary of state, and Li Ching-fong, to discuss terms of peace
with Japan, the latter being represented by Marquis (afterwards Prince)
Ito and Count Mutsu, prime minister and minister for foreign affairs,
respectively. A treaty was signed at Shimonoseki on the 17th of April
1895, and subsequently ratified by the sovereigns of the two empires. It
declared the absolute independence of Korea; ceded to Japan the part of
Manchuria lying south of a line drawn from the mouth of the river Anping
to the mouth of the Liao, through Feng-hwang, Hai-cheng and
Ying-tse-kow, as well as the islands of Formosa and the Pescadores;
pledged China to pay an indemnity of 200,000,000 taels; provided for the
occupation of Wei-hai-wei by Japan pending payment of the indemnity;
secured some additional commercial privileges, such as the opening of
four new places to foreign trade and the right of foreigners to engage
in manufacturing enterprises in China, and provided for the conclusion
of a treaty of commerce and amity between the two empires, based on the
lines of China's treaties with Occidental powers.
Foreign Interference.
No sooner was this agreement ratified than Russia, Germany and France
presented a joint note to the Tokyo government, recommending that the
territories ceded to Japan on the mainland of China should not be
permanently occupied, as such a proceeding would be detrimental to
peace. The recommendation was couched in the usual terms of diplomatic
courtesy, but everything indicated that its signatories were prepared to
enforce their advice by an appeal to arms. Japan found herself compelled
to comply. Exhausted by the Chinese campaign, which had drained her
treasury, consumed her supplies of warlike material, and kept her
squadrons constantly at sea for eight months, she had no residue of
strength to oppose such a coalition. Her resolve was quickly taken. The
day that saw the publication of the ratified treaty saw also the issue
of an Imperial rescript in which the mikado, avowing his unalterable
devotion to the cause of peace, and recognizing that the counsel offered
by the European states was prompted by the same sentiment, "yielded to
the dictates of magnanimity, and accepted the advice of the three
Powers." The Japanese people were shocked by this incident. They could
understand the motives influencing Russia and France, for it was
evidently natural that the former should desire to exclude warlike and
progressive people like the Japanese from territories contiguous to her
borders, and it was also natural that France should remain true to her
alliance with Russia. But Germany, wholly uninterested in the ownership
of Manchuria, and by profession a warm friend of Japan, seemed to have
joined in robbing the latter of the fruits of her victory simply for the
sake of establishing some shadowy title to Russia's goodwill. It was not
known until a later period that the German emperor entertained profound
apprehensions about the "yellow peril," an irruption of Oriental hordes
into the Occident, and held it a sacred duty to prevent Japan from
gaining a position which might enable her to construct an immense
military machine out of the countless millions of China.
Chinese Crisis of 1900.
Japan's third expedition over-sea in the Meiji era had its origin in
causes which belong to the history of China (q.v.). In the second half
of 1900 an anti-foreign and anti-dynastic rebellion, breaking out in
Shantung, spread to the metropolitan province of Pechili, and resulted
in a situation of extreme peril for the foreign communities of Tientsin
and Peking. It was impossible for any European power, or for the United
States, to organize sufficiently prompt measures of relief. Thus the
eyes of the world turned to Japan, whose proximity to the scene of
disturbance rendered intervention comparatively easy for her. But Japan
hesitated. Knowing now with what suspicion and distrust the development
of her resources and the growth of her military strength were regarded
by some European peoples, and aware that she had been admitted to the
comity of Western nations on sufferance, she shrank, on the one hand,
from seeming to grasp at an opportunity for armed display, and, on the
other, from the solecism of obtrusiveness in the society of strangers.
Not until Europe and America made it quite plain that they needed and
desired her aid did she send a division (21,000) men to Pechili. Her
troops played a fine part in the subsequent expedition for the relief of
Peking, which had to be approached in midsummer under very trying
conditions. Fighting side by side with European and American soldiers,
and under the eyes of competent military critics, the Japanese acquitted
themselves in such a manner as to establish a high military reputation.
Further, after the relief of Peking they withdrew a moiety of their
forces, and that step, as well as their unequivocal co-operation with
Western powers in the subsequent negotiations, helped to show the
injustice of the suspicions with which they had been regarded.
War with Russia.
From the time (1895) when Russia, with the co-operation of Germany and
France, dictated to Japan a cardinal alteration of the Shimonoseki
treaty, Japanese statesmen seem to have concluded that their country
must one day cross swords with the great northern power. Not a few
European and American publicists shared that view. But the vast
majority, arguing that the little Eastern empire would never invite
annihilation by such an encounter, believed that sufficient forbearance
to avert serious trouble would always be forthcoming on Japan's side.
Yet when the geographical and historical situation was carefully
considered, little hope of an ultimately peaceful settlement presented
itself.
Japan along its western shore, Korea along its southern and eastern, and
Russia along the eastern coast of its maritime province, are washed by
the Sea of Japan. The communications between the sea and the Pacific
Ocean are practically two only. One is on the north-east, namely,
Tsugaru Strait; the other is on the south, namely, the channel between
the extremity of the Korean peninsula and the Japanese island of the
nine provinces. Tsugaru Strait is entirely under Japan's control. It is
between her main island and her island of Yezo, and in case of need she
can close it with mines. The channel between the southern extremity of
Korea and Japan has a width of 102 m. and would therefore be a fine open
sea-way were it free from islands. But almost mid-way in this channel
lie the twin islands of Tsushima, and the space of 56 m. that separates
them from Japan is narrowed by another island, Iki. Tsushima and Iki
belong to the Japanese empire. The former has some exceptionally good
harbours, constituting a naval base from which the channel on either
side could easily be sealed. Thus the avenues from the Pacific Ocean to
the Sea of Japan are controlled by the Japanese empire. In other words,
access to the Pacific from Korea's eastern and southern coasts and
access to the Pacific from Russia's maritime province depend upon
Japan's goodwill. So far as Korea was concerned this question mattered
little, it being her fate to depend upon the goodwill of Japan in
affairs of much greater importance. But with Russia the case was
different. Vladivostok, which until recent times was her principal port
in the Far East, lies at the southern extremity of the maritime
province; that is to say, on the north-western shore of the Japan Sea.
It was therefore necessary for Russia that freedom of passage by the
Tsushima channel should be secured, and to secure it one of two things
was essential, namely, either that she herself should possess a
fortified port on the Korean side, or that Japan should be bound neither
to acquire such a port nor to impose any restriction upon the navigation
of the strait. To put the matter briefly, Russia must either acquire a
strong foothold for herself in southern Korea, or contrive that Japan
should not acquire one. There was here a strong inducement for Russian
aggression in Korea.
Russia's eastward movement through Asia has been strikingly illustrative
of her strong craving for free access to southern seas and of the
impediments she had experienced in gratifying that wish. An irresistible
impulse had driven her oceanward. Checked again and again in her attempts
to reach the Mediterranean, she set out on a five-thousand-miles march of
conquest right across the vast Asiatic continent towards the Pacific.
Eastward of Lake Baikal she found her line of least resistance along the
Amur, and when, owing to the restless perseverance of Muravief, she
reached the mouth of that great river, the acquisition of Nikolayevsk for
a naval basis was her immediate reward. But Nikolayevsk could not
possibly satisfy her. Situated in an inhospitable region far away from
all the main routes of the world's commerce, it offered itself only as a
stepping-stone to further acquisitions. To push southward from this new
port became an immediate object to Russia. There lay an obstacle in the
way, however; the long strip of sea-coast from the mouth of the Amur to
the Korean frontier--an area then called the Usuri region because the
Usuri forms its western boundary--belonged to China, and she, having
conceded much to Russia in the matter of the Amur, showed no disposition
to make further concessions in the matter of the Usuri. In the presence
of menaces, however, she agreed that the region should be regarded as
common property pending a convenient opportunity for clear delimitation.
That opportunity came very soon. Seizing the moment (1860) when China had
been beaten to her knees by England and France, Russia secured final
cession of the Usuri region, which now became the maritime province of
Siberia. Then Russia shifted her naval base on the Pacific from
Nikolayevsk to Vladivostok. She gained ten degrees in a southerly
direction.
From the mouth of the Amur, where Nikolayevsk is situated, to the
southern shore of Korea there rests on the coast of eastern Asia an arch
of islands having at its northern point Sakhalin and at its southern
Tsushima, the keystone of the arch being the main island of Japan. This
arch embraces the Sea of Japan and is washed on its convex side by the
Pacific Ocean. Immediately after the transfer of Russia's naval base
from Nikolayevsk to Vladivostok, an attempt was made to obtain
possession of the southern point of the arch, namely, Tsushima. A
Russian man-of-war proceeded thither and quietly began to establish a
settlement, which would soon have constituted a title of ownership had
not Great Britain interfered. The Russians saw that Vladivostok,
acquired at the cost of so much toil, would be comparatively useless
unless from the sea on whose shore it was situated an avenue to the
Pacific could be opened, and they therefore tried to obtain command of
the Tsushima channel. Immediately after reaching the mouth of the Amur
the same instinct had led them to begin the colonization of Sakhalin.
The axis of this long narrow island is inclined at a very acute angle to
the Usuri region, which its northern extremity almost touches, while its
southern is separated from Yezo by the strait of La Pérouse. But in
Sakhalin the Russians found Japanese subjects. In fact the island was a
part of the Japanese empire. Resorting, however, to the Usuri fiction of
joint occupation, they succeeded by 1875 in transferring the whole of
Sakhalin to Russia's dominion. Further encroachments upon Japanese
territory could not be lightly essayed, and the Russians held their
hands. They had been trebly checked: checked in trying to push southward
along the coast of the mainland; checked in trying to secure an avenue
from Vladivostok to the Pacific; and checked in their search for an
ice-free port, which definition Vladivostok did not fulfil. Enterprise
in the direction of Korea seemed to be the only hope of saving the
maritime results of the great Trans-Asian march.
Was Korea within safe range of such enterprises? Everything seemed to
answer in the affirmative. Korea had all the qualifications desired by
an aggressor. Her people were unprogressive, her resources undeveloped,
her self-defensive capacities insignificant, her government corrupt. But
she was a tributary of China, and China had begun to show some tenacity
in protecting the integrity of her buffer states. Besides, Japan was
understood to have pretensions with regard to Korea. On the whole,
therefore, the problem of carrying to full fruition the work of Muravief
and his lieutenants demanded strength greater than Russia could exercise
without some line of communications supplementing the Amur waterway and
the long ocean route. Therefore she set about the construction of a
railway across Asia.
The Amur being the boundary of Russia's east Asian territory, this
railway had to be carried along its northern bank where many
engineering and economic obstacles presented themselves. Besides, the
river, from an early stage in its course, makes a huge semicircular
sweep northward, and a railway following its bank to Vladivostok must
make the same détour. If, on the contrary, the road could be carried
over the diameter of the semicircle, it would be a straight and
therefore shorter line, technically easier and economically better. The
diameter, however, passed through Chinese territory, and an excuse for
extorting China's permission was not in sight. Russia therefore
proceeded to build each end of the road, deferring the construction of
the Amur section for the moment. She had not waited long when, in 1894,
war broke out between China and Japan, and the latter, completely
victorious, demanded as the price of peace the southern littoral of
Manchuria from the Korean boundary to the Liaotung peninsula at the
entrance to the Gulf of Pechili. This was a crisis in Russia's career.
She saw that her maritime extension could never get nearer to the
Pacific than Vladivostok were this claim of Japan's established. For the
proposed arrangement would place the littoral of Manchuria in Japan's
direct occupation and the littoral of Korea in her constructive control,
since not only had she fought to rescue Korea from Chinese suzerainty,
but also her object in demanding a slice of the Manchurian coast-line
was to protect Korea against aggression from the north; that is to say,
against aggression from Russia. Muravief's enterprise had carried his
country first to the mouth of the Amur and thence southward along the
coast to Vladivostok and to Possiet Bay at the north-eastern extremity
of Korea. But it had not given to Russia free access to the Pacific, and
now she was menaced with a perpetual barrier to that access, since the
whole remaining coast of east Asia as far as the Gulf of Pechili was
about to pass into Japan's possession or under her domination.
Then Russia took an extraordinary step. She persuaded Germany and France
to force Japan out of Manchuria. It is not to be supposed that she
frankly exposed her own aggressive designs and asked for assistance to
prosecute them. Neither is it to be supposed that France and Germany
were so curiously deficient in perspicacity as to overlook those
designs. At all events these three great powers served on Japan a notice
to quit, and Japan, exhausted by her struggle with China, had no choice
but to obey.
The notice was accompanied by an _exposé_ of reasons. Its signatories
said that Japan's tenure of the Manchurian littoral would menace the
security of the Chinese capital, would render the independence of Korea
illusory, and would constitute an obstacle to the peace of the Orient.
By way of saving the situation in some slight degree Japan sought from
China a guarantee that no portion of Manchuria should thereafter be
leased or ceded to a foreign state. But France warned Japan that to
press such a demand would offend Russia, and Russia declared that, for
her part, she had no intention of trespassing in Manchuria. Japan, had
she been in a position to insist on the guarantee, would also have been
in a position to disobey the mandate of the three powers. Unable to do
either the one or the other, she quietly stepped out of Manchuria, and
proceeded to double her army and treble her navy.
As a reward for the assistance nominally rendered to China in this
matter, Russia obtained permission in Peking to divert her Trans-Asian
railway from the huge bend of the Amur to the straight line through
Manchuria. Neither Germany nor France received any immediate recompense.
Three years later, by way of indemnity for the murder of two
missionaries by a mob, Germany seized a portion of the province of
Shantung. Immediately, on the principle that two wrongs make a right,
Russia obtained a lease of the Liaotung peninsula, from which she had
driven Japan in 1895. This act she followed by extorting from China
permission to construct a branch of the Trans-Asian railway through
Manchuria from north to south.
Russia's maritime aspirations had now assumed a radically altered phase.
Instead of pushing southward from Vladivostok and Possiet Bay along the
coast of Korea, she had suddenly leaped the Korean peninsula and found
access to the Pacific in Liaotung. Nothing was wanting to establish her
as practical mistress of Manchuria except a plausible excuse for
garrisoning the place. Such an excuse was furnished by the Boxer rising
in 1900. Its conclusion saw her in military occupation of the whole
region, and she might easily have made her occupation permanent by
prolonging it until peace and order should have been fully restored. But
here she fell into an error of judgment. Imagining that the Chinese
could be persuaded or intimidated to any concession, she proposed a
convention virtually recognizing her title to Manchuria.
Japan watched all these things with profound anxiety. If there were any
reality in the dangers which Russia, Germany and France had declared to
be incidental to Japanese occupation of a part of Manchuria, the same
dangers must be doubly incidental to Russian occupation of the whole of
Manchuria--the security of the Chinese capital would be threatened, and
an obstacle would be created to the permanent peace of the East. The
independence of Korea was an object of supreme solicitude to Japan.
Historically she held towards the little state a relation closely
resembling that of suzerain, and though of her ancient conquests nothing
remained except a settlement at Fusan on the southern coast, her
national sentiment would have been deeply wounded by any foreign
aggression in the peninsula. It was to establish Korean independence
that she waged war with China in 1894; and her annexation of the
Manchurian littoral adjacent to the Korean frontier, after the war, was
designed to secure that independence, not to menace it as the triple
alliance professed to think. But if Russia came into possession of all
Manchuria, her subsequent absorption of Korea would be almost
inevitable. For the consideration set forth above as to Vladivostok's
maritime avenues would then acquire absolute cogency. Manchuria is
larger than France and the United Kingdom lumped together. The addition
of such an immense area to Russia's east Asiatic dominions, together
with its littoral on the Gulf of Pechili and the Yellow Sea, would
necessitate a corresponding expansion of her naval forces in the Far
East. With the one exception of Port Arthur, however, the Manchurian
coast does not offer any convenient naval base. It is only in the
splendid harbours of southern Korea that such bases can be found.
Moreover, there would be an even stronger motive impelling Russia
towards Korea. Neither the Usuri region nor the Manchurian littoral
possesses so much as one port qualified to satisfy her perennial longing
for free access to the ocean in a temperate zone. Without Korea, then,
Russia's east Asian expansion, though it added huge blocks of territory
to her dominions, would have been commercially incomplete and
strategically defective.
If it be asked why, apart from history and national sentiment, Japan
should object to a Russian Korea, the answer is, first, because there
would thus be planted almost within cannon-shot of her shores a power of
enormous strength and insatiable ambition; secondly, because, whatever
voice in Manchuria's destiny Russia derived from her railway, the same
voice in Korea's destiny was possessed by Japan as the sole owner of
railways in the peninsula; thirdly, that whereas Russia had an
altogether insignificant share in the foreign commerce of Korea and
scarcely ten bona-fide settlers, Japan did the greater part of the
over-sea trade and had tens of thousands of settlers; fourthly, that if
Russia's dominions stretched uninterruptedly from the Sea of Okhotsk to
the Gulf of Pechili, her ultimate absorption of north China would be as
certain as sunrise; and fifthly, that such domination and such
absorption would involve the practical closure of all that immense
region to Japanese commerce and industry as well as to the commerce and
industry of every Western nation except Russia. This last proposition
did not rest solely on the fact that to oppose artificial barriers to
free competition is Russia's sole hope of utilizing to her own benefit
any commercial opportunities brought within her reach. It rested also on
the fact that Russia had objected to foreign settlements at the marts
recently opened by treaty with China to American and Japanese subjects.
Without settlements, trade at those marts would be impossible, and thus
Russia had constructively announced that there should be no trade but
Russian, if she could prevent it.
Against such dangers Japan would have been justified in adopting any
measure of self-protection. She had foreseen them for six years, and had
been strengthening herself to avert them. But she wanted peace. She
wanted to develop her material resources and to accumulate some measure
of wealth, without which she must remain insignificant among the
nations. Two pacific devices offered, and she adopted them both. Russia,
instead of trusting time to consolidate her tenure of Manchuria, had
made the mistake of pragmatically importuning China for a conventional
title. If then Peking could be strengthened to resist this demand, some
arrangement of a distinctly terminable nature might be made. The United
States, Great Britain and Japan, joining hands for that purpose, did
succeed in so far stiffening China's backbone that her show of
resolution finally induced Russia to sign a treaty pledging herself to
withdraw her troops from Manchuria in three instalments, each step of
evacuation to be accomplished by a fixed date. That was one of the
pacific devices. The other suggested itself in connexion with the new
commercial treaties which China had promised to negotiate in the sequel
of the Boxer troubles. In these documents clauses provided for the
opening of three places in Manchuria to foreign trade. It seemed a
reasonable hope that, having secured commercial access to Manchuria by
covenant with its sovereign, China, the powers would not allow Russia
arbitrarily to restrict their privileges. It seemed also a reasonable
hope that Russia, having solemnly promised to evacuate Manchuria at
fixed dates, would fulfil her engagement.
The latter hope was signally disappointed. When the time came for
evacuation, Russia behaved as though no promise had ever been given. She
proposed wholly new conditions, which would have strengthened her grasp
of Manchuria instead of loosening it. China being powerless to offer any
practical protest, and Japan's interests ranking next in order of
importance, the Tokyo government approached Russia direct. They did not
ask for anything that could hurt her pride or injure her position.
Appreciating fully the economical status she had acquired in Manchuria
by large outlays of capital, they offered to recognize that status,
provided that Russia would extend similar recognition to Japan's status
in Korea, would promise, in common with Japan, to respect the
sovereignty and the territorial integrity of China and Korea, and would
be a party to a mutual engagement that all nations should have equal
industrial and commercial opportunities in Manchuria and the Korean
peninsula. In a word, they invited Russia to subscribe the policy
enunciated by the United States and Great Britain, the policy of the
open door and of the integrity of the Chinese and Korean empires.
Thus commenced a negotiation which lasted five and a half months. Japan
gradually reduced her demands to a minimum. Russia never made the
smallest appreciable concession. She refused to listen to Japan for one
moment about Manchuria. Eight years previously Japan had been in
military possession of Manchuria, and Russia with the assistance of
Germany and France had expelled her for reasons which concerned Japan
incomparably more than they concerned any of the three powers--the
security of the Chinese capital, the independence of Korea, the peace of
the East. Now, Russia had the splendid assurance to declare by
implication that none of these things concerned Japan at all. The utmost
she would admit was Japan's partial right to be heard about Korea. And
at the same time she herself commenced in northern Korea a series of
aggressions, partly perhaps to show her potentialities, partly by way of
counter-irritant. That was not all. Whilst she studiously deferred her
answers to Japan's proposals and protracted the negotiations to an
extent which was actually contumelious, she hastened to send eastward a
big fleet of war-ships and a new army of soldiers. It was impossible for
the dullest politician to mistake her purpose. She intended to yield
nothing, but to prepare such a parade of force that her obduracy would
command submission. The only alternatives for Japan were war or total
and permanent effacement in Asia. She chose war, and in fighting it she
fought the battle of free and equal opportunities for all without undue
encroachment upon the sovereign rights or territorial integrity of China
or Korea, against a military dictatorship, a programme of ruthless
territorial aggrandizement and a policy of selfish restrictions.
The Results of the War.
The details of the great struggle that ensued are given elsewhere (see
RUSSO-JAPANESE WAR). After the battle of Mukden the belligerents found
themselves in a position which must either prelude another stupendous
effort on both sides or be utilized for the purpose of peace
negotiations. At this point the president of the United States of
America intervened in the interests of humanity, and on the 9th of June
1905 instructed the United States' representative in Tokyo to urge that
the Japanese government should open direct negotiations with Russia, an
exactly corresponding note being simultaneously sent to the Russian
government through the United States' representative in St Petersburg.
Japan's reply was made on the 10th of June. It intimated frank
acquiescence, and Russia lost no time in taking a similar step.
Nevertheless two months elapsed before the plenipotentiaries of the
belligerents met, on the 10th of August, at Portsmouth, New Hampshire,
U.S.A. Russia sent M. (afterwards Count) de Witte and Baron Rosen;
Japan, Baron (afterwards Count) Komura, who had held the portfolio of
foreign affairs throughout the war, and Mr. (afterwards Baron) Takahira.
In entering this conference, Japanese statesmen, as was subsequently
known, saw clearly that a great part of the credit accruing to them for
their successful conduct of the war would be forfeited in the sequel of
the negotiations. For the people of Japan had accustomed themselves to
expect that Russia would assuredly recoup the expenses incurred by their
country in the contest, whereas the cabinet in Tokyo understood well
that to look for payment of indemnity by a great state whose territory
had not been invaded effectively nor its existence menaced must be
futile. Nevertheless, diplomacy required that this conviction should be
concealed, and thus Russia carried to the conference a belief that the
financial phase of the discussion would be crucial, while, at the same
time, the Japanese nation reckoned fully on an indemnity of 150 millions
sterling. Baron Komura's mandate was, however, that the only radically
essential terms were those formulated by Japan prior to the war. She
must insist on securing the ends for which she had fought, since she
believed them to be indispensable to the peace of the Far East, but she
would not demand anything more. The Japanese plenipotentiary, therefore,
judged it wise to marshal his terms in the order of their importance,
leaving his Russian colleague to imagine, as he probably would, that the
converse method had been adopted, and that everything preliminary to the
questions of finance and territory was of minor consequence. The
negotiations, commencing on the 10th of August, were not concluded until
the 5th of September, when a treaty of peace was signed. There had been
a moment when the onlooking world believed that unless Russia agreed to
ransom the island of Sakhalin by paying to Japan a sum of 120 millions
sterling, the conference would be broken off; nor did such an exchange
seem unreasonable, for were Russia expelled from the northern part of
Sakhalin, which commands the estuary of the Amur River, her position in
Siberia would have been compromised. But the statesmen who directed
Japan's affairs were not disposed to make any display of earth-hunger.
The southern half of Sakhalin had originally belonged to Japan and had
passed into Russia's possession by an arrangement which the Japanese
nation strongly resented. To recover that portion of the island seemed,
therefore, a legitimate ambition. Japan did not contemplate any larger
demand, nor did she seriously insist on an indemnity. Therefore the
negotiations were never in real danger of failure. The treaty of
Portsmouth recognized Japan's "paramount political, military and
economic interests" in Korea; provided for the simultaneous evacuation
of Manchuria by the contracting parties; transferred to Japan the lease
of the Liaotung peninsula held by Russia from China together with the
Russian railways south of Kwang-Cheng-tsze and all collateral mining or
other privileges; ceded to Japan the southern half of Sakhalin, the 50th
parallel of latitude to be the boundary between the two parts; secured
fishing rights for Japanese subjects along the coasts of the seas of
Japan, Okhotsk and Bering; laid down that the expenses incurred by the
Japanese for the maintenance of the Russian prisoners during the war
should be reimbursed by Russia, less the outlays made by the latter on
account of Japanese prisoners--by which arrangement Japan obtained a
payment of some 4 millions sterling--and provided that the contracting
parties, while withdrawing their military forces from Manchuria, might
maintain guards to protect their respective railways, the number of such
guards not to exceed 15 per kilometre of line. There were other
important restrictions: first, the contracting parties were to abstain
from taking, on the Russo-Korean frontier, any military measures which
might menace the security of Russian or Korean territory; secondly, the
two powers pledged themselves not to exploit the Manchurian railways for
strategic purposes; and thirdly, they promised not to build on Sakhalin
or its adjacent islands any fortifications or other similar military
works, or to take any military measures which might impede the free
navigation of the straits of La Pérouse and the Gulf of Tartary. The
above provisions concerned the two contracting parties only. But China's
interests also were considered. Thus it was agreed to "restore entirely
and completely to her exclusive administration" all portions of
Manchuria then in the occupation, or under the control, of Japanese or
Russian troops, except the leased territory; that her consent must be
obtained for the transfer to Japan of the leases and concessions held by
the Russians in Manchuria; that the Russian government would disavow the
possession of "any territorial advantages or preferential or exclusive
concessions in impairment of Chinese sovereignty or inconsistent with
the principle of equal opportunity in Manchuria"; and that Japan and
Russia "engaged reciprocally not to obstruct any general measures common
to all countries which China might take for the development of the
commerce and industry of Manchuria." This distinction between the
special interests of the contracting parties and the interests of China
herself as well as of foreign nations generally is essential to clear
understanding of a situation which subsequently attracted much
attention. From the time of the opium war (1857) to the Boxer rising
(1900) each of the great Western powers struggled for its own hand in
China, and each sought to gain for itself exclusive concessions and
privileges with comparatively little regard for the interests of others,
and with no regard whatever for China's sovereign rights. The fruits of
this period were: permanently ceded territories (Hong-Kong and Macao);
leases temporarily establishing foreign sovereignty in various districts
(Kiaochow, Wei-hai-wei and Kwang-chow); railway and mining concessions;
and the establishment of settlements at open ports where foreign
jurisdiction was supreme. But when, in 1900, the Boxer rising forced all
the powers into a common camp, they awoke to full appreciation of a
principle which had been growing current for the past two or three
years, namely, that concerted action on the lines of maintaining China's
integrity and securing to all alike equality of opportunity and a
similarly open door, was the only feasible method of preventing the
partition of the Chinese Empire and averting a clash of rival interests
which might have disastrous results. This, of course, did not mean that
there was to be any abandonment of special privileges already acquired
or any surrender of existing concessions. The arrangement was not to be
retrospective in any sense. Vested interests were to be strictly guarded
until the lapse of the periods for which they had been granted, or until
the maturity of China's competence to be really autonomous. A curious
situation was thus created. International professions of respect for
China's sovereignty, for the integrity of her empire and for the
enforcement of the open door and equal opportunity, coexisted with
legacies from an entirely different past. Russia endorsed this new
policy, but not unnaturally declined to abate any of the advantages
previously enjoyed by her in Manchuria. Those advantages were very
substantial. They included a twenty-five years' lease--with provision
for renewal--of the Liaotung peninsula, within which area of 1220 sq. m.
Chinese troops might not penetrate, whereas Russia would not only
exercise full administrative authority, but also take military and naval
action of any kind; they included the creation of a neutral territory in
the immediate north of the former and still more extensive, which should
remain under Chinese administration, but where neither Chinese nor
Russian troops might enter, nor might China, without Russia's consent,
cede land, open trading marts or grant concessions to any third
nationality; and they included the right to build some 1600 m. of
railway (which China would have the opportunity of purchasing at cost
price in the year 1938 and would be entitled to receive gratis in 1982),
as well as the right to hold extensive zones on either side of the
railway, to administer these zones in the fullest sense, and to work all
mines lying along the lines. Under the Portsmouth treaty these
advantages were transferred to Japan by Russia, the railway, however,
being divided so that only the portion (521½ m.) to the south of
Kwang-Cheng-tsze fell to Japan's share, while the portion (1077 m.) to
the north of that place remained in Russia's hands. China's consent to
the above transfers and assignments was obtained in a treaty signed at
Peking on the 22nd of December 1905. Thus Japan came to hold in
Manchuria a position somewhat contradictory. On the one hand, she
figured as the champion of the Chinese Empire's integrity and as an
exponent of the new principle of equal opportunity and the open door. On
the other, she appeared as the legatee of many privileges more or less
inconsistent with that principle. But, at the same time, nearly all the
great powers of Europe were similarly circumstanced. In their cases also
the same incongruity was observable between the newly professed policy
and the aftermath of the old practice. It was scarcely to be expected
that Japan alone should make a large sacrifice on the altar of a theory
to which no other state thought of yielding any retrospective obedience
whatever. She did, indeed, furnish a clear proof of deference to the
open-door doctrine, for instead of reserving the railway zones to her
own exclusive use, as she was fully entitled to do, she sought and
obtained from China a pledge to open to foreign trade 16 places within
those zones. For the rest, however, the inconsistency between the past
and the present, though existing throughout the whole of China, was
nowhere so conspicuous as in the three eastern provinces (Manchuria);
not because there was any real difference of degree, but because
Manchuria had been the scene of the greatest war of modern times;
because that war had been fought by Japan in the cause of the new
policy, and because the principles of the equally open door and of
China's integrity had been the main bases of the Portsmouth treaty, of
the Anglo-Japanese alliance, and of the subsequently concluded
_ententes_ with France and Russia. In short, the world's eyes were fixed
on Manchuria and diverted from China proper, so that every act of Japan
was subjected to an exceptionally rigorous scrutiny, and the nations
behaved as though they expected her to live up to a standard of almost
ideal altitude. China's mood, too, greatly complicated the situation.
She had the choice between two moderate and natural courses: either to
wait quietly until the various concessions granted by her to foreign
powers in the evil past should lapse by maturity, or to qualify herself
by earnest reforms and industrious development for their earlier
recovery. Nominally she adopted the latter course, but in reality she
fell into a mood of much impatience. Under the name of a
"rights-recovery campaign" her people began to protest vehemently
against the continuance of any conditions which impaired her
sovereignty, and as this temper coloured her attitude towards the
various questions which inevitably grew out of the situation in
Manchuria, her relations with Japan became somewhat strained in the
early part of 1909.
Japan in Korea after the War with Russia.
Having waged two wars on account of Korea, Japan emerged from the second
conflict with the conviction that the policy of maintaining the
independence of Korea must be modified, and that since the identity of
Korean and Japanese interests in the Far East and the paramount
character of Japanese interests in Korea would not permit Japan to leave
Korea to the care of any third power, she must assume the charge
herself. Europe and America also recognized that view of the situation,
and consented to withdraw their legations from Seoul, thus leaving the
control of Korean foreign affairs entirely in the hands of Japan, who
further undertook to assume military direction in the event of
aggression from without or disturbance from within. But in the matter of
internal administration she continued to limit herself to advisory
supervision. Thus, though a Japanese resident-general in Seoul, with
subordinate residents throughout the provinces, assumed the functions
hitherto discharged by foreign representatives and consuls, the Korean
government was merely asked to employ Japanese experts in the position
of counsellors, the right to accept or reject their counsels being left
to their employers. Once again, however, the futility of looking for any
real reforms under this optional system was demonstrated. Japan sent her
most renowned statesman, Prince Ito, to discharge the duties of
resident-general; but even he, in spite of profound patience and tact,
found that some less optional methods must be resorted to. Hence on the
24th of July 1907 a new agreement was signed, by which the
resident-general acquired initiative as well as consultative competence
to enact and enforce laws and ordinances, to appoint and remove Korean
officials, and to place capable Japanese subjects in the ranks of the
administration. That this constituted a heavy blow to Korea's
independence could not be gainsaid. That it was inevitable seemed to be
equally obvious. For there existed in Korea nearly all the worst abuses
of medieval systems. The administration of justice depended solely on
favour or interest. The police contributed by corruption and
incompetence to the insecurity of life and property. The troops were a
body of useless mercenaries. Offices being allotted by sale, thousands
of incapables thronged the ranks of the executive. The emperor's court
was crowded by diviners and plotters of all kinds, male and female. The
finances of the throne and those of the state were hopelessly confused.
There was nothing like an organized judiciary. A witness was in many
cases considered _particeps criminis_; torture was commonly employed to
obtain evidence, and defendants in civil cases were placed under arrest.
Imprisonment meant death or permanent disablement for a man of small
means. Flogging so severe as to cripple, if not to kill, was a common
punishment; every major offence from robbery upward was capital, and
female criminals were frequently executed by administering shockingly
painful poisons. The currency was in a state of the utmost confusion.
Extreme corruption and extortion were practised in connexion with
taxation. Finally, while nothing showed that the average Korean lacked
the elementary virtue of patriotism, there had been repeated proofs that
the safety and independence of the empire counted for little in the
estimates of political intriguers. Japan must either step out of Korea
altogether or effect drastic reforms there. She necessarily chose the
latter alternative, and the things which she accomplished between the
beginning of 1906 and the close of 1908 may be briefly described as the
elaboration of a proper system of taxation; the organization of a staff
to administer annual budgets; the re-assessment of taxable property; the
floating of public loans for productive enterprises; the reform of the
currency; the establishment of banks of various kinds, including
agricultural and commercial; the creation of associations for putting
bank-notes into circulation; the introduction of a warehousing system to
supply capital to farmers; the lighting and buoying of the coasts; the
provision of posts, telegraphs, roads and railways; the erection of
public buildings; the starting of various industrial enterprises (such
as printing, brick-making, forestry and coal-mining); the laying out of
model farms; the beginning of cotton cultivation; the building and
equipping of an industrial training school; the inauguration of sanitary
works; the opening of hospitals and medical schools; the organization of
an excellent educational system; the construction of waterworks in
several towns; the complete remodelling of the central government; the
differentiation of the court and the executive, as well as of the
administration and the judiciary; the formation of an efficient body of
police; the organization of law courts with a majority of Japanese
jurists on the bench; the enactment of a new penal code; drastic reforms
in the taxation system. In the summer of 1907 the resident-general
advised the Throne to disband the standing army as an unserviceable and
expensive force. The measure was doubtless desirable, but the docility
of the troops had been over-rated. Some of them resisted vehemently, and
many became the nucleus of an insurrection which lasted in a desultory
manner for nearly two years; cost the lives of 21,000 insurgents and
1300 Japanese; and entailed upon Japan an outlay of nearly a million
sterling. Altogether Japan was 15 millions sterling out of pocket on
Korea's account by the end of 1909. She had also lost the veteran
statesman Prince Ito, who was assassinated at Harbin by a Korean fanatic
on the 26th of October 1909. Finally an end was put to an anomalous
situation by the annexation of Korea to Japan on the 29th of August
1910. (See further KOREA.)
IX.--DOMESTIC HISTORY
_Cosmography._--Japanese annals represent the first inhabitant of earth
as a direct descendant of the gods. Two books describe the events of the
"Divine age." One, compiled in 712, is called the _Kojiki (Records of
Ancient Matters)_; the other, compiled in 720, is called the _Nihongi
(Chronicles of Japan)_. Both describe the processes of creation, but the
author of the _Chronicles_ drew largely upon Chinese traditions, whereas
the compilers of the _Records_ appear to have limited themselves to
materials which they believed to be native. The _Records_, therefore,
have always been regarded as the more trustworthy guide to pure Japanese
conceptions. They deal with the creation of Japan only, other countries
having been apparently judged unworthy of attention. At the beginning of
all things a primordial trinity is represented as existing on the "plain
of high heaven." Thereafter, during an indefinite time and by an
indefinite process, other deities come into existence, their titles
indicating a vague connexion with constructive and fertilizing forces.
They are not immortal: it is explicitly stated that they ultimately pass
away, and the idea of the cosmographers seems to be that each deity
marks a gradual approach to human methods of procreation. Meanwhile the
earth is "young and, like floating oil, drifts about after the manner of
a jelly-fish." At last there are born two deities, the creator and the
creatress, and these receive the mandate of all the heavenly beings to
"make, consolidate and give birth to the drifting land." For use in that
work a jewelled spear is given to them, and, standing upon the bridge
that connects heaven and earth, they thrust downwards with the weapon,
stir the brine below and draw up the spear, when from its point fall
drops which, accumulating, form the first dry land. Upon this land the
two deities descend, and, by ordinary processes, beget the islands of
Japan as well as numerous gods representing the forces of nature. But in
giving birth to the god of fire the creatress (Izanami) perishes, and
the creator (Izanagi) makes his way to the under-world in search of
her--an obvious parallel to the tales of Ishtar and Orpheus. With
difficulty he returns to earth, and, as he washes himself from the
pollution of Hades, there are born from the turbid water a number of
evil deities succeeded by a number of good, just as in the Babylonian
cosmogony the primordial ocean, Tiamat, brings forth simultaneously gods
and imps. Finally, as Izanagi washes his left eye the Goddess of the Sun
comes into existence; as he washes his right, the God of the Moon; and
as he washes his nose, the God of Force. To these three he assigns,
respectively, the dominion of the sun, the dominion of the moon, and the
dominion of the ocean. But the god of force (Sosanoo), like Lucifer,
rebels against this decree, creates a commotion in heaven, and after
having been the cause of the temporary seclusion of the sun goddess and
the consequent wrapping of the world in darkness, kills the goddess of
food and is permanently banished from heaven by the host of deities. He
descends to Izumo on the west of the main island of Japan, and there
saves a maiden from an eight-headed serpent. Sosanoo himself passes to
the under-world and becomes the deity of Hades, but he invests one of
his descendants with the sovereignty of Japan, and the title is
established after many curious adventures. To the sun goddess also,
whose feud with her fierce brother survives the latter's banishment from
heaven, the idea of making her grandson ruler of Japan presents itself.
She despatches three embassies to impose her will upon the descendants
of Sosanoo, and finally her grandson descends, not, however, in Izumo,
where the demi-gods of Sosanoo's race hold sway, but in Hiuga in the
southern island of Kiushiu. This grandson of Amaterasu (the goddess of
the sun) is called Ninigi, whose great-grandson figures in Japanese
history as the first human sovereign of the country, known during life
as Kamu-Yamato-Iware-Biko, and given the name of Jimmu tenno (Jimmu, son
of heaven) fourteen centuries after his death. Japanese annalists
attribute the accession of Jimmu to the year 660 B.C. Why that date was
chosen must remain a matter of conjecture. The _Records of Ancient
Matters_ has no chronology, but the more pretentious writers of the
_Chronicles of Japan_, doubtless in imitation of their Chinese models,
considered it necessary to assign a year, a month, and even a day for
each event of importance. There is abundant reason, however, to question
the accuracy of all Japanese chronology prior to the 5th century. The
first date corroborated by external evidence is 461, and Aston, who has
made a special study of the subject, concludes that the year 500 may be
taken as the time when the chronology of the _Chronicles_ begins to be
trustworthy. Many Japanese, however, are firm believers in the
_Chronicles_, and when assigning the year of the empire they invariably
take 660 B.C. for starting-point, so that 1909 of the Gregorian calendar
becomes for them 2569.
_Prehistoric Period._--Thus, if the most rigid estimate be accepted, the
space of 1160 years, from 660 B.C. to A.D. 500, may be called the
prehistoric period. During that long interval the annals include 24
sovereigns, the first 17 of whom lived for over a hundred years on the
average. It seems reasonable to conclude that the so-called assignment
of the sovereignty of Japan to Sosanoo's descendants and the
establishment of their kingdom in Izumo represent an invasion of
Mongolian immigrants coming from the direction of the Korean
peninsula--indeed one of the _Nihongi's_ versions of the event actually
indicates Korea as the point of departure--and that the subsequent
descent of Ninigi on Mount Takachiho in Hiuga indicates the advent of a
body of Malayan settlers from the south sea. Jimmu, according to the
_Chronicles_, set out from Hiuga in 667 B.C. and was not crowned at his
new palace in Yamato until 660. This campaign of seven years is
described in some detail, but no satisfactory information is given as to
the nature of the craft in which the invader and his troops voyaged, or
as to the number of men under his command. The weapons said to have been
carried were bows, spears and swords. A supernatural element is imported
into the narrative in the form of the three-legged crow of the sun,
which Amaterasu sends down to act as guide and messenger for her
descendants. Jimmu died at his palace of Kashiwa-bara in 585 B.C., his
age being 127 according to the _Chronicles_, and 137 according to the
_Records_. He was buried in a kind of tomb called _misasagi_, which
seems to have been in use in Japan for some centuries before the
Christian era--"a highly specialized form of tumulus, consisting of two
mounds, one having a circular, the other a triangular base, which merged
into each other, the whole being surrounded by a moat, or sometimes by
two concentric moats with a narrow strip of land between. In some,
perhaps in most, cases the misasagi contains a large vault of great
unhewn stones without mortar. The walls of this vault converge gradually
towards the top, which is roofed in by enormous slabs of stone weighing
many tons each. The entrance is by means of a gallery roofed with
similar stones." Several of these ancient sepulchral mounds have been
examined during recent years, and their contents have furnished
information of much antiquarian interest, though there is a complete
absence of inscriptions. The reigns of the eight sovereigns who
succeeded Jimmu were absolutely uneventful. Nothing is set down except
the genealogy of each ruler, the place of his residence and his burial,
his age and the date of his death. It was then the custom--and it
remained so until the 8th century of the Christian era--to change the
capital on the accession of each emperor; a habit which effectually
prevented the growth of any great metropolis. The reign of the 10th
emperor, Sujin, lasted from 98 to 30 B.C. During his era the land was
troubled by pestilence and the people broke out in rebellion; calamities
which were supposed to be caused by the spirit of the ancient ruler of
Izumo to avenge a want of consideration shown to his descendants by
their supplanters. Divination--by a Chinese process--and visions
revealed the source of trouble; rites of worship were performed in
honour of the ancient ruler, his descendant being entrusted with the
duty, and the pestilence ceased. We now hear for the first time of
vigorous measures to quell the aboriginal savages, doubtless the Ainu.
Four generals are sent out against them in different directions. But the
expedition is interrupted by an armed attempt on the part of the
emperor's half-brother, who, utilizing the opportunity of the troops'
absence from Yamato, marches from Yamashiro at the head of a powerful
army to win the crown for himself. In connexion with these incidents,
curious evidence is furnished of the place then assigned to woman by the
writers of the _Chronicles_. It is a girl who warns one of the emperor's
generals of the plot; it is the sovereign's aunt who interprets the
warning; and it is Ata, the wife of the rebellious prince, who leads the
left wing of his army. Four other noteworthy facts are recorded of this
reign: the taking of a census; the imposition of a tax on animals' skins
and game to be paid by men, and on textile fabrics by women; the
building of boats for coastwise transport, and the digging of dikes and
reservoirs for agricultural purposes. All these things rest solely on
the testimony of annalists writing eight centuries later than the era
they discuss and compiling their narrative mostly from tradition.
Careful investigations have been made to ascertain whether the histories
of China and Korea corroborate or contradict those of Japan. Without
entering into detailed evidence, the inference may be at once stated
that the dates given in Japanese early history are just 120 years too
remote; an error very likely to occur when using the sexagenary cycle,
which constituted the first method of reckoning time in Japan. But
although this correction suffices to reconcile some contradictory
features of Far-Eastern history, it does not constitute any explanation
of the incredible longevity assigned by the _Chronicles_ to several
Japanese sovereigns, and the conclusion is that when a consecutive
record of reigns came to be compiled in the 8th century, many lacunae
were found which had to be filled up from the imagination of the
compilers. With this parenthesis we may pass rapidly over the events of
the next two centuries (29 B.C. to A.D. 200). They are remarkable for
vigorous measures to subdue the aboriginal Ainu, who in the southern
island of Kiushiu are called Kuma-so (the names of two tribes) and
sometimes earth-spiders (i.e. cave-dwellers), while in the north-eastern
regions of the main island they are designated Yemishi. Expeditions are
led against them in both regions by Prince Yamato-dake, a hero revered
by all succeeding generations of Japanese as the type of valour and
loyalty. Dying from the effects of hardship and exposure, but declaring
with his last breath that loss of life was as nothing compared with the
sorrow of seeing his father's face no more, his spirit ascends to heaven
as a white bird, and when his son, Chuai, comes to the throne, he causes
cranes to be placed in the moat surrounding his palace in memory of his
illustrious sire.
The sovereign had partly ceased to follow the example of Jimmu, who led
his armies in person. The emperors did not, however, pass a sedentary
life. They frequently made progresses throughout their dominions, and
on these occasions a not uncommon incident was the addition of some
local beauty to the Imperial harem. This licence had a far-reaching
effect, since to provide for the sovereign's numerous offspring--the
emperor Keiko (71-130) had 80 children--no better way offered than to
make grants of land, and thus were laid the foundations of a territorial
nobility destined profoundly to influence the course of Japanese
history. Woman continues to figure conspicuously in the story. The image
of the sun goddess, enshrined in Ise (5 B.C.), is entrusted to the
keeping of a princess, as are the mirror, sword and jewel inherited from
the sun goddess; a woman (Tachibana) accompanies Prince Yamato-dake in
his campaign against the Yemishi, and sacrifices her life to quell a
tempest at sea; Saho, consort of Suinin, is the heroine of a most tragic
tale in which the conflict between filial piety and conjugal loyalty
leads to her self-destruction; and a woman is found ruling over a large
district in Kiushu when the Emperor Keiko is engaged in his campaign
against the aborigines. The reign of Suinin saw the beginning of an art
destined to assume extraordinary importance in Japan--the art of
wrestling--and the first champion, Nomi no Sukune, is honoured for
having suggested that clay figures should take the place of the human
sacrifices hitherto offered at the sepulture of Imperial personages. The
irrigation works commenced in the time of Sujin were zealously continued
under his two immediate successors, Suinin and Keiko. More than 800
ponds and channels are described as having been constructed under the
former's rule. We find evidence also that the sway of the throne had
been by this time widely extended, for in 125 a governor-general of 15
provinces is nominated, and two years later, governors (_miyakko_) are
appointed in every province and mayors (_inaki_) in every village. The
number or names of these local divisions are not given, but it is
explained that mountains and rivers were taken as boundaries of
provinces, the limits of towns and villages being marked by roads
running respectively east and west, north and south.
Invasion of Korea.
An incident is now reached which the Japanese count a landmark in their
history, though foreign critics are disposed to regard it as apocryphal.
It is the invasion of Korea by a Japanese army under the command of the
empress Jingo, in 200. The emperor Chuai, having proceeded to Kiushiu
for the purpose of conducting a campaign against the Kuma-so, is there
joined by the empress, who, at the inspiration of a deity, seeks to
divert the Imperial arms against Korea. But the emperor refuses to
believe in the existence of any such country, and heaven punishes his
incredulity with death at the hands of the Kuma-so, according to one
account; from the effects of disease, according to another. The calamity
is concealed; the Kuma-so are subdued, and the empress, having collected
a fleet and raised an army, crosses to the state of Silla (in Korea),
where, at the spectacle of her overwhelming strength, the Korean monarch
submits without fighting, and swears that until the sun rises in the
west, until rivers run towards their sources, and until pebbles ascend
to the sky and become stars, he will do homage and send tribute to
Japan. His example is followed by the kings of the two other states
constituting the Korean peninsula, and the warlike empress returns
triumphant. Many supernatural elements embellish the tale, but the
features which chiefly discredit it are that it abounds in anachronisms,
and that the event, despite its signal importance, is not mentioned in
either Chinese or Korean history. It is certain that China then
possessed in Korea territory administered by Chinese governors. She must
therefore have had cognisance of such an invasion, had it occurred.
Moreover, Korean history mentions twenty-five raids made by the Japanese
against Silla during the first five centuries of the Christian era, but
not one of them can be identified with Jingo's alleged expedition. There
can be no doubt that the early Japanese were an aggressive, enterprising
people, and that their nearest over-sea neighbour suffered much from
their activity. Nor can there be any reasonable doubt that the Jingo
tale contains a large germ of truth, and is at least an echo of the
relations that existed between Japan and Korea in the 3rd and 4th
centuries. The records of the 69 years comprising Jingo's reign are in
the main an account of intercourse, sometimes peaceful, sometimes
stormy, between the neighbouring countries. Only one other episode
occupies a prominent place: it is an attempt on the part of Jingo's
step-brothers to oppose her return to Yamato and to prevent the
accession of her son to the throne. It should be noted here that all
such names as Jimmu, Sujin, Chuai, &c., are posthumous, and were
invented in the reign of Kwammu (782-806), the fashion being taken from
China and the names themselves being purely Chinese translations of the
qualities assigned to the respective monarchs. Thus Jimmu signifies
"divine valour"; Sujin, "deity-honouring"; and Chuai, "sad middle son."
The names of these rulers during life were wholly different from their
posthumous appellations.
Earliest Notices in Chinese History.
Chinese history, which is incomparably older and more precise than
Korean, is by no means silent about Japan. Long notices occur in the
later Han and Wei records (25 to 265). The Japanese are spoken of as
dwarfs (_Wa_), and their islands, frequently called the queen country,
are said to be mountainous, with soil suitable for growing grain, hemp,
and the silkworm mulberry. The climate is so mild that vegetables can be
grown in winter and summer; there are neither oxen, horses, tigers, nor
leopards; the people understand the art of weaving; the men tattoo their
faces and bodies in patterns indicating differences of rank; male attire
consists of a single piece of cloth; females wear a gown passed over the
head, and tie their hair in a bow; soldiers are armed with spears and
shields, and also with bows, from which they discharge arrows tipped
with bone or iron; the sovereign resides in Yamato; there are stockaded
forts and houses; food is taken with the fingers but is served on bamboo
trays and wooden trenchers; foot-gear is not worn; when men of the lower
classes meet a man of rank, they leave the road and retire to the grass,
squatting or kneeling with both hands on the ground when they address
him; intoxicating liquor is much used; the people are long-lived, many
reaching the age of 100; women are more numerous than men; there is no
theft, and litigation is infrequent; the women are faithful and not
jealous; all men of high rank have four or five wives, others two or
three; wives and children of law-breakers are confiscated, and for grave
crimes the offender's family is extirpated; divination is practised by
burning bones; mourning lasts for some ten days and the rites are
performed by a "mourning-keeper"; after a funeral the whole family
perform ablutions; fishing is much practised, and the fishermen are
skilled divers; there are distinctions of rank and some are vassals to
others; each province has a market where goods are exchanged; the
country is divided into more than 100 provinces, and among its products
are white pearls, green jade and cinnabar. These annals go on to say
that between 147 and 190 civil war prevailed for several years, and
order was finally restored by a female sovereign, who is described as
having been old and unmarried; much addicted to magic arts; attended by
a thousand females; dwelling in a palace with lofty pavilions surrounded
by a stockade and guarded by soldiers; but leading such a secluded life
that few saw her face except one man who served her meals and acted as a
medium of communication. There can be little question that this queen
was the empress Jingo who, according to Japanese annals, came to the
throne in the year A.D. 200, and whose every public act had its
inception or promotion in some alleged divine interposition. In one
point, however, the Chinese historians are certainly incorrect. They
represent tattooing as universal in ancient Japan, whereas it was
confined to criminals, in whose case it played the part that branding
does elsewhere. Centuries later, in feudal days, the habit came to be
practised by men of the lower orders whose avocations involved baring
the body, but it never acquired vogue among educated people. In other
respects these ancient Chinese annals must be credited with remarkable
accuracy in their description of Japan and the Japanese. Their account
may be advantageously compared with Professor Chamberlain's analysis of
the manners and customs of the early Japanese, in the preface to his
translation of the _Kojiki_.
"The Japanese of the mythical period, as pictured in the legends
preserved by the compiler of the _Records of Ancient Matters_, were a
race who had long emerged from the savage stage and had attained to a
high level of barbaric skill. The Stone Age was forgotten by them--or
nearly so--and the evidence points to their never having passed
through a genuine Bronze Age, though the knowledge of bronze was at a
later period introduced from the neighbouring continent. They used
iron for manufacturing spears, swords and knives of various shapes,
and likewise for the more peaceful purpose of making hooks wherewith
to angle or to fasten the doors of their huts. Their other warlike and
hunting implements (besides traps and gins, which appear to have been
used equally for catching beasts and birds and for destroying human
enemies) were bows and arrows, spears and elbow-pads--the latter
seemingly of skin, while special allusion is made to the fact that the
arrows were feathered. Perhaps clubs should be added to the list. Of
the bows and arrows, swords and knives, there is perpetual mention,
but nowhere do we hear of the tools with which they were manufactured,
and there is the same remarkable silence regarding such widely spread
domestic implements as the saw and the axe. We hear, however, of the
pestle and mortar, of the fire-drill, of the wedge, of the sickle, and
of the shuttle used in weaving. Navigation seems to have been in a
very elementary state. Indeed the art of sailing was but little
practised in Japan even so late as the middle of the 10th century of
our era, subsequent to the general diffusion of Chinese civilization,
though rowing and punting are often mentioned by the early poets. To
what we should call towns or villages very little reference is made
anywhere in the _Records_ or in that part of the _Chronicles_ which
contain the account of the so-called Divine Age. But from what we
learn incidentally it would seem that the scanty population was
chiefly distributed in small hamlets and isolated dwellings along the
coast and up the course of the larger streams. Of house-building there
is frequent mention. Fences were in use. Rugs of skins and
rush-matting were occasionally brought in to sit on, and we even hear
once or twice of silk rugs being used for the same purpose by the
noble and wealthy. The habits of personal cleanliness which so
pleasantly distinguish the modern Japanese from their neighbours, in
continental Asia, though less fully developed than at present would
seem to have existed in the germ in early times, as we read more than
once of bathing in rivers, and are told of bathing women being
specially attached to the person of a certain Imperial infant.
Lustrations, too, formed part of the religious practices of the race.
Latrines are mentioned several times. They would appear to have been
situated away from the houses and to have been generally placed over a
running stream, whence doubtless the name for latrine in the archaic
dialect--_kawaya_ (river-house). A peculiar sort of dwelling-place
which the two old histories bring prominently under our notice is the
so-called parturition house--a one-roomed hut without windows, which a
woman was expected to build and retire into for the purpose Of being
delivered unseen. Castles are not distinctly spoken of until a time
which coincides, according to the received chronology, with the first
century B.C. We then first meet with the curious term rice-castle,
whose precise signification is a matter of dispute among the native
commentators, but which, on comparison with Chinese descriptions of
the early Japanese, should probably be understood to mean a kind of
palisade serving the purpose of a redoubt, behind which the warriors
could ensconce themselves. The food of the early Japanese consisted of
fish and of the flesh of the wild creatures which fell by the hunter's
arrow or were taken in the trapper's snare. Rice is the only cereal of
which there is such mention made as to place it beyond a doubt that
its cultivation dates back to time immemorial. Beans, millet and
barley are indeed named once, together with silkworms, in the account
of the Divine Age. But the passage has every aspect of an
interpolation in the legend, perhaps not dating back long before the
time of the eighth-century compiler. A few unimportant vegetables and
fruits, of most of which there is but a single mention, are found. The
intoxicating liquor called _sake_ was known in Japan during the
mythical period, and so were chopsticks for eating food with. Cooking
pots and cups and dishes--the latter both of earthenware and of leaves
of trees--are also mentioned; but of the use of fire for warming
purposes we hear nothing. Tables are named several times, but never in
connexion with food: they would seem to have been used exclusively for
the purpose of presenting offerings on, and were probably quite small
and low--in fact, rather trays than tables, according to European
ideas. In the use of clothing and the specialization of garments the
early Japanese had reached a high level. We read in the most ancient
legends of upper garments, skirts, trowsers, girdles, veils and hats,
while both sexes adorned themselves with necklaces, bracelets and head
ornaments of stones considered precious--in this respect offering a
striking contrast to their descendants in modern times, of whose
attire jewelry forms no part. The material of their clothes was hempen
cloth and paper--mulberry bark, coloured by being rubbed with madder,
and probably with woad and other tinctorial plants. All the garments,
so far as we may judge, were woven, sewing being nowhere mentioned.
From the great place which the chase occupied in daily life, we are
led to suppose that skins also were used to make garments of. There is
in the _Records_ at least one passage which favours this supposition,
and the _Chronicles_ in one place mention the straw rain-coat and
broad-brimmed hat, which still form the Japanese peasant's effectual
protection against the inclemencies of the weather. The tendrils of
creeping plants served the purposes of strings, and bound the
warrior's sword round his waist. Combs are mentioned, and it is
evident that much attention was devoted to the dressing of the hair.
The men seem to have bound up their hair in two bunches, one on each
side of the head, while the young boys tied theirs in a top-knot, the
unmarried girls let their locks hang down over their necks, and the
married women dressed theirs after a fashion which apparently combined
the two last-named methods. There is no mention in any of the old
books of cutting the hair or beard except in token of disgrace;
neither do we gather that the sexes, but for the matter of the
head-dress, were distinguished by a diversity of apparel and
ornamentation. With regard to the precious stones mentioned above as
having been used as ornaments for the head, neck and arms, we know
from the specimens which have rewarded the labours of archaeological
research in Japan that agate, crystal, glass, jade, serpentine and
steatite were the most used materials, and carved and pierced
cylindrical shapes the commonest forms. The horse--which was ridden,
but not driven--the barn-door fowl and the cormorant used for fishing,
are the only domesticated creatures mentioned in the earlier
traditions, with the doubtful exception of the silkworm. In the later
portions of the _Records_ and _Chronicles_ dogs and cattle are alluded
to, but sheep, swine and even cats were apparently not yet
introduced."
As the prehistoric era draws to its end the above analyses of Japanese
civilization have to be modified. Thus, towards the close of the 3rd
century, ship-building made great progress, and instead of the small
boats hitherto in use, a vessel 100 ft. long was constructed. Notable
above all is the fact that Japan's turbulent relations with Korea were
replaced by friendly intercourse, so that she began to receive from her
neighbour instruction in the art of writing. The date assigned by the
_Chronicles_ for this important event is A.D. 285, but it has been
proved almost conclusively that Japanese annals relating to this period
are in error to the extent of 120 years. Hence the introduction of
calligraphy must be placed in 405. Chinese history shows that between 57
and 247 Japan sent four embassies to the courts of the Han and the Wei,
and this intercourse cannot have failed to disclose the ideograph. But
the knowledge appears to have been confined to a few interpreters, and
not until the year 405 were steps taken to extend it, with the aid of a
learned Korean, Wang-in. Korea herself began to study Chinese learning
only a few years before she undertook to impart it to Japan. We now find
a numerous colony of Koreans passing to Japan and settling there; a
large number are also carried over as prisoners of war, and the Japanese
obtain seamstresses from both of their continental neighbours. One fact,
related with much precision, shows that the refinements of life were in
an advanced condition: an ice-house is described, and we read that from
374 (? 494) it became the fashion to store ice in this manner for use in
the hot months by placing it in water or _sake_. The emperor, Nintoku,
to whose time this innovation is attributed, is one of the romantic
figures of Japanese history. He commenced his career by refusing to
accept the sovereignty from his younger brother, who pressed him
earnestly to do so on the ground that the proper order of succession had
been disturbed by their father's partiality--though the rights attaching
to primogeniture did not receive imperative recognition in early Japan.
After three years of this mutual self-effacement, during which the
throne remained vacant, the younger brother committed suicide, and
Nintoku reluctantly became sovereign. He chose Naniwa (the modern Osaka)
for his capital, but he would not take the farmers from their work to
finish the building of a palace, and subsequently, inferring from the
absence of smoke over the houses of the people that the country was
impoverished, he remitted all taxes and suspended forced labour for a
term of three years, during which his palace fell into a state of ruin
and he himself fared in the coarsest manner. Digging canals, damming
rivers, constructing roads and bridges, and establishing granaries
occupied his attention when love did not distract it. But in affairs of
the heart he was most unhappy. He figures as the sole wearer of the
Japanese crown who was defied by his consort; for when he took a
concubine in despite of the empress, her jealousy was so bitter that,
refusing to be placated by any of his majesty's verses or other
overtures, she left the palace altogether; and when he sought to
introduce another beauty into the inner chamber, his own half-brother,
who carried his proposals, won the girl for himself. One other fact
deserves to be remembered in connexion with Nintoku's reign:
Ki-no-tsuno, representative of a great family which had filled the
highest administrative and military posts under several sovereigns, is
mentioned as "the first to commit to writing in detail the productions
of the soil in each locality." This was in 353 (probably 473). We shall
err little if we date the commencement of Japanese written annals from
this time, though no compilation earlier than the _Kojiki_ has survived.
_Early Historical Period._--With the emperor Richu, who came to the
throne A.D. 400, the historical period may be said to commence; for
though the chronology of the records is still questionable, the facts
are generally accepted as credible. Conspicuous loyalty towards the
sovereign was not an attribute of the Japanese Imperial family in early
times. Attempts to usurp the throne were not uncommon, though there are
very few instances of such essays on the part of a subject. Love or lust
played no insignificant part in the drama, and a common method of
placating an irate sovereign was to present a beautiful damsel for his
delectation. The veto of consanguinity did not receive very strict
respect in these matters. Children of the same father might intermarry,
but not those of the same mother; a canon which becomes explicable on
observing that as wives usually lived apart from their husbands and had
the sole custody of their offspring, two or more families often remained
to the end unconscious of the fact that they had a common sire. There
was a remarkable tendency to organize the nation into groups of persons
following the same pursuit or charged with the same functions. A group
thus composed was called _be_. The heads of the great families had
titles--as _omi_, _muraji_, _miakko_, _wake_, &c.--and affairs of state
were administered by the most renowned of these nobles, wholly subject
to the sovereign's ultimate will. The provincial districts were ruled by
scions of the Imperial family, who appear to have been, on the whole,
entirely subservient to the Throne. There were no tribunals of justice:
the ordeal of boiling water or heated metal was the sole test of guilt
or innocence, apart, of course, from confession, which was often exacted
under menace of torture. A celebrated instance of the ordeal of boiling
water is recorded in 415, when this device was employed to correct the
genealogies of families suspected of falsely claiming descent from
emperors or divine beings. The test proved efficacious, for men
conscious of forgery refused to undergo the ordeal. Deprivation of rank
was the lightest form of punishment; death the commonest, and
occasionally the whole family of an offender became serfs of the house
against which the offence had been committed or which had been
instrumental in disclosing a crime. There are, however, frequent
examples of wrong-doing expiated by the voluntary surrender of lands or
other property. We find several instances of that extreme type of
loyalty which became habitual in later ages--suicide in preference to
surviving a deceased lord. On the whole the successive sovereigns of
these early times appear to have ruled with clemency and consideration
for the people's welfare. But there were two notable exceptions--Yuriaku
(457-479) and Muretsu (499-506). The former slew men ruthlessly in fits
of passion or resentment, and the latter was the Nero of Japanese
history, a man who loved to witness the agony of his fellows and knew no
sentiment of mercy or remorse. Yet even Yuriaku did not fail to promote
industrial pursuits. Skilled artisans were obtained from Korea, and it
is related that, in 462, this monarch induced the empress and the ladies
of the palace to plant mulberry trees with their own hands in order to
encourage sericulture. Throughout the 5th and 6th centuries many
instances are recorded of the acquisition of landed estates by the
Throne, and their occasional bestowal upon princes or Imperial consorts,
such gifts being frequently accompanied by the assignment of bodies of
agriculturists who seem to have accepted the position of serfs.
Meanwhile Chinese civilization was gradually becoming known, either by
direct contact or through Korea. Several immigrations of Chinese or
Korean settlers are on record. No less than 7053 householders of Chinese
subjects came, through Korea, in 540, and one of their number received
high rank together with the post of director of the Imperial treasury.
From these facts, and from a national register showing the derivation of
all the principal families in Japan, it is clearly established that a
considerable strain of Chinese and Korean blood runs in the veins of
many Japanese subjects.
Introduction of Buddhism.
The most signal and far-reaching event of this epoch was the importation
of the Buddhist creed, which took place in 552. A Korean monarch acted
as propagandist, sending a special envoy with a bronze image of the
Buddha and with several volumes of the Sutras. Unfortunately the coming
of the foreign faith happened to synchronize with an epidemic of plague,
and conservatives at the Imperial court were easily able to attribute
this visitation to resentment on the part of the ancestral deities
against the invasion of Japan by an alien creed. Thus the spread of
Buddhism was checked; but only for a time. Thirty-five years after the
coming of the Sutras, the first temple was erected to enshrine a wooden
image of the Buddha 16 ft. high. It has often been alleged that the
question between the imported and the indigenous cults had to be decided
by the sword. The statement is misleading. That the final adoption of
Buddhism resulted from a war is true, but its adoption or rejection did
not constitute the motive of the combat. A contest for the succession to
the throne at the opening of Sujun's reign (588-592) found the partisans
of the Indian faith ranged on one side, its opponents on the other, and
in a moment of stress the leaders of the former, Soma and Prince
Umayado, vowed to erect Buddhist temples should victory rest on their
arms. From that time the future of Buddhism was assured. In 588 Korea
sent Buddhist relics, Buddhist priests, Buddhist ascetics, architects of
Buddhist temples, and casters of Buddhist images. She had already sent
men learned in divination, in medicine, and in the calendar. The
building of temples began to be fashionable in the closing years of the
6th century, as did also abdication of the world by people of both
sexes; and a census taken in 623, during the reign of the empress Suiko
(583-628), showed that there were then 46 temples, 816 priests and 569
nuns in the empire. This rapid growth of the alien faith was due mainly
to two causes: first, that the empress Suiko, being of the Soga family,
naturally favoured a creed which had found its earliest Japanese patron
in the great statesman and general, Soga no Umako; secondly, that one of
the most illustrious scholars and philosophers ever possessed by Japan,
Prince Shotoku, devoted all his energies to fostering Buddhism.
The adoption of Buddhism meant to the Japanese much more than the
acquisition of a practical religion with a code of clearly defined
morality in place of the amorphous and jejune cult of Shinto. It meant
the introduction of Chinese civilization. Priests and scholars crossed
in numbers from China, and men passed over from Japan to study the
Sutras at what was then regarded as the fountain-head of Buddhism. There
was also a constant stream of immigrants from China and Korea, and the
result may be gathered from the fact that a census taken of the Japanese
nobility in 814 indicated 382 Korean and Chinese families against only
796 of pure Japanese origin. The records show that in costume and
customs a signal advance was made towards refinement. Hair-ornaments of
gold or silver chiselled in the form of flowers; caps of sarcenet in
twelve special tints, each indicating a different grade; garments of
brocade and embroidery with figured thin silks of various colours--all
these were worn on ceremonial occasions; the art of painting was
introduced; a recorder's office was established; perfumes were largely
employed; court picnics to gather medicinal herbs were instituted,
princes and princesses attending in brilliant raiment; Chinese music and
dancing were introduced; cross bows and catapults were added to the
weapons of war; domestic architecture made signal strides in obedience
to the examples of Buddhist sacred edifices, which, from the first,
showed magnificence of dimension and decoration hitherto unconceived in
Japan; the arts of metal-casting and sculpture underwent great
improvement; Prince Shotoku compiled a code, commonly spoken of as the
first written laws of Japan, but in reality a collection of maxims
evincing a moral spirit of the highest type. In some respects, however,
there was no improvement. The succession to the throne still tended to
provoke disputes among the Imperial princes; the sword constituted the
principal weapon of punishment, and torture the chief judicial device.
Now, too, for the first time, a noble family is found seeking to usurp
the Imperial authority. The head of the Soga house, Umako, having
compassed the murder of the emperor Sujun and placed on the throne his
own niece (Suiko), swept away all opposition to the latter's successor,
Jomei, and controlled the administration of state affairs throughout two
reigns. In all this he was strongly seconded by his son, Iruka, who even
surpassed him in contumelious assumption of power and parade of dignity.
Iruka was slain in the presence of the empress Kogyoku by Prince Naka
with the assistance of the minister of the interior, Kamako, and it is
not surprising to find the empress (Kogyoku) abdicating immediately
afterwards in favour of Kamako's protégé, Prince Karu, who is known in
history as Kotoku. This Kamako, planner and leader of the conspiracy
which overthrew the Soga, is remembered by posterity under the name of
Kamatari and as the founder of the most illustrious of Japan's noble
houses, the Fujiwara. At this time (645), a habit which afterwards
contributed materially to the effacement of the Throne's practical
authority was inaugurated. Prince Furubito, pressed by his brother,
Prince Karu, to assume the sceptre in accordance with his right of
primogeniture, made his refusal peremptory by abandoning the world and
taking the tonsure. This retirement to a monastery was afterwards
dictated to several sovereigns by ministers who found that an active
occupant of the throne impeded their own exercise of administrative
autocracy. Furubito's recourse to the tonsure proved, however, to be
merely a cloak for ambitious designs. Before a year had passed he
conspired to usurp the throne and was put to death with his children,
his consorts strangling themselves. Suicide to escape the disgrace of
defeat had now become a common practice. Another prominent feature of
this epoch was the prevalence of superstition. The smallest
incidents--the growing of two lotus flowers on one stem; a popular
ballad; the reputed song of a sleeping monkey; the condition of the
water in a pond; rain without clouds--all these and cognate trifles were
regarded as omens; wizards and witches deluded the common people; a
strange form of caterpillar was worshipped as the god of the everlasting
world, and the peasants impoverished themselves by making sacrifices to
it.
First Legislative Epoch.
An interesting epoch is now reached, the first legislative era of early
Japanese history. It commenced with the reign of the emperor Kotoku
(645), of whom the _Chronicles_ say that he "honoured the religion of
Buddha and despised Shinto"; that "he was of gentle disposition; loved
men of learning; made no distinction of noble and mean, and continually
dispensed beneficent edicts." The customs calling most loudly for reform
in his time were abuse of the system of forced labour; corrupt
administration of justice; spoliation of the peasant class; assumption
of spurious titles to justify oppression; indiscriminate distribution of
the families of slaves and serfs; diversion of taxes to the pockets of
collectors; formation of great estates, and a general lack of
administrative centralization. The first step of reform consisted in
ordering the governors of provinces to prepare registers showing the
numbers of freemen and serfs within their jurisdiction as well as the
area of cultivated land. It was further ordained that the advantages of
irrigation should be shared equally with the common people; that no
local governor might try and decide criminal cases while in his
province; that any one convicted of accepting bribes should be liable to
a fine of double the amount as well as to other punishment; that in the
Imperial court a box should be placed for receiving petitions and a bell
hung to be sounded in the event of delay in answering them or unfairness
in dealing with them; that all absorption of land into great estates
should cease; that barriers, outposts, guards and post-horses should be
provided; that high officials should be dowered with hereditary estates
by way of emolument, the largest of such grants being 3000 homesteads;
that men of unblemished character and proved capacity should be
appointed aldermen for adjudicating criminal matters; that there should
be chosen as clerks for governors and vice-governors of provinces men of
solid competence "skilled in writing and arithmetic"; that the land
should be parcelled out in fixed proportions to every adult unit of the
population with right of tenure for a term of six years; that forced
labour should be commuted for taxes of silk and cloth; and that for
fiscal and administrative purposes households should be organized in
groups of five, each group under an elder, and ten groups forming a
township, which, again, should be governed by an elder. Incidentally to
these reforms many of the evil customs of the time are exposed. Thus
provincial governors when they visited the capital were accustomed to
travel with great retinues who appear to have constituted a charge on
the regions through which they passed. The law now limited the number of
a chief governor's attendants to nine, and forbade him to use official
houses or to fare at public cost unless journeying on public business.
Again, men who had acquired some local distinction, though they did not
belong to noble families, took advantage of the absence of historical
records or official registers, and, representing themselves as
descendants of magnates to whom the charge of public granaries had been
entrusted, succeeded in usurping valuable privileges. The office of
provincial governor had in many cases become hereditary, and not only
were governors largely independent of Imperial control, but also, since
every free man carried arms, there had grown up about these officials a
population relying largely on the law of force. Kotoku's reforms sought
to institute a system of temporary governors, and directed that all arms
and armour should be stored in arsenals built in waste places, except in
the case of provinces adjoining lands where unsubdued aborigines
(Yemishi) dwelt. Punishments were drastic, and in the case of a man
convicted of treason, all his children were executed with him, his wives
and consorts committing suicide. From a much earlier age suicide had
been freely resorted to as the most honourable exit from pending
disgrace, but as yet the samurai's method of disembowelment was not
employed, strangulation or cutting the throat being the regular
practice. Torture was freely employed and men often died under it.
Signal abuses prevailed in regions beyond the immediate range of the
central government's observation. It has been shown that from early days
the numerous scions of the Imperial family had generally been provided
for by grants of provincial estates. Gradually the descendants of these
men, and the representatives of great families who held hereditary rank,
extended their domains unscrupulously, employing forced labour to
reclaim lands, which they let to the peasants, not hesitating to
appropriate large slices of public property, and remitting to the
central treasury only such fractions of the taxes as they found
convenient. So prevalent had the exaction of forced labour become that
country-folk, repairing to the capital to seek redress of grievances,
were often compelled to remain there for the purpose of carrying out
some work in which dignitaries of state were interested. The removal of
the capital to a new site on each change of sovereign involved a vast
quantity of unproductive toil. It is recorded that in 656, when the
empress Saimei occupied the throne, a canal was dug which required the
work of 30,000 men and a wall was built which had employed 70,000 men
before its completion. The construction of tombs for grandees was
another heavy drain on the people's labour. Some of these sepulchres
attained enormous dimensions--that of the emperor Ojin (270-310)
measures 2312 yds. round the outer moat and is some 60 ft. high; the
emperor Nintoku's (313-399) is still larger, and there is a tumulus in
Kawachi on the flank of which a good-sized village has been built.
Kotoku's laws provided that the tomb of a prince should not be so large
as to require the work of more than 1000 men for seven days, and that
the grave of a petty official must be completed by 50 men in one day.
Moreover, it was forbidden to bury with the body gold, silver, copper,
iron, jewelled shirts, jade armour or silk brocade. It appears that the
custom of suicide or sacrifice at the tomb of grandees still survived,
and that people sometimes cut off their hair or stabbed their thighs
preparatory to declaiming a threnody. All these practices were vetoed.
Abuses had grown up even in connexion with the Shinto rite of purgation.
This rite required not only the reading of rituals but also the offering
of food and fruits. For the sake of these edibles the rite was often
harshly enforced, especially in connexion with pollution from contact
with corpses; and thus it fell out that when of two brothers, returning
from a scene of forced labour, one lay down upon the road and died, the
other, dreading the cost of compulsory purgation, refused to take up the
body. Many other evil customs came into existence in connexion with this
rite, and all were dealt with in the new laws. Not the least important
of the reforms then introduced was the organization of the ministry
after the model of the Tang dynasty of China. Eight departments of state
were created, and several of them received names which are similarly
used to this day. Not only the institutions of China were borrowed but
also her official costumes. During Kotoku's reign 19 grades of head-gear
were instituted, and in the time of Tenchi (668-671) the number was
increased to 26, with corresponding robes. Throughout this era
intercourse was frequent with China, and the spread of Buddhism
continued steadily. The empress Saimei (655-661), who succeeded Kotoku,
was an earnest patron of the faith. By her command several public
expositions of the Sutras were given, and the building of temples went
on in many districts, estates being liberally granted for the
maintenance of these places of worship.
_The Fujiwara Era._--In the _Chronicles of Japan_ the year 672 is
treated as a kind of interregnum. It was in truth a year of something
like anarchy, a great part of it being occupied by a conflict of
unparalleled magnitude between Prince Otomo (called in history Emperor
Kobun) and Prince Oama, who emerged victorious and is historically
entitled Temmu (673-686). The four centuries that followed are
conveniently designated the Fujiwara era, because throughout that long
interval affairs of state were controlled by the Fujiwara family, whose
daughters were given as consorts to successive sovereigns and whose sons
filled all the high administrative posts. It has been related above that
Kamako, chief of the Shinto officials, inspired the assassination of the
Soga chief, Iruka, and thus defeated the latter's designs upon the
throne in the days of the empress Kogyoku. Kamako, better known to
subsequent generations as Kamatari, was thenceforth regarded with
unlimited favour by successive sovereigns, and just before his death in
670, the family name of Fujiwara was bestowed on him by the emperor
Tenchi. Kamatari himself deserved all the honour he received, but his
descendants abused the high trust reposed in them, reduced the sovereign
to a mere puppet, and exercised Imperial authority without openly
usurping it. Much of this was due to the adoption of Chinese
administrative systems, a process which may be said to have commenced
during the reign of Kotoku (645-654) and to have continued almost
uninterruptedly until the 11th century. Under these systems the emperor
ceased directly to exercise supreme civil or military power: he became
merely the source of authority, not its wielder, the civil functions
being delegated to a bureaucracy and the military to a soldier class.
Possibly had the custom held of transferring the capital to a new site
on each change of sovereign, and had the growth of luxurious habits been
thus checked, the comparatively simple life of early times might have
held the throne and the people in closer contact. But from the beginning
of the 8th century a strong tendency to avoid these costly migrations
developed itself. In 709 the court took up its residence at Nara,
remaining there until 784; ten years after the latter date Kioto became
the permanent metropolis. The capital at Nara--established during the
reign of the empress Gemmyo (708-715)--was built on the plan of the
Chinese metropolis. It had nine gates and nine avenues, the palace being
situated in the northern section and approached by a broad, straight
avenue, which divided the city into two perfectly equal halves, all the
other streets running parallel to this main avenue or at right angles
to it. Seven sovereigns reigned at Heijo (castle of peace), as Nara is
historically called, and, during this period of 75 years, seven of the
grandest temples ever seen in Japan were erected; a multitude of idols
were cast, among them a colossal bronze Daibutsu 53½ ft. high; large
temple-bells were founded, and all the best artists and artisans of the
era devoted their services to these works. This religious mania reached
its acme in the reign of the emperor Shomu (724-748), a man equally
superstitious and addicted to display. In Temmu's time the custom had
been introduced of compelling large numbers of persons to enter the
Buddhist priesthood with the object of propitiating heaven's aid to heal
the illness of an illustrious personage. In Shomu's day every natural
calamity or abnormal phenomenon was regarded as calling for religious
services on a large scale, and the great expense involved in all these
buildings and ceremonials, supplemented by lavish outlays on court
pageants, was severely felt by the nation. The condition of the
agricultural class, who were the chief tax-payers, was further
aggravated by the operation of the emperor Kotoku's land system, which
rendered tenure so uncertain as to deter improvements. Therefore, in the
Nara epoch, the principle of private ownership of land began to be
recognized. Attention was also paid to road-making, bridge-building,
river control and house construction, a special feature of this last
being the use of tiles for roofing purposes in place of the shingles or
thatch hitherto employed. In all these steps of progress Buddhist
priests took an active part. Costumes were now governed by purely
Chinese fashions. This change had been gradually introduced from the
time of Kotoku's legislative measures--generally called the Taikwa
reforms after the name of the era (645-650) of their adoption--and was
rendered more thorough by supplementary enactments in the period 701-703
while Mommu occupied the throne. Ladies seem by this time to have
abandoned the strings of beads worn in early eras round the neck, wrists
and ankles. They used ornaments of gold, silver or jade in their hair,
but in other respects their habiliments closely resembled those of men,
and to make the difference still less conspicuous they straddled their
horses when riding. Attempts were made to facilitate travel by
establishing stores of grain along the principal highways, but as yet
there were no hostelries, and if a wayfarer did not find shelter in the
house of a friend, he had to bivouac as best he could. Such a state of
affairs in the provinces offered a marked contrast to the luxurious
indulgence which had now begun to prevail in the capital. There
festivals of various kinds, dancing, verse-composing, flower picnics,
archery, polo, football--of a very refined nature--hawking, hunting and
gambling absorbed the attention of the aristocracy. Nothing disturbed
the serenity of the epoch except a revolt of the northern Yemishi, which
was temporarily subdued by a Fujiwara general, for the Fujiwara had not
yet laid aside the martial habits of their ancestors. In 794 the
Imperial capital was transferred from Nara to Kioto by order of the
emperor Kwammu, one of the greatest of Japanese sovereigns. Education,
the organization of the civil service, riparian works, irrigation
improvements, the separation of religion from politics, the abolition of
sinecure offices, devices for encouraging and assisting agriculture, all
received attention from him. But a twenty-two years' campaign against
the northern Yemishi; the building of numerous temples; the indulgence
of such a passionate love of the chase that he organized 140 hunting
excursions during his reign of 25 years; profuse extravagance on the
part of the aristocracy in Kioto and the exactions of provincial nobles,
conspired to sink the working classes into greater depths of hardship
than ever. Farmers had to borrow money and seed-rice from local
officials or Buddhist temples, hypothecating their land as security;
thus the temples and the nobles extended their already great estates,
whilst the agricultural population gradually fell into a position of
practical serfdom.
Rise of the Fujiwara.
Meanwhile the Fujiwara family were steadily developing their influence
in Kioto. Their methods were simple but thoroughly effective. "By
progressive exercises of arbitrariness they gradually contrived that the
choice of a consort for the sovereign should be legally limited to a
daughter of their family, five branches of which were specially
designated to that honour through all ages. When a son was born to an
emperor, the Fujiwara took the child into one of their palaces, and on
his accession to the throne, the particular Fujiwara noble that happened
to be his maternal grandfather became regent of the empire. This office
of regent, created towards the close of the 9th century, was part of the
scheme; for the Fujiwara did not allow the purple to be worn by a
sovereign after he had attained his majority, or, if they suffered him
to wield the sceptre during a few years of manhood, they compelled him
to abdicate so soon as any independent aspirations began to impair his
docility; and since for the purposes of administration in these
constantly recurring minorities an office more powerful than that of
prime minister (dajo daijin) was needed, they created that of regent
(kwambaku), making it hereditary in their own family. In fact the
history of Japan from the 9th to the 19th century may be described as
the history of four families, the Fujiwara, the Taira, the Minamoto and
the Tokugawa. The Fujiwara governed through the emperor; the Taira, the
Minamoto and the Tokugawa governed in spite of the emperor. The Fujiwara
based their power on matrimonial alliances with the Throne; the Taira,
the Minamoto and the Tokugawa based theirs on the possession of armed
strength which the throne had no competence to control. There another
broad line of cleavage is seen. Throughout the Fujiwara era the centre
of political gravity remained always in the court. Throughout the era of
the Taira, the Minamoto and the Tokugawa the centre of political gravity
was transferred to a point outside the court, the headquarters of a
military feudalism." The process of transfer was of course gradual. It
commenced with the granting of large tracts of tax-free lands to
noblemen who had wrested them from the aborigines (Yemishi) or had
reclaimed them by means of serf-labour. These tracts lay for the most
part in the northern and eastern parts of the main island, at such a
distance from the Capital that the writ of the central government did
not run there; and since such lands could be rented at rates
considerably less than the tax levied on farms belonging to the state,
the peasants by degrees abandoned the latter and settled on the former,
with the result that the revenues of the Throne steadily diminished,
while those of the provincial magnates correspondingly increased.
Moreover, in the 7th century, at the time of the adoption of Chinese
models of administration and organization, the court began to rely for
military protection on the services of guards temporarily drafted from
the provincial troops, and, during the protracted struggle against the
Yemishi in the north and east in the 8th century, the fact that the
power of the sword lay with the provinces began to be noted.
The Taira and the Minamoto.
Kioto remained the source of authority. But with the growth of luxury
and effeminacy in the capital the Fujiwara became more and more averse
from the hardships of campaigning, and in the 9th and 10th centuries,
respectively, the Taira and the Minamoto[1] families came into
prominence as military leaders, the field of the Taira operations being
the south and west, that of the Minamoto the north and east. Had the
court reserved to itself and munificently exercised the privilege of
rewarding these services, it might still have retained power and wealth.
But by a niggardly and contemptuous policy on the part of Kioto not only
were the Minamoto leaders estranged but also they assumed the right of
recompensing their followers with tax-free estates, an example which the
Taira leaders quickly followed. By the early years of the 12th century
these estates had attracted the great majority of the farming class,
whereas the public land was left wild and uncultivated. In a word, the
court and the Fujiwara found themselves without revenue, while the
coffers of the Taira and the Minamoto were full: the power of the purse
and the power of the sword had passed effectually to the two military
families. Prominent features of the moral condition of the capital at
this era (12th century) were superstition, refinement and effeminacy. A
belief was widely held that calamity could not be averted or success
insured without recourse to Buddhist priests. Thus, during a reign of
only 13 years at the close of the 11th century, the emperor Shirakawa
caused 5420 religious pictures to be painted, ordered the casting of 127
statues of Buddha, each 11 ft. high, of 3150 life-sized images and of
2930 smaller idols, and constructed 21 large temples as well as 446,630
religious edifices of various kinds. Side by side with this faith in the
supernatural, sexual immorality prevailed widely, never accompanied,
however, by immodesty. Literary proficiency ranked as the be-all and
end-all of existence. "A man estimated the conjugal qualities of a young
lady by her skill in finding scholarly similes and by her perception of
the cadence of words. If a woman was so fortunate as to acquire a
reputation for learning, she possessed a certificate of universal virtue
and amiability." All the pastimes of the Nara epoch were pursued with
increased fervour and elaboration in the Heian (Kioto) era. The building
of fine dwelling-houses and the laying out of landscape gardens took
place on a considerable scale, though in these respects the ideals of
later ages were not yet reached. As to costume, the close-fitting,
business-like and comparatively simple dress of the 8th century was
exchanged for a much more elaborate style. During the Nara epoch the
many-hued hats of China had been abandoned for a sober head-gear of silk
gauze covered with black lacquer, but in the Heian era this was replaced
by an imposing structure glistening with jewels: the sleeves of the
tunic grew so long that they hung to the knees when a man's arms were
crossed, and the trowsers were made so full and baggy that they
resembled a divided skirt. From this era may be said to have commenced
the manufacture of the tasteful and gorgeous textile fabrics for which
Japan afterwards became famous. "A fop's ideal was to wear several
suits, one above the other, disposing them so that their various colours
showed in harmoniously contrasting lines at the folds on the bosom and
at the edges of the long sleeves. A successful costume created a
sensation in court circles. Its wearer became the hero of the hour, and
under the pernicious influence of such ambition men began even to powder
their faces and rouge their cheeks like women. As for the fair sex,
their costume reached the acme of unpracticality and extravagance in
this epoch. Long flowing hair was essential, and what with developing
the volume and multiplying the number of her robes, and wearing above
her trowsers a many-plied train, a grand lady of the time always seemed
to be struggling to emerge from a cataract of habiliments." It was
fortunate for Japan that circumstances favoured the growth of a military
class in this age of her career, for had the conditions existing in
Kioto during the Heian epoch spread throughout the whole country, the
penalty never escaped by a demoralized nation must have overtaken her.
But by the middle of the 12th century the pernicious influence of the
Fujiwara had paled before that of the Taira and the Minamoto, and a
question of succession to the throne marshalled the latter two families
in opposite camps, thus inaugurating an era of civil war which held the
country in the throes of almost continuous battle for 450 years, placed
it under the administration of a military feudalism, and educated a
nation of warriors. At first the Minamoto were vanquished and driven
from the capital, Kiyomori, the Taira chief, being left complete master
of the situation. He established his headquarters at Rokuharu, in Kioto,
appropriated the revenues of 30 out of the 66 provinces forming the
empire, and filled all the high offices of state with his own relatives
or connexions. But he made no radical change in the administrative
system, preferring to follow the example of the Fujiwara by keeping the
throne in the hands of minors. And he committed the blunder of sparing
the lives of two youthful sons of his defeated rival, the Minamoto
chief. They were Yoritomo and Yoshitsune; the latter the greatest
strategist Japan ever produced, with perhaps one exception; the former,
one of her three greatest statesmen, the founder of military feudalism.
By these two men the Taira were so completely overthrown that they never
raised their heads again, a sea-fight at Dan-no-ura (1155) giving them
the _coup de grâce_. Their supremacy had lasted 22 years.
_The Feudal Era._--Yoritomo, acting largely under the advice of an
astute counsellor, Oye no Hiromoto, established his seat of power at
Kamakura, 300 m. from Kioto. He saw that, effectively to utilize the
strength of the military class, propinquity to the military centres in
the provinces was essential. At Kamakura he organized an administrative
body similar in mechanism to that of the metropolitan government but
studiously differentiated in the matter of nomenclature. As to the
country at large, he brought it effectually under the sway of Kamakura
by placing the provinces under the direct control of military governors,
chosen and appointed by himself. No attempt was made, however, to
interfere in any way with the polity in Kioto: it was left intact, and
the nobles about the Throne--_kuge_ (courtly houses), as they came to be
called in contradistinction to the _buke_ (military houses)--were
placated by renewal of their property titles. The Buddhist priests,
also, who had been treated most harshly during the Taira tenure of
power, found their fortunes restored under Kamakura's sway. Subsequently
Yoritomo obtained for himself the title of _sei-itai-shogun_
(barbarian-subduing generalissimo), and just as the office of regent
(kwambaku) had long been hereditary in the Fujiwara family, so the
office of shogun became thenceforth hereditary in that of the Minamoto.
These changes were radical. They signified a complete shifting of the
centre of power. During eighteen centuries from the time of Jimmu's
invasion--as Japanese historians reckon--the country had been ruled from
the south; now the north became supreme, and for a civilian
administration a purely military was substituted. But there was no
contumely towards the court in Kioto. Kamakura made a show of seeking
Imperial sanction for every one of its acts, and the whole of the
military administration was carried on in the name of the emperor by a
shogun who called himself the Imperial deputy. In this respect things
changed materially after the death of Yoritomo (1198). Kamakura then
became the scene of a drama analogous to that acted in Kioto from the
10th century.
Rule of the Hojo.
The Hojo family, to which belonged Masa, Yoritomo's consort, assumed
towards the Kamakura shogun an attitude similar to that previously
assumed by the Fujiwara family towards the emperor in Kioto. A child,
who on state occasions was carried to the council chamber in Masa's
arms, served as the nominal repository of the shogun's power, the
functions of administration being discharged in reality by the Hojo
family, whose successive heads took the name of _shikken_ (constable).
At first care was taken to have the shogun's office filled by a near
relative of Yoritomo; but after the death of that great statesman's two
sons and his nephew, the puppet shoguns were taken from the ranks of the
Fujiwara or of the Imperial princes, and were deposed so soon as they
attempted to assert themselves. What this meant becomes apparent when we
note that in the interval of 83 years between 1220 and 1308, there were
six shoguns whose ages at the time of appointment ranged from 3 to 16.
Whether, if events had not forced their hands, the Hojo constables would
have maintained towards the Throne the reverent demeanour adopted by
Yoritomo must remain a matter of conjecture. What actually happened was
that the ex-emperor, Go-Toba, made an ill-judged attempt (1221) to break
the power of Kamakura. He issued a call to arms which was responded to
by some thousands of cenobites and as many soldiers of Taira extraction.
In the brief struggle that ensued the Imperial partisans were wholly
shattered, and the direct consequences were the dethronement and exile
of the reigning emperor, the banishment of his predecessor together with
two princes of the blood, and the compulsory adoption of the tonsure by
Go-Toba; while the indirect consequence was that the succession to the
throne and the tenure of Imperial power fell under the dictation of the
Hojo as they had formerly fallen under the direction of the Fujiwara.
Yoshitoki, then head of the Hojo family, installed his brother,
Tokifusa, as military governor of Kioto, and confiscating about 3000
estates, the property of those who had espoused the Imperial cause,
distributed these lands among the adherents of his own family, thus
greatly strengthening the basis of the feudal system. "It fared with
the Hojo as it had fared with all the great families that preceded them:
their own misrule ultimately wrought their ruin. Their first eight
representatives were talented and upright administrators. They took
justice, simplicity and truth for guiding principles; they despised
luxury and pomp; they never aspired to high official rank; they were
content with two provinces for estates, and they sternly repelled the
effeminate, depraved customs of Kioto." Thus the greater part of the
13th century was, on the whole, a golden era for Japan, and the lower
orders learned to welcome feudalism. Nevertheless no century furnished
more conspicuous illustrations of the peculiarly Japanese system of
vicarious government. Children occupied the position of shogun in
Kamakura under authority emanating from children on the throne in Kioto;
and members of the Hojo family as shikken administered affairs at the
mandate of the child shoguns. Through all three stages in the dignities
of mikado, shogun and shikken, the strictly regulated principle of
heredity was maintained, according to which no Hojo shikken could ever
become shogun; no Minamoto or Fujiwara could occupy the throne. At the
beginning of the 14th century, however, several causes combined to shake
the supremacy of the Hojo. Under the sway of the ninth shikken
(Takatoki), the austere simplicity of life and earnest discharge of
executive duties which had distinguished the early chiefs of the family
were exchanged for luxury, debauchery and perfunctory government. Thus
the management of fiscal affairs fell into the hands of Takasuke, a man
of usurious instincts. It had been the wise custom of the Hojo
constables to store grain in seasons of plenty, and distribute it at low
prices in times of dearth. There occurred at this epoch a succession of
bad harvests, but instead of opening the state granaries with benevolent
liberality, Takasuke sold their contents at the highest obtainable
rates; and, by way of contrast to the prevailing indigence, the people
saw the constable in Kamakura affecting the pomp and extravagance of a
sovereign waited upon by 37 mistresses, supporting a band of 2000
dancers, and keeping a pack of 5000 fighting dogs. The throne happened
to be then occupied (1310-1338) by an emperor, Go-Daigo, who had reached
full maturity before his accession, and was correspondingly averse from
acting the puppet part assigned to the sovereigns of his time. Female
influence contributed to his impatience. One of his concubines bore a
son for whom he sought to obtain nomination as prince imperial, in
defiance of an arrangement made by the Hojo that the succession should
pass alternately to the senior and junior branches of the Imperial
family. Kamakura refused to entertain Go-Daigo's project, and
thenceforth the child's mother importuned her sovereign and lover to
overthrow the Hojo. The _entourage_ of the throne in Kioto at this time
was a counterpart of former eras. The Fujiwara, indeed, wielded nothing
of their ancient influence. They had been divided by the Hojo into five
branches, each endowed with an equal right to the office of regent, and
their strength was thus dissipated in struggling among themselves for
the possession of the prize. But what the Fujiwara had done in their
days of greatness, what the Taira had done during their brief tenure of
power, the Saionji were now doing, namely, aspiring to furnish prime
ministers and empresses from their own family solely. They had already
given consorts to five emperors in succession, and jealous rivals were
watching keenly to attack this clan which threatened to usurp the place
long held by the most illustrious family in the land. A petty incident
disturbed this state of very tender equilibrium before the plan of the
Hojo's enemies had fully matured, and the emperor presently found
himself an exile on the island of Oki. But there now appeared upon the
scene three men of great prowess: Kusunoki Masashige, Nitta Yoshisada
and Ashikaga Takauji. The first espoused from the outset the cause of
the Throne and, though commanding only a small force, held the Hojo
troops in check. The last two were both of Minamoto descent. Their
common ancestor was Minamoto Yoshiiye, whose exploits against the
northern Yemishi in the second half of the 11th century had so impressed
his countrymen that they gave him the title of Hachiman Taro
(first-born of the god of war). Both men took the field originally in
the cause of the Hojo, but at heart they desired to be avenged upon the
latter for disloyalty to the Minamoto. Nitta Yoshisada marched suddenly
against Kamakura, carried it by storm and committed the city to the
flames. Ashikaga Takauji occupied Kioto, and with the suicide of
Takatoki the Hojo fell finally from rule after 115 years of supremacy
(1219-1334). The emperor now returned from exile, and his son, Prince
Moriyoshi, having been appointed to the office of shogun at Kamakura,
the restoration of the administrative power to the Throne seemed an
accomplished fact.
The Ashikaga Shoguns.
Go-Daigo, however, was not in any sense a wise sovereign. The
extermination of the Hojo placed wide estates at his disposal, but
instead of rewarding those who had deserved well of him, he used a great
part of them to enrich his favourites, the companions of his
dissipation. Ashikaga Takauji sought just such an opportunity. The
following year (1335) saw him proclaiming himself shogun at Kamakura,
and after a complicated pageant of incidents, the emperor Go-Daigo was
obliged once more to fly from Kioto. He carried the regalia with him,
refused to submit to Takauji, and declined to recognize his usurped
title of shogun. The Ashikaga chief solved the situation by deposing
Go-Daigo and placing upon the throne another scion of the imperial
family who is known in history as Komyo (1336-1348), and who, of course,
confirmed Takauji in the office of shogun. Thus commenced the Ashikaga
line of shoguns, and thus commenced also a fifty-six-year period of
divided sovereignty, the emperor Go-Daigo and his descendants reigning
in Yoshino as the southern court (_nancho_), and the emperor Komyo and
his descendants reigning in Kioto as the northern court (_hokucho_). It
was by the efforts of the shogun Yoshimitsu, one of the greatest of the
Ashikaga potentates, that this quarrel was finally composed, but during
its progress the country had fallen into a deplorable condition. "The
constitutional powers had become completely disorganized, especially in
regions at a distance from the chief towns. The peasant was
impoverished, his spirit broken, his hope of better things completely
gone. He dreamed away his miserable existence and left the fields
untilled. Bands of robbers followed the armies through the interior of
the country, and increased the feeling of lawlessness and insecurity.
The coast population, especially that of the island of Kiushiu, had
given itself up in a great measure to piracy. Even on the shores of
Korea and China these enterprising Japanese corsairs made their
appearance." The shogun Yoshimitsu checked piracy, and there ensued
between Japan and China a renewal of cordial intercourse which, upon the
part of the shogun, developed phases plainly suggesting an admission of
Chinese suzerainty.
For a brief moment during the sway of Yoshimitsu the country had rest
from internecine war, but immediately after his death (1394) the
struggle began afresh. Many of the great territorial lords had now grown
too puissant to concern themselves about either mikado or shogun. Each
fought for his own hand, thinking only of extending his sway and his
territories. By the middle of the 16th century Kioto was in ruins, and
little vitality remained in any trade or industry except those that
ministered to the wants of the warrior. Again in the case of the
Ashikaga shoguns the political tendency to exercise power vicariously
was shown, as it had been shown in the case of the mikados in Kioto and
in the case of the Minamoto in Kamakura. What the regents had been to
the emperors and the constables to the Minamoto shoguns, that the
wardens (_kwanryo_) were to the Ashikaga shoguns. Therefore, for
possession of this office of kwanryo vehement conflicts were waged, and
at one time five rival shoguns were used as figure-heads by contending
factions. Yoshimitsu had apportioned an ample allowance for the support
of the Imperial court, but in the continuous warfare following his death
the estates charged with the duty of paying this allowance ceased to
return any revenue; the court nobles had to seek shelter and sustenance
with one or other of the feudal chiefs in the provinces, and the court
itself was reduced to such a state of indigence that when the emperor
Go-Tsuchi died (1500), his corpse lay for forty days awaiting burial,
no funds being available for purposes of sepulture.
Alone among the vicissitudes of these troublous times the strength and
influence of Buddhism grew steadily. The great monasteries were military
strongholds as well as places of worship. When the emperor Kwammu chose
Kioto for his capital, he established on the hill of Hiyei-zan, which
lay north-east of the city, a magnificent temple to ward off the evil
influences supposed to emanate from that quarter. Twenty years later,
Kobo, the most famous of all Japanese Buddhist saints, founded on
Koyasan in Yamato a monastery not less important than that of Hiyei-zan.
These and many other temples had large tax-free estates, and for the
protection of their property they found it expedient to train and arm
the cenobites as soldiers. From that to taking active part in the
political struggles of the time was but a short step, especially as the
great temples often became refuges of sovereigns and princes who, though
nominally forsaking the world, retained all their interest, and even
continued to take an active part, in its vicissitudes. It is recorded of
the emperor Shirakawa (1073-1086) that the three things which he
declared his total inability to control were the waters of the river
Kamo, the fall of the dice, and the monks of Buddha. His successors
might have confessed equal inability. Kiyomori, the puissant chief of
the Taira family, had fruitlessly essayed to defy the Buddhists;
Yoritomo, in the hour of his most signal triumph, thought it wise to
placate them. Where these representatives of centralized power found
themselves impotent, it may well be supposed that the comparatively
petty chieftains who fought each for his own hand in the 15th and 16th
centuries were incapable of accomplishing anything. In fact, the task of
centralizing the administrative power, and thus restoring peace and
order to the distracted empire, seemed, at the middle of the 16th
century, a task beyond achievement by human capacity.
Nobunaga, Hideyoshi and Iyeyasu.
But if ever events create the men to deal with them, such was the case
in the second half of that century. Three of the greatest captains and
statesmen in Japanese history appeared upon the stage simultaneously,
and moreover worked in union, an event altogether inconsistent with the
nature of the age. They were Oda Nobunaga, Hideyoshi (the _taiko_) and
Tokugawa Iyeyasu. Nobunaga belonged to the Taira family and was
originally ruler of a small fief in the province of Owari. Iyeyasu, a
sub-feudatory of Nobunaga's enemy, the powerful daimyo[2] of Mikawa and
two other provinces, was a scion of the Minamoto and therefore eligible
for the shogunate. Hideyoshi was a peasant's son, equally lacking in
patrons and in personal attractions. No chance seemed more remote than
that such men, above all Hideyoshi, could possibly rise to supreme
power. On the other hand, one outcome of the commotion with which the
country had seethed for more than four centuries was to give special
effect to the principle of natural selection. The fittest alone
surviving, the qualities that made for fitness came to take precedence
of rank or station, and those qualities were prowess in the battlefield
and wisdom in the statesman's closet. "Any plebeian that would prove
himself a first-class fighting man was willingly received into the armed
_comitatus_ which every feudal potentate was eager to attach to himself
and his flag." It was thus that Hideyoshi was originally enrolled in the
ranks of Nobunaga's retainers.
Nobunaga, succeeding to his small fief in Owari in 1542, added to it six
whole provinces within 25 years of continuous endeavour. Being finally
invited by the emperor to undertake the pacification of the country, and
appealed to by Yoshiaki, the last of the Ashikaga chiefs, to secure for
him the shogunate, he marched into Kioto at the head of a powerful army
(1568), and, having accomplished the latter purpose, was preparing to
complete the former when he fell under the sword of a traitor.
Throughout his brilliant career he had the invaluable assistance of
Hideyoshi, who would have attained immortal fame on any stage in any
era. Hideyoshi entered Nobunaga's service as a groom and ended by
administering the whole empire. When he accompanied Nobunaga to Kioto
in obedience to the invitation of the mikado, Okimachi, order and
tranquillity were quickly restored in the capital and its vicinity. But
to extend this blessing to the whole country, four powerful daimyos as
well as the militant monks had still to be dealt with. The monks had
from the outset sheltered and succoured Nobunaga's enemies, and one
great prelate, Kenryo, hierarch of the Monto sect, whose headquarters
were at Osaka, was believed to aspire to the throne itself. In 1571
Nobunaga attacked and gave to the flames the celebrated monastery of
Hiyei-zan, established nearly eight centuries previously; and in 1580 he
would have similarly served the splendid temple Hongwan-ji in Osaka, had
not the mikado sought and obtained grace for it. The task then remained
of subduing four powerful daimyos, three in the south and one in the
north-east, who continued to follow the bent of their own warlike
ambitions without paying the least attention to either sovereign or
shogun. The task was commenced by sending an army under Hideyoshi
against Mori of Choshu, whose fief lay on the northern shore of the
Shimonoseki strait. This proved to be the last enterprise planned by
Nobunaga. On a morning in June 1582 one of the corps intended to
reinforce Hideyoshi's army marched out of Kameyama under the command of
Akechi Mitsuhide, who either harboured a personal grudge against
Nobunaga or was swayed by blind ambition. Mitsuhide suddenly changed the
route of his troops, led them to Kioto, and attacked the temple Honno-ji
where Nobunaga was sojourning all unsuspicious of treachery. Rescue and
resistance being alike hopeless, the great soldier committed suicide.
Thirteen days later, Hideyoshi, having concluded peace with Mori of
Choshu, fell upon Mitsuhide's forces and shattered them, Mitsuhide
himself being killed by a peasant as he fled from the field.
Hideyoshi.
Nobunaga's removal at once made Hideyoshi the most conspicuous figure in
the empire, the only man with any claim to dispute that title being
Tokugawa Iyeyasu. These two had hitherto worked in concert. But the
question of the succession to Nobunaga's estates threw the country once
more into tumult. He left two grown-up sons and a baby grandson, whose
father, Nobunaga's first-born, had perished in the holocaust at
Honno-ji. Hideyoshi, not unmindful, it may be assumed, of the privileges
of a guardian, espoused the cause of the infant, and wrested from
Nobunaga's three other great captains a reluctant endorsement of his
choice. Nobutaka, third son of Nobunaga, at once drew the sword, which
he presently had to turn against his own person; two years later (1584),
his elder brother, Nobuo, took the field under the aegis of Tokugawa
Iyeyasu. Hideyoshi and Iyeyasu, now pitted against each other for the
first time, were found to be of equal prowess, and being too wise to
prolong a useless war, they reverted to their old alliance, subsequently
confirming it by a family union, the son of Iyeyasu being adopted by
Hideyoshi and the latter's daughter being given in marriage to Iyeyasu.
Hideyoshi had now been invested by the mikado with the post of regent,
and his position in the capital was omnipotent. He organized in Kioto a
magnificent pageant, in which the principal figures were himself,
Iyeyasu, Nobuo and twenty-seven daimyos. The emperor was present.
Hideyoshi sat on the right of the throne, and all the nobles did
obeisance to the sovereign. Prior to this event Hideyoshi had conducted
against the still defiant daimyos of Kiushiu, especially Shimazu of
Satsuma, the greatest army ever massed by any Japanese general, and had
reduced the island of the nine provinces, not by weight of armament
only, but also by a signal exercise of the wise clemency which
distinguished him from all the statesmen of his era.
The whole of Japan was now under Hideyoshi's sway except the fiefs in
the extreme north and those in the region known as the Kwanto, namely,
the eight provinces forming the eastern elbow of the main island. Seven
of these provinces were virtually under the sway of Hojo Ujimasa, fourth
representative of a family established in 1476 by a brilliant adventurer
of Ise, not related in any way to the great but then extinct house of
Kamakura Hojos. The daimyos in the north were comparatively powerless to
resist Hideyoshi, but to reach them the Kwanto had to be reduced, and
not only was its chief, Ujimasa, a formidable foe, but also the
topographical features of the district represented fortifications of
immense strength. After various unsuccessful overtures, having for their
purpose to induce Ujimasa to visit the capital and pay homage to the
emperor, Hideyoshi marched from Kioto in the spring of 1590 at the head
of 170,000 men, his colleagues Nobuo and Iyeyasu having under their
orders 80,000 more. The campaign ended as did all Hideyoshi's
enterprises, except that he treated his vanquished enemies with unusual
severity. During the three months spent investing Odawara, the northern
daimyos surrendered, and thus the autumn of 1590 saw Hideyoshi master of
Japan from end to end, and saw Tokugawa Iyeyasu established at Yedo as
recognized ruler of the eight provinces of the Kwanto. These two facts
should be bracketed together, because Japan's emergence from the deep
gloom of long-continued civil strife was due not more to the brilliant
qualities of Hideyoshi and Iyeyasu individually than to the fortunate
synchronism of their careers, so that the one was able to carry the
other's work to completion and permanence. The last eight years of
Hideyoshi's life--he died in 1598--were chiefly remarkable for his
attempt to invade China through Korea, and for his attitude towards
Christianity (see § VIII.: FOREIGN INTERCOURSE).
_The Tokugawa Era._--When Hideyoshi died he left a son, Hideyori, then
only six years of age, and the problem of this child's future had
naturally caused supreme solicitude to the peasant statesman. He finally
entrusted the care of the boy and the management of state affairs to
five regents, five ministers, and three intermediary councillors. But he
placed chief reliance upon Iyeyasu, whom he appointed president of the
board of regents. Among the latter was one, Ishida Mitsunari, who to
insatiable ambition added an extraordinary faculty for intrigue and
great personal magnetism. These qualities he utilized with such success
that the dissensions among the daimyos, which had been temporarily
composed by Hideyoshi, broke out again, and the year 1600 saw Japan
divided into two camps, one composed of Tokugawa Iyeyasu and his allies,
the other of Ishida Mitsunari and his partisans.
Iyeyasu.
The situation of Iyeyasu was eminently perilous. From his position in
the east of the country, he found himself menaced by two powerful
enemies on the north and on the south, respectively, the former barely
contained by a greatly weaker force of his friends, and the latter
moving up in seemingly overwhelming strength from Kioto. He decided to
hurl himself upon the southern army without awaiting the result of the
conflict in the north. The encounter took place at Sekigahara in the
province of Mino on the 21st of October 1600. The army of Iyeyasu had to
move to the attack in such a manner that its left flank and its left
rear were threatened by divisions of the enemy posted on commanding
eminences. But with the leaders of these divisions Iyeyasu had come to
an understanding by which they could be trusted to abide so long as
victory did not declare against him. Such incidents were naturally
common in an era when every man fought for his own hand. The southerners
suffered a crushing defeat. The survivors fled pell-mell to Osaka, where
in a colossal fortress, built by Hideyoshi, his son, Hideyori, and the
latter's mother, Yodo, were sheltered behind ramparts held by 80,000
men. Hideyori's cause had been openly put forward by Ishida Mitsunari
and his partisans, but Iyeyasu made no immediate attempt to visit the
sin upon the head of his deceased benefactor's child. On the contrary,
he sent word to the lady Yodo and her little boy that he absolved them
of all complicity. The battle of Sekigahara is commonly spoken of as
having terminated the civil war which had devastated Japan, with brief
intervals, from the latter half of the 12th century to the beginning of
the 17th. That is incorrect in view of the fact that Sekigahara was
followed by other fighting, especially by the terrible conflict at Osaka
in 1615 when Yodo and her son perished. But Sekigahara's importance
cannot be over-rated. For had Iyeyasu been finally crushed there, the
wave of internecine strife must have rolled again over the empire until
providence provided another Hideyoshi and another Iyeyasu to stem it.
Sekigahara, therefore, may be truly described as a turning-point in
Japan's career and as one of the decisive battles of the world. As for
the fact that the Tokugawa leader did not at once proceed to extremities
in the case of the boy Hideyori, though the events of the Sekigahara
campaign had made it quite plain that such a course would ultimately be
inevitable, we have to remember that only two years had elapsed since
Hideyoshi was laid in his grave. His memory was still green and the
glory of his achievements still enveloped his family. Iyeyasu foresaw
that to carry the tragedy to its bitter end at once must have forced
into Hideyori's camp many puissant daimyos whose sense of allegiance
would grow less cogent with the lapse of time. When he did lay siege to
the Osaka castle in 1615, the power of the Tokugawa was well-nigh
shattered against its ramparts; had not the onset been aided by
treachery, the stronghold would probably have proved impregnable.
But signal as were the triumphs of the Tokugawa chieftain in the field,
what distinguishes him from all his predecessors is the ability he
displayed in consolidating his conquests. The immense estates that fell
into his hands he parcelled out in such a manner that all important
strategical positions were held by daimyos whose fidelity could be
confidently trusted, and every feudatory of doubtful loyalty found his
fief within touch of a Tokugawa partisan. This arrangement, supplemented
by a system which required all the great daimyos to have mansions in the
shogun's capital. Yedo, to keep their families there always and to
reside there themselves in alternate years, proved so potent a check to
disaffection that from 1615, when the castle of Osaka fell, until 1864,
when the Choshu ronin attacked Kioto, Japan remained entirely free from
civil war.
It is possible to form a clear idea of the ethical and administrative
principles by which Iyeyasu and the early Tokugawa chiefs were guided in
elaborating the system which gave to Japan an unprecedented era of peace
and prosperity. Evidence is furnished not only by the system itself but
also by the contents of a document generally called the _Testament of
Iyeyasu_, though probably it was not fully compiled until the time of
his grandson, Iyemitsu (1623-1650). The great Tokugawa chief, though he
munificently patronized Buddhism and though he carried constantly in his
bosom a miniature Buddhist image to which he ascribed all his success in
the field and his safety in battle, took his ethical code from
Confucius. He held that the basis of all legislation and administration
should be the five relations of sovereign and subject, parent and child,
husband and wife, brother and sister, friend and friend. The family was,
in his eyes, the essential foundation of society, to be maintained at
all sacrifices. Beyond these broad outlines of moral duty it was not
deemed necessary to instruct the people. Therefore out of the hundred
chapters forming the _Testament_ only 22 contain what can be called
legal enactments, while 55 relate to administration and politics; 16 set
forth moral maxims and reflections, and the remainder record
illustrative episodes in the career of the author. No distinct line is
drawn between law and morals, between the duty of a citizen and the
virtues of a member of a family. Substantive law is entirely wanting,
just as it was wanting in the so-called constitution of Prince Shotoku.
Custom, as sanctioned by public observance, must be complied with in the
civil affairs of life. What required minute exposition was criminal law,
the relations of social classes, etiquette, rank, precedence,
administration and government.
Social distinctions in the Tokugawa Era.
Society under feudalism had been moulded into three sharply defined
groups, namely, first, the Throne and the court nobles (_kuge_);
secondly, the military class (_buke_ or _samurai_); and thirdly, the
common people (_heimin_). These lines of cleavage were emphasized as
much as possible by the Tokugawa rulers. The divine origin of the mikado
was held to separate him from contact with mundane affairs, and he was
therefore strictly secluded in the palace at Kioto, his main function
being to mediate between his heavenly ancestors and his subjects,
entrusting to the shogun and the samurai the duty of transacting all
worldly business on behalf of the state. In obedience to this principle
the mikado became a kind of sacrosanct abstraction. No one except his
consorts and his chief ministers ever saw his face. In the rare cases
when he gave audience to a privileged subject, he sat behind a curtain,
and when he went abroad, he rode in a closely shut car drawn by oxen. A
revenue of ten thousand _koku_ of rice--the equivalent of about as many
guineas--was apportioned for his support, and the right was reserved to
him of conferring empty titles upon the living and rank upon the dead.
His majesty had one wife, the empress (_kogo_), necessarily taken from
one of the five chosen families (_go-sekke_) of the Fujiwara, but he
might also have twelve consorts, and if direct issue failed, the
succession passed to one of the two princely families of Arisugawa and
Fushimi, adoption, however, being possible in the last resort. The
_kuge_ constituted the court nobility, consisting of 155 families all of
whom traced their lineage to ancient mikados; they ranked far above the
feudal chiefs, not excepting even the shogun; filled by right of
heredity nearly all the offices at the court, the emoluments attached
being, however, a mere pittance; were entirely without the great estates
which had belonged to them in ante-feudal times, and lived lives of
proud poverty, occupying themselves with the study of literature and the
practice of music and art. After the kuge and at a long distance below
them in theoretical rank came the military families, who, as a class,
were called _buke_ or _samurai_. They had hereditary revenues, and they
filled the administrative posts, these, too, being often hereditary. The
third, and by far the most numerous, section of the nation were the
commoners (_heimin_). They had no social status; were not allowed to
carry swords, and possessed no income except what they could earn with
their hands. About 55 in every 1000 units of the nation were samurai,
the latter's wives and children being included in this estimate.
Daimyos.
Under the Hojo and the Ashikaga shoguns the holders of the great estates
changed frequently according to the vicissitudes of those troublesome
times, but under the Tokugawa no change took place, and there thus grew
up a landed nobility of the most permanent character. Every one of these
estates was a feudal kingdom, large or small, with its own usages and
its own laws, based on the general principles above indicated and liable
to be judged according to those principles by the shogun's government
(_baku-fu_) in Yedo. A daimyo or feudal chief drew from the peasants on
his estate the means of subsistence for himself and his retainers. For
this purpose the produce of his estate was assessed by the shogun's
officials in _koku_ (one _koku_ = 180.39 litres, worth about £1), and
about one-half of the assessed amount went to the feudatory, the other
half to the tillers of the soil. The richest daimyo was Mayeda of Kaga,
whose fief was assessed at a little over a million _koku_, his revenue
thus being about half a million sterling. Just as an empress had to be
taken from one of five families designated to that distinction for all
time, so a successor to the shogunate, failing direct heir, had to be
selected from three families (_sanke_), namely, those of the daimyos of
Owari, Kii and Mito, whose first representatives were three sons of
Iyeyasu. Out of the total body of 255 daimyos existing in the year 1862,
141 were specially distinguished as _fudai_, or hereditary vassals of
the Tokugawa house, and to 18 of these was strictly limited the
perpetual privilege of filling all the high offices in the Yedo
administration, while to 4 of them was reserved the special honour of
supplying a regent (_go-tairo_) during the minority of the shogun.
Moreover, a _fudai_ daimyo was of necessity appointed to the command of
the fortress of Nijo in Kioto as well as of the great castles of Osaka
and Fushimi, which Iyeyasu designated the keys of the country. No
intermarriage might take place between members of the court nobility and
the feudal houses without the consent of Yedo; no daimyo might apply
direct to the emperor for an official title, or might put foot within
the imperial district of Kioto without the shogun's permit, and at all
entrances to the region known as the Kwanto there were established
guardhouses, where every one, of whatever rank, must submit to be
examined, in order to prevent the wives and children of the daimyos
from secretly leaving Yedo for their own provinces. In their journeys to
and from Yedo every second year the feudal chiefs had to travel by one
of two great highways, the Tokaido or the Nakasendo, and as they moved
with great retinues, these roads were provided with a number of inns and
tea-houses equipped in a sumptuous manner, and having an abundance of
female servants. A puissant daimyo's procession often numbered as many
as 1000 retainers, and nothing illustrates more forcibly the wide
interval that separated the soldier and the plebeian than the fact that
at the appearance of the heralds who preceded these progresses all
commoners who happened to be abroad had to kneel on the ground with
bowed and uncovered heads; all wayside houses had to close the shutters
of windows giving on the road, and none might venture to look down from
a height on the passing magnate. Any violation of these rules of
etiquette exposed the violator to instant death at the hands of the
daimyo's retinue. Moreover, the samurai and the heimin lived strictly
apart. A feudal chief had a castle which generally occupied a commanding
position. It was surrounded by from one to three broad moats, the
innermost crowned with a high wall of huge cut stones, its trace
arranged so as to give flank defence, which was further provided by
pagoda-like towers placed at the salient angles. Inside this wall stood
the houses of the high officials on the outskirts of a park surrounding
the residence of the daimyo himself, and from the scarps of the moats or
in the intervals between them rose houses for the military retainers,
barrack-like structures, provided, whenever possible, with small but
artistically arranged and carefully tended gardens. All this domain of
the military was called _yashiki_ in distinction to the _machi_
(streets) where the despised commoners had their habitat.
Samurai.
The general body of the samurai received stipends and lived frugally.
Their pay was not reckoned in money: it took the form of so many rations
of rice delivered from their chief's granaries. A few had landed
estates, usually bestowed in recognition of conspicuous merit. They were
probably the finest type of hereditary soldiers the world ever produced.
Money and all devices for earning it they profoundly despised. The right
of wearing a sword was to them the highest conceivable privilege. They
counted themselves the guardians of their fiefs' honour and of their
country's welfare. At any moment they were prepared cheerfully to
sacrifice their lives on the altar of loyalty. Their word, once given,
must never be violated. The slightest insult to their honour might not
be condoned. Stoicism was a quality which they esteemed next to courage:
all outward display of emotion must be suppressed. The sword might never
be drawn for a petty cause, but, if once drawn, must never be returned
to its scabbard until it had done its duty. Martial exercises occupied
much of their attention, but book learning also they esteemed highly.
They were profoundly courteous towards each other, profoundly
contemptuous towards the commoner, whatever his wealth. Filial piety
ranked next to loyalty in their code of ethics. Thus the Confucian
maxim, endorsed explicitly in the _Testament of Iyeyasu_, that a man
must not live under the same sky with his father's murderer or his
brother's slayer, received most literal obedience, and many instances
occurred of vendettas pursued in the face of apparently insuperable
difficulties and consummated after years of effort. By the standard of
modern morality the Japanese samurai would be counted cruel. Holding
that death was the natural sequel of defeat and the only certain way of
avoiding disgrace, he did not seek quarter himself or think of extending
it to an enemy. Yet in his treatment of the latter he loved to display
courtesy until the supreme moment when all considerations of mercy were
laid aside. It cannot be doubted that the practice of employing torture
judicially tended to educate a mood of callousness towards suffering, or
that the many idle hours of a military man's life in time of peace
encouraged a measure of dissipation. But there does not seem to be any
valid ground for concluding that either of these defects was conspicuous
in the character of the Japanese samurai. Faithlessness towards women
was the greatest fault that can be laid to his door. The samurai lady
claimed no privilege of timidity on account of her sex. She knew how to
die in the cause of honour just as readily as her husband, her father or
her brother died, and conjugal fidelity did not rank as a virtue in her
eyes, being regarded as a simple duty. But her husband held marital
faith in small esteem and ranked his wife far below his sword. It has to
be remembered that when we speak of a samurai's suicide, there is no
question of poison, the bullet, drowning or any comparatively painless
manner of exit from the world. The invariable method was to cut open the
abdomen (_hara-kiri_ or _seppuku_) and afterwards, if strength remained,
the sword was turned against the throat. To such endurance had the
samurai trained himself that he went through this cruel ordeal without
flinching in the smallest degree.
Heimin.
The heimin or commoners were divided into three classes--husbandmen,
artisans and traders. The farmer, as the nation lived by his labour, was
counted the most respectable among the bread-winners, and a cultivator
of his own estate might even carry one sword but never two, that
privilege being strictly reserved to a samurai. The artisan, too,
received much consideration, as is easily understood when we remember
that included in his ranks were artists, sword-smiths, armourers,
sculptors of sacred images or sword-furniture, ceramists and lacquerers.
Many artisans were in the permanent service of feudal chiefs from whom
they received fixed salaries. Tradesmen, however, were regarded with
disdain and stood lowest of all in the social organization. Too much
despised to be even included in that organization were the _eta_
(defiled folks) and the _hinin_ (outcasts). The exact origin of these
latter pariahs is uncertain, but the ancestors of the eta would seem to
have been prisoners of war or the enslaved families of criminals. To
such people were assigned the defiling duties of tending tombs,
disposing of the bodies of the dead, slaughtering animals or tanning
hides. The hinin were mendicants. On them devolved the task of removing
and burying the corpses of executed criminals. Living in segregated
hamlets, forbidden to marry with heimin, still less with samurai, not
allowed to eat, drink or associate with persons above their own class,
the eta remained under the ban of ostracism from generation to
generation, though many of them contrived to amass much wealth. They
were governed by their own headmen, and they had three chiefs, one
residing in each of the cities of Yedo, Osaka and Kioto. All these
members of the submerged classes were relieved from proscription and
admitted to the ranks of the commoners under the enlightened system of
Meiji. The 12th of October 1871 saw their enfranchisement, and at that
date the census showed 287,111 eta and 695,689 hinin.
Decline and Fall of the Shogunate.
Naturally, as the unbroken peace of the Tokugawa régime became habitual,
the mood of the nation underwent a change. The samurai, no longer
required to lead the frugal life of camp or barracks, began to live
beyond their incomes. "They found difficulty in meeting the pecuniary
engagements of everyday existence, so that money acquired new importance
in their eyes, and they gradually forfeited the respect which their
traditional disinterestedness had won for them in the past." At the same
time the abuses of feudalism were thrown into increased salience. A
large body of hereditary soldiers become an anomaly when fighting has
passed even out of memory. On the other hand, the agricultural and
commercial classes acquired new importance. The enormous sums disbursed
every year in Yedo, for the maintenance of the great establishments
which the feudal chiefs vied with each other in keeping there, enriched
the merchants and traders so greatly that their scale of living
underwent radical change. Buddhism was a potent influence, but its
ethical restraints were weakened by the conduct of its priests, who
themselves often yielded to the temptation of the time. The aristocracy
adhered to its refined pastimes--performances of the _No_; tea reunions;
poem composing; polo; football; equestrian archery; fencing and
gambling--but the commoner, being excluded from all this realm and, at
the same time, emerging rapidly from his old position of penury and
degradation, began to develop luxurious proclivities and to demand
corresponding amusements. Thus the theatre came into existence; the
dancing girl and the jester found lucrative employment; a popular school
of art was founded and quickly carried to perfection; the _lupanar_
assumed unprecedented dimensions; rich and costly costumes acquired wide
vogue in despite of sumptuary laws enacted from time to time; wrestling
became an important institution, and plutocracy asserted itself in the
face of caste distinctions.
Simultaneously with the change of social conditions thus taking place,
history repeated itself at the shogun's court. The substance of
administrative power passed into the hands of a minister, its shadow
alone remaining to the shogun. During only two generations were the
successors of Iyeyasu able to resist this traditional tendency. The
representative of the third--Iyetsuna (1661-1680)--succumbed to the
machinations of an ambitious minister, Sakai Takakiyo, and it may be
said that from that time the nominal repository of administrative
authority in Yedo was generally a species of magnificent recluse,
secluded from contact with the outer world and seeing and hearing only
through the eyes and ears of the ladies of his household. In this
respect the descendants of the great Tokugawa statesman found themselves
reduced to a position precisely analogous to that of the emperor in
Kioto. Sovereign and shogun were alike mere abstractions so far as the
practical work of government was concerned. With the great mass of the
feudal chiefs things fared similarly. These men who, in the days of
Nobunaga, Hideyoshi and Iyeyasu, had directed the policies of their
fiefs and led their armies in the field, were gradually transformed,
during the long peace of the Tokugawa era, into voluptuous _fainéants_
or, at best, thoughtless dilettanti, willing to abandon the direction of
their affairs to seneschals and mayors, who, while on the whole their
administration was able and loyal, found their account in contriving and
perpetuating the effacement of their chiefs. Thus, in effect, the
government of the country, taken out of the hands of the shogun and the
feudatories, fell into those of their vassals. There were exceptions, of
course, but so rare as to be merely accidental.
Another important factor has to be noted. It has been shown above that
Iyeyasu bestowed upon his three sons the rich fiefs of Owari, Kii
(Kishu) and Mito, and that these three families exclusively enjoyed the
privilege of furnishing an heir to the shogun should the latter be
without direct issue. Mito ought therefore to have been a most unlikely
place for the conception and propagation of principles subversive of the
shogun's administrative autocracy. Nevertheless, in the days of the
second of the Mito chiefs at the close of the 17th century, there arose
in that province a school of thinkers who, revolting against the
ascendancy of Chinese literature and of Buddhism, devoted themselves to
compiling a history such as should recall the attention of the nation to
its own annals and revive its allegiance to Shinto. It would seem that
in patronizing the compilation of this great work the Mito chief was
swayed by the spirit of pure patriotism and studentship, and that he
discerned nothing of the goal to which the new researches must lead the
litterati of his fief. "He and they, for the sake of history and without
any thought of politics, undertook a retrospect of their country's
annals, and their frank analysis furnished conclusive proof that the
emperor was the prime source of administrative authority and that its
independent exercise by a shogun must be regarded as a usurpation. They
did not attempt to give practical effect to their discoveries; the era
was essentially academical. But this galaxy of scholars projected into
the future a light which burned with growing force in each succeeding
generation and ultimately burst into a flame which consumed feudalism
and the shogunate," fused the nation into one, and restored the
governing authority to the emperor. Of course the Mito men were not
alone in this matter: many students subsequently trod in their footsteps
and many others sought to stem the tendency; but the net result was
fatal to faith in the dual system of government. Possibly had nothing
occurred to furnish signal proof of the system's practical defects, it
might have long survived this theoretical disapproval. But the crisis
caused by the advent of foreign ships and by the forceful renewal of
foreign intercourse in the 19th century afforded convincing evidence of
the shogunate's incapacity to protect the state's supposed interests and
to enforce the traditional policy of isolation which the nation had
learned to consider essential to the empire's integrity.
Another important factor made for the fall of the shogunate. That factor
was the traditional disaffection of the two great southern fiefs,
Satsuma and Choshu. When Iyeyasu parcelled out the empire, he deemed it
the wisest policy to leave these chieftains in full possession of their
large estates. But this measure, construed as an evidence of weakness
rather than a token of liberality, neither won the allegiance of the big
feudatories nor cooled their ambition. Thus no sooner did the nation
divide into two camps over the question of renewed foreign intercourse
than men of the above clans, in concert with representatives of certain
of the old court nobles, placed themselves at the head of a movement
animated by two loudly proclaimed purposes: restoration of the
administration to the emperor, and expulsion of aliens. This latter
aspiration underwent a radical change when the bombardment of the
Satsuma capital, Kagoshima, and the destruction of the Choshu forts and
ships at Shimonoseki proved conclusively to the Satsuma and Choshu clans
that Japan in her unequipped and backward condition could not hope to
stand for a moment against the Occident in arms. But the unwelcome
discovery was accompanied by a conviction that only a thoroughly united
nation might aspire to preserve its independence, and thus the abolition
of the dual form of government became more than ever an article of
public faith. It is unnecessary to recount the successive incidents
which conspired to undermine the shogun's authority, and to destroy the
prestige of the Yedo administration. Both had been reduced to vanishing
quantities by the year 1866 when Keiki succeeded to the shogunate.
Keiki, known historically as Yoshinobu, the last of the shoguns, was a
man of matured intellect and high capacities. He had been put forward by
the anti-foreign Conservatives for the succession to the shogunate in
1857 when the complications of foreign intercourse were in their first
stage of acuteness. But, like many other intelligent Japanese, he had
learned, in the interval between 1857 and 1866, that to keep her doors
closed was an impossible task for Japan, and very quickly after taking
the reins of office he recognized that national union could never be
achieved while power was divided between Kioto and Yedo. At this
juncture there was addressed to him by Yodo, chief of the great Tosa
fief, a memorial setting forth the hopelessness of the position in which
the Yedo court now found itself, and urging that, in the interests of
good government and in order that the nation's united strength might be
available to meet the exigencies of its new career, the administration
should be restored to the emperor. Keiki received this memorial in
Kioto. He immediately summoned a council of all the feudatories and high
officials then in the Imperial city, announced to them his intention to
lay down his office, and, the next day, presented his resignation to the
sovereign. This happened on the 14th of October 1867. It must be ranked
among the signal events of the world's history, for it signified the
voluntary surrender of kingly authority wielded uninterruptedly for
nearly three centuries. That the shogun's resignation was tendered in
good faith there can be no doubt, and had it been accepted in the same
spirit, the great danger it involved might have been consummated without
bloodshed or disorder. But the clansmen of Satsuma and Choshu were
distrustful. One of the shogun's first acts after assuming office had
been to obtain from the throne an edict for imposing penalties on
Choshu, and there was a precedent for suspecting that the renunciation
of power by the shogun might merely prelude its resumption on a firmer
basis. Therefore steps were taken to induce the emperor, then a youth of
fifteen, to issue a secret rescript to Satsuma and Choshu, denouncing
the shogun as the nation's enemy and enjoining his destruction. At the
same time all officials connected with the Tokugawa or suspected of
sympathy with them were expelled from office in Kioto, and the shogun's
troops were deprived of the custody of the palace gates by methods which
verged upon the use of armed force. In the face of such provocation
Keiki's earnest efforts to restrain the indignation of his vassals and
adherents failed. They marched against Kioto and were defeated,
whereupon Keiki left his castle at Osaka and retired to Yedo, where he
subsequently made unconditional surrender to the Imperial army. There is
little more to be set down on this page of the history. The Yedo court
consented to lay aside its dignities and be stripped of its
administrative authority, but all the Tokugawa vassals and adherents did
not prove equally placable. There was resistance in the northern
provinces, where the Aizu feudatory refused to abandon the Tokugawa
cause; there was an attempt to set up a rival candidate for the throne
in the person of an Imperial prince who presided over the Uyeno
Monastery in Yedo; and there was a wild essay on the part of the admiral
of the shogun's fleet to establish a republic in the island of Yezo. But
these were mere ripples on the surface of the broad stream which set
towards the peaceful overthrow of the dual system of government and
ultimately towards the fall of feudalism itself. That this system, the
outcome of five centuries of nearly continuous warfare, was swept away
in almost as many weeks with little loss of life or destruction of
property constitutes, perhaps, the most striking incident, certainly the
most momentous, in the history of the Japanese nation.
_The Meiji Era._--It must be remembered that when reference is made to
the Japanese nation in connexion with these radical changes, only the
nobles and the samurai are indicated--in other words, a section of the
population representing about one-sixteenth of the whole. The bulk of
the people--the agricultural, the industrial and the mercantile
classes--remained outside the sphere of politics, not sharing the
anti-foreign prejudice, or taking any serious interest in the great
questions of the time. Foreigners often noted with surprise the contrast
between the fierce antipathy displayed towards them by certain samurai
on the one hand, and the genial, hospitable reception given to them by
the common people on the other. History teaches that the latter was the
natural disposition of the Japanese, the former a mood educated by
special experiences. Further, even the comparatively narrow statement
that the restoration of the administrative power to the emperor was the
work of the nobles and the samurai must be taken with limitations. A
majority of the nobles entertained no idea of any necessity for change.
They were either held fast in the vice of Tokugawa authority, or
paralyzed by the sensuous seductions of the lives provided for them by
the machinations of their retainers, who transferred the administrative
authority of the fiefs to their own hands, leaving its shadow only to
their lords. It was among the retainers that longings for a new order of
things were generated. Some of these men were sincere disciples of
progress--a small band of students and deep thinkers who, looking
through the narrow Dutch window at Deshima, had caught a glimmering
perception of the realities that lay beyond the horizon of their
country's prejudices. But the influence of such Liberals was
comparatively insignificant. Though they showed remarkable moral courage
and tenacity of purpose, the age did not furnish any strong object
lesson to enforce their propaganda of progress. The factors chiefly
making for change were, first, the ambition of the southern clans to
oust the Tokugawa, and, secondly, the samurai's loyal instinct,
reinforced by the teachings of his country's history, by the revival of
the Shinto cult, by the promptings of national enterprise, and by the
object-lessons of foreign intercourse.
Character of the Revolution.
But though essentially imperialistic in its prime purposes, the
revolution which involved the fall of the shogunate, and ultimately of
feudalism, may be called democratic with regard to the personnel of
those who planned and directed it. They were, for the most part, men
without either official rank or social standing. That is a point
essential to a clear understanding of the issue. Fifty-five individuals
may be said to have planned and carried out the overthrow of the Yedo
administration, and only five of them were territorial nobles. Eight,
belonging to the court nobility, laboured under the traditional
disadvantages of their class, poverty and political insignificance; and
the remaining forty-two, the hearts and hands of the movement, may be
described as ambitious youths, who sought to make a career for
themselves in the first place, and for their country in the second. The
average age of the whole did not exceed thirty. There was another
element for which any student of Japanese history might have been
prepared: the Satsuma samurai aimed originally not merely at
overthrowing the Tokugawa but also at obtaining the shogunate for their
own chief. Possibly it would be unjust to say that all the leaders of
the great southern clan harboured that idea. But some of them certainly
did, and not until they had consented to abandon the project did their
union with Choshu, the other great southern clan, become possible--a
union without which the revolution could scarcely have been
accomplished. This ambition of the Satsuma clansmen deserves special
mention, because it bore remarkable fruit; it may be said to have laid
the foundation of constitutional government in Japan. For, in
consequence of the distrust engendered by such aspirations, the authors
of the Restoration agreed that when the emperor assumed the reins of
power, he should solemnly pledge himself to convene a deliberative
assembly, to appoint to administrative posts men of intellect and
erudition wherever they might be found, and to decide all measures in
accordance with public opinion. This promise, referred to frequently in
later times as the Imperial oath at the Restoration, came to be
accounted the basis of representative institutions, though in reality it
was intended solely as a guarantee against the political ascendancy of
any one clan.
The Anti-feudal Idea.
At the outset the necessity of abolishing feudalism did not present
itself clearly to the leaders of the revolution. Their sole idea was the
unification of the nation. But when they came to consider closely the
practical side of the problem, they understood how far it would lead
them. Evidently that one homogeneous system of law should replace the
more or less heterogeneous systems operative in the various fiefs was
essential, and such a substitution meant that the feudatories must be
deprived of their local autonomy and, incidentally, of their control of
local finances. That was a stupendous change. Hitherto each feudal chief
had collected the revenues of his fief and had employed them at will,
subject to the sole condition of maintaining a body of troops
proportionate to his income. He had been, and was still, an autocrat
within the limits of his territory. On the other hand, the active
authors of the revolution were a small band of men mainly without
prestige or territorial influence. It was impossible that they should
dictate any measure sensibly impairing the local and fiscal autonomy of
the feudatories. No power capable of enforcing such a measure existed at
the time. All the great political changes in Japan had formerly been
preceded by wars culminating in the accession of some strong clan to
supreme authority, whereas in this case there had been a displacement
without a substitution--the Tokugawa had been overthrown and no new
administrators had been set up in their stead. It was, moreover, certain
that an attempt on the part of any one clan to constitute itself
executor of the sovereign's mandates would have stirred the other clans
to vehement resistance. In short, the leaders of the revolution found
themselves pledged to a new theory of government without any machinery
for carrying it into effect, or any means of abolishing the old
practice. An ingenious exit from this curious dilemma was devised by the
young reformers. They induced the feudal chiefs of Satsuma, Choshu, Tosa
and Hizen, the four most powerful clans in the south, publicly to
surrender their fiefs to the emperor, praying his majesty to reorganize
them and to bring them all under the same system of law. In the case of
Shimazu, chief of Satsuma, and Yodo, chief of Tosa, this act must stand
to their credit as a noble sacrifice. To them the exercise of power had
been a reality and the effort of surrendering it must have been
correspondingly costly. But the chiefs of Choshu and Hizen obeyed the
suggestions of their principal vassals with little, if any, sense of the
probable cost of obedience. The same remark applies to all the other
feudatories, with exceptions so rare as to emphasize the rule. They had
long been accustomed to abandon the management of their affairs to their
leading clansmen, and they allowed themselves to follow the same
guidance at this crisis. Out of more than 250 feudatories, only 17
hesitated to imitate the example of the four southern fiefs.
Motives of the Reformers.
An explanation of this remarkable incident has been sought by supposing
that the samurai of the various clans, when they advised a course so
inconsistent with fidelity to the interests of their feudal chiefs, were
influenced by motives of personal ambition, imagining that they
themselves might find great opportunities under the new régime. Some
hope of that kind may fairly be assumed, and was certainly realized, in
the case of the leading samurai of the four southern clans which headed
the movement. But it is plain that no such expectations can have been
generally entertained. The simplest explanation seems to be the true
one: a certain course, indicated by the action of the four southern
clans, was conceived to be in accord with the spirit of the Restoration,
and not to adopt it would have been to shrink publicly from a sacrifice
dictated by the principle of loyalty to the Throne--a principle which
had acquired supreme sanctity in the eyes of the men of that era. There
might have been some uncertainty about the initial step; but so soon as
that was taken by the southern clans their example acquired compelling
force. History shows that in political crises the Japanese samurai is
generally ready to pay deference to certain canons of almost romantic
morality. There was a fever of loyalty and of patriotism in the air of
the year 1869. Any one hesitating, for obviously selfish reasons, to
adopt a precedent such as that offered by the procedure of the great
southern clans, would have seemed to forfeit the right of calling
himself a samurai. But although the leaders of this remarkable movement
now understood that they must contrive the total abolition of feudalism
and build up a new administrative edifice on foundations of
constitutional monarchy, they appreciated the necessity of advancing
slowly towards a goal which still lay beyond the range of their
followers' vision. Thus the first steps taken after the surrender of the
fiefs were to appoint the feudatories to the position of governors in
the districts over which they had previously ruled; to confirm the
samurai in the possession of their incomes and official positions; to
put an end to the distinction between court nobles and territorial
nobles, and to organize in Kioto a cabinet consisting of the leaders of
the restoration. Each new governor received one-tenth of the income of
the fief by way of emoluments; the pay of the officials and the samurai,
as well as the administrative expenses of the district, was defrayed
from the same source, and the residue, if any, was to pass into the
treasury of the central government.
Defects of the First Measures.
The defects of this system from a monarchical point of view soon became
evident. It did not give the power of either the purse or the sword to
the sovereign. The revenues of the administrative districts continued to
be collected and disbursed by the former feudatories, who also retained
the control of the troops, the right of appointing and dismissing
officials, and almost complete local autonomy. A further radical step
had to be taken, and the leaders of reform, seeing nothing better than
to continue the method of procedure which had thus far proved so
successful, contrived, first, that several of the administrative
districts should send in petitions offering to surrender their local
autonomy and be brought under the direct rule of the central government;
secondly, that a number of samurai should apply for permission to lay
aside their swords. While the nation was digesting the principles
embodied in these petitions, the government made preparations for
further measures of reform. The ex-chief of Satsuma, who showed some
umbrage because the services of his clan in promoting the restoration
had not been more fully recognized, was induced to take high ministerial
office, as were also the ex-chiefs of Choshu and Tosa. Each of the four
great clans had now three representatives in the ministry. These clans
were further persuaded to send to Tokyo--whither the emperor had moved
his court--contingents of troops to form the nucleus of a national army.
Importance attaches to these details because the principle of clan
representation, illustrated in the organization of the cabinet of 1871,
continued to be approximately observed for many years in forming
ministries, and ultimately became a target for the attacks of party
politicians.
Adoption of Radical Measures.
On the 29th of August 1871 an Imperial decree announced the abolition of
the system of local autonomy, and the removal of the territorial nobles
from the posts of governor. The taxes of the former fiefs were to be
paid thenceforth into the central treasury; all officials were to be
appointed by the Imperial government, and the feudatories, retaining
permanently an income of one-tenth of their original revenues, were to
make Tokyo their place of residence. As for the samurai, they remained
for the moment in possession of their hereditary pensions. Radical as
these changes seem, the disturbance caused by them was not great, since
they left the incomes of the military class untouched. Some of the
incomes were for life only, but the majority were hereditary, and all
had been granted in consideration of their holders devoting themselves
to military service. Four hundred thousand men approximately were in
receipt of such emoluments, and the total amount annually taken from the
tax-payers for this purpose was about £2,000,000. Plainly the nation
would have to be relieved of this burden sooner or later. The samurai
were essentially an element of the feudal system, and that they should
survive the latter's fall would have been incongruous. On the other
hand, suddenly and wholly to deprive these men and their families--a
total of some two million persons--of the means of subsistence on which
they had hitherto relied with absolute confidence, and in return for
which they and their forefathers had rendered faithful service, would
have been an act of inhumanity. It may easily be conceived that this
problem caused extreme perplexity to the administrators of the new
Japan. They left it unsolved for the moment, trusting that time and the
loyalty of the samurai themselves would suggest some solution. As for
the feudal chiefs, who had now been deprived of all official status and
reduced to the position of private gentlemen, without even a patent of
nobility to distinguish them from ordinary individuals, they did not
find anything specially irksome or regrettable in their altered
position. No scrutiny had been made into the contents of their
treasuries. They were allowed to retain unquestioned possession of all
the accumulated funds of their former fiefs, and they also became public
creditors for annual allowances equal to one-tenth of their feudal
revenues. They had never previously been so pleasantly circumstanced. It
is true that they were entirely stripped of all administrative and
military authority; but since their possession of such authority had
been in most cases merely nominal, they only felt the change as a relief
from responsibility.
Treatment of the Samurai.
By degrees public opinion began to declare itself with regard to the
samurai. If they were to be absorbed into the bulk of the people and to
lose their fixed revenues, some capital must be placed at their disposal
to begin the world again. The samurai themselves showed a noble faculty
of resignation. They had been a privileged class, but they had purchased
their privileges with their blood and by serving as patterns of all the
qualities most prized among Japanese national characteristics. The
record of their acts and the recognition of the people entitled them to
look for munificent treatment at the hands of the government which they
had been the means of setting up. Yet none of these considerations
blinded them to the painful fact that the time had passed them by; that
no place existed for them in the new polity. Many of them voluntarily
stepped down into the company of the peasant or the tradesman, and many
others signified their willingness to join the ranks of common
bread-winners if some aid was given to equip them for such a career.
After two years' consideration the government took action. A decree
announced, in 1873, that the treasury was prepared to commute the
pensions of the samurai at the rate of six years' purchase for
hereditary pensions and four years for life pensions--one-half of the
commutation to be paid in cash, and one-half in bonds bearing interest
at the rate of 8%. It will be seen that a perpetual pension of £10 would
be exchanged for a payment of £30 in cash, together with securities
giving an income of £2, 8s.; and that a £10 life pensioner received £20
in cash and securities yielding £1, 12s. annually. It is scarcely
credible that the samurai should have accepted such an arrangement.
Something, perhaps, must be ascribed to their want of business
knowledge, but the general explanation is that they made a large
sacrifice in the interests of their country. Nothing in all their career
as soldiers became them better than their manner of abandoning it. They
were told that they might lay aside their swords, and many of them did
so, though from time immemorial they had cherished the sword as the mark
of a gentleman, the most precious possession of a warrior, and the one
outward evidence that distinguished men of their order from common
toilers after gain. They saw themselves deprived of their military
employment, were invited to surrender more than one-half of the income
it brought, and knew that they were unprepared alike by education and by
tradition to earn bread in any calling save that of arms. Yet, at the
invitation of a government which they had helped to establish, many of
them bowed their heads quietly to this sharp reverse of fortune. It was
certainly a striking instance of the fortitude and resignation which the
creed of the samurai required him to display in the presence of
adversity. As yet, however, the government's measures with regard to the
samurai were not compulsory. Men laid aside their swords and commuted
their pensions at their own option.
Saigo Takamori.
Meanwhile differences of opinion began to occur among the leaders of
progress themselves. Coalitions formed for destructive purposes are
often found unable to endure the strain of constructive efforts. Such
lack of cohesion might easily have been foreseen in the case of the
Japanese reformers. Young men without experience of public affairs, or
special education to fit them for responsible posts, found the duty
suddenly imposed on them not only of devising administrative and fiscal
systems universally applicable to a nation hitherto divided into a
congeries of semi-independent principalities, but also of shaping the
country's demeanour towards novel problems of foreign intercourse and
alien civilization. So long as the heat of their assault upon the
shogunate fused them into a homogeneous party they worked together
successfully. But when they had to build a brand-new edifice on the
ruins of a still vivid past, it was inevitable that their opinions
should vary as to the nature of the materials to be employed. In this
divergence of views many of the capital incidents of Japan's modern
history had their origin. Of the fifty-five men whose united efforts had
compassed the fall of the shogunate, five stood conspicuous above their
colleagues. They were Iwakura and Sanjo, court nobles; Saigo and Okubo,
samurai of Satsuma, and Kido, a samurai of Choshu. In the second rank
came many men of great gifts, whose youth alone disqualified them for
prominence--Ito, the constructive statesman of the Meiji era, who
inspired nearly all the important measures of the time, though he did
not openly figure as their originator; Inouye, who never lacked a
resource or swerved from the dictates of loyalty; Okuma, a politician of
subtle, versatile and vigorous intellect; Itagaki, the Rousseau of his
era; and a score of others created by the extraordinary circumstances
with which they had to deal. But the five first mentioned were the
captains, the rest only lieutenants. Among the five, four were sincere
reformers--not free, of course, from selfish motives, but truthfully
bent upon promoting the interests of their country before all other
aims. The fifth, Saigo Takamori, was a man in whom boundless ambition
lay concealed under qualities of the noblest and most enduring type. His
absolute freedom from every trace of sordidness gave currency to a
belief that his aims were of the simplest; the story of his career
satisfied the highest canons of the samurai; his massive physique,
commanding presence and sunny aspect impressed and attracted even those
who had no opportunity of admiring his life of self-sacrificing effort
or appreciating the remarkable military talent he possessed. In the
first part of his career, the elevation of his clan to supreme power
seems to have been his sole motive, but subsequently personal ambition
appears to have swayed him. To the consummation of either object the
preservation of the military class was essential. By the swords of the
samurai alone could a new _imperium in imperio_ be carved out. On the
other hand, Saigo's colleagues in the ministry saw clearly not only that
the samurai were an unwarrantable burden on the nation, but also that
their continued existence after the fall of feudalism would be a menace
to public peace as well as an anomaly. Therefore they took the steps
already described, and followed them by a conscription law, making every
adult male liable for military service without regard to his social
standing. It is easy to conceive how painfully unwelcome this
conscription law proved to the samurai. Many of them were not unwilling
to commute their pensions, since their creed had always forbidden them
to care for money. Many of them were not unwilling to abandon the habit
of carrying swords, since the adoption of foreign costume rendered such
a custom incongruous and inconvenient. But very few of them could
readily consent to step down from their cherished position as the
military class, and relinquish their traditional title to bear the whole
responsibility and enjoy the whole honour of fighting their country's
battles. They had supposed, not unreasonably, that service in the army
and navy would be reserved exclusively for them and their sons, whereas
now the commonest rustic, mechanic or tradesman would be equally
eligible.
Split among the Reformers.
While the pain of this blow was still fresh there occurred a trouble
with Korea. The little state had behaved with insulting contumely, and
when Japan's course came to be debated in Tokyo, a disruption resulted
in the ranks of the reformers. Saigo saw in a foreign war the sole
remaining chance of achieving his ambition by lawful means. The
government's conscription scheme, yet in its infancy, had not produced
even the skeleton of an army. If Korea had to be conquered, the samurai
must be employed; and their employment would mean, if not their
rehabilitation, at least their organization into a force which, under
Saigo's leadership, might dictate a new policy. Other members of the
cabinet believed that the nation would be disgraced if it tamely endured
Korea's insults. Thus several influential voices swelled the clamour for
war. But a peace party offered strenuous opposition. Its members saw the
collateral issues of the problem, and declared that the country must not
think of taking up arms during a period of radical transition. The final
discussion took place in the emperor's presence. The advocates of peace
understood the national significance of the issue and perceived that
they were debating, not merely whether there should be peace or war, but
whether the country should halt or advance on its newly adopted path of
progress. They prevailed, and four members of the cabinet, including
Saigo, resigned. This rupture was destined to have far-reaching
consequences. One of the seceders immediately raised the standard of
revolt. Among the devices employed by him to win adherents was an
attempt to fan into flame the dying embers of the anti-foreign
sentiment. The government easily crushed the insurrection. Another
seceder was Itagaki Taisuke. The third and most prominent was Saigo, who
seems to have concluded from that moment that he must abandon his aims
or achieve them by force. He retired to his native province of Satsuma,
and applied his whole resources, his great reputation and the devoted
loyalty of a number of able followers to organizing and equipping a
strong body of samurai. Matters were facilitated for him by the
conservatism of the celebrated Shimazu Saburo, former chief of Satsuma,
who, though not opposed to foreign intercourse, had been revolted by the
wholesale iconoclasm of the time, and by the indiscriminate rejection of
Japanese customs in favour of foreign. He protested vehemently against
what seemed to him a slavish abandonment of the nation's individuality,
and finding his protest fruitless, he set himself to preserve in his own
distant province, where the writ of the Yedo government had never run,
the fashions, institutions and customs which his former colleagues in
the administration were ruthlessly rejecting. Satsuma thus became a
centre of conservative influences, among which Saigo and his constantly
augmenting band of samurai found a congenial environment. During four
years this breach between the central government and the southern clan
grew constantly.
Final Abolition of Sword-wearing and Pensions.
In the meanwhile (1876) two extreme measures were adopted by the
government: a veto on the wearing of swords, and an edict ordering the
compulsory commutation of the pensions and allowances received by the
nobles and the samurai. Three years previously the discarding of swords
had been declared optional, and a scheme of voluntary commutation had
been announced. Many had bowed quietly to the spirit of these
enactments. But many still retained their swords and drew their pensions
as of old, obstructing, in the former respect, the government's projects
for the reorganization of society, and imposing, in the latter, an
intolerable burden on the resources of the treasury. The government
thought that the time had come, and that its own strength sufficed, to
substitute compulsion for persuasion. The financial measure--which was
contrived so as to affect the smallest pension-holders least
injuriously--evoked no complaint. The samurai remained faithful to the
creed which forbade them to be concerned about money. But the veto
against sword-wearing overtaxed the patience of the extreme
Conservatives. It seemed to them that all the most honoured traditions
of their country were being ruthlessly sacrificed on the altar of alien
innovations. Armed protests ensued. A few score of samurai, equipping
themselves with the hauberks and weapons of old times, fell upon the
garrison of a castle, killed or wounded some 300, and then, retiring to
an adjacent mountain, died by their own hands. Their example found
imitators in two other places, and finally the Satsuma samurai rose in
arms under Saigo.
Satsuma Insurrection.
This was an insurrection very different in dimensions and motives from
the outbreaks that had preceded it. During four years the preparations
of the Satsuma men had been unremitting. They were equipped with rifles
and cannon; they numbered some 30,000; they were all of the military
class, and in addition to high training in western tactics and in the
use of modern arms of precision, they knew how to wield that formidable
weapon, the Japanese sword, of which their opponents were for the most
part ignorant. Ostensibly their object was to restore the samurai to
their old supremacy, and to secure for them all the posts in the army,
the navy and the administration. But although they doubtless entertained
that intention, it was put forward mainly with the hope of winning the
co-operation of the military class throughout the empire. The real
purpose of the revolt was to secure the governing power for Satsuma. A
bitter struggle ensued. Beginning on the 29th of January 1877, it was
brought to a close on the 24th of September by the death, voluntary or
in battle, of all the rebel leaders. During that period the number of
men engaged on the government's side had been 66,000 and the number on
the side of the rebels 40,000, out of which total the killed and wounded
aggregated 35,000, or 33% of the whole. Had the government's troops been
finally defeated, there can be no doubt that the samurai's exclusive
title to man and direct the army and navy would have been
re-established, and Japan would have found herself permanently saddled
with a military class, heavily burdening her finances, seriously
impeding her progress towards constitutional government, and
perpetuating all the abuses incidental to a policy in which the power of
the sword rests entirely in the hands of one section of the people. The
nation scarcely appreciated the great issues that were at stake. It
found more interest in the struggle as furnishing a conclusive test of
the efficiency of the new military system compared with the old. The
army sent to quell the insurrection consisted of recruits drawn
indiscriminately from every class of the people. Viewed in the light of
history, it was an army of commoners, deficient in the fighting
instinct, and traditionally demoralized for all purposes of resistance
to the military class. The Satsuma insurgents, on the contrary,
represented the flower of the samurai, long trained for this very
struggle, and led by men whom the nation regarded as its bravest
captains. The result dispelled all doubts about the fighting quality of
the people at large.
Steps of Progress.
Concurrently with these events the government diligently endeavoured to
equip the country with all the paraphernalia of Occidental civilization.
It is easy to understand that the master-minds of the era, who had
planned and carried out the Restoration, continued to take the lead in
all paths of progress. Their intellectual superiority entitled them to
act as guides; they had enjoyed exceptional opportunities of acquiring
enlightenment by visits to Europe and America, and the Japanese people
had not yet lost the habit of looking to officialdom for every
initiative. But the spectacle thus presented to foreign onlookers was
not altogether without disquieting suggestions. The government's reforms
seemed to outstrip the nation's readiness for them, and the results wore
an air of some artificiality and confusion. Englishmen were employed to
superintend the building of railways, the erection of telegraphs, the
construction of lighthouses and the organization of a navy. To Frenchmen
was entrusted the work of recasting the laws and training the army in
strategy and tactics. Educational affairs, the organization of a postal
service, the improvement of agriculture and the work of colonization
were supervised by Americans. The teaching of medical science, the
compilation of a commercial code, the elaboration of a system of local
government, and ultimately the training of military officers were
assigned to Germans. For instruction in sculpture and painting Italians
were engaged. Was it possible that so many novelties should be
successfully assimilated, or that the nation should adapt itself to
systems planned by a motley band of aliens who knew nothing of its
character and customs? These questions did not trouble the Japanese
nearly so much as they troubled strangers. The truth is that
conservatism was not really required to make the great sacrifices
suggested by appearances. Among all the innovations of the era the only
one that a Japanese could not lay aside at will was the new fashion of
dressing the hair. He abandoned the _queue_ irrevocably. But for the
rest he lived a dual life. During hours of duty he wore a fine uniform,
shaped and decorated in foreign style. But so soon as he stepped out of
office or off parade, he reverted to his own comfortable and picturesque
costume. Handsome houses were built and furnished according to Western
models. But each had an annex where alcoves, verandas, matted floors and
paper sliding doors continued to do traditional duty. Beefsteaks, beer,
"grape-wine," knives and forks came into use on occasion. But rice-bowls
and chopsticks held their everyday place as of old. In a word, though
the Japanese adopted every convenient and serviceable attribute of
foreign civilization, such as railways, steamships, telegraphs,
post-offices, banks and machinery of all kinds; though they accepted
Occidental sciences, and, to a large extent, Occidental philosophies;
though they recognized the superiority of European jurisprudence and set
themselves to bring their laws into accord with it, they nevertheless
preserved the essentials of their own mode of life and never lost their
individuality. A remarkable spirit of liberalism and a fine eclectic
instinct were needed for the part they acted, but they did no radical
violence to their own traditions, creeds and conventions. There was
indeed a certain element of incongruity and even grotesqueness in the
nation's doings. Old people cannot fit their feet to new roads without
some clumsiness. The Japanese had grown very old in their special paths,
and their novel departure was occasionally disfigured by solecisms. The
refined taste that guided them unerringly in all the affairs of life as
they had been accustomed to live it, seemed to fail them signally when
they emerged into an alien atmosphere. They have given their proofs,
however. It is now seen that the apparently excessive rapidity of their
progress did not overtax their capacities; that they have emerged safely
from their destructive era and carried their constructive career within
reach of certain success, and that while they have still to develop some
of the traits of their new civilization, there is no prospect whatever
of its proving ultimately unsuited to them.
Development of Representative Government.
After the Satsuma rebellion, nothing disturbed the even tenor of Japan's
domestic politics except an attempt on the part of some of her people to
force the growth of parliamentary government. It is evident that the
united effort made by the fiefs to overthrow the system of dual
government and wrest the administrative power from the shogun could have
only one logical outcome: the combined exercise of the recovered power
by those who had been instrumental in recovering it. That was the
meaning of the oath taken by the emperor at the Restoration, when the
youthful sovereign was made to say that wise counsels should be widely
sought, and all things determined by public discussion. But the framers
of the oath had the samurai alone in view. Into their consideration the
common people--farmers, mechanics, tradesmen--did not enter at all, nor
had the common people themselves any idea of advancing a claim to be
considered. A voice in the administration would have been to them an
embarrassing rather than a pleasing privilege. Thus the first
deliberative assembly was composed of nobles and samurai only. A mere
debating club without any legislative authority, it was permanently
dissolved after two sessions. Possibly the problem of a parliament might
have been long postponed after that fiasco, had it not found an ardent
advocate in Itagaki Taisuke (afterwards Count Itagaki). A Tosa samurai
conspicuous as a leader of the restoration movement, Itagaki was among
the advocates of recourse to strong measures against Korea in 1873, and
his failure to carry his point, supplemented by a belief that a large
section of public opinion would have supported him had there been any
machinery for appealing to it, gave fresh impetus to his faith in
constitutional government. Resigning office on account of the Korean
question, he became the nucleus of agitation in favour of a
parliamentary system, and under his banner were enrolled not only
discontented samurai but also many of the young men who, returning from
direct observation of the working of constitutional systems in Europe or
America, and failing to obtain official posts in Japan, attributed their
failure to the oligarchical form of their country's polity. Thus in the
interval between 1873 and 1877 there were two centres of disturbance in
Japan: one in Satsuma, where Saigo figured as leader; the other in Tosa,
under Itagaki's guidance. When the Satsuma men appealed to arms in 1877,
a widespread apprehension prevailed lest the Tosa politicians should
throw in their lot with the insurgents. Such a fear had its origin in
failure to understand the object of the one side or to appreciate the
sincerity of the other. Saigo and his adherents fought to substitute a
Satsuma clique for the oligarchy already in power. Itagaki and his
followers struggled for constitutional institutions. The two could not
have anything in common. There was consequently no coalition. But the
Tosa agitators did not neglect to make capital out of the embarrassment
caused by the Satsuma rebellion. While the struggle was at its height,
they addressed to the government a memorial, charging the administration
with oppressive measures to restrain the voice of public opinion, with
usurpation of power to the exclusion of the nation at large, and with
levelling downwards instead of upwards, since the samurai had been
reduced to the rank of commoners, whereas the commoners should have been
educated up to the standard of the samurai. This memorial asked for a
representative assembly and talked of popular rights. But since the
document admitted that the people were uneducated, it is plain that
there cannot have been any serious idea of giving them a share in the
administration. In fact, the Tosa Liberals were not really contending
for popular representation in the full sense of the term. What they
wanted was the creation of some machinery for securing to the samurai at
large a voice in the management of state affairs. They chafed against
the fact that, whereas the efforts and sacrifices demanded by the
Restoration had fallen equally on the whole military class, the
official prizes under the new system were monopolized by a small coterie
of men belonging to the four principal clans. It is on record that
Itagaki would have been content originally with an assembly consisting
half of officials, half of non-official samurai, and not including any
popular element whatever.
But the government did not believe that the time had come even for a
measure such as the Tosa Liberals advocated. The statesmen in power
conceived that the nation must be educated up to constitutional
standards, and that the first step should be to provide an official
model. Accordingly, in 1874, arrangements were made for periodically
convening an assembly of prefectural governors, in order that they might
act as channels of communication between the central authorities and the
provincial population, and mutually exchange ideas as to the safest and
most effective methods of encouraging progress within the limits of
their jurisdictions. This was intended to be the embryo of
representative institutions. But the governors, being officials
appointed by the cabinet, did not bear in any sense the character of
popular nominees, nor could it even be said that they reflected the
public feeling of the districts they administered, for their habitual
and natural tendency was to try, by means of heroic object lessons, to
win the people's allegiance to the government's progressive policy,
rather than to convince the government of the danger of overstepping the
people's capacities.
These conventions of local officials had no legislative power whatever.
The foundations of a body for discharging that function were laid in
1875, when a senate (_genro-in_) was organized. It consisted of official
nominees, and its duty was to discuss and revise all laws and ordinances
prior to their promulgation. It is to be noted, however, that expediency
not less than a spirit of progress presided at the creation of the
senate. Into its ranks were drafted a number of men for whom no places
could be found in the executive, and who, without some official
employment, would have been drawn into the current of disaffection. From
that point of view the senate soon came to be regarded as a kind of
hospital for administrative invalids, but undoubtedly its discharge of
quasi-legislative functions proved suggestive, useful and instructive.
Assassination of Okubo.
The second meeting of the provincial governors had just been prorogued
when, in the spring of 1878, the great minister, Okubo Toshimitsu, was
assassinated. Okubo, uniformly ready to bear the heaviest burden of
responsibility in every political complication, had stood prominently
before the nation as Saigo's opponent. He fell under the swords of
Saigo's sympathizers. They immediately surrendered themselves to
justice, having taken previous care to circulate a statement of motives,
which showed that they ranked the government's failure to establish
representative institutions as a sin scarcely less heinous than its
alleged abuses of power. Well-informed followers of Saigo could never
have been sincere believers in representative institutions. These men
belonged to a province far removed from the scene of Saigo's desperate
struggle. But the broad fact that they had sealed with their life-blood
an appeal for a political change indicated the existence of a strong
public conviction which would derive further strength from their act.
The Japanese are essentially a brave people. Throughout the troublous
events that preceded and followed the Restoration, it is not possible to
point to one man whose obedience to duty or conviction was visibly
weakened by prospects of personal peril. Okubo's assassination did not
alarm any of his colleagues; but they understood its suggestiveness, and
hastened to give effect to a previously formed resolve.
Local Government.
Two months after Okubo's death, an edict announced that elective
assemblies should forthwith be established in various prefectures and
cities. These assemblies were to consist of members having a high
property qualification, elected by voters having one-half of that
qualification; the voting to be by signed ballot, and the session to
last for one month in the spring of each year. As to their functions,
they were to determine the method of levying and spending local taxes,
subject to approval by the minister of state for home affairs; to
scrutinize the accounts for the previous year, and, if necessary, to
present petitions to the central government. Thus the foundations of
genuine representative institutions were laid. It is true that
legislative power was not vested in the local assemblies, but in all
other important respects they discharged parliamentary duties. Their
history need not be related at any length. Sometimes they came into
violent collision with the governor of the prefecture, and unsightly
struggles resulted. The governors were disposed to advocate public works
which the people considered extravagant; and further, as years went by,
and as political organizations grew stronger, there was found in each
assembly a group of men ready to oppose the governor simply because of
his official status. But on the whole the system worked well. The local
assemblies served as training schools for the future parliament, and
their members showed devotion to public duty as well as considerable
aptitude for debate.
The Liberal Party.
This was not what Itagaki and his followers wanted. Their purpose was to
overthrow the clique of clansmen who, holding the reins of
administrative power, monopolized the prizes of officialdom. Towards the
consummation of such an aim the local assemblies helped little. Itagaki
redoubled his agitation. He organized his fellow-thinkers into an
association called _jiyuto_ (Liberals), the first political party in
Japan, to whose ranks there very soon gravitated several men who had
been in office and resented the loss of it; many that had never been in
office and desired to be; and a still greater number who sincerely
believed in the principles of political liberty, but had not yet
considered the possibility of immediately adapting such principles to
Japan's case. It was in the nature of things that an association of this
kind, professing such doctrines, should present a picturesque aspect to
the public, and that its collisions with the authorities should invite
popular sympathy. Nor were collisions infrequent. For the government,
arguing that if the nation was not ready for representative
institutions, neither was it ready for full freedom of speech or of
public meeting, legislated consistently with that theory, and entrusted
to the police large powers of control over the press and the platform.
The exercise of these powers often created situations in which the
Liberals were able to pose as victims of official tyranny, so that they
grew in popularity and the contagion of political agitation spread.
The Progressist Party.
Three years later (1881) another split occurred in the ranks of the
ruling oligarchy. Okuma Shigenobu (afterwards Count Okuma) seceded from
the administration, and was followed by a number of able men who had
owed their appointments to his patronage, or who, during his tenure of
office as minister of finance, had passed under the influence of his
powerful personality. If Itagaki be called the Rousseau of Japan, Okuma
may be regarded as the Peel. To remarkable financial ability and a
lucid, vigorous judgment he added the faculty of placing himself on the
crest of any wave which a genuine _aura popularis_ had begun to swell.
He, too, inscribed on his banner of revolt against the oligarchy the
motto "constitutional government," and it might have been expected that
his followers would join hands with those of Itagaki, since the avowed
political purpose of both was identical. They did nothing of the kind.
Okuma organized an independent party, calling themselves Progressists
(_shimpoto_), who not only stood aloof from the Liberals but even
assumed an attitude hostile to them. This fact is eloquent. It shows
that Japan's first political parties were grouped, not about principles,
but about persons. Hence an inevitable lack of cohesion among their
elements and a constant tendency to break up into caves and coteries.
These are the characteristics that render the story of political
evolution in Japan so perplexing to a foreign student. He looks for
differences of platform and finds none. Just as a true Liberal must be a
Progressist, and a true Progressist a Liberal, so, though each may cast
his profession of faith in a mould of different phrases, the ultimate
shape must be the same. The mainsprings of early political agitation in
Japan were personal grievances and a desire to wrest the administrative
power from the hands of the statesmen who had held it so long as to
overtax the patience of their rivals. He that searches for profound
moral or ethical bases will be disappointed. There were no
Conservatives. Society was permeated with the spirit of progress. In a
comparative sense the epithet "Conservative" might have been applied to
the statesmen who proposed to defer parliamentary institutions until the
people, as distinguished from the former samurai, had been in some
measure prepared for such an innovation. But since these very statesmen
were the guiding spirits of the whole Meiji revolution, it was plain
that their convictions must be radical, and that, unless they did
violence to their record, they must finally lead the country to
representative institutions, the logical sequel of their own reforms.
Okubo's assassination had been followed, in 1878, by an edict announcing
the establishment of local assemblies. Okuma's secession in 1881 was
followed by an edict announcing that a national assembly would be
convened in 1891.
Anti-Government Agitation.
The political parties, having now virtually attained their object, might
have been expected to desist from further agitation. But they had
another task to perform--that of disseminating anti-official prejudices
among the future electors. They worked diligently, and they had an
undisputed field, for no one was put forward to champion the
government's cause. The campaign was not always conducted on lawful
lines. There were plots to assassinate ministers; there was an attempt
to employ dynamite, and there was a scheme to foment an insurrection in
Korea. On the other hand, dispersals of political meetings by order of
police inspectors, and suspension or suppression of newspapers by the
unchallengeable verdict of a minister for home affairs, were common
occurrences. The breach widened steadily. It is true that Okuma rejoined
the cabinet for a time in 1887, but he retired again in circumstances
that aggravated his party's hostility to officialdom. In short, during
the ten years immediately prior to the opening of the first parliament,
an anti-government propaganda was incessantly preached from the platform
and in the press.
Meanwhile the statesmen in power resolutely pursued their path of
progressive reform. They codified the civil and penal laws, remodelling
them on Western bases; they brought a vast number of affairs within the
scope of minute regulations; they rescued the finances from confusion
and restored them to a sound condition; they recast the whole framework
of local government; they organized a great national bank, and
established a network of subordinate institutions throughout the
country; they pushed on the work of railway construction, and
successfully enlisted private enterprise in its cause; they steadily
extended the postal and telegraphic services; they economized public
expenditures so that the state's income always exceeded its outlays;
they laid the foundations of a strong mercantile marine; they instituted
a system of postal savings-banks; they undertook large schemes of
harbour improvement and road-making; they planned and put into operation
an extensive programme of riparian improvement; they made civil service
appointments depend on competitive examination; they sent numbers of
students to Europe and America to complete their studies; and by
tactful, persevering diplomacy they gradually introduced a new tone into
the empire's relations with foreign powers. Japan's affairs were never
better administered.
The Constitution of 1890.
In 1890 the Constitution was promulgated. Imposing ceremonies marked the
event. All the nation's notables were summoned to the palace to witness
the delivery of the important document by the sovereign to the prime
minister; salvos of artillery were fired; the cities were illuminated,
and the people kept holiday. Marquis (afterwards Prince) Ito directed
the framing of the Constitution. He had visited the Occident for the
purpose of investigating the development of parliamentary institutions
and studying their practical working. His name is connected with nearly
every great work of constructive statesmanship in the history of new
Japan, and perhaps the crown of his legislative career was the drafting
of the Constitution, to which the Japanese people point proudly as the
only charter of the kind voluntarily given by a sovereign to his
subjects. In other countries such concessions were always the outcome of
long struggles between ruler and ruled. In Japan the emperor freely
divested himself of a portion of his prerogatives and transferred them
to the people. That view of the case, as may be seen from the story told
above, is not untinged with romance; but in a general sense it is true.
Working of the System.
No incident in Japan's modern career seemed more hazardous than this
sudden plunge into parliamentary institutions. There had been some
preparation. Provincial assemblies had partially familiarized the people
with the methods of deliberative bodies. But provincial assemblies were
at best petty arenas--places where the making or mending of roads, and
the policing and sanitation of villages came up for discussion, and
where political parties exercised no legislative function nor found any
opportunity to attack the government or to debate problems of national
interest. Thus the convening of a diet and the sudden transfer of
financial and legislative authority from the throne and its entourage of
tried statesmen to the hands of men whose qualifications for public life
rested on the verdict of electors, themselves apparently devoid of all
light to guide their choice--this sweeping innovation seemed likely to
tax severely, if not to overtax completely, the progressive capacities
of the nation. What enhanced the interest of the situation was that the
oligarchs who held the administrative power had taken no pains to win a
following in the political field. Knowing that the opening of the diet
would be a veritable letting loose of the dogs of war, an unmuzzling of
the agitators whose mouths had hitherto been partly closed by legal
restrictions upon free speech, but who would now enjoy complete immunity
within the walls of the assembly whatever the nature of their
utterances--foreseeing all this, the statesmen of the day nevertheless
stood severely aloof from alliances of every kind, and discharged their
administrative functions with apparent indifference to the changes that
popular representation could not fail to induce. This somewhat
inexplicable display of unconcern became partially intelligible when the
constitution was promulgated, for it then appeared that the cabinet's
tenure of office was to depend solely on the emperor's will; that
ministers were to take their mandate from the Throne, not from
parliament. This fact was merely an outcome of the theory underlying
every part of the Japanese polity. Laws might be redrafted, institutions
remodelled, systems recast, but amid all changes and mutations one
steady point must be carefully preserved, the Throne. The makers of new
Japan understood that so long as the sanctity and inviolability of the
imperial prerogatives could be preserved, the nation would be held by a
strong anchor from drifting into dangerous waters. They laboured under
no misapprehension about the inevitable issue of their work in framing
the constitution. They knew very well that party cabinets are an
essential outcome of representative institutions, and that to some kind
of party cabinet Japan must come. But they regarded the Imperial mandate
as a conservative safeguard, pending the organization and education of
parties competent to form cabinets. Such parties did not yet exist, and
until they came into unequivocal existence, the Restoration statesmen,
who had so successfully managed the affairs of the nation during a
quarter of a century, resolved that the steady point furnished by the
throne must not be abandoned.
On the other hand, the agitators found here a new platform. They had
obtained a constitution and a diet, but they had not obtained an
instrument for pulling down the "clan" administrators, since these stood
secure from attack under the aegis of the sovereign's mandate. They
dared not raise their voices against the unfettered exercise of the
mikado's prerogative. The nation, loyal to the core, would not have
suffered such a protest, nor could the agitators themselves have found
heart to formulate it. But they could read their own interpretation into
the text of the Constitution, and they could demonstrate practically
that a cabinet not acknowledging responsibility to the legislature was
virtually impotent for law-making purposes.
The Diet and the Government.
These are the broad outlines of the contest that began in the first
session of the Diet and continued for several years. It is unnecessary
to speak of the special points of controversy. Just as the political
parties had been formed on the lines of persons, not principles, so the
opposition in the Diet was directed against men, not measures. The
struggle presented varying aspects at different times, but the
fundamental question at issue never changed. Obstruction was the weapon
of the political parties. They sought to render legislation and finance
impossible for any ministry that refused to take its mandate from the
majority in the lower house, and they imparted an air of respectability
and even patriotism to their destructive campaign by making
"anti-clannism" their war-cry, and industriously fostering the idea that
the struggle lay between administration guided by public opinion and
administration controlled by a clique of clansmen who separated the
throne from the nation. Had not the House of Peers stood stanchly by the
government throughout this contest, it is possible that the nation might
have suffered severely from the rashness of the political parties.
There was something melancholy in the spectacle. The Restoration
statesmen were the men who had made Modern Japan; the men who had raised
her, in the face of immense obstacles, from the position of an
insignificant Oriental state to that of a formidable unit in the comity
of nations; the men, finally, who had given to her a constitution and
representative institutions. Yet these same men were now fiercely
attacked by the arms which they had themselves nerved; were held up to
public obloquy as self-seeking usurpers, and were declared to be
impeding the people's constitutional route to administrative privileges,
when in reality they were only holding the breach until the people
should be able to march into the citadel with some show of orderly and
competent organization. That there was no corruption, no abuse of
position, is not to be pretended; but on the whole the conservatism of
the clan statesmen had only one object--to provide that the newly
constructed representative machine should not be set working until its
parts were duly adjusted and brought into proper gear. On both sides the
leaders understood the situation accurately. The heads of the parties,
while publicly clamouring for parliamentary cabinets, privately
confessed that they were not yet prepared to assume administrative
responsibilities;[3] and the so-called "clan statesmen," while refusing
before the world to accept the Diet's mandates, admitted within official
circles that the question was one of time only. The situation did not
undergo any marked change until, the country becoming engaged in war
with China (1894-95), domestic squabbles were forgotten in the presence
of foreign danger. From that time an era of coalition commenced. Both
the political parties joined hands to vote funds for the prosecution of
the campaign, and one of them, the Liberals, subsequently gave support
to a cabinet under the presidency of Marquis Ito, the purpose of the
union being to carry through the diet an extensive scheme of enlarged
armaments and public works planned in the sequel of the war. The
Progressists, however, remained implacable, continuing their opposition
to the thing called bureaucracy quite irrespective of its measures.
Fusion of the Two Parties.
The next phase (1898) was a fusion of the two parties into one large
organization which adopted the name "Constitutional Party"
(_kensei-to_). By this union the chief obstacles to parliamentary
cabinets were removed. Not only did the Constitutionalists command a
large majority in the lower house, but also they possessed a sufficiency
of men who, although lacking ministerial experience, might still advance
a reasonable title to be entrusted with portfolios. Immediately the
emperor, acting on the advice of Marquis Ito, invited Counts Okuma and
Itagaki to form a cabinet. It was essentially a trial. The party
politicians were required to demonstrate in practice the justice of the
claim they had been so long asserting in theory. They had worked in
combination for the destructive purpose of pulling down the so-called
"clan statesmen"; they had now to show whether they could work in
combination for the constructive purposes of administration. Their
heads, Counts Okuma and Itagaki, accepted the Imperial mandate, and the
nation watched the result. There was no need to wait long. In less than
six months these new links snapped under the tension of old enmities,
and the coalition split up once more into its original elements. It had
demonstrated that the sweets of power, which the "clan statesmen" had
been so vehemently accused of coveting, possessed even greater
attractions for their accusers. The issue of the experiment was such a
palpable fiasco that it effectually rehabilitated the "clan statesmen,"
and finally proved, what had indeed been long evident to every close
observer, that without the assistance of those statesmen no political
party could hold office successfully.
Enrolment of the Clan Statesmen in Political Associations.
Thenceforth it became the unique aim of Liberals and Progressists alike
to join hands permanently with the men towards whom they had once
displayed such implacable hostility. Prince Ito, the leader of the
so-called "elder statesmen," received special solicitations, for it was
plain that he would bring to any political party an overwhelming access
of strength alike in his own person and in the number of friends and
disciples certain to follow him. But Prince Ito declined to be absorbed
into any existing party, or to adopt the principle of parliamentary
cabinets. He would consent to form a new association, but it must
consist of men sufficiently disciplined to obey him implicitly, and
sufficiently docile to accept their programme from his hand. The
Liberals agreed to these terms. They dissolved their party (August 1900)
and enrolled themselves in the ranks of a new organization, which did
not even call itself a party, its designation being _rikken seiyu-kai_
(association of friends of the constitution), and which had for the
cardinal plank in its platform a declaration of ministerial
irresponsibility to the Diet. A singular page was thus added to the
story of Japanese political development; for not merely did the Liberals
enlist under the banner of the statesmen whom for twenty years they had
fought to overthrow, but they also tacitly consented to erase from their
profession of faith its essential article, parliamentary cabinets, and,
by resigning that article to the Progressists, created for the first
time an opposition with a solid and intelligible platform. Nevertheless
the seiyu-kai grew steadily in strength whereas the number of its
opponents declined correspondingly. At the general elections in May 1908
the former secured 195 seats, the four sections of the opposition
winning only 184. Thus for the first time in Japanese parliamentary
history a majority of the lower chamber found themselves marching under
the same banner. Moreover, the four sections of the opposition were
independently organized and differed nearly as much from one another as
they all differed from the seiyu-kai. Their impotence to make head
against the solid phalanx of the latter was thus conspicuous, especially
during the 1908-1909 session of the Diet. Much talk then began to be
heard about the necessity of coalition, and that this talk will
materialize eventually cannot be doubted. Reduction of armaments,
abolition of taxes specially imposed for belligerent purposes, and the
substitution of a strictly constitutional system for the existing
bureaucracy--these objects constitute a sufficiently solid platform, and
nothing is wanted except that a body of proved administrators should
join the opposition in occupying it. There were in 1909 no signs,
however, that any such defection from the ranks of officialdom would
take place. Deference is paid to public opinions inasmuch as even a
seiyu-kai ministry will not remain in office after its popularity has
begun to show signs of waning. But no deference is paid to the doctrine
of party cabinets. Prince Ito did not continue to lead the seiyu-kai for
more than three years. In July 1903 he delegated that function to
Marquis Saionji, representative of one of the very oldest families of
the court nobility and a personal friend of the emperor, as also was
Prince Ito. The Imperial stamp is thus vicariously set upon the
principle of political combinations for the better practical conduct of
parliamentary business, but that the seiyu-kai, founded by Prince Ito
and led by Marquis Saionji, should ever hold office in defiance of the
sovereign's mandate is unthinkable. Constitutional institutions in Japan
are therefore developing along lines entirely without precedent. The
storm and stress of early parliamentary days have given place to
comparative calm. During the first twelve sessions of the Diet,
extending over 8 years, there were five dissolutions of the lower house.
During the next thirteen sessions, extending over 11 years, there were
two dissolutions. During the first 8 years of the Diet's existence there
were six changes of cabinet; during the next 11 years there were five
changes. Another healthy sign was that men of affairs were beginning to
realize the importance of parliamentary representation. At first the
constituencies were contested almost entirely by professional
politicians, barristers and journalists. In 1909 there was a solid body
(the _boshin_ club) of business men commanding nearly 50 votes in the
lower house; and as the upper chamber included 45 representatives of the
highest tax-payers, the interests of commerce and industry were
intelligently debated. (F. By.)
X.--THE CLAIM OF JAPAN: BY A JAPANESE STATESMAN[4]
It has been said that it is impossible for an Occidental to understand
the Oriental, and vice versa; but, admitting that the mutual
understanding of two different races or peoples is a difficult matter,
why should Occidentals and Orientals be thus set in opposition? No
doubt, different peoples of Europe understand each other better than
they do the Asiatic; but can Asiatic peoples understand each other
better than they can Europeans or than the Europeans can understand any
of them? Do Japanese understand Persians or even Indians better than
English or French? It is true perhaps that Japanese can and do
understand the Chinese better than Europeans; but that is due not only
to centuries of mutual intercourse, but to the wonderful and peculiar
fact that they have adopted the old classical Chinese literature as
their own, somewhat in the way, but in a much greater degree, in which
the European nations have adopted the old Greek and Latin literatures.
What is here contended for is that the mutual understanding of two
peoples is not so much a matter of race, but of the knowledge of each
other's history, traditions, literature, &c.
The Japanese have, they think, suffered much from the misunderstanding
of their motives, feelings and ideas; what they want is to be understood
fully and to be known for what they really are, be it good or bad. They
desire, above all, not to be lumped as Oriental, but to be known and
judged on their own account. In the latter half of the 19th century, in
fact up to the Chinese War, it irritated Japanese travelling abroad more
than anything else to be taken for Chinese. Then, after the Chinese War,
the alarm about Japan leading Eastern Asia to make a general attack upon
Europe--the so-called Yellow Peril--seemed so ridiculous to the Japanese
that the bad effects of such wild talk were not quite appreciated by
them. The aim of the Japanese nation, ever since, at the time of the
Restoration (1868), they laid aside definitively all ideas of seclusion
and entered into the comity of nations, has been that they should rise
above the level of the Eastern peoples to an equality with the Western
and should be in the foremost rank of the brotherhood of nations; it was
not their ambition at all to be the champion of the East against the
West, but rather to beat down the barriers between themselves and the
West.
The intense pride of the Japanese in their nationality, their patriotism
and loyalty, arise from their history, for what other nation can point
to an Imperial family of one unbroken lineage reigning over the land for
twenty-five centuries? Is it not a glorious tradition for a nation, that
its emperor should be descended directly from that grandson of "the
great heaven-illuminating goddess," to whom she said, "This land
(Japan) is the region over which my descendants shall be the lords. Do
thou, my august child, proceed thither and govern it. Go! _The
prosperity of thy dynasty shall be coeval with heaven and earth._" Thus
they call their country the land of _kami_ (ancient gods of tradition).
With this spirit, in the old days when China held the hegemony of the
East, and all neighbouring peoples were regarded as its tributaries,
Japan alone, largely no doubt on account of its insular position, held
itself quite aloof; it set at defiance the power of Kublai and routed
utterly the combined Chinese and Korean fleets with vast forces sent by
him to conquer Japan, this being the only occasion that Japan was
threatened with a foreign invasion.
With this spirit, as soon as they perceived the superiority of the
Western civilization, they set to work to introduce it into their
country, just as in the 7th and 8th centuries they had adopted and
adapted the Chinese civilization. In 1868, the first year of the era of
Meiji, the emperor swore solemnly the memorable oath of five articles,
setting forth the policy that was to be and has been followed thereafter
by the government. These five articles were:--
1. Deliberative assemblies shall be established and all measures of
government shall be decided by public opinion.
2. All classes, high and low, shall unite in vigorously carrying out
the plan of government.
3. Officials, civil and military, and all common people shall as far
as possible be allowed to fulfil their just desires so that there may
not be any discontent among them.
4. _Uncivilized customs of former times shall be broken through_, and
everything shall be based upon just and equitable principles of heaven
and earth (nature).
5. _Knowledge shall be sought for throughout the world_, so that the
welfare of the empire may be promoted.
(Translation due to Prof. N. Hozumi of Tokyo Imp. Univ.)
It is interesting, as showing the continuity of the policy of the
empire, to place side by side with these articles the words of the
Imperial rescript issued in 1908, which are as follows:--
"We are convinced that with the rapid and unceasing advance of
civilization, the East and West, mutually dependent and helping each
other, are bound by common interests. It is our sincere wish to
continue to enjoy for ever its benefits in common with other powers by
entering into closer and closer relations and strengthening our
friendship with them. Now in order to be able to move onward along
with the constant progress of the world and to share in the blessings
of civilization, it is obvious that we must develop our internal
resources; our nation, but recently emerged from an exhausting war,
must put forth increased activity in every branch of administration.
It therefore behoves our people to endeavour with one mind, from the
highest to the lowest, to pursue their callings honestly and
earnestly, to be industrious and thrifty, to abide in faith and
righteousness, to be simple and warm-hearted, to put away ostentation
and vanity and strive after the useful and solid, to avoid idleness
and indulgence, and to apply themselves incessantly to strenuous and
arduous tasks...."
The ambition of the Japanese people has been, as already stated, to be
recognized as an equal by the Great Powers. With this object in view,
they have spared no efforts to introduce what they considered superior
in the Western civilization, although it may perhaps be doubted whether
in their eagerness they have always been wise. _They have always
resented any discrimination against them as an Asiatic people_, not
merely protesting against it, knowing that such would not avail much,
but making every endeavour to remove reasons or excuses for it. Formerly
there were troops stationed to guard several legations; foreign postal
service was not entirely in the hands of the Japanese government for a
long time; these and other indignities against the sovereignty of the
nation were gradually removed by proving that they were not necessary.
Then there was the question of the extra-territorial jurisdiction; an
embassy was sent to Europe and America as early as 1871 with a view to
the revision of treaties in order to do away with this _imperium in
imperio_, that being the date originally fixed for the revision; the
embassy, however, failed in its object but was not altogether fruitless,
for it was then clearly seen that it would be necessary to revise
thoroughly the system of laws and entirely to reorganize the law courts
before Occidental nations could be induced to forgo this privilege.
These measures were necessary in any case as a consequence of the
introduction of the Western methods and ideas, but they were hastened by
the fact of their being a necessary preliminary to the revision of
treaties. When the new code of laws was brought before the Diet at its
first session, and there was a great opposition against it in the House
of Peers on account of its many defects and especially of its ignoring
many established usages, the chief argument in its favour, or at least
one that had a great influence with many who were unacquainted with
technical points, was that it was necessary for the revision of treaties
and that the defects, if any, could be afterwards amended at leisure.
These preparations on the part of the government, however, took a long
time, and in the meantime the whole nation, or at least the more
intelligent part of it, was chafing impatiently under what was
considered a national indignity. The United States, by being the first
to agree to its abandonment, although this agreement was rendered
nugatory by a conditional clause, added to the stock of goodwill with
which the Japanese have always regarded the Americans on account of
their attitude towards them. When at last the consummation so long and
ardently desired was attained, great was the joy with which it was
greeted, for now it was felt that Japan was indeed on terms of equality
with Occidental nations. Great Britain, by being the first to conclude
the revised treaty--an act due to the remarkable foresight of her
statesmen in spite of the opposition of their countrymen in Japan--did
much to bring about the cordial feeling of the Japanese towards the
British, which made them welcome with such enthusiasm the Anglo-Japanese
alliance. The importance of this last as a powerful instrument for the
preservation of peace in the extreme East has been, and always will be,
appreciated at its full value by the more intelligent and thoughtful
among the Japanese; but by the mass of the people it was received with
great acclamation, owing partly to the already existing good feeling
towards the British, but also in a large measure because it was felt
that the fact that Great Britain should leave its "splendid isolation"
to enter into this alliance proclaimed in the clearest possible way that
Japan had entered on terms of full equality among the brotherhood of
nations, and that thenceforth there could be no ground for that
discrimination against them as an Asiatic nation which had been so
galling to the Japanese people.
There have been, and there still are being made, many charges against
the Japanese government and people. While admitting that some of them
may be founded on facts, it is permissible to point out that traits and
acts of a few individuals have often been generalized to be the national
characteristic or the result of a fixed policy, while in many cases such
charges are due to misunderstandings arising from want of thorough
knowledge of each other's language, customs, usages, ideas, &c. Take the
principle of "the open door," for instance; the Japanese government has
been charged in several instances with acting contrary to it. It is
natural that where (as in China) competition is very keen between men of
different nationalities, individuals should sometimes feel aggrieved and
make complaints of unfairness against the government of their
competitors; it is also natural that people at home should listen to and
believe in those charges made against the Japanese by their countrymen
in the East, while unfortunately the Japanese, being so far away and
often unaware of them, have not a ready means of vindicating themselves;
but subsequent investigations have always shown those charges to be
either groundless or due to misunderstandings, and it may be asserted
that in no case has the charge been substantiated that the Japanese
government has knowingly, deliberately, of _malice prepense_ been guilty
of breach of faith in violating the principle of "the open door" to
which it has solemnly pledged itself. That it has often been accused by
the Japanese subjects of weakness _vis-à-vis_ foreign powers to the
detriment of their interests, is perhaps a good proof of its fairness.
The Japanese have often been charged with looseness of commercial
morality. This charge is harder to answer than the last, for it cannot
be denied that there have been many instances of dishonesty on the part
of Japanese tradesmen or employees; _tu quoque_ is never a valid
argument, but there are black sheep everywhere, and there were special
reasons why foreigners should have come in contact with many such in
their dealings with the Japanese. In days before the Restoration,
merchants and tradesmen were officially classed as the lowest of four
classes, the samurai, the farmers, the artisans and the merchants;
practically, however, rich merchants serving as bankers and employers of
others were held in high esteem, even by the samurai. Yet it cannot be
denied that the position of the last three was low compared with that of
the samurai; their education was not so high, and although of course
there was the same code of morality for them all, there was no such high
standard of honour as was enjoined upon the samurai by the bushido or
"the way of samurai." Now, when foreign trade was first opened, it was
naturally not firms with long-established credit and methods that first
ventured upon the new field of business--some few that did failed owing
to their want of experience--it was rather enterprising and adventurous
spirits with little capital or credit who eagerly flocked to the newly
opened ports to try their fortune. It was not to be expected that all or
most of those should be very scrupulous in their dealings with the
foreigners; the majority of those adventurers failed, while a few of the
abler men, generally those who believed in and practised honesty as the
best policy, succeeded and came to occupy an honourable position as
business men. It is also asserted that foreigners, or at least some of
them, did not scruple to take unfair advantage of the want of experience
on the part of their Japanese customers to impose upon them methods
which they would not have followed except in the East; it may be that
such methods were necessary or were deemed so in dealing with those
adventurers, but it is a fact that it afterwards took a long time and
great effort on the part of Japanese traders to break through some
usages and customs which were established in earlier days and which they
deemed derogatory to their credit or injurious to their interests.
Infringement of patent rights and fraudulent imitation of trade-marks
have with some truth also been charged against the Japanese; about this
it is to be remarked that although the principles of morality cannot
change, their applications may be new; patents and trade-marks are
something new to the Japanese, and it takes time to teach that their
infringement should be regarded with the same moral censure as stealing.
The government has done everything to prevent such practices by enacting
and enforcing laws against them, and nowadays they are not so common. Be
that as it may, such a state of affairs as that mentioned above is now
passing away almost entirely; commerce and trade are now regarded as
highly honourable professions, merchants and business men occupy the
highest social positions, several of them having been lately raised to
the peerage, and are as honourable a set of men as can be met anywhere.
It is however to be regretted that in introducing Western business
methods, it has not been quite possible to exclude some of their evils,
such as promotion of swindling companies, tampering with members of
legislature, and so forth.
The Japanese have also been considered in some quarters to be a
bellicose nation. No sooner was the war with Russia over than they were
said to be ready and eager to fight with the United States. This is
another misrepresentation arising from want of proper knowledge of
Japanese character and feelings. Although it is true that within the
quarter of a century preceding 1909 Japan was engaged in two sanguinary
wars, not to mention the Boxer affair, in which owing to her proximity
to the scene of the disturbances she had to take a prominent part, yet
neither of these was of her own seeking; in both cases she had to fight
or else submit to become a mere cipher in the world, if indeed she could
have preserved her existence as an independent state. The Japanese, far
from being a bellicose people, deliberately cut off all intercourse with
the outside world in order to avoid international troubles, and remained
absolutely secluded from the world and at profound peace within their
own territory for two centuries and a half. Besides, the Japanese have
always regarded the Americans with a special goodwill, due no doubt to
the steady liberal attitude of the American government and people
towards Japan and Japanese, and they look upon the idea of war between
Japan and the United States as ridiculous.
Restrictions upon Japanese emigrants to the United States and to
Australia are irritating to the Japanese, because it is a discrimination
against them as belonging to the "yellow" race, whereas it has been
their ambition to raise themselves above the level of the Eastern
nations to an equality with the Western nations, although they cannot
change the colour of their skin. When a Japanese even of the highest
rank and standing has to obtain a permit from an American immigrant
officer before he can enter American territory, is it not natural that
he and his countrymen should resent this discrimination as an indignity?
But they have too much good sense to think or even dream of going to war
upon such a matter; on the contrary, the Japanese government agreed in
1908 to limit the number of emigrants in order to avoid complications.
It may be repeated that it has ever been the ambition of the Japanese
people to take rank with the Great Powers of the world, and to have a
voice in the council of nations; they demand that they shall not be
discriminated against because of the colour of their skin, but that they
shall rather be judged by their deeds. With this aim, they have made
great efforts: where charges brought against them have any foundation in
fact, they have endeavoured to make reforms; where they are false or due
to misunderstandings they have tried to live them down, trusting to time
for their vindication. They are willing to be judged by the intelligent
and impartial world: a fair field and no favour is what they claim, and
think they have a right to claim, from the world. (K.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY.--The latest edition of von Wemckstern's _Bibliography of
the Japanese Empire_ contains the names of all important books and
publications relating to Japan, which have now become very numerous. A
general reference must suffice here to Captain F. Brinkley's _Japan_
(12 vols., 1904); the works of B. H. Chamberlain, _Things Japanese_
(5th ed., 1905, &c.); W. G. Aston, _Hist. of Jap. Literature, &c._,
and Lafcadio Hearn, _Japan: an Interpretation_ (1904), &c., as the
European authors with intimate knowledge of the country who have done
most to give accurate and illuminating expression to its development.
See also _Fifty Years of New Japan_, an encyclopaedic account of the
national development in all its aspects, compiled by Count Shigenobu
Okuma (2 vols., 1907, 1908; Eng. ed. by Marcus B. Huish, 1909).
FOOTNOTES:
[1] The Taira and the Minamoto both traced their descent from
imperial princes; the Tokugawa were a branch of the Minamoto.
[2] Daimyo ("great name") was the title given to a feudal chief.
[3] Neither the Liberals nor the Progressists had a working majority
in the house of representatives, nor could the ranks of either have
furnished men qualified to fill all the administrative posts.
[4] The following expression of the Japanese point of view, by a
statesman of the writer's authority and experience, may well
supplement the general account of the progress of Japan and its
inclusion among the great civilized powers of the world.--(ED.
_E. B._)
JAPANNING, the art of coating surfaces of metal, wood, &c., with a
variety of varnishes, which are dried and hardened on in stoves or hot
chambers. These drying processes constitute the main distinguishing
features of the art. The trade owes its name to the fact that it is an
imitation of the famous lacquering of Japan (see JAPAN: _Art_), which,
however, is prepared with entirely different materials and processes,
and is in all respects much more brilliant, durable and beautiful than
any ordinary japan work. Japanning is done in clear transparent
varnishes, in black and in body colours; but black japan is the most
characteristic and common style of work. The varnish for black japan
consists essentially of pure natural asphaltum with a proportion of gum
animé dissolved in linseed oil and thinned with turpentine. In thin
layers such a japan has a rich dark brown colour; it only shows a
brilliant black in thicker coatings. For fine work, which has to be
smoothed and polished, several coats of black are applied in succession,
each being separately dried in the stove at a heat which may rise to
about 300° F. Body colours consist of a basis of transparent varnish
mixed with the special mineral paints of the desired colours or with
bronze powders. The transparent varnish used by japanners is a copal
varnish which contains less drying oil and more turpentine than is
contained in ordinary painters' oil varnish. Japanning produces a
brilliant polished surface which is much more durable and less easily
affected by heat, moisture or other influences than any ordinary painted
and varnished work. It may be regarded as a process intermediate between
ordinary painting and enamelling. It is very extensively applied in the
finishing of ordinary iron-mongery goods and domestic iron-work, deed
boxes, clock dials and papier-mâché articles. The process is also
applied to blocks of slate for making imitation of black and other
marbles for chimneypieces, &c., and in a modified form is employed for
preparing enamelled, japan or patent leather.
JAPHETH ([Hebrew: Yefeth]), in the Bible, the youngest son of Noah[1]
according to the Priestly Code (c. 450 B.C.); but in the earlier
tradition[2] the second son, also the "father" of one of the three
groups into which the nations of the world are divided.[3] In Gen. ix.
27, Noah pronounces the following blessing on Japheth--
"God enlarge (Heb. _yapht_) Japheth (Heb. _yepheth_),
And let him dwell in the tents of Shem;
And let Canaan be his servant."
This is probably an ancient oracle independent alike of the flood story
and the genealogical scheme in Gen. x. Shem is probably Israel; Canaan,
of course, the Canaanites; by analogy, Japheth should be some third
element of the population of Palestine--the Philistines or the
Phoenicians have been suggested. The sense of the second line is
doubtful, it may be "let God dwell" or "let Japheth dwell"; on the
latter view Japheth appears to be in friendly alliance with Shem. The
words might mean that Japheth was an intruding invader, but this is not
consonant with the tone of the oracle. Possibly Japheth is only present
in Gen. ix. 20-27 through corruption of the text, Japheth may be an
accidental repetition of yapht "may he enlarge," misread as a proper
name.
In Gen. x. Japheth is the northern and western division of the nations;
being perhaps used as a convenient title under which to group the more
remote peoples who were not thought of as standing in ethnic or
political connexion with Israel or Egypt. Thus of his descendants,
Gomer, Magog,[4] Tubal, Meshech, Ashkenaz, Riphath and Togarmah are
peoples who are located with more or less certainty in N.E. Asia Minor,
Armenia and the lands to the N.E. of the Black Sea; Javan is the
Ionians, used loosely for the seafaring peoples of the West, including
Tarshish (Tartessus in Spain), Kittim (Cyprus), Rodanim[5] (Rhodes).
There is no certain identification of Tiras and Elishah.
The similarity of the name Japheth to the Titan Iapetos of Greek
mythology is probably a mere accident. A place Japheth is mentioned in
Judith ii. 25, but it is quite unknown.
In addition to commentaries and dictionary articles, see E. Meyer,
_Die Israeliten und ihre Nachbarstämme_, pp. 219 sqq. (W. H. Be.)
FOOTNOTES:
[1] Gen. v. 32, vi. 10, vii. 13, x. 1; cf. 1 Chron. i. 4.
[2] Gen. ix. 27, x. 2, J. c. 850-750 B.C. In ix. 18 Ham is an
editorial addition.
[3] Gen. x. 1-5; cf. I Chron. i. 5-7. For the significance of the
genealogies in Gen. x. see HAM.
[4] See GOMER, GOG.
[5] So we should read with 1 Chron. i. 7 (LXX.) for Dodanim.
JAR, a vessel of simple form, made of earthenware, glass, &c., with a
spoutless mouth, and usually without handles. The word came into English
through Fr. _jarre_ or Span, _jarra_, from Arab, _jarrah_, the
earthenware vessel of Eastern countries, used to contain water, oil,
wine, &c. The simple electrical condenser known as a _Leyden Jar_ (q.v.)
was so called because of the early experiments made in the science of
electricity at Leiden. In the sense of a harsh vibrating sound, a sudden
shock or vibrating movement, hence dissension, quarrel or petty strife,
"jar" is onomatopoeic in origin; it is also seen in the name of the bird
night-jar (also known as the goat-sucker). In the expression "on the
jar" or "ajar," of a door or window partly open, the word is another
form of _chare_ or _char_, meaning turn or turning, which survives in
charwoman, one who works at a turn, a job and _chore_, a job, spell of
work.
JARGON, in its earliest use a term applied to the chirping and
twittering of birds, but since the 15th century mainly confined to any
language, spoken or written, which is either unintelligible to the user
or to the hearer. It is particularly applied by uninstructed hearers or
readers to the language full of technical terminology used by
scientific, philosophic and other writers. The word is O. Fr., and
Cotgrave defines it as "gibridge (gibberish), fustian language." It is
cognate with Span. _gerigonza_, and Ital. _gergo_, _gergone_, and
probably related to the onomatopoeic O. Fr. _jargouiller_, to chatter.
The root is probably seen in Lat. _garrire_, to chatter.
JARGOON, or Jargon (occasionally in old writings _jargounce_ and
_jacounce_), a name applied by modern mineralogists to those zircons
which are fine enough to be cut as gem-stones, but are not of the red
colour which characterizes the hyacinth or jacinth. The word is related
to Arab _zargun_ (zircon). Some of the finest jargoons are green, others
brown and yellow, whilst some are colourless. The colourless jargoon may
be obtained by heating certain coloured stones. When zircon is heated it
sometimes changes in colour, or altogether loses it, and at the same
time usually increases in density and brilliancy. The so-called Matura
diamonds, formerly sent from Matara (or Matura), in Ceylon, were
decolorized zircons. The zircon has strong refractive power, and its
lustre is almost adamantine, but it lacks the fire of the diamond. The
specific gravity of zircon is subject to considerable variation in
different varieties; thus Sir A. H. Church found the sp. gr. of a fine
leaf-green jargoon to be as low as 3.982, and that of a pure white
jargoon as high as 4.705. Jargoon and tourmaline, when cut as gems, are
sometimes mistaken for each other, but the sp. gr. is distinctive, since
that of tourmaline is only 3 to 3.2. Moreover, in tourmaline the
dichroism is strongly marked, whereas in jargoon it is remarkably
feeble. The refractive indices of jargoon are much higher than those of
tourmaline (see ZIRCON). (F. W. R.*)
JARIR IBN 'ATIYYA UL-KHATFI (d. 728), Arabian poet, was born in the
reign of the caliph 'Ali, was a member of the tribe Kulaib, a part of
the Tamim, and lived in Irak. Of his early life little is known, but he
succeeded in winning the favour of Hajjaj, the governor of Irak (see
CALIPHATE). Already famous for his verse, he became more widely known by
his feud with Farazdaq and Akhtal. Later he went to Damascus and visited
the court of Abdalmalik ('Abd ul-Malik) and that of his successor,
Walid. From neither of these did he receive a warm welcome. He was,
however, more successful with Omar II., and was the only poet received
by the pious caliph.
His verse, which, like that of his contemporaries, is largely satire
and eulogy, was published in 2 vols. (Cairo, 1896). (G. W. T.)
JARKENT, a town of Russian Central Asia, in the province of
Semiryechensk, 70 m. W.N.W. of Kulja and near to the Ili river. Pop.
(1897), 16,372.
JARNAC, a town of western France in the department of Charente, on the
right bank of the river Charente, and on the railway 23 m. W. of
Angoulême, between that city and Cognac. Pop. (1906), 4493. The town is
well built; and an avenue, planted with poplar trees, leads to a
handsome suspension bridge. The church contains an interesting ogival
crypt. There are communal colleges for both sexes. Brandy, wine and
wine-casks are made in the town. Jarnac was in 1569 the scene of a
battle in which the Catholics defeated the Protestants. A pyramid marks
the spot where Louis, Prince de Condé, one of the Protestant generals,
was slain. Jarnac gave its name to an old French family, of which the
best known member is Gui Chabot, comte de Jarnac (d. c. 1575), whose
lucky backstroke in his famous duel with Châteigneraie gave rise to the
proverbial phrase _coup de jarnac_, signifying an unexpected blow.
JARO, a town of the province of Iloílo, Panay, Philippine Islands, on
the Jaro river, 2 m. N.W. of the town of Iloílo, the capital. Pop.
(1903), 10,681. It lies on a plain in the midst of a rich agricultural
district, has several fine residences, a cathedral, a curious
three-tiered tower, a semi-weekly paper and a monthly periodical. Jaro
was founded by the Spanish in 1584. From 1903 until February 1908 it was
part of the town or municipality of Iloílo.
JAROSITE, a rare mineral species consisting of hydrous potassium and
aluminium sulphate, and belonging to the group of isomorphous
rhombohedral minerals enumerated below:--
Alunite K2 [Al(OH)2]6 (SO4)4
Jarosite K2 [Fe(OH)2]6 (SO4)4
Natrojarosite Na2 [Fe(OH)2]6 (SO4)4
Plumbojarosite Pb [Fe(OH)2]8 (SO4)4
Jarosite usually occurs as drusy incrustations of minute indistinct
crystals with a yellowish-brown colour and brilliant lustre. Hardness 3;
sp. gr. 3.15. The best specimens, consisting of crystalline crusts on
limonite, are from the Jaroso ravine in the Sierra Almagrera, province
of Almeria, Spain, from which locality the mineral receives its name. It
has been also found, often in association with iron ores, at a few other
localities. A variety occurring as concretionary or mulberry-like forms
is known as moronolite (from Gr. [Greek: môron], "mulberry," and [Greek:
líthos], "stone"); it is found at Monroe in Orange county, New York. The
recently discovered species natrojarosite and plumbojarosite occur as
yellowish-brown glistening powders consisting wholly of minute crystals,
and are from Nevada and New Mexico respectively. (L. J. S.)
JARRAH WOOD (an adaptation of the native name _Jerryhl_), the product of
a large tree (_Eucalyptus marginata_) found in south-western Australia,
where it is said to cover an area of 14,000 sq. m. The trees grow
straight in the stem to a great size, and yield squared timber up to 40
ft. length and 24 in. diameter. The wood is very hard, heavy (sp. gr.
1.010) and close-grained, with a mahogany-red colour, and sometimes
sufficient "figure" to render it suitable for cabinet-makers' use. The
timber possesses several useful characteristics; and great expectations
were at first formed as to its value for ship-building and general
constructive purposes. These expectations have not, however, been
realized, and the exclusive possession of the tree has not proved that
source of wealth to western Australia which was at one time expected.
Its greatest merit for ship-building and marine purposes is due to the
fact that it resists, better than any other timber, the attacks of the
_Teredo navalis_ and other marine borers, and on land it is equally
exempt, in tropical countries, from the ravages of white ants. When
felled with the sap at its lowest point and well seasoned, the wood
stands exposure in the air, earth or sea remarkably well, on which
account it is in request for railway sleepers, telegraph poles and piles
in the British colonies and India. The wood, however, frequently shows
longitudinal blisters, or lacunae, filled with resin, the same as may be
observed in spruce fir timber; and it is deficient in fibre, breaking
with a short fracture under comparatively moderate pressure. It has been
classed at Lloyds for ship-building purposes in line three, table A, of
the registry rules.
JARROW, a port and municipal borough in the Jarrow parliamentary
division of Durham, England, on the right bank of the Tyne, 6½ m. below
Newcastle, and on a branch of the North-Eastern railway. Pop. (1901),
34,295. The parish church of St Paul was founded in 685, and retains
portions of pre-Norman work. The central tower is Norman, and there are
good Decorated and Perpendicular details in the body of the church.
Close by are the scattered ruins of the monastery begun by the pious
Biscop in 681, and consecrated with the church by Ceolfrid in 685.
Within the walls of this monastery the Venerable Bede spent his life
from childhood; and his body was at first buried within the church,
whither, until it was removed under Edward the Confessor to Durham, it
attracted many pilgrims. The town is wholly industrial, devoted to
ship-building, chemical works, paper mills and the neighbouring
collieries. It owes its development from a mere pit village very largely
to the enterprise of Sir Charles Mark Palmer (q.v.). Jarrow Slake, a
river bay, 1 m. long by ½ m. broad, contains the Tyne docks of the
North-Eastern railway company. A great quantity of coal is shipped.
Jarrow was incorporated in 1875, and the corporation consists of a
mayor, 6 aldermen and 18 councillors. Area, 783 acres.
JARRY, NICOLAS, one of the best-known 17th century French calligraphers.
He was born at Paris about 1620, and was officially employed by Louis
XIV. His most famous work is the _Guirlande de Julie_ (1641). He died
some time before 1674.
JARVIS, JOHN WESLEY (1780-1840), American artist, nephew of the great
John Wesley, was born at South Shields, England, and was taken to the
United States at the age of five. He was one of the earliest American
painters to give serious attention to the study of anatomy. He lived at
first in Philadelphia, afterwards establishing himself in New York,
where he enjoyed great popularity, though his conviviality and eccentric
mode of life affected his work. He visited Baltimore, Charleston and New
Orleans, entertaining much and painting portraits of prominent people,
particularly in New Orleans, where General Andrew Jackson was one of his
sitters. He had for assistants at different times both Sully and Inman.
He affected singularity in dress and manners, and his _mots_ were the
talk of the day. But his work deteriorated, and he died in great poverty
in New York City. Examples of his painting are in the collection of the
New York Historical Society.
JASHAR, BOOK OF, in Hebrew _Sepher ha-yashar_, a Hebrew composition
mentioned as though well-known in Josh. x. 13 and 2 Sam. i. 18. From
these two passages it seems to have been a book of songs relating to
important events, but no early collection of the kind is now extant, nor
is anything known of it. Various speculations have been put forward as
to the name: (1) that it means the book of the upright, i.e. Israel or
distinguished Israelites, the root being the same as in Jeshurun; (2)
that Jashar ([Hebrew: yashar]) is a transposition of shîr ([Hebrew:
shir], song); (3) that it should be pointed Yashir ([Hebrew: yashir],
sing; cf. Exod. xv. 1) and was so called after its first word. None of
these is very convincing, though support may be found for them all in
the versions. The Septuagint favours (1) by its rendering [Greek: epi
bibliou tou euthous] in Samuel (it omits the words in Joshua); the
Vulgate has _in libro justorum_ in both places; the Syriac in Samuel has
_Ashir_, which suggests a Hebrew reading _ha-shir_ (the song), and in
Joshua it translates "book of praises." The Targum on both passages has
"book of the law," an explanation which is followed by the chief Jewish
commentators, making the incidents the fulfilment of passages in the
Pentateuch. Since it contained the lament of David (2 Sam. i. 18) it
cannot have been completed till after his time. If Wellhausen's
restoration of 1 Kings viii. 12 be accepted (from Septuagint 1 Kings
viii. 53, [Greek: en bibliô tês ôdês]) where the reference is to the
building of the Temple, the book must have been growing in the time of
Solomon. The attempt of Donaldson[1] to reconstruct it is largely
subjective and uncritical.
In later times when it became customary to compose midrashic works
under well-known names, a book of Jashar naturally made its
appearance. It need hardly be remarked that this has nothing whatever
to do with the older book. It is an anonymous elaboration in Hebrew of
the early part of the biblical narrative, probably composed in the
12th century. The fact that its legendary material is drawn from
Arabic sources, as well as from Talmud, Midrash and later Jewish
works, would seem to show that the writer lived in Spain, or,
according to others, in south Italy. The first edition appeared at
Venice in 1625, and it has been frequently printed since. It was
translated into English by (or for) M. M. Noah (New York, 1840). A
work called _The Book of ... Jasher, translated ... by Alcuin_ (1751;
2nd ed., Bristol, 1829), has nothing to do with this or with any
Hebrew original, but is a mere fabrication by the printer, Jacob Hive,
who put it forward as the book "mentioned in Holy Scripture."
BIBLIOGRAPHY.--M. Heilprin, _Historical Poetry of the Ancient Hebrews_
(New York, 1879), i. 128-131; Mercati, "Una congettura sopra il libro
del Giusto," in _Studi e Testi_ (5, Roma, 1901). On the medieval work
see Zunz, _Gottesdienstliche Vorträge der Juden_ (Frankfurt a. M.,
1892), 2nd ed., p. 162.
FOOTNOTE:
[1] _Jashar: fragmenta archetypa carminum Hebraicorum_ (Berlin,
1854). Cf. Perowne's _Remarks_ on it (Lond. 1855).
JASHPUR, a tributary state of India, in the Central Provinces, having
been transferred from Bengal in 1905. The country is divided almost
equally into high and low lands. The Uparghat plateau on the east rises
2200 ft. above sea-level, and the hills above it reach their highest
point in Ranijula (3527 ft.). The only river of importance is the Ib, in
the bed of which diamonds are found, while from time immemorial its
sands have been washed for gold. Jashpur iron, smelted by the Kols, is
highly prized. Jungles of _sál_ forests abound, harbouring elephant,
bison and other wild beasts. Jungle products include lac, silk cocoons
and beeswax, which are exported. Area 1948 sq. m.; pop. (1901), 132,114;
estimated revenue £8000.
JASMIN, JACQUES (1798-1864), Provençal poet, was born at Agen on the 6th
of March 1798, his family name being Boé. His father, who was a tailor,
had a certain facility for making doggerel verses, which he sang or
recited at fairs and such-like popular gatherings; and Jacques, who used
generally to accompany him, was thus early familiarized with the part
which he afterwards so successfully filled himself. When sixteen years
of age he found employment at a hairdresser's shop, and subsequently
started a similar business of his own on the Gravier at Agen. In 1825 he
published his first volume of _Papillotos_ ("Curl Papers"), containing
poems in French (a language he used with a certain sense of restraint),
and in the familiar Agen _patois_--the popular speech of the working
classes--in which he was to achieve all his literary triumphs. Jasmin
was the most famous forerunner in Provençal literature (q.v.) of Mistral
and the _Félibrige_. His influence in rehabilitating, for literary
purposes, his native dialect, was particularly exercised in the public
recitals of his poems to which he devoted himself. His poetic gift, and
his flexible voice and action, fitted him admirably for this double rôle
of troubadour and jongleur. In 1835 he recited his "Blind Girl of
Castel-Cuillé" at Bordeaux, in 1836 at Toulouse; and he met with an
enthusiastic reception in both those important cities. Most of his
public recitations were given for benevolent purposes, the proceeds
being contributed by him to the restoration of the church of Vergt and
other good works. Four successive volumes of _Papillotos_ were published
during his lifetime, and contained amongst others the following
remarkable poems, quoted in order: "The Charivari," "My Recollections"
(supplemented after an interval of many years), "The Blind Girl,"
"Françounetto," "Martha the Simple," and "The Twin Brothers." With the
exception of "The Charivari," these are all touching pictures of humble
life--in most cases real episodes--carefully elaborated by the poet till
the graphic descriptions, full of light and colour, and the admirably
varied and melodious verse, seem too spontaneous and easy to have cost
an effort. Jasmin was not a prolific writer, and, in spite of his
impetuous nature, would work a long time at one poem, striving to
realize every feeling he wished to describe, and give it its most lucid
and natural expression. A verse from his spirited poem, "The Third of
May," written in honour of Henry IV., and published in the first volume
of _Papillotos_, is engraved on the base of the statue erected to that
king at Nérac. In 1852 Jasmin's works were crowned by the Académie
Française, and a pension was awarded him. The medal struck on the
occasion bore the inscription: _Au poëte moral et populaire_. His title
of "Maistre ès Jeux" is a distinction only conferred by the academy of
Toulouse on illustrious writers. Pius IX. sent him the insignia of a
knight of St Gregory the Great, and he was made chevalier of the Legion
of Honour. He spent the latter years of his life on a small estate which
he had bought near Agen and named "Papillotos," and which he describes
in _Ma Bigno_ ("My Vine"). Though invited to represent his native city,
he refused to do so, preferring the pleasures and leisure of a country
life, and wisely judging that he was no really eligible candidate for
electoral honours. He died on the 4th of October 1864. His last poem, an
answer to Renan, was placed between his folded hands in his coffin.
JASMINE, or JESSAMINE, botanically _Jasminum_, a genus of shrubs or
climbers constituting the principal part of the tribe Jasminoideae of
the natural order Oleaceae, and comprising about 150 species, of which
40 or more occur in the gardens of Britain. The plants of the genus are
mostly natives of the warmer regions of the Old World; there is one
South American species. The leaves are pinnate or ternate, or sometimes
apparently simple, consisting of one leaflet, articulated to the
petiole. The flowers, usually white or yellow, are arranged in terminal
or axillary panicles, and have a tubular 5- or 8-cleft calyx, a
cylindrical corolla-tube, with a spreading limb, two included stamens
and a two-celled ovary.
The name is derived from the Persian _yásmín_. Linnaeus obtained a
fancied etymology from [Greek: ia], violets, and [Greek: osmê], smell,
but the odour of its flowers bears no resemblance to that of the violet.
The common white jasmine, _Jasminum officinale_, one of the best known
and most highly esteemed of British hardy ligneous climbers, is a native
of northern India and Persia, introduced about the middle of the 16th
century. In the centre and south of Europe it is thoroughly
acclimatized. Although it grows to the height of 12 and sometimes 20
ft., its stem is feeble and requires support; its leaves are opposite,
pinnate and dark green, the leaflets are in three pairs, with an odd
one, and are pointed, the terminal one larger and with a tapering point.
The fragrant white flowers bloom from June to October; and, as they are
found chiefly on the young shoots, the plant should only be pruned in
the autumn. Varieties with golden and silver-edged leaves and one with
double flowers are known.
[Illustration: _Jasminum grandiflorum_; flower, natural size.]
The zambak or Arabian jasmine, _J. Sambac_, is an evergreen
white-flowered climber, 6 or 8 ft. high, introduced into Britain in
the latter part of the 17th century. Two varieties introduced somewhat
later are respectively 3-leaved and double-flowered, and these, as
well as that with normal flowers, bloom throughout the greater part of
the year. On account of their exquisite fragrance the flowers are
highly esteemed in the East, and are frequently referred to by the
Persian and Arabian poets. An oil obtained by boiling the leaves is
used to anoint the head for complaints of the eye, and an oil obtained
from the roots is used medicinally to arrest the secretion of milk.
The flowers of one of the double varieties are held sacred to Vishnu,
and used as votive offerings in Hindu religious ceremonies. The
Spanish, or Catalonian jasmine, _J. grandiflorum_, a native of the
north-west Himalaya, and cultivated both in the old and new world, is
very like _J. officinale_, but differs in the size of the leaflets;
the branches are shorter and stouter, and the flowers very much
larger, and reddish underneath. By grafting it on two-year-old plants
of _J. officinale_, an erect bush about 3 ft. high is obtained,
requiring no supports. In this way it is very extensively cultivated
at Cannes and Grasse, in the south of France; the plants are set in
rows, fully exposed to the sun; they come into full bearing the second
year after grafting; the blossoms, which are very large and intensely
fragrant, are produced from July till the end of October, but those of
August and September are the most odoriferous.
The aroma is extracted by the process known as _enfleurage_, i.e.
absorption by a fatty body, such as purified lard or olive oil. Square
glass trays framed with wood about 3 in. deep are spread over with
grease about half an inch thick, in which ridges are made to
facilitate absorption, and sprinkled with freshly gathered flowers,
which are renewed every morning during the whole time the plant
remains in blossom; the trays are piled up in stacks to prevent the
evaporation of the aroma; and finally the pomade is scraped off the
glass, melted at as low a temperature as possible, and strained. When
oil is employed as the absorbent, coarse cotton cloths previously
saturated with the finest olive oil are laid on wire-gauze frames, and
repeatedly covered in the same manner with fresh flowers; they are
then squeezed under a press, yielding what is termed _huile antique au
jasmin_. Three pounds of flowers will perfume 1 lb. of grease--this is
exhausted by maceration in 1 pt. of rectified spirit to form the
"extract." An essential oil is distilled from jasmine in Tunis and
Algeria, but its high price prevents its being used to any extent. The
East Indian oil of jasmine is a compound largely contaminated with
sandalwood-oil.
The distinguishing characters of _J. odoratissimum_, a native of the
Canary Islands and Madeira, consist principally in the alternate,
obtuse, ternate and pinnate leaves, the 3-flowered terminal peduncles
and the 5-cleft yellow corolla with obtuse segments. The flowers have
the advantage of retaining when dry their natural perfume, which is
suggestive of a mixture of jasmine, jonquil and orange-blossom. In
China _J. paniculatum_ is cultivated as an erect shrub, known as
_sieu-hing-hwa_; it is valued for its flowers, which are used with
those of _J. Sambac_, in the proportion of 10 lb. of the former to 30
lb. of the latter, for scenting tea--40 lb. of the mixture being
required for 100 lb. of tea. _J. angustifolium_ is a beautiful
evergreen climber 10 to 12 ft. high, found in the Coromandel forests,
and introduced into Britain during the present century. Its leaves are
of a bright shining green; its large terminal flowers are white with a
faint tinge of red, fragrant and blooming throughout the year.
In Cochin China a decoction of the leaves and branches of _J.
nervosum_ is taken as a blood-purifier; and the bitter leaves of _J.
floribundum_ (called in Abyssinia _habbez-zelim_) mixed with kousso is
considered a powerful anthelmintic, especially for tapeworm; the
leaves and branches are added to some fermented liquors to increase
their intoxicating quality. In Catalonia and in Turkey the wood of the
jasmine is made into long, slender pipe-stems, highly prized by the
Moors and Turks. Syrup of jasmine is made by placing in a jar
alternate layers of the flowers and sugar, covering the whole with wet
cloths and standing it in a cool place; the perfume is absorbed by the
sugar, which is converted into a very palatable syrup. The important
medicinal plant known in America as the "Carolina jasmine" is not a
true jasmine (see GELSEMIUM).
Other hardy species commonly cultivated in gardens are the low or
Italian yellow-flowered jasmine, _J. humile_, an East Indian species
introduced and now found wild in the south of Europe, an erect shrub 3
or 4 ft. high, with angular branches, alternate and mostly ternate
leaves, blossoming from June to September; the common yellow jasmine,
_J. fruticans_, a native of southern Europe and the Mediterranean
region, a hardy evergreen shrub, 10 to 12 ft. high, with weak, slender
stems requiring support, and bearing yellow, odourless flowers from
spring to autumn; and _J. nudiflorum_ (China), which bears its bright
yellow flowers in winter before the leaves appear. It thrives in
almost any situation and grows rapidly.
JASON ([Greek: Iasôn]), in Greek legend, son of Aeson, king of Iolcus in
Thessaly. He was the leader of the Argonautic expedition (see
ARGONAUTS). After he returned from it he lived at Corinth with his wife
Medea (q.v.) for many years. At last he put away Medea, in order to
marry Glauce (or Creusa), daughter of the Corinthian king Creon. To
avenge herself, Medea presented the new bride with a robe and
head-dress, by whose magic properties the wearer was burnt to death, and
slew her children by Jason with her own hand. A later story represents
Jason as reconciled to Medea (Justin, xlii. 2). His death was said to
have been due to suicide through grief, caused by Medea's vengeance
(Diod. Sic. iv. 55); or he was crushed by the fall of the poop of the
ship "Argo," under which, on the advice of Medea, he had laid himself
down to sleep (argument of Euripides' _Medea_). The name (more correctly
Iason) means "healer," and Jason is possibly a local hero of Iolcus to
whom healing powers were attributed. The ancients regarded him as the
oldest navigator, and the patron of navigation. By the moderns he has
been variously explained as a solar deity; a god of summer; a god of
storm; a god of rain, who carries off the rain-giving cloud (the golden
fleece) to refresh the earth after a long period of drought. Some regard
the legend as a chthonian myth, Aea (Colchis) being the under-world in
the Aeolic religious system from which Jason liberates himself and his
betrothed; others, in view of certain resemblances between the story of
Jason and that of Cadmus (the ploughing of the field, the sowing of the
dragon's teeth, the fight with the Sparti, who are finally set fighting
with one another by a stone hurled into their midst), associate both
with Demeter the corn-goddess, and refer certain episodes to practices
in use at country festivals, e.g. the stone throwing, which, like the
[Greek: ballêtys] at the Eleusinia and the [Greek: lithobolia] at
Troezen (Pausanias ii. 30, 4 with Frazer's note) was probably intended
to secure a good harvest by driving away the evil spirits of
unfruitfulness.
See articles by C. Seeliger in Roscher's _Lexikon der Mythologie_ and
by F. Durrbach in Daremberg and Saglio's _Dictionnaire des
antiquités_; H. D. Müller, _Mythologie der griechischen Stämme_
(1861), ii. 328, who explains the name Jason as "wanderer"; W.
Mannhardt, _Mythologische Forschungen_ (1884), pp. 75, 130; O.
Crusius, _Beiträge zur griechischen Mythologie una
Religionsgeschichte_ (Leipzig, 1886).
_Later Versions of the Legend._--_Les fais et prouesses du noble et
vaillant chevalier Jason_ was composed in the middle of the 15th century
by Raoul Lefèvre on the basis of Benoît's _Roman de Troie_, and
presented to Philip of Burgundy, founder of the order of the Golden
Fleece. The manners and sentiments of the 15th century are made to
harmonize with the classical legends after the fashion of the Italian
pre-Raphaelite painters, who equipped Jewish warriors with knightly
lance and armour. The story is well told; the digressions are few; and
there are many touches of domestic life and natural sympathy. The first
edition is believed to have been printed at Bruges in 1474.
Caxton translated the book under the title of _A Boke of the hoole Lyf
of Jason_, at the command of the duchess of Burgundy. A Flemish
translation appeared at Haarlem in 1495. The Benedictine Bernard de
Montfaucon (1655-1741) refers to a MS. by Guido delle Colonne,
_Historia Medeae et Jasonis_ (unpublished).
The _Histoire de la Thoison d'Or_ (Paris, 1516) by Guillaume Fillastre
(1400-1473), written about 1440-1450, is an historical compilation
dealing with the exploits of the _très chrétiennes maisons_ of France,
Burgundy and Flanders.
JASON OF CYRENE, a Hellenistic Jew, who lived about 100 B.C. and wrote a
history of the times of the Maccabees down to the victory over Nicanor
(175-161 B.C.). This work is said to have been in five books and formed
the basis of the present 2 Macc. (see ch. ii. 19-32).
JASPER, an opaque compact variety of quartz, variously coloured and
often containing argillaceous matter. The colours are usually red,
brown, yellow or green, and are due to admixture with compounds of iron,
either oxides or silicates. Although the term jasper is now restricted
to opaque quartz it is certain that the ancient _jaspis_ or [Greek:
iaspis] was a stone of considerable translucency. The jasper of
antiquity was in many cases distinctly green, for it is often compared
with the emerald and other green objects. Jasper is referred to in the
_Niebelungenlied_ as being clear and green. Probably the jasper of the
ancients included stones which would now be classed as chalcedony, and
the emerald-like jasper may have been akin to our chrysoprase. The
Hebrew word _yashefeh_ may have designated a green jasper (cf. Assyrian
_yashpu_). Professor Flinders Petrie has suggested that the _odem_, the
first stone on the High Priest's breastplate, translated "sard," was a
red jasper, whilst _tarshish_, the tenth stone, may have been a yellow
jasper (Hastings's _Dict. Bible_, 1902).
Many varieties of jasper are recognized. Riband jasper is a form in
which the colours are disposed in bands, as in the well-known
ornamental stone from Siberia, which shows a regular alternation of
dark red and green stripes. Egyptian jasper is a brown jasper,
occurring as nodules in the Lybian desert and in the Nile valley, and
characterized by a zonal arrangement of light and dark shades of
colour. Agate-jasper is a variety intermediate between true jasper and
chalcedony. Basanite, lydite, or Lydian stone, is a velvet-black
flinty jasper, used as a touchstone for testing the purity of precious
metals by their streak. Porcelain jasper is a clay indurated by
natural calcination. (F. W. R.*)
JASSY (_Iasii_), also written JASII, JASCHI and YASSY, the capital of
the department of Jassy, Rumania; situated on the left bank of the river
Bahlui, an affluent of the Jijia, about 10 m. W. of the Pruth and the
Russian frontier. Pop. (1900), 78,067. Jassy communicates by rail with
Galatz on the Danube, Kishinev in Bessarabia, and Czernowitz in
Bukowina. The surrounding country is one of uplands and woods, among
which rise the monasteries of Cetatuia, Frumoasa, and Galata with its
mineral springs, the water-cure establishment of Rapide and the great
seminary of Socola. Jassy itself stands pleasantly amid vineyards and
gardens, partly on two hills, partly in the hollow between. Its
primitive houses of timber and plaster were mostly swept away after
1860, when brick or stone came into general use, and good streets were
cut among the network of narrow, insanitary lanes. Jassy is the seat of
the metropolitan of Moldavia, and of a Roman Catholic archbishop.
Synagogues and churches abound. The two oldest churches date from the
reign of Stephen the Great (1458-1504); perhaps the finest, however, are
the 17th-century metropolitan, St Spiridion and Trei Erarchi, the last a
curious example of Byzantine art, erected in 1639 or 1640 by Basil the
Wolf, and adorned with countless gilded carvings on its outer walls and
twin towers. The St Spiridion Foundation (due to the liberality of
Prince Gregory Ghika in 1727, and available for the sick of all
countries and creeds) has an annual income of over £80,000, and
maintains hospitals and churches in several towns of Moldavia, besides
the baths at Slanic in Walachia. The main hospital in Jassy is a large
building, and possesses a maternity institution, a midwifery school, a
chemical institute, an inoculating establishment, &c. A society of
physicians and naturalists has existed in Jassy since the early part of
the 19th century, and a number of periodicals are published. Besides the
university, founded by Prince Cuza in 1864, with faculties of
literature, philosophy, law, science and medicine, there are a military
academy and schools of art, music and commerce; a museum, a fine hall
and a theatre; the state library, where the chief records of Rumanian
history are preserved; an appeal court, a chamber of commerce and
several banks. The city is the headquarters of the 4th army corps. It
has an active trade in petroleum, salt, metals, timber, cereals, fruit,
wine, spirits, preserved meat, textiles, clothing, leather, cardboard
and cigarette paper.
The inscription by which the existence of a _Jassiorum municipium_ in
the time of the Roman Empire is sought to be proved, lies open to grave
suspicion; but the city is mentioned as early as the 14th century, and
probably does derive its name from the Jassians, or Jazygians, who
accompanied the Cumanian invaders. It was often visited by the Moldavian
court. About 1564, Prince Alexander Lapusneanu, after whom one of the
chief streets is named, chose Jassy for the Moldavian capital, instead
of Suceava (now Suczawa, in Bukowina). It was already famous as a centre
of culture. Between 1561 and 1563 an excellent school and a Lutheran
church were founded by the Greek adventurer, Jacob Basilicus (see
RUMANIA: _History_). In 1643 the first printed book published in
Moldavia was issued from a press established by Basil the Wolf. He also
founded a school, the first in which the mother-tongue took the place of
Greek. Jassy was burned by the Tatars in 1513, by the Turks in 1538, and
by the Russians in 1686. By the Peace of Jassy the second Russo-Turkish
War was brought to a close in 1792. A Greek insurrection under Ypsilanti
in 1821 led to the storming of the city by the Turks in 1822. In 1844
there was a severe conflagration. For the loss caused to the city in
1861 by the removal of the seat of government to Bucharest the
constituent assembly voted £148,150, to be paid in ten annual
instalments, but no payment was ever made.
JATAKA, the technical name, in Buddhist literature, for a story of one
or other of the previous births of the Buddha. The word is also used for
the name of a collection of 547 of such stories included, by a most
fortunate conjuncture of circumstances, in the Buddhist canon. This is
the most ancient and the most complete collection of folk-lore now
extant in any literature in the world. As it was made at latest in the
3rd century B.C., it can be trusted not to give any of that modern or
European colouring which renders suspect much of the folk-lore collected
by modern travellers.
Already in the oldest documents, drawn up by the disciples soon after
the Buddha's death, he is identified with certain ancient sages of
renown. That a religious teacher should claim to be successor of the
prophets of old is not uncommon in the history of religions. But the
current belief in metempsychosis led, or enabled, the early Buddhists to
make a much wider claim. It was not very long before they gradually
identified their master with the hero of each of the popular fables and
stories of which they were so fond. The process must have been complete
by the middle of the 3rd century B.C.; for we find at that date
illustrations of the Jatakas in the bas-reliefs on the railing round the
Bharahat tope with the titles of the Jataka stories inscribed above them
in the characters of that period.[1] The hero of each story is made into
a Bodhisatta; that is, a being who is destined, after a number of
subsequent births, to become a Buddha. This rapid development of the
Bodhisatta theory is the distinguishing feature in the early history of
Buddhism, and was both cause and effect of the simultaneous growth of
the Jataka book. In adopting the folk-lore and fables already current in
India, the Buddhists did not change them very much. The stories as
preserved to us, are for the most part Indian rather than Buddhist. The
ethics they inculcate or suggest are milk for babes; very simple in
character and referring almost exclusively to matters common to all
schools of thought in India, and indeed elsewhere. Kindness, purity,
honesty, generosity, worldly wisdom, perseverance, are the usual virtues
praised; the higher ethics of the Path are scarcely mentioned. These
stories, popular with all, were especially appreciated by that school of
Buddhists that laid stress on the Bodhisatta theory--a school that
obtained its chief support, and probably had its origin, in the extreme
north-west of India and in the highlands of Asia. That school adopted,
from the early centuries of our era, the use of Sanskrit, instead of
Pali, as the means of literary expression. It is almost impossible,
therefore, that they would have carried the canonical Pali book,
voluminous as it is, into Central Asia. Shorter collections of the
original stories, written in Sanskrit, were in vogue among them. One
such collection, the Jataka-mala, by Arya Sura (6th century), is still
extant. Of the existence of another collection, though the Sanskrit
original has not yet been found, we have curious evidence. In the 6th
century a book of Sanskrit fables was translated into Pahlavi, that is,
old Persian (see Bidpai). In succeeding centuries this work was
retranslated into Arabic and Hebrew, thence into Latin and Greek and all
the modern languages of Europe. The book bears a close resemblance to
the earlier chapters of a late Sanskrit fable book called, from its
having five chapters, the _Pancha tantra_, or Pentateuch.
The introduction to the old Jataka book gives the life of the historical
Buddha. That introduction must also have reached Persia by the same
route. For in the 8th century St John of Damascus put the story into
Greek under the title of _Barlaam and Josaphat_. This story became very
popular in the West. It was translated into Latin, into seven European
languages, and even into Icelandic and the dialect of the Philippine
Islands. Its hero, that is the Buddha, was canonized as a Christian
saint; and the 27th of November was officially fixed as the date for his
adoration as such.
The book popularly known in Europe as _Aesop's Fables_ was not written
by Aesop. It was put together in the 14th century at Constantinople by
a monk named Planudes, and he drew largely for his stories upon those
in the Jataka book that had reached Europe along various channels. The
fables of Babrius and Phaedrus, written respectively in the 1st
century before, and in the 1st century after, the Christian era, also
contain Jataka stories known in India in the 4th century B.C. A great
deal has been written on this curious question of the migration of
fables. But we are still very far from being able to trace the
complete history of each story in the Jataka book, or in any one of
the later collections. For India itself the record is most incomplete.
We have the original Jataka book in text and translation. The history
of the text of the Pancha tantra, about a thousand years later, has
been fairly well traced out. But for the intervening centuries
scarcely anything has been done. There are illustrations, in the
bas-reliefs of the 3rd century B.C., of Jatakas not contained in the
Jataka book. Another collection, the _Cariyâ pitaka_, of about the
same date, has been edited, but not translated. Other collections both
in Pali and Sanskrit are known to be extant in MS; and a large number
of Jataka stories, not included in any formal collection, are
mentioned, or told in full, in other works.
AUTHORITIES.--V. Fausböll, _The Jataka_, Pali text (7 vols., London,
1877-1897), (Eng. trans., edited by E. B. Cowell, 6 vols., Cambridge,
1895-1907); _Cariyâ pitaka_, edited by R. Morris for the Pali Text
Society (London, 1882); H. Kern, _Jataka-mala_, Sanskrit text
(Cambridge, Mass., 1891), (Eng. trans. by J. S. Speyer, Oxford, 1895);
Rhys Davids, _Buddhist Birth Stories_ (with full bibliographical
tables) (London, 1880); _Buddhist India_ (chap. xi. on the Jataka
Book) (London, 1903); E. Kuhn, _Barlaam und Joasaph_ (Munich, 1893);
A. Cunningham, _The Stupa of Bharhut_ (London, 1879). (T. W. R. D.)
FOOTNOTE:
[1] A complete list of these inscriptions will be found in Rhys
Davids's _Buddhist India_, p. 209.
JATH, a native state of India, in the Deccan division of Bombay, ranking
as one of the southern Mahratta jagirs. With the small state of
Daphlapur, which is an integral part of it, it forms the Bijapur Agency,
under the collector of Bijapur district. Area, including Daphlapur, 980
sq. m. Pop. (1901), 68,665, showing a decline of 14% in the decade.
Estimated revenue £24,000; tribute £700. Agriculture and cattle-breeding
are carried on; there are no important manufactures. The chief, whose
title is deshmukh, is a Mahratta of the Daphle family. The town of JATH
is 92 m. S.E. of Satara. Pop. (1901), 5404.
JÁTIVA (formerly written XATIVA), or SAN FELIPE DE JÁTIVA, a town of
eastern Spain, in the province of Valencia, on the right bank of the
river Albaida, a tributary of the Júcar, and at the junction of the
Valencia-Murcia and Valencia-Albacete railways. Pop. (1900), 12,600.
Játiva is built on the margin of a fertile and beautiful plain, and on
the southern slopes of the Monte Bernisa, a hill with two peaks, each
surmounted by a castle. With its numerous fountains, and spacious
avenues shaded with elms or cypresses, the town has a clean and
attractive appearance. Its collegiate church, dating from 1414, but
rebuilt about a century later in the Renaissance style, was formerly a
cathedral, and is the chief among many churches and convents. The
town-hall and a church on the castle hill are partly constructed of
inscribed Roman masonry, and several houses date from the Moorish
occupation. There is a brisk local trade in grain, fruit, wine, oil and
rice.
Játiva was the Roman Saetabis, afterwards Valeria Augusta, of
Carthaginian or Iberian origin. Pliny (23-79) and Martial (c. 40-102)
mention the excellence of its linen cloth. Under the Visigoths (c.
483-711) it became an episcopal see; but early in the 8th century it was
captured by the Moors, under whom it attained great prosperity, and
received its present name. It was reconquered by James I. of Aragon
(1213-1276). During the 15th and 16th centuries, Játiva was the home of
many members of the princely house of Borgia or Borja, who migrated
hither from the town of Borja in the province of Saragossa. Alphonso
Borgia, afterwards Pope Calixtus III., and Rodrigo Borgia, afterwards
Pope Alexander VI., were natives of Játiva, born respectively in 1378
and 1431. The painter Jusepe Ribera was also born here in 1588. Owing to
its gallant defence against the troops of the Archduke Charles in the
war of the Spanish succession, Játiva received the additional name of
San Felipe from Philip V. (1700-1746).
JATS, or JUTS, a people of north-western India, who numbered altogether
more than 7 millions in 1901. They form a considerable proportion of the
population in the Punjab, Rajputana and the adjoining districts of the
United Provinces, and are also widely scattered through Sind and
Baluchistan. Some writers have identified the Juts with the ancient
Getae, and there is strong reason to believe them a degraded tribe of
Rajputs, whose Scythic origin has also been maintained. Hindu legends
point to a prehistoric occupation of the Indus valley by this people,
and at the time of the Mahommedan conquest of Sind (712) they, with a
cognate tribe called Meds, constituted the bulk of the population. They
enlisted under the banner of Mahommed bin Kasim, but at a later date
offered a vigorous resistance to the Arab invaders. In 836 they were
overthrown by Amran, who imposed on them a tribute of dogs, and used
their arms to vanquish the Meds. In 1025, however, they had gathered
audacity, not only to invade Mansura, and compel the abjuration of the
Mussulman amir, but to attack the victorious army of Mahmud, laden with
the spoil of Somnath. Chastisement duly ensued: a formidable flotilla,
collected at Multan, shattered in thousands the comparatively
defenceless Jat boats on the Indus, and annihilated their national
pretensions. It is not until the decay of the Mogul Empire that the Jats
again appear in history. One branch of them, settled south of Agra,
mainly by bold plundering raids founded two dynasties which still exist
at Bharatpur (q.v.) and Dholpur (q.v.). Another branch, settled
north-west of Delhi, who adopted the Sikh religion, ultimately made
themselves dominant throughout the Punjab (q.v.) under Ranjit Singh, and
are now represented in their original home by the Phulkian houses of
Patiala (q.v.), Jind (q.v.) and Nabha (q.v.). It is from this latter
branch that the Sikh regiments of the Indian army are recruited. The
Jats are mainly agriculturists and cattle breeders. In their settlements
on the Ganges and Jumna, extending as far east as Bareilly, they are
divided into two great clans, the Dhe and the Hele; while in the Punjab
there are said to be one hundred different sections. Their religion
varies with locality. In the Punjab they have largely embraced Sikh
tenets, while in Sind and Baluchistan they are Mahommedans. In
appearance they are not ill-favoured though extremely dark; they have
good teeth, and large beards, sometimes stained with indigo. Their
inferiority of social position, however, to some extent betrays itself
in their aspect, and tends to be perpetuated by their intellectual
apathy.
JAUBERT, PIERRE AMÉDÉE ÉMILIEN PROBE (1779-1847), French Orientalist,
was born at Aix in Provence on the 3rd of June 1779. He was one of the
most distinguished pupils of Silvestre de Sacy, whose funeral _Discours_
he pronounced in 1838. Jaubert acted as interpreter to Napoleon in Egypt
in 1798-1799, and on his return to Paris held various posts under
government. In 1802 he accompanied Sebastiani on his Eastern mission;
and in 1804 he was at Constantinople. Next year he was despatched to
Persia to arrange an alliance with the shah; but on the way he was
seized and imprisoned in a dry cistern for four months by the pasha of
Bayazid. The pasha's death freed Jaubert, who successfully accomplished
his mission, and rejoined Napoleon at Warsaw in 1807. On the eve of
Napoleon's downfall he was appointed chargé d'affaires at
Constantinople. The restoration ended his diplomatic career, but in 1818
he undertook a journey with government aid to Tibet, whence he succeeded
in introducing into France 400 Kashmir goats. The rest of his life
Jaubert spent in study, in writing and in teaching. He became professor
of Persian in the collège de France, and director of the école des
langues orientales, and in 1830 was elected member of the Académie des
Inscriptions. In 1841 he was made a peer of France and councillor of
state. He died in Paris on the 28th of January, 1847.
Besides articles in the _Journal asiatique_, he published _Voyage en
Arménie et en Perse_ (1821; the edition of 1860 has a notice of
Jaubert, by M. Sédillot) and _Éléments de la grammaire turque_
(1823-1834). See notices in the _Journal asiatique_, Jan. 1847, and
the _Journal des débats_, Jan. 30, 1847.
JAUCOURT, ARNAIL FRANÇOIS, MARQUIS DE (1757-1852), French politician,
was born on the 14th of November 1757 at Tournon (Seine-et-Marne) of a
Protestant family, protected by the prince de Condé, whose regiment he
entered. He adopted revolutionary ideas and became colonel of his
regiment. In the Assembly, to which he was returned in 1791 by the
department of Seine-et-Marne, he voted generally with the minority, and
his views being obviously too moderate for his colleagues he resigned in
1792 and was soon after arrested on suspicion of being a reactionary.
Mme de Staël procured his release from P. L. Manuel just before the
September massacres. He accompanied Talleyrand on his mission to
England, returning to France after the execution of Louis XVI. He lived
in retirement until the establishment of the Consulate, when he entered
the tribunate, of which he was for some time president. In 1803 he
entered the senate, and next year became attached to the household of
Joseph Bonaparte. Presently his imperialist views cooled, and at the
Restoration he became minister of state and a peer of France. At the
second Restoration he was for a brief period minister of marine, but
held no further office. He devoted himself to the support of the
Protestant interest in France. A member of the upper house throughout
the reign of Louis Philippe, he was driven into private life by the
establishment of the Second Republic, but lived to see the _Coup d'état_
and to rally to the government of Louis Napoleon, dying in Paris on the
5th of February 1852.
JAUER, a town of Germany, in the Prussian province of Silesia, 13 m. by
rail S. of Leignitz, on the Wüthende Neisse. Pop. (1900), 13,024. St
Martin's (Roman Catholic) church dates from 1267-1290, and the
Evangelical church from 1655. A new town-hall was erected in 1895-1898.
Jauer manufactures leather, carpets, cigars, carriages and gloves, and
is specially famous for its sausages. The town was first mentioned in
1242, and was formerly the capital of a principality embracing about
1200 sq. m., now occupied by the circles of Jauer, Bunzlau, Löweberg,
Hirschberg and Schönau. From 1392 to 1741 it belonged to the kings of
Bohemia, being taken from Maria Theresa by Frederick the Great. Jauer
was formerly the prosperous seat of the Silesian linen trade, but the
troubles of the Thirty Years' War, in the course of which it was burned
down three times, permanently injured this.
See Schönaich, _Die alte Fürstentumshauptstadt Jauer_ (Jauer, 1903).
JAUHARI (ABU NASR ISMA^EIL IBN HAMMAD UL-JAUHARI) (d. 1002 or 1010),
Arabian lexicographer, was born at Farab on the borders of Turkestan. He
studied language in Farab and Bagdad, and later among the Arabs of the
desert. He then settled in Damghan and afterwards at Nishapur, where he
died by a fall from the roof of a house. His great work is the _Kitab
us-Sahah fil-Lugha_, an Arabic dictionary, in which the words are
arranged alphabetically according to the last letter of the root. He
himself had only partially finished the last recension, but the work was
completed by his pupil, Abu Ishaq Ibrahim ibn Salih ul-Warraq.
An edition was begun by E. Scheidius with a Latin translation, but one
part only appeared at Harderwijk (1776). The whole has been published
at Tebriz (1854) and at Cairo (1865), and many abridgments and Persian
translations have appeared; cf. C. Brockelmann, _Geschichte der
arabischen Literatur_ (Weimar, 1898), i. 128 seq. (G. W. T.)
JAUNDICE (Fr. _jaunisse_, from _jaune_, yellow), or ICTERUS (from its
resemblance to the colour of the golden oriole, of which Pliny relates
that if a jaundiced person looks upon it he recovers but the bird dies),
a term in medicine applied to a yellow coloration of the skin and other
parts of the body, depending in most instances on some derangement
affecting the liver. This yellow colour is due to the presence in the
blood of bile or of some of the elements of that secretion. Jaundice,
however, must be regarded more as a symptom of some morbid condition
previously existing than as a disease _per se_.
Cases with jaundice may be divided into three groups.
1. _Obstructive Jaundice._--Any obstruction of the passage of bile from
the liver into the intestinal canal is sooner or later followed by the
appearance of jaundice, which in such circumstances is due to the
absorption of bile into the blood. The obstruction is due to one of the
following causes: (1) Obstruction by foreign bodies within the bile
duct, e.g. gallstones or parasites; (2) inflammation of the duodenum or
the lining membrane of the duct; (3) stricture or obliteration of the
duct; (4) a tumour growing from the duct; (5) pressure on the duct from
without, from the liver or other organ, or tumours arising from them.
Obstructions from these causes may be partial or complete, and the
degree of jaundice will vary accordingly, but it is to be noted that
extensive organic disease of the liver may exist without the evidence of
obstructive jaundice.
The effect upon the liver of impediments to the outflow of bile such as
those above indicated is in the first place an increase in its size, the
whole biliary passages and the liver cells being distended with retained
bile. This enlargement, however, speedily subsides when the obstruction
is removed, but should it persist the liver ultimately shrinks and
undergoes atrophy in its whole texture. The bile thus retained is
absorbed into the system, and shows itself by the yellow staining seen
to a greater or less extent in all the tissues and many of the fluids of
the body. The kidneys, which in such circumstances act in some measure
vicariously to the liver and excrete a portion of the retained bile,
are apt to become affected in their structure by the long continuance of
jaundice.
The symptoms of obstructive jaundice necessarily vary according to the
nature of the exciting cause, but there generally exists evidence of
some morbid condition before the yellow coloration appears. Thus, if the
obstruction be due to an impacted gallstone in the common or hepatic
duct, there will probably be the symptoms of intense suffering
characterizing hepatic colic (see COLIC). In the cases most frequently
seen--those, namely, arising from simple catarrh of the bile ducts due
to gastro-duodenal irritation spreading through the common duct--the
first sign to attract attention is the yellow appearance of the white of
the eye, which is speedily followed by a similar colour on the skin over
the body generally. The yellow tinge is most distinct where the skin is
thin, as on the forehead, breast, elbows, &c. It may be also well seen
in the roof of the mouth, but in the lips and gums the colour is not
observed till the blood is first pressed from them. The tint varies,
being in the milder cases faint, in the more severe a deep saffron
yellow, while in extreme degrees of obstruction it may be of dark brown
or greenish hue. The colour can scarcely, if at all, be observed in
artificial light.
The urine exhibits well marked and characteristic changes in jaundice
which exist even before any evidence can be detected on the skin or
elsewhere. It is always of dark brown colour resembling porter, but
after standing in the air it acquires a greenish tint. Its froth is
greenish-yellow, and it stains with this colour any white substance. It
contains not only the bile colouring matter but also the bile acids. The
former is detected by the play of colours yielded on the addition of
nitric acid, the latter by the purple colour, produced by placing a
piece of lump sugar in the urine tested, and adding thereto a few drops
of strong sulphuric acid.
The contents of the bowels also undergo changes, being characterized
chiefly by their pale clay colour, which is in proportion to the amount
of hepatic obstruction, and to their consequent want of admixture with
bile. For the same reason they contain a large amount of unabsorbed
fatty matter, and have an extremely offensive odour.
Constitutional symptoms always attend jaundice with obstruction. The
patient becomes languid, drowsy and irritable, and has generally a slow
pulse. The appetite is usually but not always diminished, a bitter taste
in the mouth is complained of, while flatulent eructations arise from
the stomach. Intolerable itching of the skin is a common accompaniment
of jaundice, and cutaneous eruptions or boils are occasionally seen.
Yellow vision appears to be present in some very rare cases. Should the
jaundice depend on advancing organic disease of the liver, such as
cancer, the tinge becomes gradually deeper, and the emaciation and
debility more marked towards the fatal termination, which in such cases
is seldom long postponed. Apart from this, however, jaundice from
obstruction may exist for many years, as in those instances where the
walls of the bile ducts are thickened from chronic catarrh, but where
they are only partially occluded. In the common cases of acute catarrhal
jaundice recovery usually takes place in two or three weeks.
The treatment of this form of jaundice bears reference to the cause
giving rise to the obstruction. In the ordinary cases of simple
catarrhal jaundice, or that following the passing of gallstones, a light
nutritious diet (milk, soups, &c., avoiding saccharine and farinaceous
substances and alcoholic stimulants), along with counter-irritation
applied over the right side and the use of laxatives and cholagogues,
will be found to be advantageous. Diaphoretics and diuretics to promote
the action of the skin and kidneys are useful in jaundice. In the more
chronic forms, besides the remedies above named, the waters of Carlsbad
are of special efficacy. In cases other than acute catarrhal, operative
interference is often called for, to remove the gallstones, tumour, &c.,
causing the obstruction.
2. _Toxaemic Jaundice_ is observed to occur as a symptom in certain
fevers, e.g. yellow fever, ague, and in pyaemia also as the effect of
certain poisons, such as phosphorus, and the venom of snake-bites.
Jaundice of this kind is almost always slight, and neither the urine nor
the discharges from the bowels exhibit changes in appearance to such a
degree as in the obstructive variety. Grave constitutional symptoms are
often present, but they are less to be ascribed to the jaundice than to
the disease with which it is associated.
3. _Hereditary Jaundice._--Under this group there are the jaundice of
new-born infants, which varies enormously in severity; the cases in
which a slight form of jaundice obtains in several members of the same
family, without other symptoms, and which may persist for years; and
lastly the group of cases with hypertrophic cirrhosis.
The name _malignant jaundice_ is sometimes applied to that very fatal
form of disease otherwise termed acute yellow atrophy of the liver
(see ATROPHY).
JAUNPUR, a city and district of British India, in the Benares division
of the United Provinces. The city is on the left bank of the river
Gumti, 34 m. N.W. from Benares by rail. Pop. (1901), 42,771. Jaunpur is
a very ancient city, the former capital of a Mahommedan kingdom which
once extended from Budaun and Etawah to Behar. It abounds in splendid
architectural monuments, most of which belong to the period when the
rulers of Jaunpur were independent of Delhi. The fort of Feroz Shah is
in great part completely ruined, but there remain a fine gateway of the
16th century, a mosque dating from 1376, and the _hammams_ or baths of
Ibrahim Shah. Among other buildings may be mentioned the Atala Masjid
(1408) and the ruined Jinjiri Masjid, mosques built by Ibrahim, the
first of which has a great cloistered court and a magnificent façade;
the Dariba mosque constructed by two of Ibrahim's governors; the Lal
Darwaza erected by the queen of Mahmud; the Jama Masjid (1438-1478) or
great mosque of Husain, with court and cloisters, standing on a raised
terrace, and in part restored in modern times; and finally the splendid
bridge over the Gumti, erected by Munim Khan, Mogul governor in
1569-1573. During the Mutiny of 1857 Jaunpur formed a centre of
disaffection. The city has now lost its importance, the only industries
surviving being the manufacture of perfumes and papier-mâché articles.
The DISTRICT OF JAUNPUR has an area of 1551 sq. m. It forms part of the
wide Gangetic plain, and its surface is accordingly composed of a thick
alluvial deposit. The whole country is closely tilled, and no waste
lands break the continuous prospect of cultivated fields. It is divided
into two unequal parts by the sinuous channel of the Gumti, a tributary
of the Ganges, which flows past the city of Jaunpur. Its total course
within the district is about 90 m., and it is nowhere fordable. It is
crossed by two bridges, one at Jaunpur and the other 2 m. lower down.
The Gumti is liable to sudden inundations during the rainy season, owing
to the high banks it has piled up at its entrance into the Ganges, which
act as dams to prevent the prompt outflow of its flooded waters. These
inundations extend to its tributary the Sai. Much damage was thus
effected in 1774; but the greatest recorded flood took place in
September 1871, when 4000 houses in the city were swept away, besides
9000 more in villages along its banks. The other rivers are the Sai,
Barna, Pili and Basohi. Lakes are numerous in the north and south; the
largest has a length of 8 m. Pop. (1901), 1,202,920, showing a decrease
of 5% in the decade. Sugar-refining is the principal industry. The
district is served by the line of the Oudh & Rohilkhand railway from
Benares to Fyzabad, and by branches of this and of the Bengal &
North-Western systems.
In prehistoric times Jaunpur seems to have formed a portion of the
Ajodhya principality, and when it first makes an appearance in authentic
history it was subject to the rulers of Benares. With the rest of their
dominions it fell under the yoke of the Mussulman invaders in 1194. From
that time the district appears to have been ruled by a prince of the
Kanauj dynasty, as a tributary of the Mahommedan suzerain. In 1388 Malik
Sarwar Khwaja was sent by Mahommed Tughlak to govern the eastern
province. He fixed his residence at Jaunpur, made himself independent of
the Delhi court, and assumed the title of Sultan-us-Shark, or "eastern
emperor." For nearly a century the Sharki dynasty ruled at Jaunpur, and
proved formidable rivals to the sovereigns of Delhi. The last of the
dynasty was Sultan Husain, who passed his life in a fierce and chequered
struggle for supremacy with Bahlol Lodi, then actual emperor at Delhi.
At length, in 1478, Bahlol succeeded in defeating his rival in a series
of decisive engagements. He took the city of Jaunpur, but permitted the
conquered Husain to reside there, and to complete the building of his
great mosque, the Jama Masjid, which now forms the chief ornament of the
town. Many other architectural works in the district still bear witness
to its greatness under its independent Mussulman rulers. In 1775 the
district was made over to the British by the Treaty of Lucknow. From
that time nothing occurred which calls for notice till the Mutiny. On
the 5th of June 1857, when the news of the Benares revolt reached
Jaunpur, the sepoys mutinied. The district continued in a state of
complete anarchy till the arrival of the Gurkha force from Azamgarh in
September. In November the surrounding country was lost again, and it
was not till May 1858 that the last smouldering embers of disaffection
were stifled by the repulse of the insurgent leader at the hands of the
people themselves.
See A. Führer, _The Shargi Architecture of Jaunpur_ (1889).
JAUNTING-CAR, a light two-wheeled carriage for a single horse, in its
commonest form with seats for four persons placed back to back, with the
foot-boards projecting over the wheels. It is the typical conveyance for
persons in Ireland (see CAR). The first part of the word is generally
taken to be identical with the verb "to jaunt," now only used in the
sense of to go on a short pleasure excursion, but in its earliest uses
meaning to make a horse caracole or prance, hence to jolt or bump up and
down. It would apparently be a variant of "jaunce," of the same meaning,
which is supposed to be taken from O. Fr. _jancer_. Skeat takes the
origin of jaunt and jaunce to be Scandinavian, and connects them with
the Swedish dialect word _ganta_, to romp; and he finds cognate bases in
such words as "jump," "high jinks." The word "jaunty," sprightly,
especially used of anything done with an easy nonchalant air, is a
corruption of "janty," due to confusion with "jaunt." "Janty," often
spelt in the 17th and 18th centuries "janté" or "jantee," represents the
English pronunciation of Fr. _gentil_, well-bred, neat, spruce.
JAUREGUI, JUAN (1562-1582), a Biscayan by birth, was in 1582 in the
service of a Spanish merchant, Gaspar d'Anastro, who was resident at
Antwerp. Tempted by the reward of 80,000 ducats offered by Philip II. of
Spain for the assassination of William the Silent, prince of Orange, but
being himself without courage to undertake the task, d'Anastro, with the
help of his cashier Venero, persuaded Jauregui to attempt the murder for
the sum of 2877 crowns. On Sunday the 18th of March 1582, as the prince
came out of his dining-room Jauregui offered him a petition, and William
had no sooner taken it into his hand than Jauregui fired a pistol at his
head. The ball pierced the neck below the right ear and passed out at
the left jaw-bone; but William ultimately recovered. The assassin was
killed on the spot.
JAURÉGUIBERRY, JEAN BERNARD (1815-1887), French admiral, was born at
Bayonne on the 26th of August 1815. He entered the navy in 1831, was
made a lieutenant in 1845, commander in 1856, and captain in 1860. After
serving in the Crimea and in China, and being governor of Senegal, he
was promoted to rear-admiral in 1869. He served on land during the
second part of the Franco-German War of 1870-71, in the rank of
auxiliary general of division. He was present at Coulmiers, Villépion
and Loigny-Poupry, in command of a division, and in Chanzy's retreat
upon Le Mans and the battle at that place in command of a corps. He was
the most distinguished of the many naval officers who did good service
in the military operations. On the 9th of December he had been made
vice-admiral, and in 1871 he commanded the fleet at Toulon; in 1875 he
was a member of the council of admiralty; and in October 1876 he was
appointed to command the evolutionary squadron in the Mediterranean. In
February 1879 he became minister of the navy in the Waddington cabinet,
and on the 27th of May following was elected a senator for life. He was
again minister of the navy in the Freycinet cabinet in 1880. A fine
example of the fighting French seaman of his time, Jauréguiberry died at
Paris on the 21st of October 1887.
JÁUREGUI Y AGUILAR, JUAN MARTÍNEZ DE (1583-1641), Spanish poet, was
baptized at Seville on the 24th of November 1583. In due course he
studied at Rome, returning to Spain shortly before 1610 with a double
reputation as a painter and a poet. A reference in the preface to the
_Novelas exemplares_ has been taken to mean that he painted the portrait
of Cervantes, who, in the second part of _Don Quixote_, praises the
translation of Tasso's _Aminta_ published at Rome in 1607. Jáuregui's
_Rimas_ (1618), a collection of graceful lyrics, is preceded by a
controversial preface which attracted much attention on account of its
outspoken declaration against _culteranismo_. Through the influence of
Olivares, he was appointed groom of the chamber to Philip IV., and gave
an elaborate exposition of his artistic doctrines in the _Discurso
poético contra el hablar culto y oscuro_ (1624), a skilful attack on the
new theories, which procured for its author the order of Calatrava. It
is plain, however, that the shock of controversy had shaken Jáuregui's
convictions, and his poem _Orfeo_ (1624) is visibly influenced by
Góngora. Jáuregui died at Madrid on the 11th of January 1641, leaving
behind him a translation of the _Pharsalia_ which was not published till
1684. This rendering reveals Jáuregui as a complete convert to the new
school, and it has been argued that, exaggerating the affinities between
Lucan and Góngora--both of Cordovan descent--he deliberately translated
the thought of the earlier poet into the vocabulary of the later master.
This is possible; but it is at least as likely that Jáuregui
unconsciously yielded to the current of popular taste, with no other
intention than that of conciliating the public of his own day.
JAURÈS, JEAN LÉON (1859- ), French Socialist leader, was born at
Castres (Tarn) on the 3rd of September 1859. He was educated at the
lycée Louis-le-Grand and the école normale supérieure, and took his
degree as associate in philosophy in 1881. After teaching philosophy for
two years at the lycée of Albi (Tarn), he lectured at the university of
Toulouse. He was elected republican deputy for the department of Tarn in
1885. In 1889, after unsuccessfully contesting Castres, he returned to
his professional duties at Toulouse, where he took an active interest in
municipal affairs, and helped to found the medical faculty of the
university. He also prepared two theses for his doctorate in philosophy,
_De primis socialismi germanici lineamentis apud Lutherum, Kant, Fichte
et Hegel_ (1891), and _De la réalité du monde sensible_. In 1902 he gave
energetic support to the miners of Carmaux who went out on strike in
consequence of the dismissal of a socialist workman, Calvignac; and in
the next year he was re-elected to the chamber as deputy for Albi.
Although he was defeated at the elections of 1898 and was for four years
outside the chamber, his eloquent speeches made him a force in politics
as an intellectual champion of socialism. He edited the _Petite
République_, and was one of the most energetic defenders of Captain
Alfred Dreyfus. He approved of the inclusion of M. Millerand, the
socialist, in the Waldeck-Rousseau ministry, though this led to a split
with the more revolutionary section led by M. Guesde. In 1902 he was
again returned as deputy for Albi, and during the Combes administration
his influence secured the coherence of the radical-socialist coalition
known as the _bloc_. In 1904 he founded the socialist paper,
_L'Humanité_. The French socialist groups held a congress at Rouen in
March 1905, which resulted in a new consolidation; the new party, headed
by MM. Jaurès and Guesde, ceased to co-operate with the radicals and
radical-socialists, and became known as the unified socialists, pledged
to advance a collectivist programme. At the general elections of 1906 M.
Jaurès was again elected for the Tarn. His ability and vigour were now
generally recognized; but the strength of the socialist party, and the
practical activity of its leader, still had to reckon with the equally
practical and vigorous liberalism of M. Clemenceau. The latter was able
to appeal to his countrymen (in a notable speech in the spring of 1906)
to rally to a radical programme which had no socialist Utopia in view;
and the appearance in him of a strong and practical radical leader had
the result of considerably diminishing the effect of the socialist
propaganda. M. Jaurès, in addition to his daily journalistic activity,
published _Les preuves; affaire Dreyfus_ (1900); _Action socialiste_
(1899); _Études socialistes_ (1902), and, with other collaborators,
_Histoire socialiste_ (1901), &c.
JAVA, one of the larger islands of that portion of the Malay Archipelago
which is distinguished as the Sunda Islands. It lies between 105° 12´
40´´ (St Nicholas Point) and 114° 35´ 38´´ E. (Cape Seloko) and between
5° 52´ 34´´ and 8° 46´ 46´´ S. It has a total length of 622 m. from
Pepper Bay in the west to Banyuwangi in the east, and an extreme breadth
of 121 m. from Cape Bugel in Japara to the coast of Jokjakarta,
narrowing towards the middle to about 55 m. Politically and commercially
it is important as the seat of the colonial government of the Dutch East
Indies, all other parts of the Dutch territory being distinguished as
the Outer Possessions (_Buitenbezittungens_). According to the
triangulation survey (report published in 1901) the area of Java proper
is 48,504 sq. m.; of Madura, the large adjacent and associated island,
1732; and of the smaller islands administratively included with Java and
Madura 1416, thus making a total of 50,970 sq. m. The more important of
these islands are the following: Pulau Panaitan or Princes Island
(_Prinseneiland_), 47 sq. m., lies in the Sunda Strait, off the
south-western peninsula of the main island, from which it is separated
by the Behouden Passage. The Thousand Islands are situated almost due N.
of Batavia. Of these five were inhabited in 1906 by about 1280 seafarers
from all parts and their descendants. The Karimon Java archipelago, to
the north of Semarang, numbers twenty-seven islands with an area of 16
sq. m. and a population of about 800 (having one considerable village on
the main island). Bavian[1] (Bawian), 100 m. N. of Surabaya, is a ruined
volcano with an area of 73 sq. m. and a population of about 44,000.
About a third of the men are generally absent as traders or coolies. In
Singapore and Sumatra they are known as Boyans. They are devout
Mahommedans and many of them make the pilgrimage to Mecca. The Sapudi
and Kangean archipelagoes are eastward continuations of Madura. The
former, thirteen in all, with an area of 58 sq. m. and 53,000
inhabitants, export cattle, dried fish and trepang; and many of the male
population work as day labourers in Java or as lumbermen in Sumbawa,
Flores, &c. The main island of the Kangians has an area of 19 sq. m.;
the whole group 23 sq. m. It is best known for its limestone caves and
its buffaloes. Along the south coast the islands are few and
small--Klapper or Deli, Trouwers or Tingal, Nusa Kembangan, Sempu and
Nusa Barung.
[Illustration: Map of Java.]
From Sumatra on the W., Java is separated by the Sunda Strait, which at
the narrowest is only 14 m. broad, but widens elsewhere to about 50 m.
On the E. the strait of Bali, which parts it from the island of that
name, is at the northern end not more than 1½ m. across. Through the
former strong currents run for the greater part of the day throughout
the year, outwards from the Java Sea to the Indian Ocean. In the strait
of Bali the currents are perhaps even stronger and are extremely
irregular. Pilots with local knowledge are absolutely necessary for
vessels attempting either passage. In spite of the strength of the
currents the Sunda Strait is steadily being diminished in width, and the
process if continued must result in a restoration of that junction of
Sumatra and Java which according to some authorities formerly
existed.[2]
In general terms Java may be described as one of the breakwater islands
of the Indian Ocean--part of the mountainous rim (continuous more or
less completely with Sumatra) of the partially submerged plateau which
lies between the ocean on the S. and the Chinese Sea on the N., and has
the massive island of Borneo as its chief subaerial portion. While the
waves and currents of the ocean sweep away most of the products of
denudation along the south coast or throw a small percentage back in the
shape of sandy downs, the Java Sea on the north--not more than 50
fathoms deep--allows them to settle and to form sometimes with
extraordinary rapidity broad alluvial tracts.[3]
It is customary and obvious to divide Java into three divisions, the
middle part of the island narrowing into a kind of isthmus, and each
of the divisions thus indicated having certain structural
characteristics of its own. West Java, which consists of Bantam,
Krawang and the Preanger Regencies, has an area of upwards of 18,000
sq. m. In this division the highlands lie for the most part in a
compact mass to the south and the lowlands form a continuous tract to
the north. The main portion of the uplands consists of the Preanger
Mountains, with the plateaus of Bandong, Pekalongan, Tegal, Badung and
Gurut, encircled with volcanic summits. On the borders of the
Preanger, Batavia and Bantam are the Halimon Mountains (the Blue
Mountains of the older travellers), reaching their greatest altitudes
in the volcanic summits of Gedeh and Salak. To the west lie the
highlands of Bantam, which extending northward cut off the northern
lowlands from the Sunda Strait. Middle Java is the smallest of the
three divisions, having an area of not much more than 13,200 sq. m. It
comprises Tegal, Pekalongan, Banyumas, Bagelen, Kedu, Jokjakarta,
Surakarta, and thus not only takes in the whole of the isthmus but
encroaches on the broad eastern portion of the island. In the isthmus
mountains are not so closely massed in the south nor the plains so
continuous on the north. The watershed culminating in Slamet lies
almost midway between the ocean and the Java Sea, and there are
somewhat extensive lowlands in the south. In that part of middle Java
which physically belongs to eastern Java there is a remarkable series
of lowlands stretching almost right across the island from Semarang in
the north to Jokjakarta in the south. Eastern Java comprises Rembang,
Madiun, Kediri, Surabaya, Pasuruan and Besuki, and has an area of
about 17,500 sq. m. In this division lowlands and highlands are
intermingled in endless variety except along the south coast, where
the watershed-range forms a continuous breakwater from Jokjakarta to
Besuki. The volcanic eminences, instead of rising in lines or groups,
are isolated.
For its area Java is one of the most distinctly volcanic regions of
the world. Volcanic forces made it, and volcanic forces have continued
to devastate and fertilize it. According to R. D. M. Verbeek about 125
volcanic centres can be distinguished, a number which may be increased
or diminished by different methods of classification. It is usual to
arrange the volcanoes in the following groups: westernmost Java 11
(all extinct); Preanger 50 (5 active); Cheribon 2 (both extinct);
Slamet 2 (1 active); middle Java 16 (2 active); Murio 2 (both
extinct); Lavu 2 (extinct); Wilis 2 (extinct); east Java 21 (5
active). The active volcanoes of the present time are Gedeh,
Tangkuban, Prahu, Gutar, Papandayan, Galung-gung, Slamet, Sendor,
Merapi,[4] Kalut (or Klut), Bromo, Semeru, Lamongan, Raung, but the
activity of many of these is trifling, consisting of slight ejections
of steam and scoriae.
The plains differ in surface and fertility, according to their
geological formation. Built up of alluvium and diluvium, the plains of
the north coast-lands in western and middle Java are at their lowest
levels, near the mouths of rivers and the sea, in many cases marshy
and abounding in lakes and coral remains, but for the rest they are
fertile and available for culture. The plains, too, along the south
coast of middle Java--of Banyumas and Bagelen--contain many morasses
as well as sandy stretches and dunes impeding the outlet of the
rivers. They are, nevertheless, available for the cultivation more
particularly of rice, and are thickly peopled. In eastern Java, again,
the narrow coast plains are to be distinguished from the wider plains
lying between the parallel chains of limestone and between the
volcanoes. The narrow plains of the north coast are constituted of
yellow clay and tuffs containing chalk, washed down by the rivers from
the mountain chains and volcanoes. Like the western plains, they, too,
are in many cases low and marshy, and fringed with sand and dunes. The
plains, on the other hand, at some distance from the sea, or lying in
the interior of eastern Java, such as Surakarta, Madiun, Kediri,
Pasuruan, Probolinggo and Besuki, owe their formation to the volcanoes
at whose bases they lie, occupying levels as high as 1640 ft. down to
328 ft. above the sea, whence they decline to the lower plains of the
coast. Lastly, the plains of Lusi, Solo and Brantas, lying between the
parallel chains in Japara, Rembang and Surabaya, are in part the
product of rivers formerly flowing at a higher level of 30 to 60 or 70
ft., in part the product of the sea, dating from a time when the
northern part of the above-named residencies was an island, such as
Madura, the mountains of which are the continuation of the north
parallel chain, is still.
The considerable rivers of western Java all have their outlets on the
north coast, the chief among them being the Chi (Dutch Tji) Tarum and
the Chi Manuk. They are navigable for native boats and rafts, and are
used for the transport of coffee and salt. On the south coast the Chi
Tanduwi, on the east of the Preanger, is the only stream available as
a waterway, and this only for a few miles above its mouth. In middle
Java, also, the rivers discharging at the north coast--the Pamali,
Chomal, &c.--are serviceable for the purposes of irrigation and
cultivation, but are navigable only near their mouths. The rivers of
the south coast--Progo, Serayu, Bogowonto, and Upak, enriched by rills
from the volcanoes--serve abundantly to irrigate the plains of
Bagelen, Banyumas, &c. Their stony beds, shallows and rapids, and the
condition of their mouths lessen, however, their value as waterways.
More navigable are the larger rivers of eastern Java. The Solo is
navigable for large praus, or native boats, as far up as Surakarta,
and above that town for lighter boats, as is also its affluent the
Gentung. The canal constructed in 1893 at the lower part of this
river, and alterations effected at its mouth, have proved of important
service both in irrigating the plain and facilitating the river's
outlet into the sea. The Brantas is also navigable in several parts.
The smaller rivers of eastern Java are, however, much in the condition
of those of western Java. They serve less as waterways than as
reservoirs for the irrigation of the fertile plains through which they
flow.
The north coast of Java presents everywhere a low strand covered with
nipa or mangrove, morasses and fishponds, sandy stretches and low
dunes, shifting river-mouths and coast-lines, ports and roads,
demanding continual attention and regulation. The south coast is of a
different make. The dunes of Banyumas, Bagelen, and Jokjakarta, ranged
in three ridges, rising to 50 ft. high, and varying in breadth from
300 to over 1600 ft., liable, moreover, to transformation from tides
and the east monsoon, oppose everywhere, also in Preanger and Besuki,
a barrier to the discharge of the rivers and the drainage of the
coast-lands. They assist the formation of lagoons and morasses. At
intervals in the dune coast, running in the direction of the limestone
mountains, there tower up steep inaccessible masses of land, showing
neither ports nor bays, hollowed out by the sea, rising in
perpendicular walls to a height of 160 ft. above sea-level. Sometimes
two branches project at right angles from the chain on to the coast,
forming a low bay between the capes or ends of the projecting
branches, from 1000 to 1600 ft. high. Such a formation occurs
frequently along the coast of Besuki, presenting a very irregular
coast-line. Of course the north coast is of much greater commercial
importance than the south coast.
_Geology._--With the exception of a few small patches of schist,
supposed to be Cretaceous, the whole island, so far as is known, is
covered by deposits of Tertiary and Quaternary age. The ancient
"schist formation," which occurs in Sumatra, Borneo, &c., does not
rise to the surface anywhere in Java itself, but it is visible in the
island of Karimon Java off the north coast. The Cretaceous schists
have yielded fossils only at Banjarnegara, where a limestone with
Orbitolina is interstratified with them. They are succeeded
unconformably by Eocene deposits, consisting of sandstones with
coal-seams and limestones containing Nummulites, Alveolina and
Orthophragmina; and these beds are as limited in extent as the
Cretaceous schists themselves. Sedimentary deposits of Upper Tertiary
age are widely spread, covering about 38% of the surface. They consist
of breccias, marls and limestones containing numerous fossils, and are
for the most part Miocene but probably include a part of the Pliocene
also. They were laid down beneath the sea, but have since been folded
and elevated to considerable heights. Fluviatile deposits of late
Pliocene age have been found in the east of Java, and it was in these
that the remarkable anthropoid ape or ape-like man, _Pithecanthropus
erectus_ of Dubois, was discovered. The Quaternary deposits lie
horizontally upon the upturned edges of the Tertiary beds. They are
partly marine and partly fluviatile, the marine deposits reaching to a
height of some 350 ft. above the sea and thus indicating a
considerable elevation of the island in recent times.
The volcanic rocks of Java are of great importance and cover about 28%
of the island. The eruptions began in the middle of the Tertiary
period, but did not attain their maximum until Quaternary times, and
many of the volcanoes are still active. Most of the cones seem to lie
along faults parallel to the axis of the island, or on short cross
fractures. The lavas and ashes are almost everywhere andesites and
basalts, with a little obsidian. Some of the volcanoes, however, have
erupted leucite rocks. Similar rocks, together with phonolite, occur
in the island of Bavian.[5]
_Climate._--Our knowledge of the climate of Batavia, and thus of that
of the lowlands of western Java, is almost perfect; but, rainfall
excepted, our information as to the climate of Java as a whole is
extremely defective. The dominant meteorological facts are simple and
obvious: Java lies in the tropics, under an almost vertical sun, and
thus has a day of almost uniform length throughout the year.[6] It is
also within the perpetual influence of the great atmospheric movements
passing between Asia and Australia; and is affected by the
neighbourhood of vast expanses of sea and land (Borneo and Sumatra).
There are no such maxima of temperature as are recorded from the
continents. The highest known at Batavia was 96° F. in 1877 and the
lowest 66° in the same year. The mean annual temperature is 79°. The
warmest months are May and October, registering 79.5° and 79.46°
respectively; the coldest January and February with 77.63° and 77.7°
respectively. The daily range is much greater; at one o'clock the
thermometer has a mean height of 84°; after two o'clock it declines to
about 73° at six o'clock; the greatest daily amplitude is in August
and the least in January and February. Eastern Java and the inland
plains of middle Java are said to be hotter, but scientific data are
few. A very slight degree of elevation above the seaboard plains
produces a remarkable difference in the climate, not so much in its
mere temperature as in its influence on health. The dwellers in the
coast towns are surprised at the invigorating effects of a change to
health resorts from 300 to 1200 ft. above sea-level; and at greater
elevations it may be uncomfortably cold at night, with chilly mists
and occasional frosts. The year is divided into two seasons by the
prevailing winds: the rainy season, that of the west monsoon, lasting
from November to March, and the dry season, that of the east monsoon,
during the rest of the year; the transition from one monsoon to
another--the "canting" of the monsoons--being marked by
irregularities. On the whole, the east monsoon blows steadily for a
longer period than the west. The velocity of the wind is much less
than in Europe--not more in the annual mean at Batavia than 3 ft. per
second, against 12 to 18 ft. in Europe. The highest velocity ever
observed at Batavia was 25 ft. Wind-storms are rare and hardly ever
cyclonic. There are as a matter of course a large number of purely
local winds, some of them of a very peculiar kind, but few of these
have been scientifically dealt with. Thunder-storms are extremely
frequent; but the loss of life from lightning is probably diminished
by the fact that the palm-trees are excellent conductors. At night the
air is almost invariably still. The average rainfall at Batavia is
72.28 in. per annum, of which 51.49 in. are contributed by the west
monsoon. The amount varies considerably from year to year: in 1889,
1891 and 1897 there were about 47.24 in.; in 1868 and 1877 nearly
51.17, and in 1872 and 1882 no less than 94.8. There are no long
tracts of unbroken rainfall and no long periods of continuous drought.
The rainfall is heaviest in January, but it rains only for about
one-seventh of the time. Next in order come February, March and
December. August, the driest month, has from three to five days of
rain, though the amount is usually less than an inch and not more than
one and a half inches. The popular description of the rain falling not
in drops but streams was proved erroneous by J. Wiesner's careful
observations (see _Kais. Akad. d. Wiss. Math. Naturw. Cl._ Bd. xiv.,
Vienna, 1895), which have been confirmed by A. Woeikof
("Regensintensität und Regendauer in Batavia" in _Z. für Met._, 1907).
The greatest rainfall recorded in an hour (4.5 in.) is enormously
exceeded by records even in Europe. From observations taken for the
meteorological authorities at a very considerable number of stations,
J. H. Boeseken constructed a map in 1900 (_Tijdschr. v. h. Kon. Ned.
Aardr. Gen._, 1900; reproduced in Veth, _Java_, iii. 1903). Among the
outstanding facts are the following. The south coasts of both eastern
and middle Java have a much heavier rainfall than the north. Majalenka
has an annual fall of 175 in. In western Java the maximal district
consists of a great ring of mountains from Salak and Gedeh in the west
to Galung-gung in the east, while the enclosed plateau-region of
Chanjur Bandung and Garut are not much different from the seaboard.
The whole of middle Java, with the exception of the north coast, has a
heavy rainfall. At Chilachap the annual rainfall is 151.43 in., 87.8
in. of which is brought by the south-east monsoon. The great belt
which includes the Slamet and the Dieng, and the country on the south
coast between Chilachap and Parigi, are maximal. In comparison the
whole of eastern Java, with the exception of the mountains from Wilis
eastward to Ijen, has a low record which reaches its lowest along the
north coast.[7]
_Fauna._--In respect of its fauna Java differs from Borneo, Sumatra
and the Malay Peninsula far more than these differ among themselves;
and, at the same time, it shows a close resemblance to the Malay
Peninsula, on the one hand, and to the Himalayas on the other. Of the
176 mammals of the whole Indo-Malayan region the greater number occur
in Java. Of these 41 are found on the continent of Asia, 8 are common
to Java and Borneo, and 6 are common to Java and Sumatra (see M.
Weber, _Das Indo-Malay Archipelago und die Geschichte seiner
Thierwelt_, Jena, 1902). No genus and only a few species are confined
to the island. Of the land-birds only a small proportion are peculiar.
The elephant, the tapir, the bear, and various other genera found in
the rest of the region are altogether absent. The Javanese rhinoceros
(_Rhinoceros sundaicus_; _sarak_ in Javanese, _badak_ in Sundanese),
the largest of the mammals on the island, differs from that of Sumatra
in having one horn instead of two. It ranges over the highest
mountains, and its regular paths, worn into deep channels, may be
traced up the steepest slopes and round the rims of even active
volcanoes. Two species of wild swine, _Sus vittatus_ and _Sus
verrucosus_, are exceedingly abundant, the former in the hot, the
latter in the temperate, region; and their depredations are the cause
of much loss to the natives, who, however, being Mahommedans, to whom
pork is abhorrent, do not hunt them for the sake of their flesh. Not
much less than the rhinoceros is the banteng (_Bibos banteng_ or
_sundaicus_) found in all the uninhabited districts between 2000 and
7000 ft. of elevation. The kidang or muntjak (_Cervulus muntjac_) and
the rusa or russa (_Rusa hippelaphus_ or _Russa russa_) are the
representatives of the deer kind. The former is a delicate little
creature occurring singly or in pairs both in the mountains and in the
coast districts; the latter lives in herds of fifty to a hundred in
the grassy opens, giving excellent sport to the native hunters.
Another species (_Russa kuhlii_) exists in Bavian. The kantjil
(_Tragulus javanicus_) is a small creature allied to the musk-deer but
forming a genus by itself. It lives in the high woods, for the most
part singly, seldom in pairs. It is one of the most peculiar of the
Javanese mammals. The royal tiger, the same species as that of India,
is still common enough to make a tiger-hunt a characteristic Javanese
scene. The leopard (_Felis pardus_) is frequent in the warm regions
and often ascends to considerable altitudes. Black specimens
occasionally occur, but the spots are visible on inspection; and the
fact that in the Amsterdam zoological gardens a black leopard had one
of its cubs black and the other normally spotted shows that this is
only a case of melanism. In the tree-tops the birds find a dangerous
enemy in the matjan rembak, or wild cat (_Felis minuta_), about the
size of a common cat. The dog tribe is represented by the fox-like
adjag (_Cuon_ or _Canis sutilans_) which hunts in ferocious packs; and
by a wild dog, _Canis tenggeranus_, if this is not now exterminated.
The Cheiroptera hold a prominent place in the fauna, the principal
genera being _Pteropus_, _Cynonycteris_, _Cynopterus_ and
_Macroglossus_. Remarkable especially for size is the kalong, or
flying fox, _Pteropus edulis_, a fruit-eating bat, which may be seen
hanging during the day in black clusters asleep on the trees, and in
the evening hastening in long lines to the favourite feeding grounds
in the forest. The damage these do to the young coco-nut trees, the
maize and the sugar-palms leads the natives to snare and shoot them;
and their flesh is a favourite food with Europeans, who prefer to
shoot them by night as, if shot by day, they often cling after death
to the branches. Smaller kinds of bats are most abundant, perhaps the
commonest being _Scotophilus Temminckii_. In certain places they
congregate in myriads, like sea-fowl on the cliffs, and their
excrement produces extensive guano deposits utilized by the people of
Surakarta and Madiun. The creature known to the Europeans as the
flying-cat and to the natives as the kubin is the _Galeopithecus
volans_ or _variagatus_--a sort of transition from the bats to the
lemuroids. Of these last Java has several species held in awe by the
natives for their supposed power of fascination. The apes are
represented by the wou-wou (_Hylobates leuciscus_), the lutung, and
kowi (_Semnopithecus maurus_ and _pyrrhus_), the surili
(_Semnopithecus mitratus_), and the munyuk (_Cercocebus_, or _Macacus,
cynamolgos_), the most generally distributed of all. From sunrise to
sunset the wou-wou makes its presence known, especially in the second
zone where it congregates in the trees, by its strange cry, at times
harsh and cacophonous, at times weird and pathetic. The lutung or
black ape also prefers the temperate region, though it is met with as
high as 7000 ft. above the sea and as low as 2000. The _Cercocebus_ or
grey ape keeps for the most part to the warm coast lands. Rats
(including the brown Norway rat, often called _Mus javanicus_, as if
it were a native; a great plague); mice in great variety; porcupines
(_Acanthion javanicum_); squirrels (five species) and flying squirrels
(four species) represent the rodents. A hare, _Lepus nigricollis_,
originally from Ceylon, has a very limited habitat; the Insectivora
comprise a shrew-mouse (_Rachyura indica_), two species of tupaya and
_Hylomys suillus_ peculiar to Java and Sumatra. The nearest relation
to the bears is _Arctictis binturong_. _Mydaus meliceps_ and _Helictis
orientalis_ represent the badgers. In the upper part of the mountains
occurs _Mustela Henrici_, and an otter (_Aonyx leptonyx_) in the
streams of the hot zone. The coffee rat (_Paradoxurus
hermaphroditus_), a civet cat (_Viverricida indica_), the Javanese
ichneumon (_Herpestes javanicus_), and _Priodon gracilis_ may also be
mentioned.
In 1820, 176 species of birds were known in Java; by 1900 Vorderman
and O. Finsch knew 410. Many of these are, of course, rare and occupy
a limited habitat far from the haunts of man. Others exist in myriads
and are characteristic features in the landscape. Water-fowl of many
kinds, ducks, geese, storks, pelicans, &c., give life to sea-shore and
lake, river and marsh. Snipe-shooting is a favourite sport. Common
night-birds are the owl (_Strix flammea_) and the goat-sucker
(_Caprimulgus affinis_). Three species of hornbill, the year-bird of
the older travellers (_Buceros plicatus_, _lunatus_ and _albirostris_)
live in the tall trees of the forest zone. The Javanese peacock is a
distinct species (_Pavo muticus_ or _spiciferus_), and even exceeds
the well-known Indian species in the splendour of its plumage. _Gallus
Bankiva_ is famous as the reputed parent of all barn-door fowls;
_Gallus furcatus_ is an exquisitely beautiful bird and can be trained
for cock-fighting. Of parrots two species only are known: _Palaeornis
Alexandri_ or _javanicus_ and the pretty little grass-green _Curyllis
pusilla_, peculiar to Java. As talkers and mimics they are beaten by
the _Gracula javanensis_, a favourite cage-bird with the natives. A
cuckoo, _Chrysococcyx basalis_, may be heard in the second zone. The
grass-fields are the foraging-grounds of swarms of weaver-birds
(_Plocula javanensis_ and _Ploccus baya_). They lay nearly as heavy a
toll on the rice-fields as the gelatiks (_Munia oryzivora_), which are
everywhere the rice-growers' principal foe. Hawks and falcons make
both an easy prey. The _Nictuarinas_ or honey-birds (eight species)
take the place of the humming-bird, which they rival in beauty and
diminutiveness, ranging from the lowlands to an altitude of 4000 ft.
In the upper regions the birds, like the plants, are more like those
of Europe, and some of them--notably the kanchilan (_Hyloterpe
Philomela_)--are remarkable for their song. The edible-nest swallow
(_Collocalia fuciphaga_) builds in caves in many parts of the
island.[8]
As far back as 1859 P. Bleeker credited Java with eleven hundred
species of fish; and naturalists are perpetually adding to the
number.[9] In splendour and grotesqueness of colouring many kinds, as
is well known, look rather like birds than fish. In the neighbourhood
of Batavia about three hundred and eighty species are used as food by
the natives and the Chinese, who have added to the number by the
introduction of the goldfish, which reaches a great size. The sea fish
most prized by Europeans is _Lates calcarifer_ (a perch). Of more than
one hundred species of snakes about twenty-four species (including
the cobra di capella) are poisonous and these are responsible for the
deaths of between one hundred and two hundred persons per annum.
Adders and lizards are abundant. Geckos are familiar visitants in the
houses of the natives. There are two species of crocodiles.
As in other tropical-rain forest lands the variety and abundance of
insects are amazing. At sundown the air becomes resonant for hours
with their myriad voices. The _Coleoptera_ and the _Lepidoptera_ form
the glory of all great collections for their size and magnificence. Of
butterflies proper five hundred species are known. Of the beetles one
of the largest and handsomest is _Chalcosoma atlas_. Among the spiders
(a numerously represented order) the most notable is a bird-killing
species, _Selene scomia javanensis_. In many parts the island is
plagued with ants, termites and mosquitoes. Crops of all kinds are
subject to disastrous attacks of creeping and winged foes--many still
unidentified (see especially Snellen van Hollenhoven, _Essai d'une
faune entomologique de l'Archipel Indo-néerlandais_). Of still lower
forms of life the profusion is no less perplexing. Among the worms the
_Perichaeta musica_ reaches a length of about twenty inches and
produces musical sounds. The shell of the _Tridacna gigas_ is the
largest anywhere known.
_Flora._--For the botanist Java is a natural paradise, affording him
the means of studying the effects of moisture and heat, of
air-currents and altitudes, without the interference of superincumbent
arctic conditions. The botanic gardens of Buitenzorg have long been
famous for their wealth of material, the ability with which their
treasures have been accumulated and displayed, their value in
connexion with the economic development of the island and the
extensive scientific literature published by their directors.[10]
There is a special establishment at Chibodas open to students of all
nations for the investigation on the spot of the conditions of the
primeval forest. Hardly any similar area in the world has a flora of
richer variety than Java. It is estimated that the total number of the
species of plants is about 5000; but this is probably under the mark
(De Candolle knew of 2605 phanerogamous species), and new genera and
species of an unexpected character are from time to time discovered.
The lower parts of the island are always in the height of summer. The
villages and even the smaller towns are in great measure concealed by
the abundant and abiding verdure; and their position in the landscape
is to be recognized mainly by their groves, orchards and cultivated
fields. The amount and distribution of heat and moisture at the
various seasons of the year form the dominant factors in determining
the character of the vegetation. Thus trees which are evergreen in
west Java are deciduous in the east of the island, some dropping their
leaves (e.g. _Tetrameles nudiflora_) at the very time they are in
bloom or ripening their fruit. This and other contrasts are
graphically described from personal observation by A. F. W. Schimper
in his _Pflanzen-Geographie auf physiologischer Grundlage_ (Jena,
1898). The abundance of epiphytes, orchids, pitcher-plants, mosses and
fungi is a striking result of the prevalent humidity; and many trees
and plants indeed, which in drier climates root in the soil, derive
sufficient moisture from their stronger neighbours. Of orchids J. J.
Smith records 562 species (100 genera), but the flowers of all except
about a score are inconspicuous. This last fact is the more remarkable
because, taken generally, the Javanese vegetation differs from that of
many other tropical countries by being abundantly and often gorgeously
floriferous. Many of the loftiest trees crown themselves with blossoms
and require no assistance from the climbing plants that seek, as it
were, to rival them in their display of colour. Shrubs, too, and
herbaceous plants often give brilliant effects in the savannahs, the
deserted clearings, the edges of the forest and the sides of the
highways. The _lantana_, a verbenaceous alien introduced, it is said,
from Jamaica by Lady Raffles, has made itself aggressively conspicuous
in many parts of the island, more especially in the Preanger and
middle Java, where it occupies areas of hundreds of acres.
The effect of mere altitude in the distribution of the flora was long
ago emphasized by Friedrich Junghuhn, the Humboldt of Java, who
divided the island into four vertical botanical zones--a division
which has generally been accepted by his successors, though, like all
such divisions, it is subject to many modifications and exceptions.
The forest, or hot zone, extends to a height of 2000 ft. above the
sea; the second, that of moderate heat, has its upper limit at about
4500; the third, or cool, zone reaches 7500; and the fourth, or
coldest, comprises all that lies beyond. The lowest zone has, of
course, the most extensive area; the second is only a fiftieth and the
third a five-thousandth of the first; and the fourth is an
insignificant remainder. The lowest is the region of the true tropical
forest, of rice-fields and sugar-plantations, of coco-nut palms,
cotton, sesamum, cinnamon and tobacco (though this last has a wide
altitudinal range). Many parts of the coast (especially on the north)
are fringed with mangrove (_Rhizophora mucronata_), &c., and species
of _Bruguiera_; the downs have their characteristic flora--convolvulus
and _Spinifex squarrosus_ catching the eye for very different
reasons. Farther inland along the seaboard appear the nipa dwarf palm
(_Nipa fruticans_), the _Alsbonia scholaris_ (the wood of which is
lighter than cork), Cycadacea, tree-ferns, screw pines (_Pandanus_),
&c. In west Java the gebang palm (_Corypha gebanga_) grows in clumps
and belts not far from but never quite close to the coast; and in east
Java a similar position is occupied by the lontar (_Borassus
flabelliformis_), valuable for its timber, its sago and its sugar, and
in former times for its leaves, which were used as a writing-material.
The fresh-water lakes and ponds of this region are richly covered with
Utricularia and various kinds of lotus (_Nymphaea lotus_, _N.
stellata_, _Nelumbium speciosum_, &c.) interspersed with _Pista
stratiotes_ and other floating plants. Vast prairies are covered with
the silvery alang-alang grass broken by bamboo thickets, clusters of
trees and shrubs (_Butea frondosa_, _Emblica officinalis_, &c.) and
islands of the taller erigedeh or glagah (_Saccharum spontaneum_).
Alang-alang (_Imperata arundinacea_, Cyr. var. Bentham) grows from 1
to 4 ft. in height. It springs up wherever the ground is cleared of
trees and is a perfect plague to the cultivator. It cannot hold its
own, however, with the ananas, the kratok (_Phaseolus lunatus_) or the
lantana; and, in the natural progress of events, the forest resumes
its sway except where the natives encourage the young growth of the
grass by annually setting the prairies on fire. The true forest, which
occupies a great part of this region, changes its character as we
proceed from west to east. In west Java it is a dense rain-forest in
which the struggle of existence is maintained at high pressure by a
host of lofty trees and parasitic plants in bewildering profusion. The
preponderance of certain types is remarkable. Thus of the Moraceae
there are in Java (and mostly here) seven genera with ninety-five
species, eighty-three of which are _Ficus_ (see S. H. Koorders and T.
Valeton, "Boomsoorten op Java" in _Bijdr. Mede. Dep. Landbower_
(1906). These include the so-called waringin, several kinds of figs
planted as shade-trees in the parks of the nobles and officials. The
Magnoliaceae and Anonaceae are both numerously represented. In middle
Java the variety of trees is less, a large area being occupied by
teak. In eastern Java the character of the forest is mainly determined
by the abundance of the Casuarina or Chimoro (_C. montana_ and _C.
Junghuhniana_). Another species, _C. equisetifolia_, is planted in
west Java as an ornamental tree. These trees are not crowded together
and encumbered with the heavy parasitic growths of the rain-forest;
but their tall stems are often covered with multitudes of small
vermilion fungi. Wherever the local climate has sufficient humidity,
the true rain-forest claims its own. The second of Junghuhn's zones is
the region of, more especially, tea, cinchona and coffee plantations,
of maize and the sugar palm (areng). In the forest the trees are
richly clad with ferns and enormous fungi; there is a profusion of
underwood (_Pavetta macrophylla Javanica_ and _salicifolia_; several
species of _Lasianthus_, _Boehmarias_, _Strobilanthus_, &c.), of woody
lianas and ratans, of tree ferns (especially Alsophila). Between the
bushes the ground is covered with ferns, lycopods, tradescantias,
Bignoniaceae, species of _Aeschynanthus_. Of the lianas the largest is
_Plectocomia elongata_; one specimen of which was found to have a
length of nearly 790 ft. One of the fungi, _Telephora princeps_, is
more than a yard in diameter. The trees are of different species from
those of the hot zone even when belonging to the same genus; and new
types appear mostly in limited areas. The third zone, which consists
mainly of the upper slopes of volcanic mountains, but also comprises
several plateaus (the Dieng, parts of the Tengger, the Ijen) is a
region of clouds and mists. There are a considerable number of lakes
and swamps in several parts of the region, and these have a luxuriant
environment of grasses, Cyperaceae, Characeae and similar forms. The
taller trees of the region--oaks, chestnuts, various Lauraceae, and
four or five species of _Podocarpus_--with some striking exceptions,
_Astronia spectabilis_, &c., are less floriferous than those of the
lower zones; but the shrubs (_Rhododendron javanicum_, _Ardisia
javanica_, &c.), herbs and parasites more than make up for this
defect. There is little cultivation, except in the Tengger, where the
natives grow maize, rye and tobacco, and various European vegetables
(cabbage, potatoes, &c.), with which they supply the lowland markets.
In western Java one of the most striking features of the upper parts
of this temperate region is what Schimper calls the "absolute dominion
of mosses," associated with the "elfin forest," as he quaintly calls
it, a perfect tangle of "low, thick, oblique or even horizontal
stems," almost choked to leaflessness by their grey and ghostly
burden. Much of the lower vegetation begins to have a European aspect;
violets, primulas, thalictrums, ranunculus, vacciniums, equisetums,
rhododendrons (_Rhod. retusum_). The _Primula imperialis_, found only
on the Pangerango, is a handsome species, prized by specialists. In
the fourth or alpine zone occur such distinctly European forms as
_Artemisia vulgaris_, _Plantago major_, _Solanum nigrum_, _Stellaria
media_; and altogether the alpine flora contains representatives of no
fewer than thirty-three families. A characteristic shrub is _Anaphalis
javanica_, popularly called the Javanese edelweiss, which "often
entirely excludes all other woody plants."[11] The tallest and noblest
of all the trees in the island is the rasamala or liquid-ambar
(_Altingia excelsa_), which, rising with a straight clean trunk,
sometimes 6 ft. in diameter at the base, to a height of 100 to 130
ft., spreads out into a magnificent crown of branches and foliage.
When by chance a climbing plant has joined partnership with it, the
combination of blossoms at the top is one of the finest colour effects
of the forest. The rasamala, however, occurs only in the Preanger and
in the neighbouring parts of Bantam and Buitenzorg. Of the other trees
that may be classified as timber--from 300 to 400 species--many attain
noble proportions. It is sufficient to mention _Calophyllum
inophyllum_, which forms fine woods in the south of Bantam, _Mimusops
acuminata_, _Irna glabra_, _Dalbergia latifolia_ (sun wood, English
black-wood) in middle and east Java; the rare but splendid
_Pithecolobium Junghuhnianum_; _Schima Noronhae_, _Bischofia
javanica_, _Pterospermum javanicum_ (greatly prized for
ship-building), and the upas-tree. From the economic point of view all
these hundreds of trees are of less importance than _Tectona grandis_,
the jati or teak, which, almost to the exclusion of all others,
occupies about a third of the government forest-lands. It grows best
in middle and eastern Java, preferring the comparatively dry and hot
climate of the plains and lower hills to a height of about 2000 ft.
above the sea, and thriving best in more or less calciferous soils. In
June it sheds its leaves and begins to bud again in October.
Full-grown trees reach a height of 100 to 150 ft. In 1895 teak (with a
very limited quantity of other timber) was felled to the value of
about £101,800, and in 1904 the corresponding figure was about
£119,935.
That an island which has for so long maintained a dense and growing
population in its more cultivable regions should have such extensive
tracts of primeval or quasi-primeval forest as have been above
indicated would be matter of surprise to one who did not consider the
simplicity of the life of the Javanese. They require but little fuel;
and both their dwellings and their furniture are mostly constructed of
bamboo supplemented with a palm or two. They destroy the forest mainly
to get room for their rice-fields and pasture for their cattle. In
doing this, however, they are often extremely reckless and wasteful;
and if it had not been for the unusual humidity of the climate their
annual fires would have resulted in widespread conflagrations. As it
is, many mountains are now bare which within historic times were
forested to the top; but the Dutch government has proved fully alive
to the danger of denudation. The state has control of all the woods
and forests of the island with the exception of those of the Preanger,
the "particular lands," and Madura; and it has long been engaged in
replanting with native trees and experimenting with aliens from other
parts of the world--_Eucalyptus globulus_, the juar, _Cassia florida_
from Sumatra, the surian (_Cedrela febrifuga_), &c. The greatest
success has been with cinchona.
Left to itself Java would soon clothe itself again with even a richer
natural vegetation than it had when it was first occupied by man. The
open space left by the demolition of the fortifications on Nusa
Kambangan was in twenty-eight years densely covered by thousands of
shrubs and trees of about twenty varieties, many of the latter 80 ft.
high. Resident Snijthoff succeeded about the close of the 19th century
in re-afforesting a large part of Mount Muriå by the simple expedient
of protecting the territory he had to deal with from all encroachments
by natives.[12]
_Population._--The population of Java (including Madura, &c.) was
30,098,008 in 1905. In 1900 it was 28,746,688; in 1890, 23,912,564; and
in 1880, 19,794,505. The natives consist of the Javanese proper, the
Sundanese and the Madurese. All three belong to the Malay stock. Between
Javanese and Sundanese the distinction is mainly due to the influence of
the Hindus on the former and the absence of this on the latter. Between
Javanese and Madurese the distinction is rather to be ascribed to
difference of natural environment. The Sundanese have best retained the
Malay type, both in physique and fashion of life. They occupy the west
of the island. The Madurese area, besides the island of Madura and
neighbouring isles, includes the eastern part of Java itself. The
residencies of Tegal, Pekalongan, Banyumas, Bagelen, Kedu, Semarang,
Japara, Surakarta, Jokjakarta, Rembang, Madiun, Kediri and Surabaya have
an almost purely Javanese population. The Javanese are the most numerous
and civilized of the three peoples.
The colour of the skin in all three cases presents various shades of
yellowish-brown; and it is observed that, owing perhaps to the Hindu
strain, the Javanese are generally darker than the Sundanese. The eyes
are always brown or black, the hair of the head black, long, lank and
coarse. Neither breast nor limbs are provided with hair, and there is
hardly even the suggestion of a beard. In stature the Sundanese is less
than the Javanese proper, being little over 5 ft. in average height,
whereas the Javanese is nearly 5½ ft.; at the same time the Sundanese is
more stoutly built. The Madurese is as tall as the Javanese, and as
stout as the Sundanese. The eye is usually set straight in the head in
the Javanese and Madurese; among the Sundanese it is often oblique. The
nose is generally flat and small, with wide nostrils, although among the
Javanese it not infrequently becomes aquiline. The lips are thick, yet
well formed; the teeth are naturally white, but often filed and stained.
The cheek-bones are well developed, more particularly with the Madurese.
In expressiveness of countenance the Javanese and Madurese are far in
advance of the Sundanese. The women are not so well made as the men, and
among the lower classes especially soon grow absolutely ugly. In the
eyes of the Javanese a golden yellow complexion is the perfection of
female beauty. To judge by their early history, the Javanese must have
been a warlike and vigorous people, but now they are peaceable, docile,
sober, simple and industrious.
One million only out of the twenty-six millions of natives are
concentrated in towns, a fact readily explained by their sources of
livelihood. The great bulk of the population is distributed over the
country in villages usually called by Europeans dessas, from the Low
Javanese word _déså_ (High Javanese _dusun_). Every dessa, however small
(and those containing from 100 to 1000 families are exceptionally
large), forms an independent community; and no sooner does it attain to
any considerable size than it sends off a score of families or so to
form a new dessa. Each lies in the midst of its own area of cultivation.
The general enceinte is formed by an impervious hedge of bamboos 40 to
70 ft. high. Within this lie the houses, each with its own enclosure,
which, even when the fields are the communal property, belongs to the
individual householder. The capital of a district is only a larger
dessa, and that of a regency has the same general type, but includes
several kampongs or villages. The bamboo houses in the strictly Javanese
districts are always built on the ground; in the Sunda lands they are
raised on piles. Some of the well-to-do, however, have stone houses. The
principal article of food is rice; a considerable quantity of fish is
eaten, but little meat. Family life is usually well ordered. The upper
class practise polygamy, but among the common people a man has generally
only one wife. The Javanese are nominally Mahommedans, as in former
times they were Buddhists and Brahmins; but in reality, not only such
exceptional groups as the Kalangs of Surakarta and Jokjakarta and the
Baduwis or nomad tribes of Bantam, but the great mass of the people must
be considered as believers rather in the primitive animism of their
ancestors, for their belief in Islam is overlaid with superstition. As
we ascend in the social scale, however, we find the name of Mahommedan
more and more applicable; and consequently in spite of the paganism of
the populace the influence of the Mahommedan "priests" (this is their
official title in Dutch) is widespread and real. Great prestige attaches
to the pilgrimage to Mecca, which was made by 5068 persons from Java in
1900. In every considerable town there is a mosque. Christian missionary
work is not very widely spread.
_Languages._--In spite of Sundanese, Madurese and the intrusive Malay,
Javanese has a right to the name. It is a rich and cultivated language
which has passed through many stages of development and, under
peculiar influences, has become a linguistic complex of an almost
unique kind. Though it is customary and convenient to distinguish New
Javanese from Kavi or Old Javanese, just as it was customary to
distinguish English from Anglo-Saxon, there is no break of historical
continuity. Kavi (Basa Kavi, i.e. the language of poetry) may be
defined as the form spoken and written before the founding of
Majapahit; and middle Javanese, still represented by the dialect of
Banyumas, north Cheribon, north Krawang and north Bantam, as the form
the language assumed under the Majapahit court influence; while New
Javanese is the language as it has developed since the fall of that
kingdom. Kavi continued to be a literary language long after it had
become archaic. It contains more Sanskrit than any other language of
the archipelago. New Javanese breaks up into two great varieties, so
different that sometimes they are regarded as two distinct languages.
The nobility use one form, Kråmå; the common people another, Ngoko,
the "thouing" language (cf. Fr. _tutoyant_, Ger. _dutzend_); but each
class understands the language of the other class. The aristocrat
speaks to the commonalty in the language of the commoner; the
commoner speaks to the aristocracy in the language of the aristocrat;
and, according to clearly recognized etiquette, every Javanese plays
the part of aristocrat or commoner towards those whom he addresses. To
speak Ngoko to a superior is to insult him; to speak Kråmå to an equal
or inferior is a mark of respect. In this way Dipå Negårå showed his
contempt for the Dutch General de Kock. The ordinary Javanese thinks
in Ngoko; the children use it to each other, and so on. Between the
two forms there is a kind of compromise, the Madya, or middle form of
speech, employed by those who stand to each other on equal or friendly
footing or by those who feel little constraint of etiquette. For every
idea expressed in the language Kråmå has one vocable, the Ngoko
another, the two words being sometimes completely different and
sometimes differing only in the termination, the beginning or the
middle. Thus every Javanese uses, as it were, two or even three
languages delicately differentiated from each other. How this state of
affairs came about is matter of speculation. Almost certainly the
existence side by side of two peoples, speaking each its own tongue,
and occupying towards each other the position intellectually and
politically of superior and inferior, had much to do with it. But
Professor Kern thinks that some influence must also be assigned to
_pamela_ or _pantang_, word-taboo--certain words being in certain
circumstances regarded as of evil omen--a superstition still
lingering, e.g. even among the Shetland fishermen (see G. A. F. Hazeu,
_De taal pantangs_). It has sometimes been asserted that Kråmå
contains more Sanskrit words than Ngoko does; but the total number in
Kråmå does not exceed 20; and sometimes there is a Sanskrit word in
Ngoko which is not in Kråmå. There is a village Kråmå which is not
recognized by the educated classes: Kråmå inggil, with a vocabulary of
about 300 words, is used in addressing the deity or persons of exalted
rank. The Basa Kedaton or court language is a dialect used by all
living at court except royalties, who use Ngoko. Among themselves the
women of the court employ Kråmå or Madya, but they address the men in
Basa Kedaton.[13]
_Literature._--Though a considerable body of Kavi literature is still
extant, nothing like a history of it is possible. The date and
authorship of most of the works are totally unknown. The first place
may be assigned to the _Brata Yuda_ (Sansk., _Bharata Yudha_, the
conflict of the Bharatas), an epic poem dealing with the struggle
between the Pandåwås and the Koråwas for the throne of Ngastina
celebrated in parwas 5-10 of the _Mahabharata_. To the conception,
however, of the modern Javanese it is a purely native poem; its kings
and heroes find their place in the native history and serve as
ancestors to their noble families. (Cohen Stuart published the modern
Javanese version with a Dutch translation and notes, _Bråtå-Joedå_,
&c., Samarang, 1877. The Kavi text was lithographed at the Hague by S.
Lankhout.) Of greater antiquity probably is the _Ardjunå Wiwåhå_ (or
marriage festival of Ardjuna), which Professor Kern thinks may be
assigned to the first half of the 11th century of the Christian era.
The name indicates its _Mahabharata_ origin. (Friederich published the
Kavi text from a Bali MS., and _Wiwåhå Djarwa en Bråtå Joedo Kawi_,
lithographed facsimiles of two palm-leaf MSS., Batavia, 1878. Djarwa
is the name of the poetic diction of modern Javanese.) The oldest poem
of which any trace is preserved is probably the mythological _Kåndå_
(i.e. tradition); the contents are to some extent known from the
modern Javanese version. In the literature of modern Javanese there
exists a great variety of so-called _babads_ or chronicles. It is
sufficient to mention the "history" of Baron Sakender, which appears
to give an account--often hardly recognizable--of the settlement of
Europeans in Java (Cohen Stuart published text and translation,
Batavia, 1851; J. Veth gives an analysis of the contents), and the
_Babad Tanah Djawi_ (the Hague, 1874, 1877), giving the history of the
island to 1647 of the Javanese era. Even more numerous are the
_wayangs_ or puppet-plays which usually take their subjects from the
Hindu legends or from those relating to the kingdoms of Majapahit and
Pajajaram (see e.g. H. C. Humme, _Abiåså, een Javaansche toneelstuk_,
the Hague, 1878). In these plays grotesque figures of gilded leather
are moved by the performer, who recites the appropriate speeches and,
as occasion demands, plays the part of chorus.
Several Javanese specimens are also known of the beast fable, which
plays so important a part in Sanskrit literature (W. Palmer van den
Broek, _Javaansche Vertellingen, bevattende de lotgevallen van een
kantjil, een reebok_, &c., the Hague, 1878). To the Hindu-Javanese
literature there naturally succeeded a Mahommedan-Javanese literature
consisting largely of translations or imitations of Arabic originals;
it comprises religious romances, moral exhortations and mystical
treatises in great variety.[14]
_Arts._--In mechanic arts the Javanese are in advance of the other
peoples of the archipelago. Of thirty different crafts practised among
them, the most important are those of the blacksmith or cutler, the
carpenter, the kris-sheath maker, the coppersmith, the goldsmith and
the potter. Their skill in the working of the metals is the more
noteworthy as they have to import the raw materials. The most esteemed
product of the blacksmith's skill is the kris; every man and boy above
the age of fourteen wears one at least as part of his ordinary dress,
and men of rank two and sometimes four. In the finishing and adornment
of the finer weapons no expense is spared; and ancient krises of good
workmanship sometimes fetch enormous prices. The Javanese gold and
silver work possesses considerable beauty, but there is nothing equal
to the filigree of Sumatra; the brass musical instruments are of
exceptional excellence. Both bricks and tiles are largely made, as
well as a coarse unglazed pottery similar to that of Hindustan; but
all the finer wares are imported from China. Cotton spinning, weaving
and dyeing are carried on for the most part as purely domestic
operations by the women. The usual mode of giving variety of colour is
by weaving in stripes with a succession of different coloured yarns,
but another mode is to cover with melted wax or damar the part of the
cloth not intended to receive the dye. This process is naturally a
slow one, and has to be repeated according to the number of colours
required. As a consequence the _battiks_, as the cloths thus treated
are called, are in request by the wealthier classes. For the most part
quiet colours are preferred. To the Javanese of the present day the
ancient buildings of the Hindu periods are the work of supernatural
power. Except when employed by his European master he seldom builds
anything more substantial than a bamboo or timber framework; but in
the details of such erections he exhibits both skill and taste. When
Europeans first came to the island they found native vessels of large
size well entitled to the name of ships; and, though ship-building
proper is now carried on only under the direction of Europeans,
boat-building is a very extensive native industry along the whole of
the north coast--the boats sometimes reaching a burden of 50 tons. The
only one of the higher arts which the Javanese have carried to any
degree of perfection is music; and in regard to the value of their
efforts in this direction Europeans differ greatly. The orchestra
(_gamelan_) consists of wind, string and percussion instruments, the
latter being in preponderancy to the other two. (Details of the
instruments will be found in Raffles' _Java_, and a description of a
performance in the _Tour du monde_, 1880.)
_Chief Towns and Places of Note._--The capital of Java and of the
Dutch East India possessions is Batavia (q.v.), pop. 115,567. At
Meester Cornelis (pop. 33,119), between 6 and 7 m. from Batavia on the
railway to Buitenzorg, the battle was fought in 1811 which placed Java
in the hands of the British. In the vicinity lies Depok, originally a
Christian settlement of freed slaves, but now with about 3000
Mahommedan inhabitants and only 500 Christians. The other chief towns,
from west to east through the island, are as follows: Serang (pop.
5600) bears the same relation to Bantam, about 6 m. distant, which New
Batavia bears to Old Batavia, its slight elevation of 100 ft. above
the sea making it fitter for European occupation. Anjer (Angerlor,
Anger) lies 96 m. from Batavia by rail on the coast at the narrowest
part of the Sunda Strait; formerly European vessels were wont to call
there for fresh provisions and water. Pandeglang (pop. 3644), 787 ft.
above sea-level, is known for its hot and cold sulphur springs. About
17 m. west of Batavia lies Tangerang (pop. 13,535), a busy place with
about 2800 or 3000 Chinese among its inhabitants. Buitenzorg (q.v.) is
the country-seat of the governor-general, and its botanic gardens are
famous. Krawang, formerly chief town of the residency of that
name--the least populous of all--has lost its importance since
Purwakerta (pop. 6862) was made the administrative centre. At Wanyasa
in the neighbourhood the first tea plantations were attempted on a
large scale.
The Preanger regencies--Bandung, Chanjur, Sukabumi, Sumedang, Garut
and Tasikmalaya--constitute the most important of all the residencies,
though owing to their lack of harbour on the south and the intractable
nature of much of their soil they have not shared in the prosperity
enjoyed by many other parts of the island. Bandung, the chief town
since 1864, lies 2300 ft. above sea-level, 109 m. south of Batavia by
rail; it is a well-built and flourishing place (pop. 28,965; Europeans
1522, Chinese 2650) with a handsome resident's house (1867), a large
mosque (1867), a school for the sons of native men of rank, the most
important quinine factory in the island, and a race-course where in
July a good opportunity is afforded of seeing both the life of
fashionable and official Java and the customs and costumes of the
common people. The district is famous for its waterfalls, one of the
most remarkable of which is where the Chi Tarum rushes through a
narrow gully to leap down from the Bandung plateau. In the
neighbourhood is the great military camp of Chimahi. Chanjur, formerly
the chief town, in spite of its loss of administrative position still
has a population of 13,599. From Sukabumi (pop. 12,112; 569
Europeans), a pleasant health resort among the hills at an altitude of
1965 ft., tourists are accustomed to visit Wijnkoopers Bay for the
sake of the picturesque shore scenery. Chichalengka became after 1870
one of the centres of the coffee industry. Sumedang has only 8013
inhabitants, having declined since the railway took away the highway
traffic: it is exceeded both by Garut (10,647) and by Tasikmalaya
(9196), but it is a beautiful place well known to sportsmen for its
proximity to the Rancha Ekek swamp, where great snipe-shooting matches
are held every year. For natural beauty few parts of Java can compare
with the plain of Tasikmalaya, itself remarkable, in a country of
trees, for its magnificent avenues. N.E. of the Preanger lies the
residency of Cheribon[15] (properly Chi Rebon, the shrimp river). The
chief town (pop. 24,564) is one of the most important places on the
north coast, though the unhealthiness of the site has caused Europeans
to settle at Tangkil, 2 m. distant. The church (1842), the regent's
residence, and the great prison are among the principal buildings;
there are also extensive salt warehouses. The native part of the town
is laid out more regularly than is usual, and the Chinese quarter
(pop. 3352) has the finest Chinese temple in Java. The palaces of the
old sultans of Cheribon are less extensive than those of Surakarta and
Jokjakarta. Though the harbour has to be kept open by constant
dredging the roadstead is good all the year round. A strange pleasure
palace of Sultan Supeh, often described by travellers, lies about 2 m.
off near Sunya Raja. Mundu, a village 4 m. south-east of Cheribon, is
remarkable as the only spot on the north coast of the island visited
by the ikan prut or belly-fish, a species about as large as a cod,
caught in thousands and salted by the local fishermen. Indramayu,
which lies on both banks of the Chi Manuk about 8 m. from the coast,
is mentioned under the name of Dermayo as a port for the rice of the
district and the coffee of the Preanger. The coffee trade is extinct
but the rice trade is more flourishing than ever, and the town has
13,400 inhabitants, of whom 2200 are Chinese. It might have a great
commercial future if money could be found for the works necessary to
overcome the disadvantage of its position--the roads being safe only
during the east monsoon and the river requiring to be deepened and
regulated. Tegal has long been one of the chief towns of Java:
commerce, native trade and industry, and fisheries are all well
represented and the sugar factories give abundant employment to the
inhabitants. The harbour has been the object of various improvements
since 1871. The whole district is densely populated (3100 to the sq.
m.) and the town proper with its 16,665 inhabitants is surrounded by
extensive kampongs (Balapulang, Lebaksiu, &c.). In Pekalongan (pop.
38,211) and Batang (21,286) the most important industry is the
production of battiks and stamped cloths; there are also iron-works
and sugar factories. The two towns are only some 5 m. apart. The
former has a large mosque, a Protestant church, an old fort and a
large number of European houses. The Chinese quarters consist of neat
stone or brick buildings. Pekalongan smoked ducks are well known.
Brebes (13,474) on the Pamali is an important trade centre. Banyumas
(5000) is the seat of a resident; it is exceeded by Purwokerto
(12,610), Purbalinggo (12,094) and Chilachap (12,000). This last
possesses the best harbour on the south coast, and but for malaria
would have been an important place. It was chosen as the seat of a
great military establishment but had to be abandoned, the fort being
blown up in 1893. Semarang (pop. 89,286, of whom 4800 are Europeans
and 12,372 Chinese) lies on the Kali Ngaran near the centre of the
north coast. Up to 1824 the old European town was surrounded by a wall
and ditch. It was almost the exact reproduction of a Dutch town
without the slightest accommodation to the exigencies of the climate,
the streets narrow and irregular. The modern town is well laid out.
Among the more noteworthy buildings of Semarang are the old Prince of
Orange fort, the resident's house, the Roman Catholic church, the
Protestant church, the mosque, the military hospital. A new impulse to
the growth of the town was given by the opening of the railway to
Surakarta and Jokjakarta in 1875. As a seaport the place is
unfortunately situated. The river has long been silted up; the
roadstead is insecure in the west monsoon. After many delays an
artificial canal, begun in 1858, became available as a substitute for
the river; but further works are necessary. A second great canal to
the east, begun in 1896, helps to prevent inundations and thus improve
the healthiness of the town. Demak, 13 m. N.E. of Semarang, though
situated in a wretched region of swamps and having only 5000
inhabitants, is famous in ancient Javanese history. The mosque,
erected by the first sultan of Demak, was rebuilt in 1845; only a
small part of the old structure has been preserved, but as a sanctuary
it attracts 6000 or 7000 pilgrims annually. To visit Demak seven times
has the same ceremonial value as the pilgrimage to Mecca. The tombs of
several of the sultans are still extant. Salatiga ("three stones,"
with allusion to three temples now destroyed) was in early times one
of the resting places of ambassadors proceeding to the court of
Mataram, and in the European history of Java its name is associated
with the peace of 1755 and the capitulation of 1811. It is the seat of
a cavalry and artillery camp. Its population, about 10,000, seems to
be declining. Ambarawa with its railway station is, on the other hand,
rapidly increasing. Its population of 14,745 includes 459 Europeans.
About a mile to the N. lies the fortress of Willem I. which Van den
Bosch meant to make the centre of the Javanese system of defensive
works; the Banyubiru military camp is in the neighbourhood. Kendal
(15,000) is a centre of the sugar industry. Kudus (31,000; 4300
Chinese) has grown to be one of the most important inland towns. Its
cloth and battik pedlars are known throughout the island and the
success of their enterprise is evident in the style of their houses. A
good trade is also carried on in cattle, kapok, copra, pottery and all
sorts of small wares. The mosque in the old town has interesting
remains of Majapahit architecture; and the tomb of Pangeran Kudus is a
noted Mahommedan sanctuary. A steam tramway leads northward towards,
but does not reach Japara, which in the 17th century was the chief
port of the kingdom of Mataram and retained its commercial importance
till the Dutch Company removed its establishment to Semarang. In 1818
Daendels transferred its resident to Pati. Ungaran, 1026 ft. above the
sea, was a place of importance as early as the 17th century, and in
modern times has become known as a sanatorium. Rembang, a well-built
coast town and the seat of a resident, has grown rapidly to have a
population of 29,538 with 210 Europeans. Very similar to each other
are Surakarta or Solo and Jokjakarta, the chief towns of the
quasi-independent states or Vorstenlanden. Surakarta (pop. 109,459;
Chinese 5159, Europeans 1913) contains the palace (Kraton, locally
called the Bata bumi) of the susuhunan (which the Dutch translated as
emperor), the dalem of Prince Mangku Negårå, the residences of the
Solo nobles, a small Dutch fort (Vastenburg), a great mosque, an old
Dutch settlement, and a Protestant church. Here the susuhunan lives in
Oriental pomp and state. To visitors there are few more interesting
entertainments than those afforded by the celebration of the 31st of
August (the birthday of the queen of the Netherlands) or of the New
Year and the Puasa festivals, with their wayungs, ballet-dancers, and
so on. Jokjakarta (35 m. S.) has been a great city since Mangku Bumi
settled there in 1755. The Kraton has a circuit of 3½ m., and is a
little town in itself with the palace proper, the residences of the
ladies of the court and kampongs for the hereditary smiths,
carpenters, sculptors, masons, payong-makers, musical instrument
makers, &c., &c., of his highness. The independent Prince Paku Alam
has a palace of his own. As in Surakarta there are an old Dutch town
and a fort. The Jogka market is one of the most important of all Java,
especially for jewelry. The total population is 72,235 with 1424
Europeans. To the south-east lies Pasar Gedeh, a former capital of
Mataram, with tombs of the ancient princes in the Kraton, a favourite
residence of wealthy Javanese traders. Surabaya (q.v.), on the strait
of Madura, is the largest commercial town in Java. Its population
increased from 118,000 in 1890 to 146,944 in 1900 (8906 Europeans). To
the north lies Grissee or Gresih (25,688 inhabitants) with a fairly
good harbour and of special interest in the early European history of
Java. Inland is the considerable town of Lamongan (12,485
inhabitants). Fifteen m. S. by rail lies Sidoarjo (10,207; 185
Europeans), the centre of one of the most densely populated districts
and important as a railway junction. In the neighbourhood is the
populous village of Mojosari. Pasuruan was until modern times one of
the chief commercial towns in Java, the staple being sugar. Since the
opening of the railway to Surabaya it has greatly declined, and its
warehouses and dwelling-houses are largely deserted. The population is
27,152 with 663 Europeans. Probolinggo (called by the natives Banger)
is a place of 13,240 inhabitants. The swampy tracts in the vicinity
are full of fishponds. The baths of Banyubiru (blue water) to the
south have Hindu remains much visited by devotees. Pasirian in the far
south of the residency is a considerable market town and the terminus
of a branch railway. Besuki, the easternmost of all the residencies,
contains several places of some importance; the chief town Bondowoso
(8289); Besuki, about the same size, but with no foreign trade;
Jember, a small but rapidly increasing place, and Banyuwangi (17,559).
This last was at one time the seat of the resident, now the eastern
terminus of the railway system, and is a seaport on the Bali Strait
with an important office of the telegraph company controlling
communication with Port Darwin and Singapore. It has a very mingled
population, besides Javanese and Madurese, Chinese and Arabs,
Balinese, Buginese and Europeans. The chief town of Kediri (10,489) is
the only residency town in the interior traversed by a navigable
river, and is exceeded by Tulungagung; and the residency of Madiun has
two considerable centres of population: Madiun (21,168) and Ponorogo
(16,765).
_Agriculture._--About 40% of the soil of Java is under cultivation.
Bantam and Besuki have each 16% of land under cultivation; Krawang,
21%; Preanger, 23%; Rembang, 30%; Japara, 62%; Surabaya, 65%; Kedu,
66%; Samarang, 67%. Proceeding along the south coast from its west
end, we find that in Bantam all the land cultivated on its south shore
amounts to at most but 5% of that regency; in Preanger and Banyumas,
as far as Chilachap, the land under cultivation amounts at a maximum
to 20%. East of Surakarta the percentages of land on the south coast
under cultivation decline from 30 to 20 and 10. East of the residency
of Probolinggo the percentage of land cultivated on the south coast
sinks to as low as 2. On the north coast, in Krawang and Rembang, with
their morasses and double chains of chalk, there are districts with
only 20% and 10% of the soil under cultivation. In the residencies, on
the other hand, of Batavia, Cheribon, Tegal, Samarang, Japara,
Surabaya and Pasuruan, there are districts having 80% to 90% of soil,
and even more, under cultivation.
The agricultural products of Java must be distinguished into those
raised by the natives for their own use and those raised for the
government and private proprietors. The land assigned to the natives
for their own culture and use amounts to about 9,625,000 acres. In
western Java the prevailing crop is rice, less prominently cultivated
in middle Java, while in eastern Java and Madura other articles of
food take the first rank. The Javanese tell strange legends concerning
the introduction of rice, and observe various ceremonies in connexion
with its planting, paying more regard to them than to the proper
cultivation of the cereal. The agricultural produce grown on the lands
of the government and private proprietors, comprising an area of about
3½ million acres, consists of sugar, cinchona, coffee, tobacco, tea,
indigo, &c. The Javanese possess buffaloes, ordinary cattle, horses,
dogs and cats. The buffalo was probably introduced by the Hindus. As
in agricultural products, so also in cattle-rearing, western Java is
distinguished from middle and eastern Java. The average distribution
of buffaloes is 106 per 1000 inhabitants, but it varies considerably
in different districts, being greatest in western Java. The fact that
rice is the prevailing culture in the west, while in eastern Java
other plants constitute the chief produce, explains the larger number
of buffaloes found in western Java, these animals being more in
requisition in the culture of rice. The ordinary cattle are of mixed
race; the Indian zebu having been crossed with the banting and with
European cattle of miscellaneous origin. The horses, though small, are
of excellent character, and their masters, according to their own
ideas, are extremely particular in regard to purity of race. Riding
comes naturally to the Javanese; horse-races and tournays have been in
vogue among them from early times.
Coffee is an alien in Java. Specimens brought in 1696 from Cannanore
on the Malabar coast perished in an earthquake and floods in 1699; the
effective introduction of the precious shrub was due to Hendrik
Zwaardekron (see N. P. van den Berg, "Voortbrenging en verbruck van
koffie," _Tijdschrift v. Nijverh. en Landb._ 1879; and the article
"Koffie" in _Encyc. Ned. Ind._ Wiji kawih is mentioned in a Kavi
inscription of A.D. 856, and the bean-broth in David Tappen's list of
Javanese beverages, 1667-1682, may have been coffee). The first
consignment of coffee (894 lb.) to the Netherlands was made in
1711-1712, but it was not till after 1721 that the yearly exports
reached any considerable amount. The aggregate quantity sold in the
home market from 1711 to 1791 was 2,036,437 piculs, or on an average
about 143 tons per annum; and this probably represented nearly the
whole production of the island. By the beginning of the 19th century
the annual production was about 7143 tons and after the introduction
of the Van den Bosch system of forced culture a further augmentation
was effected. The forced culture system was, in 1909, however, of
little importance. Official reports show that from 1840 to 1873 the
amount ranged from 5226 tons to 7354. During the ten years 1869 to
1878 the average crop of the plantations under state control was 5226
tons, that of the private planters about 810. The government has shown
a strange reluctance to surrender the old-fashioned monopoly, but the
spirit of private enterprise has slowly gained the day. Though the
appearance of the coffee blight (_Hemileia vastatrix_) almost ruined
the industry the planters did not give in. An immune variety was
introduced from Liberia, and scientific methods of treatment have been
adopted in dealing with the plantations. In 1887, a record year, the
value of the coffee crop reached £3,083,333, and at its average it was
about £1,750,000 between 1886 and 1895. The value was only £1,166,666
in 1896. The greatest difficulties are the uncertainties both of the
crop and of its marketable value. The former is well shown in the
figures for 1903 to 1905; government 17,900, 3949 and 3511 tons, and
private planters 22,395, 15,311 and 21,395 tons. Liberia coffee is
still produced in much smaller quantity than Java coffee; the latter
on an average of these three years 21,360 tons; the former 7409.
The cultivation of sugar has been long carried on in Java, and since
the decline of the coffee plantations it has developed into the
leading industry of the island. There are experimental stations at
Pasuruan, Pekalongan and elsewhere, where attempts are made to
overcome the many diseases to which the cane is subject. Many of the
mills are equipped with high-class machinery and produce sugar of
excellent colour and grain. In 1853-1857 the average crop was 98,094
tons; in 1869-1873, 170,831, and in 1875-1880, 204,678. By 1899-1900
the average had risen to 787,673 tons; and the crops for 1904 and 1905
were respectively 1,064,935 and 1,028,357 tons. Prices fluctuate, but
the value of the harvest of 1905 was estimated at about £15,000,000.
The cultivation of indigo shows a strange vitality. Under the culture
system the natives found this the most oppressive of all the state
crops. The modern chemist at one time seemed to have killed the
industry by his synthetic substitute, but in every year between 1899
and 1904 Java exported between one million and one and a half million
pounds of the natural product. Japan and Russia were the largest
buyers. As blue is a favourite colour with the Javanese proper a large
quantity is used at home.
Tea was first introduced to Java by the Japanese scholar von Siebold
in 1826. The culture was undertaken by the state in 1829 with plants
from China, but in 1842 they handed it over to contractors, whose
attempts to increase their profits by delivering an inferior article
ultimately led to the abandonment of the contract system in 1860. In
the meantime the basis of a better state of the industry had been laid
by the Dutch tea-taster J. J. L. L. Jacobsen of the Nederlandsch
Handel Maatschappij, who introduced not only fresh stock, but expert
growers from China in 1852-1853. The tea-planters (often taking
possession of the abandoned coffee-plantations) have greatly improved
the quality of their products. Assam tea was introduced in 1878, and
this has rapidly extended its area. The exports increased from
12,110,724 lb. in 1898 to 25,772,564 in 1905. More than half the total
goes to the Netherlands; the United Kingdom ranks next, and, far
behind both, Russia.
In 1854 the government introduced the culture of cinchona with free
labour, and it had considerable success under F. Junghuhn and his
successors, though the varieties grown were of inferior quality. Later
seed of the best cinchona was obtained, and under skilful management
Java has become the chief producer of quinine in the world. Cacao is
produced in the Preanger regencies, Pekalongan, Semarang, Pasuruan,
Besuki, Kediri and Surakarta. In 1903, a record year, 1,101,835 piculs
(about 6540 tons) were produced. _Broussonetia papyrifera_ is grown
for the sake of its bark, so well known in Japan (Jap. _kodsu_) as a
paper material. The ground-nut (the widely spread _Arachis hypogaea_
from South America), locally known as kachang china or tanah, is
somewhat extensively grown. The oil is exported to Holland, where it
is sold as Delft salad oil. Tapioca has long been cultivated,
especially in the Preanger. The industry is mainly in the hands of the
Chinese, and the principal foreign purchasers are English biscuit
manufacturers. The kapok is a tree from tropical America which,
growing freely in any soil, is extensively used throughout Java along
the highways as a support for telegraph and telephone wires, and
planted as a prop in pepper and cubeb plantations. The silky fibre
contained in its long capsuloid fruits is known as cotton wool; and
among other uses it serves almost as well as cork for filling
life-belts; and the oil from its seed is employed to adulterate
ground-nut oil. The quantity of wool exported nearly trebled between
1890 and 1896, in the latter year the total sent to Holland,
Australia, Singapore, &c., amounting to 38,586 bales. The rapid
exhaustion of the natural supply of india-rubber and gutta-percha
began to attract the attention of government in the latter decades of
the 19th century. Extensive experiments have been made in the
cultivation of _Ficus elastica_ (the karet of the natives), _Castilloa
elastica_, and _Hevea brasiliensis_. The planting of gutta-percha
trees was begun about 1886, and a regular system introduced in the
Preanger in 1901. The _Palaquium oblongifolium_ plantations at Blavan,
Kemutuk and Sewang in Banyumas have also been brought under official
control. Java tobacco, amounting to about 35,200,000 lb. a year, is
cultivated almost exclusively in eastern Java. Among other products
which are of some importance as articles of export may be mentioned
nutmegs, mace, pepper, hides, arrack and copra.
_Particular Lands._--At different times down to 1830 the government
disposed of its lands in full property to individuals who, acquiring
complete control of the inhabitants as well as of the soil, continued
down to the 19th century to act as if they were independent of all
superior authority. In this way more than 1½ millions of the people
were subject not to the state but to "stock companies, absentee
landlords and Chinese." According to the _Regeerings Almanak_ (1906)
these "particular lands," as they are called, were distributed as
follows: Bantam 21, Batavia 36, Meester Cornelis 163, Tangerang 80,
Buitenzorg 61, Semarang 32, Surabaya 46, Krawang and Demak 3 each,
Cheribon 2, and Pekalongan, Kendal and Pasuruan 1 each. In Meester
Cornelis no fewer than 297,912 persons were returned in 1905 as living
on these lands. Of the 168 estates there are not 20 that grow anything
but grass, rice and coconuts. In Buitenzorg (thanks probably to the
Botanic Gardens) matters are better: tea, coffee, cinchona and
india-rubber appearing amongst the objects of cultivation; and, in
general, it must be noted that these estates have often natural
difficulties to contend against far beyond their financial strength.
_Minerals._--Of all the great islands of the archipelago Java is the
poorest in metallic ores. Gold and silver are practically nonexistent.
Manganese is found in Jokjakarta and various other parts. A concession
for working the magnetic iron sands in the neighbourhood of Chilachap
was granted in 1904. Coal occurs in thin strata and small pockets in
many parts (Bantam, Rembang, Jokjakarta, &c.); and in 1905 a
concession was granted to a company to work the coal-beds at Bajah
close to the harbour of Wijnkoopers Bay, a port of call of the
Koninklijk Paketvaart Maatschappij. The discovery by De Groot in 1863
of petroleum added a most important industry to the list of the
resources of Java. The great Dort Petroleum Company, now centred at
Amsterdam, was founded in 1887. The production of this company alone
rose from 79,179 _kisten_ or cases (each 8.14 gall.) in 1891 to
1,642,780 in 1890, and to 1,967,124 in 1905. In 1904 there were no
fewer than 36 concessions for petroleum. At the same time there is a
larger importation of oil from Sumatra as well as from America and
Russia. Sulphur is regularly worked in the Gunong Slamet, G. Sindoro,
G. Sumbing, and in the crater of the Tangkuban Prahu as well as in
other places in the Preanger regencies and in Pasuruan. Brine-wells
exist in various parts. The bledegs (salt-mud wells) of Grobogan in
the Solo Valley, Semarang, are best known. They rise from Miocene
strata and yield iodine and bromine products as well as common salt.
The natives of the district are allowed to extract the salt for their
own use, but elsewhere (except in Jokjakarta) the manufacture of salt
is a government monopoly and confined to the districts of Sumenep,
Panekasan and Sampang in Madura, where from 3000 to 4000 people are
hereditarily engaged in extracting salt from sea water, delivering it
to the government at the rate of 10 fl. (nearly 17s.) per koyang (3700
lb.). The distribution of this salt (rough-grained, greyish and highly
hygroscopic) is extremely unsatisfactory. The waste was so great that
in 1901 the government paid a prize of about £835 (10,000 fl.) to Karl
Boltz von Bolzberg for an improved method of packing. Between 1888 and
1892 the annual amount delivered was 71,405 tons; in the next five
years it rose to 89,932; and between 1898 and 1902 sank again to
88,856. The evil effects of this monopoly have been investigated by J.
E. de Meyer, "Zout als middel van belasting," _De Ind. Gids._ (1905).
The scarcity of salt has led to a great importation of salted fish
from Siam (upwards of 6600 tons in 1902).
_Communications._--Roads and railways for the most part follow the
fertile plains and table-lands along the coast and between the
volcanic areas. The principal railways are the Semarang-Jokjakarta and
Batavia-Buitenzorg lines of the Netherlands-Indian railway company,
and the Surabaya-Pasuruan, Bangil-Mulang, Sidoarjo-Paron,
Kertosono-Tulung Agung, Buitenzorg-Chianjur, Surakarta-Madiun,
Pasuruan-Probolinggo, Jokjakarta-Chilachap and other lines of the
government. The earliest lines, between Batavia and Buitenzorg and
between Semarang and the capitals of the sultanates, were built about
1870 by a private company with a state guarantee. Since 1875, when Dr
van Goltstein, then a cabinet minister and afterwards Dutch minister
in London, had an act passed for the construction of state railways in
Java, their progress has become much more rapid. In addition, several
private companies have built either light railways or tramways, such
as that between Semarang and Joana, and the total length of all lines
was 2460 in 1905. There are some 3500 miles of telegraph line, and
cables connect Java with Madura, Bali and Sumatra, and Port Darwin in
Australia. Material welfare was promoted by the establishment of lines
of steamships between Java and the other islands, all belonging to a
Royal Packet Company, established in 1888 under a special statute, and
virtually possessing a monopoly on account of the government mail
contracts.
_Administration._--Each village (dessa) forms an independent
community, a group of dessas forms a district, a group of districts a
department and a group of departments a residency, of which there are
seventeen. At the head of each residency is a resident, with an
assistant resident and a controller, all Dutch officials. The
officials of the departments and districts are natives appointed by
the government; those of the dessa are also natives, elected by the
inhabitants and approved by the resident. In the two sultanates of
Surakarta and Jokjakarta the native sultans govern under the
supervision of the residents. (For the colonial administration of
Netherlands India see MALAY ARCHIPELAGO.)
_History._--The origin of the name Java is very doubtful. It is not
improbable that it was first applied either to Sumatra or to what was
known of the Indian Archipelago--the insular character of the several
parts not being at once recognized. Jawa Dwipa, or "land of millet," may
have been the original form and have given rise both to the Jaba diu of
Ptolemy and to the Je-pho-thi of Fahien, the Chinese pilgrim of the
4th-5th century. The oldest form of the name in Arabic is apparently
Zábej. The first epigraphic occurrence of Jawa is in an inscription of
1343. In Marco Polo the name is the common appellation of all the Sunda
islands. The Jawa of Ibn Batuta is Sumatra; Java is his Mul Jáwa (i.e.
possibly "original Java"). Jåwå is the modern Javanese name (in the
court speech Jawi), sometimes with Nusa, "island," or Tanah, "country,"
prefixed.
It is impossible to extract a rational historical narrative from the
earlier _babads_ or native chronicles, and even the later are destitute
of any satisfactory chronology. The first great era in the history is
the ascendancy of the Hindus, and that breaks up into three periods--a
period of Buddhism, a period of aggressive Sivaism, and a period of
apparent compromise. Of the various Hindu states that were established
in the island, that of Majapahit was the most widely dominant down to
the end of the 15th century; its tributaries were many, and it even
extended its sway into other parts of the archipelago. The second era of
Javanese history is the invasion of Islam in the beginning of the 15th
century; and the third is the establishment of European and more
particularly of Dutch influence and authority in the island. About 1520
the Portuguese entered into commercial relationship with the natives,
but at the close of the same century the Dutch began to establish
themselves. At the time when the Dutch East India company began to fix
its trading factories on the coast towns, the chief native state was
Mataram, which had in the 16th century succeeded to the overlordship
possessed by the house of Demak--one of the states that rose after the
fall of Majapahit. The emperors of Java, as the princes of Mataram are
called in the early accounts, had their capital at Kartasura, now an
almost deserted place, 6 m. west of Surakarta. At first and for long the
company had only forts and little fragments of territory at Jakatra
(Batavia), &c.; but in 1705 it obtained definite possession of the
Preanger by treaty with Mataram; and in 1745 its authority was extended
over the whole north-east coast, from Cheribon to Banyuwangi. In 1755
the kingdom of Mataram was divided into the two states of Surakarta and
Jokjakarta, which still retain a shadow of independence. The kingdom of
Bantam was finally subjugated in 1808. By the English occupation of the
island (1811-1818) the European ascendancy was rather strengthened than
weakened; the great Java war (1825-1830), in which Dipå Negårå, the last
Javanese prince, a clever, bold and unscrupulous leader, struggled to
maintain his claim to the whole island, resulted in the complete success
of the Dutch. To subdue him and his following, however, taxed all the
resources of the Dutch Indian army for a period of five years, and cost
it the loss of 15,000 officers and soldiers, besides millions of
guilders. Nor did his great influence die with him when his adventurous
career came to a close in 1855 at Macassar. Many Javanese, who dream of
a restoration of their ancient empire, do not believe even yet that Dipå
Negårå is dead. They are readily persuaded by fanatical hadjis that
their hero will suddenly appear to drive away the Dutch and claim his
rightful heritage. Several times there have been political troubles in
the native states of central Java, in which Dipå Negårå's name was used,
notably in 1883, when many rebellious chieftains were exiled. Similar
attempts at revolt had been made before, mainly in 1865 and 1870, but
none so serious perhaps as that in 1849, in which a son and a brother of
Dipå Negårå were implicated, aiming to deliver and reinstate him. All
such attempts proved as futile there as others in different parts of
Java, especially in Bantam, where the trouble of 1850 and 1888 had a
religious origin, and in the end they directly contributed to the
consolidation of Dutch sway. Being the principal Dutch colony in the
Malay Archipelago, Java was the first to benefit from the material
change which resulted from the introduction of the Grondwet or
Fundamental Law of 1848 in Holland. The main changes were of an
economical character, but the political developments were also
important. Since 1850 Dutch authority has steadily advanced, principally
at the expense of the semi-independent sultanates in central Java, which
had been allowed to remain after the capture and exile of Dipå Negårå.
The power of the sultans of Jokjakarta and Surakarta has diminished; in
1863 Dutch authority was strengthened in the neighbouring island of
Madura, and Bantam has lost every vestige of independence. The
strengthening of the Dutch power has largely resulted from a more
statesmanlike and more generous treatment of the natives, who have been
educated to regard the _orang blanda_, or white man, as their protector
against the native rulers. Thus, in 1866, passports for natives
travelling in Java were abolished by the then governor-general, Dr Sloet
van de Beele, who also introduced many reforms, reducing the _corvée_ in
the government plantations to a minimum, and doing away with the
monopoly of fisheries. Six years later a primary education system for
the natives, and a penal code, whose liberal provisions seemed framed
for Europeans, were introduced.
_Antiquities._--Ordinary traces of early human occupation are few in
Java. The native bamboo buildings speedily perish. Stone weapons are
occasionally found. But remains of the temples and monastic buildings
of the Hindu period are numerous and splendid, and are remarkable as
representing architecture which reached a high standard without the
use of mortar, supporting columns or arches. Chandis (i.e. temples,
though the word originally meant a depository for the ashes of a
saint) are not found in western Java. They exist in two great zones:
one in middle Java, one in eastern Java, each with its own
distinguishing characteristics, both architectural and religious. The
former begins in the Dyeng plateau, in the east of Banyumas, and
extends into the east of Bagelen, Kedu and the neighbouring districts
of Semarang, northern Jokjakarta, and the western corner of Surakarta.
The latter lies mainly in Surabaya, Kediri and Pasuruan. A
considerable number of ruins also exist in Probolinggo. Farther east
they grow scarce. There is none in Madura. The remains of Macham Putih
in Banyuwangi are possibly of non-Hindu origin. In the regency of
Kendal (Semarang), to the north of Kedu, the place-names show that
temples once existed.[16] Some of them are Sivaite, some Buddhist,
some astoundingly composite. None of the Buddhist buildings shows
traces of the older Himaryana form of the creed. The greatest of all
is a perfect sculptural exposition of the Mahayana doctrine. As to the
period during which these temples were erected, authorities are not
agreed. Ijzerman assigns the central Java groups to between the 8th
and the 10th centuries. The seven-storeyed vihara (monastery)
mentioned in the famous Menang-Kabu inscription (Sumatra) as founded
by Maharaja Dhiraya Adityadharma in A.D. 656 is by some supposed to be
Boro-Budur. A copper plate of 840 refers to Dyeng (Dehyang) as one of
the sacred mountains of Java. One thing seems certain, that the
temples of the eastern zone are of much more recent origin than most,
at least, of the central zone. They are generally distinguished by the
characteristics of a decadent and more voluptuous age, and show that
the art of the time had become less Indian and more Javanese, with
traces of influences derived from the more eastern East. At the same
time it must be noted that even in Boro Budur there are non-Indian
elements in the decoration, indicating that the Hindu architect
employed native artists and to some extent left them a free hand.
In his standard work on _Indian and Eastern Architecture_ (London,
1876), James Fergusson asserted that the Javanese temples are in the
Chalukyan style. But J. W. Ijzerman in an elaborate paper in the
_Album-Kern_ contends that the learned historian of architecture was
misled by basing his opinion mainly on inaccurate drawings reproduced
by Raffles. The Javanese temples, with the solitary exception of
Chandi Bima in the Dyeng, are Dravidian and not Chalukyan. The very
temples quoted by Fergusson, when more carefully examined, disprove
his statement: a fact not without its bearing on the history of the
Hindu immigration.
The wonderful scenery of the Dyeng plateau was already, in all
probability, an object of superstitious awe to the aboriginal
inhabitants of Java; and thus it would catch the attention of the
earliest Hindu settlers. The old crater floor is full of traces of
human occupation; though, in spite of the tradition of the existence
of a considerable town, no sepulchral relics of the inhabitants have
been discovered. There still remain five groups of temples--some well
preserved, some mere heaps of stone--to prove the devotion their
builders bore to Siva, his consort Durga, and Ganesha their son. The
Arjuno group, in the middle of the plateau, consists of Chandi Arjuno
(with its chapel or priests' residence, Ch. Semar), Ch. Srikahdi, Ch.
Puntadeva and Ch. Sembadro, each a simple square chamber with a
portico reached by a flight of steps. The second group, Ch. Daravati
and Ch. Parakesit, lies to the north-east. The third, now a ruined
mound, lies to the east. The fourth, to the north-west, is a group of
seven small temples of which Ch. Sanchaki is the most important, with
a square ground plan and an octagon roof with a second circular
storey. Of the fifth group, in the south, only one temple remains--the
Chandi Bima--a small, beautiful and exceptionally interesting
building, in "the form of a pyramid, the ribs of which stand out much
more prominently than the horizontal lines of the niche-shaped
ornaments which rest each on its lotus cushion." How this happens to
be the one Chalukyan temple amid hundreds is a problem to be solved.
The plateau lies 6500 ft. above the sea, and roads and stairways,
locally known as Buddha roads, lead up from the lowlands of Bagelen
and Pekalongan. The stairway between Lake Menjur and Lake Chebong
alone consisted of 4700 steps. The width of the roadway, however, is
only some three or four feet. A remarkable subterranean tunnel still
exists, which served to drain the plateau.
Of all the Hindu temples of Java the largest and most magnificent is
Boro-Budur, which ranks among the architectural marvels of the world.
It lies in the residency of Kedu, a little to the west of the Progo, a
considerable stream flowing south to the Indian Ocean. The place is
best reached by taking the steam-tram from Magelang or Jokjakarta to
the village of Muntilam Passar, where a conveyance may be hired.
Strictly speaking, Boro-Budur is not a temple but a hill, rising about
150 ft. above the plain, encased with imposing terraces constructed of
hewn lava-blocks and crowded with sculptures. The lowest terrace now
above ground forms a square, each side 497 ft. long. About 50 ft.
higher there is another terrace of similar shape. Then follow four
other terraces of more irregular contour. The structure is crowned by
a dome or cupola 52 ft. in diameter surrounded by sixteen smaller
bell-shaped cupolas. Regarded as a whole, the main design, to quote Mr
Sewell, may be described as "an archaic Indian temple, considerably
flattened and consisting of a series of terraces, surmounted by a
quasi-stupa capped by a dagoba." It was discovered by the engineer J.
W. Ijzerman in 1885 that the basement of the structure had been
earthed up before the building was finished, and that the lowest
retaining wall was completely concealed by the embankment. The
architects had evidently found that their temple was threatened with a
destructive subsidence; and, while the sculptors were still busy with
the decoration of the lower façades, they had to abandon their work.
But the unfinished bas-reliefs were carefully protected by clay and
blocks of stone and left in position; and since 1896 they are
gradually but systematically being exhumed and photographed by the
Dutch archaeologists, who, however, have to proceed with caution,
filling up one portion of the embankment before they go on to deal
with another. The subjects treated in this lowest enceinte are of the
most varied description, forming a picture-gallery of landscapes,
scenes of outdoor and domestic life, mingled with mythological and
religious designs. Among the genre class appear men shooting birds
with blow-pipe or bow and arrow, fishermen with rod or net, a man
playing a bagpipe, and so on. It would seem as if the architect had
intended gradually to wean the devotees from the things of this world.
When once they began to ascend from stage to stage of the temple-hill
they were introduced to the realities of religion; and by the time
they reached the dagoba they had passed through a process of
instruction and were ready, with enlightened eyes, to enter and behold
the image of Buddha, symbolically left imperfect, as beyond the power
of human art to realize or portray. From basement to summit the whole
hill is a great picture bible of the Mahayana creed.
If the statues and bas-reliefs of Boro-Budur were placed side by side
they would extend for 3 m. The eye of the spectator, looking up from
the present ground-level, is caught, says Mr Sewell, by the rows of
life-size Buddhas that adorn the retaining walls of the several
terraces and the cage-like shrines on the circular platforms. All the
great figures on the east side represent Akshobhya, the Dhyani Buddha
of the East. His right hand is in the Chumisparsa mudra (pose)
touching the earth in front of the right knee--"I swear by the earth."
All the statues on the south side are Ratnasam Chavu in the varada
mudra--the right hand displayed upwards--"I give you all." On the west
side the statues represent Amitabha in the dhyana or padinasama mudra,
the right hand resting palm upwards on the left, both being on the
lap--the attitude of meditation. Those on the north represent
Amogasiddhi in the abhaya mudra, the right hand being raised and
displayed, palm outwards--"Fear not, all is well."
Other remarkable groups of Hindu temples exist near the village of
Prambanan[17] (less correctly Brambanan) in Surakarta, but not far
from the borders of Jokjakarta, with a station on the railway between
the two chief towns. The village has been named after the temples,
Prambanan signifying the place of teachers. The whole ecclesiastical
settlement was surrounded by three lines of wall, of which only the
inmost is now visible above ground. Between the second and third walls
are 157 small temples, and in the central enclosure are the ruins of
six larger temples in a double row with two smaller ones at the side.
The middle temple of the western row is the main building, full of
statues of purely Sivaite character--Siva as Guru or teacher, Siva as
Kala or Time the Destroyer, Durga, Ganesha, and so on. But, just as
many churches in Christendom are called not after the Christ but after
the Virgin, so this is known as Lara (i.e. Virgin) Janggrang from the
popular name of Durga. In the southern temple of the row is a very
fine figure of a four-armed Brahma; in the northern there was a Vishnu
with attendant figures. Of the other row the middle temple is again
the largest, with Siva, his nandi or bull, and other symbolic
sculptures. To the north lies the extraordinary cluster of temples
which, though it does not deserve its popular name of Chandi Sewu, the
thousand shrines, consists of at least 240 small buildings gathered
round a great central temple, richly adorned, though roofless and
partially ruined since the earthquake of 1867. Among the more
noteworthy figures are those of the huge and ungainly guardians of the
temple kneeling at the four main gateways of each of the principal
buildings. Colonel Yule pointed out that there are distinct traces of
a fine coat of stucco on the exterior and the interior of the
buildings, and he compared in this respect "the cave walls of Ellora,
the great idols at Bamian, and the Doric order at Selinus." Other
temples in the same neighbourhood as Chandi Sewu are Ch. Lumbung, Ch.
Kali Bening (Baneng), with a monstrous Kala head as the centre of the
design on the southern side, Ch. Kalong and Ch. Plaosan. Tradition
assigns these temples to 1266-1296.
Of the temples of the eastern zone the best known is Chandi Jago (or
Tumpang), elaborately described in the Archaeological Commission's
monograph. According to the _Pararaton_, a native chronicle (published
in the _Verhand. v. h. Bat. Gen. v. K. en W._, 1896), it belongs to
the 13th century, containing the tomb of Rangavuni or Vishnuvardhana,
who died in 1272-1273. The shrine proper occupies the third of three
platforms, the lowest of which forms a square of 45 to 46 ft. each
side. The building fronts the west, and is constructed of an andesitic
tuff of inferior quality and dark colour. Of distinctly Buddhistic
influence there is no trace. The makara (elephant-fish head) is
notably absent. The sculptures which run round the base and along the
sides of the platforms or terraces are of the most elaborate and
varied description--kings on thrones, dwarfs, elephants, supernatural
beings, diabolical and grotesque, tree-monsters, palaces, temples,
courtyards, lakes, gardens, forests--all are represented. In one place
appears a Chinese--or Burmese-looking seven-roofed pagoda; in another,
a tall temple strangely split down the centre, with a flight of steps
running up the fissure. The inscriptions are in the Devanagari
character. In the same neighbourhood are Ch. Singossari, Ch. Kidal,
&c. Another of the most beautiful of the eastern temples is Ch.
Jabung, mentioned in 1330. It is built of red brick; and its
distinctly Javanese origin is suggested by the frequency of the
snake-motif still characteristic of modern Javanese art. It may be
added that a comparison of the several buildings of the zone affords
an interesting study in the development of the pilaster as a
decorative rather than structural element.
At Panabaram, near Blitar, Kediri, is another group of stone temples
and other buildings. The chief temple is remarkable for the richness
of its sculptures, which are peculiarly delicate and spirited in their
details. The decoration of the mere robes of one of the free-standing
stairway-guardians consists of scroll-work, interspersed with birds
and animals rendered in a non-Indian style, reminiscent of Chinese or
Japanese work. It has been described as one of the most beautiful
pieces of sculpture in all the East.
Sculptures from the temples are scattered far and wide throughout
Java, and it is one of the greatest difficulties of the archaeologist
to determine the origin of many of the most interesting specimens.
This, too, is often the case with those that have found their way to
the museums of Java and Europe (Batavia, Leiden, Haarlem, Berlin,
&c.). Minor relics of the past are to be found alike in the palaces of
the nobles and the huts of the highland peasants. Zodiac cups of
copper or bronze dating from the 12th or 13th century are in daily use
among the Tenggerese. The musical instruments used by the musicians of
the native courts are often prized on account of their great
antiquity.
As many of the Chinese came from China centuries ago and have not
ceased to hold intercourse with their native country, the houses of
the wealthier men among them are often rich in ancient specimens of
Chinese art. The special exhibition organized by Henri Borel and other
enthusiasts showed how much of value in this matter might be brought
together in spite of the reluctance of the owners to commit the
sacrilege of exposing to public gaze the images of their ancestral
gods and heroes. Borel has given exquisite examples of images of
Kwan-yin (the Chinese Virgin-Goddess), of Buddhas, of the ghoulish god
of literature, of Lie-tai-Peh (the Chinese poet who has gone to live
in the planet Venus), &c., in illustration of his papers in _L'Art
flamand et hollandais_, pt. v. (1900), a translation of his monograph
published at Batavia.
AUTHORITIES.--Besides the special works quoted _passim_, see Sir
Stamford Raffles, _History of Java_ (London, 1830); F. Junghuhn,
_Java: seine Gestalt, Pflanzendecke, und innere Bauart_ (Ger. trans.
by J. K. Hasskarl, Leipzig, 1854-1857); P. J. Veth, _Java,
Geographisch, ethnologisch, historisch_ (2nd ed., Haarlem, 1896-1903),
a masterly compendium originally based largely on Junghuhn's
descriptions; L. van Deventer, _Geschiedenis der Nederlanders op Java_
(2nd ed., Haarlem, 1895); L. W. C. van den Berg, _Le Hadhramout et les
colonies arabes dans l'archipel indien_ (Batavia, 1886); E. R.
Scidmore, _Java, the Garden of the East_ (New York, 1898); J.
Chailley-Bert, _Java et ses habitants_ (Paris, 1900); C. Day, _The
Policy and Administration of the Dutch in Java_ (London, 1904); E. S.
de Klerck, _De Java-Oorlog van_ 1825-1830 (Batavia, 1905);
_Encyclopaedie v. N. Indië_, art. "Java;" _Guide à travers
l'Exposition de Paris_ (The Hague, 1900), with articles by specialists
on each department of the Dutch colonies, more particularly Java;
_Koloniale Verslagen en Regeerings-almanak van N. Indië_, being
official publications of the Dutch and Dutch East-Indian Government
(see also MALAY ARCHIPELAGO). (H. A. W.; O. J. R. H.)
FOOTNOTES:
[1] It must be observed that Bavian, &c., are mere conventional
appendices to Java.
[2] H. B. Guppy (_R. S. G. Soc. Magazine_, 1889) holds that there is
no sufficient proof of this connexion but gives interesting details
of the present movement.
[3] See G. F. Tijdeman's map of the depths of the sea in the eastern
part of the Indian archipelago in M. Weber's _Siboga Expedition_,
1903. The details of the coast forms of the island have been studied
by J. F. Snelleman and J. F. Niermeyer in a paper in the Veth
_Feestbundel_, utilizing _inter alia_ Guppy's observations.
[4] This Merapi must be carefully distinguished from Merapi the Fire
Mountain of Sumatra.
[5] R. D. M. Verbeek and R. Fennema, _Description géologique de Java
et Madoura_ (2 vols. and atlas, Amsterdam, 1896; also published in
Dutch)--a summary with map was published by Verbeek in _Peterm.
Mitt._ xliv. (1898), 24-33, pl. 3. Also K. Martin, _Die Eintheilung
der versteinerungsführenden Sedimente von Java_, Samml. Geol.
Reichsmus. Leiden, ser. i., vol. vi. (1899-1902), 135-245.
[6] On the 16th of November the sun rises at 5.32 and sets at 5.57;
on the 16th of July it rises at 6.12 and sets at 5.57. The longest
day is in December and the shortest in June, while on the other hand
the sun is highest in February and October and lowest in June and
December.
[7] S. Figei. _Regenwaarnemingen in Nederlandsch Indië_ (1902).
[8] See J. C. Konigsberger, "De vogels Java en hunne oeconomische
betukenis," _Med. int. s. Lands Plantentuin_.
[9] See especially M. Weber, _Siboga Expedition_.
[10] The _Annales de Buitenzorg_, with their _Icones bogorienses_,
are universally known; the _Teysmannia_ is named after a former
director. A history of the gardens was published by Dr Treub,
_Festboek van's Lands Plantentuin_ (1891).
[11] Bertha Hoola van Nooten published _Fleurs, fruits et feuillages
de la flore et de la pomone de l'île de Java_ in 1863, but the book
is difficult of access. Excellent views of characteristic aspects of
the vegetation will be found in Karsten and Schenck,
_Vegetationsbilder_ (1903).
[12] It is interesting to compare this with the natural
"reflorization" of Krakatoa. See Penzig, _Ann. jard. de Buitenzorg_,
vol. viii. (1902); and W. Botting in _Nature_ (1903).
[13] See Walbreken, _De Taalsvorten in het Javaansh_; and G. A.
Wilken, _Handboek voor de vergelijkende Volkenkunde van Nederlandsch
Indie_, edited by C. M. Pleyte (1893).
[14] See Van den Berg's account of the MSS. of the Batavian Society
(the Hague, 1877); and a series of papers by C. Poensen in _Meded.
van wege het Ned. Zendelinggenootschap_ (1880).
[15] Cheribon is the form employed by the Dutch: an exception to
their usual system, in which Tj- takes the place of the Ch- used in
this article.
[16] See R. Verbeek, "Liget der oudheden van Java," in _Verhand. v.
h. Bat. Gen._, xlvi., and his _Oudheidkundige kaart van Java_. R.
Sewell's "Antiquarian notes in Java," in _Journal of the Royal
Asiatic Society_ (1906), give the best conspectus available for
English readers. W. B. Worsfold, _A Visit to Java_ (London, 1893),
has a good sketch of what was then known, revised by Professor W.
Rhys Davids; but whoever wishes full information must refer to Dutch
authorities. These are numerous but difficult of access.
[17] The chief authorities on Prambanan are J. W. Ijzerman,
_Beschrijving der oudheden nabij de Grens der residenties Soerakarta
en Djogjakarta_ (Batavia, 1891, with photographs and atlas); and J.
Groneman, _Tjandi Parambanan op Midden Java_; see also _Guide à
travers l'exposition des Pays-Bas_ (The Hague, 1900), No. 174, sqq.
JAVELIN, a spear, particularly one light enough to be thrown, a dart.
The javelin was often provided with a thong to help in casting (see
SPEAR). Javelin-throwing is one of the contests in the athletic section
at the international Olympic games. Formerly the sheriff of a county or
borough had a body of men armed with javelins, and known as javelin-men,
who acted as a bodyguard for the judges when they went on assize. Their
duties are now performed by the ordinary police. The word itself is an
adaptation of Fr. _javeline_. There are several words in Celtic and
Scandinavian languages and in Old English, meaning a spear or dart, that
seem to be connected with _javel_, the base form in French; thus Welsh
_gaflach_, Irish _gabhla_, O. Norwegian _gaflok_, O. E. _gafeluc_, later
in the form _gavelock_, cf. O. Norman-Fr. _gavelot_, _javelot_, Ital.
_giavelotto_. The origin seems to be Celtic, and the word is cognate
with Ir. _gafa_, a hook, fork, gaff; the root is seen in "gable" (q.v.),
and in the German _Gabel_, fork. The change in meaning from fork, forked
end of a spear, to the spear itself is obscure.
JAW (Mid. Eng. _jawe_, _jowe_ and _geowe_, O. Eng. _cheowan_, connected
with "chaw" and "chew," and in form with "jowl"), in anatomy, the term
for the upper maxillary bone, and the mandible or lower maxillary bone
of the skull; it is sometimes loosely applied to all the lower front
parts of the skull (q.v.).
JAWALIQI, ABU MANSUR MAUHUB UL-JAWALIQI (1073-1145), Arabian grammarian,
was born at Bagdad, where he studied philology under Tibrizi and became
famous for his handwriting. In his later years he acted as imam to the
caliph Moqtafi. His chief work is the _Kitab ul-Mu'arrab_, or
"Explanation of Foreign Words used in Arabic."
The text was edited from an incomplete manuscript by E. Sachau
(Leipzig, 1867). Many of the lacunae in this have been supplied from
another manuscript by W. Spitta in the _Journal of the German Oriental
Society_, xxxiii. 208 sqq. Another work, written as a supplement to
the _Durrat ul-Ghawwas_ of Hariri (q.v.), has been published as "Le
Livre des locutions vicieuses," by H. Derenbourg in _Morgenländische
Forschungen_ (Leipzig, 1875), pp. 107-166. (G. W. T.)
JAWHAR, a native state of India, in the Konkan division of Bombay,
situated among the lower ranges of the western Ghats. Area 310 sq. m.
Pop. (1901), 47,538. The estimated revenue is £11,000; there is no
tribute. The chief, who is a Koli by caste, traces back his descent to
1343. The leading exports are teak and rice. The principal village is
that of Jawhar (pop. 3567).
JAWORÓW, a town in Galicia, Austria, 30 m. W. of Lemberg. Pop. (1900),
10,090. It has a pottery, a brewery, a distillery and some trade in
agricultural produce. Not far from it is the watering-place of Szkto
with sulphur springs. The town was a favourite residence of John
Sobieski, who there received the congratulations of the pope and the
Venetian republic on his success against the Turks at Vienna (1683). At
Jaworów Peter the Great was betrothed to Catherine I.
JAY, JOHN (1745-1829), American statesman, the descendant of a Huguenot
family, and son of Peter Jay, a successful New York merchant, was born
in New York City on the 12th of December 1745. On graduating at King's
College (now Columbia University) in 1764, Jay entered the office of
Benjamin Kissam, an eminent New York lawyer. In 1768 he was admitted to
the bar, and rapidly acquired a lucrative practice. In 1774 he married
Sarah, youngest daughter of William Livingston, and was thus brought
into close relations with one of the most influential families in New
York. Like many other able young lawyers, Jay took an active part in the
proceedings that resulted in the independence of the United States,
identifying himself with the conservative element in the Whig or patriot
party. He was sent as a delegate from New York City to the Continental
Congress at Philadelphia in September 1774, and though almost the
youngest member, was entrusted with drawing up the address to the people
of Great Britain. Of the second congress, also, which met at
Philadelphia on the 10th of May 1775, Jay was a member; and on its
behalf he prepared an address to the people of Canada and an address to
the people of Jamaica and Ireland. In April 1776, while still retaining
his seat in the Continental Congress, Jay was chosen as a member of the
third provincial congress of New York; and his consequent absence from
Philadelphia deprived him of the honour of affixing his signature to the
Declaration of Independence. As a member of the fourth provincial
congress he drafted a resolution by which the delegates of New York in
the Continental Congress were authorized to sign the Declaration of
Independence. In 1777 he was chairman of the committee of the convention
which drafted the first New York state constitution. After acting for
some time as one of the council of safety (which administered the state
government until the new constitution came into effect), he was made
chief justice of New York state, in September 1777. A clause in the
state constitution prohibited any justice of the Supreme Court from
holding any other post save that of delegate to Congress on a "special
occasion," but in November 1778 the legislature pronounced the
secession of what is now the state of Vermont from the jurisdiction of
New Hampshire and New York to be such an occasion, and sent Jay to
Congress charged with the duty of securing a settlement of the
territorial claims of his state. He took his seat in congress on the 7th
of December, and on the 10th was chosen president in succession to Henry
Laurens.
On the 27th of September 1779 Jay was appointed minister plenipotentiary
to negotiate a treaty between Spain and the United States. He was
instructed to endeavour to bring Spain into the treaty already existing
between France and the United States by a guarantee that Spain should
have the Floridas in case of a successful issue of the war against Great
Britain, reserving, however, to the United States the free navigation of
the Mississippi. He was also to solicit a subsidy in consideration of
the guarantee, and a loan of five million dollars. His task was one of
extreme difficulty. Although Spain had joined France in the war against
Great Britain, she feared to imperil her own colonial interests by
directly encouraging and aiding the former British colonies in their
revolt against their mother country, and she had refused to recognize
the United States as an independent power. Jay landed at Cadiz on the
22nd of January 1780, but was told that he could not be received in a
formally diplomatic character. In May the king's minister, Count de
Florida Bianca, intimated to him that the one obstacle to a treaty was
the question of the free navigation of the Mississippi, and for months
following this interview the policy of the court was clearly one of
delay. In February 1781 Congress instructed Jay that he might make
concessions regarding the navigation of the Mississippi, if necessary;
but further delays were interposed, the news of the surrender of
Yorktown arrived, and Jay decided that any sacrifice to obtain a treaty
was no longer advisable. His efforts to procure a loan were not much
more successful, and he was seriously embarrassed by the action of
Congress in drawing bills upon him for large sums. Although by
importuning the Spanish minister, and by pledging his personal
responsibility, Jay was able to meet some of the bills, he was at last
forced to protest others; and the credit of the United States was saved
only by a timely subsidy from France.
In 1781 Jay was commissioned to act with Franklin, John Adams, Jefferson
and Henry Laurens in negotiating a peace with Great Britain. He arrived
in Paris on the 23rd of June 1782, and jointly with Franklin had
proceeded far with the negotiations when Adams arrived late in October.
The instructions of the American negotiators were as follows:--
"You are to make the most candid and confidential communications upon
all subjects to the ministers of our generous ally, the king of
France; to undertake nothing in the negotiations for peace or truce
without their knowledge and concurrence; and ultimately to govern
yourselves by their advice and opinion, endeavouring in your whole
conduct to make them sensible how much we rely on his majesty's
influence for effectual support in every thing that may be necessary
to the present security, or future prosperity, of the United States of
America."
Jay, however, in a letter written to the president of Congress from
Spain, had expressed in strong terms his disapproval of such dependence
upon France, and, on arriving in Paris, he demanded that Great Britain
should treat with his country on an equal footing by first recognizing
its independence, although the French minister, Count de Vergennes,
contended that an acknowledgment of independence as an effect of the
treaty was as much as could reasonably be expected. Finally, owing
largely to Jay, who suspected the good faith of France, the American
negotiators decided to treat independently with Great Britain. The
provisional articles, which were so favourable to the United States as
to be a great surprise to the courts of France and Spain, were signed on
the 30th of November 1782, and were adopted with no important change as
the final treaty on the 3rd of September 1783.
On the 24th of July 1784 Jay landed in New York, where he was presented
with the freedom of the city and elected a delegate to Congress. On the
7th of May Congress had already chosen him to be secretary for foreign
affairs, and in December Jay resigned his seat in Congress and accepted
the secretaryship. He continued to act in this capacity until 1790, when
Jefferson became secretary of state under the new constitution. In the
question of this constitution Jay had taken a keen interest, and as an
advocate of its ratification he wrote over the name "Publius," five
(Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5 and 64) of the famous series of papers known
collectively as the _Federalist_ (see HAMILTON, ALEXANDER). He published
anonymously (though without succeeding in concealing the authorship) _An
Address to the People of New York_, in vindication of the constitution;
and in the state convention at Poughkeepsie he ably seconded Hamilton in
securing its ratification by New York. In making his first appointments
to federal offices President Washington asked Jay to take his choice;
Jay chose that of chief justice of the Supreme Court, and held this
position from September 1789 to June 1795. The most famous case that
came before him was that of _Chisolm_ v. _Georgia_, in which the
question was, Can a state be sued by a citizen of another state? Georgia
argued that it could not be so sued, on the ground that it was a
sovereign state, but Jay decided against Georgia, on the ground that
sovereignty in America resided with the people. This decision led to the
adoption of the eleventh amendment to the federal constitution, which
provides that no suit may be brought in the federal courts against any
state by a citizen of another state or by a citizen or subject of any
foreign state. In 1792 Jay consented to stand for the governorship of
New York State, but a partisan returning-board found the returns of
three counties technically defective, and though Jay had received an
actual majority of votes, his opponent, George Clinton, was declared
elected.
Ever since the War of Independence there had been friction between Great
Britain and the United States. To the grievances of the United States,
consisting principally of Great Britain's refusal to withdraw its troops
from the forts on the north-western frontier, as was required by the
peace treaty of 1783, her refusal to make compensation for negroes
carried away by the British army at the close of the War of Independence,
her restrictions on American commerce, and her refusal to enter into any
commercial treaty with the United States, were added, after war broke out
between France and Great Britain in 1793, the anti-neutral naval policy
according to which British naval vessels were authorized to search
American merchantmen and impress American seamen, provisions were treated
as contraband of war, and American vessels were seized for no other
reason than that they had on board goods which were the property of the
enemy or were bound for a port which though not actually blockaded was
declared to be blockaded. The anti-British feeling in the House of
Representatives became so strong that on the 7th of April 1794 a
resolution was introduced to prohibit commercial intercourse between the
United States and Great Britain until the north-western posts should be
evacuated and Great Britain's anti-neutral naval policy should be
abandoned. Thereupon Washington, fearing that war might result, appointed
Jay minister extraordinary to Great Britain to negotiate a new treaty,
and the Senate confirmed the appointment by a vote of 18 to 8, although
the non-intercourse resolution which came from the house a few days later
was defeated in the senate only by the casting vote of Vice-President
John Adams. Jay landed at Falmouth in June 1794, signed a treaty with
Lord Grenville on the 19th of November, and disembarked again at New York
on the 28th of May 1795. The treaty, known in history as Jay's Treaty,
provided that the north-western posts should be evacuated by the 1st of
June 1796, that commissioners should be appointed to settle the
north-east and the north-west boundaries, and that the British claims for
British debts as well as the American claims for compensation for illegal
seizures should be referred to commissioners. More than one-half of the
clauses in the treaty related to commerce, and although they contained
rather small concessions to the United States, they were about as much as
could reasonably have been expected in the circumstances. One clause, the
operation of which was limited to two years from the close of the
existing war, provided that American vessels not exceeding 70 tons burden
might trade with the West Indies, but should carry only American
products there and take away to American ports only West Indian products;
moreover, the United States was to export in American vessels no
molasses, sugar, coffee, cocoa or cotton to any part of the world. Jay
consented to this prohibition under the impression that the articles
named were peculiarly the products of the West Indies, not being aware
that cotton was rapidly becoming an important export from the southern
states. The operation of the other commercial clauses was limited to
twelve years. By them the United States was granted limited privileges of
trade with the British East Indies; some provisions were made for
reciprocal freedom of trade between the United States and the British
dominions in Europe; some articles were specified under the head of
"contraband of war"; it was agreed that whenever provisions were seized
as contraband they should be paid for, and that in cases of the capture
of a vessel carrying contraband goods such goods only and not the whole
cargo should be seized; it was also agreed that no vessel should be
seized merely because it was bound for a blockaded port, unless it
attempted to enter the port after receiving notice of the blockade. The
treaty was laid before the Senate on the 8th of June 1795, and, with the
exception of the clause relating to trade with the West Indies, was
ratified on the 24th by a vote of 20 to 10. As yet the public was
ignorant of its contents, and although the Senate had enjoined secrecy on
its members even after the treaty had been ratified, Senator Mason of
Virginia gave out a copy for publication only a few days later. The
Republican party, strongly sympathizing with France and strongly
disliking Great Britain, had been opposed to Jay's mission, and had
denounced Jay as a traitor and guillotined him in effigy when they heard
that he was actually negotiating. The publication of the treaty only
added to their fury. They filled newspapers with articles denouncing it,
wrote virulent pamphlets against it, and burned Jay in effigy. The
British flag was insulted. Hamilton was stoned at a public meeting in New
York while speaking in defence of the treaty, and Washington was grossly
abused for signing it. In the House of Representatives the Republicans
endeavoured to prevent the execution of the treaty by refusing the
necessary appropriations, and a vote (29th of April, 1795) on a
resolution that it ought to be carried into effect stood 49 to 49; but on
the next day the opposition was defeated by a vote of 51 to 48. Once in
operation, the treaty grew in favour. Two days before landing on his
return from the English mission, Jay had been elected governor of New
York state; notwithstanding his temporary unpopularity, he was re-elected
in April 1798. With the close of this second term of office in 1801, he
ended his public career. Although not yet fifty-seven years old, he
refused all offers of office and retiring to his estate near Bedford in
Westchester county, N.Y., spent the rest of his life in rarely
interrupted seclusion. In politics he was throughout inclined toward
Conservatism, and after the rise of parties under the federal government
he stood with Alexander Hamilton and John Adams as one of the foremost
leaders of the Federalist party, as opposed to the Republicans or
Democratic-Republicans. From 1821 until 1828 he was president of the
American Bible Society. He died on the 17th of May 1829. The purity and
integrity of his life are commemorated in a sentence by Daniel Webster:
"When the spotless ermine of the judicial robe fell on John Jay, it
touched nothing less spotless than itself."
See _The Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay_ (4 vols., New
York, 1890-1893), edited by H. P. Johnston; William Jay, _Life of John
Jay with Selections from his Correspondence and Miscellaneous Papers_
(2 vols., New York, 1833); William Whitelocke, _Life and Times of John
Jay_ (New York, 1887); and George Pellew, _John Jay_ (Boston, 1890),
in the "American Statesmen Series."
John Jay's son, WILLIAM JAY (1789-1858), was born in New York City on
the 16th of June 1789, graduated from Yale in 1807, and soon afterwards
assumed the management of his father's large estate in Westchester
county, N.Y. He was actively interested in peace, temperance and
anti-slavery movements. He took a prominent part in 1816 in founding
the American Bible Society; was a judge of Westchester county from 1818
to 1843, when he was removed from office by the party in power in New
York, which hoped, by sacrificing an anti-slavery judge, to gain
additional strength in the southern states; joined the American
anti-slavery society in 1834, and held several important offices in this
organization. In 1840, however, when it began to advocate measures which
he deemed too radical, he withdrew his membership, but with his pen he
continued his labours on behalf of the slave, urging emancipation in the
district of Columbia and the exclusion of slavery from the Territories,
though deprecating any attempt to interfere with slavery in the states.
He was a member of the American peace society and was its president for
several years. His pamphlet, _War and Peace: the Evils of the First with
a Plan for Securing the Last_, advocating international arbitration, was
published by the English Peace Society in 1842, and is said to have
contributed to the promulgation, by the powers signing the Treaty of
Paris in 1856, of a protocol expressing the wish that nations, before
resorting to arms, should have recourse to the good offices of a
friendly power. Among William Jay's other writings, the most important
are _The Life of John Jay_ (2 vols., 1833) and a _Review of the Causes
and Consequences of the Mexican War_ (1849). He died at Bedford on the
14th of October 1858.
See Bayard Tuckerman, _William Jay and the Constitutional Movement for
the Abolition of Slavery_ (New York, 1893).
William Jay's son, JOHN JAY (1817-1894), also took an active part in the
anti-slavery movement. He was a prominent member of the free soil party,
and was one of the organizers of the Republican party in New York. He
was United States minister to Austria-Hungary in 1869-1875, and was a
member, and for a time president, of the New York civil service
commission appointed by Governor Cleveland in 1883.
JAY, WILLIAM (1769-1853), English Nonconformist divine, was born at
Tisbury in Wiltshire on the 6th of May 1769. He adopted his father's
trade of stone-mason, but gave it up in 1785 in order to enter the Rev.
Cornelius Winter's school at Marlborough. During the three years that
Jay spent there, his preaching powers were rapidly developed. Before he
was twenty-one he had preached nearly a thousand times, and in 1788 he
had for a while occupied Rowland Hill's pulpit in London. Wishing to
continue his reading he accepted the humble pastorate of Christian
Malford, near Chippenham, where he remained about two years. After one
year at Hope chapel, Clifton, he was called to the ministry of Argyle
Independent chapel in Bath; and on the 30th of January 1791 he began the
work of his life there, attracting hearers of every religious
denomination and of every rank, and winning for himself a wide
reputation as a brilliant pulpit orator, an earnest religious author,
and a friendly counsellor. Sheridan declared him to be the most manly
orator he had ever heard. A long and honourable connexion of sixty-two
years came to an end in January 1853, and he died on the 27th of
December following.
The best-known of Jay's works are his _Morning and Evening Exercises_:
_The Christian contemplated_: _The Domestic Minister's Assistant_; and
his _Discourses_. He also wrote a _Life of Rev. Cornelius Winter_, and
_Memoirs of Rev. John Clarke_. An edition of Jay's _Works_ in 12
vols., 8vo, revised by himself, was issued in 1842-1844, and again in
1856. A new edition, in 8 vols., 8vo, was published in 1876. See
_Autobiography_ (1854); S. Wilson's _Memoir of Jay_ (1854); S. Newth
in _Pulpit Memorials_ (1878).
JAY (Fr. _géai_), a well-known and very beautiful European bird, the
_Corvus glandarius_ of Linnaeus, the _Garrulus glandarius_ of modern
ornithologists. To this species are more or less closely allied numerous
birds inhabiting the Palaearctic and Indian regions, as well as the
greater part of America, but not occurring in the Antilles, in the
southern portion of the Neotropical Region, or in the Ethiopian or
Australian. All these birds are commonly called jays, and form a group
of the crows or _Corvidae_, which may fairly be considered a sub-family,
_Garrulinae_. Indeed there are, or have been, systematists who would
elevate the jays to the rank of a family _Garrulidae_--a proceeding
which seems unnecessary. Some of them have an unquestionable
resemblance to the pies, if the group now known by that name can be
satisfactorily severed from the true _Corvinae_. In structure the jays
are not readily differentiated from the pies; but in habit they are much
more arboreal, delighting in thick coverts, seldom appearing in the
open, and seeking their food on or under trees. They seem also never to
walk or run when on the ground, but always to hop. The body-feathers are
commonly loose and soft; and, gaily coloured as are most of the species,
in few of them has the plumage the metallic glossiness it generally
presents in the pies, while the proverbial beauty of the "jay's wing" is
due to the vivid tints of blue--turquoise and cobalt, heightened by bars
of jet-black, an indication of the same style of ornament being
observable in the greater number of the other forms of the group, and in
some predominating over nearly the whole surface. Of the many genera
that have been proposed by ornithologists, perhaps about nine may be
deemed sufficiently well established.
[Illustration: FIG. 1--European Jay.]
The ordinary European jay, _Garrulus glandarius_ (fig. 1), has suffered
so much persecution in the British Islands as to have become in many
districts a rare bird. In Ireland it seems now to be indigenous to the
southern half of the island only; in England generally, it is far less
numerous than formerly; and in Scotland its numbers have decreased with
still greater rapidity. There is little doubt that it would have been
exterminated but for its stock being supplied in autumn by immigration,
and for its shy and wary behaviour, especially at the breeding-season,
when it becomes almost wholly mute, and thereby often escapes detection.
No truthful man, however much he may love the bird, will gainsay the
depredations on fruit and eggs that it at times commits; but the
gardeners and gamekeepers of Britain, instead of taking a few simple
steps to guard their charge from injury, deliberately adopt methods of
wholesale destruction--methods that in the case of this species are only
too easy and too effectual--by proffering temptation to trespass which
it is not in jay-nature to resist, and accordingly the bird runs great
chance of total extirpation. Notwithstanding the war carried on against
the jay, its varied cries and active gesticulations show it to be a
sprightly bird, and at a distance that renders its beauty-spots
invisible, it is yet rendered conspicuous by its cinnamon-coloured body
and pure white tail-coverts, which contrast with the deep black and rich
chestnut that otherwise mark its plumage, and even the young at once
assume a dress closely resembling that of the adult. The nest, generally
concealed in a leafy tree or bush, is carefully built, with a lining
formed of fine roots neatly interwoven. Herein from four to seven eggs,
of a greenish-white closely freckled, so as to seem suffused with light
olive, are laid in March or April, and the young on quitting it
accompany their parents for some weeks.
Though the common jay of Europe inhabits nearly the whole of this
quarter of the globe south of 64° N. lat., its territory in the east of
Russia is also occupied by _G. brandti_, a kindred form, which replaces
it on the other side of the Ural, and ranges thence across Siberia to
Japan; and again on the lower Danube and thence to Constantinople the
nearly allied _G. krynicki_ (which alone is found in southern Russia,
Caucasia and Asia Minor) shares its haunts with it.[1] It also crosses
the Mediterranean to Algeria and Morocco; but there, as in southern
Spain, it is probably but a winter immigrant. The three forms just named
have the widest range of any of the genus. Next to them come _G.
atricapillus_, reaching from Syria to Baluchistan, _G. japonicus_, the
ordinary jay of southern Japan, and _G. sinensis_, the Chinese bird.
Other forms have a much more limited area, as _G. cervicalis_, the local
and resident jay of Algeria, _G. hyrcanus_, found on the southern shores
of the Caspian Sea, and _G. taevanus_, confined to the island of
Formosa. The most aberrant of the true jays is _G. lidthi_, a very rare
species, which seems to come from some part of Japan (_vide_ Salvadori,
_Atti Accad. Torino_, vii. 474), though its exact locality is not known.
Leaving the true jays of the genus _Garrulus_, it is expedient next to
consider those of a group named, in 1831, _Perisoreus_ by Prince C. L.
Bonaparte (_Saggio_, &c., _Anim. Vertebrati_, p. 43) and _Dysornithia_
by Swainson (_F. B.-Americana_, ii. 495).[2]
[Illustration: FIG. 2.--American Blue Jay.]
This group contains two species--one the Lanius infaustus of Linnaeus
and the Siberian jay of English writers, which ranges throughout the
pine-forests of the north of Europe and Asia, and the second the _Corvus
canadensis_ of the same author, or Canada jay, occupying a similar
station in America. The so-called Siberian jay is one of the most
entertaining birds in the world. Its versatile cries and actions, as
seen and heard by those who penetrate the solitude of the northern
forests it inhabits, can never be forgotten by one who has had
experience of them, any more than the pleasing sight of its
rust-coloured tail, which an occasional gleam of sunshine will light up
into a brilliancy quite unexpected by those who have only surveyed the
bird's otherwise gloomy appearance in the glass-case of a museum. It
seems scarcely to know fear, obtruding itself on the notice of any
traveller who invades its haunts, and, should he halt, making itself at
once a denizen of his bivouac. In confinement it speedily becomes
friendly, but suitable food for it is not easily found. Linnaeus seems
to have been under a misapprehension when he applied to it the trivial
epithet it bears; for by none of his countrymen is it deemed an unlucky
bird, but rather the reverse. In fact, no one can listen to the cheery
sound of its ordinary calls with any but a hopeful feeling. The Canada
jay, or "whisky-jack" (the corruption probably of a Cree name), seems to
be of a similar nature, but it presents a still more sombre coloration,
its nestling plumage,[3] indeed, being thoroughly corvine in appearance
and suggestive of its being a pristine form.
As though to make amends for the dull plumage of the species last
mentioned, North America offers some of the most brilliantly coloured
of the sub-family, and the common blue jay[4] of Canada and the eastern
states of the Union, _Cyanurus cristatus_ (fig. 2), is one of the most
conspicuous birds of the Transatlantic woods. The account of its habits
by Alexander Wilson is known to every student of ornithology, and
Wilson's followers have had little to do but supplement his history with
unimportant details. In this bird and its many allied forms, coloration,
though almost confined to various tints of blue, seems to reach its
climax, but want of space forbids more particular notice of them, or of
the members of the other genera _Cyanocitta_, _Cyanocorax_, _Xanthura_,
_Psilorhinus_, and more, which inhabit various parts of the Western
continent. It remains, however, to mention the genus Cissa, including
many beautiful forms belonging to the Indian region, and among them the
_C. speciosa_ and _C. sinensis_, so often represented in Oriental
drawings, though doubts may be expressed whether these birds are not
more nearly related to the pies than to the jays. (A. N.)
FOOTNOTE:
[1] Further information will possibly show that these districts are
not occupied at the same season of the year by the two forms.
[2] Recent writers have preferred the former name, though it was only
used sub-generically by its author, who assigned to it no characters,
which the inventor of the latter was careful to do, regarding it at
the same time as a genus.
[3] In this it was described and figured (_F. B. Americana_, ii. 296,
pl. 55) as a distinct species, _G. brachyrhynchus_.
[4] The birds known as blue jays in India and Africa are rollers
(q.v.).
JEALOUSY (adapted from Fr. _jalousie_, formed from _jaloux_, jealous,
Low Lat. _zelosus_, Gr. [Greek: zêlos], ardour, zeal, from the root seen
in [Greek: zéein], to boil, ferment; cf. "yeast"), originally a
condition of zealous emulation, and hence, in the usual modern sense, of
resentment at being (or believing that one is or may be) supplanted or
preferred in the love or affection of another, or in the enjoyment of
some good regarded as properly one's own. Jealousy is really a form of
envy, but implies a feeling of personal claim which in envy or
covetousness is wanting. The jealousy of God, as in Exod. xx. 5, "For I,
the Lord thy God, am a jealous God," has been defined by Pusey (_Minor
Prophets_, 1860) as the attribute "whereby he does not endure the love
of his creatures to be transferred from him." "Jealous," by etymology,
is however, only another form of "zealous," and the identity is
exemplified by such expressions as "I have been very jealous for the
Lord God of Hosts" (1 Kings xix. 10). A kind of glass, thick, ribbed and
non-transparent, was formerly known as "jealous-glass," and this
application is seen in the borrowed French word _jalousie_, a blind or
shutter, made of slats of wood, which slope in such a way as to admit
air and a certain amount of light, while excluding rain and sun and
inspection from without.
JEAN D'ARRAS, a 15th-century _trouvère_, about whose personal history
nothing is known, was the collaborator with Antoine du Val and Fouquart
de Cambrai in the authorship of a collection of stories entitled
_Évangiles de quenouille_. They purport to record the narratives of a
group of ladies at their spinning, who relate the current theories on a
great variety of subjects. The work dates from the middle of the 15th
century and is of considerable value for the light it throws on medieval
manners.
There were many editions of this book in the 15th and 16th centuries,
one of which was printed by Wynkyn de Worde in English, as _The
Gospelles of Dystaves_. A modern edition (Collection Jannet) has a
preface by Anatole France.
Another _trouvère_, JEAN D'ARRAS who flourished in the second half of
the 14th century, wrote, at the request of John, duke of Berry, a long
prose romance entitled _Chronique de la princesse_. It relates with many
digressions the antecedents and life of the fairy Mélusine (q.v.).
JEAN DE MEUN, or DE MEUNG (c. 1250-c. 1305), whose original name was
Jean Clopinel or Chopinel, was born at Meun-sur-Loire. Tradition asserts
that he studied at the university of Paris. At any rate he was, like his
contemporary, Rutebeuf, a defender of Guillaume de Saint-Amour and a
bitter critic of the mendicant orders. Most of his life seems to have
been spent in Paris, where he possessed, in the Rue Saint-Jacques, a
house with a tower, court and garden, which was described in 1305 as the
house of the late Jean de Meung, and was then bestowed by a certain Adam
d'Andely on the Dominicans. Jean de Meun says that in his youth he
composed songs that were sung in every public place and school in
France. In the enumeration of his own works he places first his
continuation of the _Roman de la rose_ of Guillaume de Lorris (q.v.).
The date of this second part is generally fixed between 1268 and 1285
by a reference in the poem to the death of Manfred and Conradin,
executed (1268) by order of Charles of Anjou (d. 1285) who is described
as the present king of Sicily. M. F. Guillon (_Jean Clopinel_, 1903),
however, considering the poem primarily as a political satire, places it
in the last five years of the 13th century. Jean de Meun doubtless
edited the work of his predecessor, Guillaume de Lorris, before using it
as the starting-point of his own vast poem, running to 19,000 lines. The
continuation of Jean de Meun is a satire on the monastic orders, on
celibacy, on the nobility, the papal see, the excessive pretensions of
royalty, and especially on women and marriage. Guillaume had been the
servant of love, and the exponent of the laws of "courtoisie"; Jean de
Meun added an "art of love," exposing with brutality the vices of women,
their arts of deception, and the means by which men may outwit them.
Jean de Meun embodied the mocking, sceptical spirit of the _fabliaux_.
He did not share in current superstitions, he had no respect for
established institutions, and he scorned the conventions of feudalism
and romance. His poem shows in the highest degree, in spite of the
looseness of its plan, the faculty of keen observation, of lucid
reasoning and exposition, and it entitles him to be considered the
greatest of French medieval poets. He handled the French language with
an ease and precision unknown to his predecessors, and the length of his
poem was no bar to its popularity in the 13th and 14th centuries. Part
of its vogue was no doubt due to the fact that the author, who had
mastered practically all the scientific and literary knowledge of his
contemporaries in France, had found room in his poem for a great amount
of useful information and for numerous citations from classical authors.
The book was attacked by Guillaume de Degulleville in his _Pèlerinage de
la vie humaine_ (c. 1330), long a favourite work both in England and
France; by John Gerson, and by Christine de Pisan in her _Épître au dieu
d'amour_; but it also found energetic defenders.
Jean de Meun translated in 1284 the treatise, _De re militari_, of
Vegetius into French as _Le livre de Vegèce de l'art de chevalerie_[1]
(ed. Ulysse Robert, _Soc. des anciens textes fr._, 1897). He also
produced a spirited version, the first in French, of the letters of
Abelard and Hèloïse. A 14th-century MS. of this translation in the
Bibliothèque Nationale has annotations by Petrarch. His translation of
the _De consolatione philosophiae_ of Boëtius is preceded by a letter
to Philip IV. in which he enumerates his earlier works, two of which
are lost--_De spirituelle amitié_ from the _De spirituali amicitia_ of
Aelred of Rievaulx (d. 1166), and the _Livre des merveilles
d'Hirlande_ from the _Topographia Hibernica_, or _De Mirabilibus
Hiberniae_ of Giraldus Cambrensis (Giraud de Barry). His last poems
are doubtless his _Testament_ and _Codicille_. The _Testament_ is
written in quatrains in monorime, and contains advice to the different
classes of the community.
See also Paulin Paris in _Hist. lit. de la France_, xxviii. 391-439,
and E. Langlois in _Hist. de la langue et de la lit. française_, ed.
L. Petit de Julleville, ii. 125-161 (1896); and editions of the _Roman
de la rose_ (q.v.).
FOOTNOTE:
[1] Jean de Meun's translation formed the basis of a rhymed version
(1290) by Jean Priorat of Besançon, _Li abreyance de l'ordre de
chevalerie_.
JEANNETTE, a borough of Westmoreland county, Pennsylvania, U.S.A., about
27 m. E. by S. of Pittsburg. Pop. (1890), 3296; (1900), 5865 (1340
foreign-born); (1910), 8077. It is served by the Pennsylvania railroad,
and is connected with Pittsburg and Uniontown by electric railway. It is
supplied with natural gas and is primarily a manufacturing centre, its
principal manufactures being glass, table-ware and rubber goods.
Jeannette was founded in 1888, and was incorporated as a borough in
1889.
JEANNIN, PIERRE (1540-1622), French statesman, was born at Autun. A
pupil of the great jurist Jacques Cujas at Bourges, he was an advocate
at Dijon in 1569 and became councillor and then president of the
_parlement_ of Burgundy. He opposed in vain the massacre of St
Bartholomew in his province. As councillor to the duke of Mayenne he
sought to reconcile him with Henry IV. After the victory of
Fontaine-Française (1595), Henry took Jeannin into his council and in
1602 named him intendant of finances. He took part in the principal
events of the reign, negotiated the treaty of Lyons with the duke of
Savoy (see HENRY IV.), and the defensive alliance between France and
the United Netherlands in 1608. As superintendent of finances under
Louis XIII., he tried to establish harmony between the king and the
queen-mother.
See Berger de Xivrey, _Lettres missives de Henri IV._ (in the
_Collection inédite pour l'histoire de France_), t. v. (1850);
P(ierre) S(aumaise), _Eloge sur la vie de Pierre Janin_ (Dijon, 1623);
Sainte-Beuve, _Causeries du lundi_, t. x. (May 1854).
JEBB, JOHN (1736-1786), English divine, was educated at Cambridge, where
he was elected fellow of Peterhouse in 1761, having previously been
second wrangler. He was a man of independent judgment and warmly
supported the movement of 1771 for abolishing university and clerical
subscription to the Thirty-nine Articles. In his lectures on the Greek
Testament he is said to have expressed Socinian views. In 1775 he
resigned his Suffolk church livings, and two years afterwards graduated
M.D. at St Andrews. He practised medicine in London and was elected
F.R.S. in 1779.
Another JOHN JEBB (1775-1833), bishop of Limerick, is best known as the
author of _Sacred Literature_ (London, 1820).
JEBB, SIR RICHARD CLAVERHOUSE (1841-1905), English classical scholar,
was born at Dundee on the 27th of August 1841. His father was a
well-known barrister, and his grandfather a judge. He was educated at
Charterhouse and at Trinity College, Cambridge. He won the Porson and
Craven scholarships, was senior classic in 1862, and became fellow and
tutor of his college in 1863. From 1869 to 1875 he was public orator of
the university; professor of Greek at Glasgow from 1875 to 1889, and at
Cambridge from 1889 till his death on the 9th of December 1905. In 1891
he was elected member of parliament for Cambridge University; he was
knighted in 1900. Jebb was acknowledged to be one of the most brilliant
classical scholars of his time, a humanist in the best sense, and his
powers of translation from and into the classical languages were
unrivalled. A collected volume, _Translations into Greek and Latin_,
appeared in 1873 (ed. 1909). He was the recipient of many honorary
degrees from European and American universities, and in 1905 was made a
member of the Order of Merit. He married in 1874 the widow of General A.
J. Slemmer, of the United States army, who survived him.
Jebb was the author of numerous publications, of which the following
are the most important: The _Characters_ of Theophrastus (1870), text,
introduction, English translation and commentary (re-edited by J. E.
Sandys, 1909); _The Attic Orators from Antiphon to Isaeus_ (2nd ed.,
1893), with companion volume, _Selections from the Attic Orators_ (2nd
ed., 1888); _Bentley_ (1882); _Sophocles_ (3rd ed., 1893) the seven
plays, text, English translation and notes, the promised edition of
the fragments being prevented by his death; _Bacchylides_ (1905),
text, translation, and notes; _Homer_ (3rd ed., 1888), an introduction
to the _Iliad_ and _Odyssey_; _Modern Greece_ (1901); _The Growth and
Influence of Classical Greek Poetry_ (1893). His translation of the
_Rhetoric_ of Aristotle was published posthumously under the
editorship of J. E. Sandys (1909). A selection from his _Essays and
Addresses_, and a subsequent volume, _Life and Letters of Sir Richard
Claverhouse Jebb_ (with critical introduction by A. W. Verrall) were
published by his widow in 1907; see also an appreciative notice by J.
E. Sandys, _Hist. of Classical Scholarship_, iii. (1908).
JEBEIL (anc. _Gebal-Byblus_), a town of Syria pleasantly situated on a
slight eminence near the sea, about 20 m. N. of Beirut. It is surrounded
by a wall 1½ m. in circumference, with square towers at the angles, and
a castle at the south-east corner. Numerous broken granite columns in
the gardens and vineyards that surround the town, with the number of
ruined houses within the walls, testify to its former importance. The
stele of Jehawmelek, king of Gebal, found here, is one of the most
important of Phoenician monuments. The small port is almost choked up
with sand and ruins. Pop. 3000, all Moslems.
The inhabitants of the Phoenician Gebal and Greek Byblus were renowned
as stonecutters and ship-builders. Arrian (ii. 20. 1) represents Enylus,
king of Byblus, as joining Alexander with a fleet, after that monarch
had captured the city. Philo of Byblus makes it the most ancient city of
Phoenicia, founded by Cronus, i.e. the Moloch who appears from the stele
of Jehawmelek to have been with Baalit the chief deity of the city.
According to Plutarch (_Mor._ 357), the ark with the corpse of Osiris
was cast ashore at Byblus, and there found by Isis. The orgies of
Adonis in the temple of Baalit (Aphrodite Byblia) are described by
Lucian, _De Dea Syr._, cap. vi. The river Adonis is the Nahr al-Ibrahim,
which flows near the town. The crusaders, after failing before it in
1099, captured "Giblet" in 1103, but lost it again to Saladin in 1189.
Under Mahommedan rule it has gradually decayed. (D. G. H.)
JEBEL (plur. _jibal_), also written GEBEL with hard _g_ (plur. _gibal_),
an Arabic word meaning a mountain or a mountain chain. It is frequently
used in place-names. The French transliteration of the word is _djebel_.
_Jebeli_ signifies a mountaineer. The pronunciation with a hard _g_
sound is that used in the Egyptian dialect of Arabic.
JEDBURGH, a royal and police burgh and county-town of Roxburghshire,
Scotland. Pop. of police burgh (1901), 3136. It is situated on Jed
Water, a tributary of the Teviot, 56¼ m. S.E. of Edinburgh by the North
British railway, via Roxburgh and St Boswells (49 m. by road), and 10 m.
from the border at Catcleuch Shin, a peak of the Cheviots, 1742 ft.
high. Of the name Jedburgh there have been many variants, the earliest
being Gedwearde (800), Jedwarth (1251), and Geddart (1586), while
locally the word is sometimes pronounced Jethart. The town is situated
on the left bank of the Jed, the main streets running at right angles
from each side of the central market-place. Of the renowned group of
Border abbeys--Jedburgh, Melrose, Dryburgh and Kelso--that of Jedburgh
is the stateliest. In 1118, according to tradition, but more probably as
late as 1138, David, prince of Cumbria, here founded a priory for
Augustinian monks from the abbey of St Quentin at Beauvais in France,
and in 1147, after he had become king, erected it into an abbey
dedicated to the Virgin. Repeatedly damaged in Border warfare, it was
ruined in 1544-45 during the English invasion led by Sir Ralph Evers (or
Eure). The establishment was suppressed in 1559, the revenues being
temporarily annexed to the Crown. After changing owners more than once,
the lands were purchased in 1637 by the 3rd earl of Lothian. Latterly
five of the bays at the west end had been utilized as the parish church,
but in 1873-1875 the 9th marquess of Lothian built a church for the
service of the parish, and presented it to the heritors in exchange for
the ruined abbey in order to prevent the latter from being injured by
modern additions and alterations.
The abbey was built of Old Red sandstone, and belongs mostly to the
end of the 12th and the beginning of the 13th centuries. The
architecture is mixed, and the abbey is a beautiful example of the
Norman and Transition styles. The total length is 235 ft., the nave
being 133½ ft. long and 59½ ft. wide. The west front contains a great
Norman porch and a fine wheel window. The nave, on each side, has nine
pointed arches in the basement storey, nine round arches in the
triforium, and thirty-six pointed arches in the clerestory, through
which an arcade is carried on both sides. The tower, at the
intersection of the nave and transepts, is of unusually massive
proportions, being 30 ft. square and fully 100 ft. high; the network
baluster round the top is modern. With the exception of the north
piers and a small portion of the wall above, which are Norman, the
tower dates from the end of the 15th century. The whole of the south
transept has perished. The north transept, with early Decorated
windows, has been covered in and walled off, and is the burial-ground
of the Kerrs of Fernihirst, ancestors of the marquess of Lothian. The
earliest tombstone is dated 1524; one of the latest is the recumbent
effigy, by G. F. Watts, R.A., of the 8th marquess of Lothian
(1832-1870). All that is left of the choir, which contains some very
early Norman work, is two bays with three tiers on each side,
corresponding to the design of the nave. It is supposed that the
aisle, with Decorated window and groined roof, south of the chancel,
formed the grammar school (removed from the abbey in 1751) in which
Samuel Rutherford (1600-1661), principal of St Mary's College, St
Andrews, and James Thomson, author of The _Seasons_, were educated.
The door leading from the south aisle into a herbaceous garden,
formerly the cloister, is an exquisite copy of one which had become
greatly decayed. It was designed by Sir Rowand Anderson, under whose
superintendence restoration in the abbey was carried out.
The castle stood on high ground at the south end of the burgh, or
"town-head." Erected by David I., it was one of the strongholds ceded to
England in 1174, under the treaty of Falaise, for the ransom of William
the Lion. It was, however, so often captured by the English that it
became a menace rather than a protection, and the townsfolk demolished
it in 1409. It had occasionally been used as a royal residence, and was
the scene, in November 1285, of the revels held in celebration of the
marriage (solemnized in the abbey) of Alexander III. to Joleta, or
Yolande, daughter of the count of Dreux. The site was occupied in 1823
by the county prison, now known as the castle, a castellated structure
which gradually fell into disuse and was acquired by the corporation in
1890. A house exists in Backgate in which Mary Queen of Scots resided in
1566, and one in Castlegate which Prince Charles Edward occupied in
1745.
The public buildings include the grammar school (built in 1883 to
replace the successor of the school in the abbey), founded by William
Turnbull, bishop of Glasgow (d. 1454), the county buildings, the free
library and the public hall, which succeeded to the corn exchange
destroyed by fire in 1898, a loss that involved the museum and its
contents, including the banners captured by the Jethart weavers at
Bannockburn and Killiecrankie. The old market cross still exists, and
there are two public parks. The chief industry is the manufacture of
woollens (blankets, hosiery), but brewing, tanning and iron-founding are
carried on, and fruit (especially pears) and garden produce are in
repute. Jedburgh was made a royal burgh in the reign of David I., and
received a charter from Robert I. and another, in 1566, from Mary Queen
of Scots. Sacked and burned time after time during the Border strife, it
was inevitable that the townsmen should become keen fighters. Their cry
of "Jethart's here!" was heard wherever the fray waxed most fiercely,
and the Jethart axe of their invention--a steel axe on a 4-ft.
pole--wrought havoc in their hands.
"Jethart or Jeddart justice," according to which a man was hanged first
and tried afterwards, seems to have been a hasty generalization from a
solitary fact--the summary execution in James VI.'s reign of a gang of
rogues at the instance of Sir George Home, but has nevertheless passed
into a proverb.
Old Jeddart, 4 m. S. of the present town, the first site of the burgh,
is now marked by a few grassy mounds, and of the great Jedburgh forest,
only the venerable oaks, the "Capon Tree" and the "King of the Woods"
remain. Dunion Hill (1095 ft.), about 2 m. south-west of Jedburgh,
commands a fine view of the capital of the county.
JEEJEEBHOY (JIJIBHAI), SIR JAMSETJEE (JAMSETJI), Bart. (1783-1859),
Indian merchant and philanthropist, was born in Bombay in 1783, of poor
but respectable parents, and was left an orphan in early life. At the
age of sixteen, with a smattering of mercantile education and a bare
pittance, he commenced a series of business travels destined to lead him
to fortune and fame. After a preliminary visit to Calcutta, he undertook
a voyage to China, then fraught with so much difficulty and risk that it
was regarded as a venture betokening considerable enterprise and
courage; and he subsequently initiated a systematic trade with that
country, being himself the carrier of his merchant wares on his passages
to and fro between Bombay and Canton and Shanghai. His second return
voyage from China was made in one of the East India Company's fleet,
which, under the command of Sir Nathaniel Dance, defeated the French
squadron under Admiral Linois (Feb. 15, 1804). On his fourth return
voyage from China, the Indiaman in which he sailed was forced to
surrender to the French, by whom he was carried as a prisoner to the
Cape of Good Hope, then a neutral Dutch possession; and it was only
after much delay, and with great difficulty, that he made his way to
Calcutta in a Danish ship. Nothing daunted, he undertook yet another
voyage to China, which was more successful than any of the previous
ones. By this time he had fairly established his reputation as a
merchant possessed of the highest spirit of enterprise and considerable
wealth, and thenceforward he settled down in Bombay, where he directed
his commercial operations on a widely extended scale. By 1836 his firm
was large enough to engross the energies of his three sons and other
relatives; and he had amassed what at that period of Indian mercantile
history was regarded as fabulous wealth. An essentially self-made man,
having experienced in early life the miseries of poverty and want, in
his days of affluence Jamsetjee Jeejeebhoy developed an active instinct
of sympathy with his poorer countrymen, and commenced that career of
private and public philanthropy which is his chief title to the
admiration of mankind. His liberality was unbounded, and the absorbing
occupation of his later life was the alleviation of human distress. To
his own community he gave lavishly, but his benevolence was mainly
cosmopolitan. Hospitals, schools, homes of charity, pension funds, were
founded or endowed by him, while numerous public works in the shape of
wells, reservoirs, bridges, causeways, and the like, not only in Bombay,
but in other parts of India, were the creation of his bounty. The total
of his known benefactions amounted at the time of his death, which took
place in 1859, to over £230,000. It was not, however, the amount of his
charities so much as the period and circumstances in which they were
performed that made his benevolent career worthy of the fame he won. In
the first half of the 19th century the various communities of India were
much more isolated in their habits and their sympathies than they are
now. Jamsetjee Jeejeebhoy's unsectarian philanthropy awakened a common
understanding and created a bond between them which has proved not only
of domestic value but has had a national and political significance. His
services were recognized first in 1842 by the bestowal of a knighthood
upon him, and in 1858 by that of a baronetcy. These were the very first
distinctions of their kind conferred by Queen Victoria upon a British
subject in India.
His title devolved in 1859 on his eldest son CURSETJEE, who, by a
special Act of the Viceroy's Council in pursuance of a provision in the
letters-patent, took the name of Sir Jamsetjee Jeejeebhoy as second
baronet. At his death in 1877 his eldest son, MENEKJEE, became Sir
Jamsetjee Jeejeebhoy, the third baronet. Both had the advantage of a
good English education, and continued the career of benevolent activity
and devoted loyalty to British rule which had signalized the life-work
of the founder of the family. They both visited England to do homage to
their sovereign; and their public services were recognized by their
nomination to the order of the Star of India, as well as by appointment
to the Legislative Councils of Calcutta and Bombay.
On the death of the third baronet, the title devolved upon his brother,
COWSAJEE (1853-1908), who became Sir Jamsetjee Jeejeebhoy, fourth
baronet, and the recognized leader of the Parsee community all over the
world. He was succeeded by his son RUSTOMJEE (b. 1878), who became Sir
Jamsetjee Jeejeebhoy, fifth baronet.
Since their emigration from Persia, the Parsee community had never had a
titular chief or head, its communal funds and affairs being managed by a
public body, more or less democratic in its constitution, termed the
Parsee panchayat. The first Sir Jamsetjee, by the hold that he
established on the community, by his charities and public spirit,
gradually came to be regarded in the light of its chief; and the
recognition which he was the first in India to receive at the hands of
the British sovereign finally fixed him and his successors in the
baronetcy in the position and title of the official Parsee leader.
(M. M. Bh.)
JEFFERIES, RICHARD (1848-1887), English naturalist and author, was born
on the 6th of November 1848, at the farmhouse of Coate about 2½ m. from
Swindon, on the road to Marlborough. He was sent to school, first at
Sydenham and then at Swindon, till the age of fifteen or so, but his
actual education was at the hands of his father, who gave him his love
for Nature and taught him how to observe. For the faculty of
observation, as Jefferies, Gilbert White, and H. D. Thoreau have
remarked, several gifts are necessary, including the possession of long
sight and quick sight, two things which do not always go together. To
them must be joined trained sight and the knowledge of what to expect.
The boy's father first showed him what there was to look for in the
hedge, in the field, in the trees, and in the sky. This kind of training
would in many cases be wasted: to one who can understand it, the book of
Nature will by-and-by offer pages which are blurred and illegible to the
city-bred lad, and even to the country lad the power of reading them
must be maintained by constant practice. To live amid streets or in the
working world destroys it. The observer must live alone and always in
the country; he must not worry himself about the ways of the world; he
must be always, from day to day, watching the infinite changes and
variations of Nature. Perhaps, even when the observer can actually read
this book of Nature, his power of articulate speech may prove inadequate
for the expression of what he sees. But Jefferies, as a boy, was more
than an observer of the fields; he was bookish, and read all the books
that he could borrow or buy. And presently, as is apt to be the fate of
a bookish boy who cannot enter a learned profession, he became a
journalist and obtained a post on the local paper. He developed literary
ambitions, but for a long time to come was as one beating the air. He
tried local history and novels; but his early novels, which were
published at his own risk and expense, were, deservedly, failures. In
1872, however, he published a remarkable letter in _The Times_, on "The
Wiltshire Labourer," full of original ideas and of facts new to most
readers. This was in reality the turning-point in his career. In 1873,
after more false starts, Jefferies returned to his true field of work,
the life of the country, and began to write for _Fraser's Magazine_ on
"Farming and Farmers." He had now found himself. The rest of his history
is that of continual advance, from close observation becoming daily more
and more close, to that intimate communion with Nature with which his
later pages are filled. The developments of the later period are
throughout touched with the melancholy that belongs to ill-health. For,
though in his prose poem called "The Pageant of Summer" the writer seems
absolutely revelling in the strength of manhood that belongs to that
pageant, yet, in the _Story of My Heart_, written about the same time,
we detect the mind that is continually turned to death. He died at
Goring, worn out with many ailments, on the 14th of August 1887. The
best-known books of Richard Jefferies are: _The Gamekeeper at Home_
(1878); _The Story of My Heart_ (1883); _Life of the Fields_ (1884),
containing the best paper he ever wrote, "The Pageant of Summer";
_Amaryllis at the Fair_ (1884), in which may be found the portraits of
his own people; and _The Open Air_. He stands among the scanty company
of men who address a small audience, for whom he read aloud these pages
of Nature spoken of above, which only he, and the few like unto him, can
decipher.
See Sir Walter Besant, _Eulogy of Richard Jefferies_ (1888); H. S.
Salt, _Richard Jefferies: a Study_ (1894); Edward Thomas, _Richard
Jefferies, his Life and Work_ (1909). (W. Be.)
JEFFERSON, JOSEPH (1820-1905), American actor, was born in Philadelphia
on the 20th of February 1829. He was the third actor of this name in a
family of actors and managers, and the most famous of all American
comedians. At the age of three he appeared as the boy in Kotzebue's
_Pizarro_, and throughout his youth he underwent all the hardships
connected with theatrical touring in those early days. After a
miscellaneous experience, partly as actor, partly as manager, he won his
first pronounced success in 1858 as Asa Trenchard in Tom Taylor's _Our
American Cousin_ at Laura Keene's theatre in New York. This play was the
turning-point of his career, as it was of Sothern's. The naturalness and
spontaneity of humour with which he acted the love scenes revealed a
spirit in comedy new to his contemporaries, long used to a more
artificial convention; and the touch of pathos which the part required
revealed no less to the actor an unexpected power in himself. Other
early parts were Newman Noggs in _Nicholas Nickleby_, Caleb Plummer in
_The Cricket on the Hearth_, Dr Pangloss in _The Heir at Law_, Salem
Scudder in _The Octoroon_, and Bob Acres in _The Rivals_, the last being
not so much an interpretation of the character as Sheridan sketched it
as a creation of the actor's. In 1859 Jefferson made a dramatic version
of the story of _Rip Van Winkle_ on the basis of older plays, and acted
it with success at Washington. The play was given its permanent form by
Dion Boucicault in London, where (1865) it ran 170 nights, with
Jefferson in the leading part. Jefferson continued to act with
undiminished popularity in a limited number of parts in nearly every
town in the United States, his Rip Van Winkle, Bob Acres, and Caleb
Plummer being the most popular. He was one of the first to establish the
travelling combinations which superseded the old system of local stock
companies. With the exception of minor parts, such as the First
Gravedigger in _Hamlet_, which he played in an "all star combination"
headed by Edwin Booth, Jefferson created no new character after 1865;
and the success of Rip Van Winkle was so pronounced that he has often
been called a one-part actor. If this was a fault, it was the public's,
who never wearied of his one masterpiece. Jefferson died on the 23rd of
April 1905. No man in his profession was more honoured for his
achievements or his character. He was the friend of many of the leading
men in American politics, art and literature. He was an ardent fisherman
and lover of nature, and devoted to painting. Jefferson was twice
married: to an actress, Margaret Clements Lockyer (1832-1861), in 1850,
and in 1867 to Sarah Warren, niece of William Warren the actor.
Jefferson's _Autobiography_ (New York, 1889) is written with admirable
spirit and humour, and its judgments with regard to the art of the
actor and of the playwright entitle it to a place beside Cibber's
_Apology_. See William Winter, _The Jeffersons_ (1881), and _Life of
Joseph Jefferson_ (1894); Mrs. E. P. Jefferson, _Recollections of
Joseph Jefferson_ (1909).
JEFFERSON, THOMAS (1743-1826), third president of the United States of
America, and the most conspicuous apostle of democracy in America, was
born on the 13th of April 1743, at Shadwell, Albemarle county, Virginia.
His father, Peter Jefferson (1707-1757), of early Virginian yeoman
stock, was a civil engineer and a man of remarkable energy, who became a
justice of the peace, a county surveyor and a burgess, served the Crown
in inter-colonial boundary surveys, and married into one of the most
prominent colonial families, the Randolphs. Albemarle county was then in
the frontier wilderness of the Blue Ridge, and was very different,
socially, from the lowland counties where a few broad-acred families
dominated an open-handed, somewhat luxurious and assertive aristocracy.
Unlike his Randolph connexions, Peter Jefferson was a whig and a
thorough democrat; from him, and probably, too, from the Albemarle
environment, his son came naturally by democratic inclinations.
Jefferson carried with him from the college of William and Mary at
Williamsburg, in his twentieth year, a good knowledge of Latin, Greek
and French (to which he soon added Spanish, Italian and Anglo-Saxon),
and a familiarity with the higher mathematics and natural sciences only
possessed, at his age, by men who have a rare natural taste and ability
for those studies. He remained an ardent student throughout life, able
to give and take in association with the many scholars, American and
foreign, whom he numbered among his friends and correspondents. With a
liberal Scotsman, Dr William Small, then of the faculty of William and
Mary and later a friend of Erasmus Darwin, and George Wythe (1726-1806),
a very accomplished scholar and leader of the Virginia bar, Jefferson
was an habitual member, while still in college, of a _partie carrée_ at
the table of Francis Fauquier (c. 1720-1768), the accomplished
lieutenant-governor of Virginia. Jefferson was an expert violinist, a
good singer and dancer, proficient in outdoor sports, and an excellent
horseman. Thorough-bred horses always remained to him a necessary
luxury. When it is added that Fauquier was a passionate gambler, and
that the gentry who gathered every winter at Williamsburg, the seat of
government of the province, were ruinously addicted to the same
weakness, and that Jefferson had a taste for racing, it does credit to
his early strength of character that of his social opportunities he took
only the better. He never used tobacco, never played cards, never
gambled, and was never party to a personal quarrel.
Soon after leaving college he entered Wythe's law office, and in 1767,
after five years of close study, was admitted to the bar. His thorough
preparation enabled him to compete from the first with the leading
lawyers of the colony, and his success shows that the bar had no rewards
that were not fairly within his reach. As an advocate, however, he did
not shine; a weakness of voice made continued speaking impossible, and
he had neither the ability nor the temperament for oratory. To his legal
scholarship and collecting zeal Virginia owed the preservation of a
large part of her early statutes. He seems to have lacked interest in
litigiousness, which was extraordinarily developed in colonial
Virginia; and he saw and wished to reform the law's abuses. It is
probable that he turned, therefore, the more willingly to politics; at
any rate, soon after entering public life he abandoned practice (1774).
The death of his father had left him an estate of 1900 acres, the income
from which (about £400) gave him the position of an independent country
gentleman; and while engaged in the law he had added to his farms after
the ambitious Virginia fashion, until, when he married in his thirtieth
year, there were 5000 acres all paid for; and almost as much more[1]
came to him in 1773 on the death of his father-in-law. On the 1st of
January 1772, Jefferson married Martha Wayles Skelton (1749-1782), a
childless widow of twenty-three, very handsome, accomplished, and very
fond of music. Their married life was exceedingly happy, and Jefferson
never remarried after her early death. Of six children born from their
union, two daughters alone survived infancy. Jefferson was emotional and
very affectionate in his home, and his generous and devoted relations
with his children and grandchildren are among the finest features of his
character.
Jefferson began his public service as a justice of the peace and parish
vestryman; he was chosen a member of the Virginia house of burgesses in
1769 and of every succeeding assembly and convention of the colony until
he entered the Continental Congress in 1775. His forceful, facile pen
gave him great influence from the first; but though a foremost member of
several great deliberative bodies, he can fairly be said never to have
made a speech. He hated the "morbid rage of debate" because he believed
that men were never convinced by argument, but only by reflection,
through reading or unprovocative conversation; and this belief guided
him through life. Moreover it is very improbable that he could ever have
shone as a public speaker, and to this fact unfriendly critics have
attributed, at least in part, his abstention from debate. The house of
burgesses of 1769, and its successors in 1773 and 1774, were dissolved
by the governor (see VIRGINIA) for their action on the subject of
colonial grievances and inter-colonial co-operation. Jefferson was
prominent in all; was a signer of the Virginia agreement of
non-importation and economy (1769); and was elected in 1774 to the first
Virginia convention, called to consider the state of the colony and
advance inter-colonial union. Prevented by illness from attending,
Jefferson sent to the convention elaborate resolutions, which he
proposed as instructions to the Virginia delegates to the Continental
Congress that was to meet at Philadelphia in September. In the direct
language of reproach and advice, with no disingenuous loading of the
Crown's policy upon its agents, these resolutions attacked the errors of
the king, and maintained that "the relation between Great Britain and
these colonies was exactly the same as that of England and Scotland
after the accession of James and until the Union; and that our
emigration to this country gave England no more rights over us than the
emigration of the Danes and Saxons gave to the present authorities of
their mother country over England." This was cutting at the common root
of allegiance, emigration and colonization; but such radicalism was too
thorough-going for the immediate end. The resolutions were published,
however, as a pamphlet, entitled _A Summary View of the Rights of
America_, which was widely circulated. In England, after receiving such
modifications--attributed to Burke--as adapted it to the purposes of the
opposition, this pamphlet ran through many editions, and procured for
its author, as he said, "the honour of having his name inserted in a
long list of proscriptions enrolled in a bill of attainder commenced in
one of the two houses of parliament, but suppressed in embryo by the
hasty course of events." It placed Jefferson among the foremost leaders
of revolution, and procured for him the honour of drafting, later, the
Declaration of Independence, whose historical portions were, in large
part, only a revised transcript of the _Summary View_. In June 1775 he
took his seat in the Continental Congress, taking with him fresh
credentials of radicalism in the shape of Virginia's answer, which he
had drafted, to Lord North's conciliatory propositions. Jefferson soon
drafted the reply of Congress to the same propositions. Reappointed to
the next Congress, he signalized his service by the authorship of the
Declaration of Independence (q.v.). Again reappointed, he surrendered
his seat, and after refusing a proffered election to serve as a
commissioner with Benjamin Franklin and Silas Deane in France, he
entered again, in October 1776, the Virginia legislature, where he
considered his services most needed.
The local work to which Jefferson attributed such importance was a
revision of Virginia's laws. Of the measures proposed to this end he
says: "I considered four, passed or reported, as forming a system by
which every trace would be eradicated of ancient or future aristocracy,
and a foundation laid for a government truly republican"--the repeal of
the laws of entail; the abolition of primogeniture and the unequal
division of inheritances (Jefferson was himself an eldest son); the
guarantee of freedom of conscience and relief of the people from
supporting, by taxation, an established church; and a system of general
education. The first object was embodied in law in 1776, the second in
1785, the third[2] in 1786 (supplemented 1799, 1801). The last two were
parts of a body of codified laws prepared (1776-1779) by Edmund
Pendleton,[3] George Wythe, and Jefferson, and principally by Jefferson.
Not so fortunate were Jefferson's ambitious schemes of education.
District, grammar and classical schools, a free state library and a
state college, were all included in his plan. He was the first American
statesman to make education by the state a fundamental article of
democratic faith. His bill for elementary education he regarded as the
most important part of the code, but Virginia had no strong middle
class, and the planters would not assume the burden of educating the
poor. At this time Jefferson championed the natural right of
expatriation, and gradual emancipation of the slaves. His earliest
legislative effort, in the five-day session of 1769, had been marked by
an effort to secure to masters freedom to manumit their slaves without
removing them from the state. It was unsuccessful, and the more radical
measure he now favoured was even more impossible of attainment; but a
bill he introduced to prohibit the importation of slaves was passed in
1778--the only important change effected in the slave system of the
state during the War of Independence. Finally he endeavoured, though
unsuccessfully, to secure the introduction of juries into the courts of
chancery, and--a generation and more before the fruition of the labours
of Romilly and his co-workers in England--aided in securing a
humanitarian revision of the penal code,[4] which, though lost by one
vote in 1785, was sustained by public sentiment, and was adopted in
1796. Jefferson is of course not entitled to the sole credit for all
these services: Wythe, George Mason and James Madison, in particular,
were his devoted lieutenants, and--after his departure for France--the
principals in the struggle; moreover, an approving public opinion must
receive large credit. But Jefferson was throughout the chief inspirer
and foremost worker.
In 1779, at almost the gloomiest stage of the war in the southern
states, Jefferson succeeded Patrick Henry as the governor of Virginia,
being the second to hold that office after the organization of the state
government. In his second term (1780-1781) the state was overrun by
British expeditions, and Jefferson, a civilian, was blamed for the
ineffectual resistance. Though he cannot be said to have been eminently
fitted for the task that devolved upon him in such a crisis, most of the
criticism of his administration was undoubtedly grossly unjust. His
conduct being attacked, he declined renomination for the governorship,
but was unanimously returned by Albemarle as a delegate to the state
legislature; and on the day previously set for legislative inquiry on a
resolution offered by an impulsive critic, he received, by unanimous
vote of the house, a declaration of thanks and confidence. He wished
however to retire permanently from public life, a wish strengthened by
the illness and death of his wife. At this time he composed his _Notes
on Virginia_, a semi-statistical work full of humanitarian liberalism.
Congress twice offered him an appointment as one of the
plenipotentiaries to negotiate peace with England, but, though he
accepted the second offer, the business was so far advanced before he
could sail that his appointment was recalled. During the following
winter (1783) he was again in Congress, and headed the committee
appointed to consider the treaty of peace. In the succeeding session his
service was marked by a report, from which resulted the present monetary
system of the United States (the fundamental idea of its decimal basis
being due, however, to Gouverneur Morris); and by the honour of
reporting the first definitely formulated plan for the government of the
western territories,[5] that embodied in the ordinance of 1784. He was
already particularly associated with the great territory north-west of
the Ohio; for Virginia had tendered to Congress in 1781, while Jefferson
was governor, a cession of her claims to it, and now in 1784 formally
transferred the territory by act of Jefferson and his fellow delegates
in congress: a consummation for which he had laboured from the
beginning. His anti-slavery opinions grew in strength with years (though
he was somewhat inconsistent in his attitude on the Missouri question in
1820-1821). Not only justice but patriotism as well pleaded with him the
cause of the negroes,[6] for he foresaw the certainty that the race must
some day, in some way, be freed, and the dire political dangers involved
in the institution of slavery; and could any feasible plan of
emancipation have been suggested he would have regarded its cost as a
mere bagatelle.
From 1784 to 1789 Jefferson was in France, first under an appointment to
assist Benjamin Franklin and John Adams in negotiating treaties of
commerce with European states, and then as Franklin's successor
(1785-1789) as minister to France.[7] In these years he travelled widely
in western Europe. Though the commercial principles of the United States
were far too liberal for acceptance, as such, by powers holding colonies
in America, Jefferson won some specific concessions to American trade.
He was exceedingly popular as a minister. The criticism is even to-day
current with the uninformed that Jefferson took his manners,[8] morals,
"irreligion" and political philosophy from his French residence; and it
cannot be wholly ignored. It may therefore be said that there is nothing
except unsubstantiated scandal to contradict the conclusion, which
various evidence supports, that Jefferson's morals were pure. His
religious views and political beliefs will be discussed later. His
theories had a deep and broad basis in English whiggism; and though he
may well have found at least confirmation of his own ideas in French
writers--and notably in Condorcet--he did not read sympathetically the
writers commonly named, Rousseau and Montesquieu; besides, his democracy
was seasoned, and he was rather a teacher than a student of
revolutionary politics when he went to Paris. The _Notes on Virginia_
were widely read in Paris, and undoubtedly had some influence in
forwarding the dissolution of the doctrines of divine rights and passive
obedience among the cultivated classes of France. Jefferson was deeply
interested in all the events leading up to the French Revolution, and
all his ideas were coloured by his experience of the five seething years
passed in Paris. On the 3rd of June 1789 he proposed to the leaders of
the third estate a compromise between the king and the nation. In July
he received the extraordinary honour of being invited to assist in the
deliberations of the committee appointed by the national assembly to
draft a constitution. This honour his official position compelled him,
of course, to decline; for he sedulously observed official proprieties,
and in no way gave offence to the government to which he was accredited.
When Jefferson left France it was with the intention of soon returning;
but President Washington tendered him the secretaryship of state in the
new federal government, and Jefferson reluctantly accepted. His only
essential objection to the constitution--the absence of a bill of
rights--was soon met, at least partially, by amendments. Alexander
Hamilton (q.v.) was secretary of the treasury. These two men, antipodal
in temperament and political belief, clashed in irreconcilable
hostility, and in the conflict of public sentiment, first on the
financial measures of Hamilton, and then on the questions with regard to
France and Great Britain, Jefferson's sympathies being predominantly
with the former, Hamilton's with the latter, they formed about
themselves the two great parties of Democrats and Federalists. The
schools of thought for which they stood have since contended for mastery
in American politics: Hamilton's gradually strengthened by the
necessities of stronger administration, as time gave widening amplitude
and increasing weight to the specific powers--and so to Hamilton's great
doctrine of the "implied powers"--of the general government of a growing
country; Jefferson's rooted in colonial life, and buttressed by the
hopes and convictions of democracy.
The most perplexing questions treated by Jefferson as secretary of state
arose out of the policy of neutrality adopted by the United States
toward France, to whom she was bound by treaties and by a heavy debt of
gratitude. Separation from European politics--the doctrine of "America
for Americans" that was embodied later in the Monroe declaration--was a
tenet cherished by Jefferson as by other leaders (not, however,
Hamilton) and by none cherished more firmly, for by nature he was
peculiarly opposed to war, and peace was a fundamental part of his
politics. However deep, therefore, his French sympathies, he drew the
same safe line as did Washington between French politics and American
politics,[9] and handled the Genet complications to the satisfaction of
even the most partisan Federalists. He expounded, as a very high
authority has said, "with remarkable clearness and power the nature and
scope of neutral duty," and gave a "classic" statement of the doctrine
of recognition.[10]
But the French question had another side in its reaction on American
parties.[11] Jefferson did not read excesses in Paris as warnings
against democracy, but as warnings against the abuses of monarchy; nor
did he regard Bonaparte's _coup d'état_ as revealing the weakness of
republics, but rather as revealing the danger of standing armies; he did
not look on the war of the coalitions against France as one of mere
powers, but as one between forms of government; and though the immediate
fruits of the Revolution belied his hopes, as they did those of ardent
humanitarians the world over, he saw the broad trend of history, which
vindicated his faith that a successful reformation of government in
France would insure "a general reformation through Europe, and the
resurrection to a new life of their people." Each of these statements
could be reversed as regards Hamilton. It is the key to an understanding
of the times to remember that the War of Independence had disjointed
society; and democracy--which Jefferson had proclaimed in the
Declaration of Independence, and enthroned in Virginia--after
strengthening its rights by the sword, had run to excesses, particularly
in the Shays' rebellion, that produced a conservative reaction. To this
reaction Hamilton explicitly appealed in the convention of 1787; and of
this reaction various features of the constitution, and Hamiltonian
federalism generally, were direct fruits. Moreover, independently of
special incentives to the alarmist and the man of property, the opinions
of many Americans turned again, after the war, into a current of
sympathy for England, as naturally as American commerce returned to
English ports. Jefferson, however, far from America in these years and
unexposed to reactionary influences, came back with undiminished fervour
of democracy, and the talk he heard of praise for England, and fearful
recoil before even the beginning of the revolution in France,
disheartened him, and filled him with suspicion.[12] Hating as he did
feudal class institutions and Tudor-Stuart traditions of arbitrary
rule,[13] his attitude can be imagined toward Hamilton's oft-avowed
partialities--and Jefferson assumed, his intrigues--for British
class-government with its eighteenth-century measure of corruption. In
short, Hamilton took from recent years the lesson of the evils of lax
government; whereas Jefferson clung to the other lesson, which crumbling
colonial governments had illustrated, that governments derived their
strength (and the Declaration had proclaimed that they derived their
just rights) from the will of the governed. Each built his system
accordingly: the one on the basis of order, the other on
individualism--which led Jefferson to liberty alike in religion and in
politics. The two men and the fate of the parties they led are
understandable only by regarding one as the leader of reaction, the
other as in line with the American tendencies. The educated classes
characteristically furnished Federalism with a remarkable body of
alarmist leaders; and thus it happened that Jefferson, because, with
only a few of his great contemporaries, he had a thorough trust and
confidence in the people, became the idol of American democracy.
As Hamilton was somewhat officious and very combative, and Jefferson,
although uncontentious, very suspicious and quite independent, both men
holding inflexibly to opinions, cabinet harmony became impossible when
the two secretaries had formed parties about them and their differences
were carried into the newspapers;[14] and Washington abandoned perforce
his idea "if parties did exist to reconcile them." Partly from
discontent with a position in which he did not feel that he enjoyed the
absolute confidence of the president,[15] and partly because of the
embarrassed condition of his private affairs, Jefferson repeatedly
sought to resign, and finally on the 31st of December 1793, with
Washington's reluctant consent, gave up his portfolio and retired to his
home at Monticello, near Charlottesville.
Here he remained improving his estate (having refused a foreign mission)
until elected vice-president in 1796. Jefferson was never truly happy
except in the country. He loved gardening, experimented enthusiastically
in varieties and rotations of crops and kept meteorological tables with
diligence. For eight years he tabulated with painful accuracy the
earliest and latest appearance of thirty-seven vegetables in the
Washington market. When abroad he sought out varieties of grasses,
trees, rice and olives for American experiment, and after his return
from France received yearly for twenty-three years, from his old friend
the superintendent of the _Jardin des plantes_, a box of seeds, which he
distributed to public and private gardens throughout the United States.
Jefferson seems to have been the first discoverer of an exact formula
for the construction of mould-boards of least resistance for ploughs. He
managed to make practical use of his calculus about his farms, and seems
to have been remarkably apt in the practical application of mechanical
principles.
In the presidential election of 1796 John Adams, the Federalist
candidate, received the largest number of electoral votes, and
Jefferson, the Republican candidate, the next largest number, and under
the law as it then existed the former became president and the latter
vice-president. Jefferson re-entered public life with reluctance, though
doubtless with keen enough interest and resolution. He had rightly
measured the strength of his followers, and was waiting for the
government to "drift into unison" with the republican sense of its
constituents, predicting that President Adams would be "overborne"
thereby. This prediction was speedily fulfilled. At first the reign of
terror and the X. Y. Z. disclosures strengthened the Federalists, until
these, mistaking the popular resentment against France for a reaction
against democracy--an equivalence in their own minds--passed the alien
and sedition laws. In answer to those odious measures Jefferson and
Madison prepared and procured the passage of the Kentucky and Virginia
resolutions. These resolutions later acquired extraordinary and
pernicious prominence in the historical elaboration of the
states'-rights doctrine. It is, however, unquestionably true, that as a
startling protest against measures "to silence," in Jefferson's words,
"by force and not by reason the complaints or criticisms, just or
unjust, of our citizens against the conduct of our agents," they served,
in this respect, a useful purpose; and as a counterblast against
Hamiltonian principles of centralization they were probably, at that
moment, very salutary; while even as pieces of constitutional
interpretation it is to be remembered that they did not contemplate
nullification by any single state, and, moreover, are not to be judged
by constitutional principles established later by courts and war. The
Federalist party had ruined itself, and it lost the presidential
election of 1800. The Republican candidates, Jefferson and Aaron Burr
(q.v.), receiving equal votes, it devolved upon the House of
Representatives, in accordance with the system which then obtained, to
make one of the two president, the other vice-president. Party feeling
in America has probably never been more dangerously impassioned than in
the three years preceding this election; discount as one will the
contrary obsessions of men like Fisher Ames, Hamilton and Jefferson, the
time was fateful. Unable to induce Burr to avow Federalist principles,
influential Federalists, in defiance of the constitution, contemplated
the desperate alternative of preventing an election, and appointing an
extra-constitutional (Federalist) president _pro tempore_. Better
counsels, however, prevailed; Hamilton used his influence in favour of
Jefferson as against Burr, and Jefferson became president, entering upon
his duties on the 4th of March 1801. Republicans who had affiliated with
the Federalists at the time of the X. Y. Z. disclosures returned; very
many of the Federalists themselves Jefferson placated and drew over.
"Believing," he wrote, "that (excepting the ardent monarchists) all our
citizens agreed in ancient whig principles"--or, as he elsewhere
expressed it, in "republican forms"--"I thought it advisable to define
and declare them, and let them see the ground on which we can rally."
This he did in his inaugural, which, though somewhat rhetorical, is a
splendid and famous statement of democracy.[16] His conciliatory policy
produced a mild schism in his own party, but proved eminently wise, and
the state elections of 1801 fulfilled his prophecy of 1791 that the
policy of the Federalists would leave them "all head and no body." In
1804 he was re-elected by 162 out of 176 votes.
Jefferson's administrations were distinguished by the simplicity that
marked his conduct in private life. He eschewed the pomp and ceremonies,
natural inheritances from English origins, that had been an innocent
setting to the character of his two noble predecessors. His dress was of
"plain cloth" on the day of his inauguration. Instead of driving to the
Capitol in a coach and six, he walked without a guard or servant from
his lodgings--or, as a rival tradition has it, he rode, and hitched his
horse to a neighbouring fence--attended by a crowd of citizens. Instead
of opening Congress with a speech to which a formal reply was expected,
he sent in a written message by a private hand. He discontinued the
practice of sending ministers abroad in public vessels. Between himself
and the governors of states he recognized no difference in rank. He
would not have his birthday celebrated by state balls. The weekly levée
was practically abandoned. Even such titles as "Excellency,"
"Honourable," "Mr" were distasteful to him. It was formally agreed in
cabinet meeting that "when brought together in society, all are
perfectly equal, whether foreign or domestic, titled or untitled, in or
out of office." Thus diplomatic grades were ignored in social precedence
and foreign relations were seriously compromised by dinner-table
complications. One minister who appeared in gold lace and dress sword
for his first, and regularly appointed, official call on the president,
was received--as he insisted with studied purpose--by Jefferson in
negligent undress and slippers down at the heel. All this was in part
premeditated system[17]--a part of Jefferson's purpose to republicanize
the government and public opinion, which was the distinguishing feature
of his administration; but it was also simply the nature of the man. In
the company he chose by preference, honesty and knowledge were his only
tests. He knew absolutely no social distinctions in his willingness to
perform services for the deserving. He held up to his daughter as an
especial model the family of a poor but gifted mechanic as one wherein
she would see "the best examples of rational living." "If it be
possible," he said, "to be certainly conscious of anything, I am
conscious of feeling no difference between writing to the highest and
lowest being on earth."
Jefferson's first administration was marked by a reduction of the army,
navy, diplomatic establishment and, to the uttermost, of governmental
expenses; some reduction of the civil service, accompanied by a large
shifting of offices to Republicans; and, above all, by the Louisiana
Purchase (q.v.), following which Meriwether Lewis and William Clark,
sent by Jefferson, conducted their famous exploring expedition across
the continent to the Pacific (see LEWIS, MERIWETHER). Early in his term
he carried out a policy he had urged upon the government when minister
to France and when vice-president, by dispatching naval forces to coerce
Tripoli into a decent respect for the trade of his country--the first in
Christendom to gain honourable immunity from tribute or piracy in the
Mediterranean. The Louisiana Purchase, although the greatest
"inconsistency" of his career, was also an illustration, in
corresponding degree, of his essential practicality, and one of the
greatest proofs of his statesmanship. It was the crowning achievement of
his administration. It is often said that Jefferson established the
"spoils system" by his changes in the civil service. He was the
innovator, because for the first time there was opportunity for
innovation. But mere justice requires attention to the fact that
incentive to that innovation, and excuse for it, were found in the
absolute one-party monopoly maintained by the Federalists. Moreover,
Jefferson's ideals were high; his reasons for changes were in general
excellent; he at least so far resisted the great pressure for
office--producing by his resistance dissatisfaction within his party--as
not to have lowered, apparently, the personnel of the service; and there
were no such blots on his administration as President Adams's "midnight
judges." Nevertheless, his record here was not clear of blots, showing a
few regrettable inconsistencies.[18] Among important but secondary
measures of his second administration were the extinguishment of Indian
titles, and promotion of Indian emigration to lands beyond the
Mississippi; reorganization of the militia; fortification of the
seaports; reduction of the public debt; and a simultaneous reduction of
taxes. But his second term derives most of its historical interest from
the unsuccessful efforts to convict Aaron Burr of treasonable acts in
the south-west, and from the efforts made to maintain, without war, the
rights of neutrals on the high seas. In his diplomacy with Napoleon and
Great Britain Jefferson betrayed a painful incorrigibility of optimism.
A national policy of "growling before fighting"--later practised
successfully enough by the United States--was not then possible; and one
writer has very justly said that what chiefly affects one in the whole
matter is the pathos of it--"a philosopher and a friend of peace
struggling with a despot of superhuman genius, and a Tory cabinet of
superhuman insolence and stolidity" (Trent). It is possible to regard
the embargo policy dispassionately as an interesting illustration of
Jefferson's love of peace. The idea--a very old one with Jefferson--was
not entirely original; in essence it received other attempted
applications in the Napoleonic period--and especially in the continental
blockade. Jefferson's statesmanship had the limitations of an agrarian
outlook. The extreme to which he carried his advocacy of diplomatic
isolation, his opposition to the creation of an adequate navy,[19] his
estimate of cities as "sores upon the body politic," his prejudice
against manufactures, trust in farmers, and political distrust of the
artisan class, all reflect them.
When, on the 4th of March 1809, Jefferson retired from the presidency,
he had been almost continuously in the public service for forty years.
He refused to be re-elected for a third time, though requested by the
legislatures of five states to be a candidate; and thus, with
Washington's prior example, helped to establish a precedent deemed by
him to be of great importance under a democratic government. His
influence seemed scarcely lessened in his retirement. Madison and
Monroe, his immediate successors--neighbours and devoted friends, whom
he had advised in their early education and led in their maturer
years--consulted him on all great questions, and there was no break of
principles in the twenty-four years of the "Jeffersonian system."
Jefferson was one of the greatest political managers his country has
known. He had a quick eye for character, was genuinely amiable,
uncontentious, tactful, masterful; and it may be assumed from his
success that he was wary or shrewd to a degree. It is true, moreover,
that, unless tested by a few unchanging principles, his acts were often
strikingly inconsistent; and even when so tested, not infrequently
remain so in appearance. Full explanations do not remove from some
important transactions in his political life an impression of
indirectness. But reasonable judgment must find very unjust the stigma
of duplicity put upon him by the Federalists. Measured by the records of
other men equally successful as political leaders, there seems little of
this nature to criticize severely. Jefferson had the full courage of his
convictions. Extreme as were his principles, his pertinacity in adhering
to them and his independence of expression were quite as extreme. There
were philosophic and philanthropic elements in his political faith which
will always lead some to class him as a visionary and fanatic; but
although he certainly indulged at times in dreams at which one may still
smile, he was not, properly speaking, a visionary; nor can he with
justice be stigmatized as a fanatic. He felt fervently, was not afraid
to risk all on the conclusions to which his heart and his mind led him,
declared himself with openness and energy; and he spoke and even wrote
his conclusions, how ever bold or abstract, without troubling to detail
his reasoning or clip his off-hand speculations. Certain it is that
there is much in his utterances for a less robust democracy than his own
to cavil at.[20] Soar, however, as he might, he was essentially not a
doctrinaire, but an empiricist; his mind was objective. Though he
remained, to the end, firm in his belief that there had been an active
monarchist party,[21] this obsession did not carry him out of touch with
the realities of human nature and of his time. He built with surety on
the colonial past, and had a better reasoned view of the actual future
than had any of his contemporaries.
Events soon appraised the ultra-Federalist judgment of American
democracy, so tersely expressed by Fisher Ames as "like death ... only
the dismal passport to a more dismal hereafter"; and, with it, appraised
Jefferson's word in his first inaugural for those who, "in the full tide
of successful experiment," were ready to abandon a government that had
so far kept them "free and firm, on the visionary fear that it might by
possibility lack energy to preserve itself." Time soon tested, too, his
principle that that government must prove the strongest on earth "where
every man ... would meet invasions of the public order as his own
personal concern." He summed up as follows the difference between
himself and the Hamiltonian group: "One feared most the ignorance of the
people; the other the selfishness of rulers independent of them."
Jefferson, in short, had unlimited faith in the honesty of the people; a
large faith in their common sense; believed that all is to be won by
appealing to the reason of voters; that by education their ignorance can
be eliminated; that human nature is indefinitely perfectible; that
majorities rule, therefore, not only by virtue of force (which was
Locke's ultimate justification of them), but of right.[22] His
importance as a maker of modern America can scarcely be overstated, for
the ideas he advocated have become the very foundations of American
republicanism. His administration ended the possibility, probability or
certainty--measure it as one will--of the development of Federalism in
the direction of class government; and the party he formed, inspired by
the creed he gave it, fixed the democratic future of the nation. And by
his own labours he had vindicated his faith in the experiment of
self-government.
Jefferson's last years were devoted to the establishment of the
university of Virginia at Charlottesville, near his home. He planned the
buildings, gathered its faculty--mainly from abroad--and shaped its
organization. Practically all the great ideas of aim, administration and
curriculum that dominated American universities at the end of the 19th
century were anticipated by him. He hoped that the university might be a
dominant influence in national culture, but circumstances crippled it.
His educational plans had been maturing in his mind since 1776. His
financial affairs in these last years gave him grave concern. His fine
library of over 10,000 volumes was purchased at a low price by Congress
in 1815, and a national contribution ($16,500) just before his death
enabled him to die in peace. Though not personally extravagant, his
salary, and the small income from his large estates, never sufficed to
meet his generous maintenance of his representative position; and after
his retirement from public life the numerous visitors to Monticello
consumed the remnants of his property. He died on the 4th of July 1826,
the fiftieth anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, on the same
day as John Adams. He chose for his tomb the epitaph: "Here was buried
Thomas Jefferson, author of the Declaration of American Independence, of
the statute of Virginia for religious freedom, and father of the
university of Virginia."
Jefferson was about 6 ft. in height, large-boned, slim, erect and
sinewy. He had angular features, a very ruddy complexion, sandy hair,
and hazel-flecked, grey eyes. Age lessened the unattractiveness of his
exterior. In later years he was negligent in dress and loose in
bearing. There was grace, nevertheless, in his manners; and his frank
and earnest address, his quick sympathy (yet he seemed cold to
strangers), his vivacious, desultory, informing talk, gave him an
engaging charm. Beneath a quiet surface he was fairly aglow with
intense convictions and a very emotional temperament. Yet he seems to
have acted habitually, in great and little things, on system. His
mind, no less trenchant and subtle than Hamilton's, was the most
impressible, the most receptive, mind of his time in America. The
range of his interests is remarkable. For many years he was president
of the American philosophical society. Though it is a biographical
tradition that he lacked wit, Molière and _Don Quixote_ seem to have
been his favourites; and though the utilitarian wholly crowds
romanticism out of his writings, he had enough of that quality in
youth to prepare to learn Gaelic in order to translate Ossian, and
sent to Macpherson for the originals! His interest in art was
evidently intellectual. He was singularly sweet-tempered, and shrank
from the impassioned political bitterness that raged about him; bore
with relative equanimity a flood of coarse and malignant abuse of his
motives, morals, religion,[23] personal honesty and decency; cherished
very few personal animosities; and better than any of his great
antagonists cleared political opposition of ill-blooded personality.
In short, his kindness of heart rose above all social, religious or
political differences, and nothing destroyed his confidence in men and
his sanguine views of life.
AUTHORITIES.--See the editions of Jefferson's _Writings_ by H. A.
Washington (9 vols., New York, 1853-1854), and--the best--by Paul
Leicester Ford (10 vols., New York, 1892-1899); letters in
Massachusetts Historical Society, _Collections_, series 7, vol. i.; S.
E. Forman, _The Letters and Writings of Thomas Jefferson, including
all his Important Utterances on Public Questions_ (1900); J. P. Foley,
_The Jefferson Cyclopaedia_ (New York, 1900); the _Memoir,
Correspondence_, &c., by T. J. Randolph (4 vols., Charlottesville,
Va., 1829); biographies by James Schouler ("Makers of America Series,"
New York, 1893); John T. Morse ("American Statesmen Series," Boston,
1883); George Tucker (2 vols., Philadelphia, 1837); James Parton
(Boston, 1874); and especially that by Henry S. Randall (3 vols., New
York, 1853), a monumental work, although marred by some special
pleading, and sharing Jefferson's implacable opinions of the
"Monocrats." See also Henry Adams, _History of the United States
1801-1817_, vols. 1-4 (New York, 1889-1890); Herbert B. Adams, _Thomas
Jefferson and the University of Virginia_ (U. S. bureau of education,
Washington, 1888); Sarah N. Randolph, _Domestic Life of Thomas
Jefferson_ (New York, 1871); and an illuminating appreciation by W. P.
Trent, in his _Southern Statesmen of the Old Régime_ (New York, 1897);
that by John Fiske, Essays, _Historical and Literary_, vol. i. (New
York, 1902), has slighter merits. (F. S. P.)
FOOTNOTES:
[1] It was embarrassed with a debt, however, of £3749, which, owing
to conditions caused by the War of Independence, he really paid three
times to his British creditors (not counting destruction on his
estates, of equal amount, ordered by Lord Cornwallis). This greatly
reduced his income for a number of years.
[2] The first law of its kind in Christendom, although not the
earliest practice of such liberty in America.
[3] George Mason and Thomas L. Lee were members of the commission,
but they were not lawyers, and did little actual work on the
revision.
[4] Capital punishment was confined to treason and murder; the former
was not to be attended by corruption of blood, drawing, or
quartering; all other felonies were made punishable by confinement
and hard labour, save a few to which was applied, against Jefferson's
desire, the principle of retaliation.
[5] This plan applied to the south-western as well as to the
north-western territory, and was notable for a provision that slavery
should not exist therein after 1800. This provision was defeated in
1784, but was adopted in 1787 for the north-western territory--a step
which is very often said to have saved the Union in the Civil War;
the south-western territory (out of which were later formed
Mississippi, Alabama, &c.) being given over to slavery. Thus the
anti-slavery clause of the ordinance of 1784 was not adopted; and it
was preceded by unofficial proposals to the same end; yet to it
belongs rightly some special honour as blazoning the way for federal
control of slavery in the territories, which later proved of such
enormous consequence. Jefferson in the first draft of the Ordinance
of 1784, suggested the names to be given to the states eventually to
be formed out of the territory concerned. For his suggestions he has
been much ridiculed. The names are as follows: Illinoia, Michigania,
Sylvania, Polypotamia, Assenisipia, Charronesus, Pelisipia, Saratoga,
Metropotamia and Washington.
[6] He owned at one time above 150 slaves. His overseers were under
contract never to bleed them; but he manumitted only a few at his
death.
[7] During this time he assisted in negotiating a treaty of amity and
commerce with Prussia (1785) and one with Morocco (1789), and
negotiated with France a "convention defining and establishing the
functions and privileges of consuls and vice-consuls" (1788).
[8] Patrick Henry humorously declaimed before a popular audience that
Jefferson, who favoured French wine and cookery, had "abjured his
native victuals."
[9] Jefferson did not sympathize with the temper of his followers who
condoned the zealous excesses of Genet, and in general with the
"misbehaviour" of the democratic clubs; but, as a student of English
liberties, he could not accept Washington's doctrine that for a
self-created permanent body to declare "this act unconstitutional,
and that act pregnant with mischiefs" was "a stretch of arrogant
presumption" which would, if unchecked, "destroy the country."
[10] John Basset Moore, _American Diplomacy_ (New York, 1905).
[11] Compare C. D. Hazen, _Contemporary American opinion of the
French Revolution_ (Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, 1897).
[12] It was at this period of his life that Jefferson gave expression
to some of the opinions for which he has been most severely
criticized and ridiculed. For the Shays' rebellion he felt little
abhorrence, and wrote: "A little rebellion now and then is a good
thing ... an observation of this truth should render honest
republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions as not
to discourage them too much. It is a medicine necessary for the sound
health of government" (_Writings_, Ford ed., iv. 362-363). Again,
"Can history produce an instance of rebellion so honorably
conducted?... God forbid that we should ever be twenty years without
such a rebellion.... What signify a few lives lost in a century or
two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the
blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure" (Ibid. iv.
467). Again he says: "Societies exist under three forms--(1) without
government, as among our Indians; (2) under governments wherein the
will of every one has a just influence.... (3) under governments of
force.... It is a problem not clear in my mind that the first
condition is not the best." (Ibid. iv. 362.)
[13] He turned law students from Blackstone's toryism to Coke on
Littleton; and he would not read Walter Scott, so strong was his
aversion to that writer's predilection for class and feudalism.
[14] Hamilton wrote for the papers himself; Jefferson never did. A
talented clerk in his department, however, Philip Freneau, set up an
anti-administration paper. It was alleged that Jefferson appointed
him for the purpose, and encouraged him. Undoubtedly there was
nothing in the charge. The Federalist outcry could only have been
silenced by removal of Freneau, or by disclaimers or admonitions,
which Jefferson did not think it incumbent upon himself--or, since he
thought Freneau was doing good, desirable for him--to make.
[15] Contrary to the general belief that Hamilton dominated
Washington in the cabinet, there is the president's explicit
statement that "there were as many instances" of his deciding against
as in favour of the secretary of the treasury.
[16] See also Jefferson to E. Gerry, 26th of January 1799
(_Writings_, vii. 325), and to Dupont de Nemours (x. 23). Cf.
Hamilton to J. Dayton, 1799 (_Works_, x. 329).
[17] In 1786 he suggested to James Monroe that the society of friends
he hoped to gather in Albemarle might, in sumptuary matters, "set a
good example" to a country (i.e. Virginia) that "needed" it.
[18] See C. R. Fish, _The Civil Service and the Patronage_ (Harvard
Historical Studies, New York, 1905), ch. 2.
[19] Jefferson's dislike of a navy was due to his desire for an
economical administration and for peace. Shortly after his
inauguration he expressed a desire to lay up the larger men of war in
the eastern branch of the Potomac, where they would require only "one
set of plunderers to take care of them." To Thomas Paine he wrote in
1807: "I believe that gunboats are the only _water_ defence which can
be useful to us and protect us from the ruinous folly of a navy."
(_Works_, Ford ed., ix. 137.) The gunboats desired by Jefferson were
small, cheap craft equipped with one or two guns and kept on shore
under sheds until actually needed, when they were to be launched and
manned by a sort of naval militia. A large number of these boats were
constructed and they afforded some protection to coasting vessels
against privateers, but in bad weather, or when employed against a
frigate, they were worse than useless, and Jefferson's "gunboat
system" was admittedly a failure.
[20] See e.g. his letters in 1787 on the Shays' rebellion, and his
speculations on the doctrine that one generation may not bind another
by paper documents. With the latter may be compared present-day
movements like the initiative and referendum, and not a few
discussions of national debts. Jefferson's distrust of governments
was nothing exceptional for a consistent individualist.
[21] In his last years he carefully sifted and revised his
contemporary notes evidencing, as he believed, the existence of such
a party, and they remain as his _Ana_ (chiefly Hamiltoniana). The
only just judgment of these notes is to be obtained by looking at
them, and by testing his suspicions with the letters of Hamilton,
Ames, Oliver Wolcott, Theodore Sedgwick, George Cabot and the other
Hamiltonians. Such a comparison measures also the relative judgment,
temper and charity of these writers and Jefferson. It must still
remain true, however, that Jefferson's _Ana_ present him in a far
from engaging light.
[22] "Jefferson, in 1789, wrote some such stuff about the will of
majorities, as a New Englander would lose his rank among men of sense
to avow."--Fisher Ames (Jan. 1800).
[23] He was classed as a "French infidel" and atheist. His attitude
toward religion was in fact deeply reverent and sincere, but he
insisted that religion was purely an individual matter, "evidenced,
as concerns the world by each one's daily life," and demanded
absolute freedom of private judgment. He looked on Unitarianism with
much sympathy and desired its growth. "I am a Christian," he wrote in
1823, "in the only sense in which he (Jesus) wished any one to be;
sincerely attached to his doctrines in preference to all others;
ascribing to himself every human excellence, and believing he never
claimed any other."
JEFFERSON CITY (legally and officially the City of Jefferson), the
capital of Missouri, U.S.A., and the county-seat of Cole county, on the
Missouri river, near the geographical centre of the state, about 125 m.
W. of St Louis. Pop. (1890), 6742; (1900), 9664, of whom 786 were
foreign-born and 1822 were negroes; (1910 census), 11,850. It is served
by the Missouri Pacific, the Chicago & Alton, and the Missouri, Kansas &
Texas railways. Its site is partly in the bottom-lands of the river and
partly on the steep banks at an elevation of about 600 ft. above the
sea. A steel bridge spans the river. The state capitol, an imposing
structure built on a bluff above the river, was built in 1838-1842 and
enlarged in 1887-1888; it was first occupied in 1840 by the legislature,
which previously had met (after 1837) in the county court house. Other
prominent buildings are the United States court house and post office,
the state supreme court house, the county court house, the state
penitentiary, the state armoury and the executive mansion. The
penitentiary is to a large extent self-supporting; in 1903-1904 the
earnings were $3493.80 in excess of the costs, but in 1904-1906 the
costs exceeded the earnings by $9044. Employment is furnished for the
convicts on the penitentiary premises by incorporated companies. The
state law library here is one of the best of the kind in the country,
and the city has a public library. In the city is Lincoln Institute, a
school for negroes, founded in 1866 by two regiments of negro infantry
upon their discharge from the United States army, opened in 1868, taken
over by the state in 1879, and having sub-normal, normal, college,
industrial and agricultural courses. Coal and limestone are found near
the city. In 1905 the total value of the factory product was $3,926,632,
an increase of 28.2% since 1900. The original constitution of Missouri
prescribed that the capital should be on the Missouri river within 40 m.
of the mouth of the Osage, and a commission selected in 1821 the site of
Jefferson City, on which a town was laid out in 1822, the name being
adopted in honour of Thomas Jefferson. The legislature first met here in
1826; Jefferson City became the county-seat in 1828, and in 1839 was
first chartered as a city. The constitutional conventions of 1845 and
1875, and the state convention which issued the call for the National
Liberal Republican convention at Cincinnati in 1872, met here, and so
for some of its sessions did the state convention of 1861-1863. In June
1861 Jefferson City was occupied by Union forces, and in
September-October 1864 it was threatened by Confederate troops under
General Sterling Price.
JEFFERSONVILLE, a city and the county-seat of Clark county, Indiana,
U.S.A., situated on the N. bank of the Ohio river, opposite Louisville,
Kentucky, with which it is connected by several bridges. Pop. (1890),
10,666; (1900), 10,774, of whom 1818 were of negro descent and 615 were
foreign-born; (1910 census), 10,412. It is served by the Baltimore &
Ohio South-western, the Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St Louis, and
the Pittsburg, Cincinnati, Chicago & St Louis railways, and by three
inter-urban electric lines. It is attractively situated on bluffs above
the river, which at this point has a descent (known as the falls of the
Ohio) of 26 ft. in 2 m. This furnishes good water power for
manufacturing purposes both at Jeffersonville and at Louisville. The
total value of the factory product in 1905 was $4,526,443, an increase
of 20% since 1900. The Indiana reformatory (formerly the Southern
Indiana penitentiary) and a large supply dépôt of the United States army
are at Jeffersonville. General George Rogers Clark started (June 24,
1778) on his expedition against Kaskaskia and Vincennes from Corn Island
(now completely washed away) opposite what is now Jeffersonville. In
1786 the United States government established Fort Finney (built by
Captain Walter Finney), afterwards re-named Fort Steuben, on the site of
the present city; but the fort was abandoned in 1791, and the actual
beginning of Jeffersonville was in 1802, when a part of the Clark grant
(the site of the present city) was transferred by its original owner,
Lieut. Isaac Bowman, to three trustees, under whose direction a town was
laid out. Jeffersonville was incorporated as a town in 1815, and was
chartered as a city in 1839.
JEFFREY, FRANCIS JEFFREY, LORD (1773-1850), Scottish judge and literary
critic, son of a depute-clerk in the Court of Session, was born at
Edinburgh on the 23rd of October 1773. After attending the high school
for six years, he studied at the university of Glasgow from 1787 to May
1789, and at Queen's College, Oxford, from September 1791 to June 1792.
He had begun the study of law at Edinburgh before going to Oxford, and
now resumed his studies there. He became a member of the speculative
society, where he measured himself in debate with Scott, Brougham,
Francis Horner, the marquess of Lansdowne, Lord Kinnaird and others. He
was admitted to the Scotch bar in December 1794, but, having abandoned
the Tory principles in which he had been educated, he found that his
Whig politics seriously prejudiced his legal prospects. In consequence
of his lack of success at the bar he went to London in 1798 to try his
fortune as a journalist, but without success; he also made more than one
vain attempt to obtain an office which would have secured him the
advantage of a small but fixed salary. His marriage with Catherine
Wilson in 1801 made the question of a settled income even more pressing.
A project for a new review was brought forward by Sydney Smith in
Jeffrey's flat in the presence of H. P. Brougham (afterwards Lord
Brougham), Francis Horner and others; and the scheme resulted in the
appearance on the 10th of October 1802 of the first number of the
_Edinburgh Review_. At the outset the _Review_ was not under the charge
of any special editor. The first three numbers were, however,
practically edited by Sydney Smith, and on his leaving for England the
work devolved chiefly on Jeffrey, who, by an arrangement with Constable,
the publisher, was eventually appointed editor at a fixed salary. Most
of those associated in the undertaking were Whigs; but, although the
general bias of the Review was towards social and political reforms, it
was at first so little of a party organ that for a time it numbered Sir
Walter Scott among its contributors; and no distinct emphasis was given
to its political leanings until the publication in 1808 of an article by
Jeffrey himself on the work of Don Pedro Cevallos on the _French
Usurpation of Spain_. This article expressed despair of the success of
the British arms in Spain, and Scott at once withdrew his subscription,
the _Quarterly_ being soon afterwards started in opposition. According
to Lord Cockburn the effect of the first number of the _Edinburgh
Review_ was "electrical." The English reviews were at that time
practically publishers' organs, the articles in which were written by
hackwriters instructed to praise or blame according to the publishers'
interests. Few men of any standing consented to write for them. The
_Edinburgh Review_, on the other hand, enlisted a brilliant and
independent staff of contributors, guided by the editor, not the
publisher. They received sixteen guineas a sheet (sixteen printed
pages), increased subsequently to twenty-five guineas in many cases,
instead of the two guineas which formed the ordinary London reviewer's
fee. Further, the review was not limited to literary criticism. It
constituted itself the accredited organ of moderate Whig public opinion.
The particular work which provided the starting-point of an article was
in many cases merely the occasion for the exposition, always brilliant
and incisive, of the author's views on politics, social subjects, ethics
or literature. These general principles and the novelty of the method
ensured the success of the undertaking even after the original circle of
exceptionally able men who founded it had been dispersed. It had a
circulation, great for those days, of 12,000 copies. The period of
Jeffrey's editorship extended to about twenty-six years, ceasing with
the ninety-eighth number, published in June 1829, when he resigned in
favour of Macvey Napier.
Jeffrey's own contributions, according to a list which has the sanction
of his authority, numbered two hundred, all except six being written
before his resignation of the editorship. Jeffrey wrote with great
rapidity, at odd moments of leisure and with little special preparation.
Great fluency and ease of diction, considerable warmth of imagination
and moral sentiment, and a sharp eye to discover any oddity of style or
violation of the accepted canons of good taste, made his criticisms
pungent and effective. But the essential narrowness and timidity of his
general outlook prevented him from detecting and estimating latent
forces, either in politics or in matters strictly intellectual and
moral; and this lack of understanding and sympathy accounts for his
distrust and dislike of the passion and fancy of Shelley and Keats, and
for his praise of the half-hearted and elegant romanticism of Rogers and
Campbell. (For his treatment of the lake poets see WORDSWORTH, WILLIAM.)
A criticism in the fifteenth number of the _Review_ on the morality of
Moore's poems led in 1806 to a duel between the two authors at Chalk
Farm. The proceedings were stopped by the police, and Jeffrey's pistol
was found to contain no bullet. The affair led to a warm friendship,
however, and Moore contributed to the _Review_, while Jeffrey made ample
amends in a later article on _Lalla Rookh_ (1817).
Jeffrey's wife had died in 1805, and in 1810 he became acquainted with
Charlotte, daughter of Charles Wilkes of New York, and great-niece of
John Wilkes. When she returned to America, Jeffrey followed her, and
they were married in 1813. Before returning to England they visited
several of the chief American cities, and his experience strengthened
Jeffrey in the conciliatory policy he had before advocated towards the
States. Notwithstanding the increasing success of the _Review_, Jeffrey
always continued to look to the bar as the chief field of his ambition.
As a matter of fact, his literary reputation helped his professional
advancement. His practice extended rapidly in the civil and criminal
courts, and he regularly appeared before the general assembly of the
Church of Scotland, where his work, though not financially profitable,
increased his reputation. As an advocate his sharpness and rapidity of
insight gave him a formidable advantage in the detection of the
weaknesses of a witness and the vulnerable points of his opponent's
case, while he grouped his own arguments with an admirable eye to
effect, especially excelling in eloquent closing appeals to a jury.
Jeffrey was twice, in 1820 and 1822, elected lord rector of the
university of Glasgow. In 1829 he was chosen dean of the faculty of
advocates. On the return of the Whigs to power in 1830 he became lord
advocate, and entered parliament as member for the Perth burghs. He was
unseated, and afterwards returned for Malton, a borough in the interest
of Lord Fitzwilliam. After the passing of the Scottish Reform Bill,
which he introduced in parliament, he was returned for Edinburgh in
December 1832. His parliamentary career, which, though not brilliantly
successful, had won him high general esteem, was terminated by his
elevation to the judicial bench as Lord Jeffrey in May 1834. In 1842 he
was moved to the first division of the Court of Session. On the
disruption of the Scottish Church he took the side of the seceders,
giving a judicial opinion in their favour, afterwards reversed by the
house of lords. He died at Edinburgh on the 26th of January 1850.
Some of his contributions to the _Edinburgh Review_ appeared in four
volumes in 1844 and 1845. This selection includes the essay on
"Beauty" contributed to the _Ency. Brit._ The _Life of Lord Jeffrey,
with a Selection from his Correspondence_, by Lord Cockburn, appeared
in 1852 in 2 vols. See also the _Selected Correspondence of Macvey
Napier_ (1877); the sketch of Jeffrey in Carlyle's _Reminiscences_,
vol. ii. (1881); and an essay by Lewis E. Gates in _Three Studies in
Literature_ (New York, 1899).
JEFFREYS, GEORGE JEFFREYS, 1ST BARON (1648-1689), lord chancellor of
England, son of John Jeffreys, a Welsh country gentleman, was born at
Acton Park, his father's seat in Denbighshire, in 1648. His family,
though not wealthy, was of good social standing and repute in Wales; his
mother, a daughter of Sir Thomas Ireland of Bewsey, Lancashire, was "a
very pious good woman." He was educated at Shrewsbury, St Paul's and
Westminster schools, at the last of which he was a pupil of Busby, and
at Trinity College, Cambridge; but he left the university without taking
a degree, and entered the Inner Temple as a student in May 1663. From
his childhood Jeffreys displayed exceptional talent, but on coming to
London he occupied himself more with the pleasures of conviviality than
with serious study of the law. Though he never appears to have fallen
into the licentious immorality prevalent at that period, he early became
addicted to hard drinking and boisterous company. But as the records of
his early years, and indeed of his whole life, are derived almost
exclusively from vehemently hostile sources, the numerous anecdotes of
his depravity cannot be accepted without a large measure of scepticism.
He was a handsome, witty and attractive boon-companion, and in the
taverns of the city he made friends among attorneys with practice in the
criminal courts. Thus assisted he rose so rapidly in his profession that
within three years of his call to the bar in 1668, he was elected common
serjeant of the city of London. Such advancement, however, was not to be
attained even in the reign of Charles II. solely by the aid of
disreputable friendships. Jeffreys had remarkable aptitude for the
profession of an advocate--quick intelligence, caustic humour, copious
eloquence. His powers of cross-examination were masterly; and if he was
insufficiently grounded in legal principles to become a profound lawyer,
nothing but greater application was needed in the opinion of so hostile
a critic as Lord Campbell, to have made him the rival of Nottingham and
Hale. Jeffreys could count on the influence of respectable men of
position in the city, such as Sir Robert Clayton and his own namesake
Alderman Jeffreys; and he also enjoyed the personal friendship of the
virtuous Sir Matthew Hale. In 1667 Jeffreys had married in circumstances
which, if improvident, were creditable to his generosity and sense of
honour; and his domestic life, so far as is known, was free from the
scandal common among his contemporaries. While holding the judicial
office of common serjeant, he pursued his practice at the bar. With a
view to further preferment he now sought to ingratiate himself with the
court party, to which he obtained an introduction possibly through
William Chiffinch, the notorious keeper of the king's closet. He at once
attached himself to the king's mistress, the duchess of Portsmouth; and
as early as 1672 he was employed in confidential business by the court.
His influence in the city of London, where opposition to the government
of Charles II. was now becoming pronounced, enabled Jeffreys to make
himself useful to Danby. In September 1677 he received a knighthood, and
his growing favour with the court was further marked by his appointment
as solicitor-general to James, duke of York; while the city showed its
continued confidence in him by electing him to the post of recorder in
October 1678.
In the previous month Titus Oates had made his first revelations of the
alleged popish plot, and from this time forward Jeffreys was prominently
identified, either as advocate or judge, with the memorable state trials
by which the political conflict between the Crown and the people was
waged during the remainder of the 17th century. The popish plot,
followed by the growing agitation for the exclusion of the duke of York
from the succession, widened the breach between the city and the court.
Jeffreys threw in his lot with the latter, displaying his zeal by
initiating the movement of the "abhorrers" (q.v.) against the
"petitioners" who were giving voice to the popular demand for the
summoning of parliament. He was rewarded with the coveted office of
chief justice of Chester on the 30th of April 1680; but when parliament
met in October the House of Commons passed a hostile resolution which
induced him to resign his recordership, a piece of pusillanimity that
drew from the king the remark that Jeffreys was "not parliament-proof."
Jeffreys nevertheless received from the city aldermen a substantial
token of appreciation for his past services. In 1681 he was created a
baronet. In June 1683 the first of the Rye House conspirators were
brought to trial. Jeffreys was briefed for the crown in the prosecution
of Lord William Howard; and, having been raised to the bench as lord
chief justice of the king's bench in September, he presided at the
trials of Algernon Sidney in November 1683 and of Sir Thomas Armstrong
in the following June. In the autumn of 1684 Jeffreys, who had been
active in procuring the surrender of municipal charters to the crown,
was called to the cabinet, having previously been sworn of the privy
council. In May 1685 he had the satisfaction of passing sentence on
Titus Oates for perjury in the plot trials; and about the same time
James II. rewarded his zeal with a peerage as Baron Jeffreys of Wem, an
honour never before conferred on a chief justice during his tenure of
office. Jeffreys had for some time been suffering from stone, which
aggravated the irritability of his naturally violent temper; and the
malady probably was in some degree the cause of the unmeasured fury he
displayed at the trial of Richard Baxter (q.v.) for seditious libel--if
the unofficial _ex parte_ report of the trial, which alone exists, is to
be accepted as trustworthy.
In August 1685 Jeffreys opened at Winchester the commission known in
history as the "bloody assizes," his conduct of which has branded his
name with indelible infamy. The number of persons sentenced to death at
these assizes for complicity in the duke of Monmouth's insurrection is
uncertain. The official return of those actually executed was 320; many
hundreds more were transported and sold into slavery in the West Indies.
In all probability the great majority of those condemned were in fact
concerned in the rising, but the trials were in many cases a mockery of
the administration of justice. Numbers were cajoled into pleading
guilty; the case for the prisoners seldom obtained a hearing. The
merciless severity of the chief justice did not however exceed the
wishes of James II.; for on his return to London Jeffreys received from
the king the great seal with the title of lord chancellor. For the next
two years he was a strenuous upholder of prerogative, though he was less
abjectly pliant than has sometimes been represented. There is no reason
to doubt the sincerity of his attachment to the Church of England; for
although the king's favour was capricious Jeffreys never took the easy
and certain path to secure it that lay through apostasy; and he even
withstood James on occasion, when the latter pushed his Catholic zeal to
extremes. Though it is true that he accepted the presidency of the
ecclesiastical commission, Burnet's statement that it was Jeffreys who
suggested that institution to James is probably incorrect; and he was so
far from having instigated the prosecution of the seven bishops in 1688,
as has been frequently alleged, that he disapproved of the proceedings
and rejoiced secretly at the acquittal. But while he watched with
misgiving the king's preferment of Roman Catholics, he made himself the
masterful instrument of unconstitutional prerogative in coercing the
authorities of Cambridge University, who in 1687 refused to confer
degrees on a Benedictine monk, and the fellows of Magdalen College,
Oxford, who declined to elect as their president a disreputable nominee
of the king.
Being thus conspicuously identified with the most tyrannical measures of
James II., Jeffreys found himself in a desperate plight when on the 11th
of December 1688 the king fled from the country on the approach to
London of William of Orange. The lord chancellor attempted to escape
like his master; but in spite of his disguise as a common seaman he was
recognized in a tavern at Wapping--possibly, as Roger North relates, by
an attorney whom Jeffreys had terrified on some occasion in the court of
chancery--and was arrested and conveyed to the Tower. The malady from
which he had long suffered had recently made fatal progress, and he died
in the Tower on the 18th of April 1689. He was succeeded in the peerage
by his son, John (2nd Baron Jeffreys of Wem), who died without male
issue in 1702, when the title became extinct.
It is impossible to determine precisely with what justice tradition has
made the name of "Judge Jeffreys" a byword of infamy. The Revolution,
which brought about his fall, handed over his reputation at the same
time to the mercy of his bitterest enemies. They alone have recorded his
actions and appraised his motives and character. Even the adherents of
the deposed dynasty had no interest in finding excuse for one who served
as a convenient scapegoat for the offences of his master. For at least
half a century after his death no apology for Lord Jeffreys would have
obtained a hearing; and none was attempted. With the exception therefore
of what is to be gathered from the reports of the state trials, all
knowledge of his conduct rests on testimony tainted by undisguised
hostility. Innumerable scurrilous lampoons vilifying the hated
instrument of James's tyranny, but without a pretence of historic value,
flooded the country at the Revolution; and these, while they fanned the
undiscriminating hatred of contemporaries who remembered the judge's
severities, and perpetuated that hatred in tradition, have not been
sufficiently discounted even by modern historians like Macaulay and Lord
Campbell. The name of Jeffreys has therefore been handed down as that of
a coarse, ignorant, dissolute, foul-mouthed, inhuman bully, who
prostituted the seat of justice. That there was sufficient ground for
the execration in which his memory was long held is not to be gainsaid.
But the portrait has nevertheless been blackened overmuch. An occasional
significant admission in his favour may be gleaned even from the
writings of his enemies. Thus Roger North declares that "in matters
indifferent," i.e. where politics were not concerned, Jeffreys became
the seat of justice better than any other that author had seen in his
place. Sir J. Jekyll, master of the rolls, told Speaker Onslow that
Jeffreys "had great parts and made a great chancellor in the business of
his court. In mere private matters he was thought an able and upright
judge wherever he sat." His keen sense of humour, allied with a spirit
of inveterate mockery and an exuberant command of pungent eloquence, led
him to rail and storm at prisoners and witnesses in grossly unseemly
fashion. But in this he did not greatly surpass most of his
contemporaries on the judicial bench, and it was a failing from which
even the dignified and virtuous Hale was not altogether exempt. The
intemperance of Jeffreys which shocked North, certainly did not exceed
that of Saunders; in violence he was rivalled by Scroggs; though accused
of political apostasy, he was not a shameless renegade like Williams;
and there is no evidence that in pecuniary matters he was personally
venal, or that in licentiousness he followed the example set by Charles
II. and most of his courtiers. Some of his actions that have incurred
the sternest reprobation of posterity were otherwise estimated by the
best of his contemporaries. His trial of Algernon Sidney, described by
Macaulay and Lord Campbell as one of the most heinous of his iniquities,
was warmly commended by Dr William Lloyd, who was soon afterwards to
become a popular idol as one of the illustrious seven bishops (see
letter from the bishop of St Asaph in H. B. Irving's _Life of Judge
Jeffreys_, p. 184). Nor was the habitual illegality of his procedure on
the bench so unquestionable as many writers have assumed. Sir James
Stephen inclined to the opinion that no actual abuse of law tainted the
trials of the Rye House conspirators, or that of Alice Lisle, the most
prominent victim of the "bloody assizes." The conduct of the judges in
Russell's trial was, he thinks, "moderate and fair in general"; and the
trial of Sidney "much resembled that of Russell." The same high
authority pronounces that the trial of Lord Delamere in the House of
Lords was conducted by Jeffreys "with propriety and dignity." And if
Jeffreys judged political offenders with cruel severity, he also crushed
some glaring abuses; conspicuous examples of which were the frauds of
attorneys who infested Westminster Hall, and the systematic kidnapping
practised by the municipal authorities of Bristol. Moreover, if any
value is to be attached to the evidence of physiognomy, the traditional
estimate of the character of Jeffreys obtains no confirmation from the
refinement of his features and expression as depicted in Kneller's
portrait in the National Portrait Gallery of London. But even though the
popular notion requires to be thus modified in certain respects, it
remains incontestable that Jeffreys was probably on the whole the worst
example of a period when the administration of justice in England had
sunk to the lowest degradation, and the judicial bench had become the
too willing tool of an unconstitutional and unscrupulous executive.
BIBLIOGRAPHY.--The chief contemporary authorities for the life of
Jeffreys are Bishop Burnet's _History of my own Time_ (1724), and see
especially the edition "with notes by the Earls of Dartmouth and
Hardwick Speaker Onslow and Dean Swift" (Oxford Univ. Press, 1833);
Roger North's _Life of the Right Hon. Francis North, Baron of
Guildford_ (1808) and _Autobiography_ (ed. by Augustus Jessopp, 1887);
_Ellis Correspondence, Verney Papers_ (Hist. MSS. Comm.), _Hatton
Correspondence_ (Camden Soc. pub.); the earl of Ailesbury's _Memoirs_;
Evelyn's _Diary_. The only trustworthy information as to the judicial
conduct and capacity of Jeffreys is to be found in the reports of the
_State Trials_, vols. vii.-xii.; and cf. Sir J. F. Stephen's _History
of the Criminal Law of England_ (1883). For details of the "bloody
assizes," see _Harl. MSS._, 4689; George Roberts, _The Life,
Progresses and Rebellion of James Duke of Monmouth_, vol. ii. (1844);
also many pamphlets, lampoons, &c., in the British Museum, as to which
see the article on "Sources of History for Monmouth's Rebellion and
the Bloody Assizes," by A. L. Humphreys, in _Proceedings of the
Somersetshire Archaeological and Natural Hist. Soc._ (1892). Later
accounts are by H. W. Woolrych, _Memoirs of the Life of Judge
Jeffreys_ (1827); Lord Campbell, _The Lives of the Lord Chancellors_
(1845), 1st series, vol. iii.; E. Foss, _The Judges of England_
(1864), vol. vii.; Henry Roscoe, _Lives of Eminent British Lawyers_
(1830); Lord Macaulay, _History of England_ (1848; and many subsequent
editions). Most of these works, and especially those by Macaulay and
Campbell, are uncritical in their hostility to Jeffreys, and are based
for the most part on untrustworthy authorities. The best modern work
on the subject, though unduly favourable to Jeffreys, is H. B.
Irving's _Life of Judge Jeffreys_ (1898), the appendix to which
contains a full bibliography. (R. J. M.)
JEHOIACHIN (Heb. "Yah[weh] establisheth"), in the Bible, son of
Jehoiakim and king of Judah (2 Kings xxiv. 8 sqq.; 2 Chron, xxxvi. 9
seq.). He came to the throne at the age of eighteen in the midst of the
Chaldean invasion of Judah, and is said to have reigned three months. He
was compelled to surrender to Nebuchadrezzar and was carried off to
Babylon (597 B.C.). This was the First Captivity, and from it Ezekiel
(one of the exiles) dates his prophecies. Eight thousand people of the
better class (including artisans, &c.) were removed, the Temple was
partially despoiled (see Jer. xxvii. 18-20; xxiii.v. 3 seq.),[1] and
Jehoiachin's uncle Mattaniah (son of Josiah) was appointed king.
Jehoiachin's fate is outlined in Jer. xxii. 20-30 (cf. xxvii. 20).
Nearly forty years later, Nebuchadrezzar II. died (562 B.C.) and
Evil-Merodach (Amil-Marduk) his successor released the unfortunate
captive and gave him precedence over the other subjugated kings who were
kept prisoners in Babylon. With this gleam of hope for the unhappy
Judaeans both the book of Kings and the prophecies of Jeremiah conclude
(2 Kings xxv. 27-30; Jer. lii. 31-34).
See, further, JEREMIAH (especially chaps. xxiv., xxvii. seq.), and
JEWS, § 17.
FOOTNOTE:
[1] 2 Kings xxiv. 13 seq. gives other numbers and a view of the
disaster which is more suitable for the Second Captivity. (See
ZEDEKIAH.)
JEHOIAKIM (Heb. "Yah[weh] raiseth up"), in the Bible, son of Josiah
(q.v.) and king of Judah (2 Kings xxiii. 34-xxiv. 6). On the defeat of
Josiah at Megiddo his younger brother Jehoahaz (or Shallum) was chosen
by the Judaeans, but the Egyptian conquerer Necho summoned him to his
headquarters at Riblah (south of Hamath on the Orontes) and removed him
to Egypt, appointing in his stead Eliakim, whose name ("El [God] raiseth
up") was changed to its better-known synonym, Jehoiakim. For a time
Jehoiakim remained under the protection of Necho and paid heavy tribute;
but with the rise of the new Chaldean Empire under Nebuchadrezzar II.,
and the overthrow of Egypt at the battle of Carchemish (605 B.C.) a
vital change occurred. After three years of allegiance the king
revolted. Invasions followed by Chaldeans, Syrians, Moabites and
Ammonites, perhaps the advance troops despatched by the Babylonian
king; the power of Egypt was broken and the whole land came into the
hands of Nebuchadrezzar. It was at the close of Jehoiakim's reign,
apparently just before his death, that the enemy appeared at the gates
of Jerusalem, and although he himself "slept with his fathers" his young
son was destined to see the first captivity of the land of Judah (597
B.C.). (See JEHOIACHIN.)
Which "three years" (2 Kings xxiv. 1) are intended is disputed; it is
uncertain whether Judah suffered in 605 B.C. (Berossus in Jos. _c.
Ap._ i. 19) or was left unharmed (Jos. _Ant._ x. 6. 1); perhaps
Nebuchadrezzar made his first inroad against Judah in 602 B.C. because
of its intrigue with Egypt (H. Winckler, _Keilinschrift. u. d. alte
Test._, pp. 107 seq.), and the three years of allegiance extends to
599. The chronicler's tradition (2 Chron. xxxvi. 5-8) speaks of
Jehoiakim's captivity, apparently confusing him with Jehoiachin. The
Septuagint, however, still preserves there the record of his peaceful
death, in agreement with the earlier source in 2 Kings, but against
the prophecy of Jeremiah (xxii. 18 seq., xxxvi. 30), which is accepted
by Jos. _Ant._ x. 6. 3. The different traditions can scarcely be
reconciled. Nothing certain is known of the marauding bands sent
against Jehoiakim; for Syrians (_Aram_) one would expect Edomites
(_Edom_), but see Jer. xxxv. 11; some recensions of the Septuagint
even include the "Samaritans"! (For further references to this reign
see especially JEREMIAH; see also JEWS: _History_, § 17.)
(S. A. C.)
JEHOL ("hot stream"), or CH'ENG-TE-FU, a city of China, formerly the
seat of the emperor's summer palace, near 118° E. and 41° N., about 140
m. N.E. of Peking, with which it is connected by an excellent road. Pop.
(estimate), 10,000. It is a flourishing town, and consists of one great
street, about 2 m. long, with smaller streets radiating in all
directions. The people are well-to-do and there are some fine shops. The
palace, called Pi-shu-shan-chuang, or "mountain lodge for avoiding
heat," was built in 1703 on the plan of the palace of Yuen-ming-yuen
near Peking. A substantial brick wall 6 m. in circuit encloses several
well-wooded heights and extensive gardens, rockeries, pavilions,
temples, &c. Jehol was visited by Lord Macartney on his celebrated
mission to the emperor K'ienlung in 1793; and it was to Jehol that the
emperor Hienfeng retired when the allied armies of England and France
occupied Peking in 1860. In the vicinity of Jehol are numerous Lama
monasteries and temples, the most remarkable being Potala-su, built on
the model of the palace of the grand lama of Tibet at Potala.
JEHORAM, or JORAM (Heb. "Yah[weh] is high"), the name of two Biblical
characters.
1. The son of Ahab, and king of Israel in succession to his brother
Ahaziah.[1] He maintained close relations with Judah, whose king came to
his assistance against Moab which had revolted after Ahab's death (2
Kings i. 1; iii.). The king in question is said to have been
Jehoshaphat; but, according to Lucian's recension, it was Ahaziah,
whilst i. 17 would show that it was Jehoram's namesake (see 2). The
result of the campaign appears to have been a defeat for Israel (see on
the incidents EDOM, ELISHA, MOAB). The prophetical party were throughout
hostile to Jehoram (with his reform iii. 2 contrast x. 27), and the
singular account of the war of Benhadad king of Syria against the king
of Israel (vi. 24-vii.) shows the feeling against the reigning dynasty.
But whether the incidents in which Elisha and the unnamed king of Israel
appear originally belonged to the time of Jehoram is very doubtful, and
in view of the part which Elisha took in securing the accession of Jehu,
it has been urged with much force that they belong to the dynasty of the
latter, when the high position of the prophet would be perfectly
natural.[2] The briefest account is given of Jehoram's alliance with
Ahaziah (son of 2 below) against Hazael of Syria, at Ramoth-Gilead (2
Kings viii. 25-29), and the incident--with the wounding of the Israelite
king in or about the critical year 842 B.C.--finds a noteworthy parallel
in the time of Jehoshaphat and Ahab (1 Kings xxii. 29-36) at the period
of the equally momentous events in 854 (see AHAB). See further JEHU.
2. The son of Jehoshaphat and king of Judah. He married Athaliah the
daughter of Ahab, and thus was brother-in-law of 1. above, and
contemporary with him (2 Kings i. 17). In his days Edom revolted, and
this with the mention of Libnah's revolt (2 Kings viii. 20 sqq.)
suggests some common action on the part of Philistines and Edomites. The
chronicler's account of his life (2 Chron. xxi-xxii. 1) presupposes
this, but adds many remarkable details: he began his reign by massacring
his brethren (cf. Jehu son of Jehoshaphat, and his bloodshed, 2 Kings
ix. seq.); for his wickedness he received a communication from Elijah
foretelling his death from disease (cf. Elijah and Ahaziah of Israel, 2
Kings i.); in a great invasion of Philistines and Arabian tribes he lost
all his possessions and family, and only Jehoahaz (i.e. Ahaziah) was
saved.[3] His son Ahaziah reigned only for a year (cf. his namesake of
Israel); he is condemned for his Israelite sympathies, and met his end
in the general butchery which attended the accession of Jehu (2 Kings
viii. 25 sqq.; 2 Chron. xxii. 3 seq., 7; with 2 Kings ix. 27 seq., note
the variant tradition in 2 Chron. xxii. 8 seq., and the details which
the LXX. (Lucian) appends to 2 Kings x.). (S. A. C.)
FOOTNOTES:
[1] 2 Kings i. 17 seq.; see Lucian's reading (cf. Vulg. and Pesh.).
Apart from the allusion 1 Kings xxii. 49 (see 2 Chron. xx. 35), and
the narrative in 2 Kings i. (see ELIJAH), nothing is known of this
Ahaziah. Notwithstanding his very brief reign (1 Kings xxii. 51; 2
Kings iii. 1), the compiler passes the usual hostile judgment (1
Kings xxii. 52 seq.); see KINGS (BOOKS). The chronology in 1 Kings
xxii. 51 is difficult; if Lucian's text (twenty-fourth year of
Jehoshaphat) is correct, Jehoram 1 and 2 must have come to their
respective thrones at almost the same time.
[2] In vii. 6 the hostility of Hittites and Mizraim (q.v.) points to
a period _after_ 842 B.C. (See JEWS, § 10 seq.)
[3] These details are scarcely the invention of the chronicler; see
CHRONICLES, and EXPOSITOR, Aug. 1906, p. 191.
JEHOSHAPHAT (Heb. "Yahweh judges"), in the Bible, son of Asa, and king
of Judah, in the 9th century B.C. During his period close relations
subsisted between Israel and Judah; the two royal houses were connected
by marriage (see ATHALIAH; JEHORAM, 2), and undertook joint enterprise
in war and commerce. Jehoshaphat aided Ahab in the battle against
Benhadad at Ramoth-Gilead in which Ahab was slain (1 Kings xxii.; 2
Chron. xviii.; cf. the parallel incident in 2 Kings viii. 25-29), and
trading journeys to Ophir were undertaken by his fleet in conjunction no
doubt with Ahab as well as with his son Ahaziah (2 Chron. xx. 35 sqq.; 1
Kings xxii. 47 sqq.). The chronicler's account of his war against Moab,
Ammon and Edomite tribes (2 Chron. xx.), must rest ultimately upon a
tradition which is presupposed in the earlier source (1 Kings xxii. 47),
and the disaster to the ships at Ezion-Geber at the head of the Gulf of
Akaba preceded, if it was not the introduction to, the great revolt in
the days of Jehoshaphat's son Jehoram, where, again, the details in 2
Chron. xxi. must rely in the first instance upon an old source. Apart
from what is said of Jehoshaphat's legislative measures (2 Chron. xix. 4
sqq.; cf. the meaning of his name above), an account is preserved of his
alliance with Jehoram of Israel against Moab (2 Kings iii.), on which
see JEHORAM; MOAB. The "valley of Jehoshaphat" (Joel iii. 12) has been
identified by tradition (as old as Eusebius) with the valley between
Jerusalem and the mount of Olives. (S. A. C.)
JEHOVAH (YAHWEH[1]), in the Bible, the God of Israel. "Jehovah" is a
modern mispronunciation of the Hebrew name, resulting from combining the
consonants of that name, _Jhvh_, with the vowels of the word _adonay_,
"Lord," which the Jews substituted for the proper name in reading the
scriptures. In such cases of substitution the vowels of the word which
is to be read are written in the Hebrew text with the consonants of the
word which is not to be read. The consonants of the word to be
substituted are ordinarily written in the margin; but inasmuch as Adonay
was regularly read instead of the ineffable name Jhvh, it was deemed
unnecessary to note the fact at every occurrence. When Christian
scholars began to study the Old Testament in Hebrew, if they were
ignorant of this general rule or regarded the substitution as a piece of
Jewish superstition, reading what actually stood in the text, they would
inevitably pronounce the name Jehovah. It is an unprofitable inquiry who
first made this blunder; probably many fell into it independently. The
statement still commonly repeated that it originated with Petrus
Galatinus (1518) is erroneous; Jehova occurs in manuscripts at least as
early as the 14th century.
The form Jehovah was used in the 16th century by many authors, both
Catholic and Protestant, and in the 17th was zealously defended by
Fuller, Gataker, Leusden and others, against the criticisms of such
scholars as Drusius, Cappellus and the elder Buxtorf. It appeared in the
English Bible in Tyndale's translation of the Pentateuch (1530), and is
found in all English Protestant versions of the 16th century except that
of Coverdale (1535). In the Authorized Version of 1611 it occurs in
Exod. vi. 3; Ps. lxxxiii. 18; Isa. xii. 2; xxvi. 4, beside the compound
names Jehovah-jireh, Jehovah-nissi, Jehovah-shalom; elsewhere, in
accordance with the usage of the ancient versions, Jhvh is represented
by Lord (distinguished by capitals from the title "Lord," Heb.
_adonay_). In the Revised Version of 1885 Jehovah is retained in the
places in which it stood in the A. V., and is introduced also in Exod.
vi. 2, 6, 7, 8; Ps. lxviii. 20; Isa. xlix. 14; Jer. xvi. 21; Hab. iii.
19. The American committee which cooperated in the revision desired to
employ the name Jehovah wherever Jhvh occurs in the original, and
editions embodying their preferences are printed accordingly.
Several centuries before the Christian era the name Jhvh had ceased to
be commonly used by the Jews. Some of the later writers in the Old
Testament employ the appellative Elohim, God, prevailingly or
exclusively; a collection of Psalms (Ps. xlii.-lxxxiii.) was revised by
an editor who changed the Jhvh of the authors into Elohim (see e.g. xlv.
7; xlviii. 10; l. 7; li. 14); observe also the frequency of "the Most
High," "the God of Heaven," "King of Heaven," in Daniel, and of "Heaven"
in First Maccabees. The oldest Greek versions (Septuagint), from the
third century B.C., consistently use [Greek: Kyrios], "Lord," where the
Hebrew has Jhvh, corresponding to the substitution of Adonay for Jhvh in
reading the original; in books written in Greek in this period (e.g.
Wisdom, 2 and 3 Maccabees), as in the New Testament, [Greek: Kyrios]
takes the place of the name of God. Josephus, who as a priest knew the
pronunciation of the name, declares that religion forbids him to divulge
it; Philo calls it ineffable, and says that it is lawful for those only
whose ears and tongues are purified by wisdom to hear and utter it in a
holy place (that is, for priests in the Temple); and in another passage,
commenting on Lev. xxiv. 15 seq.: "If anyone, I do not say should
blaspheme against the Lord of men and gods, but should even dare to
utter his name unseasonably, let him expect the penalty of death."[2]
Various motives may have concurred to bring about the suppression of the
name. An instinctive feeling that a proper name for God implicitly
recognizes the existence of other gods may have had some influence;
reverence and the fear lest the holy name should be profaned among the
heathen were potent reasons; but probably the most cogent motive was the
desire to prevent the abuse of the name in magic. If so, the secrecy had
the opposite effect; the name of the god of the Jews was one of the
great names in magic, heathen as well as Jewish, and miraculous efficacy
was attributed to the mere utterance of it.
In the liturgy of the Temple the name was pronounced in the priestly
benediction (Num. vi. 27) after the regular daily sacrifice (in the
synagogues a substitute--probably Adonay--was employed);[3] on the Day
of Atonement the High Priest uttered the name ten times in his prayers
and benediction. In the last generations before the fall of Jerusalem,
however, it was pronounced in a low tone so that the sounds were lost in
the chant of the priests.[4]
After the destruction of the Temple (A.D. 70) the liturgical use of the
name ceased, but the tradition was perpetuated in the schools of the
rabbis.[5] It was certainly known in Babylonia in the latter part of the
4th century,[6] and not improbably much later. Nor was the knowledge
confined to these pious circles; the name continued to be employed by
healers, exorcists and magicians, and has been preserved in many places
in magical papyri. The vehemence with which the utterance of the name is
denounced in the Mishna--"He who pronounces the Name with its own
letters has no part in the world to come!"[7]--suggests that this misuse
of the name was not uncommon among Jews.
The Samaritans, who otherwise shared the scruples of the Jews about the
utterance of the name, seem to have used it in judicial oaths to the
scandal of the rabbis.[8]
The early Christian scholars, who inquired what was the true name of the
God of the Old Testament, had therefore no great difficulty in getting
the information they sought. Clement of Alexandria (d. c. 212) says that
it was pronounced [Greek: Iaoue].[9] Epiphanius (d. 404), who was born
in Palestine and spent a considerable part of his life there, gives
[Greek: Iabe] (one cod. [Greek: Iaue]).[10] Theodoret (d. c. 457),[11]
born in Antioch, writes that the Samaritans pronounced the name [Greek:
Iabe] (in another passage, [Greek: Iabai]), the Jews [Greek: Aia].[12]
The latter is probably not Jhvh but _Ehyeh_ (Exod. iii. 14), which the
Jews counted among the names of God; there is no reason whatever to
imagine that the Samaritans pronounced the name Jhvh differently from
the Jews. This direct testimony is supplemented by that of the magical
texts, in which [Greek: Iabe zebyth] (Jahveh Sebaoth), as well as
[Greek: Iaba], occurs frequently.[13] In an Ethiopic list of magical
names of Jesus, purporting to have been taught by him to his disciples,
_Yawe_ is found.[14] Finally, there is evidence from more than one
source that the modern Samaritan priests pronounce the name _Yahweh_ or
_Yahwa_.[15]
There is no reason to impugn the soundness of this substantially
consentient testimony to the pronunciation Yahweh or Jahveh, coming as
it does through several independent channels. It is confirmed by
grammatical considerations. The name Jhvh enters into the composition of
many proper names of persons in the Old Testament, either as the initial
element, in the form Jeho- or Jo- (as in Jehoram, Joram), or as the
final element, in the form _-jahu_ or _-jah_ (as in Adonijahu,
Adonijah). These various forms are perfectly regular if the divine name
was Yahweh, and, taken altogether, they cannot be explained on any other
hypothesis. Recent scholars, accordingly, with but few exceptions, are
agreed that the ancient pronunciation of the name was Yahweh (the first
h sounded at the end of the syllable).
Genebrardus seems to have been the first to suggest the pronunciation
_Iahué_,[16] but it was not until the 19th century that it became
generally accepted.
Jahveh or Yahweh is apparently an example of a common type of Hebrew
proper names which have the form of the 3rd pers. sing, of the verb.
e.g. Jabneh (name of a city), Jabin, Jamlek, Jiptah (Jephthah), &c. Most
of these really are verbs, the suppressed or implicit subject being
_'el_, "_numen_, god," or the name of a god; cf. Jabneh and Jabne-el,
Jiptah and Jiptah-el.
The ancient explanations of the name proceed from Exod. iii. 14, 15,
where "Yahweh[17] hath sent me" in v. 15 corresponds to "Ehyeh hath sent
me" in v. 14, thus seeming to connect the name Yahweh with the Hebrew
verb _hayah_, "to become, to be." The Palestinian interpreters found in
this the promise that God would be with his people (cf. v. 12) in
future oppressions as he was in the present distress, or the assertion
of his eternity, or eternal constancy; the Alexandrian translation
[Greek: 'Egô eimi ho ôn ... 'Ho ôn apestalken me pros hymas],
understands it in the more metaphysical sense of God's absolute being.
Both interpretations, "He (who) is (always the same)," and "He (who) is
(absolutely, the truly existent)," import into the name all that they
profess to find in it; the one, the religious faith in God's unchanging
fidelity to his people, the other, a philosophical conception of
absolute being which is foreign both to the meaning of the Hebrew verb
and to the force of the tense employed. Modern scholars have sometimes
found in the name the expression of the aseity[18] of God; sometimes of
his reality, in contrast to the imaginary gods of the heathen. Another
explanation, which appears first in Jewish authors of the middle ages
and has found wide acceptance in recent times, derives the name from the
causative of the verb; He (who) causes things to be, gives them being;
or calls events into existence, brings them to pass; with many
individual modifications of interpretation--creator, life-giver,
fulfiller of promises. A serious objection to this theory in every form
is that the verb _hayah_, "to be," has no causative stem in Hebrew; to
express the ideas which these scholars find in the name Yahweh the
language employs altogether different verbs.
This assumption that Yahweh is derived from the verb "to be," as seems
to be implied in Exod. iii. 14 seq., is not, however, free from
difficulty. "To be" in the Hebrew of the Old Testament is not _hawah_,
as the derivation would require, but _hayah_; and we are thus driven to
the further assumption that _hawah_ belongs to an earlier stage of the
language, or to some older speech of the forefathers of the Israelites.
This hypothesis is not intrinsically improbable--and in Aramaic, a
language closely related to Hebrew, "to be" actually is _hawa_--but it
should be noted that in adopting it we admit that, using the name Hebrew
in the historical sense, Yahweh is not a Hebrew name. And, inasmuch as
nowhere in the Old Testament, outside of Exod. iii., is there the
slightest indication that the Israelites connected the name of their God
with the idea of "being" in any sense, it may fairly be questioned
whether, if the author of Exod. iii. 14 seq., intended to give an
etymological interpretation of the name Yahweh,[19] his etymology is any
better than many other paronomastic explanations of proper names in the
Old Testament, or than, say, the connexion of the name [Greek: Apollôn]
with [Greek: apolouôn], [Greek: apolyôn] in Plato's _Cratylus_, or the
popular derivation from [Greek: apollymi].
A root _hawah_ is represented in Hebrew by the nouns _howah_ (Ezek.,
Isa. xlvii. 11) and _hawwah_ (Ps., Prov., Job) "disaster, calamity,
ruin."[20] The primary meaning is probably "sink down, fall," in which
sense--common in Arabic--the verb appears in Job xxxvii. 6 (of snow
falling to earth). A Catholic commentator of the 16th century,
Hieronymus ab Oleastro, seems to have been the first to connect the name
"Jehova" with _howah_ interpreting it _contritio, sive pernicies_
(destruction of the Egyptians and Canaanites); Daumer, adopting the same
etymology, took it in a more general sense: Yahweh, as well as Shaddai,
meant "Destroyer," and fitly expressed the nature of the terrible god
whom he identified with Moloch.
The derivation of Yahweh from _hawah_ is formally unimpeachable, and is
adopted by many recent scholars, who proceed, however, from the primary
sense of the root rather than from the specific meaning of the nouns.
The name is accordingly interpreted, He (who) falls (baetyl, [Greek:
baitylos], meteorite); or causes (rain or lightning) to fall (storm
god); or casts down (his foes, by his thunderbolts). It is obvious that
if the derivation be correct, the significance of the name, which in
itself denotes only "He falls" or "He fells," must be learned, if at
all, from early Israelitish conceptions of the nature of Yahweh rather
than from etymology.
A more fundamental question is whether the name Yahweh originated among
the Israelites or was adopted by them from some other people and
speech.[21] The biblical author of the history of the sacred
institutions (P) expressly declares that the name Yahweh was unknown to
the patriarchs (Exod. vi. 3), and the much older Israelite historian (E)
records the first revelation of the name to Moses (Exod. iii. 13-15),
apparently following a tradition according to which the Israelites had
not been worshippers of Yahweh before the time of Moses, or, as he
conceived it, had not worshipped the god of their fathers under that
name. The revelation of the name to Moses was made at a mountain sacred
to Yahweh (the mountain of God) far to the south of Palestine, in a
region where the forefathers of the Israelites had never roamed, and in
the territory of other tribes; and long after the settlement in Canaan
this region continued to be regarded as the abode of Yahweh (Judg. v. 4;
Deut. xxxiii. 2 sqq.; 1 Kings xix. 8 sqq. &c.). Moses is closely
connected with the tribes in the vicinity of the holy mountain;
according to one account, he married a daughter of the priest of Midian
(Exod. ii. 16 sqq.; iii. 1); to this mountain he led the Israelites
after their deliverance from Egypt; there his father-in-law met him, and
extolling Yahweh as "greater than all the gods," offered (in his
capacity as priest of the place?) sacrifices, at which the chief men of
the Israelites were his guests; there the religion of Yahweh was
revealed through Moses, and the Israelites pledged themselves to serve
God according to its prescriptions. It appears, therefore, that in the
tradition followed by the Israelite historian the tribes within whose
pasture lands the mountain of God stood were worshippers of Yahweh
before the time of Moses; and the surmise that the name Yahweh belongs
to their speech, rather than to that of Israel, has considerable
probability. One of these tribes was Midian, in whose land the mountain
of God lay. The Kenites also, with whom another tradition connects
Moses, seem to have been worshippers of Yahweh. It is probable that
Yahweh was at one time worshipped by various tribes south of Palestine,
and that several places in that wide territory (Horeb, Sinai, Kadesh,
&c.) were sacred to him; the oldest and most famous of these, the
mountain of God, seems to have lain in Arabia, east of the Red Sea. From
some of these peoples and at one of these holy places, a group of
Israelite tribes adopted the religion of Yahweh, the God who, by the
hand of Moses, had delivered them from Egypt.[22]
The tribes of this region probably belonged to some branch of the great
Arab stock, and the name Yahweh has, accordingly, been connected with
the Arabic _hawa_, "the void" (between heaven and earth), "the
atmosphere," or with the verb _hawa_, cognate with Heb. _hawah_, "sink,
glide down" (through space); _hawwa_ "blow" (wind). "He rides through
the air, He blows" (Wellhausen), would be a fit name for a god of wind
and storm. There is, however, no certain evidence that the Israelites in
historical times had any consciousness of the primitive significance of
the name.
The attempts to connect the name Yahweh with that of an Indo-European
deity (Jehovah-Jove, &c.), or to derive it from Egyptian or Chinese, may
be passed over. But one theory which has had considerable currency
requires notice, namely, that Yahweh, or Yahu, Yaho,[23] is the name of
a god worshipped throughout the whole, or a great part, of the area
occupied by the Western Semites. In its earlier form this opinion rested
chiefly on certain misinterpreted testimonies in Greek authors about a
god [Greek: Iaô], and was conclusively refuted by Baudissin; recent
adherents of the theory build more largely on the occurrence in various
parts of this territory of proper names of persons and places which
they explain as compounds of Yahu or Yah.[24] The explanation is in most
cases simply an assumption of the point at issue; some of the names have
been misread; others are undoubtedly the names of Jews. There remain,
however, some cases in which it is highly probable that names of
non-Israelites are really compounded with Yahweh. The most conspicuous
of these is the king of Hamath who in the inscriptions of Sargon
(722-705 B.C.) is called Yaubi'di and Ilubi'di (compare
Jehoiakim-Eliakim). Azriyau of Jaudi, also, in inscriptions of
Tiglath-Pileser (745-728 B.C.), who was formerly supposed to be Azariah
(Uzziah) of Judah, is probably a king of the country in northern Syria
known to us from the Zenjirli inscriptions as Ja'di.
Friedrich Delitzsch brought into notice three tablets, of the age of the
first dynasty of Babylon, in which he read the names of _Ya-a'-ve-ilu_,
_Ya-ve-ilu_, and _Ya-u-um-ilu_ ("Yahweh is God"), and which he regarded
as conclusive proof that Yahweh was known in Babylonia before 2000 B.C.;
he was a god of the Semitic invaders in the second wave of migration,
who were, according to Winckler and Delitzsch, of North Semitic stock
(Canaanites, in the linguistic sense).[25] We should thus have in the
tablets evidence of the worship of Yahweh among the Western Semites at a
time long before the rise of Israel. The reading of the names is,
however, extremely uncertain, not to say improbable, and the
far-reaching inferences drawn from them carry no conviction. In a tablet
attributed to the 14th century B.C. which Sellin found in the course of
his excavations at Tell Ta'annuk (the Taanach of the O.T.) a name occurs
which may be read Ahi-Yawi (equivalent to Hebrew Ahijah);[26] if the
reading be correct, this would show that Yahweh was worshipped in
Central Palestine before the Israelite conquest. The reading is,
however, only one of several possibilities. The fact that the full form
Yahweh appears, whereas in Hebrew proper names only the shorter Yahu and
Yah occur, weighs somewhat against the interpretation, as it does
against Delitzsch's reading of his tablets.
It would not be at all surprising if, in the great movements of
populations and shifting of ascendancy which lie beyond our historical
horizon, the worship of Yahweh should have been established in regions
remote from those which it occupied in historical times; but nothing
which we now know warrants the opinion that his worship was ever general
among the Western Semites.
Many attempts have been made to trace the West Semitic Yahu back to
Babylonia. Thus Delitzsch formerly derived the name from an Akkadian
god, I or Ia; or from the Semitic nominative ending, Yau;[27] but this
deity has since disappeared from the pantheon of Assyriologists. The
combination of Yah with Ea, one of the great Babylonian gods, seems to
have a peculiar fascination for amateurs, by whom it is periodically
"discovered." Scholars are now agreed that, so far as Yahu or Yah occurs
in Babylonian texts, it is as the name of a foreign god.
Assuming that Yahweh was primitively a nature god, scholars in the 19th
century discussed the question over what sphere of nature he originally
presided. According to some he was the god of consuming fire; others saw
in him the bright sky, or the heaven; still others recognized in him a
storm god, a theory with which the derivation of the name from Heb.
_hawah_ or Arab. _hawa_ well accords. The association of Yahweh with
storm and fire is frequent in the Old Testament; the thunder is the
voice of Yahweh, the lightning his arrows, the rainbow his bow. The
revelation at Sinai is amid the awe-inspiring phenomena of tempest.
Yahweh leads Israel through the desert in a pillar of cloud and fire; he
kindles Elijah's altar by lightning, and translates the prophet in a
chariot of fire. See also Judg. v. 4 seq.; Deut. xxxiii. 1; Ps. xviii.
7-15; Hab. iii. 3-6. The cherub upon which he rides when he flies on the
wings of the wind (Ps. xviii. 10) is not improbably an ancient
mythological personification of the storm cloud, the genius of tempest
(cf. Ps. civ. 3). In Ezekiel the throne of Yahweh is borne up on
Cherubim, the noise of whose wings is like thunder. Though we may
recognize in this poetical imagery the survival of ancient and, if we
please, mythical notions, we should err if we inferred that Yahweh was
originally a departmental god, presiding specifically over
meteorological phenomena, and that this conception of him persisted
among the Israelites till very late times. Rather, as the god--or the
chief god--of a region and a people, the most sublime and impressive
phenomena, the control of the mightiest forces of nature are attributed
to him. As the God of Israel Yahweh becomes its leader and champion in
war; he is a warrior, mighty in battle; but he is not a god of war in
the specific sense.
In the inquiry concerning the nature of Yahweh the name Yahweh Sebaoth
(E.V., The LORD of Hosts) has had an important place. The hosts have by
some been interpreted of the armies of Israel (see 1 Sam. xvii. 45, and
note the association of the name in the Books of Samuel, where it first
appears, with the ark, or with war); by others, of the heavenly hosts,
the stars conceived as living beings, later, perhaps, the angels as the
court of Yahweh and the instruments of his will in nature and history
(Ps. lxxxix.); or of the forces of the world in general which do his
bidding, cf. the common Greek renderings, [Greek: Kyrios tôn dynameôn]
and [Greek: K. pantokratôr], (Universal Ruler). It is likely that the
name was differently understood in different periods and circles; but in
the prophets the hosts are clearly superhuman powers. In many passages
the name seems to be only a more solemn substitute for the simple
Yahweh, and as such it has probably often been inserted by scribes.
Finally, Sebaoth came to be treated as a proper name (cf. Ps. lxxx. 5,
8, 20), and as such is very common in magical texts.
LITERATURE.--Reland, _Decas exercitationum philologicarum de vera
pronuntiatione nominis Jehova_, 1707; Reinke,
"Philologisch-historische Abhandlung über den Gottesnamen Jehova," in
_Beiträge zur Erklärung des Alten Testaments_, III. (1855); Baudissin,
"Der Ursprung des Gottesnamens [Greek: Iaô]," in _Studien zur
semitischen Religionsgeschichte_, I. (1876), 179-254; Driver, "Recent
Theories on the Origin and Nature of the Tetragrammaton," in _Studia
Biblica_, I. (1885), 1-20; Deissmann, "Griechische Transkriptionen des
Tetragrammaton," in _Bibelstudien_ (1895), 1-20; Blau, _Das
altjüdische Zauberwesen_, 1898. See also HEBREW RELIGION.
(G. F. Mo.)
FOOTNOTES:
[1] This form, _Yahweh_, as the correct one, is generally used in the
separate articles throughout this work.
[2] See Josephus, Ant. ii. 12, 4; Philo, _Vita Mosis_, iii. 11 (ii.
§114, ed. Cohn and Wendland); ib. iii. 27 (ii. §206). The Palestinian
authorities more correctly interpreted Lev. xxiv. 15 seq., not of the
mere utterance of the name, but of the use of the name of God in
blaspheming God.
[3] _Siphrê_, Num. §§ 39, 43; _M. Sotah_, iii. 7; _Sotah_, 38_a_. The
tradition that the utterance of the name in the daily benedictions
ceased with the death of Simeon the Just, two centuries or more
before the Christian era, perhaps arose from a misunderstanding of
_Menahoth_, 109_b_; in any case it cannot stand against the testimony
of older and more authoritative texts.
[4] _Yoma_, 39b; _Jer. Yoma_, iii. 7; _Kiddushin_, 71_a_.
[5] R. Johanan (second half of the 3rd century), _Kiddushin_, 71a.
[6] Kiddushin, l.c. = _Pesahim_, 50a.
[7] _M. Sanhedrin_, x. 1; Abba Saul, end of 2nd century.
[8] _Jer. Sanhedrin_, x. 1; R. Mana, 4th century.
[9] _Strom._ v. 6. Variants: [Greek: Ia oue, Ia ouai]; cod. L.
[Greek: Iaou].
[10] _Panarion_, Haer. 40, 5; cf. Lagarde, _Psalter juxta Hebraeos_,
154.
[11] _Quaest._ 15 in Exod.; _Fab. haeret. compend._ v. 3, _sub fin_.
[12] [Greek: Aïa] occurs also in the great magical papyrus of Paris,
1. 3020 (Wessely, _Denkschrift. Wien. Akad._, Phil. Hist. Kl., XXXVI.
p. 120), and in the Leiden Papyrus, xvii. 31.
[13] See Deissmann, _Bibelstudien_, 13 sqq.
[14] See Driver, _Studia Biblica_, I. 20.
[15] See Montgomery, _Journal of Biblical Literature_, xxv.
(1906),49-51.
[16] _Chronographia_, Paris, 1567 (ed. Paris, 1600, p. 79 seq.).
[17] This transcription will be used henceforth.
[18] _A-se-itas_, a scholastic Latin expression for the quality of
existing by oneself.
[19] The critical difficulties of these verses need not be discussed
here. See W. R. Arnold, "The Divine Name in Exodus iii. 14," _Journal
of Biblical Literature_, XXIV. (1905), 107-165.
[20] Cf. also _hawwah_, "desire," Mic. vii. 3; Prov. x. 3.
[21] See HEBREW RELIGION.
[22] The divergent Judaean tradition, according to which the
forefathers had worshipped Yahweh from time immemorial, may indicate
that Judah and the kindred clans had in fact been worshippers of
Yahweh before the time of Moses.
[23] The form _Yahu_, or _Yaho_, occurs not only in composition, but
by itself; see _Aramaic Papyri discovered at Assuan_, B 4, 6, 11; E
14; J 6. This is doubtless the original of [Greek: Iaô], frequently
found in Greek authors and in magical texts as the name of the God of
the Jews.
[24] See a collection and critical estimate of this evidence by
Zimmern, _Die Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament_, 465 sqq.
[25] _Babel und Bibel_, 1902. The enormous, and for the most part
ephemeral, literature provoked by Delitzsch's lecture cannot be cited
here.
[26] _Denkschriften d. Wien. Akad._, L. iv. p. 115 seq. (1904).
[27] _Wo lag das Paradies?_ (1881), pp. 158-166.
JEHU, son of Jehoshaphat and grandson of Nimshi, in the Bible, a general
of Ahab and Jehoram, and, later, king of Israel. Ahaziah son of Jehoram
of Judah and Jehoram brother of Ahaziah of Israel had taken joint action
against the Aramaeans of Damascus who were attacking Ramoth-Gilead under
Hazael. Jehoram had returned wounded to his palace at Jezreel, whither
Ahaziah had come down to visit him. Jehu, meanwhile, remained at the
seat of war, and the prophet Elisha sent a messenger to anoint him king.
The general at once acknowledged the call, "drove furiously" to Jezreel,
and, having slain both kings, proceeded to exterminate the whole of the
royal family (2 Kings ix., x.). A similar fate befell the royal princes
of Judah (see ATHALIAH), and thus, for a time at least, the new king
must have had complete control over the two kingdoms (cf. 2 Chron. xxii.
9). Israelite historians viewed these events as a great religious
revolution inspired by Elijah and initiated by Elisha, as the overthrow
of the worship of Baal, and as a retribution for the cruel murder of
Naboth the Jezreelite (see JEZEBEL). A vivid description is given of the
destruction of the prophets of Baal at the temple in Samaria (2 Kings x.
27; contrast iii. 2). While Jehu was supported by the Rechabites in his
reforming zeal, a similar revolt against Baalism in Judah is ascribed to
the priest Jehoiada (see JOASH). In the tragedies of the period it seems
clear that Elisha's interest in both Jehu and the Syrian Hazael (2 Kings
viii. 7 sqq.) had some political significance, and in opposition to the
"Deuteronomic" the commendation in 2 Kings x. 28 sqq., Hosea's
denunciation (i. 4) indicates the judgment which was passed upon Jehu's
bloodshed in other circles.
In the course of an expedition against Hazael in 842 Shalmaneser II. of
Assyria received tribute of silver and gold from Ya-u-a son of Omri,[1]
Tyre and Sidon; another attack followed in 839. For some years after
this Assyria was unable to interfere, and war broke out between Damascus
and Israel. The Israelite story, which may perhaps be supplemented from
Judaean sources (see JOASH), records a great loss of territory on the
east of the Jordan (2 Kings x. 32 seq.). Under Jehu's successor Jehoahaz
there was continual war with Hazael and his son Benhadad, but relief was
obtained by his grandson Joash, and the land recovered complete
independence under Jeroboam.
Jehu is also the name of a prophet of the time of Baasha and
Jehoshaphat (1 Kings xvi.; 2 Chron. xix., xx.). (S. A. C.)
FOOTNOTE:
[1] I.e. either descendant of, or from the same district as, Omri
(see Hogg, _Ency. Bib._ col. 2291). The Assyrian king's sculpture,
depicting the embassy and its gifts, is the so-called "black obelisk"
now in the British Museum (Nimroud Central Gallery, No. 98; _Guide to
Bab. and Ass. Antiq._, 1900, p. 24 seq., pl. ii.).
JEKYLL, SIR JOSEPH (1663-1738), English lawyer and master of the rolls,
son of John Jekyll, was born in London, and after studying at the Middle
Temple was called to the bar in 1687. He rapidly rose to be chief
justice of Chester (1697), serjeant-at-law and king's serjeant (1700),
and a knight. In 1717 he was made master of the rolls. A Whig in
politics, he sat in parliament for various constituencies from 1697 to
the end of his life, and took an active part there in debating
constitutional questions with much learning, though, according to Lord
Hervey (_Mem._ 1, 474), with little "approbation." He was censured by
the House of Commons for accepting a brief for the defence of Lord
Halifax in a prosecution ordered by the house. He was one of the
managers of the impeachment of the Jacobite earl of Wintoun in 1715, and
of Harley (Lord Oxford) in 1717. In later years he supported Walpole. He
became very unpopular in 1736 for his introduction of the "gin act,"
taxing the retailing of spirituous liquors, and his house had to be
protected from the mob. Pope has an illusion to "Jekyll or some odd
Whig, Who never changed his principle or wig" (_Epilogue to the
Satires_). Jekyll was also responsible for the Mortmain Act of 1736,
which was not superseded till 1888. He died without issue in 1738.
His great-nephew JOSEPH JEKYLL (d. 1837) was a lawyer, politician and
wit, who excited a good deal of contemporary satire, and who wrote some
_jeux d'esprit_ which were well-known in his time. His _Letters of the
late Ignatius Sancho, an African_, was published in 1782. In 1894 his
correspondence was edited, with a memoir, by the Hon. Algernon Bourke.
JELLACHICH, JOSEF, COUNT (1801-1859), Croatian statesman, was born on
the 16th of October 1801 at Pétervárad. He entered the Austrian army
(1819), fought against the Bosnians in 1845, was made ban of Croatia,
Slavonia and Dalmatia in 1848 on the petition of the Croatians, and was
simultaneously raised to the rank of lieutenant-general by the emperor.
As ban, Jellachich's policy was directed to preserving the Slav kingdoms
for the Habsburg monarchy by identifying himself with the nationalist
opposition to Magyar ascendancy, while at the same time discouraging the
extreme "Illyrism" advocated by Lodovik Gáj (1809-1872). Though his
separatist measures at first brought him into disfavour at the imperial
court, their true objective was soon recognized, and, with the triumph
of the more violent elements of the Hungarian revolution, he was hailed
as the most conspicuous champion of the unity of the empire, and was
able to bring about that union of the imperial army with the southern
Slavs by which the revolution in Vienna and Budapest was overthrown (see
AUSTRIA-HUNGARY: _History_). He began the war of independence in
September 1848 by crossing the Drave at the head of 40,000 Croats. After
the bloody battle of Buda he concluded a three days' truce with the
Hungarians to enable him to assist Prince Windischgrätz to reduce
Vienna, and subsequently fought against the Magyars at Schwechát. During
the winter campaign of 1848-49 he commanded, under Windischgrätz, the
Austrian right wing, capturing Magyar-Ovar and Raab, and defeating the
Magyars at Mór. After the recapture of Buda he was made
commander-in-chief of the southern army. At first he gained some
successes against Bem (q.v.), but on the 14th of July 1849 was routed by
the Hungarians at Hegyes and driven behind the Danube. He took no part
in the remainder of the war, but returned to Agram to administer
Croatia. In 1853 he was appointed commander-in-chief of the army sent
against Montenegro, and in 1855 was created a count. He died on the 20th
of May 1859. His _Gedichte_ were published at Vienna in 1851.
See the anonymous _The Croatian Revolution_ of the Year 1848 (Croat.),
Agram, 1898. (R. N. B.)
JELLINEK, ADOLF (1821-1893), Jewish preacher and scholar, was born in
Moravia. After filling clerical posts in Leipzig, he became _Prediger_
(preacher) in Vienna in 1856. He was associated with the promoters of
the New Learning within Judaism, and wrote on the history of the
Kabbala. His bibliographies (each bearing the Hebrew title _Qontres_)
were useful compilations. But his most important work lay in three other
directions. (1) _Midrashic._ Jellinek published in the six parts of his
_Beth ha-Midrasch_ (1853-1878) a large number of smaller _Midrashi_,
ancient and medieval homilies and folk-lore records, which have been of
much service in the recent revival of interest in Jewish apocalyptic
literature. A translation of these collections of Jellinek into German
was undertaken by A. Wuensche, under the general title _Aus Israels
Lehrhalle_. (2) _Psychological._ Before the study of ethnic psychology
had become a science, Jellinek devoted attention to the subject. There
is much keen analysis and original investigation in his two essays _Der
jüdische Stamm_ (1869) and _Der jüdische Stamm in nicht-jüdischen
Sprüch-wörtern_ (1881-1882). It is to Jellinek that we owe the
oft-repeated comparison of the Jewish temperament to that of women in
its quickness of perception, versatility and sensibility. (3)
_Homiletic._ Jellinek was probably the greatest synagogue orator of the
19th century. He published some 200 sermons, in most of which are
displayed unobtrusive learning, fresh application of old sayings, and a
high conception of Judaism and its claims. Jellinek was a powerful
apologist and an accomplished homilist, at once profound and ingenious.
His son, GEORGE JELLINEK, was appointed professor of international law
at Heidelberg in 1891. Another son, MAX HERMANN JELLINEK, was made
assistant professor of philology at Vienna in 1892.
A brother of Adolf, HERMANN JELLINEK (b. 1823), was executed at the age
of 26 on account of his association with the Hungarian national movement
of 1848. One of Hermann Jellinek's best-known works was _Uriel Acosta_.
Another brother, MORITZ JELLINEK (1823-1883), was an accomplished
economist, and contributed to the Academy of Sciences essays on the
price of cereals and on the statistical organization of the country. He
founded the Budapest tramway company (1864) and was also president of
the corn exchange.
See _Jewish Encyclopedia_, vii. 92-94. For a character sketch of Adolf
Jellinek see S. Singer, _Lectures and Addresses_ (1908), pp. 88-93;
Kohut, _Berühmte israelitische Männer und Frauen_. (I. A.)
JEMAPPES, a town in the province of Hainaut, Belgium, near Mons, famous
as the scene of the battle at which Dumouriez, at the head of the French
Revolutionary Army, defeated the Austrian army (which was greatly
outnumbered) under the duke of Saxe-Teschen and Clerfayt on the 6th of
November 1792 (see FRENCH REVOLUTIONARY WARS).
JENA, a university town of Germany, in the grand duchy of Saxe-Weimar,
on the left bank of the Saale, 56 m. S.W. from Leipzig by the
Grossberigen-Saalfeld and 12 m. S.E. of Weimar by the Weimar-Gera lines
of railway. Pop. (1905), 26,355. Its situation in a broad valley
environed by limestone hills is somewhat dreary. To the north lies the
plateau, descending steeply to the valley, famous as the scene of the
battle of Jena. The town is surrounded by promenades occupying the site
of the old fortifications; it contains in addition to the medieval
market square, many old-fashioned houses and quaint narrow streets.
Besides the old university buildings, the most interesting edifices are
the 15th-century church of St Michael, with a tower 318 ft. high,
containing an altar, beneath which is a doorway leading to a vault, and
a bronze statue of Luther, originally destined for his tomb; the
university library, in which is preserved a curious figure of a dragon;
and the bridge across the Saale, as long as the church steeple is high,
the centre arch of which is surmounted by a stone carved head of a
malefactor. Across the river is the "mountain," or hill, whence a fine
view is obtained of the town and surroundings, and hard by the
Fuchs-Turm (Fox tower) celebrated for student orgies, while in the
centre of the town is the house of an astronomer, Weigel, with a deep
shaft through which the stars can be seen in the day time. Thus the
seven marvels of Jena are summed up in the Latin lines:--
_Ara, caput, draco, mons, pons, vulpecula turris,
Weigeliana domus; septem miracula Jenae._
There must also be mentioned the university church, the new university
buildings, which occupy the site of the ducal palace (Schloss) where
Goethe wrote his _Hermann und Dorothea_, the Schwarzer Bär Hotel, where
Luther spent the night after his flight from the Wartburg, and four
towers and a gateway which now alone mark the position of the ancient
walls. The town has of late years become a favourite residential resort
and has greatly extended towards the west, where there is a colony of
pleasant villas. Its chief prosperity centres, however, in the
university. In 1547 the elector John Frederick the Magnanimous of
Saxony, while a captive in the hands of the emperor Charles V.,
conceived the plan of founding a university at Jena, which was
accordingly established by his three sons. After having obtained a
charter from the emperor Ferdinand I., it was inaugurated on the 2nd of
February 1558. It was most numerously attended about the middle of the
18th century; but the most brilliant professoriate was under the duke
Charles Augustus, Goethe's patron (1787-1806), when Fichte, Hegel,
Schelling, Schlegel and Schiller were on its teaching staff. Founded as
a home for the new religious opinions of the 16th century, it has ever
been in the forefront of German universities in liberally accepting new
ideas. It distances perhaps every other German university in the extent
to which it carries out what are popularly regarded as the
characteristics of German student-life--duelling and the passion for
_Freiheit_. At the end of the 18th and the beginning of the 19th
century, the opening of new universities, co-operating with the
suspicions of the various German governments as to the democratic
opinions which obtained at Jena, militated against the university, which
has never regained its former prosperity. In 1905 it was attended by
about 1100 students, and its teaching staff (including _privatdocenten_)
numbered 112. Amongst its numerous auxiliaries may be mentioned the
library, with 200,000 volumes, the observatory, the meteorological
institute, the botanical garden, seminaries of theology, philology and
education, and well equipped clinical, anatomical and physical
institutes. There are also veterinary and agricultural colleges in
connexion with the university. The manufactures of Jena are not
considerable. The book trade has of late years revived, and there are
several printing establishments.
Jena appears to have possessed municipal rights in the 13th century. At
the beginning of the 14th century it was in the possession of the
margraves of Meissen, from whom it passed in 1423 to the elector of
Saxony. Since 1485 it has remained in the Ernestine line of the house of
Saxony. In 1662 it fell to Bernhard, youngest son of William duke of
Weimar, and became the capital of a small separate duchy. Bernhard's
line having become extinct in 1690, Jena was united with Eisenach, and
in 1741 reverted with that duchy to Weimar. In more modern times Jena
has been made famous by the defeat inflicted in the vicinity, on the
14th of October 1806, by Napoleon upon the Prussian army under the
prince of Hohenlohe (see NAPOLEONIC CAMPAIGNS).
See Schreiber and Färber, _Jena von seinem Ursprung bis zur neuesten
Zeit_ (2nd ed., 1858); Ortloff, _Jena und Umgegend_ (3rd ed., 1875);
Leonhardt, _Jena als Universität und Stadt_ (Jena, 1902); Ritter,
_Führer durch Jena und Umgebung_ (Jena, 1901); Biedermann, _Die
Universität Jena_ (Jena, 1858); and the _Urkundenbuch der Stadt Jena_
edited by J. E. A. Martin and O. Devrient (1888-1903).
JENATSCH, GEORG (1596-1639), Swiss political leader, one of the most
striking figures in the troubled history of the Grisons in the 17th
century, was born at Samaden (capital of the Upper Engadine). He studied
at Zürich and Basel, and in 1617 became the Protestant pastor of
Scharans (near Thusis). But almost at once he plunged into active
politics, taking the side of the Venetian and Protestant party of the
Salis family, as against the Spanish and Romanist policy supported by
the rival family, that of Planta. He headed the "preachers" who in 1618
tortured to death the arch-priest Rusca, of Sondrio, and outlawed the
Plantas. As reprisals, a number of Protestants were massacred at Tirano
(1620), in the Valtellina, a very fertile valley, of considerable
strategical importance (for through it the Spaniards in Milan could
communicate by the Umbrail Pass with the Austrians in Tirol), which then
fell into the hands of the Spanish. Jenatsch took part in the murder
(1621) of Pompey Planta, the head of the rival party, but later with his
friends was compelled to fly the country, giving up his position as a
pastor, and henceforth acting solely as a soldier. He helped in the
revolt against the Austrians in the Prättigau (1622), and in the
invasion of the Valtellina by a French army (1624), but the peace made
(1626) between France and Spain left the Valtellina in the hands of the
pope, and so destroyed Jenatsch's hopes. Having killed his colonel,
Ruinelli, in a duel, Jenatsch had once more to leave his native land,
and took service with the Venetians (1629-1630). In 1631 he went to
Paris, and actively supported Richelieu's schemes for driving the
Spaniards out of the Valtellina, which led to the successful campaign of
Rohan (1635), one of whose firmest supporters was Jenatsch. But he soon
saw that the French were as unwilling as the Spaniards to restore the
Valtellina to the Grisons (which had seized it in 1512). So he became a
Romanist (1635), and negotiated secretly with the Spaniards and
Austrians. He was the leader of the conspiracy which broke out in 1637,
and resulted in the expulsion of Rohan and the French from the Grisons.
This treachery on Jenatsch's part did not, however, lead to the freeing
of the Valtellina from the Spaniards, and once more he tried to get
French support. But on the 24th of January 1639 he was assassinated at
Coire by the Plantas; later in the same year the much coveted valley was
restored by Spain to the Grisons, which held it till 1797. Jenatsch's
career is of general historical importance by reason of the long
conflict between France and Spain for the possession of the Valtellina,
which forms one of the most bloody episodes in the Thirty Years' War.
(W. A. B. C.)
See biography by E. Haffter (Davos, 1894).
JENGHIZ KHAN (1162-1227), Mongol emperor, was born in a tent on the
banks of the river Onon. His father Yesukai was absent at the time of
his birth, in a campaign against a Tatar chieftain named Temuchin. The
fortune of war favoured Yesukai, who having slain his enemy returned to
his encampment in triumph. Here he was met by the news that his wife
Yulun had given birth to a son. On examining the child he observed in
its clenched fist a clot of coagulated blood like a red stone. In the
eyes of the superstitious Mongol this circumstance referred to his
victory over the Tatar chieftain, and he therefore named the infant
Temuchin. The death of Yesukai, which placed Temuchin at the age of
thirteen on the Mongol throne, was the signal also for the dispersal of
several tribes whose allegiance the old chieftain had retained by his
iron rule. When remonstrated with by Temuchin, the rebels replied: "The
deepest wells are sometimes dry, and the hardest stone is sometimes
broken; why should we cling to thee?" But Yulun was by no means willing
to see her son's power melt away; she led those retainers who remained
faithful against the deserters, and succeeded in bringing back fully one
half to their allegiance. With this doubtful material, Temuchin
succeeded in holding his ground against the plots and open hostilities
of the neighbouring tribes, more especially of the Naimans, Keraits and
Merkits. With one or other of these he maintained an almost unceasing
warfare until 1206, when he felt strong enough to proclaim himself the
ruler of an empire. He therefore summoned the notables of his kingdom
to an assembly on the banks of the Onon, and at their unanimous request
adopted the name and title of Jenghiz Khan (Chinese, Chêng-sze, or
"perfect warrior"). At this time there remained to him but one open
enemy on the Mongolian steppes, Polo the Naiman khan. Against this chief
he now led his troops, and in one battle so completely shattered his
forces that Kushlek, the successor of Polo, who was left dead upon the
field, fled with his ally Toto, the Merkit khan, to the river Irtysh.
Jenghiz Khan now meditated an invasion of the empire of the Kin Tatars,
who had wrested northern China from the Sung dynasty. As a first step he
invaded western Hia, and, having captured several strongholds, retired
in the summer of 1208 to Lung-ting to escape the great heat of the
plains. While there news reached him that Toto and Kushlek were
preparing for war. In a pitched battle on the river Irtysh he overthrew
them completely. Toto was amongst the slain, and Kushlek fled for refuge
to the Khitan Tatars. Satisfied with his victory, Jenghiz again directed
his forces against Hia. After having defeated the Kin army under the
leadership of a son of the sovereign, he captured the Wu-liang-hai Pass
in the Great Wall, and penetrated as far as Ning-sia Fu in Kansuh. With
unceasing vigour he pushed on his troops, and even established his sway
over the province of Liaotung. Several of the Kin commanders, seeing how
persistently victory attended his banners, deserted to him, and
garrisons surrendered at his bidding. Having thus secured a firm footing
within the Great Wall, he despatched three armies in the autumn of 1213
to overrun the empire. The right wing, under his three sons, Juji,
Jagatai and Ogotai, marched towards the south; the left wing, under his
brothers Hochar, Kwang-tsin Noyen and Chow-tse-te-po-shi, advanced
eastward towards the sea; while Jenghiz and his son Tule with the centre
directed their course in a south-easterly direction. Complete success
attended all three expeditions. The right wing advanced as far as Honan,
and after having captured upwards of twenty-eight cities rejoined
headquarters by the great western road. Hochar made himself master of
the country as far as Liao-si; and Jenghiz ceased his triumphal career
only when he reached the cliffs of the Shantung promontory. But either
because he was weary of the strife, or because it was necessary to
revisit his Mongolian empire, he sent an envoy to the Kin emperor in the
spring of the following year (1214), saying, "All your possessions in
Shantung and the whole country north of the Yellow River are now mine
with the solitary exception of Yenking (the modern Peking). By the
decree of heaven you are now as weak as I am strong, but I am willing to
retire from my conquests; as a condition of my doing so, however, it
will be necessary that you distribute largess to my officers and men to
appease their fierce hostility." These terms of safety the Kin emperor
eagerly accepted, and as a peace offering he presented Jenghiz with a
daughter of the late emperor, another princess of the imperial house,
500 youths and maidens, and 3000 horses. No sooner, however, had Jenghiz
passed beyond the Great Wall than the Kin emperor, fearing to remain any
longer so near the Mongol frontier, moved his court to K'ai-fêng Fu in
Honan. This transfer of capital appearing to Jenghiz to indicate a
hostile attitude, he once more marched his troops into the doomed
empire.
While Jenghiz was thus adding city to city and province to province in
China, Kushlek, the fugitive Naiman chief, was not idle. With
characteristic treachery he requested permission from his host, the
Khitan khan, to collect the fragments of his army which had been
scattered by Jenghiz at the battle on the Irtysh, and thus having
collected a considerable force he leagued himself with Mahommed, the
shah of Khwarizm, against the confiding khan. After a short but decisive
campaign the allies remained masters of the position, and the khan was
compelled to abdicate the throne in favour of the late guest.
With the power and prestige thus acquired, Kushlek prepared once again
to measure swords with the Mongol chief. On receiving the news of his
hostile preparations, Jenghiz at once took the field, and in the first
battle routed the Naiman troops and made Kushlek a prisoner. His
ill-gotten kingdom became an apanage of the Mongol Empire. Jenghiz now
held sway up to the Khwarizm frontier. Beyond this he had no immediate
desire to go, and he therefore sent envoys to Mahommed, the shah, with
presents, saying, "I send thee greeting; I know thy power and the vast
extent of thine empire; I regard thee as my most cherished son. On my
part thou must know that I have conquered China and all the Turkish
nations north of it; thou knowest that my country is a magazine of
warriors, a mine of silver, and that I have no need of other lands. I
take it that we have an equal interest in encouraging trade between our
subjects." This peaceful message was well received by the shah, and in
all probability the Mongol armies would never have appeared in Europe
but for an unfortunate occurrence. Shortly after the despatch of this
first mission Jenghiz sent a party of traders into Transoxiana who were
seized and put to death as spies by Inaljuk, the governor of Otrar. As
satisfaction for this outrage Jenghiz demanded the extradition of the
offending governor. Far from yielding to this summons, however, Mahommed
beheaded the chief of the Mongol envoys, and sent the others back
without their beards. This insult made war inevitable, and in the spring
of 1219 Jenghiz set out from Karakorum on a campaign which was destined
to be as startling in its immediate results as its ulterior effects were
far-reaching. The invading force was in the first instance divided into
two armies: one commanded by Jenghiz's second son Jagatai was directed
to march against the Kankalis, the northern defenders of the Khwarizm
empire; and the other, led by Juji, his eldest son, advanced by way of
Sighnak against Jand (Jend). Against this latter force Mahommed led an
army of 400,000 men, who were completely routed, leaving it is said
160,000 dead upon the field. With the remnant of his host Mahommed fled
to Samarkand. Meanwhile Jagatai marched down upon the Syr Daria
(Jaxartes) by the pass of Taras and invested Otrar, the offending city.
After a siege of five months the citadel was taken by assault, and
Inaljuk and his followers were put to the sword. The conquerors levelled
the walls with the ground, after having given the city over to pillage.
At the same time a third army besieged and took Khojent on the Jaxartes;
and yet a fourth, led by Jenghiz and his youngest son Tule, advanced in
the direction of Bokhara. Tashkent and Nur surrendered on their
approach, and after a short siege Bokhara fell into their hands. On
entering the town Jenghiz ascended the steps of the principal mosque,
and shouted to his followers, "The hay is cut; give your horses fodder."
No second invitation to plunder was needed; the city was sacked, and the
inhabitants either escaped beyond the walls or were compelled to submit
to infamies which were worse than death. As a final act of vengeance the
town was fired, and before the last of the Mongols left the district,
the great mosque and certain palaces were the only buildings left to
mark the spot where the "centre of science" once stood. From the ruins
of Bokhara Jenghiz advanced along the valley of the Sogd to Samarkand,
which, weakened by treachery, surrendered to him, as did also Balkh. But
in neither case did submission save either the inhabitants from
slaughter or the city from pillage. Beyond this point Jenghiz went no
farther westward, but sent Tule, at the head of 70,000 men, to ravage
Khorasan, and two flying columns under Chepe and Sabutai Bahadar to
pursue after Mahommed who had taken refuge in Nishapur. Defeated and
almost alone, Mahommed fled before his pursuers to the village of Astara
on the shore of the Caspian Sea, where he died of an attack of pleurisy,
leaving his empire to his son Jelaleddin (Jalal ud-din). Meanwhile Tule
carried his arms into the fertile province of Khorasan, and after having
captured Nessa by assault appeared before Merv. By an act of atrocious
treachery the Mongols gained possession of the city, and, after their
manner, sacked and burnt the town. From Merv Tule marched upon Nishapur,
where he met with a most determined resistance. For four days the
garrison fought desperately on the walls and in the streets, but at
length they were overpowered, and, with the exception of 400 artisans
who were sent into Mongolia, every man, woman and child was slain. Herat
escaped the fate which had overtaken Merv and Nishapur by opening its
gates to the Mongols. At this point of his victorious career Tule
received an order to join Jenghiz before Talikhan in Badakshan, where
that chieftain was preparing to renew his pursuit of Jelaleddin, after a
check he had sustained in an engagement fought before Ghazni. As soon as
sufficient reinforcements arrived Jenghiz advanced against Jelaleddin,
who had taken up a position on the banks of the Indus. Here the Turks,
though far outnumbered, defended their ground with undaunted courage,
until, beaten at all points, they fled in confusion. Jelaleddin, seeing
that all was lost, mounted a fresh horse and jumped into the river,
which flowed 20 ft. below. With admiring gaze Jenghiz watched the
desperate venture of his enemy, and even saw without regret the dripping
horseman mount the opposite bank. From the Indus Jenghiz sent in pursuit
of Jelaleddin, who fled to Delhi, but failing to capture the fugitive
the Mongols returned to Ghazni after having ravaged the provinces of
Lahore, Peshawar and Melikpur. At this moment news reached Jenghiz that
the inhabitants of Herat had deposed the governor whom Tule had
appointed over the city, and had placed one of their own choice in his
room. To punish this act of rebellion Jenghiz sent an army of 80,000 men
against the offending city, which after a siege of six months was taken
by assault. For a whole week the Mongols ceased not to kill, burn and
destroy, and 1,600,000 persons are said to have been massacred within
the walls. Having consummated this act of vengeance, Jenghiz returned to
Mongolia by way of Balkh, Bokhara and Samarkand.
Meanwhile Chepe and Sabutai marched through Azerbeijan, and in the
spring of 1222 advanced into Georgia. Here they defeated a combined
force of Lesghians, Circassians and Kipchaks, and after taking Astrakhan
followed the retreating Kipchaks to the Don. The news of the approach of
the mysterious enemy of whose name even they were ignorant was received
by the Russian princes at Kiev with dismay. At the instigation, however,
of Mitislaf, prince of Galicia, they assembled an opposing force on the
Dnieper. Here they received envoys from the Mongol camp, whom they
barbarously put to death. "You have killed our envoys," was the answer
made by the Mongols; "well, as you wish for war you shall have it. We
have done you no harm. God is impartial; He will decide our quarrel." In
the first battle, on the river Kaleza, the Russians were utterly routed,
and fled before the invaders, who, after ravaging Great Bulgaria
retired, gorged with booty, through the country of Saksin, along the
river Aktuba, on their way to Mongolia.
In China the same success had attended the Mongol arms as in western
Asia. The whole of the country north of the Yellow river, with the
exception of one or two cities, was added to the Mongol rule, and, on
the death of the Kin emperor Süan Tsung in 1223, the Kin empire
virtually ceased to be, and Jenghiz's frontiers thus became conterminous
with those of the Sung emperors who held sway over the whole of central
and southern China. After his return from Central Asia, Jenghiz once
more took the field in western China. While on this campaign the five
planets appeared in a certain conjunction, which to the superstitiously
minded Mongol chief foretold that evil was awaiting him. With this
presentiment strongly impressed upon him he turned his face homewards,
and had advanced no farther than the Si-Kiang river in Kansuh when he
was seized with an illness of which he died a short time afterwards
(1227) at his travelling palace at Ha-lao-tu, on the banks of the river
Sale in Mongolia. By the terms of his will Ogotai was appointed his
successor, but so essential was it considered to be that his death
should remain a secret until Ogotai was proclaimed that, as the funeral
procession moved northwards to the great ordu on the banks of the
Kerulen, the escort killed every one they met. The body of Jenghiz was
then carried successively to the ordus of his several wives, and was
finally laid to rest in the valley of Kilien.
Thus ended the career of one of the greatest conquerors the world has
ever seen. Born and nurtured as the chief of a petty Mongolian tribe, he
lived to see his armies victorious from the China Sea to the banks of
the Dnieper; and, though the empire which he created ultimately
dwindled away under the hands of his degenerate descendants, leaving not
a wrack behind, we have in the presence of the Turks in Europe a
consequence of his rule, since it was the advance of his armies which
drove their Osmanli ancestors from their original home in northern Asia,
and thus led to their invasion of Bithynia under Othman, and finally
their advance into Europe under Amurath I.
See Sir H. H. Howorth, _The History of the Mongols_; Sir Robert K.
Douglas, _The Life of Jenghiz Khan_. (R. K. D.)
JENKIN, HENRY CHARLES FLEEMING (1833-1885), British engineer, was born
near Dungeness on the 25th of March 1833, his father (d. 1885) being a
naval commander, and his mother (d. 1885) a novelist of some literary
repute, her best books perhaps being _Cousin Stella_ (1859) and _Who
breaks, pays_ (1861). Fleeming Jenkin was educated at first in Scotland,
but in 1846 the family went to live abroad, owing to financial straits,
and he studied at Genoa University, where he took a first-class degree
in physical science. In 1851 he began his engineering career as
apprentice in an establishment at Manchester, and subsequently he
entered Newall's submarine cable works at Birkenhead. In 1859 he began,
in concert with Sir William Thomson (afterwards Lord Kelvin), to work on
problems respecting the making and use of cables, and the importance of
his researches on the resistance of gutta-percha was at once recognized.
From this time he was in constant request in connexion with submarine
telegraphy, and he became known also as an inventor. In partnership with
Thomson, he made a large income as a consulting telegraph engineer. In
1865 he was elected F.R.S., and was appointed professor of engineering
at University College, London. In 1868 he obtained the same
professorship at Edinburgh University, and in 1873 he published a
textbook of _Magnetism and Electricity_, full of original work. He was
author of the article "Bridges" in the ninth edition of this
encyclopaedia. His influence among the Edinburgh students was
pronounced, and R. L. Stevenson's well-known _Memoir_ is a sympathetic
tribute to his ability and character. The meteoric charm of his
conversation is well described in Stevenson's essay on "Talk and
Talkers," under the name of Cockshot. Jenkin's interests were by no
means confined to engineering, but extended to the arts and literature;
his miscellaneous papers, showing his critical and unconventional views,
were issued posthumously in two volumes (1887). In 1882 Jenkin invented
an automatic method of electric transport for goods--"telpherage"--but
the completion of its details was prevented by his death on the 12th of
June 1885. A telpher line on his system was subsequently erected at
Glynde in Sussex. He was also well known as a sanitary reformer, and
during the last ten years of his life he did much useful work in
inculcating more enlightened ideas on the subject both in Edinburgh and
other places.
JENKINS, SIR LEOLINE (1623-1685), English lawyer and diplomatist, was
the son of a Welsh country gentleman. He was born in 1623 and was
educated at Jesus College, Oxford, of which he was elected a fellow at
the Restoration in 1660, having been an ardent royalist during the civil
war and commonwealth; and in 1661 he became head of the college. In the
same year he was made registrar of the consistory court of Westminster;
in 1664 deputy judge of the court of arches; about a year later judge of
the admiralty court; in 1689 judge of the prerogative court of
Canterbury. In these offices Jenkins did enduring work in elucidating
and establishing legal principles, especially in relation to
international law and admiralty jurisdiction. He was selected to draw up
the claim of Charles II. to succeed to the property of his mother,
Henrietta Maria, on her death in August 1666, and while in Paris for
this purpose he succeeded in defeating the rival claim of the duchess of
Orleans, being rewarded by a knighthood on his return. In 1673, on being
elected member for Hythe, Jenkins resigned the headship of Jesus
College. He was one of the English representatives at the congress of
Cologne in 1673, and at the more important congress of Nijmwegen in
1676-1679. He was made a privy councillor in February 1680 and became
secretary of state in April of the same year, in which office he was the
official leader of the opposition to the Exclusion Bill, though he was
by no means a pliant tool in the hands of the court. He resigned office
in 1684, and died on the 1st of September 1685. He left most of his
property to Jesus College, Oxford, including his books, which he
bequeathed to the college library, built by himself; and he left some
important manuscripts to All Souls College, where they are preserved.
Jenkins left his impress on the law of England in the Statute of Frauds,
and the Statute of Distributions, of which he was the principal author,
and of which the former profoundly affected the mercantile law of the
country, while the latter regulated the inheritance of the personal
property of intestates. He was never married.
See William Wynne, _Life of Sir Leoline Jenkins_ (2 vols., London,
1724), which contains a number of his diplomatic despatches, letters,
speeches and other papers. See also Sir William Temple, _Works_, vol.
ii. (4 vols., 1770); Anthony à Wood, _Athenae Oxonienses_ (Fasti)
edited by P. Bliss (4 vols., London, 1813-1820), and _History and
Antiquities of the University of Oxford_, edited by J. Gutch (Oxford,
1792-1796).
JENKINS, ROBERT (fl. 1731-1745), English master mariner, is known as the
protagonist of the "Jenkins's ear" incident, which, magnified in England
by the press and the opposition, became a contributory cause of the war
between England and Spain (1739). Bringing home the brig "Rebecca" from
the West Indies in 1731, Jenkins was boarded by a Spanish guarda-costa,
whose commander rifled the holds and cut off one of his ears. On
arriving in England Jenkins stated his grievance to the king, and a
report was furnished by the commander-in-chief in the West Indies
confirming his account. At first the case created no great stir, but in
1738 he repeated his story with dramatic detail before a committee of
the House of Commons, producing what purported to be the ear that had
been cut off. Afterwards it was suggested that he might have lost the
ear in the pillory.
Jenkins was subsequently given the command of a ship in the East India
Company's service, and later became supervisor of the company's
affairs at St Helena. In 1741 he was sent from England to that island
to investigate charges of corruption brought against the acting
governor, and from May 1741 until March 1742 he administered the
affairs of the island. Thereafter he resumed his naval career, and is
stated in an action with a pirate vessel to have preserved his own
vessel and three others under his care (see T. H. Brooke, _History of
the Island of St Helena_ (London, 2nd ed., 1824), and H. R. Janisch,
_Extracts from the St Helena Records_, 1885).
JENKS, JEREMIAH WHIPPLE (1856- ), American economist, was born in St
Clair, Michigan, on the 2nd of September 1856. He graduated at the
university of Michigan in 1878; taught Greek, Latin and German in Mt.
Morris College, Illinois; studied in Germany, receiving the degree of
Ph.D. from the university of Halle in 1885; taught political science and
English literature at Knox College, Galesburg, Ill., in 1886-1889; was
professor of political economy and social science at Indiana State
University in 1889-1891; and was successively professor of political,
municipal and social institutions (1891-1892), professor of political
economy and civil and social institutions (1892-1901), and after 1901
professor of political economy and politics at Cornell University. In
1899-1901 he served as an expert agent of the United States industrial
commission on investigation of trusts and industrial combinations in the
United States and Europe, and contributed to vols. i., viii. and xiii.
of this commission's report (1900 and 1901), vol. viii. being a report,
written wholly by him, on industrial combinations in Europe. In
1901-1902 he was special commissioner of the United States war
department on colonial administration, and wrote a _Report on Certain
Economic Questions in the English and Dutch Colonies in the Orient_,
published (1902) by the bureau of insular affairs; and in 1903 he was
adviser to the Mexican ministry of finance on projected currency
changes. In 1903-1904 he was a member of the United States commission on
international exchange, in especial charge of the reform of currency in
China; in 1905 he was special representative of the United States with
the imperial Chinese special mission visiting the United States. In 1907
he became a member of the United States immigration commission. Best
known as an expert on "trusts," he has written besides on elections,
ballot reform, proportional representation, on education (especially as
a training for citizenship), on legislation regarding highways, &c.
His principal published works are _Henry C. Carey als Nationalökonom_
(Halle a. S., 1885); _The Trust Problem_ (1900; revised 1903); _Great
Fortunes_ (1906); _Citizenship and the Schools_ (1906); and
_Principles of Politics_ (1909).
JENNÉ, a city of West Africa, formerly the capital of the Songhoi
empire, now included in the French colony of Upper Senegal and Niger.
Jenné is situated on a marigot or natural canal connecting the Niger and
its affluent the Bani or Mahel Balevel, and is within a few miles of the
latter stream. It lies 250 m. S.W. of Timbuktu in a straight line. The
city is surrounded by channels connected with the Bani but in the dry
season it ceases to be an island. On the north is the Moorish quarter;
on the north-west, the oldest part of the city, stood the citadel,
converted by the French since 1893 into a modern fort. The market-place
is midway between the fort and the commercial harbour. The old mosque,
partially destroyed in 1830, covered a large area in the south-west
portion of the city. It was built on the site of the ancient palace of
the Songhoi kings. The architecture of many of the buildings bears a
resemblance to Egyptian, the façades of the houses being adorned with
great buttresses of pylonic form. There is little trace of the influence
of Moorish or Arabian art. The buildings are mostly constructed of clay
made into flat long bricks. Massive clay walls surround the city. The
inhabitants are great traders and the principal merchants have
representatives at Timbuktu and all the chief places on the Niger. The
boats built at Jenné are famous throughout the western Sudan.
Jenné is believed to have been founded by the Songhoi in the 8th
century, and though it has passed under the dominion of many races it
has never been destroyed. Jenné seems to have been at the height of its
power from the 12th to the 16th century, when its merchandise was found
at every port along the west coast of Africa. From this circumstance it
is conjectured that Jenné (Guinea) gave its name to the whole coast (see
GUINEA). Subsequently, under the control of Moorish, Tuareg and Fula
invaders, the importance of the city greatly declined. With the advent
of the French, commerce again began to flourish.
See F. Dubois, _Tombouctou la mystérieuse_ (Paris, 1897), in which
several chapters are devoted to Jenné; also SONGHOI; TIMBUKTU; and
SENEGAL.
JENNER, EDWARD (1749-1823), English physician and discoverer of
vaccination, was born at Berkeley, Gloucestershire, on the 17th of May
1749. His father, the Rev. Stephen Jenner, rector of Rockhampton and
vicar of Berkeley, came of a family that had been long established in
that county, and was possessed of considerable landed property; he died
when Edward was only six years old, but his eldest son, the Rev. Stephen
Jenner, brought his brother up with paternal care and tenderness. Edward
received his early education at Wotton-under-Edge and Cirencester, where
he already showed a strong taste for natural history. The medical
profession having been selected for him, he began his studies under
Daniel Ludlow, a surgeon of Sodbury near Bristol; but in his
twenty-first year he proceeded to London, where he became a favourite
pupil of John Hunter, in whose house he resided for two years. During
this period he was employed by Sir Joseph Banks to arrange and prepare
the valuable zoological specimens which he had brought back from Captain
Cook's first voyage in 1771. He must have acquitted himself
satisfactorily in this task, since he was offered the post of naturalist
in the second expedition, but declined it as well as other advantageous
offers, preferring rather to practise his profession in his native
place, and near his eldest brother, to whom he was much attached. He was
the principal founder of a local medical society, to which he
contributed several papers of marked ability, in one of which he
apparently anticipated later discoveries concerning rheumatic
inflammations of the heart. He maintained a correspondence with John
Hunter, under whose direction he investigated various points in biology,
particularly the hibernation of hedgehogs and habits of the cuckoo; his
paper on the latter subject was laid by Hunter before the Royal Society,
and appeared in the _Phil. Trans._ for 1788. He also devoted
considerable attention to the varied geological character of the
district in which he lived, and constructed the first balloon seen in
those parts. He was a great favourite in general society, from his
agreeable and instructive conversation, and the many accomplishments he
possessed. Thus he was a fair musician, both as a part singer and as a
performer on the violin and flute, and a very successful writer, after
the fashion of that time, of fugitive pieces of verse. In 1788 he
married Catherine Kingscote, and in 1792 he obtained the degree of
doctor of medicine from St Andrews.
Meanwhile the discovery that is associated with his name had been slowly
maturing in his mind. When only an apprentice at Sodbury, his attention
had been directed to the relations between cow-pox and small-pox in
connexion with a popular belief which he found current in
Gloucestershire, as to the antagonism between these two diseases. During
his stay in London he appears to have mentioned the thing repeatedly to
Hunter, who, being engrossed by other important pursuits, was not so
strongly persuaded as Jenner was of its possible importance, yet spoke
of it to his friends and in his lectures. After he began practice in
Berkeley, Jenner was always accustomed to inquire what his professional
brethren thought of it; but he found that, when medical men had noticed
the popular report at all, they supposed it to be based on imperfect
induction. His first careful investigation of the subject dated from
about 1775, and five years elapsed before he had succeeded in clearing
away the most perplexing difficulties by which it was surrounded. He
first satisfied himself that two different forms of disease had been
hitherto confounded under the term cow-pox, only one of which protected
against small-pox, and that many of the cases of failure were to be thus
accounted for; and his next step was to ascertain that the true cow-pox
itself only protects when communicated at a particular stage of the
disease. At the same time he came to the conclusion that "the grease" of
horses is the same disease as cow-pox and small-pox, each being modified
by the organism in which it was developed. For many years, cow-pox being
scarce in his county, he had no opportunity of inoculating the disease,
and so putting his discovery to the test, but he did all he could in the
way of collecting information and communicating what he had ascertained.
Thus in 1788 he carried a drawing of the cow-pox, as seen on the hands
of a milkmaid, to London, and showed it to Sir E. Home and others, who
agreed that it was "an interesting and curious subject." At length, on
the 14th of May 1796, he was able to inoculate James Phipps, a boy about
eight years old, with matter from cow-pox vesicles on the hand of Sarah
Nelmes. On the 1st of the following July the boy was carefully
inoculated with variolous matter, but (as Jenner had predicted) no
small-pox followed. The discovery was now complete, but Jenner was
unable to repeat his experiment until 1798, owing to the disappearance
of cow-pox from the dairies. He then repeated his inoculations with the
utmost care, and prepared a pamphlet (_Inquiry into the Cause and
Effects of the Variolae Vaccinae_) which should announce his discovery
to the world. Before publishing it, however, he thought it well to visit
London, so as to demonstrate the truth of his assertions to his friends;
but he remained in London nearly three months, without being able to
find any person who would submit to be vaccinated. Soon after he had
returned home, however, Henry Cline, surgeon of St Thomas's Hospital,
inoculated some vaccine matter obtained from him over the diseased
hip-joint of a child, thinking the counter-irritation might be useful,
and found the patient afterwards incapable of acquiring small-pox. In
the autumn of the same year, Jenner met with the first opposition to
vaccination; and this was the more formidable because it proceeded from
J. Ingenhousz, a celebrated physician and man of science. But meanwhile
Cline's advocacy of vaccination brought it much more decidedly before
the medical profession, of whom the majority were prudent enough to
suspend their judgment until they had more ample information. But
besides these there were two noisy and troublesome factions, one of
which opposed vaccination as a useless and dangerous practice, while the
other endangered its success much more by rash and self-seeking
advocacy. At the head of the latter was George Pearson, who in November
1798 published a pamphlet speculating upon the subject, before even
seeing a case of cow-pox, and afterwards endeavoured, by lecturing on
the subject and supplying the virus, to put himself forward as the chief
agent in the cause. The matter which he distributed, which had been
derived from cows that were found to be infected in London, was found
frequently to produce, not the slight disease described by Jenner, but
more or less severe eruptions resembling small-pox. Jenner concluded at
once that this was due to an accidental contamination of the vaccine
with variolous matter, and a visit to London in the spring of 1799
convinced him that this was the case. In the course of this year the
practice of vaccination spread over England, being urged principally by
non-professional persons of position; and towards its close attempts
were made to found institutions for gratuitous vaccination and for
supplying lymph to all who might apply for it. Pearson proposed to
establish one of these in London, without Jenner's knowledge, in which
he offered him the post of honorary corresponding physician! On learning
of this scheme to supplant him, and to carry on an institution for
public vaccination on principles which he knew to be partly erroneous,
Jenner once more visited London early in 1800, when he had influence
enough to secure the abandonment of the project. He was afterwards
presented to the king, the queen and the prince of Wales, whose
encouragement materially aided the spread of vaccination in England.
Meanwhile it had made rapid progress in the United States, where it was
introduced by Benjamin Waterhouse, then professor of physic at Harvard,
and on the continent of Europe, where it was at first diffused by De
Carro of Vienna. In consequence of the war between England and France,
the discovery was later in reaching Paris; but, its importance once
realized, it spread rapidly over France, Spain and Italy.
A few of the incidents connected with its extension may be mentioned.
Perhaps the most striking is the expedition which was sent out by the
court of Spain in 1803, for the purpose of diffusing cow-pox through all
the Spanish possessions in the Old and New Worlds, and which returned in
three years, having circumnavigated the globe, and succeeded beyond its
utmost expectations. Clergymen in Geneva and Holland urged vaccination
upon their parishioners from the pulpit; in Sicily, South America and
Naples religious processions were formed for the purpose of receiving
it; the anniversary of Jenner's birthday, or of the successful
vaccination of James Phipps, was for many years celebrated as a feast in
Germany; and the empress of Russia caused the first child operated upon
to receive the name of Vaccinov, and to be educated at the public
expense. About the close of the year 1801 Jenner's friends in
Gloucestershire presented him with a small service of plate as a
testimonial of the esteem in which they held his discovery. This was
intended merely as a preliminary to the presenting of a petition to
parliament for a grant. The petition was presented in 1802, and was
referred to a committee, of which the investigations resulted in a
report in favour of the grant, and ultimately in a vote of £10,000.
Towards the end of 1802 steps were taken to form a society for the
proper spread of vaccination in London, and the Royal Jennerian Society
was finally established, Jenner returning to town to preside at the
first meeting. This institution began very prosperously, more than
twelve thousand persons having been inoculated in the first eighteen
months, and with such effect that the deaths from small-pox, which for
the latter half of the 18th century had averaged 2018 annually, fell in
1804 to 622. Unfortunately the chief resident inoculator soon set
himself up as an authority opposed to Jenner, and this led to such
dissensions as caused the society to die out in 1808.
Jenner was led, by the language of the chancellor of the exchequer when
his grant was proposed, to attempt practice in London, but after a
year's trial he returned to Berkeley. His grant was not paid until 1804,
and then, after the deduction of about £1000 for fees, it did little
more than pay the expenses attendant upon his discovery. For he was so
thoroughly known everywhere as the discoverer of vaccination that, as he
himself said, he was "the vaccine clerk of the whole world." At the
same time he continued to vaccinate gratuitously all the poor who
applied to him on certain days, so that he sometimes had as many as
three hundred persons waiting at his door. Meanwhile honours began to
shower upon him from abroad: he was elected a member of almost all the
chief scientific societies on the continent of Europe, the first being
that of Göttingen, where he was proposed by J. F. Blumenbach. But
perhaps the most flattering proof of his influence was derived from
France. On one occasion, when he was endeavouring to obtain the release
of some of the unfortunate Englishmen who had been detained in France on
the sudden termination of the Peace of Amiens, Napoleon was about to
reject the petition, when Josephine uttered the name of Jenner. The
emperor paused and exclaimed: "Ah, we can refuse nothing to that name."
Somewhat later he did the same service to Englishmen confined in Mexico
and in Austria; and during the latter part of the great war persons
before leaving England would sometimes obtain certificates signed by him
which served as passports. In his own country his merits were less
recognized. His applications on behalf of French prisoners in England
were less successful; he never shared in any of the patronage at the
disposal of the government, and was even unable to obtain a living for
his nephew George.
In 1806 Lord Henry Petty (afterwards the marquess of Lansdowne) became
chancellor of the exchequer, and was so convinced of the inadequacy of
the former parliamentary grant that he proposed an address to the Crown,
praying that the college of physicians should be directed to report upon
the success of vaccination. Their report being strongly in its favour,
the then chancellor of the exchequer (Spencer Perceval) proposed that a
sum of £10,000 without any deductions should be paid to Jenner. The
anti-vaccinationists found but one advocate in the House of Commons; and
finally the sum was raised to £20,000. Jenner, however, at the same time
had the mortification of learning that government did not intend to take
any steps towards checking small-pox inoculation, which so persistently
kept up that disease. About the same time a subscription for his benefit
was begun in India, where his discovery had been gratefully received,
but the full amount of this (£7383) only reached him in 1812.
The Royal Jennerian Society having failed, the national vaccine
establishment was founded, for the extension of vaccination, in 1808.
Jenner spent five months in London for the purpose of organizing it, but
was then obliged, by the dangerous illness of one of his sons, to return
to Berkeley. He had been appointed director of the institution; but he
had no sooner left London than Sir Lucas Pepys, president of the college
of physicians, neglected his recommendations, and formed the board out
of the officials of that college and the college of surgeons. Jenner at
once resigned his post as director, though he continued to give the
benefit of his advice whenever it was needed, and this resignation was a
bitter mortification to him. In 1810 his eldest son died, and Jenner's
grief at his loss, and his incessant labours, materially affected his
health. In 1813 the university of Oxford conferred on him the degree of
M.D. It was believed that this would lead to his election into the
college of physicians, but that learned body decided that he could not
be admitted until he had undergone an examination in classics. This
Jenner at once refused; to brush up his classics would, he said, "be
irksome beyond measure. I would not do it for a diadem. That indeed
would be a bauble; I would not do it for John Hunter's museum."
He visited London for the last time in 1814, when he was presented to
the Allied Sovereigns and to most of the principal personages who
accompanied them. In the next year his wife's death was the signal for
him to retire from public life: he never left Berkeley again, except for
a day or two, as long as he lived. He found sufficient occupation for
the remainder of his life in collecting further evidence on some points
connected with his great discovery, and in his engagements as a
physician, a naturalist and a magistrate. In 1818 a severe epidemic of
small-pox prevailed, and fresh doubts were thrown on the efficacy of
vaccination, in part apparently owing to the bad quality of the vaccine
lymph employed. This caused Jenner much annoyance, which was relieved by
an able defence of the practice, written by Sir Gilbert Blane. But this
led him, in 1821, to send a circular letter to most of the medical men
in the kingdom inquiring into the effect of other skin diseases in
modifying the progress of cow-pox. A year later he published his last
work, _On the Influence of Artificial Eruptions in Certain Diseases_;
and in 1823 he presented his last paper--"On the Migration of Birds"--to
the Royal Society. On the 24th of January 1823 he retired to rest
apparently as well as usual, and next morning rose and came down to his
library, where he was found insensible on the floor, in a state of
apoplexy, and with the right side paralysed. He never rallied, and died
on the following morning.
A public subscription was set on foot, shortly after his death, by the
medical men of his county, for the purpose of erecting some memorial in
his honour, and with much difficulty a sufficient sum was raised to
enable a statue to be placed in Gloucester Cathedral. In 1850 another
attempt was made to set up a monument to him; this appears to have
failed, but at length, in 1858, a statue of him was erected by public
subscription in London.
Jenner's life was written by the intimate friend of his later years,
Dr John Baron of Gloucester (2 vols., 1827, 1838). See also
Vaccination.
JENNER, SIR WILLIAM, BART. (1815-1898), English physician, was born at
Chatham on the 30th of January 1815, and educated at University College,
London. He became M.R.C.S. in 1837, and F.R.C.P. in 1852, and in 1844
took the London M.D. In 1847 he began at the London fever hospital
investigations into cases of "continued" fever which enabled him finally
to make the distinction between typhus and typhoid on which his
reputation as a pathologist principally rests. In 1849 he was appointed
professor of pathological anatomy at University College, and also
assistant physician to University College Hospital, where he afterwards
became physician (1854-1876) and consulting physician (1879), besides
holding similar appointments at other hospitals. He was also
successively Holme professor of clinical medicine and professor of the
principles and practice of medicine at University College. He was
president of the college of physicians (1881-1888); he was elected
F.R.S. in 1864, and received honorary degrees from Oxford, Cambridge and
Edinburgh. In 1861 he was appointed physician extraordinary, and in 1862
physician in ordinary, to Queen Victoria, and in 1863 physician in
ordinary to the prince of Wales; he attended both the prince consort and
the prince of Wales in their attacks of typhoid fever. In 1868 he was
created a baronet. As a consultant Sir William Jenner had a great
reputation, and he left a large fortune when he died, at Bishop's
Waltham, Hants, on the 11th of December 1898, having then retired from
practice for eight years owing to failing health.
JENNET, a small Spanish horse; the word is sometimes applied in English
to a mule, the offspring of a she-ass and a stallion. Jennet comes,
through Fr. _genet_, from Span, _jinete_, a light horseman who rides _à
la gineta_, explained as "with his legs tucked up." The name is taken to
be a corruption of the Arabic Zenata, a Berber tribe famed for its
cavalry. English and French transferred the word from the rider to his
horse, a meaning which the word has only acquired in Spain in modern
times.
JENOLAN CAVES, a series of remarkable caverns in Roxburgh county, New
South Wales, Australia; 113 m. W. by N. of Sydney, and 36 m. from
Tarana, which is served by railway. They are the most celebrated of
several similar groups in the limestone of the country; they have not
yielded fossils of great interest, but the stalactitic formations,
sometimes pure white, are of extraordinary beauty. The caves have been
rendered easily accessible to visitors and lighted by electricity.
JENSEN, WILHELM (1837- ), German author, was born at Heiligenhafen in
Holstein on the 15th of February 1837, the son of a local Danish
magistrate, who came of old patrician Frisian stock. After attending the
classical schools at Kiel and Lübeck, Jensen studied medicine at the
universities of Kiel, Würzburg and Breslau. He, however, abandoned the
medical profession for that of letters, and after engaging for some
years in individual private study proceeded to Munich, where he
associated with men of letters. After a residence in Stuttgart
(1865-1869), where for a short time he conducted the _Schwäbische
Volks-Zeitung_, he became editor in Flensburg of the _Norddeutsche
Zeitung_. In 1872 he again returned to Kiel, lived from 1876 to 1888 in
Freiburg im Breisgau, and since 1888 has been resident in Munich.
Jensen is perhaps the most fertile of modern German writers of
fiction, more than one hundred works having proceeded from his pen;
but only comparatively few of them have caught the public taste; such
are the novels, _Karin von Schweden_ (Berlin, 1878); _Die braune
Erica_ (Berlin, 1868); and the tale, _Die Pfeifer von Dusenbach, Eine
Geschichte aus dem Elsass_ (1884). Among others may be mentioned:
_Barthenia_ (Berlin, 1877); _Götz und Gisela_ (Berlin, 1886);
_Heimkunft_ (Dresden, 1894); _Aus See und Sand_ (Dresden, 1897); _Luv
und Lee_ (Berlin, 1897); and the narratives, _Aus den Tagen der Hansa_
(Leipzig, 1885); _Aus stiller Zeit_ (Berlin, 1881-1885); and _Heimath_
(1901). Jensen also published some tragedies, among which _Dido_
(Berlin, 1870) and _Der Kampf für's Reich_ (Freiburg im Br., 1884) may
be mentioned.
JENYNS, SOAME (1704-1787), English author, was born in London on the 1st
of January 1704, and was educated at St John's College, Cambridge. In
1742 he was chosen M.P. for Cambridgeshire, in which his property lay,
and he afterwards sat for the borough of Dunwich and the town of
Cambridge. From 1755 to 1780 he was one of the commissioners of the
board of trade. He died on the 18th of December 1787.
For the measure of literary repute which he enjoyed during his life
Jenyns was indebted as much to his wealth and social standing as to his
accomplishments and talents, though both were considerable. His poetical
works, the _Art of Dancing_ (1727) and _Miscellanies_ (1770), contain
many passages graceful and lively though occasionally verging on
licence. The first of his prose works was his _Free Inquiry into the
Nature and Origin of Evil_ (1756). This essay was severely criticized on
its appearance, especially by Samuel Johnson in the _Literary Magazine_.
Johnson, in a slashing review--the best paper of the kind he ever
wrote--condemned the book as a slight and shallow attempt to solve one
of the most difficult of moral problems. Jenyns, a gentle and amiable
man in the main, was extremely irritated by his failure. He put forth a
second edition of his work, prefaced by a vindication, and tried to take
vengeance on Johnson after his death by a sarcastic epitaph.[1] In 1776
Jenyns published his _View of the Internal Evidence of the Christian
Religion_. Though at one period of his life he had affected a kind of
deistic scepticism, he had now returned to orthodoxy, and there seems no
reason to doubt his sincerity, questioned at the time, in defending
Christianity on the ground of its total variance with the principles of
human reason. The work was deservedly praised in its day for its
literary merits, but is so plainly the production of an amateur in
theology that as a scientific treatise it is valueless.
A collected edition of the works of Jenyns appeared in 1790, with a
biography by Charles Nalson Cole. There are several references to him
in Boswell's _Johnson_.
FOOTNOTE:
[1] Two lines will suffice:--
Boswell and Thrale, retailers of his wit,
Will tell you how he wrote, and talk'd, and cough'd, and spit.
JEOPARDY, a term meaning risk or danger of death, loss or other injury.
The word, in Mid. Eng. _juparti_, _jeupartie_, &c., was adapted from O.
Fr. _ju_, later _jeu_, and _parti_, even game, in medieval Latin _jocus
partitus_. This term was originally used of a problem in chess or of a
stage in any other game at which the chances of success or failure are
evenly divided between the players. It was thus early transformed to any
state of uncertainty.
JEPHSON, ROBERT (1736-1803), British dramatist, was born in Ireland.
After serving for some years in the British army, he retired with the
rank of captain, and lived in England, where he was the friend of
Garrick, Reynolds, Goldsmith, Johnson, Burke, Burney and Charles
Townshend. His appointment as master of the horse to the lord-lieutenant
of Ireland took him back to Dublin. He published, in the _Mercury_
newspaper a series of articles in defence of the lord-lieutenant's
administration which were afterwards collected and issued in book form
under the title of _The Bachelor, or Speculations of Jeoffry Wagstaffe_.
A pension of £300, afterwards doubled, was granted him, and he held his
appointment under twelve succeeding viceroys. From 1775 he was engaged
in the writing of plays. Among others, his tragedy _Braganza_ was
successfully performed at Drury Lane in 1775, _Conspiracy_ in 1796, _The
Law of Lombardy_ in 1779, and _The Count of Narbonne_ at Covent Garden
in 1781. In 1794 he published an heroic poem _Roman Portraits_, and _The
Confessions of Jacques Baptiste Couteau_, a satire on the excesses of
the French Revolution. He died at Blackrock, near Dublin, on the 31st of
May 1803.
JEPHTHAH, one of the judges of Israel, in the Bible, was an illegitimate
son of Gilead, and, being expelled from his father's house by his lawful
brethren, took refuge in the Syrian land of Tob, where he gathered
around him a powerful band of homeless men like himself. The Ammonites
pressing hard on his countrymen, the elders of Gilead called for his
help, which he consented to give on condition that in the event of
victory he should be made their head (Judg. xi. 1-xii. 7). His name is
best known in history and literature in connexion with his vow, which
led to the sacrifice of his daughter on his successful return. The
reluctance shown by many writers in accepting the plain sense of the
narrative on this point proceeds to a large extent on unwarranted
assumptions as to the stage of ethical development which had been
reached in Israel in the period of the judges, or at the time when the
narrative took shape. The annual lamentation of the women for her death
suggests a mythical origin (see Adonis). Attached to the narrative is an
account of a quarrel between Jephthah and the Ephraimites. The latter
were defeated, and their retreat was cut off by the Gileadites, who had
seized the fords of the Jordan. As the fugitives attempted to cross they
were bidden to say "shibboleth" ("flood" or "ear of corn"), and those
who said "sibboleth" (the Ephraimites apparently being unused to _sh_),
were at once put to death. In this way 42,000 of the tribe were
killed.[1]
The loose connexion between this and the main narrative, as also the
lengthy speech to the children of Ammon (xi. 14-27), which really
relates to Moab, has led some writers to infer that two distinct
heroes and situations have been combined. See further the commentaries
on the Book of Judges (q.v.), and Cheyne, _Ency. Bib._, art.
"Jephthah." (S. A. C.)
FOOTNOTE:
[1] Similarly a Syrian story tells how the Druses came to slay
Ibrahim Pasha's troops, and desiring to spare the Syrians ordered the
men to say _gamal_ (camel). As the Syrians pronounce the _g_ soft,
and the Egyptians the _g_, hard, the former were easily identified.
Other examples from the East will be found in H. C. Kay, _Yaman_, p.
36, and in S. Lane-Poole, _History of Egypt in the Middle Ages_, p.
300. Also, at the Sicilian Vespers (March 13, 1282) the French were
made to betray themselves by their pronunciation of _ceci_ and
_ciceri_ (Ital. _c_ like _tch_; Fr. _c_ like _s_).
JERAHMEEL, (Heb. "May God pity"), in the Bible, a clan which with Caleb,
the Kenites and others, occupied the southern steppes of Palestine,
probably in the district around Arad, about 17 m. S. of Hebron. It was
on friendly terms with David during his residence at Ziklag (1 Sam. xxx.
29), and it was apparently in his reign that the various elements of the
south were united and were reckoned to Israel. This is expressed in the
chronicler's genealogies which make Jerahmeel and Caleb descendants of
Judah (see DAVID; JUDAH).
On the names in 1 Chron. ii. see S. A. Cook, _Ency. Bib._, col. 2363
seq. Peleth (v. 33) may be the origin of the Pelethites (2 Sam. viii.
18; xv. 18; xx. 7), and since the name occurs in the revolt of Korah
(Num. xvi. 1), it is possible that Jerahmeel, like Caleb and the
Kenites, had moved northwards from Kadesh. Samuel (q.v.) was of
Jerahmeel (1 Sam. i. 1; Septuagint), and the consecutive Jerahmeelite
names Nathan and Zabad (1 Chron. ii. 36) have been associated with the
prophet and officer (Zabud, 1 Kings iv. 5) of the times of David and
Solomon respectively. The association of Samuel and Nathan with this
clan, if correct, is a further illustration of the importance of the
south for the growth of biblical history (see KENITES and RECHABITES).
The _Chronicles of Jerahmeel_ (M. Gaster, _Oriental Translation Fund_,
1899) is a late production containing a number of apocryphal Jewish
legends of no historical value. (S. A. C.)
JERBA, an island off the coast of North Africa in the Gulf of Gabes,
forming part of the regency of Tunisia. It is separated from the
mainland by two narrow straits, and save for these channels blocks the
entrance to a large bight identified with the Lake Triton of the Romans.
The western strait, opening into the Gulf of Gabes, is a mile and a half
broad; the eastern strait is wider, but at low water it is possible to
cross to the mainland by the Tarik-el-Jemil (road of the camel). The
island is irregular in outline, its greatest length and breadth being
some 20 m., and its area 425 sq. m. It contains neither rivers nor
springs, but is supplied with water by wells and cisterns. It is flat
and well wooded with date palms and olive trees. Pop. 35,000 to 40,000,
the bulk of the inhabitants being Berbers. Though many of them have
adopted Arabic a Berber idiom is commonly spoken. An affinity exists
between the Berbers of Jerba and the Beni Mzab. About 3000 Jews live
apart in villages of their own, and some 400 Europeans, chiefly Maltese
and Greeks, are settled in the island. Jerba has a considerable
reputation for the manufacture of the woollen tissues interwoven with
silk which are known as burnous stuffs; a market for the sale of sponges
is held from November till March; and there is a considerable export
trade in olives, dates, figs and other fruits. The capital, trading
centre and usual landing-place are at Haumt-es-Suk (market quarter) on
the north side of the island (pop. 2500). Here are a medieval fort,
built by the Spaniards in 1284, and a modern fort, garrisoned by the
French. Gallala, to the south, is noted for the manufacture of a kind of
white pottery, much prized. At El Kantara (the bridge) on the eastern
strait, and formerly connected with the mainland by a causeway, are
extensive ruins of a Roman city--probably those of Meninx, once a
flourishing seaport.
Jerba is the Lotophagitis or Lotus-eaters' Island of the Greek and Roman
geographers, and is also identified with the Brachion of Scylax. The
modern name appears as early as the 4th century in Sextus Aurelius
Victor. In the middle ages the possession of Jerba was contested by the
Normans of Sicily, the Spaniards and the Turks, the Turks proving
victorious. In 1560 after the destruction of the Spanish fleet off the
coast of the island by Piali Pasha and the corsair Dragut the Spanish
garrison at Haumt-es-Suk was exterminated, and a pyramid, 10 ft. broad
at the base and 20 ft. high, was built of their skulls and other bones.
In 1848 this pyramid was pulled down at the instance of the Christian
community, and the bones were buried in the Catholic cemetery. In
general, from the Arab invasion in the 7th century Jerba shared the
fortunes of Tunisia.
See H. Barth, _Wanderungen durch die Küstenl. des Mittelmeeres_
(Berlin, 1849); and H. von Maltzan, _Reise in Tunis und Tripolis_
(Leipzig, 1870).
JERBOA, properly the name of an Arabian and North African jumping rodent
mammal, _Jaculus aegyptius_ (also known as _Jaculus_, or _Dipus_,
_jaculus_) typifying the family _Jaculidae_ (or _Dipodidae_), but in a
wider sense applied to most of the representatives of that family, which
are widely distributed over the desert and semi-desert tracts of the Old
World, although unknown in Africa south of the Sahara. In all the more
typical members of the family the three middle metatarsals of the long
hind-legs are fused into a cannon-bone; and in the true jerboas of the
genus _Jaculus_ the two lateral toes, with their supporting metatarsals,
are lost, although they are present in the alactagas (_Alactaga_), in
which, however, as in certain allied genera, only the three middle toes
are functional. As regards the true jerboas, there is a curious
resemblance in the structure of their hind-legs to that obtaining among
birds. In both groups, for instance, the lower part of the hind-leg is
formed by a long, slender cannon-bone, or metatarsus, terminating
inferiorly in triple condyles for the three long and sharply clawed
toes, the resemblance being increased by the fact that in both cases the
small bone of the leg (fibula) is fused with the large one (tibia). It
may also be noticed that in mammals and birds which hop on two legs,
such as jerboas, kangaroos, thrushes and finches, the proportionate
length of the thigh-bone or femur to the tibia and foot (metatarsus and
toes) is constant, being 2 to 5; in animals, on the other hand, such as
hares, horses and frogs, which use all four feet, the corresponding
lengths are 4 to 7. The resemblance between the jerboa's and the bird's
skeleton is owing to adaptation to a similar mode of existence. In the
young jerboa the proportion of the femur to the rest of the leg is the
same as in ordinary running animals. Further, at an early stage of
development the fibula is a complete and separate bone, while the three
metatarsals, which subsequently fuse together to form the cannon-bone,
are likewise separate. In addition to their long hind and short fore
limbs, jerboas are mostly characterized by their silky coats--of a fawn
colour to harmonize with their desert surroundings--their large eyes,
and long tails and ears. As is always the case with large-eared animals,
the tympanic bullae of the skull are of unusually large size; the size
varying in the different genera according to that of the ears. (For the
characteristics of the family and of its more important generic
representatives, see RODENTIA.)
In the Egyptian jerboa the length of the body is 8 in., and that of
the tail, which is long, cylindrical and covered with short hair
terminated by a tuft, 10 in. The five-toed front limbs are extremely
short, while the hind pair are six times as long. When about to
spring, this jerboa raises its body by means of the hinder
extremities, and supports itself at the same time upon its tail, while
the fore-feet are so closely pressed to the breast as to be scarcely
visible, which doubtless suggested the name _Dipus_, or two-footed. It
then leaps into the air and alights upon its four feet, but
instantaneously erecting itself, it makes another spring, and so on in
such rapid succession as to appear as if rather flying than running.
It is a gregarious animal, living in considerable colonies in burrows,
which it excavates with its nails and teeth in the sandy soil of Egypt
and Arabia. In these it remains during great part of the day, emerging
at night in search of the herbs on which it feeds. It is exceedingly
shy, and this, together with its extraordinary agility, renders it
difficult to capture. The Arabs, however, succeed by closing up all
the exits from the burrows with a single exception, by which the
rodents are forced to escape, and over which a net is placed for their
capture. When confined, they will gnaw through the hardest wood in
order to make their escape. The Persian jerboa (_Alactaga indica_) is
also a nocturnal burrowing animal, feeding chiefly on grain, which it
stores up in underground repositories, closing these when full, and
only drawing upon them when the supply of food above ground is
exhausted (see also JUMPING MOUSE). (R. L.*)
JERDAN, WILLIAM (1782-1869), Scottish journalist, was born on the 16th
of April 1782, at Kelso, Scotland. During the years between 1799 and
1806 he spent short periods in a country lawyer's office, a London West
India merchant's counting-house, an Edinburgh solicitor's chambers, and
held the position of surgeon's mate on board H.M. guardship "Gladiator"
in Portsmouth Harbour, under his uncle, who was surgeon. He went to
London in 1806, and became a newspaper reporter. He was in the lobby of
the House of Commons on the 11th of May 1812 when Spencer Perceval was
shot, and was the first to seize the assassin. By 1812 he had become
editor of _The Sun_, a semi-official Tory paper; he occasionally
inserted literary articles, then quite an unusual proceeding; but a
quarrel with the chief proprietor brought that engagement to a close in
1817. He passed next to the editor's chair of the _Literary Gazette_,
which he conducted with success for thirty-four years. Jerdan's position
as editor brought him into contact with many distinguished writers. An
account of his friends, among whom Canning was a special intimate, is to
be found in his _Men I have Known_ (1866). When Jerdan retired in 1850
from the editorship of the _Literary Gazette_ his pecuniary affairs were
far from satisfactory. A testimonial of over £900 was subscribed by his
friends; and in 1853 a government pension of 100 guineas was conferred
on him by Lord Aberdeen. He published his _Autobiography_ in 1852-1853,
and died on the 11th of July 1869.
JEREMIAH, in the Bible, the last pre-exilic prophet (fl. 626-586 B.C.?),
son of Hilkiah.
_Early Days of Jeremiah._--There must anciently have existed one or more
prose works on Jeremiah and his times, written partly to do honour to
the prophet, partly to propagate those views respecting Israel's past
with which the name of Jeremiah was associated. Some fragments of this
work (or these works) have come down to us; they greatly add to the
popularity of the Book of Jeremiah. Strict historical truth we must not
ask of them, but they do give us what was believed concerning Jeremiah
in the following age, and we must believe that the personality so
honoured was an extraordinary one. We have also a number of genuine
prophecies which admit us into Jeremiah's inner nature. These are our
best authorities, but they are deficient in concrete facts. By birth
Jeremiah was a countryman; he came of a priestly family whose estate lay
at Anathoth "in the land of Benjamin" (xxxii. 3; cf. i. 1). He came
forward as a prophet in the thirteenth year of Josiah (626 B.C.), still
young but irresistibly impelled. Unfortunately the account of the call
and of the object of the divine caller come to us from a later hand (ch.
i.), but we can well believe that the concrete fact which the prophetic
call illuminated was an impending blow to the state (i. 13-16; cf. ch.
iv.). What the blow exactly was is disputed,[1] but it is certain that
Jeremiah saw the gathering storm and anticipated its result, while the
statesmen were still wrapped in a false security. Five years later came
the reform movement produced by the "finding" of the "book of the law"
in the Temple in 621 B.C. (2 Kings xxii. 8), and some critics have
gathered from Jer. xi. 1-8 that Jeremiah joined the ranks of those who
publicly supported this book in Jerusalem and elsewhere. To others this
view appears in itself improbable. How can a man like Jeremiah have
advocated any such panacea? He was indeed not at first a complete
pessimist, but to be a preacher of Deuteronomy required a sanguine
temper which a prophet of the school of Isaiah could not possess.
Besides, there is a famous passage (viii. 8, see R.V.) in which Jeremiah
delivers a vehement attack upon the "scribes" (or, as we might render,
"bookmen") and their "false pen." If, as Wellhausen and Duhm suppose,
this refers to Deuteronomy (i.e. the original Deuteronomy), the
incorrectness of the theory referred to is proved. And even if we think
that the phraseology of viii. 8 applies rather to a body of writings
than to a single book, yet there is no good ground (xi. 1-8 and xxxiv.
12 being of doubtful origin) for supposing that Jeremiah would have
excepted Deuteronomy from his condemnation.
_Stages of his Development._--At first our prophet was not altogether a
pessimist. He aspired to convince the better minds that the only hope
for Israelites, as well as for Israel, lay in "returning" to the true
Yahweh, a deity who was no mere national god, and was not to be cajoled
by the punctual offering of costly sacrifices. When Jeremiah wrote iv.
1-4 he evidently considered that the judgment could even then be
averted. Afterwards he became less hopeful, and it was perhaps a closer
acquaintance with the manners of the capital that served to
disillusionize him. He began his work at Anathoth, but v. 1-5 (as Duhm
points out) seems to come from one who has just now for the first time
"run to and fro in the streets of Jerusalem," observing and observed.
And what is the result of his expedition? That he cannot find a single
just and honest man; that high and low, rich and poor, are all ignorant
of the true method of worshipping God ("the way of Yahweh," v. 4). It
would seem as if Anathoth were less corrupt than the capital, the moral
state of which so shocked Jeremiah. And yet he does not really go beyond
the great city-prophet Isaiah who calls the men of Jerusalem "a people
of Gomorrah" (i. 10). With all reverence, an historical student has to
deduct something from both these statements. It is true that commercial
prosperity had put a severe strain on the old morality, and that contact
with other peoples, as well as the course of political history, had
appeared to lower the position of the God of Israel in relation to other
gods. Still, some adherents of the old Israelitish moral and religious
standards must have survived, only they were not to be found in the
chief places of concourse, but as a rule in coteries which handed on the
traditions of Amos and Isaiah in sorrowful retirement.
_Danger of Book Religion._--Probably, too, even in the highest class
there were some who had a moral sympathy with Jeremiah; otherwise we can
hardly account for the contents of Deuteronomy, at least if the book
"found" in the Temple at all resembled the central portion of our
Deuteronomy. And the assumption seems to be confirmed by the respectful
attitude of certain "elders of the land" in xxvi. 17 sqq., and of the
"princes" in xxxvi. 19, 25, towards Jeremiah, which may, at any rate in
part, have been due to the recent reform movement. If therefore Jeremiah
aimed at Deuteronomy in the severe language of viii. 8, he went too far.
History shows that book religion has special dangers of its own.[2]
Nevertheless the same incorruptible adviser also shows that book
religion may be necessary as an educational instrument, and a compromise
between the two types of religion is without historical precedent.
_Reaction: Opposition to Jeremiah._--This, however, could not as yet be
recognized by the friends of prophecy, even though it seemed for a time
as if the claims of book religion were rebuffed by facts. The death of
the pious king Josiah at Megiddo in 608 B.C. dashed the high hopes of
the "book-men," but meant no victory for Jeremiah. Its only result for
the majority was a falling back on the earlier popular cultus of the
Baals, and on the heathen customs introduced, or reintroduced, by
Josiah's grandfather, Manasseh. Would that we possessed the section of
the prophet's biography which described his attitude immediately after
the news of the battle of Megiddo! Let us, however, be thankful for what
we have, and notably for the detailed narratives in chs. xxvi. and
xxxvi. The former is dated in the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim,
though Wellhausen suspects that the date is a mistake, and that the real
occasion was the death of Josiah. The one clear-sighted patriot saw the
full meaning of the tragedy of Megiddo, and for "prophesying against
this city"--secured, as men thought, by the Temple (vii. 4)--he was
accused by "the priests, the prophets, and all the people" of high
treason. But the divinity which hedged a prophet saved him. The
"princes," supported by certain "elders" and by "the people" (quick to
change their leaders), succeeded in quashing the accusation and setting
the prophet free. No king, be it observed, is mentioned. The latter
narrative is still more exciting. In the fourth year of Jehoiakim (= the
first of Nebuchadrezzar, xxv. 1) Jeremiah was bidden to write down "all
the words that Yahweh had spoken to him against Jerusalem (so LXX.),
Judah and all the nations from the days of Josiah onwards" (xxxvi. 2).
So at least the authors of Jeremiah's biography tell us. They add that
in the next year Jeremiah's scribe Baruch read the prophecies of
Jeremiah first to the people assembled in the Temple, then to the
"princes," and then to the king, who decided his own future policy by
burning Baruch's roll in the brazier. We cannot, however, bind ourselves
to this tradition. Much more probably the prophecy was virtually a new
one (i.e. even if some old passages were repeated yet the setting was
new), and the burden of the prophecy was "The king of Babylon shall come
and destroy this land."[3] We cannot therefore assent to the judgment
that "we have, at least as regards [the] oldest portions [of the book]
information considerably more specific than is usual in the case of the
writings of the prophets."[4]
_Fall of the State._--Under Zedekiah the prophet was less fortunate.
Such was the tension of feeling that the "princes," who were formerly
friendly to Jeremiah, now took up an attitude of decided hostility to
him. At last they had him consigned to a miry dungeon, and it was the
king who (at the instance of the Cushite Ebed-melech) intervened for his
relief, though he remained a prisoner in other quarters till the fall of
Jerusalem (586 B.C.). Nebuchadrezzar, who is assumed to have heard of
Jeremiah's constant recommendations of submission, gave him the choice
either of going to Babylon or of remaining in the country (chs. xxxviii.
seq.). He chose the latter and resided with Gedaliah, the native
governor, at Mizpah. On the murder of Gedaliah he was carried to Mizraim
or Egypt, or perhaps to the land of Mizrim in north Arabia--against his
will (chs. xl.-xliii.). How far all this is correct we know not. The
graphic style of a narrative is no sufficient proof of its truth.
Conceivably enough the story of Jeremiah's journey to Egypt (or Mizrim)
may have been imagined to supply a background for the artificial
prophecies ascribed to Jeremiah in chs. xlvi.-li. A legend in Jerome and
Epiphanius states that he was stoned to death at Daphnae, but the
biography, though not averse from horrors, does not mention this.
_A Patriot?_--Was Jeremiah really a patriot? The question has been
variously answered. He was not a Phocion, for he never became the tool
of a foreign power. To say with Winckler[5] that he was "a decided
adherent of the Chaldean party" is to go beyond the evidence. He did
indeed counsel submission, but only because his detachment from party
gave him a clearness of vision (cf. xxxviii. 17, 18) which the
politicians lacked. How he suffered in his uphill course he has told us
himself (xv. 10-21). In after ages the oppressed people saw in his love
for Israel and his patient resignation their own realized ideal. "And
Onias said, This is the lover of the brethren, he who prayeth much for
the people and the holy city, Jeremiah the prophet of God" (2 Macc. xv.
14). And in proportion as the popular belief in Jeremiah rose, fresh
prophecies were added to the book (notably those of the new covenant and
of the restoration of the people after seventy years) to justify it.
Professor N. Schmidt has gone further into the character of this
sympathetic prophet, _Ency. Bib._ "Jeremiah," § 5.
_Jeremiah's Prophecies._--It has been said above that our best
authorities are Jeremiah's own prophecies. Which may these be? Before
answering we must again point out (see also ISAIAH) that the records
of the pre-exilic prophets came down in a fragmentary form, and that
these fragments needed much supplementing to adapt them to the use of
post-exilic readers. In Jeremiah, as in Isaiah, we must constantly ask
to what age do the phraseology, the ideas and the implied
circumstances most naturally point? According to Duhm there are many
passages in which metre (see also AMOS) may also be a factor in our
critical conclusions. Jeremiah, he thinks, always uses the same metre.
Giesebrecht, on the other hand, maintains that there are passages
which are certainly Jeremiah's, but which are not in what Duhm calls
Jeremiah's metre; Giesebrecht also, himself rather conservative,
considers Duhm remarkably free with his emendations. There has also to
be considered whether the text of the poetical passages has not often
become corrupt, not only from ordinary causes but through the
misunderstanding and misreading of north Arabian names on the part of
late scribes and editors, the danger to Judah from north Arabia being
(it is held) not less in pre-exilic times than the danger from Assyria
and Babylonia, so that references to north Arabia are only to be
expected. To bring educated readers into touch with critical workers
it is needful to acquaint them with these various points, the neglect
of any one of which may to some extent injure the results of
criticism.
It is a new stage of criticism on which we have entered, so that no
single critic can be reckoned as _the_ authority on Jeremiah. But
since the results of the higher criticism depend on the soundness and
thoroughness of the criticism called "lower," and since Duhm has the
advantage of being exceptionally free from that exaggerated respect
for the letters of the traditional text which has survived the
destruction of the old superstitious veneration for the vowel-points,
it may be best to give the student his "higher critical" results,
dated 1901. Let us premise, however, that the portions mentioned in
the 9th edition of the _Ency. Brit._ as having been "entirely or in
part denied," to Jeremiah, viz. x. 1-16; xxx.; xxxiii.; l.-li. and
lii., are still regarded in their present form as non-Jeremianic. The
question which next awaits decision is whether any part of the booklet
on foreign nations (xxv., xlvi.-li.) can safely be regarded as
Jeremianic. Giesebrecht still asserts the genuineness of xxv. 15-24
(apart from glosses), xlvii. (in the main) and xlix. 7, 8, 10, 11.
Against these views see N. Schmidt, _Ency. Bib._, col. 2384.
Let us now listen to Duhm, who analyses the book into six groups of
passages. These are (a) i.-xxv., the "words of Jeremiah." (i. 1); (b)
xxvi.-xxix., passages from Baruch's biography of Jeremiah; (c)
xxx.-xxxi., the book of the future of Israel and Judah; (d)
xxxii.-xlv., from Baruch; (e) xlvi.-li., the prophecies "concerning
the nations";[6] (f) lii., historical appendix. Upon examining these
groups we find that besides a prose letter (ch. xxix.), about sixty
poetical pieces may be Jeremiah's. A: Anathoth passages before 621,
(a) ii. 2b, 3, 14-28; ii. 29-37; iii. 1-5; iii. 12b, 13, 19, 20; iii.
21-25; iv. i, 3, 4; these form a cycle, (b) xxxi. 2-6; 15-20; 21, 22;
another cycle. (c) iv. 5-8; 11b, 12a, 13, 15-17a; 19-21; 23-26; 29-31;
visions and "auditions" of the impending invasion. B: Jerusalem
passages. (d) v. 1-6a; 6b-9; 10-17; vi. 1-5; 6b-8; 9-14; 16, 17, 20;
22-26a; 27-30; vii. 28, 29; viii. 4-7a; 8, 9, 13; 14-17; viii. 18-23;
ix. 1-8; 9 (short song); 16-18; 19-21; x. 19, 20, 22; reign of Josiah,
strong personal element. (e) xxii. 10 (Jehoahaz). xxii. 13-17;
probably too xi. 15, 16; xii. 7-12 (Jehoiakim). xxii. 18, 19, perhaps
too xxii. 6b, 7; 20-23; and the cycle xiii. 15, 16; 17; 18, 19; 20,
21a, 22-25a, 26, 27 (later, Jehoiakim). xxii. 24; xxii. 28
(Jehoiachin). (f) Later poems. xiv. 2-10; xv. 5-9; xvi. 5-7; xviii.
13-17; xxiii. 9-12; 13-15; xi. 18-20; xv. 10-12; 15-19a, and 20, 21;
xvii. 9, 10, 14, 16, 17; xviii. 18-20; xx. 7-11; xx. 14-18; xiv. 17,
18; xvii. 1-4; xxxviii. 24; assigned to the close of Zedekiah's time.
_Two Recensions of the Text._--It has often been said that we have
virtually two recensions of the text, that represented by the
Septuagint and the Massoretic text, and critics have taken different
sides, some for one and some for the other. "Recension," however, is a
bad term; it implies that the two texts which undeniably exist were
the result of revising and editing according to definite critical
principles. Such, however, is not the case. It is true that "there are
(in the LXX.) many omissions of words, sentences, verses and whole
passages, in fact, that altogether about 2700 words are wanting, or
the eighth part of the Massoretic text" (Bleek). It may also be
admitted that the scribes who produced the Hebrew basis of the
Septuagint version, conscious of the unsettled state of the text, did
not shrink from what they considered a justifiable simplification. But
we must also grant that those from whom the "written" Hebrew text
proceeds allowed themselves to fill up and to repeat without any
sufficient warrant. In each case in which there is a genuine
difference of reading between the two texts, it is for the critic to
decide; often, however, he will have to seek to go behind what both
the texts present in order to constitute a truer text than either.
Here is the great difficulty of the future. We may add to the credit
of the Septuagint that the position given to the prophecies on "the
nations" (chs. xlvi.-li. in our Bible) in the Septuagint is probably
more original than that in the Massoretic text. On this point see
especially Schmidt, _Ency. Bib._ "Jeremiah (Book)" §§ 6 and 21;
Davidson, Hastings's _Dict. Bible_, ii. 573b-575; Driver,
_Introduction_ (8th ed.), pp. 269, 270.
The best German commentary is that of Cornill (1905). A skilful
translation by Driver, with notes intended for ordinary students
(1906) should also be mentioned. (T. K. C.)
FOOTNOTES:
[1] Davidson (Hast., _D.B._, ii. 570 b) mentions two views. (1) The
foe might be "a creation of his moral presentiment and assigned to
the north as the cloudy region of mystery." (2) The more usual view
is that the Scythians (see Herod, i. 76, 103-106; iv. 1 ) are meant.
Neither of these views is satisfactory. The passage v. 15-17 is too
definite for (1), and as for (2), the idea of a threatened Scythian
invasion lacks a sufficient basis. Those who hold (2) have to suppose
that original references to the Scythians were retouched under the
impression of Chaldean invasions. Hence Cheyne's theory of a north
Arabian invasion from the land of Zaphon = Zibeon (Gen. xxxvi. 2,
14), i.e. Ishmael. Cf. N. Schmidt, _Ency. Bib._, Zibeon, "Scythians,"
§ 8; Cheyne, _Critica Biblica_, part i. (Isaiah and Jeremiah).
[2] Cf. Ewald, _The Prophets_, Eng. trans., iii. 63, 64.
[3] Cheyne, _Ency. Brit._ (9th ed.,), "Jeremiah," suggests after
Grätz that the roll simply contained ch. xxv., omitting the most
obvious interpolations. Against this view see N. Schmidt, _Ency.
Bib._, "Jeremiah (Book)," § 8, who, however, accepts the negative
part of Cheyne's arguments.
[4] Driver, _Introd. to the Lit. of the O.T._ (6), p. 249.
[5] In Helmolt's _Weltgeschichte_, iii. 211.
[6] li. 59-64a, however, is a specimen of imaginative "Midrashic"
history. See Giesebrecht's monograph.
JEREMY, EPISTLE OF, an apocryphal book of the Old Testament. This letter
purports to have been written by Jeremiah to the exiles who were already
in Babylon or on the way thither. The author was a Hellenistic Jew, and
not improbably a Jew of Alexandria. His work, which shows little
literary skill, was written with a serious practical purpose. He veiled
his fierce attack on the idol gods of Egypt by holding up to derision
the idolatry of Babylon. The fact that Jeremiah (xxix. 1 sqq.) was known
to have written a letter of this nature naturally suggested to a
Hellenist, possibly of the 1st century B.C. or earlier, the idea of a
second epistolary undertaking, and other passages of Jeremiah's prophecy
(x. 1-12; xxix. 4-23) may have determined also its general character and
contents.
The writer warned the exiles that they were to remain in captivity for
seven generations; that they would there see the worship paid to idols,
from all participation in which they were to hold aloof; for that idols
were nothing save the work of men's hands, without the powers of speech,
hearing or self-preservation. They could not bless their worshippers
even in the smallest concerns of life; they were indifferent to moral
qualities, and were of less value than the commonest household objects,
and finally, "with rare irony, the author compared an idol to a
scarecrow (v. 70), impotent to protect, but deluding to the imagination"
(MARSHALL).
The date of the epistle is uncertain. It is believed by some scholars
to be referred to in 2 Macc. ii. 2, which says that Jeremiah charged
the exiles "not to forget the statutes of the Lord, neither to be led
astray in their minds when they saw images of gold and silver and the
adornment thereof." But the reference is disputed by Fritzsche,
Gifford, Shürer and others. The epistle was included in the Greek
canon. There was no question of its canonicity till the time of
Jerome, who termed it a pseudepigraph.
See Fritzsche, _Handb. zu den Apok._, 1851; Gifford, in _Speaker's
Apoc._ ii. 286-303; Marshall, in Hastings' _Dict. Bible_, ii. 578-579.
(R. H. C.)
JERÉZ DE LA FRONTERA (formerly XERES), a town of southern Spain, in the
province of Cadiz, near the right bank of the river Guadalete, and on
the Seville-Cadiz railway, about 7 m. from the Atlantic coast. Pop.
(1900), 63,473. Jeréz is built in the midst of an undulating plain of
great fertility. Its whitewashed houses, clean, broad streets, and
squares planted with trees extend far beyond the limits formerly
enclosed by the Moorish walls, almost entirely demolished. The principal
buildings are the 15th-century church of San Miguel, the 17th-century
collegiate church with its lofty bell-tower, the 16th-century town-hall,
superseded, for official purposes, by a modern edifice, the bull-ring,
and many hospitals, charitable institutions and schools, including
academies of law, medicine and commerce. But the most characteristic
features of Jeréz are the huge _bodegas_, or wine-lodges, for the
manufacture and storage of sherry, and the vineyards, covering more than
150,000 acres, which surround it on all sides. The town is an important
market for grain, fruit and livestock, but its staple trade is in wine.
Sherry is also produced in other districts, but takes its name, formerly
written in English as _sherris_ or _xeres_, from Jeréz. The demand for
sherry diminished very greatly during the last quarter of the 19th
century, especially in England, which had been the chief consumer. In
1872 the sherry shipped from Cadiz to Great Britain alone was valued at
£2,500,000; in 1902 the total export hardly amounted to one-fifth of
this sum. The wine trade, however, still brings a considerable profit,
and few towns of southern Spain display greater commercial activity than
Jeréz. In the earlier part of the 18th century the neighbourhood
suffered severely from yellow fever; but it was rendered comparatively
healthy when in 1869 an aqueduct was opened to supply pure water.
Strikes and revolutionary disturbances have frequently retarded business
in more recent years.
Jeréz has been variously identified with the Roman Municipium Seriense;
with Asido, perhaps the original of the Moorish Sherish; and with Hasta
Regia, a name which may survive in the designation of La Mesa de Asta, a
neighbouring hill. Jeréz was taken from the Moors by Ferdinand III. of
Castile (1217-1252); but it was twice recaptured before Alphonso X.
finally occupied it in 1264. Towards the close of the 14th century it
received the title _de la Frontera_, i.e. "of the frontier," common to
several towns on the Moorish border.
JERÉZ DE LOS CABALLEROS, a town of south-western Spain, in the province
of Badajoz, picturesquely situated on two heights overlooking the river
Ardila, a tributary of the Guadiana, 12 m. E. of the Portuguese
frontier. Pop. (1900), 10,271. The old town is surrounded by a Moorish
wall with six gates; the newer portion is well and regularly built, and
planted with numerous orange and other fruit trees. Owing to the lack of
railway communication Jeréz is of little commercial importance; its
staple trade is in agricultural produce, especially in ham and bacon
from the large herds of swine which are reared in the surrounding oak
forests. The town is said to have been founded by Alphonso IX. of Leon
in 1229; in 1232 it was extended by his son St Ferdinand, who gave it to
the knights templar. Hence the name _Jeréz de los Caballeros_, "Jeréz of
the knights."
JERICHO ([Hebrew: Yricho, Yricho], once [Hebrew: Yrichoa], a word of
disputed meaning, whether "fragrant" or "moon [-god] city"), an
important town in the Jordan valley some 5 m. N. of the Dead Sea. The
references to it in the Pentateuch are confined to rough geographical
indications of the latitude of the trans-Jordanic camp of the Israelites
in Moab before their crossing of the river. This was the first Canaanite
city to be attacked and reduced by the victorious Israelites. The story
of its conquest is His Sundays were spent in the catacombs in
discovering graves of the martyrs and deciphering inscriptions. Pope
Liberius baptized him in 360; three years later the news of the death of
the emperor Julian came to Rome, and Christians felt relieved from a
great dread.
When his student days were over Jerome returned to Strido, but did not
stay there long. His character was formed. He was a scholar, with a
scholar's tastes and cravings for knowledge, easily excited, bent on
scholarly discoveries. From Strido he went to Aquileia, where he formed
some friendships among the monks of the large monastery, notably with
Rufinus, with whom he was destined to quarrel bitterly over the question
of Origen's orthodoxy and worth as a commentator; for Jerome was a man
who always sacrificed a friend to an opinion, and when he changed sides
in a controversy expected his acquaintances to follow him. From Aquileia
he went to Gaul (366-370), visiting in turn the principal places in that
country, from Narbonne and Toulouse in the south to Treves on the
north-east frontier. He stayed some time at Treves studying and
observing, and it was there that he first began to think seriously upon
sacred things. From Treves he returned to Strido, and from Strido to
Aquileia. He settled down to literary work in Aquileia (370-373) and
composed there his first original tract, _De muliere septies percussa_,
in the form of a letter to his friend Innocentius. Some dispute caused
him to leave Aquileia suddenly; and with a few companions, Innocentius,
Evagrius, and Heliodorus being among them, he started for a long tour in
the East. The epistle to Rufinus (3rd in Vallarsi's enumeration) tells
us the route. They went through Thrace, visiting Athens, Bithynia,
Galatia, Pontus, Cappadocia and Cilicia, to Antioch, Jerome observing
and making notes as they went. He was interested in the theological
disputes and schisms in Galatia, in the two languages spoken in Cilicia,
&c. At Antioch the party remained some time. Innocentius died of a
fever, and Jerome was dangerously ill. This illness induced a spiritual
change, and he resolved to renounce whatever kept him back from God. His
greatest temptation was the study of the literature of pagan Rome. In a
dream Christ reproached him with caring more to be a Ciceronian than a
Christian. He disliked the uncouth style of the Scriptures. "O Lord," he
prayed, "thou knowest that whenever I have and study secular MSS. I deny
thee," and he made a resolve henceforth to devote his scholarship to the
Holy Scripture. "David was to be henceforth his Simonides, Pindar and
Alcaeus, his Flaccus, Catullus and Severus." Fortified by these resolves
he betook himself to a hermit life in the wastes of Chalcis, S.E. from
Antioch (373-379). Chalcis was the Thebaid of Syria. Great numbers of
monks, each in solitary cell, spent lonely lives, scorched by the sun,
ill-clad and scantily fed, pondering on portions of Scripture or copying
MSS. to serve as objects of meditation. Jerome at once set himself to
such scholarly work as the place afforded. He discovered and copied
MSS., and began to study Hebrew. There also he wrote the life of St Paul
of Thebes, probably an imaginary tale embodying the facts of the monkish
life around him. Just then the Meletian schism, which arose over the
relation of the orthodox to Arian bishops and to those baptized by
Arians, distressed the church at Antioch (see MELETIUS OF ANTIOCH), and
Jerome as usual eagerly joined the fray. Here as elsewhere he had but
one rule to guide him in matters of doctrine and discipline--the
practice of Rome and the West; for it is singular to see how Jerome, who
is daringly original in points of scholarly criticism, was a ruthless
partisan in all other matters; and, having discovered what was the
Western practice, he set tongue and pen to work with his usual
bitterness (_Altercatio luciferiani et orthodoxi_).
At Antioch in 379 he was ordained presbyter. From there he went to
Constantinople, where he met with the great Eastern scholar and
theologian Gregory of Nazianzus, and with his aid tried to perfect
himself in Greek. The result of his studies there was the translation of
the _Chronicon_ of Eusebius, with a continuation[1] of twenty-eight
homilies of Origen on Jeremiah and Ezekiel, and of nine homilies of
Origen on the visions of Isaiah.
In 381 Meletius died, and Pope Damasus interfered in the dispute at
Antioch, hoping to end it. Jerome was called to Rome in 382 to give help
in the matter, and was made secretary during the investigation. His work
brought him into intercourse with this great pontiff, who soon saw what
he could best do, and how his vast scholarship might be made of use to
the church. Damasus suggested to him to revise the "Old Latin"
translation of the Bible; and to this task he henceforth devoted his
great abilities. At Rome were published the Gospels (with a dedication
to Pope Damasus, an explanatory introduction, and the canons of
Eusebius), the rest of the New Testament and the version of the Psalms
from the Septuagint known as the _Psalterium romanum_, which was
followed (c. 388) by the _Psalterium gallicanum_, based on the Hexaplar
Greek text. These scholarly labours, however, did not take up his whole
time, and it was almost impossible for Jerome to be long anywhere
without getting into a dispute. He was a zealous defender of that
monastic life which was beginning to take such a large place in the
church of the 4th century, and he found enthusiastic disciples among the
Roman ladies. A number of widows and maidens met together in the house
of Marcella to study the Scriptures with him; he taught them Hebrew, and
preached the virtues of the celibate life. His arguments and
exhortations may be gathered from many of his epistles and from his
tract _Adversus Helvidium_, in which he defends the perpetual virginity
of Mary against Helvidius, who maintained that she bore children to
Joseph. His influence over these ladies alarmed their relatives and
excited the suspicions of the regular priesthood and of the populace,
but while Pope Damasus lived Jerome remained secure. Damasus died,
however, in 384, and was succeeded by Siricius, who did not show much
friendship for Jerome. He found it expedient to leave Rome, and set out
for the East in 385. His letters (especially Ep. 45) are full of
outcries against his enemies and of indignant protestations that he had
done nothing unbecoming a Christian, that he had taken no money, nor
gifts great nor small, that he had no delight in silken attire,
sparkling gems or gold ornaments, that no matron moved him unless by
penitence and fasting, &c. His route is given in the third book _In
Rufinum_; he went by Rhegium and Cyprus, where he was entertained by
Bishop Epiphanius, to Antioch. There he was joined by two wealthy Roman
ladies, Paula, a widow, and Eustochium, her daughter, one of Jerome's
Hebrew students. They came accompanied by a band of Roman maidens vowed
to live a celibate life in a nunnery in Palestine. Accompanied by these
ladies Jerome made the tour of Palestine, carefully noting with a
scholar's keenness the various places mentioned in Holy Scripture. The
results of this journey may be traced in his translation with
emendations of the book of Eusebius on the situation and names of Hebrew
places, written probably three years afterwards, when he had settled
down at Bethlehem. From Palestine Jerome and his companions went to
Egypt, remaining some time in Alexandria, and they visited the convents
of the Nitrian desert. Jerome's mind was evidently full of anxiety about
his translation of the Old Testament, for we find him in his letters
recording the conversations he had with learned men about disputed
readings and doubtful renderings; the blind Didymus of Alexandria, whom
he heard interpreting Hosea, appears to have been most useful. When they
returned to Palestine they all settled at Bethlehem, where Paula built
four monasteries, three for nuns and one for monks. She was at the head
of the nunneries until her death in 404, when Eustochium succeeded her;
Jerome presided over the fourth monastery. Here he did most of his
literary work and, throwing aside his unfinished plan of a translation
from Origen's Hexaplar text, translated the Old Testament directly from
the Hebrew, with the aid of Jewish scholars. He mentions a rabbi from
Lydda, a rabbi from Tiberias, and above all rabbi Ben Anina, who came to
him by night secretly for fear of the Jews. Jerome was not familiar
enough with Hebrew to be able to dispense with such assistance, and he
makes the synagogue responsible for the fully narrated in the first
seven chapters of Joshua. There must be some little exaggeration in the
statement that Jericho was totally destroyed; a hamlet large enough to
be enumerated among the towns of Benjamin (Josh. xviii. 21) must have
remained; but that it was small is shown by the fact that it was deemed
a suitable place for David's ambassadors to retire to after the
indignities put upon them by Hanun (2 Sam. x. 5; 1 Chron. xix. 5). Its
refortification was due to a Bethelite named Hiel, who endeavoured to
avert the curse of Joshua by offering his sons as sacrifices at certain
stages of the work (1 Kings xvi. 34). After this event it grew again
into importance and became the site of a college of prophets (2 Kings
ii. 4 sqq.) for whom Elisha "healed" its poisonous waters. The principal
spring in the neighbourhood of Jericho still bears (among the foreign
residents) the name of Elisha; the natives call it, Ain es-Sultan, or
"Sultan's spring." To Jericho the victorious Israelite marauders
magnanimously returned their Judahite captives at the bidding of the
prophet Oded (2 Chron. xxviii. 15). Here was fought the last fight
between the Babylonians and Zedekiah, wherein the kingdom of Judah came
to an end (2 Kings xxv. 5; Jer. xxxix. 5, lii. 8). In the New Testament
Jericho is connected with the well-known stories of Bar-Timaeus (Matt.
xx. 29; Mark x. 46; Luke xviii. 35) and Zacchaeus (Luke xix. 1) and with
the good Samaritan (Luke x. 30).
The extra-Biblical history of Jericho is as disastrous as are the
records preserved in the Scriptures. Bacchides, the general of the
Syrians, captured and fortified it (1. Macc. ix. 50), Aristobulus
(Jos. _Ant._ XIV. i. 2) also took it, Pompey (ib. XIV. iv. 1) encamped
here on his way to Jerusalem. Before Herod its inhabitants ran away
(ib. XIV. xv. 3) as they did before Vespasian (_Wars_, IV. viii. 2).
The reason of this lack of warlike quality was no doubt the enervating
effect of the great heat of the depression in which the city lies,
which has the same effect on the handful of degraded humanity that
still occupies the ancient site.
Few places in Palestine are more fertile. It was the city of palm
trees of the ancient record of the Israelite invasion preserved in
part in Judg. i. 16; and Josephus speaks of its fruitfulness with
enthusiasm (_Wars_ IV. 8, 3). Even now with every possible hindrance
in the way of cultivation it is an important centre of fruit-growing.
The modern er-Riha is a poor squalid village of, it is estimated,
about 300 inhabitants. It is not built exactly on the ancient site.
Indeed, the site of Jericho has shifted several times. The mound of
Tell es-Sultan, near "Elisha's Fountain," north of the modern village,
no doubt covers the Canaanite town. There are two later sites, of
Roman or Herodian date, one north, the other west, of this. It was
probably the crusaders who established the modern site. An old tower
attributed to them is to be seen in the village, and in the
surrounding mountains are many remains of early monasticism.
Aqueducts, ruined sugar-mills, and other remains of ancient industry
abound in the neighbourhood. The whole district is the private
property of the sultan of Turkey. In 1907-8 the Canaanite Jericho was
excavated under the direction of Prof. Sellin of Vienna.
See "The German Excavations at Jericho," _Pal. Explor. Fund, Quart.
Statem._ (1910), pp. 54-68.
FOOTNOTE:
[1] Cf. Schoene's critical edition (Berlin, 1866, 1875).
JERKIN, a short close-fitting jacket, made usually of leather, and
without sleeves, the typical male upper garment of the 16th and 17th
centuries. The origin of the word is unknown. The Dutch word _jurk_, a
child's frock, often taken as the source, is modern, and represents
neither the sound nor the sense of the English word. In architecture the
term "jerkin-roofed" is applied, probably with some obscure connexion
with the garment, to a particular form of gable end, the gable being cut
off half way up the roof and sloping back like a "hipped roof" to the
edge.
JEROBOAM (Heb. _yarob'am_, apparently "Am ['the clan,' here perhaps a
divine name] contends"; LXX. [Greek: ieroboam]), the name of two kings
in the Bible.
1. The first king of (north) Israel after the disruption (see SOLOMON).
According to the traditions of his early life (1 Kings xi. 26 sqq. and
LXX.), he was an Ephraimite who for his ability was placed over the
forced levy of Ephraim and Manasseh. Having subsequently incurred
Solomon's suspicions he fled to Shishak, king of Egypt, and remained
with him until Rehoboam's accession. When the latter came to be made
king at Shechem, the old religious centre (see ABIMELECH), hopes were
entertained that a more lenient policy would be introduced. But
Rehoboam refused to depart from Solomon's despotic rule, and was
tactless enough to send Adoniram, the overseer of the _corvée_. He was
stoned to death, and Rehoboam realizing the temper of the people fled to
Jerusalem and prepared for war. Jeroboam became the recognized leader of
the northern tribes.[1] Conflicts occurred (1 Kings xiv. 30), but no
details are preserved except the late story of Rehoboam's son Abijah in
2 Chron. xiii. Jeroboam's chief achievement was the fortification of
Shechem (his new capital) and of Penuel in east Jordan. To counteract
the influence of Jerusalem he established golden calves at Dan and
Bethel, an act which to later ages was as gross a piece of wickedness as
his rebellion against the legitimate dynasty of Judah. No notice has
survived of Shishak's invasion of Israel (see REHOBOAM), and after a
reign of twenty-two years Jeroboam was succeeded by Nadab, whose violent
death two years later brought the whole house of Jeroboam to an end.
The history of the separation of Judah and Israel in the 10th century
B.C. was written from a strong religious standpoint at a date
considerably later than the event itself. The visit of Ahijah to
Shiloh (xi. 29-39), to announce symbolically the rending of the
kingdom, replaces some account of a rebellion in which Jeroboam
"lifted up his hand" (v. 27) against Solomon. To such an account, not
to the incident of Ahijah and the cloak, his flight (v. 40) is the
natural sequel. The story of Ahijah's prophecy against Jeroboam (ch.
xiv.) is not in the original LXX., but another version of the same
narrative appears at xii. 24 (LXX.), in which there is no reference to
a previous promise to Jeroboam through Ahijah, but the prophet is
introduced as a new character. Further, in this version (xii. 24) the
incident of the tearing of the cloak is related of Shemaiah and placed
at the convention of Shechem. Shemaiah is the prophet who counselled
Rehoboam to refrain from war (xii. 21-24); the injunction is opposed
to xiv. 30, but appears to be intended to explain Rehoboam's failure
to overcome north Israel. (See W. R. Smith, _Old Test. in Jewish
Church_ (2nd ed.), 117 sqq.; Winckler, _Alte Test. Untersuch._ 12
sqq., and J. Skinner, _Century Bible: Kings_, pp. 443 sqq.)
2. JEROBOAM, son of Joash (2) a contemporary of Azariah king of Judah.
He was one of the greatest of the kings of Israel. He succeeded in
breaking the power of Damascus, which had long been devastating his
land, and extended his kingdom from Hamath on the Orontes to the Dead
Sea. The brief summary of his achievements preserved in 2 Kings xiv. 23
sqq. may be supplemented by the original writings of Amos and Hosea.[2]
There appears to be an allusion in Amos vi. 13 to the recovery of
Ashteroth-Karnaim and Lodebar in E. Jordan, and the conquest of Moab
(Isa. xv. seq.) is often ascribed to this reign. After a period of
prosperity, internal disturbances broke out and the northern kingdom
hastened to its fall. Jeroboam was succeeded by his son Zechariah, who
after six months was killed at Ibleam (so read in 2 Kings xv. 10; cp.
ix. 27, murder of Ahaziah) by Shallum the son of Jabesh--i.e. possibly
of Jabesh-Gilead--who a month later fell to Menahem (q.v.).
(S. A. C.)
See, further, JEWS §§ 7, 9 and §§ 12, 13.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] On the variant traditions in the Hebrew text and the Septuagint,
see the commentaries on Kings.
[2] See also JONAH. In 2 Kings xiv. 28, "Hamath, _which had belonged_
to Judah" (R.V.) is incorrect; Winckler (_Keilinschrift. u. Alte
Test._, 2nd ed., 262) suspects a reference to Israel's overlordship
in Judah; Burney (_Heb. Text of Kings_) reads: "how he fought with
Damascus and how he turned away the wrath of Yahweh from Israel"; see
also _Ency. Bib._ col. 2406 n. 4, and the commentaries.
JEROME, ST (HIERONYMUS, in full EUSEBIUS SOPHRONIUS HIERONYMUS) (c.
340-420), was born at Strido (modern Strigau?), a town on the border of
Dalmatia fronting Pannonia, destroyed by the Goths in A.D. 377. What is
known of Jerome has mostly been recovered from his own writings. He
appears to have been born about 340; his parents were Christians,
orthodox though living among people mostly Arians and wealthy. He was at
first educated at home, Bonosus, a life-long friend, sharing his
youthful studies, and was afterwards sent to Rome. Donatus taught him
grammar and explained the Latin poets. Victorinus taught him rhetoric.
He attended the law-courts, and listened to the Roman advocates pleading
in the Forum. He went to the schools of philosophy, and heard lectures
on Plato, Diogenes, Clitomachus and Carneades; the conjunction of names
show how philosophy had become a dead tradition. accuracy of his
version: "Let him who would challenge aught in this translation," he
says, "ask the Jews." The result of all this labour was the Latin
translation of the Scriptures which, in spite of much opposition from
the more conservative party in the church, afterwards became the Vulgate
or authorized version; but the Vulgate as we have it now is not exactly
Jerome's Vulgate, for it suffered a good deal from changes made under
the influence of the older translations; the text became very corrupt
during the middle ages, and in particular all the Apocrypha, except
Tobit and Judith, which Jerome translated from the Chaldee, were added
from the older versions. (See BIBLE: _O.T. Versions_.)
Notwithstanding the labour involved in translating the Scriptures,
Jerome found time to do a great deal of literary work, and also to
indulge in violent controversy. Earlier in life he had a great
admiration for Origen, and translated many of his works, and this lasted
after he had settled at Bethlehem, for in 389 he translated Origen's
homilies on Luke; but he came to change his opinion and wrote violently
against two admirers of the great Alexandrian scholar, John, bishop of
Jerusalem, and his own former friend Rufinus.
At Bethlehem also he found time to finish _Didymi de spiritu sancto
liber_, a translation begun at Rome at the request of Pope Damasus, to
denounce the revival of Gnostic heresies by Jovinianus and Vigilantius
(_Adv. Jovinianum lib. II._ and _Contra Vigilantium liber_), and to
repeat his admiration of the hermit life in his _Vita S. Hilarionis
eremitae_, in his _Vita Malchi monachi captivi_, in his translations of
the Rule of St Pachomius (the Benedict of Egypt), and in his _S.
Pachomii et S. Theodorici epistolae et verba mystica_. He also wrote at
Bethlehem _De viris illustribus sive de scriptoribus ecclesiasticis_, a
church history in biographies, ending with the life of the author; _De
nominibus Hebraicis_, compiled from Philo and Origen; and _De situ et
nominibus locorum Hebraicorum_.[1] At the same place, too, he wrote
_Quaestiones Hebraicae_ on Genesis,[2] and a series of commentaries on
Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, the Twelve Minor Prophets, Matthew
and the Epistles of St Paul. About 394 Jerome came to know Augustine,
for whom he held a high regard. He engaged in the Pelagian controversy
with more than even his usual bitterness (_Dialogi contra pelagianos_);
and it is said that the violence of his invective so provoked his
opponents that an armed mob attacked the monastery, and that Jerome was
forced to flee and to remain in concealment for nearly two years. He
returned to Bethlehem in 418, and after a lingering illness died on the
30th of September 420.
Jerome "is one of the few Fathers to whom the title of Saint appears to
have been given in recognition of services rendered to the Church rather
than for eminent sanctity. He is the great Christian scholar of his age,
rather than the profound theologian or the wise guide of souls." His
great work was the Vulgate, but his achievements in other fields would
have sufficed to distinguish him. His commentaries are valuable because
of his knowledge of Greek and Hebrew, his varied interests, and his
comparative freedom from allegory. To him we owe the distinction between
canonical and apocryphal writings; in the _Prologus Galeatus_ prefixed
to his version of Samuel and Kings, he says that the church reads the
Apocrypha "for the edification of the people, not for confirming the
authority of ecclesiastical doctrines." He was a pioneer in the fields
of patrology and of biblical archaeology. In controversy he was too fond
of mingling personal abuse with legitimate argument, and this weakness
mars his letters, which were held in high admiration in the early middle
ages, and are valuable for their history of the man and his times.
Luther in his _Table Talk_ condemns them as dealing only with fasting,
meats, virginity, &c. "If he only had insisted upon the works of faith
and performed them! But he teaches nothing either about faith, or love,
or hope, or the works of faith."
Editions of the complete works: Erasmus (9 vols., Basel, 1516-1520);
Mar. Victorius, bishop of Rieti (9 vols., Rome, 1565-1572); F.
Calixtus and A. Tribbechovius (12 vols., Frankfort and Leipzig,
1684-1690); J. Martianay (5 vols., incomplete Benedictine ed., Paris,
1693-1706); D. Vallarsi (11 vols., Verona, 1734-1742), the best;
Migne, _Patrol. Ser. Lat._ (xxii.-xxix.). The _De viris illust._ was
edited by Herding in 1879. A selection is given in translation by W.
H. Fremantle, "Select Library of Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers," 2nd
series, vol. vi. (New York, 1893). Biographies are prefixed to most of
the above editions. See also lives by F. Z. Collombet (Paris and
Lyons, 1844); O. Zöckler (Gotha, 1865); E. L. Cutts (London, 1878); C.
Martin (London, 1888); P. Largent (Paris, 1898); F. W. Farrar, _Lives
of the Fathers_, ii. 150-297 (Edinburgh, 1889). Additional literature
is cited in Hauck-Herzog's _Realencyk. für prot. Theol._ viii. 42.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] Compare the critical edition of these two works in Lagarde's
_Onomastica sacra_ (Götting. 1870).
[2] See Lagarde's edition appended to his _Genesis Graece_ (Leipzig,
1868).
JEROME, JEROME KLAPKA (1859- ), English author, was born on the 2nd of
May 1859. He was educated at the philological school, Marylebone,
London; and was by turns clerk, schoolmaster and actor, before he
settled down to journalism. He made his reputation as a humorist in 1889
with _Idle Thoughts of an Idle Fellow_ and _Three Men in a Boat_, and
from 1892 to 1897 he was co-editor of the _Idler_ with Robert Barr. At
the same time he was also the editor of _To-Day_. A one-act play of his,
_Barbara_, was produced at the Globe theatre in 1886, and was followed
by many others, among them _Sunset_ (1888), _Wood Barrow Farm_ (1891),
_The Passing of the Third Floor Back_ (1907). Among his later books are
_Letters to Clorinda_ (1898), _The Second Thoughts of an Idle Fellow_
(1898), _Three Men on the Bummel_ (1900), _Tommy and Co._ (1904), _They
and I_ (1909).
JEROME OF PRAGUE (d. 1416), an early Bohemian church-reformer and friend
of John Hus. Jerome's part in the Hussite movement was formerly much
over-rated. Very little is known of his early years. He is stated to
have belonged to a noble Bohemian family[1] and to have been a few years
younger than Hus. After beginning his studies at the university of
Prague, where he never attempted to obtain any ecclesiastical office,
Jerome proceeded to Oxford in 1398. There he became greatly impressed by
the writings of Wycliffe, of whose _Dialogus_ and _Trialogus_ he made
copies. Always inclined to a roving life, he soon proceeded to the
university of Paris and afterwards continued his studies at Cologne and
Heidelberg, returning to Prague in 1407. In 1403 he is stated to have
undertaken a journey to Jerusalem. At Paris his open advocacy of the
views of Wycliffe brought him into conflict with John Gerson, chancellor
of the university. In Prague Jerome soon attracted attention by his
advanced and outspoken opinions. He gave great offence also by
exhibiting a portrait of Wycliffe in his room. Jerome was soon on terms
of friendship with Hus, and took part in all the controversies of the
university. When in 1408 a French embassy arrived at Kutná Hora, the
residence of King Wenceslaus of Bohemia, and proposed that the papal
schism should be terminated by the refusal of the temporal authorities
further to recognize either of the rival popes, Wenceslaus summoned to
Kutná Hora the members of the university. The Bohemian _magistri_ spoke
strongly in favour of the French proposals, while the Germans maintained
their allegiance to the Roman pope, Gregory XII. The reorganization of
the university was also discussed, and as Wenceslaus for a time favoured
the Germans, Hus and Jerome, as leaders of the Bohemians, incurred the
anger of the king, who threatened them with death by fire should they
oppose his will.
In 1410 Jerome, who had incurred the hostility of the archbishop of
Prague by his speeches in favour of Wycliffe's teaching, went to Ofen,
where King Sigismund of Hungary resided, and, though a layman, preached
before the king denouncing strongly the rapacity and immorality of the
clergy. Sigismund shortly afterwards received a letter from the
archbishop of Prague containing accusations against Jerome. He was
imprisoned by order of the king, but does not appear to have been
detained long in Hungary. Appearing at Vienna, he was again brought
before the ecclesiastical authorities. He was accused of spreading
Wycliffe's doctrines, and his general conduct at Oxford, Paris, Cologne,
Prague and Ofen was censured. Jerome vowed that he would not leave
Vienna till he had cleared himself from the accusation of heresy.
Shortly afterwards he secretly left Vienna, declaring that this promise
had been forced on him. He went first to Vöttau in Moravia, and then to
Prague. In 1412 the representatives of Pope Gregory XII. publicly
offered indulgences for sale at Prague, wishing to raise money for the
pope's campaign against King Ladislaus of Naples, an adherent of the
antipope of Avignon. Contrary to the wishes of the archbishop of Prague
a meeting of the members of the university took place, at which both Hus
and Jerome spoke strongly against the sale of indulgences. The fiery
eloquence of Jerome, which is noted by all contemporary writers,
obtained for him greater success even than that of Hus, particularly
among the younger students, who conducted him in triumph to his
dwelling-place. Shortly afterwards Jerome proceeded to Poland--it is
said on the invitation of King Wladislaus. His courtly manners and his
eloquence here also caused him to become very popular, but he again met
with strong opposition from the Roman Church. While travelling with the
grand-duke Lithold of Lithuania Jerome took part in the religious
services of the Greek Orthodox Church.
During his stay in northern Europe Jerome received the news that Hus had
been summoned to appear before the council of Constance. He wrote to his
friend advising him to do so and adding that he would also proceed there
to afford him assistance. Contrary to the advice of Hus he arrived at
Constance on the 4th of April 1415. Advised to fly immediately to
Bohemia, he succeeded in reaching Hirschau, only 25 m. from the Bohemian
frontier. He was here arrested and brought back in chains to Constance,
where he was examined by judges appointed by the council. His courage
failed him in prison and, to regain his freedom, he renounced the
doctrines of Wycliffe and Hus. He declared that Hus had been justly
executed and stated in a letter addressed on the 12th of August 1415 to
Lacek, lord of Kravâr--the only literary document of Jerome that has
been preserved--that "the dead man (Hus) had written many false and
harmful things." Full confidence was not placed in Jerome's recantation.
He claimed to be heard at a general meeting of the council, and this was
granted to him. He now again maintained all the theories which he had
formerly advocated, and, after a trial that lasted only one day, he was
condemned to be burnt as a heretic. The sentence was immediately carried
out on the 30th of May 1416, and he met his death with fortitude. As
Poggio Bracciolini writes, "none of the Stoics with so constant and
brave a soul endured death, which he (Jerome) seemed rather to long
for." The eloquence of the Italian humanist has bestowed a not entirely
merited aureole on the memory of Jerome of Prague.
See all works dealing with Hus; and indeed all histories of Bohemia
contain detailed accounts of the career of Jerome. _The Lives of John
Wicliffe, Lord Cobham, John Huss, Jerome of Prague and Zizka_ by
William Gilpin (London, 1765) still has a certain value. (L.)
FOOTNOTE:
[1] The statement that Jerome's family name was Faulfiss, is founded
on a misunderstood passage of Aeneas Sylvius, _Historica Bohemica_.
Aeneas Sylvius names as one of the early Bohemian reformers a man
"_genere nobilis, ex domo quam Putridi Piscis vacant_." This was
erroneously believed to refer to Jerome.
JERROLD, DOUGLAS WILLIAM (1803-1857), English dramatist and man of
letters, was born in London on the 3rd of January 1803. His father,
Samuel Jerrold, actor, was at that time lessee of the little theatre of
Wilsby near Cranbrook in Kent, but in 1807 he removed to Sheerness.
There, among the bluejackets who swarmed in the port during the war with
France, Douglas grew into boyhood. He occasionally took a child's part
on the stage, but his father's profession had little attraction for the
boy. In December 1813 he joined the guardship "Namur," where he had Jane
Austen's brother as captain, and he served as a midshipman until the
peace of 1815. He saw nothing of the war save a number of wounded
soldiers from Waterloo; but till his dying day there lingered traces of
his early passion for the sea. The peace of 1815 ruined Samuel Jerrold;
there was no more prize money. On the 1st of January 1816 he removed
with his family to London, where the ex-midshipman began the world again
as a printer's apprentice, and in 1819 became a compositor in the
printing-office of the _Sunday Monitor_. Several short papers and copies
of verses by him had already appeared in the sixpenny magazines, and
one evening he dropped into the editor's box a criticism of the opera
_Der Freischütz_. Next morning he received his own copy to set up,
together with a flattering note from the editor, requesting further
contributions from the anonymous author. Thenceforward Jerrold was
engaged in journalism. In 1821 a comedy that he had composed in his
fifteenth year was brought out at Sadler's Wells theatre, under the
title _More Frightened than Hurt_. Other pieces followed, and in 1825 he
was engaged for a few pounds weekly to produce dramas and farces to the
order of Davidge of the Coburg theatre. In the autumn of 1824 the
"little Shakespeare in a camlet cloak," as he was called, married Mary
Swann; and, while he was engaged with the drama at night, he was
steadily pushing his way as a journalist. For a short while he was part
proprietor of a small Sunday newspaper. In 1829, through a quarrel with
the exacting Davidge, Jerrold left the Coburg; and his three-act
melodrama, _Black-eyed Susan; or, All in the Downs_, was brought out by
R. W. Elliston at the Surrey theatre. The success of the piece was
enormous. With its free gallant sea-flavour, it took the town by storm,
and "all London went over the water to see it." Elliston made a fortune
by the piece; T. P. Cooke, who played William, made his reputation;
Jerrold received about £60 and was engaged as dramatic author at five
pounds a week. But his fame as a dramatist was achieved. In 1830 it was
proposed that he should adapt something from the French for Drury Lane.
"No," was his reply, "I shall come into this theatre as an original
dramatist or not at all." _The Bride of Ludgate_ (December 8, 1831) was
the first of a number of his plays produced at Drury Lane. The other
patent houses threw their doors open to him also (the Adelphi had
already done so); and in 1836 Jerrold became co-manager of the Strand
theatre with W. J. Hammond, his brother-in-law. The venture was not
successful, and the partnership was dissolved. While it lasted Jerrold
wrote his only tragedy, _The Painter of Ghent_, and himself appeared in
the title-rôle, without any very marked success. He continued to write
sparkling comedies till 1854, the date of his last piece, _The Heart of
Gold_.
Meanwhile he had won his way to the pages of numerous
periodicals--before 1830 of the second-rate magazines only, but after
that to those of more importance. He was a contributor to the _Monthly
Magazine, Blackwood's,_ the _New Monthly_, and the _Athenaeum_. To
_Punch_, the publication which of all others is associated with his
name, he contributed from its second number in 1841 till within a few
days of his death. He founded and edited for some time, though with
indifferent success, the _Illuminated Magazine, Jerrold's Shilling
Magazine_, and _Douglas Jerrold's Weekly Newspaper;_ and under his
editorship _Lloyd's Weekly Newspaper_ rose from almost nonentity to a
circulation of 182,000. The history of his later years is little more
than a catalogue of his literary productions, interrupted now and again
by brief visits to the Continent or to the country. Douglas Jerrold died
at his house, Kilburn Priory, in London, on the 8th of June 1857.
Jerrold's figure was small and spare, and in later years bowed almost to
deformity. His features were strongly marked and expressive from the
thin humorous lips to the keen blue eyes gleaming from beneath the
shaggy eyebrows. He was brisk and active, with the careless bluffness of
a sailor. Open and sincere, he concealed neither his anger nor his
pleasure; to his simple frankness all polite duplicity was distasteful.
The cynical side of his nature he kept for his writings; in private life
his hand was always open. In politics Jerrold was a Liberal, and he gave
eager sympathy to Kossuth, Mazzini and Louis Blanc. In social politics
especially he took an eager part; he never tired of declaiming against
the horrors of war, the luxury of bishops, and the iniquity of capital
punishment.
Douglas Jerrold is now perhaps better known from his reputation as a
brilliant wit in conversation than from his writings. As a dramatist he
was very popular, though his plays have not kept the stage. He dealt
with rather humbler forms of social life than had commonly been
represented on the boards. He was one of the first and certainly one of
the most successful of those who in defence of the native English drama
endeavoured to stem the tide of translation from the French, which
threatened early in the 19th century altogether to drown original native
talent. His skill in construction and his mastery of epigram and
brilliant dialogue are well exemplified in his comedy, _Time Works
Wonders_ (Haymarket, April 26, 1845). The tales and sketches which form
the bulk of Jerrold's collected works vary much in skill and interest;
but, although there are evident traces of their having been composed
from week to week, they are always marked by keen satirical observation
and pungent wit.
Among the best known of his numerous works are: _Men of Character_
(1838), including "Job Pippin: The man who couldn't help it," and
other sketches of the same kind; _Cakes and Ale_ (2 vols., 1842), a
collection of short papers and whimsical stories; some more serious
novels--_The Story of a Feather_ (1844), _The Chronicles of
Clovernook_ (1846), _A Man made of Money_ (1849); and _St Giles and St
James_ (1851); and various series of papers reprinted from
_Punch--Punch's Letters to his Son_ (1843), _Punch's Complete
Letter-writer_ (1845), and the famous _Mrs Caudle's Curtain Lectures_
(1846).
See W. B. Jerrold, _Life and Remains of Douglas Jerrold_ (1859). A
collected edition of his writings appeared in 1851-1854, and _The
Works of Douglas Jerrold_, with a memoir by his son, W. B. Jerrold, in
1863-1864; but neither is complete. Among the numerous selections from
his tales and witticisms are two edited by his grandson, Walter
Jerrold, _Bons Mots of Charles Dickens and Douglas Jerrold_ (new ed.
1904), and _The Essays of Douglas Jerrold_ (1903), illustrated by H.
M. Brock. See also _The Wit and Opinions of Douglas Jerrold_ (1858),
edited by W. B. Jerrold.
His eldest son, WILLIAM BLANCHARD JERROLD (1826-1884), English
journalist and author, was born in London on the 23rd of December 1826,
and abandoning the artistic career for which he was educated, began
newspaper work at an early age there. He was appointed Crystal Palace
commissioner to Sweden in 1853, and wrote _A Brage-Beaker with the
Swedes_ (1854) on his return. In 1855 he was sent to the Paris
exhibition as correspondent for several London papers, and from that
time he lived much in Paris. In 1857 he succeeded his father as editor
of _Lloyd's Weekly Newspaper_, a post which he held for twenty-six
years. During the Civil War in America he strongly supported the North,
and several of his leading articles were reprinted and placarded in New
York by the federal government. He was the founder and president of the
English branch of the international literary association for the
assimilation of copyright laws. Four of his plays were successfully
produced on the London stage, the popular farce _Cool as a Cucumber_
(Lyceum 1851) being the best known. His French experiences resulted in a
number of books, most important of which is his _Life of Napoleon III_.
(1874). He was occupied in writing the biography of Gustave Doré, who
had illustrated several of his books, when he died on the 10th of March
1884.
Among his books are _A Story of Social Distinction_ (1848), _Life and
Remains of Douglas Jerrold_ (1859), _Up and Down in the World_ (1863),
_The Children of Lutetia_ (1864), _Cent per Cent_ (1871), _At Home in
Paris_ (1871), _The Best of all Good Company_ (1871-1873), and _The
Life of George Cruikshank_ (1882).
JERRY, a short form of the name Jeremiah, applied to various common
objects, and more particularly to a machine for finishing cloth. The
expression "jerry-built" is applied to houses built badly and of
inferior materials, and run up by a speculative builder. There seems to
be no foundation for the assertion that this expression was occasioned
by the work of a firm of Liverpool builders named Jerry.
JERSEY, EARLS OF. Sir Edward Villiers (c. 1656-1711), son of Sir Edward
Villiers (1620-1689), of Richmond, Surrey, was created Baron Villiers
and Viscount Villiers in 1691 and earl of Jersey in 1697. His
grandfather, Sir Edward Villiers (c. 1585-1626), master of the mint and
president of Munster, was half-brother of George Villiers, 1st duke of
Buckingham, and of Christopher Villiers, 1st earl of Anglesey; his
sister was Elizabeth Villiers, the mistress of William III., and
afterwards countess of Orkney. Villiers was knight-marshal of the royal
household in succession to his father; master of the horse to Queen
Mary; and lord chamberlain to William III. and Queen Anne. In 1696 he
represented his country at the congress of Ryswick; he was ambassador
at the Hague, and after becoming an earl was ambassador in Paris. In
1699 he was made secretary of state for the southern department, and on
three occasions he was one of the lords justices of England. In 1704 he
was dismissed from office by Anne, and after this event he was concerned
in some of the Jacobite schemes. He died on the 25th of August 1711. The
2nd earl was his son William (c. 1682-1721), an adherent of the exiled
house of Stuart, and the 3rd earl was the latter's son William (d.
1769), who succeeded his kinsman John Fitzgerald (c. 1692-1766) as 6th
Viscount Grandison. The 3rd earl's son, George Bussy, the 4th earl
(1735-1805), held several positions at the court of George III., and on
account of his courtly manners was called the "prince of Maccaronies."
The 4th earl's son, George, 5th earl of Jersey (1773-1859), one of the
most celebrated fox-hunters of his time and a successful owner of
racehorses, married Sarah Sophia (1785-1867), daughter of John Fane,
10th earl of Westmorland, and granddaughter of Robert Child, the banker.
She inherited her grandfather's great wealth, including his interest in
Child's bank, and with her husband took the name of Child-Villiers.
Since this time the connexions of the earls of Jersey with Child's bank
has been maintained. Victor Albert George Child-Villiers (b. 1845)
succeeded his father George Augustus (1808-1859), 6th earl, who had only
held the title for three weeks, as 7th earl of Jersey in 1859. This
nobleman was governor of New South Wales from 1890 to 1893.
JERSEY, the largest of the Channel Islands, belonging to Great Britain.
Its chief town, St Helier, on the south coast of the island, is in 49°
12´ N., 2° 7´ W., 105 m. S. by E. of Portland Bill on the English coast,
and 24 m. from the French coast to the east. Jersey is the southernmost
of the more important islands of the group. It is of oblong form with a
length of 10 m. from east to west and an extreme breadth of 6¼ m. The
area is 28,717 acres, or 45 sq. m. Pop. (1901), 52,576.
The island reaches its greatest elevation (nearly 500 ft.) in the north,
the land rising sharply from the north coast, and displaying bold and
picturesque cliffs towards the sea. The east, south and west coasts
consist of a succession of large open bays, shallow and rocky, with
marshy or sandy shores separated by rocky headlands. The principal bays
are Grève au Lançons, Grève de Lecq, St John's and Bouley Bays on the
north coast; St Catherine's and Grouville Bays on the east; St
Clement's, St Aubin's and St Brelade's Bays on the south; and St Ouen's
Bay, the wide sweep of which occupies nearly the whole of the west
coast. The sea in many places has encroached greatly on the land, and
sand drifts have been found troublesome, especially on the west coast.
The surface of the country is broken by winding valleys having a general
direction from north to south, and as they approach the south uniting so
as to form small plains. The lofty hedges which bound the small
enclosures into which Jersey is divided, the trees and shrubberies which
line the roads and cluster round the uplands and in almost every nook of
the valleys unutilized for pasturage or tillage, give the island a
luxuriant appearance, neutralizing the bare effect of the few sandy
plains and sand-covered hills. Fruits and flowers indigenous to warm
climates grow freely in the open air. The land, under careful
cultivation, is rich and productive, the soil being generally a deep
loam, especially in the valleys, but in the west shallow, light and
sandy. The subsoil is usually gravel, but in some parts an unfertile
clay. Some two-thirds of the total area is under cultivation, great
numbers of cattle being pastured, and much market gardening practised.
The potato crop is very large. The peasants take advantage of every bit
of wall and every isolated nook of ground for growing fruit trees.
Grapes are ripened under glass; oranges can be grown in sheltered
situations, but the most common fruits are apples, which are used for
cider, and pears. A manure of burnt sea-weed (vraic) is generally used.
The pasturage is very rich, and is much improved by the application of
this manure to the surface. The breed of cattle is kept pure by
stringent laws against the importation of foreign animals. The milk is
used almost exclusively to manufacture butter. The cattle are always
housed in winter, but remain out at night from May till October. There
was formerly a small black breed of horses peculiar to the island, but
horses are now chiefly imported from France or England. Pigs are kept
principally for local consumption, and only a few sheep are reared. Fish
are not so plentiful as round the shores of Guernsey, but mackerel,
turbot, cod, mullet and especially the conger eel are abundant at the
Minquiers. There is a large oyster bed between Jersey and France, but
partly on account of over-dredging the supply is not so abundant as
formerly. There is a great variety of other shell fish. The fisheries,
ship-building and boat-building employ many of the inhabitants. Kelp and
iodine are manufactured from sea-weed. The principal exports are
granite, fruit and vegetables (especially potatoes), butter and cattle;
and the chief imports coal and articles of human consumption.
Communications with England are maintained principally from Southampton
and Weymouth, and there are regular steamship services from Granville
and St Malo on the French coast. The Jersey railway runs west from St
Helier round St Aubin's Bay to St Aubin, and continues to Corbière at
the south-western extremity of the island; and the Jersey eastern
railway follows the southern and eastern coasts to Gorey. The island is
intersected with a network of good roads.
Jersey is under a distinct and in several respects different form of
administrative government from Guernsey and the smaller islands included
in the bailiwick of Guernsey. For its peculiar constitution, system of
justice, ecclesiastical arrangements and finance, see CHANNEL ISLANDS.
There are twelve parishes, namely St Helier, Grouville, St Brelade, St
Clement, St John, St Laurence, St Martin, St Mary, St Ouen, St Peter, St
Saviour and Trinity. The population of the island nearly doubled between
1821 and 1901, but decreased from 54,518 to 52,576 between 1891 and
1901.
The history of Jersey is treated under CHANNEL ISLANDS. Among objects of
antiquarian interest, a cromlech near Mont Orgueil is the finest of
several examples. St Brelade's church, probably the oldest in the
island, dates from the 12th century; among the later churches St
Helier's, of the 14th century, may be mentioned. There are also some
very early chapels, considered to date from the 10th century or earlier;
among these may be noted the Chapelle-ès-Pêcheurs at St Brelade's, and
the picturesque chapel in the grounds of the manor of Rozel. The castle
of Mont Orgueil, of which there are considerable remains, is believed to
be founded upon the site of a Roman stronghold, and a "Caesar's fort"
still forms a part of it.
JERSEY CITY, a city and the county-seat of Hudson county, New Jersey,
U.S.A., on a peninsula between the Hudson and Hackensack rivers at the
N. and between New York and Newark bays at the S., opposite lower
Manhattan Island. Pop. (1890), 163,003; (1900), 206,433, of whom 58,424
were foreign-born (19,314 Irish, 17,375 German, 4642 English, 3832
Italian, 1694 Russian, 1690 Scottish, 1643 Russian Poles, 1445 Austrian)
and 3704 were negroes; (1910 census) 267,779. It is the eastern terminus
of the Pennsylvania, the Lehigh Valley, the West Shore, the Central of
New Jersey, the Baltimore & Ohio, the Northern of New Jersey (operated
by the Erie), the Erie, the New York, Susquehanna & Western, and the New
Jersey & New York (controlled by the Erie) railways, the first three
using the Pennsylvania station; and of the little-used Morris canal.
Jersey City is served by several inter-urban electric railways and by
the tunnels of the Hudson & Manhattan railroad company to Dey St. and to
33rd St. and 6th Ave., New York City, and it also has docks of several
lines of Transatlantic and coast steamers. The city occupies a land area
of 14.3 sq. m. and has a water-front of about 12 m. Bergen Hill, a
southerly extension of the Palisades, extends longitudinally through it
from north to south. At the north end this hill rises on the east side
precipitously to a height of nearly 200 ft.; on the west and south sides
the slope is gradual. On the crest of the hill is the fine Hudson County
Boulevard, about 19 m. long and 100 ft. wide, extending through the city
and county from north to south and passing through West Side Park, a
splendid county park containing lakes and a 70-acre playground. The
water-front, especially on the east side, is given up to manufacturing
and shipping establishments. In the hill section are the better
residences, most of which are wooden and detached.
The principal buildings are the city hall and the court house. There
are nine small city parks with an aggregate area of 39.1 acres. The
city has a public library containing (1907) 107,600 volumes and an
historical museum. At the corner of Bergen Ave. and Forrest St. is the
People's Palace, given in 1904 by Joseph Milbank to the First
Congregational church and containing a library and reading-room, a
gymnasium, bowling alleys, a billiard-room, a rifle-range, a
roof-garden, and an auditorium and theatre; kindergarten classes are
held and an employment bureau is maintained. Among the educational
institutions are the German American school, Hasbrouck institute, St
Aloysius academy (Roman Catholic) and St Peter's college (Roman
Catholic); and there are good public schools. Grain is shipped to and
from Jersey City in large quantities, and in general the city is an
important shipping port; being included, however, in the port of New
York, no separate statistics are available. There are large
slaughtering establishments, and factories for the refining of sugar
and for the manufacture of tobacco goods, soap and perfumery, lead
pencils, iron and steel, railway cars, chemicals, rubber goods, silk
goods, dressed lumber, and malt liquors. The value of the city's
manufactured products increased from $37,376,322 in 1890 to
$77,225,116 in 1900, or 106.6%; in 1905 the factory product alone was
valued at $75,740,934, an increase of only 3.9% over the factory
product in 1900, this small rate of increase being due very largely to
a decline in the value of the products of the sugar and molasses
refining industry. The value of the wholesale slaughtering and
meat-packing product decreased from $18,551,783 in 1880 and
$11,356,511 in 1890 to $6,243,217 in 1900--of this $5,708,763
represented wholesale slaughtering alone; in 1905 the wholesale
slaughtering product was valued at $7,568,739.
In 1908 the assessed valuation of the city was $267,039,754. The city is
governed by a board of aldermen and a mayor (elected biennially), who
appoints most of the officials, the street and water board being the
principal exception.
Jersey City when first incorporated was a small sandy peninsula (an
island at high tide) known as Paulus Hook, directly opposite the lower
end of Manhattan Island. It had been a part of the Dutch patroonship of
Pavonia granted to Michael Pauw in 1630. In 1633 the first buildings
were erected, and for more than a century the Hook was occupied by a
small agricultural and trading community. In 1764 a new post route
between New York and Philadelphia passed through what is now the city,
and direct ferry communication began with New York. Early in the War of
Independence Paulus Hook was fortified by the Americans, but soon after
the battle of Long Island they abandoned it, and on the 23rd of
September 1776 it was occupied by the British. On the morning of the
19th of August 1779 the British garrison was surprised by Major Henry
Lee ("Light Horse Harry"), who with about 500 men took 159 prisoners and
lost only 2 killed and 3 wounded, one of the most brilliant exploits
during the War of Independence. In 1804 Paulus Hook, containing 117
acres and having about 15 inhabitants, passed into the possession of
three enterprising New York lawyers, who laid it out as a town and
formed an association for its government, which was incorporated as the
"associates of the Jersey company." In 1820 the town was incorporated as
the City of Jersey, but it remained a part of the township of Bergen
until 1838, when it was reincorporated as a distinct municipality. In
1851 the township of Van Vorst, founded in 1804 between Paulus Hook and
Hoboken, was annexed. In 1870 there were two annexations: to the south,
the town of Bergen, the county-seat, which was founded in 1660; to the
north-west, Hudson City, which had been separated from the township of
North Bergen in 1852 and incorporated as a city in 1855. The town of
Greenville, to the south, was annexed in 1873.
JERUSALEM (Heb. [Hebrew: Yerushalaïm] _Yerushalaïm_, pronounced as a
dual), the chief city of Palestine. Letters found at Tell el-Amarna in
Egypt, written by an early ruler of Jerusalem, show that the name
existed under the form _Urusalim_, i.e. "City of Salim" or "City of
Peace," many years before the Israelites under Joshua entered Canaan.
The emperor Hadrian, when he rebuilt the city, changed the name to Aelia
Capitolina. The Arabs usually designate Jerusalem by names expressive of
holiness, such as Beit el Makdis and El Mukaddis or briefly El Kuds,
i.e. the Sanctuary.
_Natural Topography._--Jerusalem is situated in 31° 47´ N. and 35° 15´
E., in the hill country of southern Palestine, close to the watershed,
at an average altitude of 2500 ft. above the Mediterranean, and 3800
ft. above the level of the Dead Sea. The city stands on a rocky
plateau, which projects southwards from the main line of hills. On the
east the valley of the Kidron separates this plateau from the ridge of
the Mount of Olives, which is 100 to 200 ft. higher, while the Wadi Er
Rababi bounds Jerusalem on the west and south, meeting the Valley of
Kidron near the lower pool of Siloam. Both valleys fall rapidly as
they approach the point of junction, which lies at a depth of more
than 600 ft. below the general valley of the plateau. The latter,
which covers an area of about 1000 acres, has at the present time a
fairly uniform surface and slopes gradually from the north to the
south and east. Originally, however, its formation was very different,
as it was intersected by a deep valley, called Tyropoeon by Josephus,
which, starting from a point N.W. of the Damascus gate, followed a
course first south-east and then west of south, and joined the two
main valleys of Kidron and Er Rababi at Siloam. Another shorter valley
began near the present Jaffa gate and, taking an easterly direction,
joined the Tyropoeon; while a third ravine passed across what is now
the northern part of the Haram enclosure and fell into the valley of
the Kidron. The exact form of these three interior valleys, which had
an important influence on the construction and history of the city, is
still imperfectly known, as they are to a great extent obliterated by
vast accumulations of rubbish, which has filled them up in some places
to a depth of more than 100 ft. Their approximate form was only
arrived at by excavations made during the later years of the 19th
century. The limited knowledge which we possess of the original
features of the ground within the area of the city makes a
reconstruction of the topographical history of the latter a difficult
task; and, as a natural result, many irreconcilable theories have been
suggested. The difficulty is increased by the fact that the
geographical descriptions given in the Old Testament the Apocrypha and
the writings of Josephus are very short, and, having been written for
those who were acquainted with the places, convey insufficient
information to historians of the present day, when the sites are so
greatly altered. All that can be done is to form a continuous account
in accord with the ancient histories, and with the original formation
of the ground, so far as this has been identified by modern
exploration. But the progress of exploration and excavation may render
this subject to further modification.
The geological formation of the plateau consists of thin beds of hard
silicious chalk, locally called _misse_, which overlie a thick bed of
soft white limestone, known by the name of _meleke_. Both descriptions
of rock yielded good material for building; while in the soft _meleke_
tanks, underground chambers, tombs, &c., were easily excavated. In
ancient times a brook flowed down the valley of the Kidron, and it is
possible that a stream flowed also through the Tyropoeon valley. The
only known spring existing at present within the limits of the city is
the "fountain of the Virgin," on the western side of the Kidron
valley, but there may have been others which are now concealed by the
accumulations of rubbish. Cisterns were also used for the storage of
rain water, and aqueducts, of which the remains still exist (see
AQUEDUCTS _ad init._), were constructed for the conveyance of water
from a distance. Speaking generally, it is probable that the water
supply of Jerusalem in ancient times was better than it is at present.
_History._--The early history of Jerusalem is very obscure. The Tell
el-Amarna letters show that, long before the invasion by Joshua, it was
occupied by the Egyptians, and was probably a stronghold of considerable
importance, as it formed a good strategical position in the hill country
of southern Palestine. We do not know how the Egyptians were forced to
abandon Jerusalem; but, at the time of the Israelite conquest, it was
undoubtedly in the hands of the Jebusites, the native inhabitants of the
country. The exact position of the Jebusite city is unknown; some
authorities locate it on the western hill, now known as Zion; some on
the eastern hill, afterwards occupied by the Temple and the city of
David; while others consider it was a double settlement, one part being
on the western, and the other on the eastern hill, separated from one
another by the Tyropoeon valley. The latter view appears to be the most
probable, as, according to the Biblical accounts, Jerusalem was partly
in Judah and partly in Benjamin, the line of demarcation between the two
tribes passing through the city. According to this theory, the part of
Jerusalem known as Jebus was situated on the western hill, and the
outlying fort of Zion on the eastern hill. The men of Judah and Benjamin
did not succeed in getting full possession of the place, and the
Jebusites still held it when David became king of Israel. Some years
after his accession David succeeded after some difficulty in taking
Jerusalem. He established his royal city on the eastern hill close to
the site of the Jebusite Zion, while Jebus, the town on the western side
of the Tyropoeon valley, became the civil city, of which Joab, David's
leading general, was appointed governor. David surrounded the royal city
with a wall and built a citadel, probably on the site of the Jebusite
fort of Zion, while Joab fortified the western town. North of the city
of David, the king, acting under divine guidance, chose a site for the
Temple of Jehovah, which was erected with great magnificence by Solomon.
The actual site occupied by this building has given rise to much
controversy, though all authorities are agreed that it must have stood
on some part of the area now known as the Haram. James Fergusson was of
opinion that the Temple stood near the south-western corner. As,
however, it was proved by the explorations of Sir Charles Warren in
1869-1870 that the Tyropoeon valley passed under this corner, and that
the foundations must have been of enormous depth, Fergusson's theory
must be regarded as untenable (see also SEPULCHRE, HOLY). On the whole
it is most likely that the Temple was erected by Solomon on the same
spot as is now occupied by the Dome of the Rock, commonly known as the
Mosque of Omar, and, regard being had to the levels of the ground, it is
possible that the Holy of Holies, the most sacred chamber of the Temple,
stood over the rock which is still regarded with veneration by the
Mahommedans. Solomon greatly strengthened the fortifications of
Jerusalem, and was probably the builder of the line of defence, called
by Josephus the first or old wall, which united the cities on the
eastern and western hills. The kingdom reached its highest point of
importance during the reign of Solomon, but, shortly after his death, it
was broken up by the rebellion of Jeroboam, who founded the separate
kingdom of Israel with its capital at Shechem. Two tribes only, Judah
and Benjamin, with the descendants of Levi, remained faithful to
Rehoboam, the son of Solomon. Jerusalem thus lost much of its
importance, especially after it was forced to surrender to Shishak, king
of Egypt, who carried off a great part of the riches which had been
accumulated by Solomon. The history of Jerusalem during the succeeding
three centuries consists for the most part of a succession of wars
against the kingdom of Israel, the Moabites and the Syrians. Joash, king
of Israel, captured the city from Amaziah, king of Judah, and destroyed
part of the fortifications, but these were rebuilt by Uzziah, the son of
Amaziah, who did much to restore the city to its original prosperity. In
the reign of Hezekiah, the kingdom of Judah became tributary to the
Assyrians, who attempted the capture of Jerusalem. Hezekiah improved the
defences and arranged for a good water supply, preparatory to the siege
by Sennacherib, the Assyrian general. The siege failed and the Assyrians
retired. Some years later Syria was again invaded by the Egyptians, who
reduced Judah to the position of a tributary state. In the reign of
Zedekiah, the last of the line of kings, Jerusalem was captured by
Nebuchadrezzar, king of Babylon, who pillaged the city, destroyed the
Temple, and ruined the fortifications (see JEWS, § 17). A number of the
principal inhabitants were carried captive to Babylon, and Jerusalem was
reduced to the position of an insignificant town. Nebuchadrezzar placed
in the city a garrison which appears to have been quartered on the
western hill, while the eastern hill on which were the Temple and the
city of David was left more or less desolate. We have no information
regarding Jerusalem during the period of the captivity, but fortunately
Nehemiah, who was permitted to return and rebuild the defences about 445
B.C., has given a fairly clear description of the line of the wall which
enables us to obtain a good idea of the extent of the city at this
period. The Temple had already been partially rebuilt by Zedekiah and
his companions, but on a scale far inferior to the magnificent building
of King Solomon, and Nehemiah devoted his attention to the
reconstruction of the walls. Before beginning the work, he made a
preliminary reconnaissance of the fortifications on the south of the
town from the Valley Gate, which was near the S.E. corner, to the pool
of Siloam and valley of the Kidron. He then allotted the reconstruction
of wall and gates to different parties of workmen, and his narrative
describes the portion of wall upon which each of these was employed.[1]
It is clear from his account that the lines of fortifications included
both the eastern and western hills. North of the Temple enclosure
there was a gate, known as the Sheep Gate, which must have opened into
the third valley mentioned above, and stood somewhere near what is now
the north side of the Haram enclosure, but considerably south of the
present north wall of the latter. To the west of the Sheep Gate there
were two important towers in the wall, called respectively Meah and
Hananeel. The tower Hananeel is specially worthy of notice as it stood
N.W. of the Temple and probably formed the basis of the citadel built
by Simon Maccabaeus, which again was succeeded by the fortress of
Antonia, constructed by Herod the Great, and one of the most important
positions at the time of the siege by Titus. At or near the tower
Hananeel the wall turned south along the east side of the Tyropoeon
valley, and then again westward, crossing the valley at a point
probably near the remarkable construction known as Wilson's arch. A
gate in the valley, known as the Fish Gate, opened on a road which,
leading from the north, went down the Tyropoeon valley to the southern
part of the city. Westward of this gate the wall followed the south
side of the valley which joined the Tyropoeon from the west as far as
the north-western corner of the city at the site of the present Jaffa
Gate and the so-called tower of David. In this part of the wall there
were apparently two gates facing north, i.e. the Old Gate and the Gate
of Ephraim, 400 cubits from the corner.[2] At the corner stood the
residence of the Babylonian governor, near the site upon which King
Herod afterwards built his magnificent palace. From the corner at the
governor's house, the wall went in a southerly direction and turned
south-east to the Valley Gate, remains of which were discovered by F.
J. Bliss and fully described in his _Excavations in Jerusalem in
1894-1897_. From the Valley Gate the wall took an easterly course for
a distance of 1000 cubits to the Dung Gate, near which on the east was
the Fountain Gate, not far from the lower pool of Siloam. Here was the
most southerly point of Jerusalem, and the wall turning hence to the
north followed the west side of the valley of the Kidron, enclosing
the city of David and the Temple enclosure, and finally turning west
at some point near the site of the Golden Gate joined the wall,
already described, at the Sheep Gate. Nehemiah mentions a number of
places on the eastern hill, including the tomb of David, the positions
of which cannot with our present knowledge be fixed with any
certainty.
After the restoration of the walls of Jerusalem by Nehemiah, a
considerable number of Jews returned to the city, but we know
practically nothing of its history for more than a century until, in 332
B.C., Alexander the Great conquered Syria. The gates of Jerusalem were
opened to him and he left the Jews in peaceful occupation. But his
successors did not act with similar leniency; when the city was captured
by Ptolemy I., king of Egypt, twelve years later, the fortifications
were partially demolished and apparently not again restored until the
period of the high priest Simon II., who repaired the defences and also
the Temple buildings. In 168 B.C. Antiochus Epiphanes captured
Jerusalem, destroyed the walls, and devastated the Temple, reducing the
city to a worse position than it had occupied since the time of the
captivity. He built a citadel called the Acra to dominate the town and
placed in it a strong garrison of Greeks. The position of the Acra is
doubtful, but it appears most probable that it stood on the eastern hill
between the Temple and the city of David, both of which it commanded.
Some writers place it north of the Temple on the site afterwards
occupied by the fortress of Antonia, but such a position is not in
accord with the descriptions either in Josephus or in the books of the
Maccabees, which are quite consistent with each other. Other writers
again have placed the Acra on the eastern side of the hill upon which
the church of the Holy Sepulchre now stands, but as this point was
probably quite outside the city at the time of Antiochus Epiphanes, and
is at too great a distance from the Temple, it can hardly be accepted.
But the site which has been already indicated at the N.E. corner of the
present Mosque el Aksa meets the accounts of the ancient authorities
better than any other. At this point in the Haram enclosure there is an
enormous underground cistern, known as the Great Sea, and this may
possibly have been the source of water supply for the Greek garrison.
The oppression of Antiochus led to a revolt of the Jews under the
leadership of the Maccabees, and Judas Maccabaeus succeeded in capturing
Jerusalem after severe fighting, but could not get possession of the
Acra, which caused much trouble to the Jews, who erected a wall between
it and the Temple, and another wall to cut it off from the city. The
Greeks held out for a considerable time, but had finally to surrender,
probably from want of food, to Simon Maccabaeus, who demolished the Acra
and cut down the hill upon which it stood so that it might no longer be
higher than the Temple, and that there should be no separation between
the latter and the city. Simon then constructed a new citadel, north of
the Temple, to take the place of the Acra, and established in Judaea the
Asmonean dynasty, which lasted for nearly a century, when the Roman
republic began to make its influence felt in Syria. In 65 B.C. Jerusalem
was captured by Pompey after a difficult siege. The Asmonean dynasty
lasted a few years longer, but finally came to an end when Herod the
Great, with the aid of the Romans, took possession of Jerusalem and
became the first king of the Idumaean dynasty. Herod again raised the
city to the position of an important capital, restoring the
fortifications, and rebuilding the Temple from its foundations. He also
built the great fortress of Antonia, N.W. of the Temple, on the site of
the citadel of the Asmoneans, and constructed a magnificent palace for
himself on the western hill, defended by three great towers, which he
named Mariamne, Hippicus and Phasaelus. At some period between the time
of the Maccabees and of Herod, a second or outer wall had been built
outside and north of the first wall, but it is not possible to fix an
accurate date to this line of defence, as the references to it in
Josephus are obscure. Herod adorned the town with other buildings and
constructed a theatre and gymnasium. He doubled the area of the
enclosure round the Temple, and there can be little doubt that a great
part of the walls of the Haram area date from the time of Herod, while
probably the tower of David, which still exists near the Jaffa Gate, is
on the same foundation as one of the towers adjoining his palace.
Archelaus, Herod's successor, had far less authority than Herod, and the
real power of government at Jerusalem was assumed by the Roman
procurators, in the time of one of whom, Pontius Pilate, Jesus Christ
was condemned to death and crucified outside Jerusalem. The places of
his execution and burial are not certainly known (see SEPULCHRE, HOLY).
Herod Agrippa, who succeeded to the kingdom, built a third or outer wall
on the north side of Jerusalem in order to enclose and defend the
buildings which had gradually been constructed outside the old
fortifications. The exact line of this third wall is not known with
certainty, but it probably followed approximately the same line as the
existing north wall of Jerusalem. Some writers have considered that it
extended a considerable distance farther to the north, but of this there
is no proof, and no remains have as yet been found which would support
the opinion. The wall of Herod Agrippa was planned on a grand scale, but
its execution was stopped by the Romans, so that it was not completed at
the time of the siege of Jerusalem by Titus. The writings of Josephus
give a good idea of the fortifications and buildings of Jerusalem at the
time of the siege, and his accurate personal knowledge makes his account
worthy of the most careful perusal. He explains clearly how Titus,
beginning his attack from the north, captured the third or outer wall,
then the second wall, and finally the fortress of Antonia, the Temple,
and the upper city. After the capture, Titus ordered the Temple to be
demolished and the fortifications to be levelled, with the exception of
the three great towers at Herod's palace. It is, however, uncertain how
far the order was carried out, and it is probable that the outer walls
of the Temple enclosure were left partially standing and that the
defences on the west and south of the city were not completely levelled.
When Titus and his army withdrew from Jerusalem, the 10th legion was
left as a permanent Roman garrison, and a fortified camp for their
occupation was established on the western hill. We have no account of
the size or position of this camp, but a consideration of the site, and
a comparison with other Roman camps in various parts of Europe, make it
probable that it occupied an area of about 50 acres, extending over what
is now known as the Armenian quarter of the town, and that it was
bounded on the north by the old or first wall, on the west also by the
old wall, on the south by a line of defence somewhat in the same
position as the present south wall where it passes the Zion Gate, and on
the east by an entrenchment running north and south parallel to the
existing thoroughfare known as David Street. For sixty years the Roman
garrison were left in undisturbed occupation, but in 132 the Jews rose
in revolt under the leadership of Bar-Cochebas or Barcochba, and took
possession of Jerusalem. After a severe struggle, the revolt was
suppressed by the Roman general, Julius Severus, and Jerusalem was
recaptured and again destroyed. According to some writers, this
devastation was even more complete than after the siege by Titus. About
130 the emperor Hadrian decided to rebuild Jerusalem, and make it a
Roman colony. The new city was called Aelia Capitolina. The exact size
of the city is not known, but it probably extended as far as the present
north wall of Jerusalem and included the northern part of the western
hill. A temple dedicated to Jupiter Capitolinus was erected on the site
of the Temple, and other buildings were constructed, known as the
Theatre, the Demosia, the Tetranymphon, the Dodecapylon and the Codra.
The Jews were forbidden to reside in the city, but Christians were
freely admitted. The history of Jerusalem during the period between the
foundation of the city of Aelia by the emperor Hadrian and the accession
of Constantine the Great in 306 is obscure, but no important change
appears to have been made in the size or fortifications of the city,
which continued as a Roman colony. In 326 Constantine, after his
conversion to Christianity, issued orders to the bishop Macarius to
recover the site of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ, and the tomb in
which his body was laid (see SEPULCHRE, HOLY). After the holy sites had
been determined, Constantine gave orders for the construction of two
magnificent churches, the one over the tomb and the other over the place
where the cross was discovered. The present church of the Holy Sepulchre
stands on the site upon which one of the churches of Constantine was
built, but the second church, the Basilica of the Cross, has completely
disappeared. The next important epoch in building construction at
Jerusalem was about 460, when the empress Eudocia visited Palestine and
expended large sums oh the improvement of the city. The walls were
repaired by her orders, and the line of fortifications appears to have
been extended on the south so as to include the pool of Siloam. A church
was built above the pool, probably at the same time, and, after having
completely disappeared for many centuries, it was recovered by F. J.
Bliss when making his exploration of Jerusalem. The empress also erected
a large church in honour of St Stephen north of the Damascus Gate, and
is believed to have been buried therein. The site of this church was
discovered in 1874, and it has since been rebuilt. In the 6th century
the emperor Justinian erected a magnificent basilica at Jerusalem, in
honour of the Virgin Mary, and attached to it two hospitals, one for the
reception of pilgrims and one for the accommodation of the sick poor.
The description given by Procopius does not indicate clearly where this
church was situated. A theory frequently put forward is that it stood
within the Haram area near the Mosque of el Aksa, but it is more
probable that it was on Zion, near the traditional place of the
Coenaculum or last supper, where the Mahommedan building known as the
tomb of David now stands. In 614 Chosroes II., the king of Persia,
captured Jerusalem, devastated many of the buildings, and massacred a
great number of the inhabitants. The churches at the Holy Sepulchre were
much damaged, but were partially restored by the monk Modestus, who
devoted himself with great energy to the work. After a severe struggle
the Persians were defeated by the emperor Heraclius, who entered
Jerusalem in triumph in 629 bringing with him the holy cross, which had
been carried off by Chosroes. At this period the religion of Mahomet was
spreading over the east, and in 637 the caliph Omar marched on
Jerusalem, which capitulated after a siege of four months. Omar behaved
with great moderation, restraining his troops from pillage and leaving
the Christians in possession of their churches. A wooden mosque was
erected near the site of the Temple, which was replaced by the Mosque
of Aksa, built by the amir Abdalmalik (Abd el Malek), who also
constructed the Dome of the Rock, known as the Mosque of Omar, in 688.
The Mahommedans held Jerusalem until 1099, when it was captured by the
crusaders under Godfrey of Bouillon, and became the capital of the Latin
Kingdom of Jerusalem (see CRUSADES, vol. viii. p. 401) until 1187, when
Saladin reconquered it, and rebuilt the walls. Since that time, except
from 1229 to 1239, and from 1243 to 1244, the city has been held by the
Mahommedans. It was occupied by the Egyptian sultans until 1517, when
the Turks under Selim I. occupied Syria. Selim's successor, Suleiman the
Magnificent, restored the fortifications, which since that time have
been little altered.
_Modern Jerusalem._--Jerusalem is the chief town of a sanjak, governed
by a _mutessarif_, who reports directly to the Porte. It has the usual
executive and town councils, upon which the recognized religious
communities, or _millets_, have representatives; and it is garrisoned
by infantry of the V. army corps. The city is connected with its port,
Jaffa, by a carriage road, 41 m., and by a metre-gauge railway, 54 m.,
which was completed in 1892, and is worked by a French company. There
are also carriage roads to Bethlehem, Hebron and Jericho, and a road
to Nablus was in course of construction in 1909. Prior to 1858, when
the modern building period commenced, Jerusalem lay wholly within its
16th-century walls, and even as late as 1875 there were few private
residences beyond their limits. At present Jerusalem without the walls
covers a larger area than that within them. The growth has been
chiefly towards the north and north-west; but there are large suburbs
on the west, and on the south-west near the railway station on the
plain of Rephaim. The village of Siloam has also increased in size,
and the western slopes of Olivet are being covered with churches,
monasteries and houses. Amongst the most marked features of the change
that has taken place since 1875 are the growth of religious and
philanthropic establishments; the settlement of Jewish colonies from
Bokhara, Yemen and Europe; the migration of Europeans, old Moslem
families, and Jews from the city to the suburbs; the increased
vegetation, due to the numerous gardens and improved methods of
cultivation; the substitution of timber and red tiles for the vaulted
stone roofs which were so characteristic of the old city; the striking
want of beauty, grandeur, and harmony with their environment exhibited
by most of the new buildings; and the introduction of wheeled
transport, which, cutting into the soft limestone, has produced mud
and dust to an extent previously unknown. To facilitate communication
between the city and its suburbs, the Bab ez-Zahire, or Herod's Gate,
and a new gate, near the north-west angle of the walls, have been
opened; and a portion of the wall, adjoining the Jaffa Gate, has been
thrown down, to allow free access for carriages. Within the city the
principal streets have been roughly paved, and iron bars placed across
the narrow alleys to prevent the passage of camels. Without the walls
carriage roads have been made to the mount of Olives, the railway
station, and various parts of the suburbs, but they are kept in bad
repair. Little effort has been made to meet the increased sanitary
requirements of the larger population and wider inhabited area. There
is no municipal water-supply, and the main drain of the city
discharges into the lower pool of Siloam, which has become an open
cesspit. In several places the débris within the walls is saturated
with sewage, and the water of the Fountain of the Virgin, and of many
of the old cisterns, is unfit for drinking. Amongst the more important
buildings for ecclesiastical and philanthropic purposes erected to the
north of the city since 1860 are the Russian cathedral, hospice and
hospital; the French hospital of St Louis, and hospice and church of
St Augustine; the German schools, orphanages and hospitals; the new
hospital and industrial school of the London mission to the Jews; the
Abyssinian church; the church and schools of the Church missionary
society; the Anglican church, college and bishop's house; the
Dominican monastery, seminary and church of St Stephen; the Rothschild
hospital and girls' school; and the industrial school and workshops of
the Alliance Israélite. On the mount of Olives are the Russian church,
tower and hospice, near the chapel of the Ascension; the French
Paternoster church; the Carmelite nunnery; and the Russian church of
St Mary Magdalene, near Gethsemane. South of the city are the Armenian
monastery of Mount Zion and Bishop Gobat's school. On the west side
are the institution of the sisters of St Vincent; the Ratisbon school;
the Montefiore hospice; the British ophthalmic hospital of the knights
of St John; the convent and church of the Clarisses; and the Moravian
leper hospital. Within the city walls are the Latin Patriarchal church
and residence; the school of the Frères de la Doctrine Chrétienne; the
schools and printing house of the Franciscans; the Coptic monastery;
the German church of the Redeemer, and hospice; the United Armenian
church of the Spasm; the convent and school of the Soeurs de Zion; the
Austrian hospice; the Turkish school and museum; the monastery and
seminary of the Frères de la Mission Algérienne, with the restored
church of St Anne, the church, schools and hospital of the London
mission to the Jews; the Armenian seminary and Patriarchal buildings;
the Rothschild hospital; and Jewish hospices and synagogues. The
climate is naturally good, but continued neglect of sanitary
precautions has made the city unhealthy. During the summer months the
heat is tempered by a fresh sea-breeze, and there is usually a sharp
fall of temperature at night; but in spring and autumn the east and
south-east winds, which blow across the heated depression of the Ghor,
are enervating and oppressive. A dry season, which lasts from May to
October, is followed by a rainy season, divided into the early winter
and latter rains. Snow falls two years out of three, but soon melts.
The mean annual temperature is 62.8° F., the maximum 112°, and the
minimum 25°. The mean monthly temperature is lowest (47.2°) in
February, and highest (76.3°) in August. The mean annual rainfall
(1861 to 1899) is 26.06 in. The most unhealthy period is from 1st May
to 31st October, when there are, from time to time, outbreaks of
typhoid, small-pox, diphtheria and other epidemics. The unhealthiness
of the city is chiefly due to want of proper drainage, impure
drinking-water, miasma from the disturbed rubbish heaps, and
contaminated dust from the uncleansed roads and streets. The only
industry is the manufacture of olive-wood and mother-of-pearl goods
for sale to pilgrims and for export. The imports (see Joppa) are
chiefly food, clothing and building material. The population in 1905
was about 60,000 (Moslems 7000, Christians 13,000, Jews 40,000).
During the pilgrimage season it is increased by about 15,000
travellers and pilgrims.
AUTHORITIES.--Pal. Exp. Fund Publications--Sir C. Warren, _Jerusalem,
Memoir_ (1884); Clermont-Ganneau, _Archaeol. Researches_ (vol. i.,
1899); Bliss, _Excavns. at Jerusalem_ (1898); Conder, _Latin Kingdom
of Jerusalem_ (1897), and _The City of Jerusalem_ (1909), an
historical survey over 4000 years; Le Strange, _Pal. under the
Moslems_ (1890); Fergusson, _Temples of the Jews_ (1878); Hayter
Lewis, _Holy Places of Jerusalem_(1888); _Churches of Constantine at
Jerusalem_ (1891); Guthe, "Ausgrabungen in Jer.," in _Zeitschrift d.
D. Pal. Vereins_ (vol. v.); Tobler, _Topographie von Jerusalem_
(Berlin, 1854); Dritte Wanderung (1859); Sepp, _Jerusalem und das
heilige Land_ (1873); Röhricht, _Regesta Regni Hierosolymitani;
Bibliotheca Geographica Palaestinae_ (1890); De Vogüé, _Le Temple de
Jérusalem_ (1864); Sir C. W. Wilson, _Golgotha and the Holy Sepulchre_
(1906); publications of the Pal. Pilgrims' Text Society and of the
_Société de l'Orient latin_; papers in _Quarterly Statements_ of the
P. E. Fund, the _Zeitschrift d. D. Pal. Vereins_, Clermont-Ganneau's
_Recueil d'archéologie orientale and Études d'arch. orientale_, and
the _Revue Biblique_; Baedeker's _Handbook to Palestine and Syria_
(1906); Mommert, _Die hl. Grabeskirche zu Jerusalem_ (1898); _Golgotha
und das hl. Grab zu Jerusalem_ (1900); Couret, _La Prise de Jérusm.
par les Perses, 614_. (Orléans, 1896--Plans, Ordnance Survey, revised
ed.; Ordnance Survey revised by Dr Schick in _Z.D.P.V._ xviii., 1895).
(C. W. W.; C. M. W.)
FOOTNOTES:
[1] The sites shown on the plan are tentative, and cannot be regarded
as certain; see Nehemiah ii. 12-15, iii. 1-32, xii. 37-39.
[2] See 2 Kings xiv. 13.
JERUSALEM, SYNOD OF (1672). By far the most important of the many synods
held at Jerusalem (see Wetzer and Welte, _Kirchenlexikon_, 2nd ed., vi.
1357 sqq.) is that of 1672; and its confession is the most vital
statement of faith made in the Greek Church during the past thousand
years. It refutes article by article the confession of Cyril Lucaris,
which appeared in Latin at Geneva in 1629, and in Greek, with the
addition of four "questions," in 1633. Lucaris, who died in 1638 as
patriarch of Constantinople, had corresponded with Western scholars and
had imbibed Calvinistic views. The great opposition which arose during
his lifetime continued after his death, and found classic expression in
the highly venerated confession of Petrus Mogilas, metropolitan of Kiev
(1643). Though this was intended as a barrier against Calvinistic
influences, certain Reformed writers, as well as Roman Catholics,
persisted in claiming the support of the Greek Church for sundry of
their own positions. Against the Calvinists the synod of 1672 therefore
aimed its rejection of unconditional predestination and of justification
by faith alone, also its advocacy of what are substantially the Roman
doctrines of transubstantiation and of purgatory; the Oriental hostility
to Calvinism had been fanned by the Jesuits. Against the Church of Rome,
however, there was directed the affirmation that the Holy Ghost proceeds
from the Father and not from both Father and Son; this rejection of the
_filioque_ was not unwelcome to the Turks. Curiously enough, the synod
refused to believe that the heretical confession it refuted was actually
by a former patriarch of Constantinople; yet the proofs of its
genuineness seem to most scholars overwhelming. In negotiations between
Anglican and Russian churchmen the confession of Dositheus[1] usually
comes to the front.
TEXTS.--The confession of Dositheus, or the eighteen decrees of the
Synod of Jerusalem, appeared in 1676 at Paris as _Synodus
Bethlehemitica_; a revised text in 1678 as _Synodus Jerosolymitana_;
Hardouin, _Acta conciliorum_, vol. xi.; Kimmel, _Monumenta fidei
ecclesiae orientalis_ (Jena, 1850; critical edition); P. Schaff, _The
Creeds of Christendom_, vol. ii. (text after Hardouin and Kimmel, with
Latin translation); _The Acts and Decrees of the Synod of Jerusalem
translated from the Greek, with notes_, by J. N. W. B. Robertson
(London, 1899); J. Michalcescu, _Die Bekenntnisse und die wichtigsten
Glaubenszeugnisse der griechisch-orientalischen Kirche_ (Leipzig,
1904; Kimmel's text with introductions). LITERATURE.--_The Doctrine of
the Russian Church ..._ translated by R. W. Blackmore (Aberdeen,
1845), p. xxv. sqq.; Schaff, i. § 17; Wetzer and Welte,
_Kirchenlexikon_ (2nd ed.) vi. 1359 seq.; Herzog-Hauck,
_Realencyklopädie_ (3rd ed.), viii. 703-705; Michalcescu, 123 sqq.
(See COUNCILS.) (W. W. R.*)
FOOTNOTE:
[1] Patriarch of Jerusalem (1669-1707), who presided over the synod.
JESI (anc. _Aesis_), a town and episcopal see of the Marches, Italy, in
the province of Ancona, from which it is 17 m. W. by S. by rail, 318 ft.
above sea-level. Pop. (1901), 23,285. The place took its ancient name
from the river Aesis (mod. Esino), upon the left bank of which it lies.
It still retains its picturesque medieval town walls. The Palazzo del
Comune is a fine, simple, early Renaissance building (1487-1503) by
Francesco di Giorgio Martini; the walls are of brick and the window and
door-frames of stone, with severely restrained ornamentation. The
courtyard with its loggie was built by Andrea Sansovino in 1519. The
library contains some good pictures by Lorenzo Lotto. The castle was
built by Baccio Pontelli (1488), designer of the castle at Ostia
(1483-1486). Jesi was the birthplace of the emperor Frederic II. (1194),
and also of the musical composer, Giovanni Battista Pergolesi
(1710-1736). The river Aesis formed the boundary of Italy proper from
about 250 B.C. to the time of Sulla (c. 82 B.C.); and, in Augustus'
division of Italy, that between Umbria (the 6th region) and Picenum (the
5th). The town itself was a colony, of little importance, except,
apparently, as a recruiting ground for the Roman army.
JESSE, in the Bible, the father of David (q.v.), and as such often
regarded as the first in the genealogy of Jesus Christ (cf. Isa. xi. 1,
10). Hence the phrase "tree of Jesse" is applied to a design
representing the descent of Jesus from the royal line of David, formerly
a favourite ecclesiastical ornament. From a recumbent figure of Jesse
springs a tree bearing in its branches the chief figures in the line of
descent, and terminating in the figure of Jesus, or of the Virgin and
Child. There are remains of such a tree in the church of St Mary at
Abergavenny, carved in wood, and supposed to have once stood behind the
high altar. Jesse candelabra were also made. At Laon and Amiens there
are sculptured Jesses over the central west doorways of the cathedrals.
The design was chiefly used in windows. The great east window at Wells
and the window at the west end of the nave at Chartres are fine
examples. There is a 16th-century Jesse window from Mechlin in St
George's, Hanover Square, London. The Jesse window in the choir of
Dorchester Abbey, Oxfordshire, is remarkable in that the tree forms the
central mullion, and many of the figures are represented as statuettes
on the branches of the upper tracery; other figures are in the stained
glass; the whole gives a beautiful example of the combination of glass
and carved stonework in one design.
JESSE, EDWARD (1780-1868), English writer on natural history, was born
on the 14th of January 1780, at Hutton Cranswick, Yorkshire, where his
father was vicar of the parish. He became clerk in a government office
in 1798, and for a time was secretary to Lord Dartmouth, when president
of the Board of Control. In 1812 he was appointed commissioner of
hackney coaches, and later he became deputy surveyor-general of the
royal parks and palaces. On the abolition of this office he retired on a
pension, and he died at Brighton on the 28th of March 1868.
The result of his interest in the habits and characteristics of
animals was a series of pleasant and popular books on natural history,
the principal of which are _Gleanings in Natural History_ (1832-1835);
_An Angler's Rambles_ (1836); _Anecdotes of Dogs_ (1846); and
_Lectures on Natural History_ (1863). He also edited Izaak Walton's
_Compleat Angler_, Gilbert White's _Selborne_, and L. Ritchie's
_Windsor Castle_, and wrote a number of handbooks to places of
interest, including Windsor and Hampton Court.
JESSE, JOHN HENEAGE (1815-1874), English historian, son of Edward Jesse,
was educated at Eton, and afterwards became a clerk in the secretary's
department of the admiralty. He died in London on the 7th of July 1874.
His poem on Mary Queen of Scots was published about 1831, and was
followed by a collection of poems entitled _Tales of the Dead_. He also
wrote a drama, _Richard III._, and a fragmentary poem entitled _London_.
None of these ventures achieved any success, but his numerous historical
works are written with vivacity and interest, and, in their own style,
are an important contribution to the history of England. They include
_Memoirs of the Court of England during the Reign of the Stuarts_
(1840), _Memoirs of the Court of England from the Revolution of 1688 to
the Death of George II._ (1843), _George Selwyn and his Contemporaries_
(1843, new ed. 1882), _Memoirs of the Pretenders and their Adherents_
(1845), _Memoirs of Richard the Third and his Contemporaries_ (1861),
and _Memoirs of the Life and Reign of King George the Third_ (1867). The
titles of these works are sufficiently indicative of their character.
They are sketches of the principal personages and of the social details
of various periods in the history of England rather than complete and
comprehensive historical narratives. In addition to these works Jesse
wrote _Literary and Historical Memorials of London_ (1847), _London and
its Celebrities_ (1850), and a new edition of this work as _London: its
Celebrated Characters and Remarkable Places_ (1871). His _Memoirs of
Celebrated Etonians_ appeared in 1875.
A collected edition containing most of his works in thirty volumes was
published in London in 1901.
JESSEL, SIR GEORGE (1824-1883), English judge, was born in London on the
13th of February 1824. He was the son of Zadok Aaron Jessel, a Jewish
coral merchant. George Jessel was educated at a school for Jews at Kew,
and being prevented by then existing religious disabilities from
proceeding to Oxford or Cambridge, went to University College, London.
He entered as a student at Lincoln's Inn in 1842, and a year later took
his B.A. degree at the university of London, becoming M.A. and gold
medallist in mathematics and natural philosophy in 1844. In 1846 he
became a fellow of University College, and in 1847 he was called to the
bar at Lincoln's Inn. His earnings during his first three years at the
bar were 52, 346, and 795 guineas, from which it will be seen that his
rise to a tolerably large practice was rapid. His work, however, was
mainly conveyancing, and for long his income remained almost stationary.
By degrees, however, he got more work, and was called within the bar in
1865, becoming a bencher of his Inn in the same year and practising in
the Rolls Court. Jessel entered parliament as Liberal member for Dover
in 1868, and although neither his intellect nor his oratory was of a
class likely to commend itself to his fellow-members, he attracted
Gladstone's attention by two learned speeches on the Bankruptcy Bill
which was before the house in 1869, with the result that in 1871 he was
appointed solicitor-general. His reputation at this time stood high in
the chancery courts; on the common law side he was unknown, and on the
first occasion upon which he came into the court of Queen's bench to
move on behalf of the Crown, there was very nearly a collision between
him and the bench. His forceful and direct method of bringing his
arguments home to the bench was not modified in his subsequent practice
before it. His great powers were fully recognized; his business in
addition to that on behalf of the Crown became very large, and his
income for three years before he was raised to the bench amounted to
nearly £25,000 per annum. In 1873 Jessel succeeded Lord Romilly as
master of the rolls. From 1873 to 1881 Jessel sat as a judge of first
instance in the rolls court, being also a member of the court of appeal.
In November 1874 the first Judicature Act came into effect, and in 1881
the Judicature Act of that year made the master of the rolls the
ordinary president of the first court of appeal, relieving him of his
duties as a judge of first instance. In the court of appeal Jessel
presided almost to the day of his death. For some time before 1883 he
suffered from diabetes with chronic disorder of the heart and liver, but
struggled against it; on the 16th of March 1883 he sat in court for the
last time, and on the 21st of March he died at his residence in London,
the immediate cause of death being cardiac syncope.
As a judge of first instance Jessel was a revelation to those accustomed
to the proverbial slowness of the chancery courts and of the master of
the rolls who preceded him. He disposed of the business before him with
rapidity combined with correctness of judgment, and he not only had no
arrears himself, but was frequently able to help other judges to clear
their lists. His knowledge of law and equity was wide and accurate, and
his memory for cases and command of the principles laid down in them
extraordinary. In the rolls court he never reserved a judgment, not even
in the Epping Forest case (_Commissioners of Sewers_ v. _Glasse_, L.R.
19 Eq.; _The Times_, 11th November 1874), in which the evidence and
arguments lasted twenty-two days (150 witnesses being examined in court,
while the documents went back to the days of King John), and in the
court of appeal he did so only twice, and then in deference to the
wishes of his colleagues. The second of these two occasions was the case
of _Robarts_ v. _The Corporation of London_ (49 _Law Times_ 455; _The
Times_, 10th March 1883), and those who may read Jessel's judgment
should remember that, reviewing as it does the law and custom on the
subject, and the records of the city with regard to the appointment of a
remembrancer from the 16th century, together with the facts of the case
before the court, it occupied nearly an hour to deliver, but was
nevertheless delivered without notes--this, too, on the 9th of March
1883, when the judge who uttered it was within a fortnight of his death.
Never during the 19th century was the business of any court performed so
rapidly, punctually, and satisfactorily as it was when Jessel presided.
He was master of the rolls at a momentous period of legal history. The
Judicature Acts, completing the fusion of law and equity, were passed
while he was judge of first instance, and were still new to the courts
when he died. His knowledge and power of assimilating knowledge of all
subjects, his mastery of every branch of law with which he had to
concern himself, as well as of equity, together with his willingness to
give effect to the new system, caused it to be said when he died that
the success of the Judicature Acts would have been impossible without
him. His faults as a judge lay in his disposition to be intolerant of
those who, not able to follow the rapidity of his judgment, endeavoured
to persist in argument after he had made up his mind; but though he was
peremptory with the most eminent counsel, young men had no cause to
complain of his treatment of them.
Jessel sat on the royal commission for the amendment of the Medical
Acts, taking an active part in the preparation of its report. He
actively interested himself in the management of London University, of
which he was a fellow from 1861, and of which he was elected
vice-chancellor in 1880. He was one of the commissioners of patents, and
trustee of the British Museum. He was also chairman of the committee of
judges which drafted the new rules rendered necessary by the Judicature
Acts. He was treasurer of Lincoln's Inn in 1883, and vice-president of
the council of legal education. He was also a fellow of the Royal
Society. Jessel's career marks an epoch on the bench, owing to the
active part taken by him in rendering the Judicature Acts effective, and
also because he was the last judge capable of sitting in the House of
Commons, a privilege of which he did not avail himself. He was the first
Jew who, as solicitor-general, took a share in the executive government
of his country, the first Jew who was sworn a regular member of the
privy council, and the first Jew who took a seat on the judicial bench
of Great Britain; he was also, for many years after being called to the
bar, so situated that any one might have driven him from it, because,
being a Jew, he was not qualified to be a member of the bar. In person
Jessel was a stoutish, square-built man of middle height, with dark
hair, somewhat heavy features, a fresh ruddy complexion, and a large
mouth. He married in 1856 Amelia, daughter of Joseph Moses, who survived
him together with three daughters and two sons, the elder of whom,
Charles James (b. 1860), was made a baronet shortly after the death of
his distinguished father and in recognition of his services.
See _The Times_, March 23, 1883; E. Manson, _Builders of our Law_
(1904).
JESSORE, a town and district of British India, in the Presidency
division of Bengal. The town is on the Bhairab river, with a railway
station 75 m. N.E. of Calcutta. Pop. (1901), 8054.
The DISTRICT OF JESSORE has an area of 2925 sq. m. Pop. (1901),
1,813,155, showing a decrease of 4% in the decade. The district forms
the central portion of the delta between the Hugli and the united Ganges
and Brahmaputra. It is a vast alluvial plain intersected by rivers and
watercourses, which in the southern portion spread out into large
marshes. The northern part is verdant, with extensive groves of
date-palms; villages are numerous and large; and the people are
prosperous. In the central portion the population is sparse, the only
part suitable for dwellings being the high land on the banks of rivers.
The principal rivers are the Madhumati or Haringhata (which forms the
eastern boundary of the district), with its tributaries the Nabaganga,
Chitra, and Bhairab; the Kumar, Kabadak, Katki, Harihar, Bhadra and
Atharabanka. Within the last century the rivers in the interior of
Jessore have ceased to be true deltaic rivers; and, whereas the northern
portion of the district formerly lay under water for several months
every year, it is now reached only by unusual inundations. The tide
reaches as far north as the latitude of Jessore town. Jessore is the
centre of sugar manufacture from date palms. The exports are sugar,
rice, pulse, timber, honey, shells, &c.; the imports are salt, English
goods, and cloth. The district is crossed by the Eastern Bengal railway,
but the chief means of communication are waterways.
British administration was completely established in the district in
1781, when the governor-general ordered the opening of a court at Murali
near Jessore. Before that, however, the fiscal administration had been
in the hands of the English, having been transferred to the East India
company with that of the rest of Bengal in 1765. The changes in
jurisdiction in Jessore have been very numerous. After many transfers
and rectifications, the district was in 1863 finally constituted as it
at present stands. The rajas of Jessore or Chanchra trace their origin
to Bhabeswar Rai, a soldier in the army of Khan-i-Azam, an imperial
general, who deprived Raja Pratapaditya, the popular hero of the
Sundarbans, of several fiscal divisions, and conferred them on
Bhabeswar. But Manohar Rai (1649-1705) is regarded as the principal
founder of the family. The estate when he inherited it was of moderate
size, but he acquired one _pargana_ after another, until, at his death,
the property was by far the largest in the neighbourhood.
JESTER, a provider of "jests" or amusements, a buffoon, especially a
professional fool at a royal court or in a nobleman's household (see
FOOL). The word "jest," from which "jester" is formed, is used from the
16th century for the earlier "gest," Lat. _gesta_, or _res gestae_,
things done, from _gerere_, to do, hence deeds, exploits, especially as
told in history, and so used of the metrical and prose romances and
chronicles of the middle ages. The word became applied to satirical
writings and to any long-winded empty tale, and thence to a joke or
piece of fun, the current meaning of the word.
JESUATI, a religious order founded by Giovanni Colombini of Siena in
1360. Colombini had been a prosperous merchant and a senator in his
native city, but, coming under ecstatic religious influences, abandoned
secular affairs and his wife and daughter (after making provision for
them), and with a friend of like temperament, Francesco Miani, gave
himself to a life of apostolic poverty, penitential discipline, hospital
service and public preaching. The name Jesuati was given to Colombini
and his disciples from the habit of calling loudly on the name of Jesus
at the beginning and end of their ecstatic sermons. The senate banished
Colombini from Siena for imparting foolish ideas to the young men of the
city, and he continued his mission in Arezzo and other places, only to
be honourably recalled home on the outbreak of a devastating pestilence.
He went out to meet Urban V. on his return from Avignon to Rome in 1367,
and craved his sanction for the new order and a distinctive habit.
Before this was granted Colombini had to clear the movement of a
suspicion that it was connected with the heretical sect of Fraticelli,
and he died on the 31st of July 1367, soon after the papal approval had
been given. The guidance of the new order, whose members (all lay
brothers) gave themselves entirely to works of mercy, devolved upon
Miani. Their rule of life, originally a compound of Benedictine and
Franciscan elements, was later modified on Augustinian lines, but traces
of the early penitential idea persisted, e.g. the wearing of sandals and
a daily flagellation. Paul V. in 1606 arranged for a small proportion of
clerical members, and later in the 17th century the Jesuati became so
secularized that the members were known as the Aquavitae Fathers, and
the order was dissolved by Clement IX. in 1668. The female branch of the
order, the Jesuati sisters, founded by Caterina Colombini (d. 1387) in
Siena, and thence widely dispersed, more consistently maintained the
primitive strictness of the society and survived the male branch by 200
years, existing until 1872 in small communities in Italy.
JESUITS, the name generally given to the members of the Society of
Jesus, a religious order in the Roman Catholic Church, founded in 1539.
This Society may be defined, in its original conception and well-avowed
object, as a body of highly trained religious men of various degrees,
bound by the three personal vows of poverty, chastity and obedience,
together with, in some cases, a special vow to the pope's service, with
the object of labouring for the spiritual good of themselves and their
neighbours. They are declared to be mendicants and enjoy all the
privileges of the other mendicant orders. They are governed and live by
constitutions and rules, mostly drawn up by their founder, St Ignatius
of Loyola, and approved by the popes. Their proper title is "Clerks
Regulars of the Society of Jesus," the word _Societas_ being taken as
synonymous with the original Spanish term, _Compañia_; perhaps the
military term _Cohors_ might more fully have expressed the original idea
of a band of spiritual soldiers living under martial law and discipline.
The ordinary term "Jesuit" was given to the Society by its avowed
opponents; it is first found in the writings of Calvin and in the
registers of the Parlement of Paris as early as 1552.
_Constitution and Character._--The formation of the Society was a
masterpiece of genius on the part of a man (see LOYOLA) who was quick to
realize the necessity of the moment. Just before Ignatius was
experiencing the call to conversion, Luther had begun his revolt against
the Roman Church by burning the papal bull of excommunication on the
10th of December 1520. But while Luther's most formidable opponent was
thus being prepared in Spain, the actual formation of the Society was
not to take place for eighteen years. Its conception seems to have
developed very slowly in the mind of Ignatius. It introduced a new idea
into the Church. Hitherto all regulars made a point of the choral office
in choir. But as Ignatius conceived the Church to be in a state of war,
what was desirable in days of peace ceased when the life of the cloister
had to be exchanged for the discipline of the camp; so in the sketch of
the new society which he laid before Paul III., Ignatius laid down the
principle that the obligation of the breviary should be fulfilled
privately and separately and not in choir. The other orders, too, were
bound by the idea of a constitutional monarchy based on the democratic
spirit. Not so with the Society. The founder placed the general for life
in an almost uncontrolled position of authority, giving him the faculty
of dispensing individuals from the decrees of the highest legislative
body, the general congregations. Thus the principle of military
obedience was exalted to a degree higher than that existing in the older
orders, which preserved to their members certain constitutional rights.
The soldier-mind of Ignatius can be seen throughout the constitutions.
Even in the spiritual labours which the Society shares with the other
orders, its own ways of dealing with persons and things result from
the system of training which succeeds in forming men to a type that is
considered desirable. But it must not be thought that in practice the
rule of the Society and the high degree of obedience demanded result
in mere mechanism. By a system of check and counter check devised in
the constitutions the power of local superiors is modified, so that in
practice the working is smooth. Ignatius knew that while a high ideal
was necessary for every society, his followers were flesh and blood,
not machines. He made it clear from the first that the Society was
everything and the individual nothing, except so far as he might prove
a useful instrument for carrying out the Society's objects. Ignatius
said to his secretary Polanco that "in those who offered themselves
he looked less to purely natural goodness than to firmness of
character and ability for business, for he was of opinion that those
who were not fit for public business were not adapted for filling
offices in the Society." He further declared that even exceptional
qualities and endowments in a candidate were valuable in his eyes only
on the condition of their being brought into play, or held in
abeyance, strictly at the command of a superior. Hence his teaching on
obedience. His letter on this subject, addressed to the Jesuits of
Coimbra in 1553, is still one of the standard formularies of the
Society, ranking with those other products of his pen, the _Spiritual
Exercises_ and the _Constitutions_. In this letter Ignatius clothes
the general with the powers of a commander-in-chief in time of war,
giving him the absolute disposal of all members of the Society in
every place and for every purpose. He pushes the claim even further,
requiring, besides entire outward submission to command, also the
complete identification of the inferior's will with that of the
superior. He lays down that the superior is to be obeyed simply as
such and as standing in the place of God, without reference to his
personal wisdom, piety or discretion; that any obedience which falls
short of making the superior's will one's own, in inward affection as
well as in outward effect, is lax and imperfect; that going beyond the
letter of command, even in things abstractly good and praiseworthy, is
disobedience, and that the "sacrifice of the intellect" is the third
and highest grade of obedience, well pleasing to God, when the
inferior not only wills what the superior wills, but thinks what he
thinks, submitting his judgment, so far as it is possible for the will
to influence and lead the judgment. This _Letter on Obedience_ was
written for the guidance and formation of Ignatius's own followers; it
was an entirely domestic affair. But when it became known beyond the
Society the teaching met with great opposition, especially from
members of other orders whose institutes represented the normal days
of peace rather than those of war. The letter was condemned by the
Inquisitions of Spain and Portugal; and it tasked all the skill and
learning of Bellarmine as its apologist, together with the whole
influence of the Society, to avert what seemed to be a probable
condemnation at Rome.
The teaching of the _Letter_ must be understood in the living spirit
of the Society. Ignatius himself lays down the rule that an inferior
is bound to make all necessary representations to his superior so as
to guide him in imposing a precept of obedience. When a superior knows
the views of his inferior and still commands, it is because he is
aware of other sides of the question which appear of greater
importance than those that the inferior has brought forward. Ignatius
distinctly excepts the case where obedience in itself would be sinful:
"In all things _except sin_ I ought to do the will of my superior and
not my own." There may be cases where an inferior judges that what is
commanded is sinful. What is to be done? Ignatius says: "When it seems
to me that I am commanded by my superior to do a thing against which
my conscience revolts as sinful and my superior judges otherwise, it
is my duty to yield my doubts to him unless I am otherwise constrained
by evident reasons. ... If submissions do not appease my conscience I
must impart my doubts to two or three persons of discretion and abide
by their decision." From this it is clear that only in _doubtful_
cases concerning sin should an inferior try to submit his judgment to
that of his superior, who _ex officio_ is held to be not only one who
would not order what is clearly sinful, but also a competent judge who
knows and understands, better than the inferior, the nature and aspect
of the command. As the Jesuit obedience is based on the law of God, it
is clearly impossible that he should be bound to obey in what is
directly opposed to the divine service. A Jesuit lives in obedience
all his life, though the yoke is not galling nor always felt. He can
accept no dignity or office which will make him independent of the
Society; and even if ordered by the pope to accept the cardinalate or
the episcopate, he is still bound, if not to obey, yet to listen to
the advice of those whom the general deputes to counsel him in
important matters.
The Jesuits had to find their principal work in the world and in
direct and immediate contact with mankind. To seek spiritual
perfection in a retired life of contemplation and prayer did not seem
to Ignatius to be the best way of reforming the evils which had
brought about the revolt from Rome. He withdrew his followers from
this sort of retirement, except as a mere temporary preparation for
later activity; he made habitual intercourse with the world a prime
duty; and to this end he rigidly suppressed all such external
peculiarities of dress or rule as tended to put obstacles in the way
of his followers acting freely as emissaries, agents or missionaries
in the most various places and circumstances. Another change he
introduced even more completely than did the founders of the Friars.
The Jesuit has no home: the whole world is his parish. Mobility and
cosmopolitanism are of the very essence of the Society. As Ignatius
said, the ancient monastic communities were the infantry of the
Church, whose duty was to stand firmly in one place on the
battlefield; the Jesuits were to be her light horse, capable of going
anywhere at a moment's notice, but especially apt and designed for
scouting and skirmishing. To carry out this view, it was one of his
plans to send foreigners as superiors or officers to the Jesuit houses
in each country, requiring of these envoys, however, invariably to use
the language of their new place of residence and to study it both in
speaking and writing till entire mastery of it had been acquired--thus
by degrees making all the parts of his system mutually
interchangeable, and so largely increasing the number of persons
eligible to fill any given post without reference to locality. But
subsequent experience has, in practice, modified this interchange, as
far as local government goes, though the central government of the
Society is always cosmopolitan.
Next we must consider the machinery by which the Society is constituted
and governed so as to make its spirit a living energy and not a mere
abstract theory. The Society is distributed into six grades: novices,
scholastics, temporal coadjutors (lay brothers), spiritual coadjutors,
professed of the three vows, and professed of the four vows. No one can
become a postulant for admission to the Society until fourteen years
old, unless by special dispensation. The novice is classified according
as his destination is the priesthood or lay brotherhood, while a third
class of "indifferents" receives such as are reserved for further
inquiry before a decision of this kind is made. The novice has first to
undergo a strict retreat, practically in solitary confinement, during
which he receives from a director the _Spiritual Exercises_ and makes a
general confession of his whole life; after which the first novitiate of
two years' duration begins. In this period of trial the real character
of the man is discerned, his weak points are noted and his will is
tested. Prayer and the practices of asceticism, as means to an end, are
the chief occupations of the novice. He may leave or be dismissed at any
time during the two years; but at the end of the period if he is
approved and destined for the priesthood, he is advanced to the grade of
scholastic and takes the following simple vows in the presence of
certain witnesses, but not to any person:--
"Almighty Everlasting God, albeit everyway most unworthy in Thy holy
sight, yet relying on Thine infinite kindness and mercy and impelled
by the desire of serving Thee, before the Most Holy Virgin Mary and
all Thy heavenly host, I, N., vow to Thy divine Majesty Poverty,
Chastity and Perpetual Obedience to the Society of Jesus, and promise
that I will enter the same Society to live in it perpetually,
understanding all things according to the Constitutions of the
Society. I humbly pray from Thine immense goodness and clemency,
through the Blood of Jesus Christ, that Thou wilt deign to accept this
sacrifice in the odour of sweetness; and as Thou hast granted me to
desire and to offer this, so wilt Thou bestow abundant grace to fulfil
it."
The scholastic then follows the ordinary course of an undergraduate at a
university. After passing five years in arts he has, while still keeping
up his own studies, to devote five or six years more to teaching the
junior classes in various Jesuit schools or colleges. About this period
he takes his simple vows in the following terms:--
"I, _N._, promise to Almighty God, before His Virgin Mother and the
whole heavenly host, and to thee, Reverend Father General of the
Society of Jesus, holding the place of God, and to thy successors (or
to thee, Reverend Father _M._ in place of the General of the Society
of Jesus and his successors holding the place of God), Perpetual
Poverty, Chastity and Obedience; and according to it a peculiar care
in the education of boys, according to the manner expressed in the
Apostolic Letter and Constitutions of the said Society."
The lay brothers leave out the clause concerning education. The
scholastic does not begin the study of theology until he is twenty-eight
or thirty, and then passes through a four or six years' course. Only
when he is thirty-four or thirty-six can he be ordained a priest and
enter on the grade of a spiritual coadjutor. A lay brother, before he
can become a temporal coadjutor for the discharge of domestic duties,
must pass ten years before he is admitted to vows. Sometimes after
ordination the priest, in the midst of his work, is again called away to
a third year's novitiate, called the tertianship, as a preparation for
his solemn profession of the three vows. His former vows were simple and
the Society was at liberty to dismiss him for any canonical reason. The
formula of the famous Jesuit vow is as follows:--
"I, _N._, promise to Almighty God, before His Virgin Mother and the
whole heavenly host, and to all standing by; and to thee, Reverend
Father General of the Society of Jesus, holding the place of God, and
to thy successors (or to thee, Reverend Father _M._ in place of the
General of the Society of Jesus and his successors holding the place
of God), Perpetual Poverty, Chastity and Obedience; and according to
it a peculiar care in the education of boys according to the form of
life contained in the Apostolic Letters of the Society of Jesus and in
its Constitutions."
Immediately after the vows the Jesuit adds the following simple vows:
(1) that he will never act nor consent that the provisions in the
constitutions concerning poverty should be changed; (2) that he will not
directly nor indirectly procure election or promotion for himself to any
prelacy or dignity in the Society; (3) that he will not accept or
consent to his election to any dignity or prelacy outside the Society
unless forced thereunto by obedience; (4) that if he knows of others
doing these things he will denounce them to the superiors; (5) that if
elected to a bishopric he will never refuse to hear such advice as the
general may deign to send him and will follow it if he judges it is
better than his own opinion. The professed is now eligible to certain
offices in the Society, and he may remain as a professed father of the
three vows for the rest of his life. The highest class, who constitute
the real core of the Society, whence all its chief officers are taken,
are the professed of the four vows. This grade can seldom be reached
until the candidate is in his forty-fifth year, which involves a
probation of thirty-one years in the case of those who have entered on
the novitiate at the earliest legal age. The number of these select
members is small in comparison with the whole Society; the exact
proportion varies from time to time, the present tendency being to
increase the number. The vows of this grade are the same as the last
formula, with the addition of the following important clause:--
"Moreover I promise the special obedience to the Sovereign Pontiff
concerning missions, as is contained in the same Apostolic Letter and
Constitutions."
These various members of the Society are distributed in its novitiate
houses, its colleges, its professed houses and its mission residences.
The question has been hotly debated whether, in addition to these six
grades, there be not a seventh answering in some degree to the
tertiaries of the Franciscan and Dominican orders, but secretly
affiliated to the Society and acting as its emissaries in various lay
positions. This class was styled in France "Jesuits of the short robe,"
and there is some evidence in support of its actual existence under
Louis XV. The Jesuits themselves deny the existence of any such body,
and are able to adduce the negative disproof that no provision for it is
to be found in their constitutions. On the other hand there are clauses
therein which make the creation of such a class perfectly feasible if
thought expedient. An admitted instance is the case of Francisco Borgia,
who in 1548, while still duke of Gandia, was received into the Society.
What has given colour to the idea is that certain persons have made vows
of obedience to individual Jesuits; as Thomas Worthington, rector of the
Douai seminary, to Father Robert Parsons; Ann Vaux to Fr. Henry Garnet,
who told her that he was not indeed allowed to receive her vows, but
that she might make them if she wished and then receive his direction.
The archaeologist George Oliver of Exeter was, according to Foley's
_Records of the English Province_, the last of the secular priests of
England who vowed obedience to the Society before its suppression.
The general lives permanently at Rome and holds in his hands the right
to appoint, not only to the office of provincial over each of the head
districts into which the Society is mapped, but to the offices of each
house in particular. There is no standard of electoral right in the
Society except in the election of the general himself. By a minute and
frequent system of official and private reports he is informed of the
doings and progress of every member of the Society and of everything
that concerns it throughout the world. Every Jesuit has not only the
right but the duty in certain cases of communicating, directly and
privately, with his general. While the general thus controls everything,
he himself is not exempt from supervision on the part of the Society. A
consultative council is imposed upon him by the general congregation,
consisting of the assistants of the various nations, a _socius_, or
adviser, to warn him of mistakes, and a confessor. These he cannot
remove nor select; and he is bound, in certain circumstances, to listen
to their advice, although he is not obliged to follow it. Once elected
the general may not refuse the office, nor abdicate, nor accept any
dignity or office outside of the Society; on the other hand, for certain
definite reasons, he may be suspended or even deposed by the authority
of the Society, which can thus preserve itself from destruction. No such
instance has occurred, although steps were once taken in this direction
in the case of a general who had set himself against the current
feeling.
It is said that the general of the Jesuits is independent of the pope;
and his popular name, "the black pope," has gone to confirm this idea.
But it is based on an entirely wrong conception of the two offices.
The suppression of the Society by Clement XIV. in 1773 was an
object-lesson in the supremacy of the pope. The Society became very
numerous and, from time to time, received extraordinary privileges
from popes, who were warranted by the necessities of the times in
granting them. A great number of influential friends, also, gathered
round the fathers who, naturally, sought in every way to retain what
had been granted. Popes who thought it well to bring about certain
changes, or to withdraw privileges that were found to have passed
their intentions or to interfere unduly with the rights of other
bodies, often met with loyal resistances against their proposed
measures. Resistance up to a certain point is lawful and is not
disobedience, for every society has the right of self-preservation. In
cases where the popes insisted, in spite of the representations of the
Jesuits, their commands were obeyed. Many of the popes were distinctly
unfavourable to the Society, while others were as friendly, and often
what one pope did against them the next pope withdrew. Whatever was
done in times when strong divergence of opinion existed, and whatever
may have been the actions of individuals who, even in so highly
organized a body as the Society of Jesus, cannot always be
successfully controlled by their superiors, yet the ultimate result on
the part of the Society has always been obedience to the pope, who
authorized, protected and privileged them, and on whom they ultimately
depend for their very existence.
Thus constituted, with a skilful union of strictness and freedom, of
complex organization with a minimum of friction in working, the Society
was admirably devised for its purpose of introducing a new power into
the Church and the world. Its immediate services to the Church were
great. The Society did much, single-handed, to roll back the tide of
Protestant advance when half of Europe, which had not already shaken off
its allegiance to the papacy, was threatening to do so. The honours of
the reaction belong to the Jesuits, and the reactionary spirit has
become their tradition. They had the wisdom to see and to admit, in
their correspondence with their superiors, that the real cause of the
Reformation was the ignorance, neglect and vicious lives of so many
priests. They recognized, as most earnest men did, that the difficulty
was in the higher places, and that these could best be touched by
indirect methods. At a time when primary or even secondary education had
in most places become a mere effete and pedantic adherence to obsolete
methods, they were bold enough to innovate, both in system and material.
Putting fresh spirit and devotion into the work, they not merely taught
and catechized in a new, fresh and attractive manner, besides
establishing free schools of good quality, but provided new school books
for their pupils which were an enormous advance on those they found in
use; so that for nearly three centuries the Jesuits were accounted the
best schoolmasters in Europe, as they were, till their forcible
suppression in 1901, confessedly the best in France. The Jesuit teachers
conciliated the goodwill of their pupils by mingled firmness and
gentleness. Although the method of the _Ratio Studiorum_ has ceased to
be acceptable, yet it played in its time as serious a part in the
intellectual development of Europe as did the method of Frederick the
Great in modern warfare. Bacon succinctly gives his opinion of the
Jesuit teaching in these words: "As for the pedagogical part, the
shortest rule would be, Consult the schools of the Jesuits; for nothing
better has been put in practice" (_De Augmentis_, vi. 4). In instruction
they were excellent; but in education, or formation of character,
deficient. Again, when most of the continental clergy had sunk, more or
less, into the moral and intellectual slough which is pictured for us in
the writings of Erasmus and the _Epistolae obscurorum virorum_ (see
HUTTEN, ULRICH VON), the Jesuits won back respect for the clerical
calling by their personal culture and the unimpeachable purity of their
lives. These qualities they have carefully maintained; and probably no
large body of men in the world has been so free from the reproach of
discreditable members or has kept up, on the whole, an equally high
average of intelligence and conduct. As preachers, too, they delivered
the pulpit from the bondage of an effete scholasticism and reached at
once a clearness and simplicity of treatment such as the English pulpit
scarcely begins to exhibit till after the days of Tillotson; while in
literature and theology they count a far larger number of respectable
writers than any other religious society can boast. It is in the mission
field, however, that their achievements have been most remarkable.
Whether toiling among the teeming millions in Hindustan and China,
labouring amongst the Hurons and Iroquois of North America, governing
and civilizing the natives of Brazil and Paraguay in the missions and
"reductions," or ministering, at the hourly risk of his life to his
fellow-Catholics in England under Elizabeth and the Stuarts, the Jesuit
appears alike devoted, indefatigable, cheerful and worthy of hearty
admiration and respect.
Nevertheless, two startling and indisputable facts meet the student who
pursues the history of the Society. The first is the universal suspicion
and hostility it has incurred--not merely from the Protestants whose
avowed foe it has been, not yet from the enemies of all clericalism and
dogma, but from every Catholic state and nation in the world. Its chief
enemies have been those of the household of the Roman Catholic faith.
The second fact is the ultimate failure which seems to dog all its most
promising schemes and efforts. These two results are to be observed
alike in the provinces of morals and politics. The first cause of the
opposition indeed redounds to the Jesuits' credit, for it was largely
due to their success. Their pulpits rang with a studied eloquence; their
churches, sumptuous and attractive, were crowded; and in the
confessional their advice was eagerly sought in all kinds of
difficulties, for they were the fashionable professors of the art of
direction. Full of enthusiasm and zeal, devoted wholly to their Society,
they were able to bring in numbers of rich and influential persons to
their ranks; for, with a clear understanding of the power of wealth,
they became, of set purpose, the apostles of the rich and influential.
The Jesuits felt that they were the new men, the men of the time; so
with a perfect confidence in themselves they went out to set the Church
to rights. It was no wonder that success, so well worked for and so well
deserved, failed to win the approval or sympathy of those who found
themselves supplanted. Old-fashioned men, to whom the apostles' advice
to "do all to the glory of God" seemed sufficient, mistrusted those who
professed to go beyond all others and adopted as their motto the famous
_Ad majorem Dei gloriam_, "To the greater glory of God." But, besides
this, the _esprit de corps_ which is necessary for every body of men
was, it was held, carried to an excess and made the Jesuits intolerant
of any one or anything if not of "ours." The novelties too which they
introduced into the conception of the religious life, naturally, were
displeasing to the older orders, who felt like old aristocratic families
towards a newly rich or purse-proud upstart. The Society, or rather its
members, were too aggressive and self-assertive to be welcomed; and a
certain characteristic, which soon began to manifest itself in an
impatience of episcopal control, showed that the quality of "Jesuitry,"
usually associated with the Society, was singularly lacking in their
dealings with opponents. Their political attitude also alienated many.
Many of the Jesuits could not separate religion from politics. To say
this is only to assert that they were not clearer-minded than most men
of their age. But unfortunately they invariably took the wrong side and
allowed themselves to be made the tools of men who saw farther and more
clearly than they did. They had their share, direct or indirect, in the
embroiling of states, in concocting conspiracies and in kindling wars.
They were also responsible by their theoretical teachings in theological
schools, where cases were considered and treated in the abstract, for
not a few assassinations of the enemies of the cause. Weak minds heard
tyrannicide discussed and defended in the abstract; and it was no
wonder that, when opportunity served, the train that had been heedlessly
laid by speculative professors was fired by rash hands. What professors
like Suarez taught in the calm atmosphere of the lecture hall, what
writers like Mariana upheld and praised, practical men took as
justification for deeds of blood. There is no evidence that any Jesuit
took a direct part in political assassinations; however, indirectly,
they may have been morally responsible. They were playing with edged
tools and often got wounded through their own carelessness. Other
grievances were raised by their perpetual meddling in politics, e.g.
their large share in fanning the flames of political hatred against the
Huguenots under the last two Valois kings; their perpetual plotting
against England in the reign of Elizabeth; their share in the Thirty
Years' War and in the religious miseries of Bohemia; their decisive
influence in causing the revocation of the edict of Nantes and the
expulsion of the Protestants from France; the ruin of the Stuart cause
under James II., and the establishment of the Protestant succession. In
a number of cases where the evidence against them is defective, it is at
least an unfortunate coincidence that there is always direct proof of
some Jesuit having been in communication with the actual agents engaged.
They were the stormy petrels of politics. Yet the Jesuits, as a body,
should not be made responsible for the doings of men who, in their
political intrigues, were going directly against the distinct law of the
Society, which in strict terms, and under heavy penalties, forbade them
to have anything to do with such matters. The politicians were
comparatively few in number, though unfortunately they held high rank;
and their disobedience to the rule besmirched the name of the society
and destroyed the good work of the other Jesuits who were faithfully
carrying out their own proper duties.
A far graver cause for uneasiness was given by the Jesuits' activity in
the region of doctrine and morals. Here the charges against them are
precise, early, numerous and weighty. Their founder himself was
arrested, more than once, by the Inquisition and required to give
account of his belief and conduct. But St Ignatius, with all his
powerful gifts of intellect, was entirely practical and ethical in his
range, and had no turn whatever for speculation, nor desire to discuss,
much less to question, any of the received dogmas of the Church. He
gives it as a rule of orthodoxy to be ready to say that black is white
if the Church says so. He was therefore acquitted on every occasion, and
applied each time for a formally attested certificate of his orthodoxy,
knowing well that, in default of such documents, the fact of his arrest
as a suspected heretic would be more distinctly recollected by opponents
than that of his honourable dismissal from custody. His followers,
however, have not been so fortunate. On doctrinal questions indeed,
though their teaching on grace, especially in the form given to it by
Molina (q.v.), ran contrary to the accepted teaching on the subject by
the Augustinians, Dominicans and other representative schools; yet by
their pertinacity they gained for their views a recognized and
established position. A special congregation of cardinals and
theologians known as _de auxiliis_ was summoned by the pope to settle
the dispute, for the _odium theologicum_ had risen to a desperate height
between the representatives of the old and the new theology; but after
many years they failed to arrive at any satisfactory conclusion, and the
pope, instead of settling the dispute, was only able to impose mutual
silence on all opponents. Among those who held out stiffly against the
Jesuits on the subject of grace were the Jansenists, who held that they
were following the special teaching of St Augustine, known _par
excellence_ as the doctor of grace. The Jesuits and the Jansenists soon
became deadly enemies; and in the ensuing conflict both parties accused
each other of flinging scruples to the wind. (See JANSENISM.)
But the accusations against the Jesuit system of moral theology and
their action as guides of conduct have had a more serious effect on
their reputation. It is undeniable that some of their moral writers were
lax in their teaching; and conscience was strained to the snapping
point. The Society was trying to make itself all things to all men.
Propositions extracted from Jesuit moral theologians have again and
again been condemned by the pope and declared untenable. Many of these
can be found in Viva's _Condemned Propositions_. As early as 1554 the
Jesuits were censured by the Sorbonne, chiefly at the instance of
Eustache de Bellay, bishop of Paris, as being dangerous in matters of
faith. Melchor Cano, a Dominican, one of the ablest divines of the 16th
century, never ceased to lift up his testimony against them, from their
first beginnings till his own death in 1560; and, unmollified by the
bribe of the bishopric of the Canaries, which their interest procured
for him, he succeeded in banishing them from the university of
Salamanca. Carlo Borromeo, to whose original advocacy they owed much,
especially in the council of Trent, found himself attacked in his own
cathedral pulpit and interfered with in his jurisdiction. He withdrew
his protection and expelled them from his colleges and churches; and he
was followed in 1604 in this policy by his cousin and successor Cardinal
Federigo Borromeo. St Theresa learnt, in after years, to mistrust their
methods, although she was grateful to them for much assistance in the
first years of her work. The credit of the Society was seriously damaged
by the publication, at Cracow, in 1612, of the _Monita Secreta_. This
book, which is undoubtedly a forgery, professes to contain the
authoritative secret instructions drawn up by the general Acquaviva and
given by the superiors of the Society to its various officers and
members. A bold caricature of Jesuit methods, the book has been ascribed
to John Zaorowsky or to Cambilone and Schloss, all ex-Jesuits, and it is
stated to have been discovered in manuscript by Christian of Brunswick
in the Jesuit college at Prague. It consists of suggestions and methods
for extending the influence of the Jesuits in various ways, for securing
a footing in fresh places, for acquiring wealth, for creeping into
households and leading silly rich widows captive and so forth, all
marked with ambition, craft and unscrupulousness. It had a wide success
and popularity, passing through several editions, and even to this day
it is used by controversialists as unscrupulous as the original writers.
It may, perhaps, represent the actions of some individuals who allowed
their zeal to outrun their discretion, but surely no society which
exists for good and is marked by so many worthy men could systematically
have conducted its operations in such a manner. Later on a formidable
assault was made on Jesuit moral theology in the famous _Provincial
Letters_ of Blaise Pascal (q.v.), eighteen in number, issued under the
pen-name of Louis de Montalte, from January 1656 to March 1657. Their
wit, irony, eloquence and finished style have kept them alive as one of
the great French classics--a destiny more fortunate than that of the
kindred works by Antoine Arnauld, _Théologie morale des Jésuites_,
consisting of extracts from writings of members of the Society, and
_Morale pratique des Jésuites_, made up of narratives professing to set
forth the manner in which they carried out their own maxims. But, like
most controversial writers, the authors were not scrupulous in their
quotations, and by giving passages divorced from their contexts often
entirely misrepresented their opponents. The immediate reply on the part
of the Jesuits, _The Discourses of Cleander and Eudoxus_ by Père Daniel,
could not compete with Pascal's work in brilliancy, wit or style;
moreover, it was unfortunate enough to be put upon the Index of
prohibited books in 1701. The reply on behalf of the Society to Pascal's
charges of lax morality, apart from mere general denials, is broadly as
follows:--
(1) St Ignatius himself, the founder of the Society, had a special
aversion from untruthfulness in all its forms, from quibbling,
equivocation or even studied obscurity of language, and it would be
contrary to the spirit of conformity with his example and institutions
for his followers to think and act otherwise. Hence, any who practised
equivocation were, so far, unfaithful to the Society. (2) Several of
the cases cited by Pascal are mere abstract hypotheses, many of them
now obsolete, argued simply as intellectual exercises, but having no
practical bearing whatever. (3) Even such as do belong to the sphere
of actual life are of the nature of counsel to spiritual physicians,
how to deal with exceptional maladies; and were never intended to fix
the standard of moral obligation for the general public. (4) The
theory that they were intended for this latter purpose and do
represent the normal teaching of the Society becomes more untenable in
exact proportion as this immorality is insisted on, because it is a
matter of notoriety that the Jesuits themselves have been singularly
free from personal, as distinguished from corporate, evil repute; and
no one pretends that the large number of lay-folk whom they have
educated or influenced exhibit greater moral inferiority than others.
The third of these replies is the most cogent as regards Pascal, but the
real weakness of his attack lies in that nervous dread of appeal to
first principles and their logical result which has been the besetting
snare of Gallicanism. Pascal, at his best, has mistaken the part for the
whole; he charges to the Society what, at the most, are the doings of
individuals; and from these he asserts the degeneration of the body from
its original standard; whereas the stronger the life and the more
extensive the natural development, side by side will exist marks of
degeneration; and a society like the Jesuits has no difficulty in
asserting its life independently of such excrescences or, in time, in
freeing itself from them.
A charge persistently made against the Society is that it teaches that
the end justifies the means. And the words of Busembaum, whose
_Medulla theologiae_ has gone through more than fifty editions, are
quoted in proof. True it is that Busembaum uses these words: _Cui
licitus est finis etiam licent media_. But on turning to his work (ed.
Paris 1729, p. 584, or Lib. vi. Tract vi. cap. ii., _De sacramentis_,
dubium ii.) it will be found that the author is making no universal
application of an old legal maxim; but is treating of a particular
subject (concerning certain lawful liberties in the marital relation)
beyond which his words cannot be forced. The sense in which other
Jesuit theologians--e.g. Paul Laymann (1575-1635), in his _Theologia
moralis_ (Munich, 1625), and Ludwig Wagemann (1713-1792), in his
_Synopsis theologiae moralis_ (Innsbruck, 1762)--quote the axiom is an
equally harmless piece of common sense. For instance, if it is lawful
to go on a journey by railway it is lawful to take a ticket. No one
who put forth that proposition would be thought to mean that it is
lawful to defraud the company by stealing a ticket; for the _proviso_
is always to be understood, that the means employed should, in
themselves, not be bad but good or at least indifferent. So when
Wagemann says tersely _Finis determinat probitatem actus_ he is
clearly referring to acts which in themselves are indifferent, i.e.
indeterminate. For instance: shooting is an indifferent act, neither
good nor bad in itself. The morality of any specified shooting depends
upon what is shot, and the circumstances attending that act: shooting
a man in self-defence is, as a moral act, on an entirely different
plane to shooting a man in murder. It has never been proved, and never
can be proved, although the attempt has frequently been made, that the
Jesuits ever taught the nefarious proposition ascribed to them, which
would be entirely subversive of all morality. Again, the doctrine of
probabilism is utterly misunderstood. It is based on an accurate
conception of law. Law to bind must be clear and definite; if it be
not so, its obligation ceases and liberty of action remains. No
probable opinion can stand against a clear and definite law; but when
a law is doubtful in its application, in certain circumstances, so is
the obligation of obedience: and as a doubtful law is, for practical
purposes, no law at all, so it superinduces no obligation. Hence a
probable opinion is one, founded on reason and held on serious
grounds, that the law does not apply to certain specified cases; and
that the law-giver therefore did not intend to bind. It is the
principle of equity applied to law. In moral matters a probable
opinion, that is one held on no trivial grounds but by unprejudiced
and solid thinkers, has no place where the voice of conscience is
clear, distinct and formed.
Two causes have been at work to produce the universal failure of the
great Society in all its plans and efforts. First stands its lack of
really great intellects. It has had its golden age. No society can keep
up to its highest level. Nothing can be wider of the truth than the
popular conception of the ordinary Jesuit as a being of almost
superhuman abilities and universal knowledge. The Society, numbering as
it does so many thousands, and with abundant means of devoting men to
special branches of study, has, without doubt, produced men of great
intelligence and solid learning. The average member, too, on account of
his long and systematic training, is always equal and often superior to
the average member of any other equally large body, besides being
disciplined by a far more perfect drill. But it takes great men to carry
out great plans; and of really great men, as the outside world knows and
judges, the Society has been markedly barren from almost the first.
Apart from its founder and his early companion, St Francis Xavier, there
is none who stands in the very first rank. Laynez and Acquaviva were
able administrators and politicians; the Bollandists (q.v.) were
industrious workers and have developed a critical spirit from which much
good can be expected; Francisco Suarez, Leonhard Lessius and Cardinal
Franzelin were some of the leading Jesuit theologians; Cornelius a
Lapide (1567-1637) represents their old school of scriptural studies,
while their new German writers are the most advanced of all orthodox
higher critics; the French Louis Bourdaloue (q.v.), the Italian Paolo
Segneri (1624-1694), and the Portuguese Antonio Vieyra (1608-1697)
represent their best pulpit orators; while of the many mathematicians
and astronomers produced by the Society Angelo Secchi, Ruggiero Giuseppe
Boscovich and G. B. Beccaria are conspicuous, and in modern times
Stephen Joseph Perry (1833-1889), director of the Stonyhurst College
observatory, took a high rank among men of science. Their boldest and
most original thinker, Denis Petau, so many years neglected, is now, by
inspiring Cardinal Newman's _Essay on the Development of Christian
Doctrine_, producing a permanent influence over the current of human
thought. The Jesuits have produced no Aquinas, no Anselm, no Bacon, no
Richelieu. Men whom they trained, and who broke loose from their
teaching, Pascal, Descartes, Voltaire, have powerfully affected the
philosophical and religious beliefs of great masses of mankind; but
respectable mediocrity is the brand on the long list of Jesuit names in
the catalogues of Alegambe and De Backer. This is doubtless due in great
measure to the destructive process of scooping out the will of the
Jesuit novice, to replace it with that of his superior (as a watchmaker
might fit a new movement into a case), and thereby tending, in most
cases, to annihilate those subtle qualities of individuality and
originality which are essential to genius. Men of the higher stamp will
either refuse to submit to the process and leave the Society, or run the
danger of coming forth from the mill with their finest qualities
pulverized and useless. In accordance with the spirit of its founder,
who wished to secure uniformity in the judgment of his followers even in
points left open by the Church ("Let us all think the same way, let us
all speak in the same manner if possible"), the Society has shown itself
to be impatient of those who think or write in a way different from what
is current in its ranks.
Nor is this all. The _Ratio Studiorum_, devised by Acquaviva and still
obligatory in the colleges of the Society, lays down rules which are
incompatible with all breadth and progress in the higher forms of
education. True to the anti-speculative and traditional side of the
founder's mind, it prescribes that, even where religious topics are
not in question, the teacher is not to permit any novel opinions or
discussions to be mooted; nor to cite or allow others to cite the
opinions of an author not of known repute; nor to teach or suffer to
be taught anything contrary to the prevalent opinions of acknowledged
doctors current in the schools. Obsolete and false opinions are not to
be mentioned at all, even for refutation, nor are objections to
received teaching to be dwelt on at any length. The result is that the
Jesuit emerges from his schools without any real knowledge of any
other method of thought than that which his professors have instilled
into him. The professor of Biblical Literature is always to support
and defend the Vulgate and can never prefer the marginal readings from
the Hebrew and Greek. The Septuagint, as far as it is incorrupt, is to
be held not less authentic than the Vulgate. In philosophy Aristotle
is always to be followed, and St Thomas Aquinas generally, care being
taken to speak respectfully of him even when abandoning his opinions,
though now it is customary for the Jesuit teachers to explain him in
their own sense. _De vera mente D. Thomas_ is no unfamiliar expression
in their books. It is not wonderful, under such a method of training,
fixed as it has been in minute detail for more than three hundred
years, that highly cultivated commonplaces should be the inevitable
average result; and that in proportion as Jesuit power has become
dominant in Christendom, especially in ecclesiastical circles, the
same doom of intellectual sterility and consequent loss of influence
with the higher and thoughtful classes, has separated the part from
the whole. The initial mistake in the formation of character is that
the Jesuits have aimed at educating lay boys in the same manner as
they consider advisable for their own novices, for whom obedience and
direction is the one thing necessary; whereas for lay people the right
use of liberty and initiative are to be desired.
The second cause which has blighted the efforts of the Society is the
lesson, too faithfully learnt and practised, of making its corporate
interests the first object at all times and in all places. Men were
quick to see that Jesuits did not aim at co-operation with the other
members of the Church but directly or indirectly at mastery. The most
brilliant exception to this rule is found in some of the missions of the
Society and notably in that of St Francis Xavier (q.v.). But he quitted
Europe in 1541 before the new society, especially under Laynez, had
hardened into its final mould; and he never returned. His work, so far
as can be gathered from contemporary accounts, was not done on true
Jesuit lines as they afterwards developed, though the Society has reaped
all the credit; and it is even possible that, had he succeeded the
founder as general, the institute might not have received that political
and self-seeking turn which Laynez, as second general, gave at the
critical moment.
It would almost seem that careful selection was made of the men of the
greatest piety and enthusiasm, whose unworldliness made them less apt
for diplomatic intrigues, to break new ground in the various missions
where their success would throw lustre on the Society and their
scruples need never come into play. But such men are not to be found
easily; and, as they died off, the tendency was to fill their places
with more ordinary characters, whose aim was to increase the power and
resources of the body. Hence the condescension to heathen rites in
Hindustan and China, and the attempted subjugation of the English
Catholic clergy. The first successes of the Indian mission were
entirely among the lower classes; but when in Madura, in 1606, Robert
de Nobili, a nephew of Bellarmine, to win the Brahmins, adopted their
dress and mode of life--a step sanctioned by Gregory XV. in 1623 and
by Clement XI. in 1707--the fathers who followed his example pushed
the new caste-feeling so far as absolutely to refuse the ministrations
and sacraments to the pariahs, lest the Brahmin converts should take
offence--an attempt which was reported to Rome and was vainly censured
by the breves of Innocent X. in 1645, Clement IX. in 1669, Clement
XII. in 1734 and 1739, and Benedict XIV. in 1745. The Chinese rites,
assailed with equal unsuccess by one pope after another, were not
finally put down until 1744 by a bull of Benedict XIV. For Japan,
where their side of the story is that best known, we have a remarkable
letter, printed by Lucas Wadding in the _Annales minorum_, addressed
to Paul V. by Soleto, a Franciscan missionary, who was martyred in
1624, in which he complains to the pope that the Jesuits
systematically postponed the spiritual welfare of the native
Christians to their own convenience and advantage; while as regards
the test of martyrdom, no such result had followed on their teaching,
but only on that of the other orders who had undertaken missionary
work in Japan. Yet soon many Jesuit martyrs in Japan were to shed a
new glory on the Society (see JAPAN: _Foreign Intercourse_). Again,
even in Paraguay, the most promising of all Jesuit undertakings, the
evidence shows that the fathers, though civilizing the Guarani
population just sufficiently to make them useful and docile servants,
happier no doubt than they were before or after, stopped there. While
the mission was begun on the rational principle of governing races
still in their childhood by methods adapted to that stage in their
mental development, yet for one hundred and fifty years the
"reductions" were conducted in the same manner, and when the hour of
trial came the Jesuit civilization fell like a house of cards.
These examples are sufficient to explain the final collapse of so many
promising efforts. The individual Jesuit might be, and often was, a
hero, saint and martyr, but the system which he was obliged to
administer was foredoomed to failure; and the suppression which came in
1773 was the natural result of forces and elements they had set in
antagonism without the power of controlling.
The influence of the Society since its restoration in 1814 has not been
marked with greater success than in its previous history. It was natural
after the restoration that an attempt should be made to pick up again
the threads that were dropped; but soon they came to realize the truth
of the saying of St Ignatius: "The Society shall adapt itself to the
times and not the times to the Society." The political conditions of
Europe have completely changed, and constitutionalism is unfavourable to
that personal influence which, in former times, the Jesuits were able to
bring to bear upon the heads of states. In Europe they confine
themselves mainly to educational and ecclesiastical politics, although
both Germany and France have followed the example of Portugal and
refuse, on political grounds, to allow them to be in these countries. It
would appear as though some of the Jesuits had not, even yet, learnt the
lesson that meddling with politics has always been their ruin. The main
cause of any difficulty that may exist to-day with the Society is that
the Jesuits are true to the teaching of that remarkable panegyric, the
_Imago primi saeculi Societatis_ (probably written by John Tollenarius
in 1640), by identifying the Church with their own body, and being
intolerant of all who will not share this view. Their power is still
large in certain sections of the ecclesiastical world, but in secular
affairs it is small. Moreover within the church itself there is a strong
and growing feeling that the interests of Catholicism may necessitate a
second and final suppression of the Society. Cardinal Manning, a keen
observer of times and influences, was wont to say:--"The work of 1773
was the work of God: and there is another 1773 coming." But, if this
come, it will be due not to the pressure of secular governments, as in
the 18th century, but to the action of the Church itself. The very
nations which have cast out the Society have shown no disposition to
accept its own estimate and identify it with the Church; while the
Church itself is not conscious of depending upon the Society. To the
Church the Jesuits have been what the Janissaries were to the Ottoman
Empire, at first its defenders and its champions, but in the end its
taskmasters.
_History._--The separate article on Loyola tells of his early years, his
conversion, and his first gathering of companions. It was not until
November 1537, when all hope of going to the Holy Land was given up,
that any outward steps were taken to form these companions into an
organized body. It was on the eve of their going to Rome, for the second
time, that the fathers met Ignatius at Vicenza and it was determined to
adopt a common rule and, at the suggestion of Ignatius, the name of the
Company of Jesus. Whatever may have been his private hopes and
intentions, it was not until he, Laynez and Faber (Pierre Lefevre), in
the name of their companions, were sent to lay their services at the
feet of the pope that the history of the Society really begins.
On their arrival at Rome the three Jesuits were favourably received by
Paul III., who at once appointed Faber to the chair of scripture and
Laynez to that of scholastic theology in the university of the
Sapienza. But they encountered much opposition and were even charged
with heresy; when this accusation had been disposed of, there were
still difficulties in the way of starting any new order. Despite the
approval of Cardinal Contarini and the goodwill of the pope (who is
said to have exclaimed on perusing the scheme of Ignatius, "The finger
of God is here"), there was a strong and general feeling that the
regular system had broken down and could not be wisely developed
farther. Cardinal Guidiccioni, one of the commission of three
appointed to examine the draft constitution, was known to advocate the
abolition of all existing orders, save four which were to be
remodelled and put under strict control. That very year, 1538, a
commission of cardinals, including Reginald Pole, Contarini, Sadolet,
Caraffa (afterwards Paul IV.), Fregoso and others, had reported that
the conventual orders, which they had to deal with, had drifted into
such a state that they should all be abolished. Not only so, but, when
greater strictness of rule and of enclosure seemed the most needful
reforms in communities that had become too secular in tone, the
proposal of Ignatius, to make it a first principle that the members of
his institute should mix freely in the world and be as little marked
off as possible externally from secular clerical life and usages, ran
counter to all tradition and prejudice, save that Caraffa's then
recent order of Theatines, which had some analogy with the proposed
Society, had taken some steps in the same direction.
Ignatius and his companions, however, had but little doubt of ultimate
success, and so bound themselves, on the 15th of April 1539, to obey
any superior chosen from amongst their body, and added on the 4th of
May certain other rules, the most important of which was a vow of
special allegiance to the pope for mission purposes to be taken by all
the members of the society. But Guidiccioni, on a careful study of the
papers, changed his mind; it is supposed that the cause of this change
was in large measure the strong interest in the new scheme exhibited
by John III., king of Portugal, who instructed his ambassador to press
it on the pope and to ask Ignatius to send some priests of his Society
for mission work in Portugal and its Indian possessions. Francis
Xavier and Simon Rodriguez were sent to the king in March 1540.
Obstacles being cleared away, Paul III., on the 27th of September
1540, issued his bull _Regimini militantis ecclesiae_, by which he
confirmed the new Society (the term "order" does not belong to it),
but limited the members to sixty, a restriction which was removed by
the same pope in the bull _Injunctum nobis_ of the 14th of March 1543.
In the former bull, the pope gives the text of the formula submitted
by Ignatius as the scheme of the proposed society, and in it we get
the founder's own ideas: "... This Society, instituted to this special
end, namely, to offer spiritual consolation for the advancement of
souls in life and Christian doctrine, for the propagation of the faith
by public preaching and the ministry of the word of God, spiritual
exercises and works of charity and, especially, by the instruction of
children and ignorant people in Christianity, and by the spiritual
consolation of the faithful in Christ in hearing confessions...." In
this original scheme it is clearly marked out "that this entire
Society and all its members fight for God under the faithful
obedience of the most sacred lord, the pope, and the other Roman
pontiffs his successors"; and Ignatius makes particular mention that
each member should "be bound by a special vow," beyond that formal
obligation under which all Christians are of obeying the pope, "so
that whatsoever the present and other Roman pontiffs for the time
being shall ordain, pertaining to the advancement of souls and the
propagation of the faith, to whatever provinces he shall resolve to
send us, we are straightway bound to obey, as far as in us lies,
without any tergiversation or excuse, whether he send us among the
Turks or to any other unbelievers in being, even to those parts called
India, or to any heretics or schismatics or likewise to any
believers." Obedience to the general is enjoined "in all things
pertaining to the institute of the Society ... and in him they shall
acknowledge Christ as though present, and as far as is becoming shall
venerate him"; poverty is enjoined, and this rule affects not only the
individual but the common sustentation or care of the Society, except
that in the case of colleges revenues are allowed "to be applied to
the wants and necessities of the students"; and the private recitation
of the Office is distinctly mentioned. On the other hand, the
perpetuity of the general's office during his life was no part of the
original scheme.
On the 7th of April 1541, Ignatius was unanimously chosen general. His
refusal of this post was overruled, so he entered on his office on the
13th of April; and two days after, the newly constituted Society took
its formal corporate vows in the basilica of San Paolo _fuori le mura_.
Scarcely was the Society launched when its members dispersed in various
directions to their new tasks. Alfonso Salmeron and Pasquier-Brouet, as
papal delegates, were sent on a secret mission to Ireland to encourage
the native clergy and people to resist the religious changes introduced
by Henry VIII.; Nicholas Bobadilla went to Naples; Faber, first to the
diet of Worms and then to Spain; Laynez and Claude le Jay to Germany,
while Ignatius busied himself at Rome in good works and in drawing up
the constitutions and completing the _Spiritual Exercises_. Success
crowned these first efforts; and the Society began to win golden
opinions. The first college was founded at Coimbra in 1542 by John III.
of Portugal and put under the rectorship of Rodriguez. It was designed
as a training school to feed the Indian mission of which Francis Xavier
had already taken the oversight, while a seminary at Goa was the second
institution founded outside Rome in connexion with the Society. Both
from the original scheme and from the foundation at Coimbra it is clear
that the original idea of the colleges was to provide for the education
of future Jesuits. In Spain, national pride in the founder aided the
Society's cause almost as much as royal patronage did in Portugal; and
the third house was opened in Gandia under the protection of its duke,
Francisco Borgia, a grandson of Alexander VI. In Germany, the Jesuits
were eagerly welcomed as the only persons able to meet the Lutherans on
equal terms. Only in France, among the countries which still were united
with the Roman Church, was their advance checked, owing to political
distrust of their Spanish origin, together with the hostility of the
Sorbonne and the bishop of Paris. However, after many difficulties, they
succeeded in getting a footing through the help of Guillaume du Prat,
bishop of Clermont (d. 1560), who founded a college for them in 1545 in
the town of Billom, besides making over to them his house at Paris, the
hôtel de Clermont, which became the nucleus of the afterwards famous
college of Louis-le-Grand, while a formal legalization was granted to
them by the states-general at Poissy in 1561. In Rome, Paul III.'s
favour did not lessen. He bestowed on them the church of St Andrea and
conferred at the same time the valuable privilege of making and altering
their own statutes; besides the other points, in 1546, which Ignatius
had still more at heart, as touching the very essence of his institute,
namely, exemption from ecclesiastical offices and dignities and from the
task of acting as directors and confessors to convents of women. The
former of these measures effectually stopped any drain of the best
members away from the society and limited their hopes within its bounds,
by putting them more freely at the general's disposal, especially as it
was provided that the final vows could not be annulled, nor could a
professed member be dismissed, save by the joint action of the general
and the pope. The regulation as to convents seems partly due to a desire
to avoid the worry and expenditure of time involved in the discharge of
such offices and partly to a conviction that penitents living in
enclosure, as all religious persons then were, would be of no effective
use to the Society; whereas the founder, against the wishes of several
of his companions, laid much stress on the duty of accepting the post of
confessor to kings, queens and women of high rank when opportunity
presented itself. And the year 1546 is notable in the annals of the
Society as that in which it embarked on its great educational career,
especially by the annexation of free day-schools to all its colleges.
The council of Trent, in its first period, seemed to increase the
reputation of the Society; for the pope chose Laynez, Faber and
Salmeron to act as his theologians in that assembly, and in this
capacity they had no little influence in framing its decrees. When the
council reassembled under Pius IV., Laynez and Salmeron again attended
in the same capacity. It is sometimes said that the council formally
approved of the Society. This is impossible; for as the Society had
received the papal approval, that of the council would have been
impertinent as well as unnecessary. St Charles Borromeo wrote to the
presiding cardinals, on the 11th of May 1562, saying that, as France
was disaffected to the Jesuits whom the pope wished to see established
in every country, Pius IV. desired, when the council was occupying
itself about regulars, that it should make some honourable mention of
the Society in order to recommend it. This was done in the
twenty-fifth session (cap. XVI., d.r.) when the decree was passed that
at the end of the time of probation novices should either be professed
or dismissed; and the words of the council are: "By these things,
however, the Synod does not intend to make any innovation or
prohibition, so as to hinder the religious order of Clerks of the
Society of Jesus from being able to serve God and His Church, in
accordance with their pious institute approved of by the Holy
Apostolic See."
In 1548 the Society received a valuable recruit in the person of
Francisco Borgia, duke of Gandia, afterwards thrice general, while two
important events marked 1550--the foundation of the Collegio Romano and
a fresh confirmation of the Society by Julius III. The German college,
for the children of poor nobles, was founded in 1552; and in the same
year Ignatius firmly settled the discipline of the Society by putting
down, with promptness and severity, some attempts at independent action
on the part of Rodriguez at Coimbra--this being the occasion of the
famous letter on obedience; while 1553 saw the despatch of a mission to
Abyssinia with one of the fathers as patriarch, and the first rift
within the lute when the pope thought that the Spanish Jesuits were
taking part with the emperor against the Holy See. Paul IV. (whose
election alarmed the Jesuits, for they had not found him very friendly
as cardinal) was for a time managed with supreme tact by Ignatius, whom
he respected personally. In 1556, the founder died and left the Society
consisting of forty-five professed fathers and two thousand ordinary
members, distributed over twelve provinces, with more than a hundred
colleges and houses.
After the death of the first general there was an interregnum of two
years, with Laynez as vicar. During this long period he occupied
himself with completing the constitutions by incorporating certain
declarations, said to be Ignatian, which explained and sometimes
completely altered the meaning of the original text. Laynez was an
astute politician and saw the vast capabilities of the Society over a
far wider field than the founder contemplated; and he prepared to give
it the direction that it has since followed. In some senses, this
learned and consummately clever man may be looked upon as the real
founder of the Society as history knows it. Having carefully prepared
the way, he summoned the general congregation from which he emerged as
second general in 1556. As soon as Ignatius had died Paul IV.
announced his intention of instituting reforms in the Society,
especially in two points: the public recitation of the office in choir
and the limitation of the general's office to a term of three years.
Despite all the protests and negotiations of Laynez, the pope remained
obstinate; and there was nothing but to submit. On the 8th of
September 1558, two points were added to the constitutions: that the
generalship should be triennial and not perpetual, although after the
three years the general might be confirmed; and that the canonical
hours should be observed in choir after the manner of the other
orders, but with that moderation which should seem expedient to the
general. Taking advantage of this last clause, Laynez applied the new
law to two houses only, namely, Rome and Lisbon, the other houses
contenting themselves with singing vespers on feast days; and as soon
as Paul IV. died, Laynez, acting on advice, quietly ignored for the
future the orders of the late pope. He also succeeded in increasing
further the already enormous powers of the general. Laynez took a
leading part in the colloquy of Poissy in 1561 between the Catholics
and Huguenots; and obtained a legal footing from the states-general
for colleges of the Society in France. He died in 1564, leaving the
Society increased to eighteen provinces with a hundred and thirty
colleges, and was succeeded by Francisco Borgia. During the third
generalate, Pius V. confirmed all the former privileges, and in the
amplest form extended to the Society, as being a mendicant institute,
all favours that had been or might afterwards be granted to such
mendicant bodies. It was a trifling set-off that in 1567 the pope
again enjoined the fathers to keep choir and to admit only the
professed to priests' orders, especially as Gregory XIII. rescinded
both these injunctions in 1573; and indeed, as regards the hours, all
that Pius V. was able to obtain was the nominal concession that the
breviary should be recited in choir in the professed houses only, and
that not of necessity by more than two persons at a time. Everard
Mercurian, a Fleming, and a subject of Spain, succeeded Borgia in
1573, being forced on the Society by the pope, in preference to
Polanco, Ignatius's secretary and the vicar-general, who was rejected
partly as a Spaniard and still more because he was a "New Christian"
of Jewish origin and therefore objected to in Spain itself. During his
term of office there took place the troubles in Rome concerning the
English college and the subsequent Jesuit rule over that institution;
and in 1580 the first Jesuit mission, headed by the redoubtable Robert
Parsons and the saintly Edmund Campion, set out for England. This
mission, on one side, carried on an active propaganda against
Elizabeth in favour of Spain; and on the other, among the true
missionaries, was marked with devoted zeal and heroism even to the
ghastly death of traitors. Claude Acquaviva, the fifth general, held
office from 1581 to 1615, a time almost coinciding with the high tide
of the successful reaction, chiefly due to the Jesuits. He was an
able, strong-willed man, and crushed what was tantamount to a
rebellion in Spain. It was during this struggle that Mariana, the
historian and the author of the famous _De rege_ in which he defends
tyrannicide, wrote his treatise _On the Defects in the Government of
the Society_. He confessed freely that the Society had faults and that
there was a great deal of unrest among the members; and he mentioned
among the various points calling for reform the education of the
novices and students; the state of the lay brother and the possessions
of the Society; the spying system, which he declared to be carried so
far that, if the general's archives at Rome should be searched, not
one Jesuit's character would be found to escape; the monopoly of the
higher offices by a small clique; and the absence of all encouragement
and recompense for the best men of the Society.
It was chiefly during the generalship of Acquaviva that the Society
began to gain an evil reputation which eclipsed its good report. In
France the Jesuits joined, if they did not originate, the league against
Henry of Navarre. Absolution was refused by them to those who would not
join in the Guise rebellion, and Acquaviva is said to have tried to stop
them, but in vain. The assassination of Henry III. in the interests of
the league and the wounding of Henry IV. in 1594 by Chastel, a pupil of
theirs, revealed the danger that the whole Society was running by the
intrigues of a few men. The Jesuits were banished from France in 1594,
but were allowed to return by Henry IV. under conditions; as Sully has
recorded, the king declared his only motive to be the expediency of not
driving them into a corner with possible disastrous results to his life,
and because his only hope of tranquillity lay in appeasing them and
their powerful friends. In England the political schemings of Parsons
were no small factors in the odium which fell on the Society at large;
and his determination to capture the English Catholics as an apanage of
the Society, to the exclusion of all else, was an object lesson to the
rest of Europe of a restless ambition and lust of domination which were
to find many imitators. The political turn which was being given by some
to the Society, to the detriment of its real spiritual work, evoked the
fears of the wiser heads of the body; and in the fifth general
congregation held in 1593-1594 it was decreed: "Whereas in these times
of difficulty and danger it has happened through the fault of certain
individuals, through ambition and intemperate zeal, that our institute
has been ill spoken of in divers places and before divers sovereigns ...
it is severely and strictly forbidden to all members of the Society to
interfere in any manner whatever in public affairs even though they be
thereto invited; or to deviate from the institute through entreaty,
persuasion or any other motive whatever." It would have been well had
Acquaviva enforced this decree; but Parsons was allowed to keep on with
his work, and other Jesuits in France for many years after directed, to
the loss of religion, affairs of state. In 1605 took place in England
the Gunpowder Plot, in which Henry Garnet, the superior of the Society
in England, was implicated. That the Jesuits were the instigators of
the plot there is no evidence, but they were in close touch with the
conspirators, of whose designs Garnet had a general knowledge. There is
now no reasonable doubt that he and other Jesuits were legally
accessories, and that the condemnation of Garnet as a traitor was
substantially just (see GARNET, HENRY).
It was during Acquaviva's generalship that Philip II. of Spain
complained bitterly of the Society to Sixtus V., and encouraged him in
those plans of reform (even to changing the name) which were only cut
short by the pope's death in 1590, and also that the long protracted
discussions on grace, wherein the Dominicans contended against the
Jesuits, were carried on at Rome with little practical result, by the
Congregation _de auxiliis_, which sat from 1598 till 1607. The _Ratio
Studiorum_ took its shape during this time. The Jesuit influence at
Rome was supported by the Spanish ambassador; but when Henry IV. "went
to Mass," the balance inclined to the side of France, and the Spanish
monopoly became a thing of the past. Acquaviva saw the expulsion of
the Jesuits from Venice in 1606 for siding with Paul V. when he placed
the republic under interdict, but did not live to see their recall,
which took place at the intercession of Louis XIV. in 1657. He also
had to banish Parsons from Rome, by order of Clement VIII., who was
wearied with the perpetual complaints made against that intriguer.
Gregory XIV., by the bull _Ecclesiae Christi_ (July 28, 1591), again
confirmed the Society, and granted that Jesuits might, for true cause,
be expelled from the body without any form of trial or even
documentary procedure, besides denouncing excommunications against
every one, save the pope or his legates, who directly or indirectly
infringed the constitutions of the Society or attempted to bring about
any change therein.
Under Vitelleschi, the next general, the Society celebrated its first
centenary on the 25th of September 1639, the hundredth anniversary of
the verbal approbation given to the scheme by Paul III. During this
hundred years the Society had grown to thirty-six provinces, with
eight hundred houses containing some fifteen thousand members. In 1640
broke out the great Jansenist controversy, in which the Society took
the leading part on one side and finally secured the victory. In this
same year, considering themselves ill-used by Olivarez, prime minister
of Philip IV. of Spain, the Jesuits powerfully aided the revolution
which placed the duke of Braganza on the throne of Portugal; and their
services were rewarded for nearly one hundred years with the practical
control of ecclesiastical and almost of civil affairs in that kingdom.
The Society also gained ground steadily in France; for, though held in
check by Richelieu and little more favoured by Mazarin, yet from the
moment that Louis XIV. took the reins, their star was in the
ascendant, and Jesuit confessors, the most celebrated of whom were
François de La Chaise (q.v.) and Michel Le Tellier (1643-1719), guided
the policy of the king, not hesitating to take his side in his quarrel
with the Holy See, which nearly resulted in a schism, nor to sign the
Gallican articles. Their hostility to the Huguenots forced on the
revocation of the Edict of Nantes in 1685, and their war against their
Jansenist opponents did not cease till the very walls of Port Royal
were demolished in 1710, even to the very abbey church itself, and the
bodies of the dead taken with every mark of insult from their graves
and literally flung to the dogs to devour. But while thus gaining
power in one direction, the Society was losing it in another. The
Japanese mission had vanished in blood in 1651; and though many
Jesuits died with their converts bravely as martyrs for the faith, yet
it is impossible to acquit them of a large share in the causes of that
overthrow. It was also about this same period that the grave scandal
of the Chinese and Malabar rites began to attract attention in Europe,
and to make thinking men ask seriously whether the Jesuit missionaries
in those parts taught anything which could fairly be called
Christianity at all. When it was remembered, too, that they had
decided, at a council held at Lima, that it was inexpedient to impose
any act of Christian devotion except baptism, on the South American
converts, without the greatest precautions, on the ground of
intellectual difficulties, it is not wonderful that this doubt was not
satisfactorily cleared up, notably in face of the charges brought
against the Society by Bernardin de Cardonas, bishop of Paraguay, and
the saintly Juan de Palafox (q.v.), bishop of Angelopolis in Mexico.
But "the terrible power in the universal church, the great riches and
the extraordinary prestige" of the Society, which Palafox complained
had raised it "above all dignities, laws, councils and apostolic
constitutions," carried with them the seeds of rapid and inevitable
decay. A succession of devout but incapable generals, after the death
of Acquaviva, saw the gradual secularization of tone by the flocking
in of recruits of rank and wealth desirous to share in the glories and
influence of the Society, but not well adapted to increase them. The
general's supremacy received a shock when the eleventh general
congregation appointed Oliva as vicar, with the right of succession
and powers that practically superseded those of the general Goswin
Nickel, whose infirmities, it is said, did not permit him to govern
with the necessary application and vigour; and an attempt was made to
depose Tirso Gonzalez, the thirteenth general, whose views on
probabilism diverged from those favoured by the rest of the Jesuits.
Though the political weight of the Society continued to increase in
the cabinets of Europe, it was being steadily weakened internally. The
Jesuits abandoned the system of free education which had won them so
much influence and honour; by attaching themselves exclusively to the
interests of courts, they lost favour with the middle and lower
classes; and above all, their monopoly of power and patronage in
France, with the fatal use they had made of it, drew down the
bitterest hostility upon them. It was to their credit, indeed, that
the encyclopaedists attacked them as the foremost representatives of
Christianity, but they are accountable in no small degree in France,
as in England, for alienating the minds of men from the religion for
which they professed to work.
But the most fatal part of the policy of the Society was its activity,
wealth and importance as a great trading firm with branch houses
scattered over the richest countries of the world. Its founder, with a
wise instinct, had forbidden the accumulation of wealth; its own
constitutions, as revised in the 84th decree of the sixth general
congregation, had forbidden all pursuits of a commercial nature, as also
had various popes; but nevertheless the trade went on unceasingly,
necessarily with the full knowledge of the general, unless it be pleaded
that the system of obligatory espionage had completely broken down. The
first muttering of the storm which was soon to break was heard in a
breve issued in 1741 by Benedict XIV., wherein he denounced the Jesuit
offenders as "disobedient, contumacious, captious and reprobate
persons," and enacted many stringent regulations for their better
government. The first serious attack came from a country where they had
been long dominant. In 1753 Spain and Portugal exchanged certain
American provinces with each other, which involved a transfer of
sovereign rights over Paraguay; but it was also provided that the
populations should severally migrate also, that the subjects of each
crown might remain the same as before. The inhabitants of the
"reductions," whom the Jesuits had trained in the use of European arms
and discipline, naturally rose in defence of their homes, and attacked
the troops and authorities. Their previous docility and their entire
submission to the Jesuits left no possible doubt as to the source of the
rebellion, and gave the enemies of the Jesuits a handle against them
that was not forgotten. In 1757 Carvalho, marquis of Pombal, prime
minister of Joseph I. of Portugal, and an old pupil of the Jesuits at
Coimbra, dismissed the three Jesuit chaplains of the king and named
three secular priests in their stead. He next complained to Benedict
XIV. that the trading operations of the Society hampered the commercial
prosperity of the nation, and asked for remedial measures. The pope, who
knew the situation, committed a visitation of the Society to Cardinal
Saldanha, an intimate friend of Pombal, who issued a severe decree
against the Jesuits and ordered the confiscation of all their
merchandise. But at this juncture Benedict XIV., the most learned and
able pope of the period, was succeeded by a pope strongly in favour of
the Jesuits, Clement XIII. Pombal, finding no help from Rome, adopted
other means. The king was fired at and wounded on returning from a visit
to his mistress on the 3rd of September 1758. The duke of Aveiro and
other high personages were tried and executed for conspiracy; while some
of the Jesuits, who had undoubtedly been in communication with them,
were charged, on doubtful evidence, with complicity in the attempted
assassination. Pombal charged the whole Society with the possible guilt
of a few, and, unwilling to wait the dubious issue of an application to
the pope for licence to try them in the civil courts, whence they were
exempt, issued on the 1st of September 1759 a decree ordering the
immediate deportation of every Jesuit from Portugal and all its
dependencies and their suppression by the bishops in the schools and
universities. Those in Portugal were at once shipped, in great misery,
to the papal states, and were soon followed by those in the colonies. In
France, Madame de Pompadour was their enemy because they had refused her
absolution while she remained the king's mistress; but the immediate
cause of their ruin was the bankruptcy of Father Lavalette, the Jesuit
superior in Martinique, a daring speculator, who failed, after trading
for some years, for 2,400,000 francs and brought ruin upon some French
commercial houses of note. Lorenzo Ricci, then general of the Society,
repudiated the debt, alleging lack of authority on Lavalette's part to
pledge the credit of the Society, and he was sued by the creditors.
Losing his cause, he appealed to the parlement of Paris, and it, to
decide the issue raised by Ricci, required the constitutions of the
Jesuits to be produced in evidence, and affirmed the judgment of the
courts below. But the publicity given to a document scarcely known till
then raised the utmost indignation against the Society. A royal
commission, appointed by the duc de Choiseul to examine the
constitutions, convoked a private assembly of fifty-one archbishops and
bishops under the presidency of Cardinal de Luynes, all of whom except
six voted that the unlimited authority of the general was incompatible
with the laws of France, and that the appointment of a resident vicar,
subject to those laws, was the only solution of the question fair on all
sides. Ricci replied with the historical answer, _Sint ut sunt, aut non
sint_; and after some further delay, during which much interest was
exerted in their favour, the Jesuits were suppressed by an edict in
November 1764, but suffered to remain on the footing of secular priests,
a grace withdrawn in 1767, when they were expelled from the kingdom. In
the very same year, Charles III. of Spain, a monarch known for personal
devoutness, convinced, on evidence not now forthcoming, that the Jesuits
were plotting against his authority, prepared, through his minister
D'Aranda, a decree suppressing the Society in every part of his
dominions. Sealed despatches were sent to every Spanish colony, to be
opened on the same day, the 2nd of April 1767, when the measure was to
take effect in Spain itself, and the expulsion was relentlessly carried
out, nearly six thousand priests being deported from Spain alone, and
sent to the Italian coast, whence, however, they were repelled by the
orders of the pope and Ricci himself, finding a refuge at Corte in
Corsica, after some months' suffering in overcrowded vessels at sea. The
general's object may probably have been to accentuate the harshness with
which the fathers had been treated, and so to increase public sympathy,
but the actual result of his policy was blame for the cruelty with which
he enhanced their misfortunes, for the poverty of Corsica made even a
bare subsistence scarcely procurable for them there. The Bourbon courts
of Naples and Parma followed the example of France and Spain; Clement
XIII. retorted with a bull launched at the weakest adversary, and
declaring the rank and title of the duke of Parma forfeit. The Bourbon
sovereigns threatened to make war on the pope in return (France, indeed,
seizing on the county of Avignon), and a joint note demanding a
retractation, and the abolition of the Jesuits, was presented by the
French ambassador at Rome on the 10th of December 1768 in the name of
France, Spain and the two Sicilies. The pope, a man of eighty-two, died
of apoplexy, brought on by the shock, early in 1769. Cardinal Lorenzo
Ganganelli, a conventual Franciscan, was chosen to succeed him, and took
the name of Clement XIV. He endeavoured to avert the decision forced
upon him, but, as Portugal joined the Bourbon league, and Maria Theresa
with her son the emperor Joseph II. ceased to protect the Jesuits, there
remained only the petty kingdom of Sardinia in their favour, though the
fall of Choiseul in France raised the hopes of the Society for a time.
The pope began with some preliminary measures, permitting first the
renewal of lawsuits against the Society, which had been suspended by
papal authority, and which, indeed, had in no case been ever successful
at Rome. He then closed the Collegio Romano, on the plea of its
insolvency, seized the houses at Frascati and Tivoli, and broke up the
establishments in Bologna and the Legations. Finally on the 21st of July
1773 the famous breve _Dominus ac Redemptor_ appeared, suppressing the
Society of Jesus. This remarkable document opens by citing a long series
of precedents for the suppression of religious orders by the Holy See,
amongst which occurs the ill-omened instance of the Templars. It then
briefly sketches the objects and history of the Jesuits themselves. It
speaks of their defiance of their own constitution, expressly revived by
Paul V., forbidding them to meddle in politics; of the great ruin to
souls caused by their quarrels with local ordinaries and the other
religious orders, their condescension to heathen usages in the East, and
the disturbances, resulting in persecutions of the Church, which they
had stirred up even in Catholic countries, so that several popes had
been obliged to punish them. Seeing then that the Catholic sovereigns
had been forced to expel them, that many bishops and other eminent
persons demanded their extinction, and that the Society had ceased to
fulfil the intention of its institute, the pope declares it necessary
for the peace of the Church that it should be suppressed, extinguished,
abolished and abrogated for ever, with all its houses, colleges, schools
and hospitals; transfers all the authority of its general or officers to
the local ordinaries; forbids the reception of any more novices,
directing that such as were actually in probation should be dismissed,
and declaring that profession in the Society should not serve as a title
to holy orders. Priests of the Society are given the option of either
joining other orders or remaining as secular clergy, under obedience to
the ordinaries, who are empowered to grant or withhold from them
licences to hear confessions. Such of the fathers as are engaged in the
work of education are permitted to continue, on condition of abstaining
from lax and questionable doctrines apt to cause strife and trouble. The
question of missions is reserved, and the relaxations granted to the
Society in such matters as fasting, reciting the hours and reading
heretical books, are withdrawn; while the breve ends with clauses
carefully drawn to bar any legal exceptions that might be taken against
its full validity and obligation. It has been necessary to cite these
heads of the breve because the apologists of the Society allege that no
motive influenced the pope save the desire of peace at any price, and
that he did not believe in the culpability of the fathers. The
categorical charges made in the document rebut this plea. The pope
followed up this breve by appointing a congregation of cardinals to take
possession of the temporalities of the Society, and armed it with
summary powers against all who should attempt to retain or conceal any
of the property. He also threw Lorenzo Ricci, the general, into prison,
first in the English college and then in the castle of St Angelo, where
he died in 1775, under the pontificate of Pius VI., who, though not
unfavourable to the Society, and owing his own advancement to it, dared
not release him, probably because his continued imprisonment was made a
condition by the powers who enjoyed a right of veto in papal elections.
In September 1774 Clement XIV. died after much suffering, and the
question has been hotly debated ever since whether poison was the cause
of his death. But the latest researches have shown that there is no
evidence to support the theory of poison. Salicetti, the pope's
physician, denied that the body showed signs of poisoning, and Tanucci,
Neapolitan ambassador at Rome, who had a large share in procuring the
breve of suppression, entirely acquits the Jesuits, while F. Theiner, no
friend to the Society, does the like.
At the date of this suppression, the Society had 41 provinces and 22,589
members, of whom 11,295 were priests. Far from submitting to the papal
breve, the ex-Jesuits, after some ineffectual attempts at direct
resistance, withdrew into the territories of the free-thinking
sovereigns of Russia and Prussia, Frederick II. and Catherine II., who
became their active friends and protectors; and the fathers alleged as a
principle, in so far as their theology is concerned, that no papal bull
is binding in a state whose sovereign has not approved and authorized
its publication and execution. Russia formed the headquarters of the
Society, and two forged breves were speedily circulated, being dated
June 9 and June 29, 1774, approving their establishment in Russia, and
implying the repeal of the breve of suppression. But these are
contradicted by the tenor of five genuine breves issued in September
1774 to the archbishop of Gnesen, and making certain assurances to the
ex-Jesuits, on condition of their complete obedience to the injunctions
already laid on them. The Jesuits also pleaded a verbal approbation by
Pius VI., technically known as an _Oraculum vivae vocis_, but this is
invalid for purposes of law unless reduced to writing and duly
authenticated.
They elected three Poles successively as generals, taking, however, only
the title of vicars, till on the 7th of March 1801 Pius VII. granted
them liberty to reconstitute themselves in north Russia, and permitted
Kareu, then vicar, to exercise full authority as general. On the 30th of
July 1804 a similar breve restored the Jesuits in the Two Sicilies, at
the express desire of Ferdinand IV., the pope thus anticipating the
further action of 1814, when, by the constitution _Sollicitudo omnium
Ecclesiarum_, he revoked the action of Clement XIV., and formally
restored the Society to corporate legal existence, yet not only omitted
any censure of his predecessor's conduct, but all vindication of the
Jesuits from the heavy charges in the breve _Dominus ac Redemptor_. In
France, even after their expulsion in 1765, they had maintained a
precarious footing in the country under the partial disguise and names
of "Fathers of the Faith" or "Clerks of the Sacred Heart," but were
obliged by Napoleon I. to retire in 1804. They reappeared under their
true name in 1814, and obtained formal licence in 1822, but became the
objects of so much hostility that Charles X. deprived them by ordinance
of the right of instruction, and obliged all applicants for licences as
teachers to make oath that they did not belong to any community
unrecognized by the laws. They were dispersed again by the revolution of
July 1830, but soon reappeared and, though put to much inconvenience
during the latter years of Louis Philippe's reign, notably in 1845,
maintained their footing, recovered the right to teach freely after the
revolution of 1848, and gradually became the leading educational and
ecclesiastical power in France, notably under the Second Empire, till
they were once more expelled by the Ferry laws of 1880, though they
quietly returned since the execution of those measures. They were again
expelled by the Law of Associations of 1901. In Spain they came back
with Ferdinand VII., but were expelled at the constitutional rising in
1820, returning in 1823, when the duke of Angoulême's army replaced
Ferdinand on his throne; they were driven out once more by Espartero in
1835, and have had no legal position since, though their presence is
openly tolerated. In Portugal, ranging themselves on the side of Dom
Miguel, they fell with his cause, and were exiled in 1834. There are
some to this day in Lisbon under the name of "Fathers of the Faith."
Russia, which had been their warmest patron, drove them from St
Petersburg and Moscow in 1813, and from the whole empire in 1820, mainly
on the plea of attempted proselytizing in the imperial army. Holland
drove them out in 1816, and, by giving them thus a valid excuse for
aiding the Belgian revolution of 1830, secured them the strong position
they have ever since held in Belgium; but they have succeeded in
returning to Holland. They were expelled from Switzerland in 1847-1848
for the part they were charged with in exciting the war of the
Sonderbund. In south Germany, inclusive of Austria and Bavaria, their
annals since their restoration have been uneventful; but in north
Germany, owing to the footing Frederick II. had given them in Prussia,
they became very powerful, especially in the Rhine provinces, and,
gradually moulding the younger generation of clergy after the close of
the War of Liberation, succeeded in spreading Ultramontane views amongst
them, and so leading up to the difficulties with the civil government
which issued in the Falk laws, and their own expulsion by decree of the
German parliament (June 19, 1872). Since then many attempts have been
made to procure the recall of the Society to the German Empire, but
without success, although as individuals they are now allowed in the
country. In Great Britain, whither they began to straggle over during
the revolutionary troubles at the close of the 18th century, and where,
practically unaffected by the clause directed against them in the
Emancipation Act of 1829, their chief settlement has been at Stonyhurst
in Lancashire, an estate conferred on them by Thomas Weld in 1795, they
have been unmolested; but there has been little affinity to the order in
the British temperament, and the English province has consequently never
risen to numerical or intellectual importance in the Society. In Rome
itself, its progress after the restoration was at first slow, and it was
not till the reign of Leo XII. (1823-1829) that it recovered its place
as the chief educational body there. It advanced steadily under Gregory
XVI., and, though it was at first shunned by Pius IX., it secured his
entire confidence after his return from Gaeta in 1849, and obtained from
him a special breve erecting the staff of its literary journal, the
_Civiltà Cattolica_, into a perpetual college under the general of the
Jesuits, for the purpose of teaching and propagating the faith in its
pages. How, with this pope's support throughout his long reign, the
gradual filling of nearly all the sees of Latin Christendom with bishops
of their own selection, and their practical capture, directly or
indirectly, of the education of the clergy in seminaries, they contrived
to stamp out the last remains of independence everywhere, and to crown
the Ultramontane triumph with the Vatican Decrees, is matter of familiar
knowledge. Leo XIII., while favouring them somewhat, never gave them his
full confidence; and by his adhesion to the Thomist philosophy and
theology, and his active work for the regeneration and progress of the
older orders, he made another suppression possible by destroying much of
their prestige. But the usual sequence has been observed under Pius X.,
who appeared to be greatly in favour of the Society and to rely upon
them for many of the measures of his pontificate.
The Society has been ruled by twenty-five generals and four vicars from
its foundation to the present day (1910). Of all the various
nationalities represented in the Society, neither France, its original
cradle, nor England, has ever given it a head, while Spain, Italy,
Holland, Belgium, Germany and Poland, were all represented. The numbers
of the Society are not accurately known, but are estimated at about
20,000, in all parts of the world; and of these the English, Irish and
American Jesuits are under 3000.
The generals of the Jesuits have been as follow:--
1. Ignatius de Loyola (Spaniard) 1541-1556
2. Diego Laynez (Spaniard) 1558-1565
3. Francisco Borgia (Spaniard) 1565-1572
4. Everard Mercurian (Belgian) 1573-1580
5. Claudio Acquaviva (Neapolitan) 1581-1615
6. Mutio Vitelleschi (Roman) 1615-1645
7. Vincenzio Caraffa (Neapolitan) 1646-1649
8. Francesco Piccolomini (Florentine) 1649-1651
9. Alessandro Gottofredi (Roman) 1652
10. Goswin Nickel (German) 1652-1664
11. Giovanni Paolo Oliva (Genoese) vicar-general and
coadjutor, 1661; general 1664-1681
12. Charles de Noyelle (Belgian) 1682-1686
13. Tirso Gonzalez (Spaniard) 1687-1705
14. Michele Angelo Tamburini (Modenese) 1706-1730
15. Franz Retz (Bohemian) 1730-1750
16. Ignazio Visconti (Milanese) 1751-1755
17. Alessandro Centurioni (Genoese) 1755-1757
18. Lorenzo Ricci (Florentine) 1758-1775
_a_. Stanislaus Czerniewicz (Pole), vicar-general 1782-1785
_b_. Gabriel Lienkiewicz (Pole), " 1785-1798
_c_. Franciscus Xavier Kareu (Pole), (general in
Russia, 7th March 1801) 1799-1802
_d_. Gabriel Gruber (German) 1802-1805
19. Thaddaeus Brzozowski (Pole) 1805-1820
20. Aloysio Fortis (Veronese) 1820-1829
21. Johannes Roothaan (Dutchman) 1829-1853
22. Peter Johannes Beckx (Belgian) 1853-1884
23. Antoine Anderledy (Swiss) 1884-1892
24. Luis Martin (Spanish) 1892-1906
25. Francis Xavier Wernz (German) 1906-
The bibliography of Jesuitism is of enormous extent, and it is
impracticable to cite more than a few of the most important works.
They are as follows: _Institutum Societatis Jesu_ (7 vols., Avignon,
1830-1838); Orlandini, _Historia Societatis Jesu_ (Antwerp, 1620);
_Imago primi saeculi Societatis Jesu_ (Antwerp, 1640); Nieremberg,
_Vida de San Ignacio de Loyola_ (9 vols., fol., Madrid, 1645-1736);
Genelli, _Life of St Ignatius of Loyola_ (London, 1872); Backer,
_Bibliothèque des écrivains de la Compagnie de Jésus_ (7 vols., Paris,
1853-1861); Crétineau Joly, _Histoire de la Compagnie de Jésus_ (6
vols., Paris, 1844); Guettée, _Histoire des Jésuites_ (3 vols., Paris,
1858-1859); Wolff, _Allgemeine Geschichte der Jesuiten_ (4 vols.,
Zürich, 1789-1792); Gioberti, _Il Gesuita moderno_ (Lausanne, 1846);
F. Parkman, _Pioneers of France in the New World_ and _The Jesuits in
North America_ (Boston, 1868); _Lettres édifiantes et curieuses,
écrites des missions étrangères, avec les Annales de la propagation de
la foi_ (40 vols., Lyons, 1819-1854); Saint-Priest, _Histoire de la
chute des Jésuites au XVIII^e Siècle_ (Paris, 1844); Ranke, _Römische
Päpste_ (3 vols., Berlin, 1838); E. Taunton, _History of the Jesuits
in England_ (London, 1901); Thomas Hughes, S.J., _History of the
Society of Jesus in North America_ (London and New York, 1907); R. G.
Thwaites, _Jesuit Relations and Allied Documents_ (73 vols. Cleveland,
1896-1901). (R. F. L.; E. Tn.)
JESUP, MORRIS KETCHUM (1830-1908), American banker and philanthropist,
was born at Westport, Connecticut, on the 21st of June 1830. In 1842 he
went to New York City, where after some experience in business he
established a banking house in 1852. In 1856 he organized the banking
firm of M. K. Jesup & Company, which after two reorganizations became
Cuyler, Morgan & Jesup. He became widely known as a financier, retiring
from active business in 1884. He was best known, however, as a
munificent patron of scientific research, a large contributor to the
needs of education, and a public-spirited citizen of wide interests, who
did much for the betterment of social conditions in New York. He
contributed largely to the funds for the Arctic expeditions of Commander
Robert E. Peary, becoming president of the Peary Arctic Club in 1899. To
the American museum of natural history, in New York City, he gave large
sums in his lifetime and bequeathed $1,000,000. He was president of the
New York chamber of commerce from 1899 until 1907, and was the largest
subscriber to its new building. To his native town he gave a fine public
library. He died in New York City on the 22nd of January 1908.
JESUS CHRIST. To write a summary account of the life of Christ, though
always involving a grave responsibility, was until recent years a
comparatively straightforward task; for it was assumed that all that was
needed, or could be offered, was a chronological outline based on a
harmony of the four canonical Gospels. But to-day history is not
satisfied by this simple procedure. Literary criticism has analysed the
documents, and has already established some important results; and many
questions are still in debate, the answers to which must affect our
judgment of the historical value of the existing narratives. It seems
therefore consonant alike with prudence and reverence to refrain from
attempting to combine afresh into a single picture the materials
derivable from the various documents, and to endeavour instead to
describe the main contents of the sources from which our knowledge of
the Lord Jesus Christ as an historical personage is ultimately drawn,
and to observe the picture of Him which each writer in turn has offered
to us.
The chief elements of the evidence with which we shall deal are the
following:--
1. First, because earliest in point of time, the references to the
Lord Jesus Christ in the earliest Epistles of St Paul.
2. The Gospel according to St Mark.
3. A document, no longer extant, which was partially incorporated into
the Gospels of St Matthew and St Luke.
4. Further information added by St Matthew's Gospel.
5. Further information added by St Luke's Gospel.
6. The Gospel according to St John.
With regard to traditional sayings or doings of our Lord, which were
only written down at a later period, it will suffice to say that those
which have any claim to be genuine are very scanty, and that their
genuineness has to be tested by their correspondence with the great
bulk of information which is derived from the sources already
enumerated. The fictitious literature of the second and third
centuries, known as the Apocryphal Gospels, offers no direct evidence
of any historical value at all: it is chiefly valuable for the
contrast which it presents to the grave simplicity of the canonical
Gospels, and as showing how incapable a later age was of adding
anything to the Gospel history which was not palpably absurd.
1. _Letters of St Paul._--In the order of chronology we must give the
first place to the earliest letters of St Paul. The first piece of
Christian literature which has an independent existence and to which we
can fix a date is St Paul's first Epistle to the Thessalonians.
Lightfoot dates it in 52 or 53; Harnack places it five years earlier. We
may say, then, that it was written some twenty years after the
Crucifixion. St Paul is not an historian; he is not attempting to
describe what Jesus Christ said or did. He is writing a letter to
encourage a little Christian society which he, a Jew, had founded in a
distant Greek city; and he reminds his readers of many things which he
had told them when he was with them. The evidence, to be collected from
his epistles generally must not detain us here, but we may glance for a
moment at this one letter, because it contains what appears to be the
first mention of Jesus Christ in the literature of the world. Those who
would get a true history cannot afford to neglect their earliest
documents. Now the opening sentence of this letter is as follows: "Paul
and Silvanus and Timothy to the Church of the Thessalonians in God the
Father and the Lord Jesus Christ: Grace to you, and peace." Three men
with Greek or Latin names are writing to some kind of assembly in a city
of Macedonia. The writers are Jews, to judge by their salutation of
"peace," and by their mention of "God the Father," and of the assembly
or society as being "in" Him. But what is this new name which is placed
side by side with the Divine Name--"in God the Father and the Lord Jesus
Christ"? An educated Greek, who knew something (as many at that time
did) of the Greek translation of the ancient Hebrew Scriptures, if he
had picked up this letter before he had ever heard the name of Jesus
Christ, would have been deeply interested in these opening words. He
would have known that "Jesus" was the Greek form of Joshua; that
"Christ" was the Greek rendering of Messiah, or Anointed, the title of
the great King for whom the Jews were looking; he might further have
remembered that "the Lord" is the expression which the Greek Old
Testament constantly uses instead of the ineffable name of God, which we
now call "Jehovah" (q.v.). Who, then, he might well ask is this Jesus
Christ who is lifted to this unexampled height? For it is plain that
Jesus Christ stands in some close relation to "God the Father," and that
on the ground of that relation a society has been built up, apparently
by Jews, in a Greek city far distant from Palestine. He would learn
something as he read on; for the letter makes a passing reference to the
foundation of the society, and to the expansion of its influence in
other parts of Greece; to the conversion of its members from heathenism,
and to the consequent sufferings at the hands of their heathen
neighbours. The writers speak of themselves as "apostles," or
messengers, of Christ; they refer to similar societies "in Christ
Jesus," which they call "churches of God," in Judaea, and they say that
these also suffer from the Jews there, who had "killed the Lord Jesus"
some time before. But they further speak of Jesus as "raised from the
dead," and they refer to the belief which they had led the society to
entertain, that He would come again "from heaven to deliver them from
the coming wrath." Moreover, they urge them not to grieve for certain
members of the society who have already died, saying that, "if we
believe that Jesus died and rose again," we may also be assured that
"the dead in Christ will rise" and will live for ever with Him. Thus the
letter assumes that its readers already have considerable knowledge as
to "the Lord Jesus Christ," and as to His relation to "God the Father,"
a knowledge derived from teaching given in person on a former visit. The
purpose of the letter is not to give information as to the past, but to
stimulate its readers to perseverance by giving fresh teaching as to the
future. Historically it is of great value as showing how widely within
twenty or twenty-five years of the Crucifixion a religion which
proclaimed developed theological teaching as to "the Lord Jesus Christ"
had spread in the Roman Empire. We may draw a further conclusion from
this and other letters of St Paul before we go on. St Paul's missionary
work must have created a demand. Those who had heard him and read his
letters would want to know more than he had told them of the earthly
life of the Lord Jesus. They would wish to be able to picture Him to
their minds; and especially to understand what could have led to His
being put to death by the Romans at the requisition of the Jews. St Paul
had not been one of his personal disciples in Galilee or Jerusalem; he
had no memories to relate of His miracles and teaching. Some written
account of these was an obvious need. And we may be sure that any such
narrative concerning One who was so deeply reverenced would be most
carefully scrutinized at a time when many were still living whose
memories went back to the period of Our Lord's public ministry. One such
narrative we now proceed to describe.
2. _St Mark's Gospel._--The Gospel according to St Mark was written
within fifteen years of the first letter of St Paul to the
Thessalonians--i.e. about 65. It seems designed to meet the requirements
of Christians living far away from Palestine. The author was not an
eye-witness of what he relates, but he writes with the firm security of
a man who has the best authority behind him. The characteristics of his
work confirm the early belief that St Mark wrote this Gospel for the
Christians of Rome under the guidance of St Peter. It is of the first
importance that we should endeavour to see this book as a whole; to gain
the total impression which it makes on the mind; to look at the picture
of Jesus Christ which it offers. That picture must inevitably be an
incomplete representation of Him; it will need to be supplemented by
other pictures which other writers have drawn. But it is important to
consider it by itself, as showing us what impress the Master had made on
the memory of one disciple who had been almost constantly by His side.
Beginning of Christ's Mission.
The book opens thus: "The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ." This
"beginning" is shown to be itself rooted in the past. Hebrew prophets
had foretold that God would send a "messenger"; that a voice would be
heard saying, "Prepare the way of the Lord." And so, in fact, John came,
baptizing in the wilderness and turning the heart of the nation back to
God. But John was only a forerunner. He was himself a prophet, and his
prophecy was this, "He that is stronger than I am is coming after me."
Then, we read, "Jesus came." St Mark introduces Him quite abruptly, just
as he had introduced John; for he is writing for those who already know
the outlines of the story. "Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee." He was
baptized by John, and as He came out of the water He had a vision of the
opened heavens and the Holy Spirit, like a dove, descending upon Him;
and He heard a Voice saying, "Thou art My Son, the Beloved: in Thee I am
well pleased." He then passed away into the wilderness, where He was
tempted by Satan and fed by angels. Then He begins His work; and from
the very first we feel that He fulfils John's sign: He is strong. His
first words are words of strength; "the time is fulfilled"--that is to
say, all the past has been leading up to this great moment; "the kingdom
of God is at hand"--that is to say, all your best hopes are on the point
of being fulfilled; "repent, and believe the Gospel"--that is to say,
turn from your sins and accept the tidings which I bring you. It is but
a brief summary of what He must have said; but we feel its strength. He
does not hesitate to fix all eyes upon Himself. Then we see Him call two
brothers who are fishermen. "Come after Me," He says, "and I will make
you fishers of men." They dropped their nets and went after Him, and so
did two other brothers, their partners; for they all felt the power of
this Master of men: He was strong. He began to teach in the synagogue;
they were astonished at His teaching, for he spoke with authority. He
was interrupted by a demoniac, but He quelled the evil spirit by a word;
He was stronger than the power of evil. When the sun set the Sabbath was
at an end, and the people could carry out their sick into the street
where He was; and He came forth and healed them all. The demoniacs
showed a strange faculty of recognition, and cried that He was "the holy
one of God," and "the Christ," but He silenced them at once. The next
morning He was gone. He had sought a quiet spot for prayer. Peter, one
of those fishermen whom He had called, whose wife's mother had been
healed the day before, found Him and tried to bring Him back. "All men
are seeking Thee," he pleaded. "Let us go elsewhere" was the quiet reply
of one who could not be moved by popular enthusiasm. Once again, we
observe, He fulfils John's sign: He is strong. This is our first sight
of Jesus Christ. The next shows us that this great strength is united to
a most tender sympathy. To touch a leper was forbidden, and the offence
involved ceremonial defilement. Yet when a leper declared that Jesus
could heal him, if only He would, "He put forth His hand and touched
him." The act perfected the leper's faith, and he was healed
immediately. But he disobeyed the command to be silent about the matter,
and the result was that Jesus could not openly enter into the town, but
remained outside in the country. It is the first shadow that falls
across His path; His power finds a check in human wilfulness. Presently
He is in Capernaum again. He heals a paralysed man, but not until He has
come into touch, as we say, with him also, by reaching his deepest need
and declaring the forgiveness of his sins. This declaration disturbs the
rabbis, who regard it as a blasphemous usurpation of Divine authority.
But He claims that "the Son of Man hath authority on earth to forgive
sins." The title which He thus adopts must be considered later.
Attitude towards Religious Tradition.
We may note, as we pass on, that He has again, in the exercise of His
power and His sympathy, come into conflict with the established
religious tradition. This freedom from the trammels of convention
appears yet again when he claims as a new disciple a publican, a man
whose calling as a tax-gatherer for the Roman government made him odious
to every patriotic Jew. Publicans were classed with open sinners; and
when Jesus went to this man's house and met a company of his fellows the
rabbis were scandalized: "Why eateth your Master with publicans and
sinners?" The gentle answer of Jesus showed His sympathy even with those
who opposed Him: "The doctor," He said, "must go to the sick." And
again, when they challenged His disciples for not observing the regular
fasts, He gently reminded them that they themselves relaxed the
discipline of fasting for a bridegroom's friends. And He added, in
picturesque and pregnant sayings, that an old garment could not bear a
new patch, and that old wine-skins could not take new wine. Such
language was at once gentle and strong; without condemning the old, it
claimed liberty for the new. To what lengths would this liberty go? The
sacred badge of the Jews' religion, which marked them off from other men
all the world over, was their observance of the Sabbath. It was a
national emblem, the test of religion and patriotism. The rabbis had
fenced the Sabbath round with minute commands, lest any Jews should even
seem to work on the Sabbath day. Thus, plucking and rubbing the ears of
corn was counted a form of reaping and threshing. The hungry disciples
had so transgressed as they walked through the fields of ripe corn.
Jesus defended them by the example of David, who had eaten the
shewbread, which only priests might eat, and had given it to his hungry
men. Necessity absolves from ritual restrictions. And he went farther,
and proclaimed a principle: "The Sabbath was made for man, and not man
for the Sabbath, so that the Son of Man is lord even of the Sabbath."
For a second time, in justifying His position, He used the expression
"the Son of Man." The words might sound to Jewish ears merely as a
synonym for "man." For Himself, and possibly for some others, they
involved a reference, as appears later, to the "one like to a son of
man" in Daniel's prophecy of the coming kingdom. They emphasized His
relation to humanity as a whole, in contrast to such narrower titles as
"Son of Abraham" or "Son of David." They were fitted to express a wider
mission than that of a merely Jewish Messiah: He stood and spoke for
mankind. The controversy was renewed when a man with a withered hand
appeared in the synagogue on the Sabbath, and the rabbis watched to see
whether Jesus would heal him. For the first time, we read that Jesus was
angry. They were wilfully blind, and they would rather not see good done
than see it done in a way that contradicted their teachings and
undermined their influence. After a sharp remonstrance, He healed the
man by a mere word. And they went out to make a compact with the
followers of the worldly Herod to kill Him, and so to stave off a
religious revolution which might easily have been followed by political
trouble.
Recapitulation.
Up to this point what have we seen? On the stage of Palestine, an
outlying district of the Roman Empire, the home of the Jewish nation,
now subject but still fired with the hope of freedom and even of
universal domination under the leadership of a divinely anointed King, a
new figure has appeared. His appearance has been announced by a
reforming prophet, who has summoned the nation to return to its God, and
promised that a stronger than himself is to follow. In fulfilment of
this promise, who is it that has come? Not a rough prophet in the desert
like John, not a leader striking for political freedom, not a pretender
aiming at the petty throne of the Herods, not even a great rabbi,
building on the patriotic foundation of the Pharisees who had secured
the national life by a new devotion to the ancient law. None of these,
but, on the contrary, an unknown figure from the remote hills of
Galilee, standing on the populous shores of its lake, proclaiming as a
message from God that the highest hopes were about to be fulfilled,
fastening attention on Himself by speaking with authority and attaching
a few followers to His person, exhibiting wonderful powers of healing as
a sign that He has come to fulfil all needs, manifesting at the same
time an unparalleled sympathy, and setting quietly aside every religious
convention which limited the outflow of this sympathy; and as the result
of all this arousing the enthusiasm of astonished multitudes and evoking
the opposition and even the murderous resentment of the religious guides
of the nation. Of His teaching we have heard nothing, except in the
occasional sentences by which He justified some of His unexpected
actions. No party is formed, no programme is announced, no doctrine is
formulated; without assuming the title of Messiah, He offers Himself as
the centre of expectation, and seems to invite an unlimited confidence
in His person. This, then, in brief summary, is what we have seen: the
natural development of an historical situation, a march of events
leading rapidly to a climax; an unexampled strength and an unexampled
sympathy issuing inevitably in an unexampled liberty; and then the
forces of orthodox religion combining with the forces of worldly
indifference in order to suppress a dangerous innovator. Yet the writer
who in a few pages presents us with so remarkable a representation shows
no consciousness at all of artistic treatment. He tells a simple tale in
the plainest words: he never stops to offer a comment or to point a
moral. The wonder of it all is not in the writing, but in the subject
itself. We feel that we have here no skilful composition, but a bare
transcript of what occurred. And we feel besides that such a narrative
as this is the worthy commencement of an answer to the question with
which its readers would have come to it: What was the beginning of the
Gospel? How did the Lord Jesus speak and act? and why did He arouse such
malignant enmity amongst His own people?
We have followed St Mark's narrative up to the point at which it became
clear that conciliatory argument could have no effect upon the Jewish
religious leaders. The controversy about the Sabbath had brought their
dissatisfaction to a climax. Henceforth Jesus was to them a
revolutionary, who must, by any means, be suppressed. After this
decisive breach a new period opens. Jesus leaves Capernaum, never again,
it would seem, to appear in its synagogue. Henceforward He was to be
found, with His disciples, on the shore of the lake, where vast
multitudes gathered round Him, drawn not only from Galilee and Judaea,
but also from the farther districts north and east of these. He would
take refuge from the crowds in a boat, which carried Him from shore to
shore; and His healing activity was now at its height. Yet in the midst
of this popular enthusiasm He knew that the time had come to prepare for
a very different future, and accordingly a fresh departure was made when
He selected twelve of His disciples for a more intimate companionship,
with a view to a special mission: "He appointed twelve that they might
be with Him, and that He might send them forth to preach and to have
power to cast out the devils." The excitement and pressure of the crowds
was at this time almost overwhelming, and the relatives of Jesus
endeavoured to restrain Him; "for they said, He is mad." The scribes
from Jerusalem offered a more sinister explanation, saying that He was
possessed by the prince of the devils, and that this was why He was able
to control all the evil spirits. He answered them first in figurative
language, speaking of the certain downfall of a kingdom or a family
divided against itself, and of the strong man's house which could not be
looted unless the strong man were first bound. Then followed the
tremendous warning, that to assign His work to Satan, and so to call
good evil, was to blaspheme against the Holy Spirit--the one sin which
admitted of no forgiveness. Presently, when He was told that His mother
and brethren were calling for Him, He disclaimed their interference by
pointing to a new circle of family relationship, consisting of all those
who "do the will of God."
Christ's Teaching.
Again we find Him teaching by the lake, and the pressure of the
multitude is still so great that He sits in a boat while they line the
shore. For the first time we are allowed to hear how He taught them. He
gives them a parable from nature--the sower's three kinds of failure,
compensated by the rich produce of the good soil. At the close He utters
the pregnant saying: "He that hath ears to hear let him hear." When His
disciples afterwards asked for an explanation, He prefaced it by saying
that the inner circle only were intended to understand. The disciples
might learn that the message would often prove fruitless, but that
nevertheless an abundant harvest would result. For the light was
intended to shine, and the hidden was meant to be revealed. Another
parable compared the kingdom of God to seed which, when once planted,
must inevitably germinate; the process was secret and slow, but the
harvest was certain. Again, it was like the tiny mustard-seed which grew
out of all proportion to its original size, till the birds could shelter
in its great branches. These enigmatic speeches were all that the
multitudes got, but the disciples in private were taught their lesson of
hope. As we review this teaching it is very remarkable. The world of
common things is seen to be a lesson-book of the kingdom of God to those
who have eyes to read it. What that kingdom is to be we are not told; we
are only taught that its coming is secret, slow and certain. If nature
in its ordinary processes was thus seen to be full of significance, the
disciples were also to learn that it was under His control. As the boat
from which He had been teaching passed to the other side, the tired
Teacher slept. A sudden storm terrified the disciples, and they roused
Him in alarm. He stilled the storm with a word and rebuked their want of
faith. "Who then is this," they whispered with awe, "that even the wind
and the sea obey Him?" On the opposite hills a solitary spectator had
watched the rise and the lull of the tempest, a fierce demoniac who
dwelt among the tombs on the mountain-side. He believed himself to be
possessed by a regiment of demons. When Jesus bade them go forth, he
begged that they might be allowed to enter into a herd of swine which
was hard by. His request was granted, and the swine rushed over a steep
place into the lake. It is worth while to note that while most of the
cures which Jesus had performed appear to have belonged to this class,
this particular case is described as an exceptionally severe one, and
the visible effect of the removal of his tormentors may have greatly
helped to restore the man's shattered personality.
We must not attempt to trace in detail the whole of St Mark's story. We
have followed it long enough to see its directness and simplicity, to
observe the naturalness with which one incident succeeds another, and to
watch the gradual manifestation of a personality at once strong and
sympathetic, wielding extraordinary powers, which are placed wholly at
the service of others, and refusing to be hindered from helping men by
the ordinary restrictions of social or religious custom. And we have
seen as the consequence of all this the development of an historical
situation in which the leaders of current orthodoxy ally themselves with
the indifferentism which accepts existing political conditions in order
to put down a disturber of the peace. We must now be content with a
broader survey of the course of events.
Healing Powers.
Two notable cures were wrought on the western side of the lake--the
healing of the woman with the issue and the raising of Jairus's
daughter. In each of these cures prominence is given to the requirement
and the reward of faith--that is to say, of personal confidence in the
Healer: "Thy faith hath made thee whole." "Fear not, only believe."
After this Jesus passed away from the enthusiastic crowds by the lake to
visit His own Nazareth, and to find there a strange incredulity in
regard to one whom the villagers knew as the carpenter. Once more we
come across a mysterious limitation of His powers: "He could not do
there any miracle," save the cure of a few sick folk; and He marvelled
because of their want of faith. The moment had now come when the twelve
disciples were to be entrusted with a share of His healing power and
with the proclamation of repentance. While they are journeying two and
two in various directions St Mark takes occasion to tell us the current
conjectures as to who Jesus really was. Some thought him Elijah or one
of the ancient prophets returned to earth--a suggestion based on popular
tradition; others said He was John the Baptist risen from the dead--the
superstition of Herod who had put him to death. When the disciples
returned, Jesus took them apart for rest; but the crowds reassembled
when they found Him again near the lake, and His yearning compassion for
these shepherdless sheep led Him to give them an impressive sign that He
had indeed come to supply all human needs. Hitherto His power had gone
forth to individuals, but now He fed five thousand men from the scanty
stock of five loaves and two fishes. That night He came to His disciples
walking upon the waters, and in the period which immediately followed
there was once more a great manifestation of healing power.
Opposition of the Scribes.
We have heard nothing for some time of any opposition; but now a fresh
conflict arose with certain scribes who had come down from Jerusalem,
and who complained that the disciples neglected the ceremonial washing
of their hands before meals. Jesus replied with a stern rebuke,
addressing the questioners as hypocrites, and exposing the falsity of a
system which allowed the breach of fundamental commandments in order
that traditional regulations might be observed. He then turned from them
to the multitude, and uttered a saying which in effect annulled the
Jewish distinction between clean and unclean meats. This was a direct
attack on the whole Pharisaic position. The controversy was plainly
irreconcilable, and Jesus withdrew to the north, actually passing
outside the limits of the Holy Land. He desired to remain unknown, and
not to extend His mission to the heathen population, but the
extraordinary faith and the modest importunity of a Syrophenician woman
induced Him to heal her daughter. Then He returned by a circuitous route
to the Sea of Galilee. His return was marked by another miraculous
feeding of the multitude, and also by two healing miracles which present
unusual features. In both the patient was withdrawn from the multitude
and the cure was wrought with the accompaniment of symbolic actions.
Moreover, in one case Jesus is described as groaning before He spoke; in
the other the cure was at first incomplete; and both of the men were
strictly charged to observe silence afterwards. It cannot be a mere
coincidence that these are the last cures which St Mark records as
performed in Galilee.
Messianic Teaching.
In fact the Galilean ministry is now closed. Jesus retires northwards to
Caesarea Philippi, and appears henceforth to devote Himself entirely to
the instruction of his disciples, who needed to be prepared for the
fatal issue which could not long be delayed. He begins by asking them
the popular opinion as to His Person. The suggestions are still the
same--John the Baptist, or Elijah, or some other of the prophets. But
when He asked their own belief, Peter replied, "Thou art the Christ." He
warned them not to make this known; and He proceeded to give them the
wholly new teaching that the Son of Man must suffer and be killed,
adding that after three days He must rise again. Peter took Him aside
and urged Him not to speak so. But He turned to the other disciples and
openly rebuked Peter. And then, addressing a yet wider circle, He
demanded of those who should follow Him a self-sacrifice like His own.
He even used the metaphor of the cross which was carried by the sufferer
to the place of execution. Life, he declared, could only be saved by
voluntary death. He went on to demand an unswerving loyalty to Himself
and His teaching in the face of a threatening world; and then He
promised that some of those who were present should not die before they
had seen the coming of the kingdom of God. We have had no hint of such
teaching as this in the whole of the Galilean ministry. Jesus had stood
forth as the strong healer and helper of men; it was bewildering to hear
Him speak of dying. He had promised to fulfil men's highest
expectations, if only they would not doubt His willingness and power. He
had been enthusiastically reverenced by the common people, though
suspected and attacked by the religious leaders. He had spoken of "the
will of God" as supreme, and had set aside ceremonial traditions. He had
announced the nearness of the kingdom of God, but had described it only
in parables from nature. He had adopted the vague title of the "Son of
Man," but had refrained from proclaiming Himself as the expected
Messiah. At last the disciples had expressed their conviction that He
was the Christ, and immediately He tells them that He goes to meet
humiliation and death as the necessary steps to a resurrection and a
coming of the Son of Man in the glory of His Father. It was an amazing
announcement and He plainly added that their path like His own lay
through death to life. The dark shadows of this picture of the future
alone could impress their minds, but a week later three of them were
allowed a momentary vision of the light which should overcome the
darkness. They saw Jesus transfigured in a radiance of glory: Elijah
appeared with Moses, and they talked with Jesus. A cloud came over them,
and a Voice, like that of the Baptism, proclaimed "This is My Son, the
Beloved: hear ye Him." They were bidden to keep the vision secret till
the Son of Man should have risen from the dead. It was in itself a
foretaste of resurrection, and the puzzled disciples remembered that the
scribes declared that before the resurrection Elijah would appear. Their
minds were confused as to what resurrection was meant. Jesus told them
that Elijah had in fact come; and He also said that the Scriptures
foretold the sufferings of the Son of Man. But the situation was wholly
beyond their grasp, and the very language of St Mark at this point seems
to reflect the confusion of their minds.
The other disciples, in the meantime, had been vainly endeavouring to
cure a peculiarly violent case of demoniacal possession. Jesus Himself
cast out the demon, but not before the suffering child had been rendered
seemingly lifeless by a final assault. Then they journeyed secretly
through Galilee towards Judaea and the eastern side of the Jordan. On
the way Jesus reinforced the new lesson of self-renunciation. He offered
the little children as the type of those to whom the kingdom of God
belonged; and He disappointed a young and wealthy aspirant to His
favour, amazing His disciples by saying that the kingdom of God could
hardly be entered by the rich; he who forsook all should have all, and
more than all; the world's estimates were to be reversed--the first
should be last and the last first. They were now journeying towards
Jerusalem, and the prediction of the Passion was repeated. James and
John, who had witnessed the Transfiguration, and who were confident of
the coming glory, asked for the places nearest to their Master, and
professed their readiness to share His sufferings. When the other ten
were aggrieved Jesus declared that greatness was measured by service,
not by rank; and that the Son of Man had come not to be served but to
serve, and to give His life to ransom many other lives. As they came up
from the Jordan valley and passed through Jericho, an incident occurred
which signalized the beginning of the final period. A blind man appealed
to Jesus as "the Son of David," and was answered by the restoration of
his sight; and when, a little later, Jesus fulfilled an ancient prophecy
by mounting an ass and riding into Jerusalem, the multitudes snouted
their welcome to the returning "kingdom of David." Hitherto He had not
permitted any public recognition of His Messiahship, but now He entered
David's city in lowly but significant pomp as David's promised heir.
Entry into Jerusalem.
Two incidents illustrate the spirit of judgment with which He approached
the splendid but apostate city. On His arrival He had carefully observed
the condition of the Temple, and had retired to sleep outside the city.
On the following morning, finding no fruit on a fig-tree in full leaf,
He said, "Let no man eat fruit of thee henceforth for ever." It was a
parable of impending doom. Then, when He entered the Temple, He swept
away with a fiery zeal the merchants and merchandise which had turned
God's House into "a robbers' den." The act was at once an assertion of
commanding authority and an open condemnation of the religious rulers
who had permitted the desecration. Its immediate effect was to make new
and powerful enemies; for the chief priests, as well as their rivals the
scribes, were now inflamed against Him. At the moment they could do
nothing, but the next day they formally demanded whence He derived His
right so to act. When they refused to answer His question as to the
authority of John the Baptist, He in turn refused to tell them His own.
But He uttered a parable which more than answered them. The owner of the
vineyard, who had sent his servants and last of all his only son, would
visit their rejection and murder on the wicked husbandmen. He added a
reminder that the stone which the builders refused was, after all, the
Divine choice. They were restrained from arresting Him by fear of the
people, to whom the meaning of the parable was plain. They therefore
sent a joint deputation of Pharisees and Herodians to entrap Him with a
question as to the Roman tribute, in answering which He must either lose
His influence with the people or else lay Himself open to a charge of
treason. When they were baffled, the Sadducees, to whose party the chief
priests belonged, sought in vain to pose Him with a problem as to the
resurrection of the dead; and after that a more honest scribe confessed
the truth of His teaching as to the supremacy of love to God and man
over all the sacrificial worship of the Temple, and was told in reply
that he was not far from the kingdom of God. Jesus Himself now put a
question as to the teaching of the scribes which identified the Messiah
with "the Son of David"; and then He denounced those scribes whose pride
and extortion and hypocrisy were preparing for them a terrible doom.
Before He left the Temple, never to return, one incident gave Him pure
satisfaction. His own teaching that all must be given for God was
illustrated by the devotion of a poor widow who cast into the treasury
the two tiny coins which were all that she had. As He passed out He
foretold, in words which corresponded to the doom of the fig-tree, the
utter demolition of the imposing but profitless Temple; and presently He
opened up to four of His disciples a vision of the future, warning them
against false Christs, bidding them expect great sorrows, national and
personal, declaring that the gospel must be proclaimed to all the
nations, and that after a great tribulation the Son of Man should
appear, "coming with the clouds of heaven." The day and the hour none
knew, neither the angels nor the Son, but only the Father: it was the
duty of all to watch.
Final Scenes.
We now come to the final scenes. The passover was approaching, and plots
were being laid for His destruction. He Himself spoke mysteriously of
His burial, when a woman poured a vase of costly ointment upon His head.
To some this seemed a wasteful act; but He accepted it as a token of the
love which gave all that was in its power, and He promised that it
should never cease to illustrate His Gospel. Two of the disciples were
sent into Jerusalem to prepare the Passover meal. During the meal Jesus
declared that He should be betrayed by one of their number. Later in the
evening He gave them bread and wine, proclaiming that these were His
body and His blood--the tokens of His giving Himself to them, and of a
new covenant with God through His death. As they withdrew to the Mount
of Olives He foretold their general flight, but promised that when He
was risen He would go before them into Galilee. Peter protested
faithfulness unto death, but was told that he would deny his Master
three times that very night. Then coming to a place called Gethsemane,
He bade the disciples wait while He should pray; and taking the three
who had been with Him at the Transfiguration He told them to tarry near
Him and to watch. He went forward, and fell on the ground, praying that
"the cup might be taken away" from Him, but resigning Himself to His
Father's will. Presently Judas arrived with a band of armed men, and
greeted his Master with a kiss--the signal for His arrest. The disciples
fled in panic, after one of them had wounded the high priest's servant.
Only a nameless young man tried to follow, but he too fled when hands
were laid upon him. Before the high priest Jesus was charged, among
other accusations, with threatening to destroy the Temple; but the
matter was brought to an issue when He was plainly asked if He were "the
Christ, the Son of the Blessed One." He answered that He was, and He
predicted that they should see the fulfilment of Daniel's vision of the
Son of Man sitting on the right hand of power. Thereupon He was
condemned to death for manifest blasphemy, and a scene of cruel mockery
followed. Meanwhile Peter in the court below had been sitting with the
servants, and in his anxiety to escape recognition had thrice declared
that he did not know Jesus. Thus the night passed, and in the morning
Jesus was taken to Pilate, for the Jewish council had no power to
execute their decree of death. Pilate's question, "Art Thou the King of
the Jews?" shows the nature of the accusation which was thought likely
to tell with the Roman governor. He had already in bonds one leader of
revolution, whose hands were stained with blood--a striking contrast to
the calm and silent figure who stood before him. At this moment a crowd
came up to ask the fulfilment of his annual act of grace, the pardon of
a prisoner at the Passover. Pilate, discerning that it was the envy of
the rulers which sought to destroy an inconvenient rival, offered "the
King of the Jews" as the prisoner to be released. But the chief priests
succeeded in making the people ask for Barabbas and demand the
crucifixion of Jesus. Pilate fulfilled his pledge by giving them the man
of their choice, and Jesus, whom he had vainly hoped to release on a
satisfactory pretext, he now condemned to the shameful punishments of
scourging and crucifixion; for the cross, as Jesus had foreseen, was the
inevitable fate of a Jewish pretender to sovereignty. The Roman soldiers
mocked "the King of the Jews" with a purple robe and a crown of thorns.
As they led Him out they forced the cross, which the sufferer commonly
carried, upon the shoulders of one Simon of Cyrene, whose son's
Alexander and Rufus are here mentioned--probably as being known to St
Mark's readers; at any rate, it is interesting to note that, in writing
to the Christians at Rome, St Paul a few years earlier had sent a
greeting to "Rufus and his mother." Over the cross, which stood between
two others, was the condemnatory inscription, "The King of the Jews."
This was the Roman designation of Him whom the Jewish rulers tauntingly
addressed as "the King of Israel." The same revilers, with a deeper
truth than they knew, summed up the mystery of His life and death when
they said, "He saved others, Himself He cannot save."
A great darkness shrouded the scene for three hours, and then, in His
native Aramaic, Jesus cried in the words of the Psalm, "My God, My God,
why has Thou forsaken Me?" One other cry He uttered, and the end came,
and at that moment the veil of the Temple was rent from top to
bottom--an omen of fearful import to those who had mocked Him, even on
the cross, as the destroyer of the Temple, who in three days should
build it anew. The disciples of Jesus do not appear as spectators of the
end, but only a group of women who had ministered to His needs in
Galilee, and had followed Him up to Jerusalem. These women watched His
burial, which was performed by a Jewish councillor, to whom Pilate had
granted the body after the centurion had certified the reality of the
unexpectedly early death. The body was placed in a rock-hewn tomb, and a
great stone was rolled against the entrance. Sunset brought on the
Jewish sabbath, but the next evening the women brought spices to anoint
the body, and at sunrise on the third day they arrived at the tomb, and
saw that the stone was rolled away. They entered and found a young man
in a white robe, who said, "He is risen, He is not here," and bade them
say to His disciples and Peter, "He goeth before you into Galilee; there
ye shall see Him, as He said unto you." In terror they fled from the
tomb, "and they said nothing to any man, for they feared...."
So with a broken sentence the narrative ends. The document is imperfect,
owing probably to the accidental loss of its last leaf. In very early
times attempts were made to furnish it with a fitting close; but neither
of the supplements which we find in manuscripts can be regarded as
coming from the original writer. If we ask what must, on grounds of
literary probability, have been added before the record was closed, we
may content ourselves here with saying that some incident must certainly
have been narrated which should have realized the twice-repeated promise
that Jesus would be seen by His disciples in Galilee.
3. _Document used by St Matthew and St Luke._--We pass on now to compare
with this narrative of St Mark another very early document which no
longer exists in an independent form, but which can be partially
reconstructed from the portions of it which have been embodied in the
Gospels of St Matthew and St Luke.
When we review St Mark's narrative as a whole we are struck, first of
all, with its directness and simplicity. It moves straightforward upon a
well-defined path. It shows us the Lord Jesus entering on the mission
predicted by the Baptist without declaring Himself to be the Messiah;
attracting the multitudes in Galilee by His healing power and His
unbounded sympathy, and at the same time awakening the envy and
suspicion of the leaders of religion; training a few disciples till they
reach the conviction that He is the Christ, and then, but not till then,
admitting them into the secret of His coming sufferings, and preparing
them for a mission in which they also must sacrifice themselves; then
journeying to Jerusalem to fulfil the destiny which He foresaw,
accepting the responsibility of the Messianic title, only to be
condemned by the religious authorities as a blasphemer and handed over
to the Roman power as a pretender to the Jewish throne. That is the
story in its barest outline. It is adequate to its presumed purpose of
offering to distant Gentile converts a clear account of their Master's
earthly work, and of the causes which led to His rejection by His own
people and to His death by Roman crucifixion. The writer makes no
comment on the wonderful story which he tells. Allusions to Jewish
customs are, indeed, explained as they occur, but apart from this the
narrative appears to be a mere transcript of remembered facts. The
actors are never characterized; their actions are simply noted down;
there is no praise and no blame. To this simplicity and directness of
narrative we may in large measure attribute the fact that when two later
evangelists desired to give fuller accounts of our Lord's life they both
made this early book the basis of their work. In those days there was no
sense of unfairness in using up existing materials in order to make a
more complete treatise. Accordingly so much of St Mark's Gospel has been
taken over word for word in the Gospels of St Luke and St Matthew that,
if every copy of it had perished, we could still reconstruct large
portions of it by carefully comparing their narratives. They did not
hesitate, however, to alter St Mark's language where it seemed to them
rough or obscure, for each of them had a distinctive style of his own,
and St Luke was a literary artist of a high order. Moreover, though they
both accepted the general scheme of St Mark's narrative, each of them
was obliged to omit many incidents in order to find room for other
material which was at their disposal, by which they were able to
supplement the deficiencies of the earlier book. The most conspicuous
deficiency was in regard to our Lord's teaching, of which, as we have
seen, St Mark had given surprisingly little. Here they were happily in a
position to make a very important contribution.
For side by side with St Mark's Gospel there was current in the earliest
times another account of the doings and sayings of Jesus Christ. Our
knowledge of it to-day is entirely derived from a comparison of the two
later evangelists who embodied large portions of it, working it in and
out of the general scheme which they derived from St Mark, according as
each of them thought most appropriate. St Luke appears to have taken it
over in sections for the most part without much modification; but in St
Matthew's Gospel its incidents seldom find an independent place; the
sayings to which they gave rise are often detached from their context
and grouped with sayings of a similar character so as to form
considerable discourses, or else they are linked on to sayings which
were uttered on other occasions recorded by St Mark. It is probable that
many passages of St Luke's Gospel which have no parallel in St Matthew
were also derived from this early source; but this is not easily capable
of distinct proof; and, therefore, in order to gain a secure conception
of the document we must confine ourselves at first to those parts of it
which were borrowed by both writers. We shall, however, look to St Luke
in the main as preserving for us the more nearly its original form.
We proceed now to give an outline of the contents of this document. To
begin with, it contained a fuller account of the teaching of John the
Baptist. St Mark tells us only his message of hope; but here we read the
severer language with which he called men to repentance. We hear his
warning of "the coming wrath": his mighty Successor will baptize with
fire; the fruitless tree will be cast into the fire; the chaff will be
separated from the wheat and burned with unquenchable fire; the claim to
be children of Abraham will not avail, for God can raise up other
children to Abraham, if it be from the stones of the desert. Next, we
have a narrative of the Temptation, of which St Mark had but recorded
the bare fact. It was grounded on the Divine sonship, which we already
know was proclaimed at the Baptism. In a threefold vision Jesus is
invited to enter upon His inheritance at once; to satisfy His own needs,
to accept of earthly dominion, to presume on the Divine protection. The
passage stands almost alone as a revelation of inner conflict in a life
which outwardly was marked by unusual calm.
The Sermon on the Mount.
Not far from the beginning of the document there stood a remarkable
discourse delivered among the hills above the lake. It opens with a
startling reversal of the common estimates of happiness and misery. In
the light of the coming kingdom it proclaims the blessedness of the
poor, the hungry, the sad and the maligned; and the woefulness of the
rich, the full, the merry and the popular. It goes on to reverse the
ordinary maxims of conduct. Enemies are to be loved, helped, blessed,
prayed for. No blow is to be returned; every demand, just or unjust, is
to be granted: in short, "as ye desire that men should do to you, do in
like manner to them." Then the motive and the model of this conduct are
adduced: "Love your enemies ... and ye shall be sons of the Highest; for
He is kind to the thankless and wicked. Be merciful, as your Father is
merciful; and judge not, and ye shall not be judged." We note in passing
that this is the first introduction of our Lord's teaching of the
fatherhood of God. God is your Father, He says in effect; you will be
His sons if like Him you will refuse to make distinctions, loving
without looking for a return, sure that in the end love will not be
wholly lost. Then follow grave warnings--generous towards others, you
must be strict with yourselves; only the good can truly do good; hearers
of these words must be doers also, if they would build on the rock and
not on the sand. So, with the parable of the two builders, the discourse
reached its formal close.
It was followed by the entry of Jesus into Capernaum, where He was asked
to heal the servant of a Roman officer. This man's unusual faith, based
on his soldierly sense of discipline, surprised the Lord, who declared
that it had no equal in Israel itself. Somewhat later messengers arrived
from the imprisoned Baptist, who asked if Jesus were indeed "the coming
One" of whom he had spoken. Jesus pointed to His acts of healing the
sick, raising the dead and proclaiming good news for the poor; thereby
suggesting to those who could understand that He fulfilled the ancient
prophecy of the Messiah. He then declared the greatness of John in
exalted terms, adding, however, that the least in the kingdom of God was
John's superior. Then He complained of the unreasonableness of an age
which refused John as too austere and Himself as too lax and as being
"the friend of publicans and sinners." This narrative clearly
presupposes a series of miracles already performed, and also such a
conflict with the Pharisees as we have seen recorded by St Mark.
Presently we find an offer of discipleship met by the warning that "the
Son of Man" is a homeless wanderer; and then the stern refusal of a
request for leave to perform a father's funeral rites.
Other Sayings of Jesus.
Close upon these incidents follows a special mission of disciples,
introduced by the saying: "The harvest is great, but the labourers are
few." The disciples as they journey are to take no provisions, but to
throw themselves on the bounty of their hearers; they are to heal the
sick and to proclaim the nearness of the kingdom of God. The city that
rejects them shall have a less lenient judgment than Sodom; Tyre and
Sidon shall be better off than cities like Chorazin and Bethsaida which
have seen His miracles; Capernaum, favoured above all, shall sink to the
deepest depth. If words could be sterner than these, they are those
which follow: "He that heareth you heareth Me; and he that rejecteth you
rejecteth Me; but He that rejecteth Me rejecteth Him that sent Me." This
reference to His own personal mission is strikingly expanded in words
which He uttered on the return of the disciples. After thanking the
Father for revealing to babes what He hides from the wise, He continued
in mysterious language: "All things are delivered to Me by My Father;
and none knoweth who the Son is but the Father; and who the Father is
but the Son, and he to whom the Son chooseth to reveal Him." Happy were
the disciples in seeing and hearing what prophets and kings had looked
for in vain.
When His disciples, having watched Him at prayer, desired to be taught
how to pray, they were bidden to address God as "Father"; to ask first
for the hallowing of the Father's name, and the coming of His kingdom;
then for their daily food, for the pardon of their sins and for freedom
from temptation. It was the prayer of a family--that the sons might be
true to the Father, and the Father true to the sons; and they were
further encouraged by a parable of the family: "Ask and ye shall
receive.... Every one that asketh receiveth": for the heavenly Father
will do more, not less, than an earthly father would do for his
children. After He had cast out a dumb demon, some said that His power
was due to Beelzebub. He accordingly asked them by whom the Jews
themselves cast out demons; and He claimed that His power was a sign
that the kingdom of God was come. But He warned them that demons cast
out once might return in greater force. When they asked for a sign from
heaven, He would give them no more than the sign of Jonah, explaining
that the repentant Ninevites should condemn the present generation: so,
too, should the queen of Sheba; for that which they were now rejecting
was more than Jonah and more than Solomon. Yet further warnings were
given when a Pharisee invited Him to his table, and expressed surprise
that He did not wash His hands before the meal. The cleansing of
externals and the tithing of garden-produce, He declares, have usurped
the place of judgment and the love of God. Woe is pronounced upon the
Pharisees: they are successors to the murderers of the prophets. Then
citing from Genesis and 2 Chronicles, the first and last books in the
order of the Jewish Bible, He declared that all righteous blood from
that of Abel to that of Zachariah should be required of that generation.
After this the disciples are encouraged not to fear their murderous
opponents. The very sparrows are God's care--much more shall they be;
the hairs of their head are all counted. In the end the Son of Man will
openly own those who have owned Him before men. For earthly needs no
thought is to be taken: the birds and the flowers make no provision for
their life and beauty. God will give food and raiment to those who are
seeking His kingdom. Earthly goods should be given away in exchange for
the imperishable treasures. Suddenly will the Son of Man come: happy the
servant whom His Master finds at his appointed task. In brief parables
the kingdom of God is likened to a mustard-seed and to leaven. When
Jesus is asked if the saved shall be few, He replies that the door is a
narrow one. Then, changing His illustration, He says that many shall
seek entrance in vain; for the master of the house will refuse to
recognize them. But while they are excluded, a multitude from all
quarters of the earth shall sit down with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and
the prophets in the kingdom of God.
His eyes are now fixed on Jerusalem, where, like the prophets, He must
die. "Jerusalem, Jerusalem, how often have I desired to gather thy
children together, as a bird her brood beneath her wings, but ye
refused." "Ye shall not see Me, until ye shall say, Blessed is He that
cometh in the name of the Lord." After this we have the healing of a
dropsical man on the Sabbath, with a reply to the murmuring Pharisees;
and then a parable of the failure of invited guests and the filling of
their places from the streets. A few fragmentary passages remain, of
which it will be sufficient to cite a word or two to call them to
remembrance. There is a warning that he who forsakes not father and
mother cannot be a disciple, nor he who does not bear his cross.
Savourless salt is fit for nothing. The lost sheep is brought home with
a special joy. "Ye cannot serve God and Mammon." Scandals must arise,
but woe to him through whom they arise. The Son of Man will come with
the suddenness of lightning; the days of Noah and the days of Lot will
find a parallel in their blind gaiety and their inevitable disaster. He
who seeks to gain his life will lose it. "One shall be taken, and the
other left." "Where the carcase is, the vultures will gather." Then,
lastly, we have a parable of the servant who failed to employ the money
entrusted to him; and a promise that the disciples shall sit on twelve
thrones to judge the twelve tribes of Israel. We cannot say by our
present method of determination, how this document closed; for in the
narratives of the Passion and the Resurrection St Matthew and St Luke
only coincide in passages which they have taken from St Mark.
Comparison with St Mark.
Now that we have reconstructed in outline this early account of the Lord
Jesus, so far as it has been used by both the later evangelists, we may
attempt to compare the picture which it presents to us with that which
was offered by St Mark. But in doing so we must remember that we know it
only in fragments. There can be little doubt that much more of it is
embedded in St Luke's Gospel, and something more also in St Matthew's;
but in order to stand on firm ground we have considered thus far only
those portions which both of these writers elected to use in composing
their later narratives. To go beyond this is a work of delicate
discrimination. It can only be effected by a close examination of the
style and language of the document, which may enable us in some
instances to identify with comparative security certain passages which
are found in St Luke, but which St Matthew did not regard as suitable
for his purpose. Among these we may venture, quite tentatively, to
mention the sermon at Nazareth which opened with a passage from the Book
of Isaiah, the raising of the widow's son at Nain, and the parable of
the good Samaritan. These are found in St Luke, but not in St Matthew.
On the other hand, it is not improbable that the wonderful words which
begin, "Come unto Me all ye that labour," were drawn by St Matthew from
the same document, though they are not recorded by St Luke. But here we
have entered upon a region of less certainty, in which critical
scholarship has still much to do; and these passages are mentioned here
only as a reminder that the document must have contained more than what
St Matthew and St Luke each independently determined to borrow from it.
Looking, then, at the portions which we have indicated as having this
two-fold testimony, we see that in their fragmentary condition we cannot
trace the clear historical development which was so conspicuous a
feature of St Mark's Gospel; yet we need not conclude that in its
complete form it failed to present an orderly narrative. Next, we see
that wherever we are able to observe its method of relating an incident,
as in the case of the healing of the centurion's servant, we have the
same characteristics of brevity and simplicity which we admired in St
Mark. No comment is made by the narrator; he tells his tale in the
fewest words and passes on. Again, we note that it supplies just what we
feel we most need when we have reached the end of St Mark's story, a
fuller account of the teaching which Jesus gave to His disciples and to
the people at large. And we see that the substance of that teaching is
in complete harmony with the scattered hints that we found in St Mark.
If the fatherhood of God stands out clearly, we may remember a passage
of St Mark also which speaks of "the Heavenly Father" as forgiving those
who forgive. If prayer is encouraged, we may also remember that the same
passage of St Mark records the saying: "All things whatsoever ye pray
for and ask, believe that ye have received them and ye shall have them."
If in one mysterious passage Jesus speaks of "the Father" and "the
Son"--terms with which the Gospel of St John has made us familiar--St
Mark also in one passage uses the same impressive terms--"the Son" and
"the Father." There are, of course, many other parallels with St Mark,
and at some points the two documents seem to overlap and to relate the
same incidents in somewhat different forms. There is the same use of
parables from nature, the same incisiveness of speech and employment of
paradox, the same demand to sacrifice all to Him and for His cause, the
same importunate claim made by Him on the human soul.
The Element of Warning.
But the contrast between the two writers is even more important for our
purpose. No one can read through the passages to which we have pointed
without feeling the solemn sternness of the great Teacher, a sternness
which can indeed be traced here and there in St Mark, but which does not
give its tone to the whole of his picture. Here we see Christ standing
forth in solitary grandeur, looking with the eyes of another world on a
society which is blindly hastening to its dissolution. It may be that if
this document had come down to us in its entirety, we should have
gathered from it an exaggerated idea of the severity of our Lord's
character. Certain it is that as we read over these fragments we are
somewhat startled by the predominance of the element of warning, and by
the assertion of rules of conduct which seem almost inconsistent with a
normal condition of settled social life. The warning to the nation
sounded by the Baptist, that God could raise up a new family for
Abraham, is heard again and again in our Lord's teaching. Gentile faith
puts Israel to shame. The sons of the kingdom will be left outside,
while strangers feast with Abraham. Capernaum shall go to perdition;
Jerusalem shall be a desolate ruin. The doom of the nation is
pronounced; its fate is imminent; there is no ray of hope for the
existing constitution of religion and society. As to individuals within
the nation, the despised publicans and sinners will find God's favour
before the self-satisfied representatives of the national religion. In
such a condition of affairs it is hardly surprising to find that the
great and stern Teacher congratulates the poor and has nothing but pity
for the rich; that He has no interest at all in comfort or property. If
a man asks you for anything, give it him; if he takes it without asking,
do not seek to recover it. Nothing material is worth a thought; anxiety
is folly; your Father, who feeds His birds and clothes His flowers, will
feed and clothe you. Rise to the height of your sonship to God; love
your enemies even as God loves His; and if they kill you, God will care
for you still; fear them not, fear only Him who loves you all.
Here is a new philosophy of life, offering solid consolation amid the
ruin of a world. We have no idea who the disciple may have been who thus
seized upon the sadder elements of the teaching of Jesus; but we may
well think of him as one of those who were living in Palestine in the
dark and threatening years of internecine strife, when the Roman eagles
were gathering round their prey, and the first thunder was muttering of
the storm which was to leave Jerusalem a heap of stones. At such a
moment the warnings of our Lord would claim a large place in a record of
His teaching, and the strange comfort which He had offered would be the
only hope which it would seem possible to entertain.
The Earlier Narratives.
4. _Additions by the Gospel according to St Matthew._--We have now
examined in turn the two earliest pictures which have been preserved to
us of the life of Jesus Christ. The first portrays Him chiefly by a
record of His actions, and illustrates His strength, His sympathy, and
His freedom from conventional restraints. It shows the disturbing forces
of these characteristics, which aroused the envy and apprehension of the
leaders of religion. The first bright days of welcome and popularity are
soon clouded: the storm begins to lower. More and more the Master
devotes Himself to the little circle of His disciples, who are taught
that they, as well as He, can only triumph through defeat, succeed by
failure, and find their life in giving it away. At length, in fear of
religious innovations and pretending that He is a political usurper, the
Jews deliver Him up to die on a Roman cross. The last page of the story
is torn away, just at the point when it has been declared that He is
alive again and about to show Himself to His disciples. The second
picture has a somewhat different tone. It is mainly a record of
teaching, and the teaching is for the most part stern and paradoxical.
It might be described as revolutionary. It is good tidings to the poor:
it sets no store on property and material comfort: it pities the wealthy
and congratulates the needy. It reverses ordinary judgments and
conventional maxims of conduct. It proclaims the downfall of
institutions, and compares the present blind security to the days of
Noah and of Lot: a few only shall escape the coming overthrow. Yet even
in this sterner setting the figure portrayed is unmistakably the same.
There is the same strength, the same tender sympathy, the same freedom
from convention: there is the same promise to fulfil the highest hopes,
the same surrender of life, and the same imperious demand on the lives
of others. No thoughtful man who examines and compares these pictures
can doubt that they are genuine historical portraits of a figure wholly
different from any which had hitherto appeared on the world's stage.
They are beyond the power of human invention. They are drawn with a
simplicity which is their own guarantee. If we had these, and these
only, we should have an adequate explanation of the beginnings of
Christianity. There would still be a great gap to be filled before we
reached the earliest letters of St Paul; but yet we should know what the
Apostle meant when he wrote to "the Church of the Thessalonians in God
the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ," and reminded them how they had
"turned from idols to serve the living and true God, and to wait for His
Son from heaven, whom He raised from the dead, even Jesus who delivereth
us from the wrath to come."
If these two narratives served the first needs of Christian believers,
it is easy to see that they would presently stimulate further activity
in the same direction. For, to begin with, they were obviously
incomplete: many incidents and teachings known to the earliest disciples
found no place in them; and they contained no account of the life of
Jesus Christ before His public ministry, no record of His pedigree, His
birth or His childhood. Secondly, their form left much to be desired;
for one of them at least was rude in style, sometimes needlessly
repetitive and sometimes brief to obscurity. Moreover the very fact that
there were two challenged a new and combined work which perhaps should
supersede both.
The Gospel of St Matthew.
Accordingly, some years after the fall of Jerusalem--we cannot tell the
exact date or the author's name--the book which we call the Gospel
according to St Matthew was written to give the Palestinian Christians a
full account of Jesus Christ, which should present Him as the promised
Messiah, fulfilling the ancient Hebrew prophecies, proclaiming the
kingdom of heaven, and founding the Christian society. The writer takes
St Mark as his basis, but he incorporates into the story large portions
of the teaching which he has found in the other document. He groups his
materials with small regard to chronological order; and he fashions out
of the many scattered sayings of our Lord continuous discourses,
everywhere bringing like to like, with considerable literary art. A wide
knowledge of the Old Testament supplies him with a text to illustrate
one incident after another; and so deeply is he impressed with the
correspondence between the life of Christ and the words of ancient
prophecy, that he does not hesitate to introduce his quotations by the
formula "that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet."
His Hebrew instinct leads him to begin with a table of genealogy,
artificially constructed in groups of fourteen generations--from Abraham
to David, from David to the Captivity, and from the Captivity to the
Christ. The royal descent of the Messiah is thus declared, and from the
outset His figure is set against the background of the Old Testament. He
then proceeds to show that, though His lineage is traced through
Joseph's ancestors, He was but the adopted son of Joseph, and he tells
the story of the Virgin-birth. The coming of the Child draws Eastern
sages to his cradle and fills the court of Herod with suspicious fears.
The cruel tyrant kills the babes of Bethlehem, but the Child has been
withdrawn by a secret flight into Egypt, whence he presently returns to
the family home at Nazareth in Galilee. All this is necessarily fresh
material, for the other records had dealt only with the period of public
ministry. We have no knowledge of the source from which it was drawn.
From the historical standpoint its value must be appraised by the
estimate which is formed of the writer's general trustworthiness as a
narrator, and by the extent to which the incidents receive confirmation
from other quarters. The central fact of the Virgin-birth, as we shall
presently see, has high attestation from another early writer.
Discourses and Parables.
The next addition which St Matthew's Gospel makes to our knowledge is of
a different kind. It consists of various important sayings of our Lord,
which are combined with discourses found in the second document and are
worked up into the great utterance which we call the Sermon on the
Mount. Such grouping of materials is a feature of this Gospel, and was
possibly designed for purposes of public instruction; so that continuous
passages might be read aloud in the services of the Church, just as
passages from the Old Testament were read in the Jewish synagogues. This
motive would account not only for the arrangement of the material, but
also for certain changes in the language which seem intended to remove
difficulties, and to interpret what is ambiguous or obscure. An example
of such interpretation meets us at the outset. The startling saying,
"Blessed are ye poor," followed by the woe pronounced upon the rich,
might seem like a condemnation of the very principle of property; and
when the Christian Church had come to be organized as a society
containing rich and poor, the heart of the saying was felt to be more
truly and clearly expressed in the words, "Blessed are the poor in
spirit." This interpretative process may be traced again and again in
this Gospel, which frequently seems to reflect the definite tradition of
a settled Church.
Apart from the important parables of the tares, the pearl and the net,
the writer adds little to his sources until we come to the remarkable
passage in ch. xvi., in which Peter the Rock is declared to be the
foundation of the future Church, and is entrusted with the keys of the
kingdom of heaven. The function of "binding and loosing," here assigned
to him, is in identical terms assigned to the disciples generally in a
passage in ch. xviii. in which for the second time we meet with the word
"Church"--a word not found elsewhere in the Gospels. There is no
sufficient ground for denying that these sayings were uttered by our
Lord, but the fact that they were now first placed upon record
harmonizes with what has been said already as to the more settled
condition of the Christian society which this Gospel appears to reflect.
The parables of the two debtors, the labourers in the vineyard, the two
sons, the ten virgins, the sheep and goats, are recorded only by this
evangelist. But by way of incident he has almost nothing to add till we
come to the closing scenes. The earthquake at the moment of our Lord's
death and the subsequent appearance of departed saints are strange
traditions unattested by other writers. The same is to be said of the
soldiers placed to guard the tomb, and of the story that they had been
bribed to say that the sacred body had been stolen while they slept. On
the other hand, the appearance of the risen Christ to the women may have
been taken from the lost pages of St Mark, being the sequel to the
narrative which is broken off abruptly in this Gospel: and it is not
improbable that St Mark's Gospel was the source of the great commission
to preach and baptize with which St Matthew closes, though the wording
of it has probably been modified in accordance with a settled tradition.
The work which the writer of this Gospel thus performed received the
immediate sanction of a wide acceptance. It met a definite spiritual
need. It presented the Gospel in a suitable form for the edification of
the Church; and it confirmed its truth by constant appeals to the Old
Testament scriptures, thus manifesting its intimate relation with the
past as the outcome of a long preparation and as the fulfilment of a
Divine purpose. No Gospel is so frequently quoted by the early
post-apostolic writers: none has exercised a greater influence upon
Christianity, and consequently upon the history of the world.
Yet from the purely historical point of view its evidential value is not
the same as that of St Mark. Its facts for the most part are simply
taken over from the earlier evangelist, and the historian must obviously
prefer the primary source. Its true importance lies in its attestation
of the genuineness of the earlier portraits to which it has so little to
add, in its recognition of the relation of Christ to the whole purpose
of God as revealed in the Old Testament, and in its interpretation of
the Gospel message in its bearing on the living Church of the primitive
days.
5. _Additions by St Luke._--While the needs of Jewish believers were
amply met by St Matthew's Gospel, a like service was rendered to Gentile
converts by a very different writer. St Luke was a physician who had
accompanied St Paul on his missionary journeys. He undertook a history
of the beginnings of Christianity, two volumes of which have come down
to us, entitled the Gospel and the Acts of the Apostles. His Gospel,
like St Matthew's, is founded on St Mark, with the incorporation of
large portions of the second document of which we have spoken above. But
the way in which the two writers have used the same materials is
strikingly different. In St Matthew's Gospel the original sources are
frequently blended: the incidents of St Mark are rearranged and often
grouped afresh according to subject matter: harsh and ambiguous
sentences of both documents are toned down or interpreted. St Luke, on
the contrary, chooses between parallel stories of his two sources,
preferring neither to duplicate nor to combine: he incorporates St Mark
in continuous sections, following him alone for a time, then leaving him
entirely, and then returning to introduce a new block of his narrative.
He modifies St Mark's style very freely, but he makes less change in the
recorded words of our Lord, and he adheres more closely to the original
language of the second document.
In his first two chapters he gives an account of the birth and childhood
of St John the Baptist and of our Lord Himself, gathered perhaps
directly from the traditions of the Holy Family, and written in close
imitation of the sacred stories of the Old Testament which were familiar
to him in their Greek translation. The whole series of incidents differ
from that which we find in St Matthew's Gospel, but there is no direct
variance between them. The two narratives are in agreement as to the
central fact of the Virgin-birth. St Luke gives a table of genealogy
which is irreconcilable with the artificial table of St Matthew's
Gospel, and which traces our Lord's ancestry up to Adam, "which was the
son of God."
The opening scene of the Galilean ministry is the discourse at Nazareth,
in which our Lord claims to fulfil Isaiah's prophecy of the proclamation
of good tidings to the poor. The same prophecy is alluded to in His
reply to the Baptist's messengers which is incorporated subsequently
from the second document. The scene ends with the rejection of Christ by
His own townsfolk, as in the parallel story of St Mark which St Luke
does not give. It is probable that St Luke found this narrative in the
second document, and chose it after his manner in preference to the less
instructive story in St Mark. He similarly omits the Marcan account of
the call of the fishermen, substituting the story of the miraculous
draught. After that he follows St Mark alone, until he introduces after
the call of the twelve apostles the sermon which begins with the
beatitudes and woes. This is from the second document, which he
continues to use, and that without interruption (if we may venture to
assign to it the raising of the widow's son at Nain and the anointing by
the sinful woman in the Pharisee's house), until he returns to
incorporate another section from St Mark.
Characteristic Section of St. Luke's Gospel.
This in turn is followed by the most characteristic section of his
Gospel (ix. 51-xviii. 14), a long series of incidents wholly independent
of St Mark, and introduced as belonging to the period of the final
journey from Galilee to Jerusalem. Much of this material is demonstrably
derived from the second document; and it is quite possible that the
whole of it may come from that source. There are special reasons for
thinking so in regard to certain passages, as for example the mission of
the seventy disciples and the parable of the good Samaritan, although
they are not contained in St Matthew's Gospel.
For the closing scenes at Jerusalem St Luke makes considerable additions
to St Mark's narrative: he gives a different account of the Last Supper,
and he adds the trial before Herod and the incident of the penitent
robber. He appears to have had no information as to the appearance of
the risen Lord in Galilee, and he accordingly omits from his
reproduction of St Mark's narrative the twice-repeated promise of a
meeting with the disciples there. He supplies, however, an account of
the appearance to the two disciples at Emmaus and to the whole body of
the apostles in Jerusalem.
St Luke's use of his two main sources has preserved the characteristics
of both of them. The sternness of certain passages, which has led some
critics to imagine that he was an Ebionite, is mainly, if not entirely,
due to his faithful reproduction of the language of the second document.
The key-note of his Gospel is universality: the mission of the Christ
embraces the poor, the weak, the despised, the heretic and the sinful:
it is good tidings to all mankind. He tells of the devotion of Mary and
Martha, and of the band of women who ministered to our Lord's needs and
followed Him to Jerusalem: he tells also of His kindness to more than
one sinful woman. Zacchaeus the publican and the grateful Samaritan
leper further illustrate this characteristic. Writing as he does for
Gentile believers he omits many details which from their strongly Jewish
cast might be unintelligible or uninteresting. He also modifies the
harshness of St Mark's style, and frequently recasts his language in
reference to diseases. From an historical point of view his Gospel is of
high value. The proved accuracy of detail elsewhere, as in his narration
of events which he witnessed in company with St Paul, enhances our
general estimation of his work. A trustworthy observer and a literary
artist, the one non-Jewish evangelist has given us--to use M. Renan's
words--"the most beautiful book in the world."
6. _Additions by St John._--We come lastly to consider what addition to
our knowledge of Christ's life and work is made by the Fourth Gospel. St
Mark's narrative of our Lord's ministry and passion is so simple and
straightforward that it satisfies our historical sense. We trace a
natural development in it: we seem to see why with such power and such
sympathy He necessarily came into conflict with the religious leaders of
the people, who were jealous of the influence which He gained and were
scandalized by His refusal to be hindered in His mission of mercy by
rules and conventions to which they attached the highest importance. The
issue is fought out in Galilee, and when our Lord finally journeys to
Jerusalem He knows that He goes there to die. The story is so plain and
convincing in itself that it gives at first sight an impression of
completeness. This impression is confirmed by the Gospels of St Matthew
and St Luke, which though they add much fresh material do not disturb
the general scheme presented by St Mark. But on reflection we are led to
question the sufficiency of the account thus offered to us. Is it
probable, we ask, that our Lord should have neglected the sacred custom
in accordance with which the pious Jew visited Jerusalem several times
each year for the observance of the divinely appointed feasts? It is
true that St Mark does not break his narrative of the Galilean ministry
to record such visits: but this does not prove that such visits were not
made. Again, is it probable that He should have so far neglected
Jerusalem as to give it no opportunity of seeing Him and hearing His
message until the last week of His life? If the writers of the other two
Gospels had no means at their disposal for enlarging the narrow
framework of St Mark's narrative by recording definite visits to
Jerusalem, at least they preserve to us words from the second document
which seem to imply such visits: for how else are we to explain the
pathetic complaint, "Jerusalem, Jerusalem, how often would I have
gathered thee, as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings; but ye
would not"?
St John's Gospel meets our questionings by a wholly new series of
incidents and by an account of a ministry which is concerned mainly not
with Galileans but with Judaeans, and which centres in Jerusalem. It is
carried on to a large extent concurrently with the Galilean ministry: it
is not continuous, but is taken up from feast to feast as our Lord
visits the sacred city at the times of its greatest religious activity.
It differs in character from the Galilean ministry: for among the
simple, unsophisticated folk of Galilee Jesus presents Himself as a
healer and helper and teacher, keeping in the background as far as
possible His claim to be the Messiah; whereas in Jerusalem His authority
is challenged at His first appearance, the element of controversy is
never absent, His relation to God is from the outset the vital issue,
and consequently His Divine claim is of necessity made explicit. Time
after time His life is threatened before the feast is ended, and when
the last passover has come we can well understand, what was not made
sufficiently clear in the brief Marcan narrative, why Jerusalem proved
so fatally hostile to His Messianic claim.
The Purpose of St John's Gospel.
The Fourth Gospel thus offers us a most important supplement to the
limited sketch of our Lord's life which we find in the Synoptic Gospels.
Yet this was not the purpose which led to its composition. That purpose
is plainly stated by the author himself: "These things have been written
that ye may believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that
believing ye may have life in His name." His avowed aim is, not to write
history, but to produce conviction. He desires to interpret the coming
of Jesus Christ into the world, to declare whence and why He came, and
to explain how His coming, as light in the midst of darkness, brought a
crisis into the lives of all with whom He came in contact. The issue of
this crisis in His rejection by the Jews at Jerusalem is the main theme
of the book.
St John's prologue prepares us to find that he is not writing for
persons who require a succinct narrative of facts, but for those who
having such already in familiar use are asking deep questions as to our
Lord's mission. It goes back far behind human birth or lines of
ancestry. It begins, like the sacred story of creation, "In the
beginning." The Book of Genesis had told how all things were called into
existence by a Divine utterance: "God said, Let there be ... and there
was." The creative Word had been long personified by Jewish thought,
especially in connexion with the prophets to whom "the Word of the Lord"
came. "In the beginning," then, St John tells us, the Word was--was with
God--yea, was God. He was the medium of creation, the source of its
light and its life--especially of that higher life which finds its
manifestation in men. So He was in the world, and the world was made by
Him, and yet the world knew Him not. At length He came, came to the home
which had been prepared for Him, but His own people rejected Him. But
such as did receive Him found a new birth, beyond their birth of flesh
and blood: they became children of God, were born of God. In order thus
to manifest Himself He had undergone a human birth: "the Word was made
flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory"--the glory, as the
evangelist has learned to see, of the Father's only-begotten Son, who
has come into the world to reveal to men that God whom "no man hath ever
seen." In these opening words we are invited to study the life of Christ
from a new point of view, to observe His self-manifestation and its
issue. The evangelist looks back across a period of half a century, and
writes of Christ not merely as he saw Him in those far-off days, but as
he has come by long experience to think and speak of Him. The past is
now filled with a glory which could not be so fully perceived at the
time, but which, as St John tells, it was the function of the Holy
Spirit to reveal to Christ's disciples.
The first name which occurs in this Gospel is that of John the Baptist.
He is even introduced into the prologue which sketches in general terms
the manifestation of the Divine Word: "There was a man sent from God,
whose name was John: he came for witness, to witness to the Light, that
through him all might believe." This witness of John holds a position of
high importance in this Gospel. His mission is described as running on
for a while concurrently with that of our Lord, whereas in the other
Gospels we have no record of our Lord's work until John is cast into
prison. It is among the disciples of the Baptist on the banks of the
Jordan that Jesus finds His first disciples. The Baptist has pointed Him
out to them in striking language, which recalls at once the symbolic
ritual of the law and the spiritual lessons of the prophets: "Behold,
the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world."
Soon afterwards at Cana of Galilee Jesus gives His first "sign," as the
evangelist calls it, in the change of water into wine to supply the
deficiency at a marriage feast. This scene has all the happy brightness
of the early Galilean ministry which St Mark records. It stands in sharp
contrast with the subsequent appearance of Jesus in Jerusalem at the
Passover, when His first act is to drive the traders from the Temple
courts. In this He seems to be carrying the Baptist's stern mission of
purification from the desert into the heart of the sacred city, and so
fulfilling, perhaps consciously, the solemn prophecy of Malachi which
opens with the words: "Behold, I will send My Messenger, and He shall
prepare the way before Me; and the Lord whom ye seek shall suddenly come
to His Temple" (Mai. iii. 1-5). This significant action provokes a
challenge of His authority, which is answered by a mysterious saying,
not understood at the time, but interpreted afterwards as referring to
the Resurrection. After this our Lord was visited secretly by a Pharisee
named Nicodemus, whose advances were severely met by the words, "Except
a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." When Nicodemus
objected that this was to demand a physical impossibility, he was
answered that the new birth was "of water and spirit"--words which
doubtless contained a reference to the mission of the Baptist and to his
prophecy of One who should baptize with the Holy Spirit. Towards the end
of this conversation the evangelist passes imperceptibly from reporting
the words of the Lord into an interpretation or amplification of them,
and in language which recalls the prologue he unfolds the meaning of
Christ's mission and indicates the crisis of self-judgment which
necessarily accompanies the manifestation of the Light to each
individual. When he resumes his narrative the Lord has left Jerusalem,
and is found baptizing disciples, in even greater numbers than the
Baptist himself. Though Jesus did not personally perform the rite, it is
plain once again that in this early period He closely linked His own
mission with that of John the Baptist. When men hinted at a rivalry
between them, John plainly declared "He must increase, and I must
decrease": and the reply of Jesus was to leave Judaea for Galilee.
Away from the atmosphere of contention we find Him manifesting the same
broad sympathy and freedom from convention which we have noted in the
other Gospels, especially in that of St Luke. He converses with a woman,
with a woman moreover who is a Samaritan, and who is of unchaste life.
He offers her the "living water" which shall supply all her needs: she
readily accepts Him as the expected Messiah, and He receives a welcome
from the Samaritans. He passes on to Galilee, where also He is welcomed,
and where He performs His second "sign," healing the son of one of
Herod's courtiers.
The Ministry at Jerusalem.
But St John's interest does not lie in Galilee, and he soon brings our
Lord back to Jerusalem on the occasion of a feast. The Baptist's work is
now ended; and, though Jesus still appeals to the testimony of John, the
new conflict with the Jewish authorities shows that He is moving now on
His own independent and characteristic lines. In cleansing the Temple He
had given offence by what might seem an excess of rigour: now, by
healing a sick man and bidding him carry his bed on the Sabbath, He
offended by His laxity. He answered His accusers by the brief but
pregnant sentence: "My Father worketh even until now, and I work." They
at once understood that He thus claimed a unique relation to God, and
their antagonism became the more intense: "the Jews therefore sought the
more to kill Him, because He had not only broken the Sabbath, but had
also said that God was His own Father, making Himself equal to God." His
first reply is then expanded to cover the whole region of life. The Son
beholds the Father at work, and works concurrently, doing nothing of
Himself. He does the Father's will. The very principle of life is
entrusted to Him. He quickens, and He judges. As Son of Man He judges
man.
The next incident is the feeding of the five thousand, which belongs to
the Galilean ministry and is recorded by the three other evangelists. St
John's purpose in introducing it is not historical but didactic. It is
made the occasion of instruction as to the heavenly food, the flesh and
blood of Him who came down from heaven. This teaching leads to a
conflict with certain Judaeans who seem to have come from Jerusalem, and
it proves a severe test even to the faith of disciples.
The feast of tabernacles brings fresh disputes in Jerusalem, and an
attempt is made to arrest Jesus. A climax of indignation is reached when
a blind man is healed at the pool of Siloam on the sabbath day. At the
feast of the dedication a fresh effort at arrest was made, and Jesus
then withdrew beyond the Jordan. Here He learned of the sickness of
Lazarus, and presently He returned and came to Bethany to raise him from
the dead. The excitement produced by this miracle led to yet another
attack, destined this time to be successful, on the life of Jesus. The
Passover was at hand, and the last supper of our Lord with His disciples
on the evening before the Passover lamb was killed is made the occasion
of the most inspiring consolations. Our Lord interprets His relation to
the disciples by the figure of a tree and its branches--He is the whole
of which they are the parts; He promises the mission of the Holy Spirit
to continue His work in the world; and He solemnly commends to His
Father the disciples whom He is about to leave.
The account of the trial and the crucifixion differs considerably from
the accounts given in the other Gospels. St John's narratives are in
large part personal memories, and in more than one incident he himself
figures as the unnamed disciple "whom Jesus loved." In the Resurrection
scenes he also gives incidents in which he has played a part; and the
appearances of the risen Lord are not confined either to Jerusalem or to
Galilee, but occur in both localities.
If we ask what is the special contribution to history, apart from
theology, which St John's Gospel makes, the answer would seem to be
this--that beside the Galilean ministry reported by St Mark there was a
ministry to "Jews" (Judaeans) in Jerusalem, not continuous, but
occasional, taken up from time to time as the great feasts came round;
that its teaching was widely different from that which was given to
Galileans, and that the situation created was wholly unlike that which
arose out of the Galilean ministry. The Galilean ministry opens with
enthusiasm, ripening into a popularity which even endangers a
satisfactory result. Where opposition manifests itself, it is not native
opposition, but comes from religious teachers who are parts of a system
which centres in Jerusalem, and who are sometimes expressly noted as
having come from Jerusalem. The Jerusalem ministry on the contrary is
never welcomed with enthusiasm. It has to do with those who challenge it
from the first. There is no atmosphere of simplicity and teachableness
which rejoices in the manifestation of power and sympathy and liberty.
It is a witness delivered to a hostile audience, whether they will hear
or no. Ultimate issues are quickly raised: keen critics see at once the
claims which underlie deeds and words, and the claims in consequence
become explicit: the relation of the teacher to God Himself is the vital
interest. The conflict which thus arose explains what St Mark's succinct
narrative had left unexplained--the fatal hostility of Jerusalem. It may
have been a part of St John's purpose to give this explanation, and to
make other supplements or corrections where earlier narratives appeared
to him incomplete or misleading. But he says nothing to indicate this,
while on the other hand he distinctly proclaims that his purpose is to
produce and confirm conviction of the divine claims of Jesus Christ.
For bibliography see BIBLE; CHRISTIANITY; CHURCH HISTORY; and the
articles on the separate Gospels. (J. A. R.)
JET (Fr. _jais_, Ger. _Gagat_), a substance which seems to be a peculiar
kind of lignite or anthracite; often cut and polished for ornaments. The
word "jet" probably comes, through O. Fr. _jaiet_, from the classical
_gagates_, a word which was derived, according to Pliny, from Gagas, in
Lycia, where jet, or a similar substance, was originally found. Jet was
used in Britain in prehistoric times; many round barrows of the Bronze
age have yielded jet beads, buttons, rings, armlets and other ornaments.
The abundance of jet in Britain is alluded to by Caius Julius Solinus
(fl. 3rd century) and jet ornaments are found with Roman relics in
Britain. Probably the supply was obtained from the coast of Yorkshire,
especially near Whitby, where nodules of jet were formerly picked up on
the shore. Caedmon refers to this jet, and at a later date it was used
for rosary beads by the monks of Whitby Abbey.
The Whitby jet occurs in irregular masses, often of lenticular shape,
embedded in hard shales known as jet-rock. The jet-rock series belongs
to that division of the Upper Lias which is termed the zone of
_Ammonites serpentinus_. Microscopic examination of jet occasionally
reveals the structure of coniferous wood, which A. C. Seward has shown
to be araucarian. Probably masses of wood were brought down by a
river, and drifted out to sea, where becoming water-logged they sank,
and became gradually buried in a deposit of fine mud, which eventually
hardened into shale. Under pressure, perhaps assisted by heat, and
with exclusion of air, the wood suffered a peculiar kind of
decomposition, probably modified by the presence of salt water, as
suggested by Percy E. Spielmann. Scales of fish and other fossils of
the jet-rock are frequently impregnated with bituminous products,
which may replace the original tissues. Drops of liquid bitumen occur
in the cavities of some fossils, whilst inflammable gas is not
uncommon in the jet-workings, and petroleum may be detected by its
smell. Iron pyrites is often associated with the jet.
Formerly sufficient jet was found in loose pieces on the shore, set
free by the disintegration of the cliffs, or washed up from a
submarine source. When this supply became insufficient, the rock was
attacked by the jet-workers; ultimately the workings took the form of
true mines, levels being driven into the shales not only at their
outcrop in the cliffs but in some of the inland dales of the Yorkshire
moorlands, such as Eskdale. The best jet has a uniform black colour,
and is hard, compact and homogeneous in texture, breaking with a
conchoidal fracture. It must be tough enough to be readily carved or
turned on the lathe, and sufficiently compact in texture to receive a
high polish. The final polish was formerly given by means of rouge,
which produces a beautiful velvety surface, but rotten-stone and
lampblack are often employed instead. The softer kinds, not capable of
being freely worked, are known as bastard jet. A soft jet is obtained
from the estuarine series of the Lower Oolites of Yorkshire.
Much jet is imported from Spain, but it is generally less hard and
lustrous than true Whitby jet. In Spain the chief locality is
Villaviciosa, in the province of Asturias. France furnishes jet,
especially in the department of the Aude. Much jet, too, occurs in the
Lias of Württemberg, and works have been established for its
utilization. In the United States jet is known at many localities but
is not systematically worked. Pennsylvanian anthracite, however, has
been occasionally employed as a substitute. In like manner Scotch
cannel coal has been sometimes used at Whitby. Imitations of jet, or
substitutes for it, are furnished by vulcanite, glass, black obsidian
and black onyx, or stained chalcedony. Jet is sometimes improperly
termed black amber, because like amber, though in less degree, it
becomes electric by friction.
See P. E. Spielmann, "On the Origin of Jet," _Chemical News_ (Dec. 14,
1906); C. Fox-Strangways, "The Jurassic Rocks of Britain, Vol. I.
Yorkshire," _Mem. Geol. Surv._ (1892); J. A. Bower, "Whitby Jet and
its Manufacture," _Journ. Soc. Arts_ (1874, vol. xxii. p. 80).
JETHRO (or JETHER, Exod. iv. 18), the priest of Midian, in the Bible,
whose daughter Zipporah became the wife of Moses. He is known as Hobab
the son of Reuel the Kenite (Num. x. 29; Judg. iv. 11 ), and once as
Reuel (Exod. ii. 18); and if Zipporah is the wife of Moses referred to
in Num. xii. 1, the family could be regarded as Cushite (see Cush).
Jethro was the priest of Yahweh, and resided at the sacred mountain
where the deity commissioned Moses to deliver the Israelites from Egypt.
Subsequently Jethro came to Moses (probably at Kadesh), a great
sacrificial feast was held, and the priest instructed Moses in
legislative procedure; Exod. xviii. 27 (see EXODUS) and Num. x. 30 imply
that the scene was not Sinai. Jethro was invited to accompany the people
into the promised land, and later, we find his clan settling in the
south of Judah (Judg. i. 16); see KENITES. The traditions agree in
representing the kin of Moses as related to the mixed tribes of the
south of Palestine (see EDOM) and in ascribing to the family an
important share in the early development of the worship of Yahweh.
Cheyne suggests that the names of Hobab and of Jonadab the father of the
Rechabites (q.v.) were originally identical (_Ency. Bib._ ii. col.
2101).
JETTY. The term jetty, derived from Fr. _jetée_, and therefore
signifying something "thrown out," is applied to a variety of structures
employed in river, dock and maritime works, which are generally carried
out in pairs from river banks, or in continuation of river channels at
their outlets into deep water; or out into docks, and outside their
entrances; or for forming basins along the sea-coast for ports in
tideless seas. The forms and construction of these jetties are as varied
as their uses; for though they invariably extend out into water, and
serve either for directing a current or for accommodating vessels, they
are sometimes formed of high open timber-work, sometimes of low solid
projections, and occasionally only differ from breakwaters in their
object.
_Jetties for regulating Rivers._--Formerly jetties of timber-work were
very commonly extended out, opposite one another, from each bank of a
river, at intervals, to contract a wide channel, and by concentration
of the current to produce a deepening of the central channel; or
sometimes mounds of rubble stone, stretching down the foreshore from
each bank, served the same purpose. As, however, this system
occasioned a greater scour between the ends of the jetties than in the
intervening channels, and consequently produced an irregular depth, it
has to a great extent been superseded by longitudinal training works,
or by dipping cross dikes pointing somewhat upstream (see RIVER
ENGINEERING).
[Illustration: FIG 1.--Timber Jetty across Dock Slope.]
_Jetties at Docks._--Where docks are given sloping sides, openwork
timber jetties are generally carried across the slope, at the ends of
which vessels can lie in deep water (fig. 1); or more solid structures
are erected over the slope for supporting coal-tips. Pilework jetties
are also constructed in the water outside the entrances to docks on
each side, so as to form an enlarging trumpet-shaped channel between
the entrance, lock or tidal basin and the approach channel, in order
to guide vessels in entering or leaving the docks. Solid jetties,
moreover, lined with quay walls, are sometimes carried out into a wide
dock, at right angles to the line of quays at the side, to enlarge the
accommodation; and they also serve, when extended on a large scale
from the coast of a tideless sea under shelter of an outlying
breakwater, to form the basins in which vessels lie when discharging
and taking in cargoes in such a port as Marseilles (see DOCK).
_Jetties at Entrances to Jetty Harbours._--The approach channel to
some ports situated on sandy coasts is guided and protected across the
beach by parallel jetties, made solid up to a little above low water
of neap tides, on which open timber-work is erected, provided with a
planked platform at the top raised above the highest tides. The
channel between the jetties was originally maintained by tidal scour
from low-lying areas close to the coast, and subsequently by the
current from sluicing basins; but it is now often considerably
deepened by sand-pump dredging. It is protected to some extent by the
solid portion of the jetties from the inroad of sand from the adjacent
beach, and from the levelling action of the waves; whilst the upper
open portion serves to indicate the channel, and to guide the vessels
if necessary (see HARBOUR). The bottom part of the older jetties, in
such long-established jetty ports as Calais, Dunkirk and Ostend, was
composed of clay or rubble stone, covered on the top by fascine-work
or pitching; but the deepening of the jetty channel by dredging, and
the need which arose for its enlargement, led to the reconstruction of
the jetties at these ports. The new jetties at Dunkirk were founded in
the sandy beach, by the aid of compressed air, at a depth of 22¾ ft.
below low water of spring tides; and their solid masonry portion, on a
concrete foundation, was raised 5(3/5) ft. above low water of neap
tides (fig. 2).
[Illustration: FIG. 2.--Dunkirk East Jetty.]
_Jetties at Lagoon Outlets._--A small tidal rise spreading tidal water
over a large expanse of lagoon or inland back-water causes the influx
and efflux of the tide to maintain a deep channel through a narrow
outlet; but the issuing current on emerging from the outlet, being no
longer confined by a bank on each side, becomes dispersed, and owing
to the reduction of its scouring force, is no longer able at a
moderate distance from the shore effectually to resist the action of
the waves and littoral currents tending to form a continuous beach in
front of the outlet. Hence a bar is produced which diminishes the
available depth in the approach channel. By carrying out a solid jetty
over the bar, however, on each side of the outlet, the tidal currents
are concentrated in the channel across the bar, and lower it by scour.
Thus the available depth of the approach channels to Venice through
the Malamocco and Lido outlets from the Venetian lagoon have been
deepened several feet over their bars by jetties of rubble stone
surmounted by a small superstructure (fig. 3), carried out across the
foreshore into deep water on both sides of the channel. Other examples
are provided by the long jetties extended into the sea in front of the
entrance to Charleston harbour, formerly constructed of fascines,
weighted with stone and logs, but subsequently of rubble stone, and by
the two converging rubble jetties carried out from each shore of
Dublin bay for deepening the approach to Dublin harbour.
[Illustration: FIG. 3.--Lido Outlet Jetty, Venice.]
[Illustration: FIG. 4.--Mississippi South Pass Outlet Jetty.]
_Jetties at the Outlet of Tideless Rivers._--Jetties have been
constructed on each side of the outlet of some of the rivers flowing
into the Baltic, with the objects of prolonging the scour of the river
and protecting the channel from being shoaled by the littoral drift
along the shore. The most interesting application of parallel jetties
is in lowering the bar in front of one of the mouths of a deltaic
river flowing into a tideless sea, by extending the scour of the river
out to the bar by a virtual prolongation of its banks. Jetties
prolonging the Sulina branch of the Danube into the Black Sea, and the
south pass of the Mississippi into the Gulf of Mexico (fig. 4), formed
of rubble stone and concrete blocks, and fascine mattresses weighted
with stone and surmounted with large concrete blocks respectively,
have enabled the discharge of these rivers to scour away the bars
obstructing the access to them; and they have also carried the
sediment-bearing waters sufficiently far out to come under the
influence of littoral currents, which, by conveying away some of the
sediment, postpone the eventual formation of a fresh bar farther out
(see RIVER ENGINEERING).
[Illustration: FIG. 5.--River Maas Outlet, North Jetty.]
[Illustration: FIG. 6.--River Nervion Outlet, Western Jetty.]
_Jetties at the Mouth of Tidal Rivers._--Where a river is narrow near
its mouth, and its discharge is generally feeble, the sea is liable on
an exposed coast, when the tidal range is small, to block up its
outlet during severe storms. The river is thus forced to seek another
exit at a weak spot of the beach, which along a low coast may be at
some distance off; and this new outlet in its turn may be blocked up,
so that the river from time to time shifts the position of its mouth.
This inconvenient cycle of changes may be stopped by fixing the outlet
of the river at a suitable site, by carrying a jetty on each side of
this outlet across the beach, thereby concentrating its discharge in a
definite channel and protecting the mouth from being blocked up by
littoral drift. This system was long ago applied to the shifting
outlet of the river Yare to the south of Yarmouth, and has also been
successfully employed for fixing the wandering mouth of the Adur near
Shoreham, and of the Adour flowing into the Bay of Biscay below
Bayonne. When a new channel was cut across the Hook of Holland to
provide a straighter and deeper outlet channel for the river Maas,
forming the approach channel to Rotterdam, low, broad, parallel
jetties, composed of fascine mattresses weighted with stone (fig. 5),
were carried across the foreshore into the sea on either side of the
new mouth of the river, to protect the jetty channel from littoral
drift, and cause the discharge of the river to maintain it out to deep
water (see RIVER ENGINEERING). The channel, also, beyond the outlet of
the river Nervion into the Bay of Biscay has been regulated by
jetties; and by extending the south-west jetty out for nearly half a
mile with a curve concave towards the channel the outlet has not only
been protected to some extent from the easterly drift, but the bar in
front has been lowered by the scour produced by the discharge of the
river following the concave bend of the south-west jetty. As the outer
portion of this jetty was exposed to westerly storms from the Bay of
Biscay before the outer harbour was constructed, it has been given the
form and strength of a breakwater situated in shallow water (fig. 6).
(L. F. V.-H.)
JEVER, a town of Germany, in the grand-duchy of Oldenburg, 13 m. by rail
N.W. of Wilhelmshaven, and connected with the North Sea by a navigable
canal. Pop. (1901), 5486. The chief industries are weaving, spinning,
dyeing, brewing and milling; there is also a trade in horses and cattle.
The fathers (_Die Getreuen_) of the town used to send an annual birthday
present of 101 plovers' eggs to Bismarck, with a dedication in verse.
The castle of Jever was built by Prince Edo Wiemken (d. 1410), the ruler
of Jeverland, a populous district which in 1575 came under the rule of
the dukes of Oldenburg. In 1603 it passed to the house of Anhalt and was
later the property of the empress Catherine II. of Russia, a member of
this family. In 1814 it came again into the possession of Oldenburg.
See D. Hohnholz, _Aus Jevers Vorgangenheit_ (Jever, 1886); Hagena,
_Jeverland bis zum Jahr_ 1500 (Oldenburg, 1902); and F. W. Riemann,
_Geschichte des Jeverlandes_ (Jever, 1896).
JEVEROS (JEBEROS, JIBAROS, JIVAROS or GIVAROS), a tribe of South
American Indians on the upper Marañon, Peru, where they wander in the
forests. The tribe has many branches and there are frequent tribal wars,
but they have always united against a common enemy. Juan de Velasco
declares them to be faithful, noble and amiable. They are brave and
warlike, and though upon the conquest of Peru they temporarily
submitted, a general insurrection in 1599 won them back their liberty.
Curious dried human heads, supposed to have been objects of worship,
have been found among the Jeveros (see _Ethnol. Soc. Trans._ 1862, W.
Bollaert).
*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, Volume 15, Slice 3 - "Japan" (part) to "Jeveros"" ***
Copyright 2023 LibraryBlog. All rights reserved.