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
all Classics books content using ISYS

Download this book: [ ASCII | HTML | PDF ]

Look for this book on Amazon

We have new books nearly every day.
If you would like a news letter once a week or once a month
fill out this form and we will give you a summary of the books for that week or month by email.

Title: Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, Volume 17, Slice 1 - "Lord Chamberlain" to "Luqman"
Author: Various
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
Copyright Status: Not copyrighted in the United States. If you live elsewhere check the laws of your country before downloading this ebook. See comments about copyright issues at end of book.

*** Start of this Doctrine Publishing Corporation Digital Book "Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, Volume 17, Slice 1 - "Lord Chamberlain" to "Luqman"" ***

This book is indexed by ISYS Web Indexing system to allow the reader find any word or number within the document.

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

(4) Macrons and breves above letters and dots below letters were not

(5) [root] stands for the root symbol; [alpha], [beta], etc. for greek

(6) The following typographical errors have been corrected:

    ARTICLE LOTHAIR I.: "He was alternately master of the Empire, and
      banished and confined to Italy; at one time taking up arms in
      alliance with his brothers and at another fighting against them
      ..." 'alternately' amended from 'alternetely'.

    ARTICLE LOTI, PIERRE: "He proceeded to the South Seas, and on
      leaving Tahiti published the Polynesian idyll, originally called
      Rarahu (1880) ..." 'idyll' amended from 'idyl'.

    ARTICLE LOUIS XIV.: "His numerous descendants seemed at one time to
      place the succession beyond all difficulty." 'beyond' amended from

    ARTICLE LOUVET DE COUVRAI, JEAN BAPTISTE: "They were mainly written
      in the various hiding-places in which Louvet took refuge, and they
      give a vivid picture of the sufferings of the proscribed
      Girondists." 'took' amended from 'rook'.

    ARTICLE LUGO: "The bishopric dates from a very early period, and it
      is said to have acquired metropolitan rank in the middle of the 6th
      century; it is now in the archiepiscopal province of Santiago de
      Compostela." 'is' amended from 'it'.




  FIRST  edition, published in three    volumes, 1768-1771.
  SECOND    "        "        ten          "     1777-1784.
  THIRD     "        "        eighteen     "     1788-1797.
  FOURTH    "        "        twenty       "     1801-1810.
  FIFTH     "        "        twenty       "     1815-1817.
  SIXTH     "        "        twenty       "     1823-1824.
  SEVENTH   "        "        twenty-one   "     1830-1842.
  EIGHTH    "        "        twenty-two   "     1853-1860.
  NINTH     "        "        twenty-five  "     1875-1889.
  TENTH     "   ninth edition and eleven
                  supplementary volumes,         1902-1903.
  ELEVENTH  "  published in twenty-nine volumes, 1910-1911.


  in all countries subscribing to the Bern Convention


  of the

  _All rights reserved_






  New York

  Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc.
  342 Madison Avenue

  Copyright, in the United States of America, 1910,
  The Encyclopædia Britannica Company.


     Lord Chamberlain to Luqman


  LORD HIGH STEWARD                 LOWELL (Massachusetts, U.S.A.)
  LORD HOWE                         LÖWENBERG
  LORD MAYOR'S DAY                  LOWLAND
  LORD STEWARD                      LOWTH, ROBERT
  LORE                              LOYALISTS or TORIES
  LORELEI                           LOYALTY
  LORETO (Italy)                    LOYALTY ISLANDS
  LORETO (Peru)                     LOYOLA, ST IGNATIUS OF
  LORIENT                           LOZENGE
  LORINER                           LOZÈRE
  LORIS                             LUANG-PRABANG
  LORIUM                            LÜBBEN
  LÖRRACH                           LÜBECK
  LORRAINE                          LUBLIN (government of Poland)
  LORTZING, GUSTAV ALBERT           LUBLIN (town of Poland)
  LORY, CHARLES                     LUBRICANTS
  LORY                              LUBRICATION
  LOS ANDES                         LUCAN
  LOS ANGELES                       LUCANIA
  LOS ISLANDS                       LUCARIS, CYRILLUS
  LOSSIEMOUTH                       LUCARNE
  LÖSSNITZ                          LUCAS, CHARLES
  LOSTWITHIEL                       LUCAS VAN LEYDEN
  LOT (Biblical)                    LUCCA
  LOT (Franch river)                LUCCA, BAGNI DI
  LOT (Franch department)           LUCCEIUS, LUCIUS
  LOTHAIR I.                        LUCENA (southern Spain)
  LOTHAIR II. or III.               LUCERA (Italy)
  LOTHAIR (king of France)          LUCERNE (Swiss canton)
  LOTHAIR (king of Lotharingia)     LUCERNE (Swiss town)
  LOTHIAN                           LUCERNE (plant)
  LOTTERIES                         LUCIA (or Lucy), ST
  LOTTI, ANTONIO                    LUCIAN (Christian martyr)
  LOTTO, LORENZO                    LUCIAN (Greek satirist)
  LOTTO                             LUCIFER (bishop of Cagliari)
  LOTUS                             LUCIFER (planet)
  LOTUS-EATERS                      LUCILIUS, GAIUS
  LOUGHBOROUGH                      LUCKENWALDE
  LOUGHREA                          LUCKNOW
  LOUGHTON                          LUÇON
  LOUHANS                           LUCRE
  LOUIS (name)                      LUCRETIA
  LOUIS I. (Roman emperor)          LUCRETILIS MONS
  LOUIS II. (Roman emperor)         LUCRETIUS
  LOUIS III. (Roman emperor)        LUCRINUS LACUS
  LOUIS IV., or V. (Roman emperor)  LUCULLUS
  LOUIS (king of the East Franks)   LUCUS FERONIAE
  LOUIS I. (king of Bavaria)        LUCY, RICHARD DE
  LOUIS II. (king of Bavaria)       LUCY, SIR THOMAS
  LOUIS II. (king of France)        LUDDITES
  LOUIS III. (king of France)       LÜDENSCHEID
  LOUIS IV. (king of France)        LUDHIANA
  LOUIS V.                          LUDINGTON
  LOUIS VI.                         LUDLOW, EDMUND
  LOUIS VII.                        LUDLOW (town)
  LOUIS VIII.                       LUDLOW GROUP
  LOUIS IX.                         LUDOLF (or Leutholf), HIOB
  LOUIS X.                          LUDWIG, KARL FRIEDRICH WILHELM
  LOUIS XI.                         LUDWIG, OTTO
  LOUIS XII.                        LUDWIGSBURG
  LOUIS XIII.                       LUDWIGSHAFEN
  LOUIS XIV.                        LUDWIGSLUST
  LOUIS XV.                         LUG
  LOUIS XVI.                        LUGANO
  LOUIS XVII.                       LUGANO, LAKE OF
  LOUIS XVIII.                      LUGANSK
  LOUIS II. (king of Hungary)       LUGO (Spanish province)
  LOUIS (kings of Naples)           LUGO (Spanish town)
  LOUIS (king of the Franks)        LUGOS
  LOUIS OF NASSAU                   LUGUDUNUM
  LOUIS PHILIPPE I.                 LUKE
  LOUISBURG                         LUKE, GOSPEL OF ST
  LOUISE                            LULEÅ
  LOUISE OF SAVOY                   LULL (or Lully), RAIMON
  LOUISIANA (U.S.A. city)           LUMBAGO
  LOUISVILLE                        LUMBINI
  LOULÉ                             LUMP-SUCKER
  LOURDES                           LUMSDEN, SIR HARRY BURNETT
  LOUSE                             LUNA
  LOUTH (Leinster, Ireland)         LUNATION
  LOUTH (Lincolnshire, England)     LUNAVADA
  LOUVAIN                           LUNCHEON
  LOUVER                            LUND, TROELS FREDERIK
  LOUVET, JEAN                      LUND
  LOUVIERS                          LUNDY, ROBERT
  LOU[:Y]S, PIERRE                  LÜNEBURG
  LOVE-BIRD                         LUNETTE
  LOVEDALE                          LUNÉVILLE
  LOVELACE, RICHARD                 LUNG (anatomy)
  LOVELL, FRANCIS LOVELL            LUNG (symbolical creature)
  LOVER, SAMUEL                     LUNGCHOW
  LOVERE                            LUNGE, GEORG
  LOW, SETH                         LUPERCALIA
  LOW, WILL HICOK                   LUPINE
  LOWBOY                            LUPUS, PUBLIUS RUTILIUS
  LOW CHURCHMAN                     LUPUS
  LOWE, SIR HUDSON                  LUQMAN


  A. C. G.

      Keeper of Zoological Department, British Museum, 1875-1895. Gold
      Medalist, Royal Society, 1878. Author of _Catalogues of Colubrine
      Snakes, Batrachia salientia, and Fishes in the British Museum_;

    Mackerel (_in part_).

  A. C. S.

      See the biographical article: SWINBURNE, ALGERNON CHARLES.

    Marlowe, Christopher;
    Mary, Queen of Scots.

  A. E. J.

      Fellow, Tutor and Mathematical Lecturer, Corpus Christi College,
      Oxford. Senior Mathematical Scholar, 1892.


  A. F. P.

      Professor of English History in University of London. Fellow of
      All Souls' College, Oxford. Author of _England under the Protector
      Somerset_; _Henry VIII._; &c.

    Macalpine, John.

  A. G. D.

      Dominion Archivist of Canada. Member of the Geographical Board of
      Canada. Author of _The Cradle of New France_; &c. Joint-editor of
      _Documents relating to the Constitutional History of Canada_.

    McGee, T. A.

  A. Ha.

      See the biographical article: HARNACK, ADOLF.

    Manichaeism (_in part_);

  A. H. F.

       Principal of Church Missionary College, Islington, 1870-1874.

    Magic Square.

  A. H. S.

      See the biographical article: SAYCE, ARCHIBALD HENRY.


  A. H.-S.

      General in the Persian Army. Author of _Eastern Persian Irak_.


  A. J. G.*

      King's College, Cambridge. Professor of History in the University
      of Leeds.

    Louis XIII., XIV. and XV. of France.

  A. J. H.
    ALFRED J. HIPKINS, F.S.A. (1826-1903).

      Formerly Member of Council and Hon. Curator of the Royal College
      of Music, London. Member of Committee of the Inventions and Music
      Exhibition, 1885; of the Vienna Exhibition, 1892; and of the Paris
      Exhibition, 1900. Author of _Musical Instruments_; &c.

    Lute (_in part_);
    Lyre (_in part_).

  A. M. C.

      See the biographical article: CLERKE, A. M.

    Mayer, Johann Tobias.

  A. M. Cl.
    AGNES MURIEL CLAY (Mrs Edward Wilde).

      Formerly Resident Tutor of Lady Margaret Hall, Oxford.
      Joint-editor of _Sources of Roman History, 133-79 B.C._


  A. M. F.

      See the biographical article: FAIRBAIRN, A. M.

    Martineau, James.

  A. N.

      See the biographical article: NEWTON, ALFRED.


  A. N. W.

      Fellow and Senior Lecturer in Mathematics, Trinity College,
      Cambridge. Author of _A Treatise on Universal Algebra_.


  A. R. C.

      Colonel R.E. Royal Medal of Royal Society, 1887. In charge of
      Trigonometrical Operations of the Ordnance Survey, 1854-1881.

    Map: _Projections_ (_in part_).

  A. R. L.*

      Editor of the _Journal of the Institute of Brewing_. Lecturer on
      Brewing and Malting at the Sir John Cass Institute, London.
      Vice-President of the Society of Chemical Industry.


  A. Sl.

      Member of Council of Epidemiological Society. Author of _The
      London Water-Supply_; _Industrial Efficiency_; _Drink, Temperance
      and Legislation_.

    Malaria (_in part_);

  A. Sy.

      See the biographical article: SYMONS, ARTHUR.

    Mallarmé, Stéphane.

  A. Wa.

      Managing Director of Chapman & Hall, Ltd., Publishers. Formerly
      Literary Adviser to Kegan Paul & Co. Author of _Alfred Lord
      Tennyson_; _Legends of the Wheel_; _Robert Browning_ in
      "Westminster Biographies." Editor of Johnson's _Lives of the

    Lytton, 1st Baron.

  A. W. H.*

      Formerly Scholar of St John's College, Oxford. Bacon Scholar of
      Gray's Inn, 1900.

    Louis I., II., III. and IV.: _Roman Emperors_;
    Louis the German;
    Louis II. and III. of France;
    Louis the Child;
    Magna Carta;
    Maximilian I.: _Roman Emperor_.

  A. W. Hu.

      Rector of Bow Church, London. Formerly Librarian of the National
      Liberal Club. Author of _Life of Cardinal Manning_; &c.

    Manning, Cardinal.

  A. W. M.
    ARTHUR WILLIAM MOORE, C.V.O., M.A. (1853-1909).

      Trinity College, Cambridge. Formerly Speaker of the House of Keys,
      and J.P. for the Isle of Man. Author of _A History of the Isle of
      Man_; &c.

    Man, Isle of.

  A. W. R.

      Puisne Judge of the Supreme Court of Ceylon. Editor of
      _Encyclopaedia of the Laws of England_.

    Maxims, Legal.

  B. W.

      Professor of Natural Philosophy, and Vice-Provost of Trinity
      College, Dublin. Author of _Differential Calculus_; &c.

    Maclaurin, Colin.

  C. A. M. F.

      Formerly Fellow of Jesus College, Cambridge. Editor of Pindar's
      _Odes and Fragments_, and of the _Stanford Dictionary of
      Anglicized Words and Phrases_.

    Magic Square (_in part_).

  C. B. P.
    CATHERINE BEATRICE PHILLIPS, B.A. (Mrs W. Alison Phillips).

      Associate of Bedford College, London.

    Louis XVIII. of France;
    Marie Antoinette.

  C. Ch.

      Superintendent, Kew Observatory. Formerly Fellow of King's
      College, Cambridge. President of Physical Society of London. Watt
      Medallist, Institute of Civil Engineers, 1905.

    Magnetism, Terrestrial.

  C. F. A.

      Formerly Scholar of Queen's College, Oxford. Captain, 1st City of
      London (Royal Fusiliers). Author of _The Wilderness and Cold


  C. F. Cl.

      Lieutenant-Colonel, R.E. Head of the Geographical Section, British
      General Staff. Formerly British Representative on the
      Nyasa-Tanganyika Boundary Commission. Author of _Text-Book of
      Topographical Surveying_; &c.

    Map: _Projections_ (_in part_).

  C. G. Cr.

      Balliol College, Oxford. Clerk in H.M. Public Record Office,
      London. Editor of _Landor's Works_; &c.

    Manor: _in England_.

  C. H. Ha.

      Assistant Professor of History in Columbia University, New York
      City. Member of the American Historical Association.

            Matilda, Countess of Tuscany;

  C. L. K.

      Assistant Secretary to the Board of Education. Author of _Life of
      Henry V._ Editor of _Chronicles of London_ and Stow's _Survey of

    Lovell, Viscount;
    Margaret of Anjou.

  C. M.

      Professor of Church History in the University of Marburg. Author
      of _Publizistik im Zeitalter Gregor VII._; _Quellen zur Geschichte
      des Papstthums_; &c.

    Lyons, Councils of;
    Marburg, Colloquy of.

  C. Pf.

      Professor at the Sorbonne, Paris. Chevalier of the Legion of
      Honour. Author of _Études sur le règne de Robert le Pieux_.

    Mayor of the Palace.

  C. R. B.

      Professor of Modern History in the University of Birmingham.
      Formerly Fellow of Merton College, Oxford. University Lecturer in
      the History of Geography. Author of _Henry the Navigator_; _The
      Dawn of Modern Geography_; &c.

    Marignolli (_in part_).

  D. B. Ma.

      Professor of Semitic Languages, Hartford Theological Seminary,
      U.S.A. Author of _Development of Muslim Theology, Jurisprudence
      and Constitutional Theory_; _Religious Attitude and Life in
      Islam_; &c.

    Mahommedan Institutions;
    Mahommedan Law;
    Malik Ibn Anas.

  D. F. T.

      Author of _Essays in Musical Analysis_, comprising _The Classical
      Concerto_, _The Goldberg Variations_ and analyses of many other
      classical works.

    Madrigal (_in music_);
    Mass (_in music_).

  D. G. H.

      Fellow of Magdalen College, Oxford. Fellow of the British Academy.
      Keeper of the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford. Excavated at Paphos, 1888;
      Naucratis, 1899 and 1903; Ephesus, 1904-1905; Assiut, 1906-1907;
      Director, British School at Athens, 1897-1900; Director, Cretan
      Exploration Fund, 1899.


  D. H.

      Formerly British Vice-Consul at Barcelona. Author of _Short
      History of the Royal Navy_; _Life of Emilio Castelar_; &c.

    Marryat, Frederick;
    Mathews, Thomas.

  D. Mn.

      Minister of South Grove Congregational Church, Highgate. Author of
      _Constructive Congregational Ideals_; &c.

    Mackennal, Alexander.

  D. M. W.

      Extra Groom of the Bedchamber to H.M. King George V. Director of
      the Foreign Department of The Times, 1891-1899. Member of Institut
      de Droit International and Officier de l'Instruction Publique of
      France. Joint-editor of New Volumes (10th ed.) of the
      _Encyclopaedia Britannica_. Author of _Russia_; _Egypt and the
      Egyptian Question_; _The Web of Empire_; &c.


  D. S. M.*

      Laudian Professor of Arabic, Oxford. Fellow of New College. Author
      of _Arabic Papyri of the Bodleian Library_; _Mohammed and the Rise
      of Islam_; _Cairo, Jerusalem and Damascus_.


  E. A. J.

      Author of _Old English Gold Plate_; _Old Church Plate of the Isle
      of Man_; _Old Silver Sacramental Vessels of Foreign Protestant
      Churches in England_; _Illustrated Catalogue of Leopold de
      Rothschild's Collection of Old Plate_; _A Private Catalogue of the
      Royal Plate at Windsor Castle_; &c.


  E. Bn.

      Member of the German Reichstag, 1902-1906. Author of _Zur Theorie
      und Geschichte des Socialismus_; &c.


  E. C. B.

      Abbot of Downside Abbey, Bath. Author of the _Lausiac History of
      Palladius_, in "Cambridge Texts and Studies."


  E. G.

      See the biographical article: GOSSE, EDMUND.

    Loti, Pierre;
    Lyrical Poetry;
    Madrigal (_in verse_);

  E. Gr.

      See the biographical article: GARDNER, PERCY.

    Mantinela (_in part_);
    Marathon (_in part_).

  E. G. R.

      Professor of Geography at Bedford College, London, 1882-1883.
      Formerly in Topographical (now Intelligence) Department of the War
      Office. Author of _The Russians on the Amur_; _A Systematic
      Atlas_; &c.

    Map (_in part_).

  E. H. M.

      University Lecturer in Palaeography, Cambridge. Lecturer and
      Assistant Librarian at Pembroke College, Cambridge. Formerly
      Fellow of Pembroke College.


  E. L. W.

      Formerly Vice-President, Institute of Civil Engineers. Consulting
      Engineer, Manchester Ship Canal. Chief Engineer of the Manchester
      Ship Canal during its construction. Author of papers printed in
      _Proceedings of Institute of Civil Engineers_.

    Manchester Ship Canal.

  E. M. T.

      Director and Principal Librarian, British Museum, 1898-1909.
      Sandars Reader in Bibliography, Cambridge, 1895-1896. Hon. Fellow
      of University College, Oxford. Correspondent of the Institute of
      France and of the Royal Prussian Academy of Sciences. Author of
      _Handbook of Greek and Latin Palaeography_. Editor of _Chronicon


  E. O.*
    EDMUND OWEN, M.B., F.R.C.S., LL.D., D.SC.

      Consulting Surgeon to St Mary's Hospital, London, and to the
      Children's Hospital, Great Ormond Street, London. Chevalier of the
      Legion of Honour. Late Examiner in Surgery at the Universities of
      Cambridge, London and Durham. Author of _A Manual of Anatomy for
      Senior Students_.

    Mammary Gland: _Diseases_.

  E. Pr.

      Special Lecturer in Portuguese Literature in the University of
      Manchester. Examiner in Portuguese in the Universities of London,
      Manchester, &c. Commendador, Portuguese Order of S. Thiago.
      Corresponding Member of Lisbon Royal Academy of Sciences, Lisbon
      Geographical Society, &c. Editor of _Letters of a Portuguese Nun_;
      _Azurara's Chronicle of Guinea_; &c.

    Manuel de Mello.

  E. R. B.

      Formerly Scholar of New College, Oxford. Author of _House of
      Seleucus_; _Jerusalem under the High Priests_.

    Macedonian Empire;

  E. Tn.

      Author of _The English Black Monks of St Benedict_; _History of
      the Jesuits in England_.


  E. W. B. N.

      Librarian of the Bodleian Library, Oxford. Principal Librarian and
      Superintendent of the London Institution, 1873-1882. Author of
      _Keltic Researches_.

    Mandevllle, Sir John.

  F. A. P.

      See the biographical article: PALEY, F. A.


  F. C. C.

      Fellow of the British Academy. Formerly Fellow of University
      College, Oxford. Author of _The Ancient Armenian Texts of
      Aristotle_; _Myth, Magic and Morals_; &c.

    Manichaeism (_in part_).

  F. G. M. B.

      Fellow and Lecturer in Classics, Clare College, Cambridge.


  F. G. P.

      Vice-President, Anatomical Society of Great Britain and Ireland.
      Lecturer on Anatomy at St Thomas's Hospital and the London School
      of Medicine for Women. Formerly Hunterian Professor at the Royal
      College of Surgeons.

    Lymphatic System (_in part_);
    Mammary Gland: _Anatomy_.

  F. J. H.

      Camden Professor of Ancient History at Oxford University. Fellow
      of Brasenose College, Oxford. Fellow of the British Academy.
      Member of the German Imperial Archaeological Institute. Formerly
      Senior Censor, Student, Tutor and Librarian of Christ Church,
      Oxford. Ford's Lecturer, 1906. Author of Monographs on Roman
      History, &c.


  F. J. S.

      Balliol College, Oxford. Author of _The Age of Chaucer_; &c.


  F. K.

      See the biographical article: KHNOPFF, FERNAND E. J. M.


  F. Ll. G.

      Reader in Egyptology, Oxford University. Editor of the
      Archaeological Survey and Archaeological Reports of the Egypt
      Exploration Fund. Fellow of Imperial German Archaeological


  F. Po.

      See the article: POLLOCK (family).

    Maine, Sir Henry.

  F. R. C.

      Author of _South Africa from the Great Trek to the Union_.


  F. W. R.*

      Curator and Librarian at the Museum of Practical Geology, London,
      1879-1902. President of the Geologists' Association, 1887-1889.


  G. A. Gr.

      Indian Civil Service, 1873-1903. In charge of Linguistic Survey of
      India, 1898-1902. Gold Medallist, Royal Asiatic Society, 1909.
      Vice-President of the Royal Asiatic Society. Formerly Fellow of
      Calcutta University. Author of _The Languages of India_; &c.


  G. Br.
    REV. GEORGE BRYCE, M.A., D.D., LL.D., F.R.S. (Canada).

      President of the Royal Society of Canada. Head of Faculty of
      Science and Lecturer in Biology and Geology in Manitoba
      University, 1891-1904. Author of _Manitoba_; _A Short History of
      the Canadian People_; &c.

    Manitoba (_in part_).

  G. B. S.

      Author of _William I. and the German Empire_; _Life of Queen
      Victoria_; &c.


  G. C. L.

      Member of Board of Advice to Agent-General of Victoria. Formerly
      Editor and Proprietor of the _Melbourne Herald_. Secretary to
      Commissioners for Victoria at the Exhibitions in London, Paris,
      Vienna, Philadelphia and Melbourne.

    McCulloch, Sir James.

  G. G.*

      Associate Editor of _Current Literature_, 1904-1905. Editor of
      Biography, _New International Encyclopaedia_, 1901-1904,
      1906-1907, and _New International Year Book_, 1907-1908; &c.

    Martha's Vineyard.

  G. G. S.

      Professor of English Literature, Queen's University of Belfast.
      Author of _The Days of James IV._; _The Transition Period_;
      _Specimens of Middle Scots_; &c.

    Lyndsay, Sir David.

  G. H. C.

      Professor of Zoology in the Royal College of Science, Dublin.
      Author of _Insects: their Structure and Life_.

    May-Fly (_in part_).

  G. R. P.

      See the biographical article: PARKIN, GEORGE ROBERT.

    Macdonald, Sir John Alexander.

  G. Sa.

      See the biographical article: SAINTSBURY, GEORGE E. B.

    Maistre, Joseph de;
    Malherbe, Franois de;
    Marguerite de Valois;
    Marivaux, Pierre;
    Marot, Clement.

  G. W. T.

      Warden of Camden College, Sydney, N.S.W. Formerly Tutor in Hebrew
      and Old Testament History at Mansfield College, Oxford.

    Mahommedan Religion;
    Mandaeans (_in part_);

  H. B. Wo.

      Formerly Assistant Director, Geological Survey of England and
      Wales. Wollaston Medallist, Geological Society. Author of _The
      History of the Geological Society of London_; &c.

    Lyell, Sir Charles.

  H. Cl.

      Colonial Secretary, Ceylon. Fellow of the Royal Colonial
      Institute. Formerly Resident, Pahang. Colonial Secretary, Trinidad
      and Tobago, 1903-1907. Author of _Studies in Brown Humanity_;
      _Further India_; &c. Joint-author of _A Dictionary of the Malay

    Malay Peninsula;
    Malay States: _Federated_.

  H. C. H.

      Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science,
      Geological Society of America, National Geographic Society and
      Société de Spéléologie (France). Author of _Celebrated American
      Caverns_; _Handbook of Mammoth Cave of Kentucky_; &c.

    Luray Cavern;
    Mammoth Cave.

  H. De.

      Bollandist. Joint-editor of the _Acta Sanctorum_.

    Lucia, St;
    Marcellinus, St;
    Margaret, St;

  H. E. S.*

      Formerly Editor of the _Atlantic Monthly_. Author of _Life of
      James Russell Lowell_; _History of the United States_; &c.

    Lowell, James Russell.

  H. Fr.

      Art Critic, _Gazette des Beaux-Arts_ (Paris).


  H. Le.

      Queen's College, Cambridge. Curator of Oriental Literature,
      University Library, Cambridge. Formerly Chief English Master at
      the Schools of the Alliance at Cairo and Abyassiyyeh, Egypt.
      Author of _Kitab el Ansab of Samani_; &c.


  H. Lb.
    HORACE LAMB, M.A., LL.D., D.SC, F.R.S.

      Professor of Mathematics, University of Manchester. Formerly
      Fellow and Assistant Tutor of Trinity College, Cambridge. Member
      of Council of Royal Society, 1894-1896. Royal Medallist, 1902.
      President of London Mathematical Society, 1902-1904. Author of
      _Hydrodynamics_; &c.

    Mechanics: _Theoretical_.

  H. L. H.

    Malaria (_in part_).

  H. M. S.

      Balliol College, Oxford. Professor of History in the University of
      California. Author of _History of the French Revolution_; &c.

    Maintenon, Madame de;

  H. S.*

      Trinity College, Cambridge. Barrister-at-Law. Clerk of Assize for
      the Northern Circuit.

    Lytton, 1st Earl of.

  H. St.

      Author of _Idola Theatri_; _The Idea of a Free Church_; _Personal
      Idealism_; &c.

    Lotze (_in part_).

  H. W. C. D.

      Fellow and Tutor of Balliol College, Oxford. Fellow of All Souls'
      College, Oxford, 1895-1902. Author of _England under the Normans
      and Angevins_; _Charlemagne_.

    Mandeville, Geoffrey de;
    Marsh, Adam;
    Matilda, Queen;
    Matthew of Paris.

  H. W. R.*

      Professor of Church History in Rawdon College, Leeds. Senior
      Kennicott Scholar, Oxford, 1901. Author of _Hebrew Psychology in
      Relation to Pauline Anthropology_ (in _Mansfield College Essays_);

    Malachi (_in part_).

  H. Y.

      See the biographical article: YULE, SIR HENRY.

    Mandeville, Sir John (_in part_);
    Marignolli (_in part_).

  I. A.

      Reader in Talmudic and Rabbinic Literature in the University of
      Cambridge. Formerly President, Jewish Historical Society of
      England. Author of _A Short History of Jewish Literature_; _Jewish
      Life in the Middle Ages_; _Judaism_; &c.

    Luzzatto, Moses Hayim;
    Luzzatto, Samuel David;

  J. A. C.

      See the biographical article: CROWE, SIR J. A.


  J. A. S.

       See the biographical article: SYMONDS, J. A.


  J. A. V.*

      Consulting Chemist to the Royal Agricultural Society of England,
      &c. Author of _The Woburn Experiments_; &c.


  J. Bt.

      Lecturer on Construction, Architecture, Sanitation, Quantities,
      &c., at King's College, London. Member of Society of Architects.
      Member of Institute of Junior Engineers.


  J. C. R. C.

      See the biographical article: COLOMB, P. H.


  J. D. B.

      King's College. Cambridge. Correspondent of The Times in
      South-Eastern Europe. Commander of the Orders of Prince Danilo of
      Montenegro and of the Saviour of Greece, and Officer of the Order
      of St Alexander of Bulgaria.


  J. F.-K.

      Gilmour Professor of Spanish Language and Literature, Liverpool
      University. Norman McColl Lecturer, Cambridge University. Fellow
      of the British Academy. Member of the Council of the Hispanic
      Society of America. Knight Commander of the Order of Alphonso XII.
      Author of _A History of Spanish Literature_.

    Lull, Raimon;

  J. Ga.

      See the biographical article: GAIRDNER, JAMES.

    Mary I., Queen.

  J. G. Sc.

      Superintendent and Political Officer, Southern Shan States. Author
      of _Burma_; _The Upper Burma Gazetteer_.


  J. Hn.

      Privatdozent in Medieval and Modern History, University of Bonn.
      Author of _Das Rheinland unter die franzosische Herrschaft_.

    Louis I. and II. of Bavaria.

  J. H. F.

      Formerly Fellow of St John's College, Cambridge.


  J. H. R.

      Author of _Feudal England_; _Studies in Peerage and Family
      History_; _Peerage and Pedigree_.

    Lord Great Chamberlain;
    Mar, Earldom of;

  J. Hl. R.

      Christ's College, Cambridge. Lecturer on Modern History to the
      Cambridge University Local Lectures Syndicate. Author of _Life of
      Napoleon I._; _Napoleonic Studies_; _The Development of the
      European Nations_; _The Life of Pitt_; chapters in the _Cambridge
      Modern History_.

    Lowe, Sir Hudson;

  J. I.

      Professor of History at the Lycée of Lyons.

    Louis XII. of France.

  J. J. T.

      Cavendish Professor of Experimental Physics and Fellow of Trinity
      College, Cambridge. President of the British Association,
      1909-1910. Author of _A Treatise on the Motion of Vortex Rings_;
      _Application of Dynamics to Physics and Chemistry_; _Recent
      Researches in Electricity and Magnetism_; &c.


  J. L. W.

      Author of _Arthurian Romances unrepresented in Malory_.

    Malory, Sir Thomas;
    Map, Walter.

  J. M. Gr.

      Major-General, R.A. Commanding 1st Division Aldershot Command.
      Director of Military Operations at Headquarters, 1904-1906. Served
      through South African War, 1900-1901. _Author of Staff Duties in
      the Field_; &c.

    Manoevres, Military.

  J. M. M.

      Sometime Scholar of Queen's College, Oxford. Lecturer in Classics,
      East London College (University of London). Joint-editor of
      Grote's _History of Greece_.

    Mandeville, Bernard de;
    Marcus Aurelius Antoninus.

  J. P. P.

      Professor of Latin in the University of Liverpool. Fellow of
      Trinity College, Cambridge. Fellow of the British Academy. Editor
      of the _Classical Quarterly_. Editor-in-chief of the _Corpus
      Poetarum Latinorum_; &c.

    Lucan (_in part_).

  Jno. S.
    SIR JOHN SCOTT, K.C.M.G., D.C.L. (1841-1904).

      Deputy Judge Advocate-General to the Forces, 1898-1904. Judicial
      Adviser to the Khedive of Egypt, 1890-1898. Hon. Fellow of
      Pembroke College, Oxford.

    Martial Law.

  J. Si.*

      Principal Emeritus, United College (L.M.S. and F.F.M.A.),
      Antanànarivo, Madagascar. Membre de l'Académie Malgache. Author of
      _Madagascar and its People_; _Madagascar before the Conquest_; _A
      Madagascar Bibliography_; &c.


  J. S. Bl.

      Assistant-editor of the 9th edition of the Encyclopaedia
      Britannica. Joint-editor of the _Encyclopaedia Biblica_.

    Mary: Mother of Jesus (_in part_).

  J. S. Co.

      Editor of the Imperial Gazetteer of India. Hon. Secretary of the
      Egyptian Exploration Fund. Formerly Fellow and Lecturer of Queen's
      College, Oxford. Author of _India_; &c.

    Mahrattas (_in part_).

  J. S. F.

      Petrographer to the Geological Survey. Formerly Lecturer on
      Petrology in Edinburgh University. Neill Medallist of the Royal
      Society of Edinburgh. Bigsby Medallist of the Geological Society
      of London.


  J. T. Be.

      Joint-author of Stanford's _Europe_. Formerly Editor of the
      _Scottish Geographical Magazine_. Translator of Sven Hedin's
      _Through Asia, Central Asia and Tibet_; &c.

    Maritime Province (_in part_).

  J. T. C.

      Lecturer on Zoology at the South-Western Polytechnic, London.
      Formerly Fellow of University College, Oxford. Assistant Professor
      of Natural History in the University of Edinburgh and Naturalist
      to the Marine Biological Association.

    Mackerel (_in part_).

  J. T. M.

      Chairman of the Newcastle-upon-Tyne Electric Supply Co., Ltd.
      Author of _History of European Thought in the XIXth Century_; &c.

    Lotze (_in part_).

  J. T. S.*

      Professor of History in Columbia University, New York City.

    Louis VI., VII., IX., X. and XI. of France.

  J. V.*

      Archivist at the National Archives, Paris. Officer of Public
      Instruction, France. Author of _La France sous Philippe VI de
      Valois_; &c.

    Lore, Ambroise de;
    Louvet, Jean;
    Marcel, Étienne.

  J. V. B.
    JAMES VERNON BARTLET, M.A., D.D. (St Andrews).

      Professor of Church History, Mansfield College, Oxford. Author of
      _The Apostolic Age_; &c.

    Mark, St (_in part_);
    Matthew, St;
    Luke, St.

  K. G. J.

      Sometime Scholar of Wadham College, Oxford. Matthew Arnold
      Prizeman, 1903. Author of _Vasco da Gama and his Successors_.

    Malay Archipelago.

  K. K.

      Formerly Professor of Semitic Languages at the University of

    Mandaeans (_in part_).

  K. L.

      Lincoln College, Oxford. Professor of Early Christian Literature
      and New Testament Exegesis in the University of Leiden. Author of
      _The Text of the New Testament_; _The Historical Evidence for the
      Resurrection of Jesus Christ_; &c.

    Mary, Mother of Jesus (_in part_).

  K. S.

      Editor of Portfolio of Musical Archaeology. Author of _The
      Instruments of the Orchestra_.

    Lute (_in part_);
    Lyre (_in part_);

  L. J. S.

      Assistant, Department of Mineralogy, Natural History Museum, South
      Kensington. Formerly Scholar of Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge,
      and Harkness Scholar. Editor of the _Mineralogical Magazine_.


  L. V.*

      Italian Foreign Office (Emigration Dept.). Formerly Newspaper
      Correspondent in East of Europe. Author of _Italian Life in Town
      and Country_; &c.

    Mazzini: _Bibliography_.

  L. W. V-H.
    L. W. VERNON-HARCOURT (d. 1909).

      Barrister-at-Law. Author of _His Grace the Steward and the Trial
      of Peers_.

    Lord High Steward.

  M. A. W.

      See the biographical article: WARD, MARY AUGUSTA.


  M. Br.

    Louis VIII. and XVII. of France.

  M. Ja.

      Professor of Semitic Languages, University of Pennsylvania. Author
      of _Religion of the Babylonians and Assyrians_; &c.


  M. N. T.

      Fellow and Tutor of Oriel College, Oxford. University Lecturer in
      Epigraphy. Joint-author of _Catalogue of the Sparta Museum_.

    Lycurgus: _Spartan Lawgiver_;

  M. O. B. C.

      Reader in Ancient History at London University. Lecturer in Greek
      at Birmingham University, 1905-1908.

    Mantineia (_in part_);
    Manuel I., Comnenus;
    Marathon (_in part_).

  M. P.

      See the biographical article: PATTISON, MARK.


  N. D. M.

      Author of _Maryland as a Proprietary Province_.


  N. V.

      Member of Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, Paris.
      Honorary Archivist at the Archives Nationales. Formerly President
      of the Société de l'Histoire de France, and of the Société de
      l'École des Chartes.

    Marsilius of Padua;
    Martin I.-V.: _Popes_.

  N. W. T.

      Government Anthropologist to Southern Nigeria. Corresponding
      Member of the Société d'Anthropologie de Paris. Author of _Thought
      Transference_; _Kinship and Marriage in Australia_; &c.


  O. R.

      Formerly Professor of Engineering, Victoria University,
      Manchester. Honorary Fellow of Queens' College, Cambridge.


  P. A. A.

      New College, Oxford. Barrister-at-Law.

    Lübeck (_in part_).

  P. A. K.

      See the biographical article: KROPOTKIN, PRINCE, P. A.

    Maritime Province (_in part_).

  P. G.

      See the biographical article: GARDNER, PERCY.


  P. Gi.

      Fellow and Classical Lecturer of Emmanuel College, Cambridge, and
      University Reader in Comparative Philology. Formerly Secretary of
      the Cambridge Philological Society.


  P. G. T.

      See the biographical article: TAIT, PETER GUTHRIE.

    Maxwell, James Clerk.

  P. Vi.

      See the biographical article: VINOGRADOFF, PAUL.

    Manor (_in part_).

  R. A.*

      Archivist to the Department de l'Eure.

    Louis XVI.;

  R. B. McK.

      Trinity College, Cambridge. Editor of _The Works of Thomas Nashe_;

    Marprelate Controversy.

  R. C. J.

      See the biographical article: JEBB, SIR RICHARD CLAVERHOUSE.

    Lysias (_in part_).

  R. G.

      See the biographical article: GARNETT, RICHARD.

    Lucan (_in part_);
    Max Müller.

  R. H. C.

      Grinfield Lecturer on the Septuagint at Oxford, 1905-1907. Fellow
      of the British Academy. Professor of Biblical Greek at Trinity
      College, Dublin, 1898-1906. Hibbert Lecturer at Oxford, 1898;
      Jowett Lecturer, 1898-1899. Author of _Critical History of a
      Future Life_; &c.

    Manasses, Prayer of.

  R. J. M.

      Christ Church, Oxford. Barrister-at-law. Formerly Editor of the
      _St James's Gazette_, London.

    Lundy, Robert;
    Macdonnell, Sorley Boy;
    McNeile, Hugh;
    Manchester, Earls and Dukes of;
    March, Earls of;
    Margaret, Queen of Scotland;
    Masham, Abigail.

  R. K. D.

      Formerly Professor of Chinese, King's College, London. Keeper of
      Oriental Printed Books and MSS. at British Museum, 1892-1907.
      Member of the Chinese Consular Service, 1858-1865. Author of _The
      Language and Literature of China_; _China_; _Europe and the Far
      East_; &c.


  R. L.*

      Member of the Staff of the Geological Survey of India, 1874-1882.
      Author of _Catalogues of Fossil Mammals, Reptiles and Birds in the
      British Museum_; _The Deer of all Lands_; _The Game Animals of
      Africa_; &c.

    Mammalia (_in part_);
    Mammoth (_in part_);

  R. M'L.

      Editor of the _Entomologists' Monthly Magazine_.

    May-Fly (_in part_).

  R. M. D.

      Late Locomotive Superintendent, Midland Railway. Joint-author of
      _Lubrication and Lubricants_.


  R. N. B.
    ROBERT NISBET BAIN (d. 1909).

      Assistant Librarian, British Museum, 1883-1909. Author of
      _Scandinavia, the Political History of Denmark, Norway and Sweden,
      1513-1900_; _The First Romanovs, 1613 to 1725_; _Slavonic Europe,
      the Political History of Poland and Russia from 1469 to 1796_; &c.

    Louis I. and II. of Hungary;
    Margaret, Queen;
    Matthias I., Hunyadi;

  R. P.

      See the biographical article: PAULI, REINHOLD.

    Lübeck (_in part_).

  R. P. S.

      Formerly Master of the Architectural School, Royal Academy,
      London. Past President of Architectural Association. Associate and
      Fellow of King's College, London. Corresponding Member of the
      Institute of France. Editor of Fergusson's _History of
      Architecture_. Author of _Architecture: East and West_; &c.


  R. Po.

      Secretary of the École des Chartes. Honorary Librarian at the
      Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris. Author of _Le Royaume de Provence
      sous les Carolingiens_; _Recueil des chartes de Saint-Germain_;

    Louis IV. and V. of France.

  R. S. C.

      Professor of Latin and Indo-European Philology in the University
      of Manchester. Formerly Professor of Latin in University College,
      Cardiff; and Fellow of Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge.
      Author of _The Italic Dialects_.


  R. T.

      See the biographical article: TEMPLE, SIR RICHARD.

    Mahrattas (_in part_).

  R. We.

      Formerly Fellow in Classics, Princeton University. Editor of _The
      Elegies of Maximianus_; &c.

    Mather, Increase;
    Mather, Richard.

  S. A. C.

      Lecturer in Hebrew and Syriac, and formerly Fellow, Gonville and
      Caius College, Cambridge. Editor for Palestine Exploration Fund.
      Examiner in Hebrew and Aramaic, London University, 1904-1908.
      Author of _Glossary of Aramaic Inscriptions_; _The Laws of Moses
      and the Code of Hammurabi_; _Critical Notes on Old Testament
      History_; _Religion of Ancient Palestine_; &c.


  S. Bi.
    SHELFORD BIDWELL, M.A., D.SC., F.R.S. (1848-1909).

      Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge. Formerly President of the
      Physical Society and Member of Council of the Royal Society.


  S. C.

      See the biographical article: COLVIN, SIDNEY.


  S. N.

      See the biographical article: NEWCOMB, SIMON.

    Mars: _Planet_.

  T. As.

      Director of the British School of Archaeology at Rome.
      Corresponding Member of the Imperial German Archaeological
      Institute. Formerly Scholar of Christ Church, Oxford; Craven
      Fellow, Oxford, 1897. Author of _The Classical Topography of the
      Roman Campagna_; &c.

    Lucretilis, Mons;
    Lucus Feroniae;
    Magna Graecia;
    Marches, The;

  T. Ba.

      Member of the Institute of International Law. Member of the
      Supreme Council of the Congo Free State. Officer of the Legion of
      Honour. Author of _Problems of International Practice and
      Diplomacy_; &c. M.P. for Blackburn, 1910.

    Mare Clausum.

  T. F. C.

      Assistant Professor of History, Williams College, Williamstown,
      Mass., U.S.A.


  T. G. Br.

      Professor of Physiology in the University of Toronto. Author of
      _Essentials of Experimental Physiology_.

    Lymph and Lymph Formation.

  T. H. H.*

      Superintendent, Frontier Surveys, India, 1892-1898. Gold
      Medallist, R.G.S., London, 1887. Author of _The Indian
      Borderland_; _The Countries of the King's Award_; _India_;


  T. M. L.

      Principal of the United Free Church College, Glasgow. Formerly
      Assistant to the Professor of Logic and Metaphysics in the
      University of Edinburgh. Author of _History of the Reformation_;
      _Life of Luther_; &c.

    Luther, Martin;

  T. R. R. S.

      Fellow of King's College, London. Hon. Fellow of Worcester
      College, Oxford. Zoological Secretary of Linnaean Society,
      1903-1907. Author of _A History of Crustacea_; _The Naturalist of
      Cumbrae_; &c.


  T. Se.

      Balliol College, Oxford. Lecturer in History, East London and
      Birkbeck Colleges, University of London. Stanhope Prizeman,
      Oxford, 1887. Assistant Editor of _Dictionary of National
      Biography_, 1891-1901. Author of _The Age of Johnson_; &c.

    Marlowe, Christopher (_in part_);
    Marston, Philip Bourke.

  T. W. R. D.

      Professor of Comparative Religion in the University of Manchester.
      Professor of Pali and Buddhist Literature, University College,
      London, 1882-1904. President of the Pali Text Society. Fellow of
      the British Academy. Secretary and Librarian of Royal Asiatic
      Society, 1885-1902. Author of _Buddhism_; &c.


  V. H. S.

      Ely Professor of Divinity in the University of Cambridge. Canon of
      Ely. Formerly Fellow, Dean, Tutor and Lecturer of Trinity College,
      Cambridge. Author of The _Jewish and the Christian Messiahs_; &c.

    Mark, Gospel of St;
    Matthew, Gospel of St;
    Luke, Gospel of St.

  W. A. B. C.

      Fellow of Magdalen College, Oxford. Professor of English History,
      St David's College, Lampeter, 1880-1881. Author of _Guide to
      Switzerland_; _The Alps in Nature and in History_; &c. Editor of
      the _Alpine Journal_, 1880-1889.

    Lötschen Pass;
    Lucerne: Canton, Town, Lake of;
    Lugano, Lake of;
    Maggiore, Lago.

  W. A. G.

      His Siamese Majesty's Resident Commissioner for the Siamese Malay
      State of Kelantan. Adviser to his Siamese Majesty's Minister for
      Lands and Agriculture. Author of _Kelantan, a Handbook_; &c.

    Malay States: _Non-Federated_.
    Malay States: _Siamese_.

  W. A. P.

      Formerly Exhibitioner of Merton College and Senior Scholar of St
      John's College, Oxford. Author of _Modern Europe_; &c.

    Louis Philippe;
    Mahmud II.;
    Mass: _Church_.

  W. D. L.

      Dean of the Law School, University of Pennsylvania. Lecturer on
      Economics, Haverford College, Pennsylvania, 1890-1896. Editor of
      _Great American Lawyers_; &c.

    Marshall, John.

  W. E. A. A.

      Formerly Deputy Chief Librarian of the Manchester Free Libraries.
      On Literary Staff of Manchester Guardian, 1874-1905. Member of the
      Gorsedd, with the bardic name of Manceinion. Author of _Annals of
      Manchester_; &c.


  W. E. D.

      Professor of Civil and Mechanical Engineering at the City and
      Guilds of London Institute Central Technical College, South
      Kensington. Formerly University Demonstrator in the Engineering
      Department, Cambridge. Author of _The Balancing of Engines_;
      _Valves and Valve-Gear Mechanism_; &c.

    Mechanics: _Applied_ (_in part_).

  W. E. G. F.

      Author of _The Transvaal and the Boers_.


  W. F.*

      Minister of Dunnikier United Free Church, Kirkcaldy, N.B. Author
      of _Maccabees_ (Cambridge Bible for Schools); _The Background of
      the Gospels_; &c.

    Maccabees, Books of.

  W. Ho.

      Clare College, Cambridge. Financial Editor of _The Times_, London.


  W. H. F.

      See the biographical article: FLOWER, SIR W. H.

    Mammalia (_in part_);
    Mammoth (_in part_);
    Mandrill (_in part_);

  W. J. M. R.

      See the biographical article: RANKINE, WILLIAM JOHN MACQUORN.

    Mechanics: _Applied_ (_in part_).

  W. L. C.*

      Associate Professor of English, Wells College, Aurora, New York.

    Mather, Cotton.

  W. L. F.

      Professor of History in Louisiana State University. Author of
      _Documentary History of Reconstruction_; &c.

    Lynch Law;
    McGillivray, Alexander.

  W. L. G.

      Professor at Queen's University, Kingston, Canada. Formerly Beit
      Lecturer in Colonial History at Oxford University. Editor of _Acts
      of the Privy Council_, ("Colonial" series); _Canadian
      Constitutional Development_ (in collaboration).

    Mackenzie, William Lyon;
    Manitoba (_in part_).

  W. M. R.

      See the biographical article: ROSSETTI, DANTE G.

    Masolino da Panicale.

  W. M. Ra.

      See the biographical article: RAMSAY, SIR WILLIAM MITCHELL.


  W. P. C.

      See the article: COURTNEY, L. H., BARON.

    Marlborough, 1st Duke of.

  W. R. S.

      See the biographical article: SMITH, WILLIAM ROBERTSON.

    Malachi (_in part_);

  W. Wn.

      Assistant Professor of Physics, Royal College of Science, London.
      Vice-President of the Physical Society.


  W. W. F.*

      Fellow of Lincoln College, Oxford. Sub-Rector, 1881-1904. Gifford
      Lecturer, Edinburgh University, 1908. Author of _The City-State of
      the Greeks and Romans_; _The Roman Festivals of the Republican
      Period_; &c.

    Mars: _Mythology_;

  W. Y. S.

      See the biographical article: SELLAR, WILLIAM YOUNG.

    Lucilius (_in part_);


  Lord Chamberlain.     Mafia.               March.
  Lotteries.            Magnesium.           Marengo.
  Louisiana.            Magnolia.            Marionettes.
  Lourdes.              Maine, U.S.A.        Marriage.
  Loyalists.            Maize.               Marseilles.
  Luchu Archipelago.    Malplaquet.          Marshal.
  Lützen.               Malta.               Marston Moor.
  Lyons.                Mandamus.            Maryland.
  Macabre.              Manganese.           Massachusetts.
  McKinley, William.    Manila.              Match.
  Madeira.              Manipur.             Mayo.
  Madison, James.       Manna.               Mayor.
  Madras.               Maori.               Measles.
  Madrid.               Maple.               Mecklenburg.


  [1] A complete list, showing all individual contributors, appears in
    the final volume.

LORD CHAMBERLAIN, in England, an important officer of the king's
household, to be distinguished from the lord great chamberlain (q.v.).
He is the second dignitary of the court, and is always a member of the
government of the day (before 1782 the office carried cabinet rank), a
peer and a privy councillor. He carries a white staff, and wears a
golden or jewelled key, typical of the key of the palace, which is
supposed to be in his charge, as the ensigns of his office. He is
responsible for the necessary arrangements connected with state
ceremonies, such as coronations and royal marriages, christenings and
funerals; he examines the claims of those who desire to be presented at
court; all invitations are sent out in his name by command of the
sovereign, and at drawing-rooms arid levees he stands next to the
sovereign and announces the persons who are approaching the throne. It
is also part of his duty to conduct the sovereign to and from his
carriage.[1] The bedchamber, privy chamber and presence chamber, the
wardrobe, the housekeeper's room, the guardroom and the chapels royal
are in the lord chamberlain's department. He is regarded as chief
officer of the royal household, and he has charge of a large number of
appointments, such as those of the royal physicians, tradesmen and
private attendants of the sovereign. All theatres in the cities of
London and Westminster (except patent theatres), in certain of the
London boroughs and in the towns of Windsor and Brighton, are licensed
by him and he is also licenser of plays (see THEATRE: _Law_; and REVELS,
MASTER OF THE). His salary is £2000 a year.

  The vice-chamberlain of the household is the lord chamberlain's
  assistant and deputy. He also is one of the ministry, a white-staff
  officer and the bearer of a key; and he is generally a peer or the son
  of a peer as well as a privy councillor. He receives £700 a year. Next
  to the vice-chamberlain comes the groom of the stole, an office only
  in use during the reign of a king. He has the charge of the vestment
  called the stole worn by the sovereign on state occasions. In the lord
  chamberlain's department also are the master, assistant master,
  marshal of the ceremonies and deputy-marshal of the ceremonies,
  officers whose special function it is to enforce the observance of the
  _etiquette_ of the court. The reception of foreign potentates and
  ambassadors is under their particular care, and they assist in the
  ordering of all entertainments and festivities at the palace.[2] The
  gentleman usher of the black rod--the black rod which he carries being
  the ensign of his office--is the principal usher of the court and
  kingdom. He is one of the original functionaries of the order of the
  Garter, and is in constant attendance on the House of Lords, from
  whom, either personally or by his deputy, the yeoman usher of the
  black rod, it is part of his duty to carry messages and summonses to
  the House of Commons. There are six lords and six grooms "in waiting"
  who attend on the sovereign throughout the year and whose terms of
  attendance are of a fortnight's or three weeks' duration at a time.
  Usually "extra" lords and grooms in waiting are nominated by the
  sovereign, who, however, are unpaid and have no regular duties. Among
  the serjeants-at-arms there are two to whom special duties are
  assigned: the one attending the speaker in the House of Commons, and
  the other attending the lord chancellor in the House of Lords,
  carrying their maces and executing their orders.[3] The comptroller
  and examiner of accounts, the paymaster of the household, the licenser
  of plays, the dean and subdean of the chapels royal, the clerk and
  deputy clerks of the closet, the groom of the robes, the pages of the
  backstairs, of the chamber and of the presence, the poet laureate, the
  royal physicians and surgeons, chaplains, painters and sculptors,
  librarians and musicians, &c., are all under the superintendence of
  the lord chamberlain of the household.[4]

  The queen consort's household is also in the department of the lord
  chamberlain of the household. It comprises a lord chamberlain, a
  vice-chamberlain and treasurer, equerry and the various ladies of the
  royal household, a groom and a clerk of the robes. The ladies of the
  household are the mistress of the robes, the ladies of the bedchamber,
  the bedchamber women and the maids of honour. The mistress of the
  robes in some measure occupies the position of the groom of the
  stole.[5] She is the only lady of the court who comes into office and
  goes out with the administration. She is always a duchess, and attends
  the queen consort at all state ceremonies and entertainments, but is
  never in permanent residence at the palace.[6] The ladies of the
  bedchamber share the personal attendance on the queen consort
  throughout the year. Of these there are eight, always peeresses, and
  each is in waiting for a fortnight or three weeks at a time. But the
  women of the bedchamber, of whom there are also eight, appear only at
  court ceremonies and entertainments according to a roster annually
  issued under the authority of the lord chamberlain of the queen
  consort. They are usually the daughters of peers or the wives of the
  sons of peers, and formerly, like the mistress of the robes and the
  ladies of the bedchamber, habitually assisted the queen at her daily
  toilette. But this has long ceased to be done by any of them. The
  eight maids of honour have the same terms of waiting as the ladies of
  the bedchamber. They are commonly if not always the daughters or
  granddaughters of peers, and when they have no superior title and
  precedence by birth are called "honourable" and placed next after the
  daughters of barons.


  [1] The lord chamberlain of the household at one time discharged some
    important political functions, which are described by Sir Harris
    Nicolas (_Proceedings of the Privy Council_, vol. vi., Preface, p.

  [2] The office of master of the ceremonies was created by James I.
    The master of the ceremonies wears a medal attached to a gold chain
    round his neck, on one side being an emblem of peace with the motto
    "Beati pacifici," and on the other an emblem of war with the motto
    "Dieu et mon droit" (see _Finetti Philoxensis_, by Sir John Finett,
    master of the ceremonies to James I. and Charles I., 1656; and
    D'Israeli's _Curiosities of Literature_, 10th ed., p. 242 seq.).

  [3] See May, _Parliamentary Practice_, pp. 236, 244.

  [4] The offices of master of the great wardrobe and master of the
    jewel house in the lord chamberlain's department were abolished in

  [5] In the reign of Queen Anne, Sarah duchess of Marlborough from
    1704, and Elizabeth duchess of Somerset from 1710, held the combined
    offices of mistress of the robes and groom of the stole.

  [6] Since the great "bedchamber question" of 1839 the settled
    practice has been for all the ladies of the court except the mistress
    of the robes to receive and continue in their appointments
    independently of the political connexions of their husbands, fathers
    and brothers (see Gladstone's _Gleanings of Past Years_, i. 40; and
    Torrens's _Memoirs of Lord Melbourne_, ii. 304).

LORD CHIEF JUSTICE, in England, the presiding judge of the king's bench
division of the High Court of Justice, and in the absence of the lord
chancellor, president of the High Court. He traces his descent from the
justiciar of the Norman kings. This officer appears first as the
lieutenant or deputy of the king, exercising all the functions of the
regal office in the absence of the sovereign. "In this capacity William
Fitz-Osbern, the steward of Normandy, and Odo of Bayeux, acted during
the Conqueror's visit to the continent in 1067; they were left,
according to William of Poitiers, the former to govern the north of
England, the latter to hold rule in Kent, vice sua; Florence of
Worcester describes them as "custodes Angliae," and Ordericus Vitalis
gives to their office the name of "praefectura." It would seem most
probable that William Fitz-Osbern at least was left in his character of
steward, and that the Norman seneschalship was thus the origin of the
English justiciarship" (Stubbs's _Constitutional History_, i. 346). The
same authority observes that William of Warenne and Richard Clare
(Bienfaite), who were left in charge of England in 1074, are named by a
writer in the next generation "praecipui Angliae justitiarii"; but he
considers the name to have not yet been definitely attached to any
particular office, and that there is no evidence to show that officers
appointed to this trust exercised any functions at all when the king was
at home, or in his absence exercised supreme judicial authority to the
exclusion of other high officers of the court. The office became
permanent in the reign of William Rufus, and in the hands of Ranulf
Flambard it became coextensive with the supreme powers of government.
But it was not till the reign of Henry II. that the chief officer of the
crown acquired the exclusive right to the title of _capitalis_ or
_totius Angliae justitiarius_. Stubbs considers that the English form of
the office is to be accounted for by the king's desire to prevent the
administration falling into the hands of an hereditary noble. The early
justiciars were clerics, in whom the possession of power could not
become hereditary. The justiciar continued to be the chief officer of
state, next to the king, until the fall of Hubert de Burgh (in the reign
of King John), described by Stubbs as the last of the great justiciars.
Henceforward, according to Stubbs, the office may be said to have
survived only in the judicial functions, which were merely part of the
official character of the chief justiciar. He was at the head of the
curia regis, which was separating itself into the three historical
courts of common law about the time when the justiciarship was falling
from the supreme place. The chancellor took the place of the justiciar
in council, the treasurer in the exchequer, while the two offshoots from
the curia regis, the common pleas and the exchequer, received chiefs of
their own. The king's bench represented the original stock of the curia
regis, and its chief justice the great justiciar. The justiciar may,
therefore, be said to have become from a political a purely judicial
officer. A similar development awaited his successful rival the
chancellor. Before the Judicature Act the king's bench and the common
pleas were each presided over by a lord chief justice, and the lord
chief justice of the king's bench was nominal head of all the three
courts, and held the title of lord chief justice of England. The titles
of lord chief justice of the common pleas and lord chief baron were
abolished by the Judicature Act 1873, and all the common law divisions
of the High Court united into the king's bench division, the president
of which is the lord chief justice of England.

  The lord chief justice is, next to the lord chancellor, the highest
  judicial dignitary in the kingdom. He is an _ex-officio_ judge of the
  court of appeal. He holds office during good behaviour, and can only
  be removed by the crown (by whom he is appointed) after a joint
  address of both houses of parliament. He is now the only judicial
  functionary privileged to wear the collar of SS. There has been much
  discussion as to the origin and history of this collar;[1] it was a
  badge or insignia attached to certain offices entitling the holders to
  wear it only so long as they held those offices. The collar of SS. was
  worn by the chiefs of the three courts previous to their amalgamation
  in 1873, and that now worn by the lord chief justice of England was
  provided by Sir A. Cockburn in 1859 and entailed by him on all holders
  of the office. The salary is £8000 a year.

  In the United States the supreme court consists of a chief justice and
  eight associate justices, any six of whom make a quorum. The salary of
  the chief justice is $13,000 and that of the associates $12,500. The
  chief justice takes rank next after the president, and he administers
  the oath on the inauguration of a new president and vice-president.
  The principal or presiding judge in most of the state judicatures also
  takes the title of chief justice.


  [1] _Notes and Queries_, series 1, vol. ii.; series 4, vols. ii. ix.
    x.; series 6, vols. ii. iii.; Planché, _Dictionary of Costume_, p.
    126; Foss, _Lives of the Judges_, vol. vii.; Dugdale, _Orig. Jud._
    fol. 102.

LORD GREAT CHAMBERLAIN, in England, a functionary who must be carefully
distinguished from the lord chamberlain; he is one of the great officers
of state, whose office dates from Norman times; and the only one who
still holds it under a creation of that period. As his name implies, he
was specially connected by his duties with the king's chamber (_camera
curie_); but this phrase was also used to denote the king's privy purse,
and the chamberlain may be considered as originally the financial
officer of the household. But as he was always a great baron, deputies
performed his financial work, and his functions became, as they are now,
mainly ceremonial, though the emblem of his office is still a key. The
office had been held by Robert Malet, son of a leading companion of the
Conqueror, but he was forfeited by Henry I., who, in 1133, gave the
great chamberlainship to Aubrey de Vere and his heirs. Aubrey's son was
created earl of Oxford, and the earls held the office, with some
intermission, till 1526, when the then earl left female heirs. His
heir-male succeeded to the earldom, but the crown, as is now
established, denied his right to the office, which was thenceforth held
under grants for life till Queen Mary and Elizabeth admitted in error
the right of the earls on the strength of their own allegation. So
matters continued till 1626, when an earl died and again left an
heir-male and an heir-female. After an historic contest the office was
adjudged to the former, Lord Willoughby d'Eresby. No further question
arose till 1779, when his heirs were two sisters. In 1781 the House of
Lords decided that it belonged to them jointly, and that they could
appoint a deputy, which they did. Under a family arrangement the heirs
of the two sisters respectively appointed deputies in alternate reigns
till the death of Queen Victoria, when Lord Ancaster, the heir of the
elder, who was then in possession, claimed that he, as such, had sole
right to the office. Lord Cholmondeley and Lord Carrington as coheirs of
the younger sister, opposed his claim, and the crown also claimed for
itself on the ground of the action taken by the king in 1526. After a
long and historic contest, the House of Lords (1902) declined to re-open
the question, and merely re-affirmed the decision of 1781, and the
office, therefore, is now vested jointly in the three peers named and
their heirs.

The lord great chamberlain has charge of the palace of Westminster,
especially of the House of Lords, in which he has an office; and when
the sovereign opens parliament in person he is responsible for the
arrangements. At the opening or closing of the session of parliament by
the sovereign in person he disposes of the sword of state to be carried
by any peer he may select, and walks himself in the procession on the
right of the sword of state, a little before it and next to the
sovereign. He issues the tickets of admission on the same occasions. He
assists at the introduction of all peers into the House of Lords on
their creation, and at the homage of all bishops after their
consecration. At coronations he emerges into special importance; he
still asserts before the court of claims his archaic right to bring the
king his "shirt, stockings and drawers" and to dress him on coronation
day and to receive his ancient fees, which include the king's bed and
"night robe." He also claims in error to serve the king ~~3 with water
before and after the banquet, which was the function of the "ewry," a
distinct office held by the earls of Oxford. At the actual coronation
ceremony he takes an active part in investing the king with the royal

  See J. H. Round, "The Lord Great Chamberlain" (_Monthly Review_, June
  1902) and "Notes on the Lord Great Chamberlain Case" (_Ancestor_, No.
  IV.).     (J. H. R.)

LORD HIGH CHANCELLOR, one of the great officers of state of the United
Kingdom, and in England the highest judicial functionary. The history of
the office and of the growth of the importance of the lord chancellor
will be found under CHANCELLOR. The lord chancellor is in official rank
the highest civil subject in the land outside the royal family, and
takes precedence immediately after the archbishop of Canterbury. His
functions have sometimes been exercised by a lord keeper of the great
seal (see LORD KEEPER), the only real difference between the two offices
being in the appointment of the keeper by mere delivery of the seal,
while a lord chancellor receives letters patent along with it. He is by
office a privy councillor, and it has long been the practice to make him
a peer and also a cabinet minister. He is by prescription Speaker or
prolocutor of the House of Lords, and as such he sits upon the woolsack,
which is not strictly within the House. Unlike the Speaker of the House
of Commons, the lord chancellor takes part in debates, speaking from his
place in the House. He votes from the woolsack instead of going into the
division lobby. The only function which he discharges as Speaker
practically is putting the question; if two debaters rise together, he
has no power to call upon one, nor can he rule upon points of order.
Those taking part in debates address, not the lord chancellor, but the
whole House, as "My Lords." The lord chancellor always belongs to a
political party and is affected by its fluctuations. This has often been
denounced as destructive of the independence and calm deliberativeness
essential to the purity and efficiency of the bench. In defence,
however, of the ministerial connexion of the chancellor, it has been
said that, while the other judges should be permanent, the head of the
law should stand or fall with the ministry, as the best means of
securing his effective responsibility to parliament for the proper use
of his extensive powers. The transference of the judicial business of
the chancery court to the High Court of Justice removed many of the
objections to the fluctuating character of the office. As a great
officer of state, the lord chancellor acts for both England and
Scotland, and in some respects for the United Kingdom, including Ireland
(where, however, an Irish lord chancellor is at the head of the legal
system). By Article XXIV. of the Act of Union (1705) one great seal was
appointed to be kept for all public acts, and in this department the
lord chancellor's authority extends to the whole of Britain, and thus
the commissions of the peace for Scotland as well as England issue from
him.[1] As an administrative officer, as a judge and as head of the law,
he acts merely for England. His English ministerial functions are thus
briefly described by Blackstone: "He became keeper of the king's
conscience, visitor, in right of the king, of all hospitals and colleges
of the king's foundation, and patron of all the king's livings under the
value of twenty marks per annum in the king's books. He is the general
guardian of all infants, idiots and lunatics, and has the general
superintendence of all charitable uses in the kingdom." But these duties
and jurisdiction by modern statutes have been distributed for the most
part among other offices or committed to the judges of the High Court
1873 the lord chancellor is a member of the court of appeal, and, when
he sits, its president, and he is also a judge of the High Court of
Justice. He is named as president of the chancery division of the latter
court. His judicial patronage is very extensive, and he is by usage the
adviser of the crown in the appointment of judges[2] of the High Court.
He presides over the hearing of appeals in the House of Lords. His
proper title is "Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain and Ireland." His
salary is £10,000 per annum, and he is entitled to a pension of £5000
per annum.

  AUTHORITIES.--_Observations concerning the Office of Lord Chancellor_
  (1651), attributed to Lord Chancellor Ellesmere; Blackstone's
  _Commentaries_; Campbell's _Lives of the Chancellors_; and D. M.
  Kerly, _Historical Sketch of the Equitable Jurisdiction of the Court
  of Chancery_ (1890).


  [1] The great seal, which exists in duplicate for Irish use, is the
    great seal of the United Kingdom.

  [2] Except the lord chief justice, who is appointed on the nomination
    of the prime minister.

LORD HIGH CONSTABLE, in England, the seventh of the great officers of
state. His office is now called out of abeyance for coronations alone.
The constable was originally the commander of the royal armies and the
master of the horse. He was also, in conjunction with the earl marshal,
president of the court of chivalry or court of honour. In feudal times
martial law was administered in the court of the lord high constable.
The constableship was granted as a grand serjeanty with the earldom of
Hereford by the empress Maud to Milo of Gloucester, and was carried by
his heiress to the Bohuns, earls of Hereford and Essex. Through a
coheiress of the Bohuns it descended to the Staffords, dukes of
Buckingham; and on the attainder of Edward Stafford, third duke of
Buckingham, in the reign of Henry VIII. it became merged in the crown.
The Lacys and Verduns were hereditary constables of Ireland from the
12th to the 14th century, and the Hays, earls of Erroll, have been
hereditary constables of Scotland from early in the 14th century.

LORD HIGH STEWARD. The Lord High Steward of England, who must not be
confused with the Lord Steward, ranks as the first of the great officers
of state. Appointments to this office are now made only for special
occasions, such as the coronation of a sovereign or the trial of a peer
by his peers. The history of the office is noteworthy. The household of
the Norman and Angevin kings of England included certain persons of
secondary rank, styled dapifers, seneschals or stewards (the prototypes
of the lord steward), who were entrusted with domestic and state duties;
the former duties were those of purveyors and sewers to the king, the
latter were undefined. At coronations, however, and great festivals it
became the custom in England and elsewhere to appoint magnates of the
first rank to discharge for the occasion the domestic functions of the
ordinary officials. In accordance with this custom Henry II. appointed
both Robert II., earl of Leicester, and Hugh Bigod, earl of Norfolk, to
be his honorary hereditary stewards; and at the Christmas festival of
1186 the successors in title of these two earls, with William, earl of
Arundel, who held the similar honorary office of hereditary butler, are
described as serving the king at the royal banqueting table.
Subsequently the earls of Leicester bought out the rights of the earls
of Norfolk for ten knights' fees.

The last of these earls of Leicester to inherit the hereditary
stewardship was Simon V. de Montfort; how he served as steward at the
coronation of Eleanor, queen of Henry III., is described in the
Exchequer Red Book. The office of steward in France, then recently
suppressed, had for some time been the highest office of state in that
kingdom, and Simon de Montfort appears to have considered that his
hereditary stewardship entitled him to high official position in
England; and after his victory at Lewes he repeatedly figures as steward
of England in official documents under the great seal. After Simon's
death at Evesham his forfeited estates were conferred on his son Edmund
of Lancaster, who also obtained a grant of the stewardship, but only for
life. Edmund was succeeded by Thomas, earl of Lancaster, who received a
fresh grant of the stewardship to himself and the heirs of his body from
Edward II.; and this earl it was who, during the weak administration of
the last-mentioned king, first put forward in a celebrated tract the
claim of the steward to be the second personage in the realm and supreme
judge in parliament, a claim which finds some slight recognition in the
preamble to the statute passed against the Despencers in the first year
of Edward III.

Earl Thomas was executed for treason, and though his attainder was
reversed he left no issue, and was succeeded in the earldom by his
brother Henry. The subsequent earls and dukes of Lancaster were all
recognized as stewards of England, the office apparently being treated
as annexed to the earldom, or honor, of Leicester. John of Gaunt,
indeed, at a time when it was possible that he would never obtain the
Leicester moiety of the Lancastrian estates, seems to have made an
ingenious but quite unfounded claim to the office as annexed to the
honor of Hinckley. Strictly speaking, none of the Lancasters after
Thomas had any clear title either by grant or otherwise; such title as
they had merged in the crown when Henry IV. usurped the throne.
Meanwhile the stewardship had increased in importance. On the accession
of Edward III., Henry, earl of Lancaster, as president of the council,
had superintended the coronation of the infant king; John of Gaunt did
the same for the infant Richard II.; and, as part of the duties
involved, sat in the White Hall of Westminster to hear and determine the
claims to perform coronation services. The claims were made by petition,
and included amongst others: the claim of Thomas of Woodstock to act as
constable, the rival claims of John Dymock and Baldwin de Frevile to act
as champion, and the claim of the barons of the Cinque Ports to carry a
canopy over the king. Minutes of these proceedings, in which the duke is
stated to have sat "as steward of England," were enrolled by his order.
This is the origin of what is now called the Court of Claims. The
precedent of Richard II. has been followed on all subsequent occasions,
except that in modern times it has been the practice to appoint
commissioners instead of a steward to superintend this court. In 1397
John of Gaunt created a notable precedent in support of the steward's
claim to be supreme judge in parliament by presiding at the trial of the
earl of Arundel and others.

When Henry IV. came to the throne he appointed his young son Thomas,
afterwards duke of Clarence, to the office of steward. Clarence held the
office until his death. He himself never acted as judge in parliament;
but in 1415 he was appointed to preside at the judgment of peers
delivered in Southampton against Richard, earl of Cambridge, and Lord
Scrope of Masham, who had been previously tried by commissioners of oyer
and terminer. No permanent steward was ever again created; but a steward
was always appointed for coronations to perform the various ceremonial
services associated with the office, and, until the Court of Claims was
entrusted to commissioners, to preside over that court. Also, in the
15th century, it gradually became the custom to appoint a steward _pro
hac vice_ to preside at the trial, or at the proceedings upon the
attainder of a peer in parliament; and later, to preside over a court,
called the court of the lord high steward, for the trial of peers when
parliament was not sitting. To assist in establishing the latter court a
precedent of 1400 appears to have been deliberately forged. This
precedent is reported in the printed _Year-Book_ of 1400, first
published in 1553; it describes the trial of "the earl of H" for
participation in the rebellion of that year, and gives details of
procedure. John Holand, earl of Huntingdon, is undoubtedly the earl
indicated, but the evidence is conclusive that he was murdered in Essex
without any trial. The court of the lord high steward seems to have been
first definitely instituted in 1499 for the trial of Edward Plantagenet,
earl of Warwick; only two years earlier Lord Audley had been condemned
by the court of chivalry, a very different and unpopular tribunal. The
Warwick trial was most carefully schemed: the procedure, fundamentally
dissimilar to that adopted in 1415, follows exactly the forged
precedent; but the constitution of the court was plainly derived from
the Southampton case. The record of the trial was consigned to a new
repository (commonly but wrongly called the Baga de Secretis), which
thenceforth became the regular place of custody for important state
trials. Latterly, and possibly from its inception, this repository
consisted of a closet with three locks, of which the keys were
entrusted, one to the chief justice of England, another to the
attorney-general and the third to the master of the crown office, or
coroner. Notwithstanding the irregular origin of the steward's court,
for which Henry VII. must be held responsible, the validity of its
jurisdiction cannot be questioned. The Warwick proceedings were
confirmed by act of parliament, and ever since this court has been fully
recognized as part of the English constitution.

For about a century and a half prior to the reign of James I. the
criminal jurisdiction of parliament remained in abeyance, and bills of
attainder were the vogue. The practice of appointing a steward on these
occasions to execute judgment upon a peer was kept up till 1477, when
George, duke of Clarence, was attainted, and then dropped. Under the
Stuarts the criminal jurisdiction of parliament was again resorted to,
and when the proceedings against a peer were founded on indictment the
appointment of a steward followed as a matter of settled practice. The
proper procedure in cases of impeachment had, on the contrary, never
been defined. On the impeachment of Strafford the lords themselves
appointed Arundel to be high steward. In Danby's case a commission under
the great seal issued in the common form adopted for the court of the
steward; this was recalled, and the rule agreed to by a joint committee
of both houses that a steward for trials of peers upon impeachments was
unnecessary. But, as such an appointment was obviously convenient, the
lords petitioned for a steward; and a fresh commission was accordingly
issued in an amended form, which recited the petition, and omitted words
implying that the appointment was necessary. This precedent has been
treated as settling the practice of parliament with regard to

Of the proceedings against peers founded upon indictment very few trials
antecedent to the revolution took place in parliament. The preference
given to the steward's court was largely due to the practice, founded
upon the Southampton case, of summoning only a few peers selected by the
steward, a practice which made it easy for the king to secure a
conviction. This arrangement has been partially abrogated by the Treason
Act of William III., which in cases of treason and misprision of treason
requires that all peers of parliament shall be summoned twenty days at
least before every such trial. The steward's court also differed in
certain other particulars from the high court of parliament. For
example, it was ruled by Lord Chancellor Jeffreys, as steward at the
trial of Lord Delamere, that, in trials of peers which take place during
the recess of parliament in the steward's court, the steward is the
judge of the court, the court is held before him, his warrant convenes
the prisoner to the bar, his summons convenes the peers for the trial,
and he is to determine by his sole authority all questions of law that
arise in the course of the trial, but that he is to give no vote upon
the issue of guilty or not guilty; during a session of parliament, on
the contrary, all the peers are both triers and judges, and the steward
is only as chairman of the court and gives his vote together with the
other lords. Lord Delamere was tried in 1685 in the steward's court;
since then all trials of peers have taken place before the lords in
parliament. The most recent trial was that of Earl Russell in 1901, when
Lord Chancellor Halsbury was made lord high steward. The steward is
addressed as "his grace," he has a rod of office, and the commission
appointing him is dissolved according to custom by breaking this rod.

A court of claims sat and a steward was appointed for the coronation of
Edward VII.; and during the procession in Westminster Abbey the duke of
Marlborough, as steward, carried "St Edward's crown" in front of the
bearer of the Bible (the bishop of London), who immediately preceded the
king; this function of the steward is of modern origin. The steward's
ancient and particular services at coronations are practically obsolete;
the full ceremonies, procession from Westminster Hall and banquet in
which he figured prominently, were abandoned on the accession of William

  For the early history of the steward see L. W. Vernon-Harcourt, _His
  Grace the Steward and Trial of Peers_ (1907); for the later history of
  the office see Sir E. Coke, _Institutes_ (1797); Cobbett and Howell,
  _State Trials_ (1809, seq.); S. M. Phillipps, _State Trials_ (1826);
  John Hatsell, _Precedents_, vol. 4 (1818); and Sir M. Foster, _Crown
  Law_ (1809). See also the various works on _Coronations_ for the
  steward's services on these occasions.     (L. W. V.-H.)

LORD HIGH TREASURER, in England, once the third great officer of state.
The office was of Norman origin and dated from 1216. The duty of the
treasurer originally was to act as keeper of the royal treasure at
Winchester, while as officer of the exchequer he sat at Westminster to
receive the accounts of the sheriffs, and appoint officers to collect
the revenue. The treasurer was subordinate to both the justiciar and the
chancellor, but the removal of the chancery from the exchequer in the
reign of Richard I., and the abolition of the office of justiciars in
the reign of Henry III., increased his importance. Indeed, from the
middle of the reign of Henry III. he became one of the chief officers of
the crown. He took an important part in the equitable jurisdiction of
the exchequer, and was now styled not merely king's treasurer or
treasurer of the exchequer, but lord high treasurer and treasurer of the
exchequer. The first office was conferred by delivery of a white staff,
the second by patent. Near the end of the 16th century he had developed
into an official so occupied with the general policy of the country as
to be prevented from supervising personally the details of the
department, and Lord Burleigh employed a secretary for this purpose. On
the death of Lord Salisbury in 1612 the office was put in commission; it
was filled from time to time until 1714, when the duke of Shrewsbury
resigned it; since that time it has always been in commission (see
TREASURY). The Scottish treasury was merged with the English by the Act
of Union, but the office of lord high treasurer for Ireland was
continued until 1816.

LORD HOWE, an island of the southern Pacific Ocean, lying about 31° 36´
S., 159° 5´ E., 520 m. E.N.E. of Sydney. Pop. 120. It was discovered in
1778 by Lieutenant Ball (whose name is commemorated in the adjacent
islet of Ball's Pyramid), and is a dependency of New South Wales. It
measures about 5½ m. by 1 m., and is well wooded and hilly (reaching a
height of 2840 ft. at the southern end), being of volcanic formation,
while there are coral reefs on the western shore. It has a pleasant
climate. The name Lord Howe is given also to an islet of the Santa Cruz
group, and to two islands, also known under other names--Mopiha, of the
Society group, and Ongtong Java of the Solomon Islands.

LORD JUSTICE CLERK, in Scotland, a judge next in rank to the lord
justice-general. He presides in the second division of the court of
session, and in the absence of the lord justice-general, presides in the
court of justiciary. The justice clerk was originally not a judge at
all, but simply clerk and legal assessor of the justice court. In course
of time he was raised from the clerk's table to the bench, and by custom
presided over the court in the absence of the justice-general. Up to
1672 his position was somewhat anomalous, as it was doubtful whether he
was a clerk or a judge, but an act of that year, which suppressed the
office of justice-depute, confirmed his position as a judge, forming
him, with the justice-general and five of the lords of session into the
court of justiciary. The lord justice clerk is also one of the officers
of state for Scotland, and one of the commissioners for keeping the
Scottish Regalia. His salary is £4800 a year.

LORD JUSTICE-GENERAL, the highest judge in Scotland, head of the court
of justiciary, called also the lord president, and as such head of the
court of session and representative of the sovereign. The office of
justice-general was for a considerable time a sinecure post held by one
of the Scottish nobility, but by the Court of Session Act 1830, it was
enacted that, at the termination of the existing interest, the office
should be united with that of lord president of the court of session,
who then became presiding judge of the court of justiciary. The salary
is £5000 a year.

LORD KEEPER OF THE GREAT SEAL, in England, formerly a great officer of
state. The Great Seal of England, which is affixed on all solemn
occasions to documents expressing the pleasure of the sovereign, was
first adopted by Edward the Confessor (see SEALS), and entrusted to a
chancellor for keeping. The office of chancellor from the time of Becket
onwards varied much in importance; the holder being an ecclesiastic, he
was not only engaged in the business of his diocese, but sometimes was
away from England. Consequently, it became not unusual to place the
personal custody of the great seal in the hands of a vice-chancellor or
keeper; this, too, was the practice followed during a temporary vacancy
in the chancellorship. This office gradually developed into a permanent
appointment, and the lord keeper acquired the right of discharging all
the duties connected with the great seal. He was usually, though not
necessarily, a peer, and held office during the king's pleasure, he was
appointed merely by delivery of the seal, and not, like the chancellor,
by patent. His status was definitely fixed (in the case of lord keeper
Sir Nicholas Bacon) by an act of Elizabeth, which declared him entitled
to "like place, pre-eminence, jurisdiction, execution of laws, and all
other customs, commodities, and advantages" as the lord chancellor. In
subsequent reigns the lord keeper was generally raised to the
chancellorship, and retained the custody of the seal. The last lord
keeper was Sir Robert Henley (afterwards Lord Northington), who was made
chancellor on the accession of George III.

LORD MAYOR'S DAY, in England, the 9th of November, the date of the
inauguration of the lord mayor of London (see Vol. XVI., p. 966), marked
by a pageant known as the Lord Mayor's Show. The first of these pageants
was held in 1215. The idea originated in the stipulation made in a
charter then granted by John that the citizen chosen to be mayor should
be presented to the king or his justice for approval. The crowd of
citizens who accompanied the mayor on horseback to Westminster developed
into a yearly pageant, which each season became more elaborate. Until
the 15th century the mayor either rode or walked to Westminster, but in
1453 Sir John Norman appears to have set a fashion of going by water.
From 1639 to 1655 the show disappeared owing to Puritan opposition. With
the Restoration the city pageant was revived, but interregnums occurred
during the years of the plague and fire, and in 1683 when a quarrel
broke out between Charles and the city, ending in the temporary
abrogation of the charter. In 1711 an untoward accident befell the show,
the mayor Sir Gilbert Heathcote (the original of Addison's Sir Andrew
Freeport) being thrown by his horse. The next year a coach was, in
consequence, provided for the chief magistrate. In 1757 this was
superseded by a gilded and elaborately decorated equipage costing
£10,065 which was used till 1896, when a replica of it was built to
replace it.

LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL, in England, one of the great officers of
state, and a member of the ministry. It was only in 1679 that the office
of lord president became permanent. Previously either the lord
chancellor, the lord keeper of the seal, or some particular court
official took formal direction of the Privy Council. In the reign of
Charles I. a special lord president of the council was appointed, but in
the following reign the office was left unfilled. The office was of
considerable importance when the powers of the Privy Council, exercised
through various committees, were of greater extent than at the present
time. For example, a committee of the lords of the council was formerly
responsible for the work now dealt with by the secretary of state for
foreign affairs; so also with that now discharged by the Board of Trade.
The lord president up to 1855--when a new post of vice-president of the
council was created--was responsible for the education department. He
was also responsible for the duties of the council in regard to public
health, now transferred to the Local Government Board, and for duties in
regard to agriculture, now transferred to the Board of Agriculture and
Fisheries. The duties of the office now consist of presiding on the not
very frequent occasions when the Privy Council meets, and of the drawing
up of minutes of council upon subjects which do not belong to any other
department of state. The office is very frequently held in conjunction
with other ministerial offices, for example, in Gladstone's fourth
ministry the secretary of state for India was also lord president of the
council, and in the conservative ministry of 1903 the holder of the
office was also president of the Board of Education. The lord president
is appointed by a declaration made in council by the sovereign. He is
invariably a member of the House of Lords, and he is also included in
the cabinet.

LORDS JUSTICES OF APPEAL, in England, the ordinary judges of the court
of appeal, the appellate division of the High Court of Justice. Their
style was provided for by the Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1877. The
number was fixed at five by the Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1881, s.
3. Their salary is £5000 a year (see APPEAL).

LORDS OF APPEAL IN ORDINARY, in England, certain persons (limited to
four), who, having held high judicial office or practised at the bar for
not less than fifteen years, sit as members of the House of Lords to
adjudicate in cases before that House in its legal capacity, and also to
aid the judicial committee of the Privy Council in hearing appeals. Of
the four lords of appeal in ordinary one is usually appointed from the
Irish bench or bar and one from Scotland. Their salary is £6000 a year.
They hold office on the same conditions as other judges. By the
Appellate Jurisdiction Act 1876, under which they are appointed, lords
of appeal in ordinary are, by virtue of and according to the date of
their appointment, entitled during life to rank as barons and during the
time that they continue in office are entitled to a writ of summons to
attend, and to sit and vote in the House of Lords. They are life peers
only. The patent of a lord of appeal in ordinary differs from that of a
baron in that he is not "created" but "nominated and appointed to be a
Lord of Appeal in Ordinary by the style of Baron."

LORD STEWARD, in England, an important official of the king's household.
He is always a member of the government, a peer and a privy councillor.
Up to 1782, the office was one of considerable political importance and
carried cabinet rank. The lord steward receives his appointment from the
sovereign in person, and bears a white staff as the emblem and warrant
of his authority. He is the first dignitary of the court. In the
_Statutes of Eltham_ he is called "the lord great master," but in the
_Household Book_ of Queen Elizabeth "the lord steward," as before and
since. In an act of Henry VIII. (1539) "for placing of the lords," he is
described as "the grand master or lord steward of the king's most
honourable household." He presides at the Board of Green Cloth.[1] In
his department are the treasurer and comptroller of the household, who
rank next to him. These officials are usually peers or the sons of peers
and privy councillors. They sit at the Board of Green Cloth, carry white
staves, and belong to the ministry. But the duties which in theory
belong to the lord steward, treasurer and comptroller of the household
are in practice performed by the master of the household, who is a
permanent officer and resides in the palace. He is a white-staff officer
and a member of the Board of Green Cloth but not of the ministry, and
among other things he presides at the daily dinners of the suite in
waiting on the sovereign. In his case history repeats itself. He is not
named in the _Black Book_ of Edward IV. or in the _Statutes_ of Henry
VIII., and is entered as "master of the household and clerk of the green
cloth" in the _Household Book_ of Queen Elizabeth. But he has superseded
the lord steward of the household, as the lord steward of the household
at one time superseded the lord high steward of England.

In the lord steward's department are the officials of the Board of Green
Cloth, the coroner ("coroner of the verge"), and paymaster of the
household, and the officers of the almonry (see ALMONER). Other offices
in the department were those of the cofferer of the household, the
treasurer of the chamber, and the paymaster of pensions, but these, with
six clerks of the Board of Green Cloth, were abolished in 1782. The lord
steward had formerly three courts besides the Board of Green Cloth under
him. First, the lord steward's court, superseded (1541) by--second--the
Marshalsea court, a court of record having jurisdiction, both civil and
criminal within the verge (the area within a radius of 12 m. from where
the sovereign is resident), and originally held for the purpose of
administering justice between the domestic servants of the sovereign,
"that they might not be drawn into other courts and their service lost."
Its criminal jurisdiction had long fallen into disuse and its civil
jurisdiction was abolished in 1849. Third, the palace court, created by
letters patent in 1612 and renewed in 1665 with jurisdiction over all
personal matters arising between parties within 12 m. of Whitehall (the
jurisdiction of the Marshalsea court, the City of London, and
Westminster Hall being excepted). It differed from the Marshalsea court
in that it had no jurisdiction over the sovereign's household nor were
its suitors necessarily of the household. The privilege of practising
before the palace court was limited to four counsel. It was abolished in
1849. The lord steward or his deputies formerly administered the oaths
to the members of the House of Commons. In certain cases (messages from
the sovereign under the sign-manual) "the lords with white staves" are
the proper persons to bear communications between the sovereign and the
houses of parliament.

  AUTHORITIES.--_Statutes of Eltham; Household Book_ of Queen Elizabeth;
  Coke, _Institutes_; Reeves, _History of the Law of England_; Stephen,
  _Commentaries on the Laws of England_; Hatsell, _Precedents of
  Proceedings in the House of Commons_; May, _Parliamentary Practice_.


  [1] A committee of the king's household, consisting of the lord
    steward and his subordinates, charged with the duty of examining and
    passing all the accounts of the household. The board had also power
    to punish all offenders within the verge or jurisdiction of the
    palace, which extended in every direction for 200 yds. from the gates
    of the court yard. The name is derived from the green-covered table
    at which the transactions of the board were originally conducted.

LORÉ, AMBROISE DE (1396-1446), baron of Ivry in Normandy and a French
commander, was born at the château of Loré (Orne, arrondissement of
Domfront). His first exploit in arms was at the battle of Agincourt in
1415; he followed the party of the Armagnacs and attached himself to the
dauphin Charles. He waged continual warfare against the English in Maine
until the advent of Joan of Arc. He fought at Jargeau, at
Meung-sur-Loire and at Patay (1429). Using his fortress of Saint Céneri
as a base of operations during the next few years, he seized upon
Matthew Gough near Vivoin in 1431, and made an incursion as far as the
walls of Caen, whence he brought away three thousand prisoners. Taken
captive himself in 1433, he was exchanged for Talbot. In 1435 he and
Dunois defeated the English near Meulan, and in 1436 he helped the
constable Arthur, earl of Richmond (de Richmond), to expel them from
Paris. He was appointed provost of Paris in February 1437, and in 1438
he was made "judge and general reformer of the malefactors of the
kingdom." He was present in 1439 at the taking of Meaux, in 1441 at that
of Pontoise, and he died on the 24th of May 1446.

  See the _Nouvelle Biographie Générale_, vol. xxxi., and the _Revue
  Historique du Maine_, vols. iii. and vi.     (J. V.*)

LORE, properly instruction, teaching, knowledge. The O. Eng. _lár_, as
the Dutch _leer_ and Ger. _Lehre_, represents the Old Teutonic root,
meaning to impart or receive knowledge, seen in "to learn," "learning."
In the _Gentleman's Magazine_ for June 1830 it was suggested that "lore"
should be used as a termination instead of the Greek derivative -_ology_
in the names of the various sciences. This was never done, but the word,
both as termination and alone, is frequently applied to the many
traditional beliefs, stories, &c., connected with the body of knowledge
concerning some special subject; e.g. legendary lore, bird-lore, &c. The
most familiar use is in "folk-lore" (q.v.).

LORELEI (from Old High Ger. _Lur_, connected with modern Ger. _lauern_,
"to lurk," "be on the watch for," and equivalent to elf, and _lai_, "a
rock"). The Lorelei is a rock in the Rhine near St Goar, which gives a
remarkable echo, which may partly account for the legend. The tale
appears in many forms, but is best known through Heinrich Heine's poem,
beginning _Ich weiss nicht was soll es bedeuten_. In the commonest form
of the story the Lorelei is a maiden who threw herself into the Rhine in
despair over a faithless lover, and became a siren whose voice lured
fishermen to destruction. The 13th-century minnesinger, known as Der
Marner, says that the Nibelungen treasure was hidden beneath the rock.
The tale is obviously closely connected with the myth of Holda, queen of
the elves. On the Main she sits combing her locks on the Hullenstein,
and the man who sees her loses sight or reason, while he who listens is
condemned to wander with her for ever. The legend, which Clemens
Brentano claimed as his own invention when he wrote his poem "Zu
Bacharach am Rheine" in his novel of _Godwi_ (1802), bears all the marks
of popular mythology. In the 19th century it formed material for a great
number of songs, dramatic sketches, operas and even tragedies, which
are enumerated by Dr Hermann Seeliger in his _Loreleysage in Dichtung
und Musik_ (Leipzig-Reudnitz, 1898). The favourite poem with composers
was Heine's, set to music by some twenty-five musicians, the settings by
Friedrich Silcher (from an old folk-song) and by Liszt being the most

LORETO, an episcopal see and pilgrimage resort of the Marches, Italy, in
the province of Ancona, 15 m. by rail S.S.E. of that town. Pop. (1901)
1178 (town), 8033 (commune). It lies upon the right bank of the Musone,
at some distance from the railway station, on a hill-side commanding
splendid views from the Apennines to the Adriatic, 341 ft. above
sea-level. The town itself consists of little more than one long narrow
street, lined with shops for the sale of rosaries, medals, crucifixes
and similar objects, the manufacture of which is the sole industry of
the place. The number of pilgrims is said to amount to 50,000 annually,
the chief festival being held on the 8th of September, the Nativity of
the Virgin. The principal buildings, occupying the four sides of the
piazza, are the college of the Jesuits, the Palazzo Apostolico, now
Reale (designed by Bramante), which contains a picture gallery with
works of Lorenzo Lotto, Vouet and Caracci and a collection of majolica,
and the cathedral church of the Holy House (Chiesa della Casa Santa), a
Late Gothic structure continued by Giuliano da Maiano, Giuliano da
Sangallo and Bramante. The handsome façade of the church was erected
under Sixtus V., who fortified Loreto and gave it the privileges of a
town (1586); his colossal statue stands in the middle of the flight of
steps in front. Over the principal doorway is a life-size bronze statue
of the Virgin and Child by Girolamo Lombardo; the three superb bronze
doors executed at the latter end of the 16th century and under Paul V.
(1605-1621) are also by Lombardo, his sons and his pupils, among them
Tiburzio Vergelli, who also made the fine bronze font in the interior.
The doors and hanging lamps of the Santa Casa are by the same artists.
The richly decorated campanile, by Vanvitelli, is of great height; the
principal bell, presented by Leo X. in 1516, weighs 11 tons. The
interior of the church has mosaics by Domenichino and Guido Reni and
other works of art. In the sacristies on each side of the right transept
are frescoes, on the right by Melozzo da Forli, on the left by Luca
Signorelli. In both are fine intarsias.

But the chief object of interest is the Holy House itself. It is a plain
stone building, 28 ft. by 12½ and 13½ ft. in height; it has a door on
the north side and a window on the west; and a niche contains a small
black image of the Virgin and Child, in Lebanon cedar, and richly
adorned with jewels. St Luke is alleged to have been the sculptor; its
workmanship suggests the latter half of the 15th century. Around the
Santa Casa is a lofty marble screen, designed by Bramante, and executed
under Popes Leo X., Clement VII. and Paul III., by Andrea Sansovino,
Girolamo Lombardo, Bandinelli, Guglielmo della Porta and others. The
four sides represent the Annunciation, the Nativity, the Arrival of the
Santa Casa at Loreto and the Nativity of the Virgin respectively. The
treasury contains a large variety of rich and curious votive offerings.
The architectural design is finer than the details of the sculpture. The
choir apse is decorated with modern German frescoes, which are somewhat
out of place.

The legend of the Holy House seems to have sprung up (how is not exactly
known) at the close of the crusading period.

It is briefly referred to in the _Italia Illustrata_ of Flavius Blondus,
secretary to Popes Eugenius IV., Nicholas V., Calixtus III. and Pius II.
(_ob._ 1464); it is to be read in all its fullness in the "Redemptoris
mundi Matris Ecclesiae Lauretana historia," by a certain Teremannus,
contained in the _Opera Omnia_ (1576) of Baptista Mantuanus. According
to this narrative the house at Nazareth in which Mary had been born and
brought up, had received the annunciation, and had lived during the
childhood of Jesus and after His ascension, was converted into a church
by the apostles. In 336 the empress Helena made a pilgrimage to Nazareth
and caused a basilica to be erected over it, in which worship continued
until the fall of the kingdom of Jerusalem. Threatened with destruction
by the Turks, it was carried by angels through the air and deposited
(1291) in the first instance on a hill at Tersatto in Dalmatia, where
an appearance of the Virgin and numerous miraculous cures attested its
sanctity, which was confirmed by investigations made at Nazareth by
messengers from the governor of Dalmatia. In 1294 the angels carried it
across the Adriatic to a wood near Recanati; from this wood (lauretum),
or from the name of its proprietrix (Laureta), the chapel derived the
name which it still retains ("sacellum gloriosae Virginis in Laureto").
From this spot it was afterwards (1295) removed to the present hill, one
other slight adjustment being required to fix it in its actual site.
Bulls in favour of the shrine at Loreto were issued by Pope Sixtus IV.
in 1491 and by Julius II. in 1507, the last alluding to the translation
of the house with some caution ("ut pie creditur et fama est"). The
recognition of the sanctuary by subsequent pontiffs has already been
alluded to. In the end of the 17th century Innocent XII. appointed a
"missa cum officio proprio" for the feast of the Translation of the Holy
House, and the feast is still enjoined in the Spanish Breviary as a
"greater double" (December 10).

  See also U. Chevalier, _Notre-Dame de Lorette_ (Paris, 1906).

LORETO, an inland department of Peru, lying E. of the Andean Cordilleras
and forming the N.E. part of the republic. Extensive territories,
nominally parts of this department, are in dispute between Peru and the
neighbouring republics of Brazil, Colombia and Ecuador (see PERU), and
the northern and eastern boundaries of the territory are therefore not
definitely determined. Loreto is bounded W. by the departments of
Amazonas and San Martin (the latter a new department, with an area of
30,744 sq. m., taken from Loreto, lying between the central and eastern
Cordilleras and extending from the 6th to the 9th parallels,
approximately), and S. by Huánuco and Cuzco. The area of the department,
including the territories claimed by Peru, is estimated at 257,798 sq.
m. The population is estimated (1906) at 120,000. The aboriginal
population is not numerous, as the thick, humid forests are inhabited
only where lakes and streams make open spaces for sunlight and
ventilation. With the exception of the eastern Andean slopes and a
little-known range of low mountains on the Brazilian frontier, called
the Andes Conomamas, the surface is that of a thickly wooded plain
sloping gently towards the Marañon, or Upper Amazon, which crosses it
from W. to E. There are open plains between the Ucayali and Huallaga,
known as the Pampas del Sacramento, but otherwise there are no extensive
breaks in the forest. The elevation of the plain near the base of the
Andes is 526 ft. on the Ucayali, 558 on the Huallaga, and 453 at
Barranca, on the Marañon, a few miles below the Pongo de Manseriche. The
eastward slope of the plain is about 250 ft. in the 620 m. (direct)
between this point and Tabatinga, on the Brazilian frontier; this not
only shows the remarkably level character of the Amazon valley of which
it forms a part, but also the sluggish character of its drainage. From
the S. the principal rivers traversing Loreto are the Ucayali and
Huallaga, the former entering from Cuzco across its southern boundary
and skirting the eastern base of the Andes for about four degrees of
latitude before it turns away to the N.E. to join the Marañon, and the
latter breaking through the Eastern Cordillera between the 6th and 7th
parallels and entering the Marañon 143 m. below Yurimaguas, where
navigation begins. The lower Ucayali, which has a very tortuous course,
is said to have 868 m. of navigable channel at high water and 620 m. at
low water. North of the Marañon several large rivers pass through
Peruvian territory between the Santiago and Napo (see Ecuador), nearly
all having navigable channels. On the level plains are a number of
lakes, some are formed by the annual floods and are temporary in
character. Among the permanent lakes are the Gran Cocama, of the Pampas
del Sacramento, the Caballococha--a widening of the Amazon itself about
60 m. N.W. of Tabatinga--and Rimachuma, on the north side of the
Marañon, near the lower Pastaza.

The natural resources of this extensive region are incalculable, but
their development has been well nigh impossible through lack of
transport facilities. They include the characteristic woods of the
Amazon valley, rubber, nuts, cinchona or Peruvian bark, medicinal
products, fish, fruits and fibres. The cultivated products include
cocoa, coffee, tobacco and fruits. Straw hats and hammocks are
manufactured to some extent. The natural outlet of this region is the
Amazon river, but this involves 2500 m. of river navigation from Iquitos
before the ocean is reached. Communication with the Pacific coast cities
and ports of Peru implies the crossing of three high, snow-covered
ranges of the Andes by extremely difficult trails and passes. A rough
mountain road has been constructed from Oroya to Puerto Bermudez, at the
head of navigation on the Pachitea, and is maintained by the government
pending the construction of a railway, but the distance is 210 m. and it
takes nine days for a mule train to make the journey. At Puerto Bermudez
a river steamer connects with Iquitos, making the distance of 930 m. in
seven days. From Lima to Iquitos by this route, therefore, involves 17
days travel over a distance of 1268 m. The most feasible route from the
department to the Pacific coast is that which connects Puerto Limon, on
the Marañon, with the Pacific port of Payta, a distance of 410 m., it
being possible to cross the Andes on this route at the low elevation of
6600 ft. The climate of Loreto is hot and humid, except on the higher
slopes of the Andes. The year is divided into a wet and a dry season,
the first from May to October, and the average annual rainfall is
estimated at 70 in. though it varies widely between distant points. The
capital and only town of importance in the department is Iquitos.

LORIENT, a maritime town of western France, capital of an arrondissement
in the department of Morbihan, on the right bank of the Scorff at its
confluence with the Blavet, 34 m. W. by N. of Vannes by rail. Pop.
(1906) 40,848. The town is modern and regularly built. Its chief objects
of interest are the church of St Louis (1709) and a statue by A. Mercié
of Victor Massé, the composer, born at Lorient in 1822. It is one of the
five maritime prefectures in France and the first port for naval
construction in the country. The naval port to the east of the town is
formed by the channel of the Scorff, on the right bank of which the
chief naval establishments are situated. These include magazines,
foundries, forges, fitting-shops, rope-works and other workshops on the
most extensive scale, as well as a graving dock, a covered slip and
other slips. A floating bridge connects the right bank with the
peninsula of Caudan formed by the union of the Scorff and Blavet. Here
are the shipbuilding yards covering some 38 acres, and comprising nine
slips for large vessels and two others for smaller vessels, besides
forges and workshops for iron shipbuilding. The commercial port to the
south of the town consists of an outer tidal port protected by a jetty
and of an inner dock, both lined by fine quays planted with trees. It
separates the older part of the town, which is hemmed in by
fortifications from a newer quarter. In 1905, 121 vessels of 28,785 tons
entered with cargo and 145 vessels of 38,207 tons cleared. The chief
export is pit-timber, the chief import is coal. Fishing is actively
carried on. Lorient is the seat of a sub-prefect, of commercial and
maritime tribunals and of a tribunal of first instance, and has a
chamber of commerce, a board of trade-arbitrators, a lycée, schools of
navigation, and naval artillery. Private industry is also engaged in
iron-working and engine making. The trade in fresh fish, sardines,
oysters (which are reared near Lorient) and tinned vegetables is
important and the manufacture of basket-work, tin-boxes and
passementerie, arid the preparation of preserved sardines and vegetables
are carried on. The roadstead, formed by the estuary of the Blavet, is
accessible to vessels of the largest size; the entrance, 3 or 4 m. south
from Lorient, which is defended by numerous forts, is marked on the east
by the peninsula of Gâvres (an artillery practising ground) and the
fortified town of Port Louis; on the west are the fort of Loqueltas and,
higher up, the battery of Kernevel. In the middle of the channel is the
granite rock of St Michel, occupied by a powder magazine. Opposite it,
on the right bank of the Blavet, is the mouth of the river Ter, with
fish and oyster breeding establishments from which 10 millions of
oysters are annually obtained. The roadstead is provided with six
lighthouses. Above Lorient on the Scorff, here spanned by a suspension
bridge, is Kérentrech, a pretty village surrounded by numerous country

Lorient took the place of Port Louis as the port of the Blavet. The
latter stands on the site of an ancient hamlet which was fortified
during the wars of the League and handed over by Philip Emmanuel, duke
of Morcoeur, to the Spaniards. After the treaty of Vervins it was
restored to France, and it received its name of Port Louis under
Richelieu. Some Breton merchants trading with the Indies had established
themselves first at Port Louis, but in 1628 they built their warehouses
on the other bank. The Compagnie des Indes Orientales, created in 1664,
took possession of these, giving them the name of l'Orient. In 1745 the
Compagnie des Indes, then at the acme of its prosperity, owned
thirty-five ships of the largest class and many others of considerable
size. Its decadence dates from the English conquest of India, and in
1770 its property was ceded to the state. In 1782 the town was purchased
by Louis XVI. from its owners, the Rohan-Guéméné family. In 1746 the
English under Admiral Richard Lestock made an unsuccessful attack on

LORINER, or LORIMER (from O. Fr. _loremier_ or _lorenier_, a maker of
_lorains_, bridles, from Lat. _lorum_, thong, bridle; the proper form is
with the _n_; a similar change is found in Latimer for Latiner, the
title of an old official of the royal household, the king's
interpreter), one who makes bits and spurs and the metal mountings for
saddles and bridles; the term is also applied to a worker in wrought
iron and to a maker of small iron ware. The word is now rarely used
except as the name of one of the London livery companies (see LIVERY

LORIS, a name of uncertain origin applied to the Indo-Malay
representatives of the lemurs, which, together with the African pottos,
constitute the section _Nycticebinae_ of the family _Nycticebidae_ (see
PRIMATES). From their extremely slow movements and lethargic habits in
the daytime these weird little creatures are commonly called sloths by
Anglo-Indians. Their soft fur, huge staring eyes, rudimentary tails and
imperfectly developed index-fingers render lorises easy of recognition.
The smallest is the slender loris (_Loris gracilis_) of the forests of
Madras and Ceylon, a creature smaller than a squirrel. It is of such
exceeding strangeness and beauty that it might have been thought it
would be protected by the natives; but they hold it alive before a fire
till its beautiful eyes burst in order to afford a supposed remedy for
ophthalmia! The mainland and Cingalese animals form distinct races. Both
in this species and the slow loris there is a pair of rudimentary
abdominal teats in addition to the normal pectoral pair. The slow loris
(_Nycticebus tardigradus_) is a heavier built and larger animal, ranging
from eastern Bengal to Cochin China, Siam, the Malay Peninsula, Java and
Sumatra. There are several races, mostly grey in colour, but the
Sumatran _N. t. hilleri_ is reddish.     (R. L.*)

statesman, son of an Armenian merchant, was born at Tiflis in 1825 or
1826, and educated in St Petersburg, first in the Lazarev School of
Oriental Languages, and afterwards in the Guards' Cadet Institute. He
joined a hussar regiment, and four years afterwards (1847) he was sent
to the Caucasus, where he remained for more than twenty years, and made
for himself during troublous times the reputation of a distinguished
cavalry officer and an able administrator. In the latter capacity,
though a keen soldier, he aimed always at preparing the warlike and
turbulent population committed to his charge for the transition from
military to normal civil administration, and in this work his favourite
instrument was the schoolmaster. In the Russo-Turkish War of 1877-78 he
commanded a separate corps d'armée on the Turkish frontier in Asia
Minor. After taking the fortress of Ardahan, he was repulsed by Mukhtar
Pasha at Zevin, but subsequently defeated his opponent at Aladja Dagh,
took Kars by storm, and laid siege to Erzerum. For these services he
received the title of Count. In the following year he was appointed
temporary governor-general of the region of the Lower Volga, to combat
an outbreak of the plague. The measures he adopted proved so effectual
that he was transferred to the provinces of Central Russia to combat the
Nihilists and Anarchists, who had adopted a policy of terrorism, and had
succeeded in assassinating the governor of Kharkov. His success in this
struggle led to his being appointed chief of the Supreme Executive
Commission which had been created in St Petersburg to deal with the
revolutionary agitation in general. Here, as in the Caucasus, he showed
a decided preference for the employment of ordinary legal methods rather
than exceptional extra-legal measures, and an attempt on his own life
soon after he assumed office did not shake his convictions. In his
opinion the best policy was to strike at the root of the evil by
removing the causes of popular discontent, and for this purpose he
recommended to the emperor a large scheme of administrative and economic
reforms. Alexander II., who was beginning to lose faith in the efficacy
of the simple method of police repression hitherto employed, lent a
willing ear to the suggestion; and when the Supreme Commission was
dissolved in August 1880, he appointed Count Loris-Melikov Minister of
the Interior with exceptional powers. The proposed scheme of reforms was
at once taken in hand, but it was never carried out. On the very day in
March 1881 that the emperor signed a ukaz creating several commissions,
composed of officials and eminent private individuals, who should
prepare reforms in various branches of the administration, he was
assassinated by Nihilist conspirators; and his successor, Alexander
III., at once adopted a strongly reactionary policy. Count Loris-Melikov
immediately resigned, and lived in retirement until his death, which
took place at Nice on the 22nd of December 1888.     (D. M. W.)

LORIUM, an ancient village of Etruria, Italy, on the Via Aurelia, 12 m.
W. of Rome. Antoninus Pius, who was educated here, afterwards built a
palace, in which he died. It was also a favourite haunt of Marcus
Aurelius. Remains of ancient buildings exist in the neighbourhood of the
road on each side (near the modern Castel di Guido) and remains of
tombs, inscriptions, &c., were excavated in 1823-1824. Two or three
miles farther west was probably the post-station of Bebiana, where
inscriptions show that some sailors of the fleet were stationed--no
doubt a detachment of those at Centumcellae, which was reached by this

LÖRRACH, a town in the grand-duchy of Baden, in the valley of the Wiese,
6 m. by rail N.E. of Basel. Pop. (1905) 10,794. It is the seat of
considerable industry, its manufactures including calico, shawls, cloth,
silk, chocolate, cotton, ribbons, hardware and furniture, and has a
trade in wine, fruit and timber. There is a fine view from the
neighbouring Schützenhaus, 1085 ft. high. In the neighbourhood also is
the castle of Rötteln, formerly the residence of the counts of Hachberg
and of the margraves of Baden; this was destroyed by the French in 1678,
but was rebuilt in 1867. Lörrach received market rights in 1403, but did
not obtain municipal privileges until 1682.

  See Höchstetter, _Die Stadt Lörrach_ (Lörrach, 1882).

LORRAINE, one of the former provinces of France. The name has designated
different districts in different periods. Lotharingia, or Lothringen,
i.e. _regnum Lotharii_, is derived from the _Lotharingi_ or
_Lotharienses_ (O.G. _Lotheringen_, Fr. _Loherains, Lorrains_), a term
applied originally to the Frankish subjects of Lothair, but restricted
at the end of the 9th century to those who dwelt north of the southern

_Lorraine in Medieval Times._--The original kingdom of Lorraine was the
northern part of the territories allotted by the treaty of Verdun
(August 843) to the emperor Lothair I., and in 855 formed the
inheritance of his second son, King Lothair. This kingdom of Lorraine
was situated between the realms of the East and the West Franks, and
originally extended along the North Sea between the mouths of the Rhine
and the Ems, including the whole or part of Frisia and the cities on the
right bank of the Rhine. From Bonn the frontier followed the Rhine as
far as its confluence with the Aar, which then became the boundary,
receding from the left bank in the neighbourhood of Bingen so as to
leave the cities of Worms and Spires to Germany, and embracing the duchy
of Alsace. After crossing the Jura, the frontier joined the Saône a
little south of its confluence with the Doubs, and followed the Saône
for some distance, and finally the valleys of the Meuse and the Scheldt.
Thus the kingdom roughly comprised the region watered by the Moselle
and the Meuse, together with the dioceses of Cologne, Trier, Metz,
Toul, Verdun, Liége and Cambrai, Basel, Strassburg and Besançon, and
corresponded to what is now Holland and Belgium, parts of Rhenish
Prussia, of Switzerland, and of the old province of Franche-Comté, and
to the district known later as Upper Lorraine, or simply Lorraine.
Though apparently of an absolutely artificial character, this kingdom
corresponded essentially to the ancient Francia, the cradle of the
Carolingian house, and long retained a certain unity. It was to the
inhabitants of this region that the name of _Lotharienses_ or
_Lotharingi_ was primitively applied, although the word _Lotharingia_,
as the designation of the country, only appears in the middle of the
10th century.

The reign of King Lothair (q.v.), which was continually disturbed by
quarrels with his uncles, Charles the Bald and Louis the German, and by
the difficulties caused by the divorce of his queen Teutberga, whom he
had forsaken for a concubine called Waldrada, ended on the 8th of August
869. His inheritance was disputed by his uncles, and was divided by the
treaty of Meersen (8th of August 870), by which Charles the Bald
received part of the province of Besançon and some land between the
Moselle and the Meuse. Then for a time the emperor Charles the Fat
united under his authority the whole of the kingdom of Lorraine with the
rest of the Carolingian empire. After the deposition of Charles in 888
Rudolph, king of Burgundy, got himself recognized in Lorraine. He was
unable to maintain himself there, and succeeded in detaching
definitively no more than the province of Besançon. Lorraine remained in
the power of the emperor Arnulf, who in 895 constituted it a distinct
kingdom in favour of his son Zwentibold. Zwentibold quickly became
embroiled with the nobles and the bishops, and especially with Bishop
Radbod of Trier. Among the lay lords the most important was Regnier
(incorrectly called Long-neck), count of Hesbaye and Hainault, who is
styled duke by the Lotharingian chronicler Reginon, though he does not
appear ever to have borne the title. In 898 Zwentibold stripped Regnier
of his fiefs, whereupon the latter appealed to the king of France,
Charles the Simple, whose intervention, however, had no enduring effect.
After the death of Arnulf in 899, the Lotharingians appealed to his
successor, Louis the Child, to replace Zwentibold, who, on the 13th of
August 900, was killed in battle. In spite of the dissensions which
immediately arose between him and the Lotharingian lords, Louis retained
the kingdom till his death. The Lotharingians, however, refused to
recognize the new German king, Conrad I., and testified their attachment
to the Carolingian house by electing as sovereign the king of the West
Franks, Charles the Simple. Charles was at first supported by Giselbert,
son and successor of Regnier, but was abandoned by his ally, who in 919
appealed to the German king, Henry I. The struggle ended in the treaty
of Bonn (921), by which apparently the rights of Charles over Lorraine
were recognized. The revolt of the Frankish lords in 922 and the
captivity of Charles finally settled the question. After an unsuccessful
attack by Rudolph or Raoul, king of France, Henry became master of
Lorraine in 925, thanks to the support of Giselbert, whom he rewarded
with the hand of his daughter Gerberga and the title of duke of
Lorraine. Giselbert at first remained faithful to Henry's son, Otto the
Great, but in 938 he appears to have joined the revolt directed against
Otto by Eberhard, duke of Franconia. In 939, in concert with Eberhard
and Otto's brother, Henry of Saxony, he declared open war against Otto
and appealed to Louis d'Outremer, who penetrated into Lorraine and
Alsace, but was soon called back to France by the revolt of the count of
Vermandois. In the same year Giselbert and Eberhard were defeated and
killed near Andernach, and Otto at once made himself recognized in the
whole of Lorraine, securing it by a treaty with Louis d'Outremer, who
married Giselbert's widow Gerberga, and entrusting the government of it
to Count Otto, son of Ricuin, until Giselbert's son Henry should have
attained his majority.

After the deaths of the young Henry and Count Otto in 944, Otto the
Great gave Lorraine to Conrad the Red, duke of Franconia, the husband
of his daughter Liutgard, a choice which was not completely satisfactory
to the Lotharingians. In 953 Conrad, in concert with Liudulf, the son of
the German king, revolted against Otto, but was abandoned by his
supporters. Otto stripped Conrad of his duchy, and in 954 gave the
government of it to his own brother Bruno, archbishop of Cologne. Bruno
had to contend against the efforts of the last Carolingians of France to
make good their claims on Lorraine, as well as against the spirit of
independence exhibited by the Lotharingian nobles; and his attempts to
raze certain castles built by brigand lords and to compel them to
respect their oath of fidelity resulted in serious sedition. To obviate
these difficulties Bruno divided the ducal authority, assigning Lower
Lorraine to a certain Duke Godfrey, who was styled _dux Ripuariorum_,
and Upper Lorraine to Frederick (d. 959), count of Bar, a member of the
house of Ardenne and son-in-law of Hugh the Great, with the title of
_dux Mosellanorum_; and it is probable that the partition of the ancient
kingdom of Lorraine into two new duchies was confirmed by Otto after
Bruno's death in 965. In 977 the emperor Otto II. gave the government of
Lower Lorraine to Charles I., a younger son of Louis d'Outremer, on
condition that that prince should acknowledge himself his vassal and
should oppose any attempt of his brother Lothair on Lorraine. The
consequent expedition of the king of France in 978 against
Aix-la-Chapelle had no enduring result, and Charles retained his duchy
till his death about 992. He left two sons, Otto, who succeeded him and
died without issue, and Henry, who is sometimes regarded as the ancestor
of the landgraves of Thuringia. The duchy of Lower Lorraine, sometimes
called _Lothier_ (_Lotharium_), was then given to Godfrey (d. 1023), son
of Count Godfrey of Verdun, and for some time the history of Lorraine is
the history of the attempts made by the dukes of Lothier to seize Upper
Lorraine. Gothelon (d. 1043), son of Duke Godfrey, obtained Lorraine at
the death of Frederick II., duke of Upper Lorraine, in 1027, and
victoriously repulsed the incursions of Odo (Eudes) of Blois, count of
Champagne, who was defeated and killed in a battle near Bar (1037). At
Gothelon's death in 1043, his son Godfrey the Bearded received from the
emperor only Lower Lorraine, his brother Gothelon II. obtaining Upper
Lorraine. Godfrey attempted to seize the upper duchy, but was defeated
and imprisoned in 1045. On the death of Gothelon in 1046, Godfrey
endeavoured to take Upper Lorraine from Albert of Alsace, to whom it had
been granted by the emperor Henry III. The attempt, however, also
failed; and Godfrey was for some time deprived of his own duchy of Lower
Lorraine in favour of Frederick of Luxemburg. Godfrey took part in the
struggles of Pope Leo IX. against the Normans in Italy, and in 1053
married Beatrice, daughter of Duke Frederick of Upper Lorraine and widow
of Boniface, margrave of Tuscany. On the death of Frederick of Luxemburg
in 1065 the emperor Henry IV. restored the duchy of Lower Lorraine to
Godfrey, who retained it till his death in 1069, when he was succeeded
by his son Godfrey the Hunchback (d. 1076), after whose death Henry IV.
gave the duchy to Godfrey of Bouillon, the hero of the first crusade,
son of Eustace, count of Boulogne, and Ida, sister of Godfrey the
Hunchback. On the death of Godfrey of Bouillon in 1100 Lower Lorraine
was given to Henry, count of Limburg. The new duke supported the emperor
Henry IV. in his struggles with his sons, and in consequence was deposed
by the emperor Henry V., who gave the duchy in 1106 to Godfrey, count of
Louvain, a descendant of the Lotharingian dukes of the beginning of the
10th century. This Godfrey was the first hereditary duke of Brabant, as
the dukes of Lower Lorraine came to be called.

_Upper Lorraine._--The duchy of Upper Lorraine, or Lorraine _Mosellana_,
to which the name of Lorraine was restricted from the 11th century,
consisted of a tract of undulating country watered by the upper course
of the Meuse and Moselle, and bounded N. by the Ardennes, S. by the
table-land of Langres, E. by the Vosges and W. by Champagne. Its
principal fiefs were the countship of Bar which Otto the Great gave in
951 to Count Frederick of Ardenne, and which passed in 1093 to the lords
of Montbéliard; the countship of Chiny, formed at the end of the 10th
century, of which, since the 13th, Montmédy was the capital; the
lordship of Commercy, whose rulers bore the special title of
_damoiseau_, and which passed in the 13th century to the house of
Saarebrücken; and, finally the three important ecclesiastical lordships
of the bishops of Metz, Toul and Verdun. Theodoric, or Thierri (d.
1026), son of Frederick, count of Bar and first duke of Upper Lorraine,
was involved in a war with the emperor Henry II., a war principally
remarkable for the siege of Metz (1007). After having been the object of
numerous attempts on the part of the dukes of Lower Lorraine, Upper
Lorraine was given by the emperor Henry III. to Albert of Alsace, and
passed in 1048 to Albert's brother Gerard, who died by poison in 1069,
and who was the ancestor of the hereditary house of Lorraine. Until the
15th century the representatives of the hereditary house were Theodoric
II., called the Valiant (1069-1115), Simon (1115-1139), Matthew
(1139-1176), Simon II. (1176-1205), Ferri I. (1205-1206), Ferri II.
(1206-1213), Theobald (Thibaut) I. (1213-1220), Matthew II. (1220-1251),
Ferri III. (1251-1304), Theobald II. (1304-1312), Ferri IV., called the
Struggler (1312-1328), Rudolph, or Raoul (1328-1346), John (1346-1391)
and Charles II. or I., called the Bold (1391-1431). The 12th century and
the first part of the 13th were occupied with wars against the counts of
Bar and Champagne. Theobald I. intervened in Champagne to support Erard
of Brienne against the young count Theobald IV. The regent of Champagne,
Blanche of Navarre, succeeded in forming against the duke of Lorraine a
coalition consisting of the count of Bar and the emperor Frederick II.,
who had become embroiled with Theobald over the question of Rosheim in
Alsace. Attacked by the emperor, the duke of Lorraine was forced at the
treaty of Amance (1218) to acknowledge himself the vassal of the count
of Champagne, and to support the count in his struggles against his
ancient ally the count of Bar. The long government of Ferri III. was
mainly occupied with wars against the feudal lords and the bishop of
Metz, which resulted in giving an impulse to the municipal movement
through Ferri's attempt to use the movement as a weapon against the
nobles. The majority of the municipal charters of Lorraine were derived
from the charter of Beaumont in Argonne, which was at first extended to
the Barrois and was granted by Ferri, in spite of the hostility of his
barons, to La Neuveville in 1257, to Frouard in 1263 and to Lunéville in
1265. In the church lands the bishops of Toul and Metz granted liberties
from the end of the 12th century to the communes in their lordship, but
not the Beaumont charter, which, however, obtained in the diocese of
Verdun in the 14th and 15th centuries.

By the will of Duke Charles the Bold, Lorraine was to pass to his
daughter Isabella, who married René of Anjou, duke of Bar, in 1420. But
Anthony of Vaudemont, Charles's nephew and heir male, disputed this
succession with René, who obtained from the king of France an army
commanded by Arnault Guilhem de Barbazan. René, however, was defeated
and taken prisoner at the battle of Bulgnéville, where Barbazan was
killed (2nd of July 1431). The negotiations between René's wife and
Anthony had no result, in spite of the intervention of the council of
Basel and the emperor Sigismund, and it was not until 1436 that René
obtained his liberty by paying a ransom of 200,000 crowns, and was
enabled to dispute with Alfonso of Aragon the kingdom of Naples, which
he had inherited in the previous year. In 1444 Charles VII. of France
and the dauphin Louis went to Lorraine, accompanied by envoys from Henry
VI. of England, and procured a treaty (confirmed at Chalons in 1445), by
which Yolande, René's eldest daughter, married Anthony's son, Ferri of
Vaudemont, and René's second daughter Margaret became the wife of Henry
VI. of England. After his return to Lorraine in 1442, René was seldom in
the duchy. Like his successor John, duke of Calabria, who died in 1470,
he was continually occupied with expeditions in Italy or in Spain.
John's son and successor, Nicholas (d. 1473), who supported the duke of
Burgundy, Charles the Bold, against the king of France, died without
children, and his heir was René, son of Frederick of Vaudemont. The duke
of Burgundy, however, disputed this inheritance, and carried off the
young René and his mother, but on the intervention of Louis XI. had to
set them at liberty. René helped the Swiss during their wars with
Charles the Bold, who invaded Lorraine and was killed under the walls of
Nancy (1477). René's last years were mainly spent in expeditions in
Provence and Italy. He died in 1508, leaving by his second wife three
sons--Anthony, called the Good, who succeeded him; Claude, count (and
afterwards duke) of Guise, the ancestor of the house of Guise; and John
(d. 1550), known as the cardinal of Lorraine. Anthony, who was declared
of age at his father's death by the estates of Lorraine, although his
mother had tried to seize the power as regent, had been brought up from
the age of twelve at the French court, where he became the friend of
Louis XII., whom he accompanied on his Italian expeditions. In 1525 he
had to defend Lorraine against the revolted Alsatian peasants known as
_rustauds_ (boors), whom he defeated at Lupstein and Scherweiler; and he
succeeded in maintaining a neutral position in the struggle between
Francis I. of France and the emperor Charles V. He died on the 14th of
June 1544, and was succeeded by his son Francis I., who died of apoplexy
(August 1545) at the very moment when he was negotiating peace between
the king of France and the emperor.

_Lorraine in Modern Times._--Francis's son Charles III. or II., called
the Great, succeeded under the tutelage of his mother and Nicholas of
Vaudemont, bishop of Metz. Henry II. of France took this opportunity to
invade Lorraine, and in 1552 seized the three bishoprics of Metz, Toul
and Verdun. In the same year the emperor laid siege to Metz, but was
forced to retreat with heavy loss before the energetic resistance of
Duke Francis of Guise. On leaving Lorraine, Henry II. took Charles to
France, brought him up at the court and married him to his daughter
Claude. After the accession of Francis II., the young duke returned to
Lorraine, and, while his cousins the Guises endeavoured to make good the
claims of the house of Lorraine to the crown of France by virtue of its
descent from the Carolingians through Charles, the son of Louis
d'Outremer, he devoted himself mainly to improving the administration of
his duchy. He reconstituted his domain by revoking the alienations
irregularly granted by his predecessors, instructed his _chambre des
comptes_ to institute inquiries on this subject, and endeavoured to
ameliorate the condition of industry and commerce by reorganizing the
working of the mines and saltworks, unifying weights and measures and
promulgating edicts against vagabonds. His duchy suffered considerably
from the passage of German bands on their way to help the Protestants in
France, and also from disturbances caused by the progress of Calvinism,
especially in the neighbourhood of the three bishoprics. To combat
Calvinism Charles had recourse to the Jesuits, whom he established at
Pont-à Mousson, and to whom he gave over the university he had founded
in that town in 1572. To this foundation he soon added chairs of
medicine and law, the first professor of civil law being the _maître des
requêtes_, the Scotsman William Barclay, and the next Gregory of
Toulouse, a pupil of the jurist Cujas. Charles died on the 14th of May
1608, and was succeeded by his eldest son Henry II., called the Good,
who rid Lorraine of the German bands and died in 1624 without issue.

Henry was succeeded by his brother Francis II., who abdicated on the
26th of November 1624 in favour of his son Charles IV. or III. At the
beginning of the reign of Louis XIII. Charles embroiled himself with
France by harbouring French malcontents. Louis entered Lorraine, and by
the treaty of Vic (31st of December 1631) bound over Charles to desist
from supporting the enemies of France, and compelled him to cede the
fortress of Marsal. Charles's breach of this treaty led to a renewal of
hostilities, and the French troops occupied St Mihiel, Bar-le-duc,
Pont-à-Mousson and Nancy, which the duke was forced to cede for four
years (1633). In 1632, by the treaty of Liverdun, he had already had to
abandon the fortresses of Stenay and Clermont in Argonne. On the 19th of
January 1634 he abdicated in favour of his younger brother Francis
Nicholas, cardinal of Lorraine, and withdrew to Germany, the parlement
of Paris declaring him guilty of rebellion and confiscating his estates.
After vain attempts to regain his estates with the help of the emperor,
he decided to negotiate with France; and the treaty of St Germain (29th
of March 1641) re-established him in his duchy on condition that he
should cede Nancy, Stenay and other fortresses until the general peace.
This treaty he soon broke, joining the Imperialists in the Low Countries
and defeating the French at Tuttlingen (December 1643). He was restored,
however, to his estates in 1644, and took part in the wars of the
Fronde. He was arrested at Brussels in 1654, imprisoned at Toledo and
did not recover his liberty until the peace of the Pyrenees in 1659. On
the 28th of February 1661 the duchies of Lorraine and Bar were restored
to him by the treaty of Vincennes, on condition that he should demolish
the fortifications of Nancy and cede Clermont, Saarburg and Pfalzburg.
In 1662 Hugues de Lionne negotiated with him the treaty of Montmartre,
by which Charles sold the succession to the duchy to Louis XIV. for a
life-rent; but the Lorrainers, perhaps with the secret assent of their
prince, refused to ratify the treaty. Charles, too, was accused of
intriguing with the Dutch, and was expelled from his estates, Marshal de
Créqui occupying Lorraine. He withdrew to Germany, and in 1673 took an
active part in the coalition of Spain, the Empire and Holland against
France. After an unsuccessful invasion of Franche-Comté he took his
revenge by defeating Créqui at Conzer Brücke (11th of August 1675) and
forcing him to capitulate at Trier. On the 18th of September 1675 died
this adventurous prince, who, as Voltaire said, passed his life in
losing his estates. His brother Francis, in favour of whom he had
abdicated, was a cardinal at the age of nineteen and subsequently bishop
of Toul, although he had never taken orders. He obtained a dispensation
to marry his cousin, Claude of Lorraine, and died in 1670. He had one
son, Charles, who in 1675 took the title of duke of Lorraine and was
recognized by all the powers except France. After an unsuccessful
attempt to seize Lorraine in 1676, Charles vainly solicited the throne
of Poland, took an active part in the wars in Hungary, and married
Eleanor of Austria, sister of the emperor Leopold I., in 1678. At the
treaty of Nijmwegen France proposed to restore his estates on condition
that he should abandon a part of them; but Charles refused, and passed
the rest of his life in Austria, where he took part in the wars against
the Turks, whom he defeated at Mohacz (1687). He died in 1690.

Leopold, Charles's son and successor, was restored to his estates by the
treaty of Ryswick (1697), but had to dismantle all the fortresses in
Lorraine and to disband his army with the exception of his guard. Under
his rule Lorraine flourished. While diminishing the taxes, he succeeded
in augmenting his revenues by wise economy. The population increased
enormously during his reign--that of Nancy, for instance, almost
trebling itself between the years 1699 and 1735. Leopold welcomed French
immigrants, and devoted himself to the development of commerce and
industry, particularly to the manufacture of stuffs and lace, glass and
paper. He was responsible, too, for the compilation of a body of law
which was known as the "Code Léopold." Some time after his death, which
occurred on the 27th of March 1729, his heir Francis III. was betrothed
to Maria Theresa of Austria, the daughter and heiress of the emperor
Charles VI. France, however, could not admit the possibility of a union
of Lorraine with the Empire; and in 1735, at the preliminaries of
Vienna, Louis XV. negotiated an arrangement by which Francis received
the duchy of Tuscany, which was vacant by the death of the last Medici,
in exchange for Lorraine, and Stanislaus Leszczynski, the dethroned king
of Poland and father-in-law of Louis XV., obtained Lorraine, which after
his death would pass to his daughter--in other words, to France. These
arrangements were confirmed by the treaty of Vienna (18th of November
1738). In 1736, by a secret agreement, Stanislaus had abandoned the
financial administration of his estates to Louis XV. for a yearly
subsidy. The intendant, Chaumont de la Galaizière, was instructed to
apply the French system of taxation in Lorraine; and in spite of the
severity of the administration Lorraine preserved a grateful memory of
the good king Stanislaus, who held his brilliant little court at
Lunéville, and founded an academy and several libraries and hospitals.
At his death in February 1766 the two duchies of Lorraine and Bar became
definitively incorporated in the kingdom of France. The treaties of 1735
and 1736, however, guaranteed their legislation, the privileges enjoyed
by the three orders, and their common law and customs tariffs, which
they retained until the French Revolution. Lorraine and Barrois formed a
large government corresponding, together with the little government of
the three bishoprics, to the _intendance_ of Lorraine and the
_généralité_ of Metz. For legal purposes, Metz had been the seat of a
parlement since 1633, and the parlement of Nancy was created in 1776.
There was, too, a _chambre des comptes_ at Metz, and another at
Bar-le-duc. (For the later history see Alsace-Lorraine.)

  See Dom. A. Calmet, _Histoire ecclésiastique et civile de Lorraine_
  (2nd ed., Nancy, 1747-1757); A. Digot, _Histoire de Lorraine_
  (1879-1880); E. Huhn, _Geschichte Lothringens_ (Berlin, 1877); R.
  Parisot, _Le Royaume de Lorraine sous les Carolingiens_ (Paris, 1899);
  Comte D'Haussonville, _Histoire de la réunion de la Lorraine à la
  France_ (2nd ed., Paris, 1860); E. Bonvalot, _Histoire du droit et des
  institutions de la Lorraine et des Trois-Évêchés_ (Paris, 1895); and
  E. Duvernoy, _Les États Généraux des duchés de Lorraine et de Bar
  jusqu'à la majorité de Charles III_. (Paris, 1904).     (R. Po.)

LORTZING, GUSTAV ALBERT (1801-1851), German composer, was born at Berlin
on the 23rd of October 1801. Both his parents were actors, and when he
was nineteen the son began to play youthful lover at the theatres of
Düsseldorf and Aachen, sometimes also singing in small tenor or baritone
parts. His first opera _Ali Pascha von Jannina_ appeared in 1824, but
his fame as a musician rests chiefly upon the two operas _Der
Wildschütz_ (1842) and _Czar und Zimmermann_ (1837). The latter,
although now regarded as one of the masterpieces of German comic opera,
was received with little enthusiasm by the public of Leipzig. Subsequent
performance in Berlin, however, provoked such a tempest of applause that
the opera was soon placed on all the stages of Germany. It was
translated into English, French, Swedish, Danish, Dutch, Bohemian,
Hungarian and Russian. _Der Wildschütz_ was based on a comedy of
Kotzebue, and was a satire on the unintelligent and exaggerated
admiration for the highest beauty in art expressed by the _bourgeois
gentilhomme_. Of his other operas it is only necessary to note _Der Pole
und sein Kind_, produced shortly after the Polish insurrection of 1831,
and _Undine_ (1845). Lortzing died at Berlin on the 21st of January

LORY, CHARLES (1823-1889), French geologist, was born at Nantes on the
30th of July 1823. He graduated _D. ès Sc._ in 1847; in 1852 he was
appointed to the chair of geology at the University of Grenoble, and in
1881 to that of the _École Normale Supérieure_ in Paris. He was
distinguished for his researches on the geology of the French Alps,
being engaged on the geological survey of the departments of Isère,
Drôme and the Hautes Alpes, of which he prepared the maps and
explanatory memoirs. He dealt with some of the disturbances in the Savoy
Alps, describing the fan-like structures, and confirming the views of J.
A. Favre with regard to the overthrows, reversals and duplication of the
strata. His contributions to geological literature include also
descriptions of the fossils and stratigraphical divisions of the Lower
Cretaceous and Jurassic rocks of the Jura. He died at Grenoble on the
3rd of May 1889.

LORY (a word of Malayan origin signifying parrot, in general use with
but slight variation of form in many European languages), the name of
certain birds of the order _Psittaci_, mostly from the Moluccas and New
Guinea, remarkable for their bright scarlet or crimson colouring, though
also, and perhaps subsequently, applied to some others in which the
plumage is chiefly green. The lories have been referred to a
considerable number of genera, of which _Lorius_ (the _Domicella_ of
some authors), _Eos_ and _Chalcopsittacus_ may be here particularized,
while under the name of "lorikeets" may be comprehended such genera as
_Trichoglossus_, _Charmosyna_, _Loriculus_ and _Coriphilus_. By most
systematists some of these forms have been placed far apart, even in
different families of _Psittaci_, but A. H. Garrod has shown (_Proc.
Zool. Society_, 1874, pp. 586-598, and 1876, p. 692) the many common
characters they possess, which thus goes some way to justify the
relationship implied by their popular designation. A full account of
these birds is given in the first part of Count T. Salvadori's
_Ornitologia della Papuasia e delle Molucche_ (Turin 1880), whilst a
later classification appeared in Salvadori's section of the British
Museum _Catalogue of Birds_, xx., 1891.

Though the name lory has often been used for the species of _Eclectus_,
and some other genera related thereto, modern writers would restrict its
application to the birds of the genera _Lorius_, _Eos_,
_Chalcopsittacus_ and their near allies, which are often placed in a
subfamily, _Loriinae_, belonging to the so-called family of
_Trichoglossidae_ or "brush-tongued" parrots. Garrod in his
investigations on the anatomy of _Psittaci_ was led not to attach much
importance to the structure indicated by the epithet "brush-tongued"
stating (_Proc. Zool. Society_, 1874, p. 597) that it "is only an
excessive development of the papillae which are always found on the
lingual surface." The birds of this group are very characteristic of the
New Guinea subregion,[1] in which occur, according to Count Salvadori,
ten species of _Lorius_, eight of _Eos_ and four of _Chalcopsittacus_;
but none seem here to require any further notice,[2] though among them,
and particularly in the genus _Eos_, are included some of the most
richly-coloured birds in the whole world; nor does it appear that more
need be said of the lorikeets.

  The family is the subject of an excellent monograph by St George
  Mivart (London, 1896).     (A. N.)


  [1] They extend, however, to Fiji, Tahiti and Fanning Island.

  [2] Unless it be _Oreopsittacus arfaki_, of New Guinea, remarkable as
    the only parrot known as yet to have fourteen instead of twelve

LOS ANDES, a former state of Venezuela under the redivision of 1881,
which covered the extreme western part of the republic N. of Zamora and
S. of Zulia. In the redivision of 1904 Los Andes was cut up into three
states--Mérida Táchira and Trujillo.

LOS ANGELES, a city and the county-seat of Los Angeles county, in
southern California, U.S.A., along the small Los Angeles river, in the
foothills of the San Gabriel Mountains; a narrow strip, 18 m. long,
joins the main part of the city to its water front on the ocean, San
Pedro Bay. Pop. (1880) 11,183, (1890) 50,395, (1900) 102,479, of whom
19,964 were foreign-born;[1] the growth in population since 1900 has
been very rapid and in 1910 it was 319,198. The city had in 1910 an area
of 85.1 sq. m., of which more than one-half has been added since 1890.
Los Angeles is served by the Southern Pacific, the Atchison, Topeka &
Santa Fé, and the San Pedro, Los Angeles & Salt Lake railways; by
steamers to San Francisco; and by five systems of urban and suburban
electric railways, which have 300 m. of track within the city and 700 m.
within a radius of 30 m. beyond its limits. Inclined railways ascend
Third Street Hill and Court Street Hill, in the heart of the city; and a
system of subways extends from the centre of the city to its western
limits. The harbour, San Pedro Bay, originally open and naturally poor,
has been greatly improved by the Federal government; a breakwater 9250
ft. long was begun in 1898 and the bar has been deepened, and further
improvements of the inner harbour at Wilmington (which is nearly
landlocked by a long narrow island lying nearly east and west across its
mouth) were begun in 1907. Important municipal docks have been built by
the city.

The situation of the city between the mountains and the sea is
attractive. The site of the business district is level, and its plan
regular; the suburbs are laid out on hills. Although not specifically a
health resort, Los Angeles enjoys a high reputation for its climate.
From July 1877 to 1908 (inclusive) the mean of the minima for January,
the coldest month of the year, was 44.16° F.; the mean of the minima for
August, the warmest month, was 60.1° F.; and the difference of the mean
temperature of the coldest and the warmest month was about 18° F.; while
on five days only in this period (and on no day in the years 1904-1908)
did the official thermometer fall below 32° F. There are various
pleasure resorts in the mountains, and among seaside resorts are Santa
Monica, Ocean Park, Venice, Playa del Rey, Hermosa, Redondo, Terminal
Island, Long Beach, Alamitos Bay, Huntington Beach, Newport, Balboa and
Corona del Mar. There are excellent roads throughout the country. Los
Angeles has beautiful shade trees and a wealth of semi-tropic
vegetation. Its residential portions are characterized by detached homes
set in ample and beautiful grounds. Towering eucalyptus, graceful pepper
trees, tropic palms, rubber trees, giant bananas, yuccas and a wonderful
growth of roses, heliotrope, calla lilies in hedges, orange trees,
jasmine, giant geraniums and other flowers beautify the city throughout
the year. There are 22 parks, with about 3800 acres within or on the
borders of the city limits; among the parks are Griffith (3015 acres),
Elysian (532 acres), Eastlake (57 acres), Westlake (35 acres) and Echo
(38 acres). The old Spanish-Moorish mission architecture has
considerably influenced building styles. Among the important buildings
are the Federal Building, the County Court House, the City Hall, a
County Hall of Records, the Public Library with about 110,000 volumes in
1908, the large Auditorium and office buildings and the Woman's Club.
The exhibit in the Chamber of Commerce Building illustrates the
resources of southern California. Here also are the Coronel Collection,
given in 1901 by Dona Mariana, the widow of Don Antonio Coronel, and
containing relics of the Spanish and Mexican régime in California; and
the Palmer Collection of Indian antiquities. In Los Angeles also are the
collections of the Southwest Society (1904; for southern California,
Arizona and New Mexico) of the Archaeological Institute of America. On
the outskirts of the city, near Eastlake Park, is the Indian Crafts
Exhibition, which contains rare collections of aboriginal handiwork, and
where Indians may be seen making baskets, pottery and blankets. Of
interest to visitors is that part of the city called Sonora Town, with
its adobe houses, Mexican quarters, old Plaza and the Church of Our
Lady, Queen of the Angels (first erected in 1822; rebuilt in 1861),
which contains interesting paintings by early Indian converts. Near
Sonora Town is the district known as Chinatown. The principal
educational institutions are the University of Southern California
(Methodist Episcopal, 1880), the Maclay College of Theology and a
preparatory school; Occidental College (Presbyterian, 1887), St
Vincent's College (Roman Catholic, founded 1865; chartered 1869) and the
Los Angeles State Normal School (1882).

  The economic interests of Los Angeles centre in the culture of fruits.
  The surrounding country is very fertile when irrigated, producing
  oranges, lemons, figs and other semi-tropical fruits. Thousands of
  artesian wells have been bored, the region between Los Angeles, Santa
  Clara and San Bernardino being one of the most important artesian well
  regions of the world. The city, which then got its water supply from
  the Los Angeles river bed, in 1907 authorized the issue of $23,000,000
  worth of 4% bonds for the construction of an aqueduct 209 m. long,
  bringing water to the city from the Owens river, in the Sierra Nevada
  Mountains. It was estimated that the project would furnish water for
  one million people, beside supplying power for lighting, manufacturing
  and transportation purposes. All the water in excess of the city's
  actual needs may be employed for irrigation. Work on the aqueduct was
  begun in 1908, and it was to be completed in five years. From 1900 to
  1905 the value of the factory products increased from $15,133,696 to
  $34,814,475 or 130%, and the capital employed in manufactures from
  $10,045,095 to $28,181,418 or 180.5%. The leading manufacturing
  industries in 1905, with the product-value of each in this year, were
  slaughtering and meat-packing ($4,040,162), foundry and machine shop
  work ($3,146,914), flour and grist milling ($2,798,740), lumber
  manufacturing and planing ($2,519,081), printing and publishing
  (newspapers and periodicals, $2,097,339; and book and job printing,
  $1,278,841), car construction and repairing ($1,549,836)--in 1910
  there were railway shops here of the Southern Pacific, Pacific
  Electric, Los Angeles Street, Salt Lake and Santa Fé railways--and the
  manufacture of confectionery ($953,915), furniture ($879,910) and
  malt liquors ($789,393). The canning and preserving of fruits and
  vegetables are important industries. There is a large wholesale trade
  with southern California, with Arizona and with the gold-fields of
  Nevada, with which Los Angeles is connected by railway. Los Angeles is
  a port of entry, but its foreign commerce is relatively unimportant.
  The value of its imports increased from $721,705 in 1905 to $1,654,549
  in 1907; in 1908 the value was $1,193,552. The city's exports were
  valued at $45,000 in 1907 and at $306,439 in 1908. The coastwise trade
  is in lumber (about 700,000,000 ft. annually), shipped from northern
  California, Oregon and Washington, and in crude oil and general
  merchandise. There are rich oil-fields N. and W. of the city and wells
  throughout the city; petroleum is largely employed as fuel in
  factories. The central field, the Second Street Park field in the
  city, was developed between 1892 and 1895 and wells were drilled
  farther E. until in 1896 the eastern field was tapped with wells at
  Adobe and College streets; the wells within the city are gradually
  being abandoned. The western field and the western part of the central
  field were first worked in 1899-1900. The Salt Lake field, controlled
  by the Salt Lake Oil Company, near Rancho de Brea, W.S.W. of the city,
  first became important in 1902 and in 1907 it was the most valuable
  field in California, S. of Santa Barbara county, and the value of its
  product was $1,749,980. In 1905 the value of petroleum refined in Los
  Angeles was $461,281.

  Land has not for many years been cheap (i.e. absolutely) in the
  southern Californian fruit country, and immigration has been,
  generally, of the comparatively well-to-do. This fact has greatly
  affected the character and development of the city. The assessed
  valuation of property increased more than threefold from 1900 to 1910,
  being $276,801,517 in the latter year, when the bonded city debt was
  $17,259,312.50. Since 1896 there has been a strong independent
  movement in politics, marked by the organization of a League for
  Better City Government (1896) and a Municipal League (1900), and by
  the organization of postal primaries to secure the co-operation of
  electors pledged to independent voting. Since 1904 the public school
  system has been administered by a non-partisan Board of Education
  chosen from the city at large, and not by wards as theretofore.

Los Angeles, like all other Californian cities, has the privilege of
making and amending its own charter, subject to the approval of the
state legislature. In 1902 thirteen amendments were adopted, including
provisions for the initiative, the referendum and the recall. The last
of these provides that 25% of the voters choosing a municipal officer
may, by signing a petition for his recall, force a new election during
his term of office and thereby remove him if another candidate receives
a greater number of votes. This provision, introducing an entirely new
principle into the American governmental system, came into effect in
January 1903, and was employed in the following year when a previously
elected councilman who was "recalled" by petition and was unsuccessful
in the 1904 election brought suit to hold his office, and on a mere
technicality the Supreme Court of the state declared the recall election
invalid. In 1909 there was a recall election at which a mayor was
removed and another chosen in his place.

The Pueblo de Nuestra Señora la Reina de los Angeles was founded in
1781. The Franciscan mission of San Gabriel--still a famous
landmark--had been established ten years earlier a few miles eastward.
Beginning about 1827, Los Angeles, being the largest pueblo of the
territory, became a rival of Monterey for the honour of being the
capital of California, was the seat of conspiracies to overthrow the
Mexican authority, and the stronghold of the South California party in
the bickerings and struggles that lasted down to the American
occupation. In 1835 it was made a city by the Mexican Congress, and
declared the capital, but the last provision was not enforced and was
soon recalled. In 1836-1838 it was the headquarters of C. A. Carrillo, a
legally-named but never _de facto_ governor of California, whose
jurisdiction was never recognized in the north; and in 1845-1847 it was
the actual capital. The city was rent by factional quarrels when war
broke out between Mexico and the United States, but the appearance of
United States troops under Commodore Robert F. Stockton and General John
C. Frémont before Los Angeles caused both factions to unite against a
common foe. The defenders of Los Angeles fled at the approach of the
troops, and on the 13th of August 1846 the American flag was raised over
the city. A garrison of fifty men, left in control, was compelled in
October to withdraw on account of a revolt of the inhabitants, and Los
Angeles was not retaken until General Philip Kearny and Commodore
Stockton entered the city on the 18th of January 1847. This was the only
important overt resistance to the establishment of the new régime in
California. The city was chartered in 1850. It continued to grow
steadily thereafter until it attained railway connexion with the Central
Pacific and San Francisco in 1876, and with the East by the Santa Fé
system in 1885. The completion of the latter line precipitated one of
the most extraordinary of American railway wars and land booms, which
resulted in giving southern California a great stimulus. The growth of
the city since 1890 has been even more remarkable. In 1909 the township
of Wilmington (pop. in 1900, 2983), including the city of San Pedro
(pop. in 1900, 1787), Colegrove, a suburb W.N.W. of the city, Cahuenga
(pop. in 1900, 1586), a township N.W. of the former city limits, and a
part of Los Feliz were annexed to the city.


  [1] In addition to the large foreign-born population (4023 Germans,
    3017 English, 2683 English Canadians, 1885 Chinese, 1720 Irish and
    smaller numbers of French, Mexicans, Swedes, Italians, Scots, Swiss,
    Austrians, Danes, French Canadians, Russians, Norwegians, Welsh and
    Japanese) 26,105 of the native white inhabitants were of foreign
    parentage (i.e. had one or both parents not native born), so that
    only 54,121 white persons were of native parentage. German, French
    and Italian weekly papers are published in Los Angeles.

LOS ISLANDS (ISLAS DE LOS IDOLOS), a group of islands off the coast of
French Guinea, West Africa, lying south of Sangarea Bay, between 9° 25´
and 9° 31´ N. and 13° 46´ and 13° 51´ W., and about 80 m. N.N.W. of
Freetown, Sierra Leone. There are five principal islands: Tamara,
Factory, Crawford, White (or Ruma) and Coral. The two largest islands
are Tamara and Factory, Tamara, some 8 m. long by 1 to 2 m. broad, being
the largest. These two islands lie parallel to each other, Tamara to the
west; they form a sort of basin, in the centre of which is the islet of
Crawford. The two other islands are to the south. The archipelago is of
volcanic formation, Tamara and Factory islands forming part of a ruined
crater, with Crawford Island as the cone. The highest point is a knoll,
some 450 ft. above sea-level, in Tamara. All the islands are richly
clothed with palm trees and flowering underwood. Tamara has a good
harbour, and contains the principal settlement. The inhabitants, about
1500, are immigrants of the Baga tribe of Senegambian negroes, whose
home is the coast land between the Pongo and Nunez rivers. These are
chiefly farmers. The Church of England has a flourishing mission, with a
native pastorate. At one time the islands were a great seat of
slave-traders and pirates. The latter are supposed to have buried large
amounts of treasure in them. In an endeavour to stop the slave trade and
piracy, the islands were garrisoned (1812-1813) by British troops, but
the unhealthiness of the climate led to their withdrawal. In 1818 Sir
Charles McCarthy, governor of Sierra Leone, obtained the cession of the
islands to Great Britain from the chiefs of the Baga country, and in
1882 France recognized them to be a British possession. They were then
the headquarters of several Sierra Leone traders. By article 6 of the
Anglo-French convention of the 8th of April 1904, the islands were ceded
to France. They were desired by France because of their geographical
position, Konakry, the capital of French Guinea, being built on an islet
but 3 m. from Factory Island, and at the mercy of long range artillery
planted thereon. The islands derive their name from the sacred images
found on them by the early European navigators.

  See A. B. Ellis, _West African Islands_ (London, 1885), and the works
  cited under FRENCH GUINEA.

LOSSIEMOUTH, a police burgh of Elginshire, Scotland. Pop. (1901) 3904.
It embraces the villages of Lossiemouth, Branderburgh and Stotfield, at
the mouth of the Lossie, 5½ m. N.N.E. of Elgin, of which it is the port,
by a branch line of the Great North of Scotland railway. The industries
are boat-building and fishing. Lossiemouth, or the Old Town, dates from
1700; Branderburgh, farther north, grew with the harbour and began about
1830; Stotfield is purely modern and contiguous to the splendid
golf-course. The cliffs at Covesea, 2 m. W., contain caves of curious
shape. Sir Robert Gordon of Gordonstown used one as a stable in the
rebellion of 1745; weapons of prehistoric man were found in another, and
the roof of a third is carved with ornaments and emblems of early Celtic

  Kinneddar Castle in the parish of Drainie--in which Lossiemouth is
  situated--was a seat of the bishops of Moray, and Old Duffus Castle,
  2½ m. S.W., was built in the reign of David II. The estate of
  Gordonstown, close by, was founded by Sir Robert Gordon (1580-1656),
  historian of the Sutherland family, and grandfather of the baronet
  who, because of his inventions and scientific attainments, was known
  locally as "Sir Robert the Warlock" (1647-1704). Nearly midway between
  Lossiemouth and Elgin stand the massive ruins of the palace of Spynie,
  formerly a fortified residence of the bishops of Moray. "Davie's
  Tower," 60 ft. high with walls 9 ft. thick, was built by Bishop David
  Stewart about 1470. The adjacent loch is a favourite breeding-place
  for the sea-birds, which resort to the coast of Elginshire in enormous
  numbers. A mile S.E. of the lake lies Pitgaveny, one of the reputed
  scenes of the murder of King Duncan by Macbeth.

LOSSING, BENSON JOHN (1813-1891), American historical writer, was born
in Beekman, New York, on the 12th of February 1813. After editing
newspapers in Poughkeepsie he became an engraver on wood, and removed to
New York in 1839 for the practice of his profession, to which he added
that of drawing illustrations for books and periodicals. He likewise
wrote or edited the text of numerous publications. His _Pictorial
Field-Book of the Revolution_ (first issued in 30 parts, 1850-1852, and
then in 2 volumes) was a pioneer work of value in American historical
literature. In its preparation he travelled some 9000 m. during a period
of nearly two years; made more than a thousand sketches of extant
buildings, battlefields, &c.; and presented his material in a form
serviceable to the topographer and interesting to the general reader.
Similar but less characteristic and less valuable undertakings were a
_Pictorial Field-Book of the War of 1812_ (1868), and a _Pictorial
History of the Civil War in the United States of America_ (3 vols.
1866-1869). His other books were numerous: an _Outline History of the
Fine Arts_; many illustrated histories, large and small, of the United
States; popular descriptions of Mount Vernon and other localities
associated with famous names; and biographical sketches of celebrated
Americans, of which _The Life and Times of Major-General Philip
Schuyler_ (2 vols. 1860-1873) was the most considerable. He died at
Dover Plains, New York, on the 3rd of June 1891.

LÖSSNITZ, a district in the kingdom of Saxony, extending for about 5 m.
along the right bank of the Elbe, immediately N.W. of Dresden. Pop.
(1905) 6929. A line of vine-clad hills shelters it from the north winds,
and so warm and healthy is the climate that it has gained for the
district the appellation of the "Saxon Nice." Asparagus, peaches,
apricots, strawberries, grapes and roses are largely cultivated and find
a ready market in Dresden.

LOST PROPERTY. The man who loses an article does not lose his right
thereto, and he may recover it from the holder whoever he be, unless his
claim be barred by some Statute of Limitations or special custom, as
sale in market overt. The rights and duties of the finder are more
complex. If he know or can find out the true owner, and yet convert the
article to his own use, he is guilty of theft. But if the true owner
cannot be discovered, the finder keeps the property, his title being
superior to that of every one except the true owner. But this is only if
the find be in public or some public place. Thus if you pick up bank
notes in a shop where they have been lost by a stranger, and hand them
to the shopkeeper that he may discover and repossess the true owner, and
he fail to do so, then you can recover them from him. The owner of
private land, however, is entitled to what is found on it. Thus a man
sets you to clear out his pond, and you discover a diamond in the mud at
the bottom. The law will compel you to hand it over to the owner of the
pond. This applies even against the tenant. A gas company were lessees
of certain premises; whilst making excavations therein they came upon a
prehistoric boat; and they were forced to surrender it to their lessor.
An aerolite becomes the property of the owner of the land on which it
falls, and not of the person finding or digging it out. The principle of
these three last cases is that whatever becomes part of the soil belongs
to the proprietor of that soil.

Property lost at sea is regulated by different rules. Those who recover
abandoned vessels are entitled to salvage. Property absolutely lost upon
the high seas would seem to belong to the finder. It has been claimed
for the crown, and the American courts have held, that apart from a
decree the finder is only entitled to salvage rights, the court
retaining the rest, and thus practically taking it for the state on the
original owner not being found. The modern English law on the subject of
wreck (including everything found on the shore of the sea or tidal
river) is contained in the Merchant Shipping Act 1894. The finder must
forthwith make known his discovery to the receiver of wreck under a
penalty. He is entitled to a salvage reward, but the property belongs to
the crown or its grantee unless the true owner claims within a year. In
the United States unclaimed wreck after a year generally becomes the
property of the state. In Scotland the right to lost property is
theoretically in the crown, but the finder would not in practice be
interfered with except under the provisions of the Burgh Police
(Scotland) Act 1892. Section 412 requires all persons finding goods to
deliver them forthwith to the police under a penalty. If the true owner
is not discovered within six months the magistrates may hand them over
to the finder. If the owner appears he must pay a reasonable reward.
Domestic animals, including swans, found straying without an owner may
be seized by the crown or lord of the manor, and if not claimed within a
year and a day they become the property of the crown or the lord, on the
observance of certain formalities. In Scotland they were held to belong
to the crown or its donatory, usually the sheriff of a county. By the
Burgh Police Act above quoted provision is made for the sale of lost
animals and the disposal of the free proceeds for the purposes of the
act unless such be claimed. In the United States there is diversity of
law and custom. Apart from special rule, lost animals become the
property of the finder, but in many cases the proceeds of their sale are
applied to public purposes. When property is lost by carriers,
innkeepers or railway companies, special provisions as to their
respective responsibilities apply. As to finds of money or the precious
metals, see TREASURE TROVE.

LOSTWITHIEL, a market town and municipal borough in the Bodmin
parliamentary division of Cornwall, England, 30½ m. W. of Plymouth by
the Great Western railway. Pop. (1901) 1379. It is pleasantly situated
on the banks of the river Fowey. The church of St Bartholomew is
remarkable for a fine Early English tower surmounted by a Decorated
spire; there are also beautiful Decorated windows and details in the
body of the church, and a richly carved octagonal font. A bridge of the
14th century crosses the river. The shire hall includes remains of a
building, called the Stannary prison, dating from the 13th century. The
Great Western railway has workshops at Lostwithiel.

Lostwithiel owed its ancient liberties--probably its existence--to the
neighbouring castle of Restormel. The Pipe Rolls (1194-1203) show that
Robert de Cardinan, lord of Restormel, paid ten marks yearly for having
a market at Lostwithiel. By an undated charter still preserved with the
corporation's muniments he surrendered to the burgesses all the
liberties given them by his predecessors (_antecessores_) when they
founded the town. These included hereditary succession to tenements,
exemption from sullage, the right to elect a reeve (_praepositus_) if
the grantor thought one necessary and the right to marry without the
lord's interference. By Isolda, granddaughter of Robert de Cardinan, the
town was given to Richard, king of the Romans, who in the third year of
his reign granted to the burgesses a gild merchant sac and soc, toll,
team and infangenethef, freedom from pontage, lastage, &c., throughout
Cornwall, and exemption from the jurisdiction of the hundred and county
courts, also a yearly fair and a weekly market. Richard transferred the
assizes from Launceston to Lostwithiel. His son Edmund, earl of
Cornwall, built a great hall at Lostwithiel and decreed that the coinage
of tin should be at Lostwithiel only. In 1325 Richard's charter was
confirmed and the market ordered to be held on Thursdays. In 1386 the
assizes were transferred back to Launceston. In 1609 a charter of
incorporation provided for a mayor, recorder, six capital burgesses and
seventeen assistants and courts of record and pie powder. The boundaries
of the borough were extended in 1733. Under the reformed charter granted
in 1885 the corporation consists of a mayor, four aldermen and twelve
councillors. From 1305 to 1832 two members represented Lostwithiel in
parliament. The electors after 1609 were the twenty-five members of the
corporation. Under the Reform Act (1832) the borough became merged in
the county. For the Thursday market granted in 1326 a Friday market was
substituted in 1733, and this continues to be held. The fair granted in
1326 and the three fairs granted in 1733 have all given place to others.
The archdeacon's court, the sessions and the county elections were long
held at Lostwithiel, but all have now been removed. For the victory
gained by Charles I. over the earl of Essex in 1644, see GREAT

LOT, in the Bible, the legendary ancestor of the two Palestinian
peoples, Moab and Ammon (Gen. xix. 30-38; cp. Ps. lxxxiii. 8); he
appears to have been represented as a Horite or Edomite (cp. the name
Lotan, Gen. xxxvi. 20, 22). As the son of Haran and grandson of Terah,
he was Abraham's nephew (Gen. xi. 31), and he accompanied his uncle in
his migration from Haran to Canaan. Near Bethel[1] Lot separated from
Abraham, owing to disputes between their shepherds, and being offered
the first choice, chose the rich fields of the Jordan valley which were
as fertile and well irrigated as the "garden of Yahweh" (i.e. Eden, Gen.
xiii. 7 sqq.). It was in this district that the cities of Sodom and
Gomorrah were situated. He was saved from their fate by two divine
messengers who spent the night in his house, and next morning led Lot,
his wife, and his two unmarried daughters out of the city. His wife
looked back and was changed to a pillar of salt,[2] but Lot with his two
daughters escaped first to Zoar and then to the mountains east of the
Dead Sea, where the daughters planned and executed an incest by which
they became the mothers of Moab and Ben-Ammi (i.e. Ammon; Gen. xix.).
The account of Chedorlaomer's invasion and of Lot's rescue by Abraham
belongs to an independent source (Gen. xiv.), the age and historical
value of which has been much disputed. (See further ABRAHAM;
MELCHIZEDEK.) Lot's character is made to stand in strong contrast with
that of Abraham, notably in the representation of his selfishness (xiii.
5 sqq.), and reluctance to leave the sinful city (xix. 16 sqq.);
relatively, however, he was superior to the rest (with the crude story
of his insistence upon the inviolable rights of guests, xix. 5 sqq.; cf.
Judges xix. 22 sqq.), and is regarded in 2 Pet. ii. 7 seq. as a type of

  Lot and his daughters passed into Arabic tradition from the Jews. The
  daughters are named Zahy and Ra'wa by Mas'udi ii. 139; but other
  Arabian writers give other forms. Paton (_Syria and Palestine_, pp.
  43, 123) identifies Lot-Lotan with _Ruten_, one of the Egyptian names
  for Palestine; its true meaning is obscure. For traces of mythical
  elements in the story see Winckler, _Altorient. Forsch._ ii. 87 seq.
  See further, J. Skinner, _Genesis_, pp. 310 sqq.     (S. A. C.)


  [1] The district is thus regarded as the place where the Hebrews, on
    the one side, and the Moabites and Ammonites, on the other, commence
    their independent history. Whilst the latter settle across the
    Jordan, Abraham moves down south to Hebron.

  [2] Tradition points to the _Jebel Usdum_ (cp. the name Sodom) at the
    S.W. end of the Dead Sea. It consists almost entirely of pure
    crystallized salt with pillars and pinnacles such as might have given
    rise to the story (see Driver, Genesis, p. 201; and cf. also
    _Palestine Explor. Fund, Quart. Statements_, 1871, p. 16, 1885, p.
    20; Conder, _Syrian Stone-lore_, p. 279 seq.). Jesus cites the story
    of Lot and his wife to illustrate the sudden coming of the Kingdom of
    God (Luke xvii. 28-32). The history of the interpretation of the
    legend by the early and medieval church down to the era of rational
    and scientific investigation will be found in A. D. White, _Warfare
    of Science with Theology_, ii. ch. xviii.

LOT (Lat. _Oltis_), a river of southern France flowing westward across
the central plateau, through the departments of Lozère, Aveyron, Lot and
Lot-et-Garonne. Its length is about 300 m., the area of its basin 4444
sq. m. The river rises in the Cévennes on the Mont du Goulet at a height
of 4918 ft. about 15 m. E. of Mende, past which it flows. Its upper
course lies through gorges between the Causse of Mende and Aubrac
Mountains on the north and the tablelands (_causses_) of Sauveterre,
Severac and Comtal on the south. Thence its sinuous course crosses the
plateau of Quercy and entering a wider fertile plain flows into the
Garonne at Aiguillon between Agen and Marmande. Its largest tributary,
the Truyère, rises in the Margeride mountains and after a circuitous
course joins it on the right at Entraygues (department of Aveyron), its
affluence more than doubling the volume of the river. Lower down it
receives the Dourdou de Bozouls (or du Nord) on the left and on the right
the Célé above Cahors (department of Lot), which is situated on a
peninsula skirted by one of the river's many windings. Villeneuve-sur-Lot
(department of Lot-et-Garonne) is the only town of any importance between
this point and its mouth. The Lot is canalized between Bouquiès, above
which there is no navigation, and the Garonne (160 m.).

LOT, a department of south-western France, formed in 1790 from the
district of Quercy, part of the old province of Guyenne. It is bounded
N. by Corrèze, W. by Dordogne and Lot-et-Garonne, S. by Tarn-et-Garonne,
and E. by Aveyron and Cantal. Area 2017 sq. m. Pop. (1906) 216,611. The
department extends over the western portion of the Massif Central of
France; it slopes towards the south-west, and has a maximum altitude of
2560 ft. on the borders of Cantal with a minimum of 213 ft. at the point
where the river Lot quits the department. The Lot, which traverses it
from east to west, is navigable for the whole distance (106 m.) with the
help of locks; its principal tributary within the department is the Célé
(on the right). In the north of the department the Dordogne has a course
of 37 m.; among its tributaries are the Cère, which has its rise in
Cantal, and the Ouysse, a river of no great length, but remarkable for
the abundance of its waters. The streams in the south of Lot all flow
into the Tarn. The eastern and western portions of the department are
covered by ranges of hills; the north, the centre, and part of the south
are occupied by a belt of limestone plateaus or _causses_, that to the
north of the Dordogne is called the Causse de Martel; between the
Dordogne and the Lot is the Causse de Gramat or de Rocamadour; south of
the Lot is the Causse de Cahors. The _causses_ are for the most part
bare and arid owing to the rapid disappearance of the rain in clefts and
chasms in the limestone, which are known as _igues_. These are most
numerous in the Causse de Gramat and are sometimes of great beauty; the
best known is the Gouffre de Padirac, 7 m. N.E. of Rocamadour. The
altitude of the _causses_ (from 700 to 1300 ft., much lower than that of
the similar plateaus in Lozère, Hérault and Aveyron) permits the
cultivation of the vine; they also yield a small quantity of cereals and
potatoes and some wood. The deep intervening valleys are full of
verdure, being well watered by abundant springs. The climate is on the
whole that of the Girondine region; the valleys are warm, and the
rainfall is somewhat above the average for France. The difference of
temperature between the higher parts of the department belonging to the
central plateau and the sheltered valleys of the south-west is
considerable. Wheat, maize, oats and rye are the chief cereals. Wine is
the principal product, the most valued being that of Cahors grown in the
valley of the Lot, which is, in general, the most productive portion of
the department. It is used partly for blending with other wines and
partly for local consumption. The north-east cantons produce large
quantities of chestnuts; walnuts, apples and plums are common, and the
department also grows potatoes and tobacco and supplies truffles. Sheep
are the most abundant kind of live stock; but pigs, horned cattle,
horses, asses, mules and goats are also reared, as well as poultry and
bees. Iron and coal are mined, and there are important zinc deposits
(Planioles). Limestone is quarried. There are oil-works and numerous
mills, and wool spinning and carding as well as cloth making, tanning,
currying, brewing and the making of agricultural implements are carried
on to some extent. The three arrondissements are those of Cahors, the
capital, Figeac and Gourdon; there are 29 cantons and 329 communes.

Lot belongs to the 17th military district, and to the _académie_ of
Toulouse, and falls within the circumscription of the court of appeal at
Agen, and the province of the archbishop of Albi. It is served by the
Orleans railway. Cahors, Figeac and Rocamadour are the principal places.
Of the interesting churches and châteaux of the department, may be
mentioned the fine feudal fortress at Castelnau occupying a commanding
natural position, with an audience hall of the 12th century, and the
Romanesque abbey-church at Souillac with fine sculpturing on the
principal entrance. The plateau of Puy d'Issolu, near Vayrac, is
believed by most authorities to be the site of the ancient Uxcellodunum,
the scene of the last stand of the Gauls against Julius Caesar in 51
B.C. Lot has many dolmens, the finest being that of Pierre Martine, near
Livernon (arr. of Figeac).

LOT-ET-GARONNE, a department of south-western France, formed in 1790 of
Agenais and Bazadais, two districts of the old province of Guienne, and
of Condomois, Lomagne, Brullois and pays d'Albret, formerly portions of
Gascony. It is bounded W. by Gironde, N. by Dordogne, E. by Lot and
Tarn-et-Garonne, S. by Gers and S.W. by Landes. Area 2079 sq. m. Pop.
(1906) 274,610. The Garonne, which traverses the department from S.E. to
N.W., divides it into two unequal parts. That to the north is a country
of hills and deep ravines, and the slope is from east to west, while in
the region to the south, which is a continuation of the plateau of
Lannemezan and Armagnac, the slope is directly from south to north. A
small portion in the south-west belongs to the sterile region of the
Landes (q.v.); the broad valleys of the Garonne and of its affluent the
Lot are proverbial for their fertility. The wildest part is towards the
north-east on the borders of Dordogne, where a region of _causses_
(limestone plateaus) and forests begins; the highest point (896 ft.) is
also found here. The Garonne, where it quits the department, is only some
20 ft. above the sea-level; it is navigable throughout, with the help of
its lateral canal, as also are the Lot and Baise with the help of locks.
The Drot, a right affluent of the Garonne in the north of the department,
is also navigable in the lower part of its course. The climate is that of
the Girondine region--mild and fine--the mean temperature of Agen being
56.6° Fahr., or 5° above that of Paris; the annual rainfall, which, in
the plain of Agen, varies from 20 to 24 in., is nearly the least in
France. Agriculturally the department is one of the richest. Of cereals
wheat is the chief, maize and oats coming next. Potatoes, vines and
tobacco are important sources of wealth. The best wines are those of
Clairac and Buzet. Vegetable and fruit-growing are prosperous. Plum-trees
(_pruniers d'ente_) are much cultivated in the valleys of the Garonne and
Lot, and the apricots of Nicole and Tonneins are well known. The chief
trees are the pine and the oak; the cork-oak flourishes in the Landes,
and poplars and willows are abundant on the borders of the Garonne.
Horned cattle, chiefly of the Garonne breed, are the principal live
stock. Poultry and pigs are also reared profitably. There are deposits of
iron in the department. The forges, blast furnaces and foundries of Fumel
are important; and agricultural implements and other machines are
manufactured. The making of lime and cement, of tiles, bricks and
pottery, of confectionery and dried plums (pruneaux d'Agen) and other
delicacies, and brewing and distilling, occupy many of the inhabitants.
At Tonneins (pop. 4691 in 1906) there is a national tobacco manufactory.
Cork cutting, of which the centre is Mézin, hat and candle making, wool
spinning, weaving of woollen and cotton stuffs, tanning, paper-making,
oil-making, dyeing and flour and saw-milling are other prominent
industries. The peasants still speak the Gascon patois. The
arrondissements are 4--Agen, Marmande, Nérac and Villeneuve-sur-Lot--and
there are 35 cantons and 326 communes.

Agen, the capital, is the seat of a bishopric and of the court of appeal
for the department of Lot-et-Garonne. The department belongs to the
region of the XVII. army corps, the _académie_ of Bordeaux, and the
province of the archbishop of Bordeaux. Lot-et-Garonne is served by the
lines of the Southern and the Orleans railways, its rivers afford about
160 m. of navigable waterway, and the lateral canal of the Garonne
traverses it for 54 m. Agen, Marmande, Nérac and Villeneuve-sur-Lot, the
principal places, are treated under separate headings. The department
possesses Roman remains at Mas d'Agenais and at Aiguillon. The churches
of Layrac, Monsempron, Mas d'Agenais, Moirax, Mézin and Vianne are of
interest, as also are the fortifications of Vianne of the 13th century,
and the châteaux of Xaintrailles, Bonaguil, Gavaudun and of the
industrial town of Casteljaloux.

LOTHAIR I. (795-855), Roman emperor, was the eldest son of the emperor
Louis I., and his wife Irmengarde. Little is known of his early life,
which was probably passed at the court of his grandfather Charlemagne,
until 815 when he became ruler of Bavaria. When Louis in 817 divided the
Empire between his sons, Lothair was crowned joint emperor at
Aix-la-Chapelle and given a certain superiority over his brothers. In
821 he married Irmengarde (d. 851), daughter of Hugo, count of Tours; in
822 undertook the government of Italy; and, on the 5th of April 823, was
crowned emperor by Pope Paschal I. at Rome. In November 824 he
promulgated a statute concerning the relations of pope and emperor which
reserved the supreme power to the secular potentate, and he afterwards
issued various ordinances for the good government of Italy. On his
return to his father's court his stepmother Judith won his consent to
her plan for securing a kingdom for her son Charles, a scheme which was
carried out in 829. Lothair, however, soon changed his attitude, and
spent the succeeding decade in constant strife over the division of the
Empire with his father. He was alternately master of the Empire, and
banished and confined to Italy; at one time taking up arms in alliance
with his brothers and at another fighting against them; whilst the
bounds of his appointed kingdom were in turn extended and reduced. When
Louis was dying in 840, he sent the imperial _insignia_ to Lothair, who,
disregarding the various partitions, claimed the whole of the Empire.
Negotiations with his brother Louis and his half-brother Charles, both
of whom armed to resist this claim, were followed by an alliance of the
younger brothers against Lothair. A decisive battle was fought at
Fontenoy on the 25th of June 841, when, in spite of his personal
gallantry, Lothair was defeated and fled to Aix. With fresh troops he
entered upon a war of plunder, but the forces of his brothers were too
strong for him, and taking with him such treasure as he could collect,
he abandoned to them his capital. Efforts to make peace were begun, and
in June 842 the brothers met on an island in the Sâone, and agreed to an
arrangement which developed, after much difficulty and delay, into the
treaty of Verdun signed in August 843. By this Lothair received Italy
and the imperial title, together with a stretch of land between the
North and Mediterranean Seas lying along the valleys of the Rhine and
the Rhone. He soon abandoned Italy to his eldest son, Louis, and
remained in his new kingdom, engaged in alternate quarrels and
reconciliations with his brothers, and in futile efforts to defend his
lands from the attacks of the Normans and the Saracens. In 855 he became
seriously ill, and despairing of recovery renounced the throne, divided
his lands between his three sons, and on the 23rd of September entered
the monastery of Prüm, where he died six days later. He was buried at
Prüm, where his remains were found in 1860. Lothair was entirely
untrustworthy and quite unable to maintain either the unity or the
dignity of the empire of Charlemagne.

  See "Annales Fuldenses"; Nithard, "Historiarum Libri," both in the
  _Monumenta Germaniae historica. Scriptores, Bände_ i. and ii. (Hanover
  and Berlin, 1826 fol.); E. Mühlbacher, _Die Regesten des Kaiserreichs
  unter den Karolingern_ (Innsbruck, 1881); E. Dümmler, _Geschichte des
  ostfränkischen Reichs_ (Leipzig, 1887-1888); B. Simson, _Jahrbücher
  des deutschen Reiches unter Ludwig dem Frommen_ (Leipzig, 1874-1876).

LOTHAIR II. or III. (c. 1070-1137), surnamed the "Saxon," Roman emperor,
son of Gebhard, count of Supplinburg, belonged to a family possessing
extensive lands around Helmstadt in Saxony, to which he succeeded on his
father's death in 1075. Gebhard had been a leading opponent of the
emperor Henry IV. in Saxony, and his son, taking the same attitude,
assisted Egbert II., margrave of Meissen, in the rising of 1088. The
position and influence of Lothair in Saxony, already considerable, was
increased when in 1100 he married Richenza, daughter of Henry, count of
Nordheim, who became an heiress on her father's death in 1101, and
inherited other estates when her brother Otto died childless in 1116.
Having assisted the German king, Henry V., against his father in 1104,
Lothair was appointed duke of Saxony by Henry, when Duke Magnus, the
last of the Billungs, died in 1106. His first care was to establish his
authority over some districts east of the Elbe; and quickly making
himself independent of the king, he stood forth as the representative of
the Saxon race. This attitude brought him into collision with Henry V.,
to whom, however, he was forced to submit after an unsuccessful rising
in 1112. A second rising was caused when, on the death of Ulrich II.,
count of Weimar and Orlamünde, without issue in 1112, Henry seized these
counties as vacant fiefs of the empire, while Lothair supported the
claim of Siegfried, count of Ballenstädt, whose mother was a relative of
Ulrich. The rebels were defeated, and Siegfried was killed at Warnstädt
in 1113, but his son secured possession of the disputed counties. After
the defeat by Lothair of Henry's forces at Welfesholz on the 11th of
February 1115, events called Henry to Italy; and Lothair appears to have
been undisturbed in Saxony until 1123, when the death of Henry II.,
margrave of Meissen and Lusatia raised a dispute as to the right of
appointment to the vacant margraviates. A struggle ensued, in which
victory remained with the duke. The Saxony policy of Lothair during
these years had been to make himself independent, and to extend his
authority; to this end he allied himself with the papal party, and
easily revived the traditional hostility of the Saxons to the Franconian

When Henry V. died in 1125, Lothair, after a protracted election, was
chosen German king at Mainz on the 30th of August 1125. His election was
largely owing to the efforts of Adalbert, archbishop of Mainz, and the
papal party, who disliked the candidature of Henry's nephew and heir,
Frederick II. of Hohenstaufen, duke of Swabia. The new king was crowned
at Aix-la-Chapelle on the 13th of September 1125. Before suffering a
severe reverse, brought about by his interference in the internal
affairs of Bohemia, Lothair requested Frederick of Hohenstaufen to
restore to the crown the estates bequeathed to him by the emperor Henry
V. Frederick refused, and was placed under the ban. Lothair, unable to
capture Nüremberg, gained the support of Henry the Proud, the new duke
of Bavaria, by giving him his daughter, Gertrude, in marriage, and that
of Conrad, count of Zähringen, by granting him the administration of the
kingdom of Burgundy, or Arles. As a counterstroke, however, Conrad of
Hohenstaufen, the brother of Frederick, was chosen German king in
December 1127, and was quickly recognized in northern Italy. But Lothair
gained the upper hand in Germany, and by the end of 1129 the
Hohenstaufen strongholds, Nüremberg and Spires, were in his possession.
This struggle was accompanied by disturbances in Lorraine, Saxony and
Thuringia, but order was soon restored after the resistance of the
Hohenstaufen had been beaten down. In 1131 the king led an expedition
into Denmark, where one of his vassals had been murdered by Magnus, son
of the Danish king, Niels, and where general confusion reigned; but no
resistance was offered, and Niels promised to pay tribute to Lothair.

The king's attention at the time was called to Italy where two popes,
Innocent II. and Anacletus II., were clamouring for his support. At
first Lothair, fully occupied with the affairs of Germany, remained
heedless and neutral; but in March 1131 he was visited at Liége by
Innocent, to whom he promised his assistance. Crossing the Alps with a
small army in September 1132, he reached Rome in March 1133, accompanied
by Innocent. As St Peter's was held by Anacletus, Lothair's coronation
as emperor took place on the 4th of June 1133 in the church of the
Lateran. He then received as papal fiefs the vast estates of Matilda,
marchioness of Tuscany, thus securing for his daughter and her Welf
husband lands which might otherwise have passed to the Hohenstaufen. His
efforts to continue the investiture controversy were not very serious.
He returned to Germany, where he restored order in Bavaria, and made an
expedition against some rebels in the regions of the lower Rhine.
Resuming the struggle against the Hohenstaufen, Lothair soon obtained
the submission of the brothers, who retained their lands, and a general
peace was sworn at Bamberg. The emperor's authority was now generally
recognized, and the annalists speak highly of the peace and order of his
later years. In 1135, Eric II., king of Denmark, acknowledged himself a
vassal of Lothair; Boleslaus III., prince of the Poles, promised
tribute and received Pomerania and Rügen as German fiefs; while the
eastern emperor, John Comnenus, implored Lothair's aid against Roger II.
of Sicily.

The emperor seconded the efforts of his vassals, Albert the Bear,
margrave of the Saxon north mark, and Conrad I., margrave of Meissen and
Lusatia, to extend the authority of the Germans in the districts east of
the Elbe, and assisted Norbert, archbishop of Magdeburg, and Albert I.,
archbishop of Bremen, to spread Christianity. In August 1136, attended
by a large army, Lothair set out upon his second Italian journey. The
Lombard cities were either terrified into submission or taken by storm;
Roger II. was driven from Apulia; and the imperial power enforced over
the whole of southern Italy. A mutiny among the German soldiers and a
breach with Innocent concerning the overlordship of Apulia compelled the
emperor to retrace his steps. An arrangement was made with regard to
Apulia, after which Lothair, returning to Germany, died at Breitenwang,
a village in the Tirol, on the 3rd or 4th of December 1137. His body was
carried to Saxony and buried in the monastery which he had founded at
Königslutter. Lothair was a strong and capable ruler, who has been
described as the "imitator and heir of the first Otto." Contemporaries
praise his justice and his virtue, and his reign was regarded,
especially by Saxons and churchmen, as a golden age for Germany.

  The main authorities for the life and reign of Lothair are: "Vita
  Norberti archiepiscopi Magdeburgensis"; Otto von Freising, "Chronicon
  Annalista Saxo" and "Narratio de electione Lotharii" all in the
  _Monumenta Germaniae historica_. _Scriptores_, Bände vi., xii. and xx.
  (Hanover and Berlin, 1826-1892). The best modern works are: L. von
  Ranke, _Weltgeschichte_, pt. viii. (Leipzig, 1887-1888); W. von
  Giesebrecht, _Geschichte der Deutschen Kaiserzeit_, Band iv.
  (Brunswick, 1877), Band v. (Leipzig, 1888); Ph. Jaffe, _Geschichte des
  Deutschen Reiches unter Lothar_ (Berlin, 1843); W. Bernhardi, _Lothar
  von Supplinburg_ (Leipzig, 1879); O. von Heinemann, _Lothar der Sachse
  und Konrad III._ (Halle, 1869); and Ch. Volkmar, "Das Vërhältniss
  Lothars III. zur Investiturfrage," in the _Forschungen zur Deutschen
  Geschichte_, Band xxvi. (Göttingen, 1862-1886).

LOTHAIR (941-986), king of France, son of Louis IV., succeeded his
father in 954, and was at first under the guardianship of Hugh the
Great, duke of the Franks, and then under that of his maternal uncle
Bruno, archbishop of Cologne. The beginning of his reign was occupied
with wars against the vassals, particularly against the duke of
Normandy. Lothair then seems to have conceived the design of recovering
Lorraine. He attempted to precipitate matters by a sudden attack, and in
the spring of 978 nearly captured the emperor Otto II. at
Aix-la-Chapelle. Otto took his revenge in the autumn by invading France.
He penetrated as far as Paris, devastating the country through which he
passed, but failed to take the town, and was forced to retreat with
heavy loss. Peace was concluded in 980 at Margut-sur-Chiers, and in 983
Lothair was even chosen guardian to the young Otto III. Towards 980,
however, Lothair quarrelled with Hugh the Great's son, Hugh Capet, who,
at the instigation of Adalberon, archbishop of Reims, became reconciled
with Otto III. Lothair died on the 2nd of March 986. By his wife Emma,
daughter of Lothair, king of Italy, he left a son who succeeded him as
Louis V.

  See F. Lot, _Les Derniers Carolingiens_ (Paris, 1891); and the
  _Recueil des actes de Lothaire et de Louis V._, edited by L. Halphen
  and F. Lot (1908).

LOTHAIR (825-869), king of the district called after him Lotharingia, or
Lorraine, was the second son of the emperor Lothair I. On his father's
death in 855, he received for his kingdom a district lying west of the
Rhine, between the North Sea and the Jura mountains, which was called
_Regnum Lotharii_ and early in the 10th century became known as
Lotharingia or Lorraine. On the death of his brother Charles in 863 he
added some lands south of the Jura to this inheritance, but, except for
a few feeble expeditions against the Danish pirates, he seems to have
done little for its government or its defence. The reign was chiefly
occupied by efforts on the part of Lothair to obtain a divorce from his
wife Teutberga, a sister of Hucbert, abbot of St Maurice (d. 864); and
his relations with his uncles, Charles the Bald and Louis the German,
were influenced by his desire to obtain their support to this plan.
Although quarrels and reconciliations between the three kings followed
each other in quick succession, in general it may be said that Louis
favoured the divorce, and Charles opposed it, while neither lost sight
of the fact that Lothair was without male issue. Lothair, whose desire
for the divorce was prompted by his affection for a certain Waldrada,
put away Teutberga; but Hucbert took up arms on her behalf, and after
she had submitted successfully to the ordeal of water, Lothair was
compelled to restore her in 858. Still pursuing his purpose, he won the
support of his brother, the emperor Louis II., by a cession of lands,
and obtained the consent of the local clergy to the divorce and to his
marriage with Waldrada, which was celebrated in 862. A synod of Frankish
bishops met at Metz in 863 and confirmed this decision, but Teutberga
fled to the court of Charles the Bald, and Pope Nicholas I. declared
against the decision of the synod. An attack on Rome by the emperor was
without result, and in 865 Lothair, convinced that Louis and Charles at
their recent meeting had discussed the partition of his kingdom, and
threatened with excommunication, again took back his wife. Teutberga,
however, either from inclination or compulsion, now expressed her desire
for a divorce, and Lothair went to Italy to obtain the assent of the new
pope Adrian II. Placing a favourable interpretation upon the words of
the pope, he had set out on the return journey, when he was seized with
fever and died at Piacenza on the 8th of August 869. He left, by
Waldrada, a son Hugo who was declared illegitimate, and his kingdom was
divided between Charles the Bald and Louis the German.

  See Hincmar, "Opusculum de divortio Lotharii regis et Tetbergae
  reginae," in _Cursus completus patrologiae_, tome cxxv., edited by J.
  P. Migne (Paris, 1857-1879); M. Sdralek, _Hinkmars von Rheims
  Kanonistisches Gutachten über die Ehescheidung des Königs Lothar II._
  (Freiburg, 1881); E. Dümmler, _Geschichte des ostfränkischen Reiches_
  (Leipzig, 1887-1888); and E. Mühlbacher, _Die Regenten des
  Kaiserreichs unter den Karolingern_ (Innsbruck, 1881).

1609), was the eldest son of Mark Kerr (d. 1584), abbot, and then
commendator, of Newbattle, or Newbottle, and was a member of the famous
border family of Ker of Cessford. The earls and dukes of Roxburghe, who
are also descended from the Kers of Cessford, have adopted the spelling
Ker, while the earls and marquesses of Lothian have taken the form Kerr.
Like his father, the abbot of Newbattle, Mark Kerr was an extraordinary
lord of session under the Scottish king James VI.; he became Lord
Newbattle in 1587 and was created earl of Lothian in 1606. He was master
of inquests from 1577 to 1606, and he died on the 8th of April 1609,
having had, as report says, thirty-one children by his wife, Margaret
(d. 1617), daughter of John Maxwell, 4th Lord Herries. His son Robert,
the 2nd earl, died without sons in July 1624. He had, in 1621, obtained
a charter from the king enabling his daughter Anne to succeed to his
estates provided that she married a member of the family of Ker.
Consequently in 1631 she married William Ker, son of Robert, 1st earl of
Ancrum (1578-1654), a member of the family of Ker of Ferniehurst, whose
father, William Ker, had been killed in 1590 by Robert Ker, afterwards
1st earl of Roxburghe. Robert was in attendance upon Charles I. both
before and after he came to the throne, and was created earl of Ancrum
in 1633. He was a writer and a man of culture, and among his friends
were the poet Donne and Drummond of Hawthornden. His elder son William
was created earl of Lothian in 1631, the year of his marriage with Anne
Kerr, and Sir William Kerr of Blackhope, a brother of the 2nd earl, who
had taken the title of earl of Lothian in 1624, was forbidden to use it
(see _Correspondence of Sir Robert Ker, earl of Ancrum, and his son
William, third earl of Lothian_, 1875).

WILLIAM KER (c. 1605-1675), who thus became 3rd earl of Lothian, signed
the Scottish national covenant in 1638 and marched with the Scots into
England in 1640, being present when the English were routed at Newburn,
after which he became governor of Newcastle-on-Tyne. During the Civil
War he was prominent rather as a politician than as a soldier; he
became a Scottish secretary of state in 1649, and was one of the
commissioners who visited Charles II. at Breda in 1650. He died at
Newbattle Abbey, near Edinburgh, in October 1675. William's eldest son
Robert, the 4th earl (1636-1703), supported the Revolution of 1688 and
served William III. in several capacities; he became 3rd earl of Ancrum
on the death of his uncle Charles in 1690, and was created marquess of
Lothian in 1701. His eldest son William, the 2nd marquess (c.
1662-1722), who had been a Scottish peer as Lord Jedburgh since 1692,
was a supporter of the union with England. His son William, the 3rd
marquess (c. 1690-1767), was the father of William Henry, the 4th
marquess, who was wounded at Fontenoy and was present at Culloden. He
was a member of parliament for some years and had reached the rank of
general in the army when he died at Bath on the 12th of April 1775. His
grandson William, the 6th marquess (1763-1824), married Henrietta
(1762-1805), daughter and heiress of John Hobart, 2nd earl of
Buckinghamshire, thus bringing Blickling Hall and the Norfolk estates of
the Hobarts into the Kerr family. In 1821 he was created a peer of the
United Kingdom as Baron Ker and he died on the 27th of April 1824. In
1900 Robert Schomberg Kerr (b. 1874) succeeded his father, Schomberg
Henry, the 9th marquess (1833-1900), as 10th marquess of Lothian.

LOTHIAN. This name was formerly applied to a considerably larger extent
of country than the three counties of Linlithgow, Edinburgh and
Haddington. Roxburghshire and Berwickshire at all events were included
in it, probably also the upper part of Tweeddale (at least Selkirk). It
would thus embrace the eastern part of the Lowlands from the Forth to
the Cheviots, i.e. all the English part of Scotland in the 11th century.
This region formed from the 7th century onward part of the kingdoms of
Bernicia and Northumbria, though we have no definite information as to
the date or events by which it came into English hands. In Roman times,
according to Ptolemy, it was occupied by a people called Otadini, whose
name is thought to have been preserved in Manaw Gododin, the home of the
British king Cunedda before he migrated to North Wales. There is no
reason to doubt that the district remained in Welsh hands until towards
the close of the 6th century; for in the _Historia Brittonum_ the
Bernician king Theodoric, whose traditional date is 572-579, is said to
have been engaged in war with four Welsh kings. One of these was
Rhydderch Hen who, as we know from Adamnan, reigned at Dumbarton, while
another named Urien is said to have besieged Theodoric in Lindisfarne.
If this statement is to be believed it is hardly likely that the English
had by this time obtained a firm footing beyond the Tweed. At all events
there can be little doubt that the whole region was conquered within the
next fifty years. Most probably the greater part of it was conquered by
the Northumbrian king Æthelfrith, who, according to Bede, ravaged the
territory of the Britons more often than any other English king, in some
places reducing the natives to dependence, in others exterminating them
and replacing them by English settlers.

In the time of Oswic the English element became predominant in northern
Britain. His supremacy was acknowledged both by the Welsh in the western
Lowlands and by the Scots in Argyllshire. On the death of the Pictish
king Talorgan, the son of his brother Eanfrith, he seems to have
obtained the sovereignty over a considerable part of that nation also.
Early in Ecgfrith's reign an attempt at revolt on the part of the Picts
proved unsuccessful. We hear at this time also of the establishment of
an English bishopric at Abercorn, which, however, only lasted for a few
years. By the disastrous overthrow of Ecgfrith in 685 the Picts, Scots
and some of the Britons also recovered their independence. Yet we find a
succession of English bishops at Whithorn from 730 to the 9th century,
from which it may be inferred that the south-west coast had already by
this time become English. The Northumbrian dominions were again enlarged
by Eadberht, who in 750 is said to have annexed Kyle, the central part
of Ayrshire, with other districts. In conjunction with Oengus mac
Fergus, king of the Picts, he also reduced the whole of the Britons to
submission in 756. But this subjugation was not lasting, and the British
kingdom, though now reduced to the basin of the Clyde, whence its
inhabitants are known as Strathclyde Britons, continued to exist for
nearly three centuries. After Eadberht's time we hear little of events
in the northern part of Northumbria, and there is some reason for
suspecting that English influence in the south-west began to decline
before long, as our list of bishops of Whithorn ceases early in the 9th
century; the evidence on this point, however, is not so decisive as is
commonly stated. About 844 an important revolution took place among the
Picts. The throne was acquired by Kenneth mac Alpin, a prince of
Scottish family, who soon became formidable to the Northumbrians. He is
said to have invaded "Saxonia" six times, and to have burnt Dunbar and
Melrose. After the disastrous battle at York in 867 the Northumbrians
were weakened by the loss of the southern part of their territories, and
between 883 and 889 the whole country as far as Lindisfarne was ravaged
by the Scots. In 919, however, we find their leader Aldred calling in
Constantine II., king of the Scots, to help them. A few years later
together with Constantine and the Britons they acknowledged the
supremacy of Edward the Elder. After his death, however, both the Scots
and the Britons were for a time in alliance with the Norwegians from
Ireland, and consequently Æthelstan is said to have ravaged a large
portion of the Scottish king's territories in 934. Brunanburh, where
Æthelstan defeated the confederates in 937, is believed by many to have
been in Dumfriesshire, but we have no information as to the effects of
the battle on the northern populations. By this time, however, the
influence of the Scottish kingdom certainly seems to have increased in
the south, and in 945 the English king Edmund gave Cumberland, i.e.
apparently the British kingdom of Strathclyde, to Malcolm I., king of
the Scots, in consideration of his alliance with him. Malcolm's
successor Indulph (954-962) succeeded in capturing Edinburgh, which
thenceforth remained in possession of the Scots. His successors made
repeated attempts to extend their territory southwards, and certain late
chroniclers state that Kenneth II. in 971-975 obtained a grant of the
whole of Lothian from Edgar. Whatever truth this story may contain, the
cession of the province was finally effected by Malcolm II. by force of
arms. At his first attempt in 1006 he seems to have suffered a great
defeat from Uhtred, the son of earl Waltheof. Twelve years later,
however, he succeeded in conjunction with Eugenius, king of Strathclyde,
in annihilating the Northumbrian army at Carham on the Tweed, and Eadulf
Cudel, the brother and successor of Uhtred, ceded all his territory to
the north of that river as the price of peace. Henceforth in spite of an
invasion by Aldred, the son of Uhtred, during the reign of Duncan,
Lothian remained permanently in possession of the Scottish kings. In the
reign of Malcolm III. and his son, the English element appears to have
acquired considerable influence in the kingdom. Some three years before
he obtained his father's throne Malcolm had by the help of earl Siward
secured the government of Cumbria (Strathclyde) with which Lothian was
probably united. Then in 1068 he received a large number of exiles from
England, amongst them the Ætheling Eadgar, whose sister Margaret he
married. Four other sons in succession occupied the throne, and in the
time of the youngest, David, who held most of the south of Scotland as
an earldom from 1107-1124 and the whole kingdom from 1124-1153, the
court seems already to have been composed chiefly of English and

  AUTHORITIES.--Bede, _Historia Ecclesiastica_ (ed. C. Plummer, Oxford,
  1896); _Anglo-Saxon Chronicle_ (ed. Earle and Plummer, Oxford, 1899);
  Simeon of Durham (Rolls Series, ed. T. Arnold, 1882); W. F. Skene,
  _Chronicle of Picts and Scots_ (Edinburgh, 1867), and _Celtic
  Scotland_ (Edinburgh, 1876-1880); and J. Rhys, _Celtic Britain_
  (London).     (F. G. M. B.)

LOTI, PIERRE [the pen-name of LOUIS MARIE JULIEN VIAUD] (1850-   ),
French author, was born at Rochefort on the 14th of January 1850. The
Viauds are an old Protestant family, and Pierre Loti consistently
adhered, at least nominally, to the faith of his fathers. Of the
picturesque and touching incidents of his childhood he has given a very
vivid account in _Le Roman d'un enfant_ (1890). His education began in
Rochefort, but at the age of seventeen, being destined for the navy, he
entered the naval school, Le Borda, and gradually rose in his
profession, attaining the rank of captain in 1906. In January 1910 he
was placed on the reserve list. His pseudonym is said to be due to his
extreme shyness and reserve in early life, which made his comrades call
him after _le Loti_, an Indian flower which loves to blush unseen. He
was never given to books or study (when he was received at the French
Academy, he had the courage to say, "Loti ne sait pas lire"), and it was
not until 1876 that he was persuaded to write down and publish some
curious experiences at Constantinople, in _Aziyadé_, a book which, like
so many of Loti's, seems half a romance, half an autobiography. He
proceeded to the South Seas, and on leaving Tahiti published the
Polynesian idyll, originally called _Rarahu_ (1880), which was reprinted
as _Le Mariage de Loti_, and which first introduced to the wider public
an author of remarkable originality and charm. _Le Roman d'un spahi_, a
record of the melancholy adventures of a soldier in Senegambia, belongs
to 1881. In 1882 Loti issued a collection of short studies under the
general title of _Fleurs d'ennui_. In 1883 he achieved the widest
celebrity, for not only did he publish _Mon frère Yves_, a novel
describing the life of a French bluejacket in all parts of the
world--perhaps his most characteristic production--but he was involved
in a public discussion in a manner which did him great credit. While
taking part as a naval officer in the Tongking War, Loti had exposed in
the _Figaro_ a series of scandals which followed on the capture of Hué
(1883), and was suspended from the service for more than a year. He
continued for some time nearly silent, but in 1886 he published a novel
of life among the Breton fisher-folk, called _Pêcheur d'islande_, the
most popular of all his writings. In 1887 he brought out a volume of
extraordinary merit, which has not received the attention it deserves;
this is _Propos d'exil_, a series of short studies of exotic places, in
his peculiar semi-autobiographic style. The fantastic novel of Japanese
manners, _Madame Chrysanthème_, belongs to the same year. Passing over
one or two slighter productions, we come in 1890 to _Au Maroc_, the
record of a journey to Fez in company with a French embassy. A
collection of strangely confidential and sentimental reminiscences,
called _Le Livre de la pitié et de la mort_, belongs to 1891. Loti was
on board his ship at the port of Algiers when news was brought to him of
his election, on the 21st of May 1891, to the French Academy. In 1892 he
published _Fantôme d'orient_, another dreamy study of life in
Constantinople, a sort of continuation of _Aziyadé_. He described a
visit to the Holy Land, somewhat too copiously, in three volumes
(1895-1896), and wrote a novel, _Ramuntcho_ (1897), a story of manners
in the Basque province, which is equal to his best writings. In 1900 he
visited British India, with the view of describing what he saw; the
result appeared in 1903--_L'Inde_ (_sans les Anglais_). At his best
Pierre Loti was unquestionably the finest descriptive writer of the day.
In the delicate exactitude with which he reproduced the impression given
to his own alert nerves by unfamiliar forms, colours, sounds and
perfumes, he was without a rival. But he was not satisfied with this
exterior charm; he desired to blend with it a moral sensibility of the
extremest refinement, at once sensual and ethereal. Many of his best
books are long sobs of remorseful memory, so personal, so intimate, that
an English reader is amazed to find such depth of feeling compatible
with the power of minutely and publicly recording what is felt. In spite
of the beauty and melody and fragrance of Loti's books his mannerisms
are apt to pall upon the reader, and his later books of pure description
were rather empty. His greatest successes were gained in the species of
confession, half-way between fact and fiction, which he essayed in his
earlier books. When all his limitations, however, have been rehearsed,
Pierre Loti remains, in the mechanism of style and cadence, one of the
most original and most perfect French writers of the second half of the
19th century. Among his later works were: _La Troisième jeunesse de Mme
Prune_ (1905); _Les Désenchantées_ (1906, Eng. trans. by C. Bell); _La
Mort de Philae_ (1908); _Judith Renaudin_ (Théâtre Antoine, 1904), a
five-act historical play based on an earlier book; and, in
collaboration with Émile Vedel, a translation of _King Lear_, also
produced at the Théâtre Antoine in 1904.     (E. G.)

LÖTSCHEN PASS, or LÖTSCHBERG, an easy glacier pass (8842 ft.) leading
from Kandersteg in the Bernese Oberland to the Lötschen valley in the
Valais. It is a very old pass, first mentioned distinctly in 1352, but
probably crossed previously by the Valaisans who colonized various parts
of the Bernese Oberland. In 1384 and again in 1419 battles were fought
on it between the Bernese and the Valaisans, while in 1698 a mule path
(of which traces still exist) was constructed on the Bernese slope,
though not continued beyond owing to the fear of the Valaisans that the
Bernese would come over and alter their religion. In 1906 the piercing
of a tunnel (8½ m. long) beneath this pass was begun, starting a little
above Kandersteg and ending at Goppenstein near the mouth of the
Lötschen valley. Subsidies were granted by both the confederation and
the canton of Bern. This pass is to be carefully distinguished from the
Lötschenlücke (10,512 ft.), another easy glacier pass which leads from
the head of the Lötschen valley to the Great Aletsch glacier.
     (W. A. B. C.)

LOTTERIES. The word lottery[1] has no very definite signification. It
may be applied to any process of determining prizes by lot, whether the
object be amusement or gambling or public profit. In the Roman
Saturnalia and in the banquets of aristocratic Romans the object was
amusement; the guests received _apophoreta_. The same plan was followed
on a magnificent scale by some of the emperors. Nero gave such prizes as
a house or a slave. Heliogabalus introduced an element of absurdity--one
ticket for a golden vase, another for six flies. This custom descended
to the festivals given by the feudal and merchant princes of Europe,
especially of Italy; and it formed a prominent feature of the splendid
court hospitality of Louis XIV. In the Italian republics of the 16th
century the lottery principle was applied to encourage the sale of
merchandise. The lotto of Florence and the seminario of Genoa are well
known, and Venice established a monopoly and drew a considerable revenue
for the state. The first letters patent for a lottery in France were
granted in 1539 by Francis I., and in 1656 the Italian, Lorenzo Tonti
(the originator of "Tontines") opened another for the building of a
stone bridge between the Louvre and the Faubourg St Germain. The
institution became very popular in France, and gradually assumed an
important place in the government finance. The parlements frequently
protested against it, but it had the support of Mazarin, and L.
Phelypeaux, comte de Pontchartrain, by this means raised the expenses of
the Spanish Succession War. Necker, in his _Administration des
finances_, estimates the public charge for lotteries at 4,000,000 livres
per annum. There were also lotteries for the benefit of religious
communities and charitable purposes. Two of the largest were the
_Loteries de Piété_ and _Des Enfans Trouvés_. These and also the great
_Loterie de l'École militaire_ were practically merged in the _Loterie
Royale_ by the decree of 1776, suppressing all private lotteries in
France. The financial basis of these larger lotteries was to take
(5/24)ths for expenses and benefit, and return (19/24)ths to the public
who subscribed. The calculation of chances had become a familiar
science. It is explained in detail by Caminade de Castres in _Enc. méth.
finances_, ii. s.v. "Loterie." The names of the winning numbers in the
first drawing were (1) _extrait_, (2) _ambe_, (3) _terne_, (4)
_quaterne_, (5) _quine_. After this there were four drawings called
_primes gratuites_. The _extrait_ gave fifteen times the price of the
ticket; the _quine_ gave one million times the price. These are said to
be much more favourable terms than were given in Vienna, Frankfort and
other leading European cities at the end of the 18th century. The
_Loterie Royale_ was ultimately suppressed in 1836. Under the law of the
29th of May 1844 lotteries may be held for the assistance of charity and
the fine arts. In 1878 twelve million lottery tickets of one franc each
were sold in Paris to pay for prizes to exhibitors in the great
Exhibition and expenses of working-men visitors. The first prize was
worth £5000; the second, £4000, and the third and fourth £2000 each. The
Société du Crédit Foncier, and many of the large towns, are permitted to
contract loans, the periodical repayments of which are determined by
lot. This practice, which is prohibited in Germany and England,
resembles the older system of giving higher and lower rates of interest
for money according to lot. Lotteries were suppressed in Belgium in
1830, Sweden in 1841 and Switzerland in 1865, but they still figure in
the state budgets of Austria-Hungary, Prussia and other German States,
Holland, Spain, Italy and Denmark. In addition to lottery loans,
ordinary lotteries (_occasion lotteries_) are numerous in various
countries of the continent of Europe. They are of various magnitude and
are organized for a variety of purposes, such as charity, art,
agriculture, church-building, &c. It is becoming the tendency, however,
to discourage private and indiscriminate lotteries, and even state
lotteries which contribute to the revenue. In Austria-Hungary and
Germany, for instance, every year sees fewer places where tickets can be
taken for them receive licenses. In 1904 a proposal for combining a
working-class savings bank with a national lottery was seriously
considered by the Prussian ministry. The scheme, which owes its
conception to August Scherl, editor of the Berlin _Lokalanzeiger_, is an
endeavour to utilize the love of gambling for the purpose of promoting
thrift among the working-classes. It was proposed to make weekly
collections from subscribers, in fixed amounts, ranging from sixpence to
four shillings. The interest on the money deposited would not go to the
depositors but would be set aside to form the prizes. Three hundred
thousand tickets, divisible into halves, quarters and eighths, according
to the sum deposited weekly, would form a series of 12,500 prizes, of a
total value of £27,000. At the same time, the subscriber, while having
his ordinary lottery chances of these prizes, still has to his credit
intact the amount which he has subscribed week by week.

In England the earliest lotteries sanctioned by government were for such
purposes as the repair of harbours in 1569, and the Virginia Company in
1612. In the lottery of 1569, 40,000 chances were sold at ten shillings
each, the prizes being "plate, and certain sorts of merchandises." In
1698 lotteries, with the exception of the Royal Oak lottery for the
benefit of the Royal Fishing Company, were prohibited as common
nuisances, by which children, servants and other unwary persons had been
ruined. This prohibition was in the 18th century gradually extended to
illegal insurances on marriages and other events, and to a great many
games with dice, such as faro, basset, hazard, except backgammon and
games played in the royal palace. In spite of these prohibitions, the
government from 1709 down to 1824 annually raised considerable sums in
lotteries authorized by act of parliament. The prizes were in the form
of terminable or perpetual annuities. The £10 tickets were sold at a
premium of say 40% to contractors who resold them in retail (sometimes
in one-sixteenth parts) by "morocco men," or men with red leather books
who travelled through the country. As the drawing extended over forty
days, a very pernicious system arose of insuring the fate of tickets
during the drawing for a small premium of 4d. or 6d. This was partly
cured by the Little Go Act of 1802, directed against the itinerant
wheels which plied between the state lotteries, and partly by Perceval's
Act in 1806, which confined the drawing of each lottery to one day. From
1793 to 1824 the government made an average yearly profit of £346,765.
Cope, one of the largest contractors, is said to have spent £36,000 in
advertisements in a single year. The English lotteries were used to
raise loans for general purposes, but latterly they were confined to
particular objects, such as the improvement of London, the disposal of
a museum, the purchase of a picture gallery, &c. Through the efforts of
Lord Lyttleton and others a strong public opinion was formed against
them, and in 1826 they were finally prohibited. An energetic proposal to
revive the system was made before the select committee on metropolitan
improvements in 1830, but it was not listened to. By a unique blunder in
legislation, authority was given to hold a lottery under an act of 1831
which provided a scheme for the improvement of the city of Glasgow.
These "Glasgow lotteries" were suppressed by an act of 1834. Art Unions
were legalized by the Art Unions Act 1846. The last lottery prominently
before the public in England was that of Dethier's twelfth-cake lottery,
which was suppressed on the 27th of December 1860. As defined at the
beginning of this article, the word lottery has a meaning wide enough to
include missing-word competitions, distributions by tradesmen of prize
coupons, sweepstakes, &c. See _Report of Joint Select Committee on
Lotteries, &c._ (1908). The statute law in Scotland is the same as in
England. At common law in Scotland it is probable that all lotteries and
raffles, for whatever purpose held, may be indicted as nuisances. The
art unions are supposed to be protected by a special statute.

_United States._--The American Congress of 1776 instituted a national
lottery. Most states at that time legalized lotteries for public
objects, and before 1820 the Virginia legislature passed seventy acts
authorizing lotteries for various public purposes, such as schools,
roads, &c.--about 85% of the subscriptions being returned in prizes. At
an early period (1795) the city of Washington was empowered to set up
lotteries as a mode of raising money for public purposes; and this
authorization from the Maryland legislature was approved by an act of
the Federal Congress in 1812. In 1833 they were prohibited in New York
and Massachusetts and gradually in the other states, until they survived
only in Louisiana. In that state, the Louisiana State Lottery, a company
chartered in 1868, had a monopoly for which it paid $40,000 to the state
treasury. Its last charter was granted in 1879 for a period of
twenty-five years, and a renewal was refused in 1890. In 1890 Congress
forbade the use of the mails for promoting any lottery enterprise by a
statute so stringent that it was held to make it a penal offence to
employ them to further the sale of Austrian government bonds, issued
under a scheme for drawing some by lot for payment at a premium (see
_Horner_ v. _United States_, 147 United States Reports, 449). This had
the effect of compelling the Louisiana State Lottery to move its
quarters to Honduras, in which place it still exists, selling its bonds
to a considerable extent in the Southern States.

  Since lotteries have become illegal there have been a great number of
  judicial decisions defining a lottery. In general, where skill or
  judgment is to be exercised there is no lottery, the essential element
  of which is chance or lot. There are numerous statutes against
  lotteries, the reason being given that they "tend to promote a
  gambling spirit," and that it is the duty of the state to "protect the
  morals and advance the welfare of the people." In New York the
  Constitution of 1846 forbade lotteries, and by § 324 of the Penal Code
  a lottery is declared "unlawful and a public nuisance." "Contriving"
  and advertising lotteries is also penal. The following have been held
  illegal lotteries: In New York, a concert, the tickets for which
  entitled the holder to a prize to be drawn by lot; in Indiana,
  offering a gold watch to the purchaser of goods who guesses the number
  of beans in a bottle; in Texas, selling "prize candy" boxes; and
  operating a nickel-in-the-slot machine--so also in Louisiana; in
  Massachusetts, the "policy" or "envelope game," or a "raffle"; in
  Kentucky (1905), prize coupon packages, the coupons having to spell a
  certain word (_U.S._ v. _Jefferson_, 134 Fed. R. 299); in Kansas
  (1907) it was held by the Supreme Court that the gift of a hat-pin to
  each purchaser was not illegal as a "gift enterprise," there being no
  chance or lot. In Oklahoma (1907) it was held that the making of
  contracts for the payment of money, the certainty in value of return
  being dependent on chance, was a lottery (_Fidelity Fund Co._ v.
  _Vaughan_, 90 Pac. Rep. 34). The chief features of a lottery are
  "procuring through lot or chance, by the investment of a sum of money
  or something of value, some greater amount of money or thing of
  greater value. When such are the chief features of any scheme whatever
  it may be christened, or however it may be guarded or concealed by
  cunningly devised conditions or screens, it is under the law a
  lottery" (_U.S._ v. _Wallace_, 58, Fed. Rep. 942). In 1894 and 1897
  Congress forbade the importation of lottery tickets or advertisements
  into the United States. In 1899, setting up or promoting lotteries in
  Alaska was prohibited by Congress, and in 1900 it forbade any lottery
  or sale of lottery tickets in Hawaii. In Porto Rico lotteries, raffles
  and gift-enterprises are forbidden (Penal Code, 1902, § 291).

  AUTHORITIES.--_Critique hist. pol. mor. econ. et comm. sur les
  loteries anc. et mod. spirituelles et temporelles des états et des
  églises_ (3 vols., Amsterdam, 1697), by the Bolognese historian
  Gregorio Leti; J. Dessaulx, _De la passion du jeu depuis les anciens
  temps jusqu'à nos jours_ (Paris, 1779); Endemann, _Beiträge zur
  Geschichte der Lottrie und zur heutigen Lotterie_ (Bonn, 1882);
  Larson, _Lottrie und Volkswirtschaft_ (Berlin, 1894); J. Ashton,
  _History of English Lotteries_ (1893); _Annual Report of the American
  Historical Association_ (1892); _Journal of the American Social
  Science Association_, xxxvi. 17.


  [1] The word "lottery" is directly derived from Ital. _lotteria_, cf.
    Fr. _loterie_, formed from _lotto_, lot, game of chance. "Lot" is in
    origin a Teutonic word, adopted into Romanic languages. In O. Eng. it
    appears as _hlot_, cf. Dutch _lot_, Ger. _Loos_, Dan. _lod_, &c. The
    meaning of the Teutonic root _hleut_ from which these words have
    derived is unknown. Primarily "lot" meant the object, such as a disk
    or counter of wood, a pebble, bean or the like, which was drawn or
    cast to decide by chance, under divine guidance, various matters,
    such as disputes, divisions of property, selection of officers and
    frequently as a method of divination in ancient times. From this
    original sense the meaning develops into that which falls to a person
    by lot, chance or fate, then to any portion of land, &c., allotted to
    a person, and hence, quite generally, of a quantity of anything.

LOTTI, ANTONIO (1667?-1740), Italian musical composer, was the son of
Matteo Lotti, Kapellmeister to the court of Hanover. He was born,
however, at Venice and as a pupil of Legrenzi. He entered the Doge's
chapel as a boy, and in 1689 was engaged as an alto singer, succeeding
later to the posts of deputy organist (1690), second organist (1692),
first organist (1704), and, finally, in 1736 Maestro di Cappella at St
Mark's church. He was also a composer of operas, and having attracted
the interest of the crown prince of Saxony during his visit to Venice in
1712, he was invited to Dresden, where he went in 1717. After producing
three operas there he was obliged to return to his duties at Venice in
1719. He died on the 5th of January 1740. Like many other Venetian
composers he wrote operas for Vienna, and enjoyed a considerable
reputation outside Italy. A volume of madrigals published in 1705
contains the famous _In una siepe ombrosa_, passed off by Bononcini as
his own in London. Another is quoted by Martini in his _Saggio di
Contrappunto_. Among his pupils were Alberti, Bassani, Galuppi,
Gasparini and Marcello. Burney justly praises his church music, which is
severe in style, but none the less modern in its grace and pathos. A
fine setting of the _Dies Irae_ is in the Imperial Library at Vienna,
and some of his masses have been printed in the collections of Proske
and Lück.

LOTTO, LORENZO (c. 1480-1556), Italian painter, is variously stated to
have been born at Bergamo, Venice and Treviso, between 1475 and 1480,
but a document published by Dr Bampo proves that he was born in Venice,
and it is to be gathered from his will that 1480 was probably the year
of his birth. Overshadowed by the genius of his three great
contemporaries, Titian, Giorgione and Palma, he had been comparatively
neglected by art historians until Mr Bernhard Berenson devoted to him an
"essay in constructive art criticism," which not only restores to him
his rightful position among the great masters of the Renaissance, but
also throws clear light upon the vexed question of his artistic descent.
Earlier authorities have made Lotto a pupil of Giovanni Bellini
(Morelli), of Previtali (Crowe and Cavalcaselle), of Leonardo da Vinci
(Lomazzo), whilst others discovered in his work the influences of Cima,
Carpaccio, Dürer, Palma and Francia. Mr Berenson has, however, proved
that he was the pupil of Alvise Vivarini, whose religious severity and
asceticism remained paramount in his work, even late in his life, when
he was attracted by the rich glow of Giorgione's and Titian's colour.
What distinguishes Lotto from his more famous contemporaries is his
psychological insight into character and his personal vision--his
unconventionality, which is sufficient to account for the comparative
neglect suffered by him when his art is placed beside the more typical
art of Titian and Giorgione, the supreme expression of the character of
the period.

That Lotto, who was one of the most productive painters of his time,
could work for thirty years without succumbing to the mighty influence
of Titian's sumptuous colour, is explained by the fact that during these
years he was away from Venice, as is abundantly proved by documents and
by the evidence of signed and dated works. The first of these documents,
dated 1503, proves him to have lived at Treviso at this period. His
earliest authentic pictures, Sir Martin Conway's "Danaë" (about 1498)
and the "St Jerome" of the Louvre (a similar subject is at the Madrid
Gallery ascribed to Titian), as indeed all the works executed before
1509, have unmistakable Vivarinesque traits in the treatment of the
drapery and landscape, and cool grey tonality. To this group belong the
Madonnas at Bridgewater House, Villa Borghese, Naples, and Sta Cristina
near Treviso, the Recanati altarpiece, the "Assumption of the Virgin" at
Asolo, and the portrait of a young man at Hampton Court. We find him at
Rome between 1508 and 1512, at the time Raphael was painting in the
Stanza della Signatura. A document in the Corsini library mentions that
Lotto received 100 ducats as an advance payment for fresco-work in the
upper floor of the Vatican, but there is no evidence that this work was
ever executed. In the next dated works, the "Entombment" at Jesi (1512),
and the "Transfiguration," "St James," and "St Vincent" at Recanati,
Lotto has abandoned the dryness and cool colour of his earlier style,
and adopted a fluid method and a blonde, joyful colouring. In 1513 we
find him at Bergamo, where he had entered into a contract to paint for
500 gold ducats an altarpiece for S. Stefano. The picture was only
completed in 1516, and is now at S. Bartolommeo. From the next years,
spent mostly at Bergamo, with intervals in Venice and Jesi in the
Marches, date the Dresden "Madonna," "Christ taking leave of his Mother"
at the Berlin Gallery, the "Bride and Bridegroom" at Madrid, the
National Gallery "Family Group" and portrait of the Protonothary
Giuliano, several portraits in Berlin, Milan and Vienna, numerous
altarpieces in and near Bergamo, the strangely misnamed "Triumph of
Chastity" at the Rospigliosi Palace in Rome, and the portrait of Andrea
Odoni at Hampton Court. In 1526 or 1527 Lotto returned to Venice, where
Titian ruled supreme in the world of art; and it was only natural that
the example of the great master should have fired him to emulation,
though his experiments in this direction were confined to an attempt at
rivalling the master's rich and ruddy colour-schemes. Even in the
Carmine altarpiece, the "St Nicholas of Bari," which is his nearest
approach to Titian, he retained his individualized, as opposed to
Titian's generalized, expression of emotion. But it was only a passing
phase, and he soon returned to the cooler schemes of his earlier work.
Among his chief pictures executed in Venice between 1529 and 1540 are
the "Christ and the Adulteress," now at the Louvre, the "Visitation" at
the Jesi Library, the "Crucifixion" at Monte S. Giusto, the Madonna at
the Uffizi, the "Madonna and Saints" at Cingoli, and some portraits at
the Berlin and Vienna museums, the Villa Borghese and Doria Palace in
Rome, and at Dorchester House. He is again to be found at Treviso from
1542-1545, at Ancona in 1550, the year in which he entirely lost his
voice; and in 1552 he "devoted his person and all his property to the
Holy Virgin of Loreto" and took up his abode with the monks of that
shrine. He died in 1556. A codex in his own handwriting, discovered in
the archives of Loreto, not only includes a complete statement of his
accounts from about 1539 to his death, but has a most interesting entry
from which we gather that in 1540 Lotto completed the portraits of
Martin Luther and his wife. These portraits could not have been painted
from life; they were presumably executed from some contemporary

  See _Lorenzo Lotto_, by Bernard Berenson (London, 1901).

LOTTO (Ital. for "lot"), a gambling game usually called _Keno_ in
America, played by any number of persons upon large boards or cards,
each of which is divided into three horizontal rows of nine spaces, four
spaces in each row being left blank and the other five marked with
numbers up to 90. Each card is designated by a general number. The cards
usually lie on the gambling-table, and a player may buy from the bank as
many as he cares to use, each card being registered or _pegged_ on an
exposed table as soon as bought. Ninety small ivory markers, generally
balls flattened on one side, numbered from 1 to 90, are placed in a bag
and shaken out one by one, or, more usually, in a so-called
_keno-goose_, a kind of urn with a spout through which the balls are
allowed to roll by means of a spring. When a number falls out, the
banker, or _keno-roller_, calls it out distinctly, and each player upon
whose card that number occurs places a mark over it. This is repeated
until one player has all the numbers in one row of his card covered,
upon which he calls out "Keno!" and wins all the money staked excepting
a percentage to the bank.

LOTUS, a popular name applied to several plants. The lotus fruits of the
Greeks belonged to _Zizyphus Lotus_, a bush native in south Europe with
fruits as large as sloes, containing a mealy substance which can be used
for making bread and also a fermented drink. In ancient times the fruits
were an important article of food among the poor; whence "lotophagi" or
lotus-eaters. _Zizyphus_ is a member of the natural order Rhamnaceae to
which belongs the British buckthorn. The Egyptian lotus was a
water-lily, _Nymphaea Lotus_; as also is the sacred lotus of the Hindus,
_Nelumbium speciosum_. The lotus tree, known to the Romans as the Libyan
lotus, and planted by them for shade, was probably _Celtis australis_,
the nettle-tree (q.v.), a southern European tree, a native of the elm
family, with fruits like small cherries, which are first red and then
black. _Lotus_ of botanists is a genus of the pea-family
(_Leguminosae_), containing a large number of species of herbs and
undershrubs widely distributed in the temperate regions of the old
world. It is represented in Britain by _L. corniculatus_, bird's foot
trefoil, a low-growing herb, common in pastures and waste places, with
clusters of small bright yellow pea-like flowers, which are often
streaked with crimson; the popular name is derived from the pods which
when ripe spread like the toes of a bird's foot.

LOTUS-EATERS (Gr. [Greek: Lôtophagoi]), a Libyan tribe known to the
Greeks as early as the time of Homer. Herodotus (iv. 177) describes
their country as in the Libyan district bordering on the Syrtes, and
says that a caravan route led from it to Egypt. Victor Bérard identifies
it with the modern Jerba. When Odysseus reached the country of the
Lotophagi, many of his sailors after eating the lotus lost all wish to
return home. Both Greeks and Romans used the expression "to eat the
lotus" to denote forgetfulness (cf. Tennyson's poem "The Lotus-Eaters").

  There has been considerable discussion as to the identification of the
  Homeric lotus. Some have held that it is a prickly shrub, Zizyphus
  Lotus, which bears a sweet-tasting fruit, and still grows in the old
  home of the Lotophagi. It is eaten by the natives, who also make a
  kind of wine from the juice. P. Champault (_Phéniciens et Grecs en
  Italie d'après l'Odyssée_, p. 400, note 2), however, maintains that
  the lotus was a date; Victor Bérard (_Les Phéniciens et l'Odyssée_,
  1902-1903, ii. 102) is doubtful, but contends that it was certainly a
  tree-fruit. If either of these be correct, then the lotus of _Od._ iv.
  603-604 is quite a different plant, a kind of clover. Now Strabo
  (xvii. 829a) calls the lotus [Greek: poan tina kai rhizan]. Putting
  these two references together with Sulpicius Severus, _Dialogi_ i. 4.
  4, R. M. Henry suggests that the Homeric lotus was really the [Greek:
  poa] of Strabo, i.e. a kind of clover (_Classical Review_, December
  1906, p. 435).

LOTZE, RUDOLF HERMANN (1817-1881), German philosopher, was born in
Bautzen on the 21st of May 1817, the son of a physician. He received his
education in the gymnasium of Zittau under teachers who inspired him
with an enduring love of the classical authors, as we see from his
translation of the _Antigone_ of Sophocles into Latin verse, published
when he had reached middle life. He went to the university of Leipzig as
a student of philosophy and natural sciences, but entered officially as
a student of medicine. He was then only seventeen. It appears that thus
early Lotze's studies were governed by two distinct interests. The first
was scientific, based upon mathematical and physical studies under the
guidance of E. H. Weber, W. Volckmann and G. T. Fechner. The other was
his aesthetical and artistic interest, which was developed under the
care of C. H. Weisse. To the former he owes his appreciation of exact
investigation and a complete knowledge of the aims of science, to the
latter an equal admiration for the great circle of ideas which had been
diffused by the teaching of Fichte, Schelling and Hegel. Each of these
influences, which early in life must have been familiar to him, tempered
and modified the other. The true method of science which he possessed
forced him to condemn as useless the entire form which Schelling's and
Hegel's expositions had adopted, especially the dialectic method of the
latter, whilst his love of art and beauty, and his appreciation of moral
purposes, revealed to him the existence of a trans-phenomenal world of
values into which no exact science could penetrate. It is evident how
this initial position at once defined to him the tasks which philosophy
had to perform. First there were the natural sciences, themselves only
just emerging from a confused conception of their true method;
especially those which studied the borderland of physical and mental
phenomena, the medical sciences; and pre-eminently that science which
has since become so popular, the science of biology.

Lotze's first essay was his dissertation _De futurae biologiae
principibus philosophicis_, with which he gained (1838) the degree of
doctor of medicine, after having only four months previously got the
degree of doctor of philosophy. Then, secondly, there arose the question
whether the methods of exact science sufficed to explain the connexion
of phenomena, or whether for the explanation of this the thinking mind
was forced to resort to some hypothesis not immediately verifiable by
observation, but dictated by higher aspirations and interests. And, if
to satisfy these we were forced to maintain the existence of a world of
moral standards, it was, thirdly, necessary to form some opinion as to
the relation of these moral standards of value to the forms and facts of
phenomenal existence. These different tasks, which philosophy had to
fulfil, mark pretty accurately the aims of Lotze's writings, and the
order in which they were published. He laid the foundation of his
philosophical system very early in his _Metaphysik_ (Leipzig, 1841) and
his _Logik_ (1843), short books published while he was still a junior
lecturer at Leipzig, from which university he migrated to Göttingen,
succeeding Herbart in the chair of philosophy. But it was only during
the last decade of his life that he ventured, with much hesitation, to
present his ideas in a systematic and final form. The two books
mentioned remained unnoticed by the reading public, and Lotze first
became known to a larger circle through a series of works which aimed at
establishing in the study of the physical and mental phenomena of the
human organism in its normal and diseased states the same general
principles which had been adopted in the investigation of inorganic
phenomena. These works were his _Allgemeine Pathologie und Therapie als
mechanische Naturwissenschaften_ (Leipzig, 1842, 2nd ed., 1848), the
articles "Lebenskraft" (1843) and "Seele und Seelenleben" (1846) in Rud.
Wagner's _Handwörterbuch der Physiologie_, his _Allgemeine Physiologie
des Körperlichen Lebens_ (Leipzig, 1851), and his _Medizinische
Psychologie oder Physiologie der Seele_ (Leipzig, 1852).

When Lotze published these works, medical science was still much under
the influence of Schelling's philosophy of nature. The mechanical laws,
to which external things were subject, were conceived as being valid
only in the inorganic world; in the organic and mental worlds these
mechanical laws were conceived as being disturbed or overridden by other
powers, such as the influence of final causes, the existence of types,
the work of vital and mental forces. This confusion Lotze, who had been
trained in the school of mathematical reasoning, tried to dispel. The
laws which govern particles of matter in the inorganic world govern them
likewise if they are joined into an organism. A phenomenon _a_, if
followed by _b_ in the one case, is followed by the same _b_ also in the
other case. Final causes, vital and mental forces, the soul itself can,
if they act at all, only act through the inexorable mechanism of natural
laws. As we therefore have only to do with the study of existing
complexes of material and spiritual phenomena, the changes in these must
be explained in science by the rule of mechanical laws, such as obtain
everywhere in the world, and only by such. One of the results of these
investigations was to extend the meaning of the word mechanism, and
comprise under it all laws which obtain in the phenomenal world, not
excepting the phenomena of life and mind. Mechanism was the unalterable
connexion of every phenomenon a with other phenomena _b_, _c_, _d_,
either as following or preceding it; mechanism was the inexorable form
into which the events of this world are cast, and by which they are
connected. The object of those writings was to establish the
all-pervading rule of mechanism. But the mechanical view of nature is
not identical with the materialistic. In the last of the above-mentioned
works the question is discussed at great length how we have to consider
mind, and the relation between mind and body; the answer is--we have to
consider mind as an immaterial principle, its action, however, on the
body and vice versa as purely mechanical, indicated by the fixed laws
of a psycho-physical mechanism. These doctrines of Lotze--though
pronounced with the distinct and reiterated reserve that they did not
contain a solution of the philosophical question regarding the nature,
origin, or deeper meaning of this all-pervading mechanism, neither an
explanation how the action of external things on each other takes place
nor yet of the relation of mind and body, that they were merely a
preliminary formula of practical scientific value, itself requiring a
deeper interpretation--these doctrines were nevertheless by many
considered to be the last word of the philosopher who, denouncing the
reveries of Schelling or the idealistic theories of Hegel, established
the science of life and mind on the same basis as that of material
things. Published as they were during the years when the modern school
of German materialism was at its height,[1] these works of Lotze were
counted among the opposition literature which destroyed the phantom of
Hegelian wisdom and vindicated the independent and self-sufficing
position of empirical philosophy. Even philosophers of the eminence of
I. H. Fichte (the younger) did not escape this misinterpretation of
Lotze's true meaning, though they had his _Metaphysik_ and _Logik_ to
refer to, though he promised in his _Allgemeine Physiologie_ (1851) to
enter in a subsequent work upon the "bounding province between
aesthetics and physiology," and though in his _Medizinische Psychologie_
he had distinctly stated that his position was neither the idealism of
Hegel nor the realism of Herbart, nor materialism, but that it was the
conviction that the essence of everything is the part it plays in the
realization of some idea which is in itself valuable, that the sense of
an all-pervading mechanism is to be sought in this, that it denotes the
ways and means by which the highest idea, which we may call the idea of
the good, has voluntarily chosen to realize itself.

The misinterpretations which he had suffered induced Lotze to publish a
small pamphlet of a polemical character (_Streitschriften_, Leipzig,
1857), in which he corrected two mistakes. The opposition which he had
made to Hegel's formalism had induced some to associate him with the
materialistic school, others to count him among the followers of
Herbart. Lotze publicly and formally denied that he belonged to the
school of Herbart, though he admitted that historically the same
doctrine which might be considered the forerunner of Herbart's teachings
might lead to his own views, viz. the monadology of Leibnitz.

When Lotze wrote these explanations, he had already given to the world
the first volume of his great work, _Mikrokosmus_ (vol. i. 1856, vol.
ii. 1858, vol. iii. 1864; 3rd ed., 1876-1880). In many passages of his
works on pathology, physiology, and psychology Lotze had distinctly
stated that the method of research which he advocated there did not give
an explanation of the phenomena of life and mind, but only the means of
observing and connecting them together; that the meaning of all
phenomena, and the reason of their peculiar connexions, was a
philosophical problem which required to be attacked from a different
point of view; and that the significance especially which lay in the
phenomena of life and mind would only unfold itself if by an exhaustive
survey of the entire life of man, individually, socially, and
historically, we gain the necessary data for deciding what meaning
attaches to the existence of this microcosm, or small world of human
life, in the macrocosm of the universe. This review, which extends, in
three volumes, over the wide field of anthropology, beginning with the
human frame, the soul, and their union in life, advancing to man, his
mind, and the course of the world, and concluding with history,
progress, and the connexion of things, ends with the same idea which was
expressed in Lotze's earliest work, his _Metaphysik_. The view peculiar
to him is reached in the end as the crowning conception towards which
all separate channels of thought have tended, and in the light of which
the life of man in nature and mind, in the individual and in society,
had been surveyed. This view can be briefly stated as follows:
Everywhere in the wide realm of observation we find three distinct
regions,--the region of facts, the region of laws and the region of
standards of value. These three regions are separate only in our
thoughts, not in reality. To comprehend the real position we are forced
to the conviction that the world of facts is the field in which, and
that laws are the means by which, those higher standards of moral and
aesthetical value are being realized; and such a union can again only
become intelligible through the idea of a personal Deity, who in the
creation and preservation of a world has voluntarily chosen certain
forms and laws, through the natural operation of which the ends of His
work are gained.

Whilst Lotze had thus in his published works closed the circle of his
thought, beginning with a conception metaphysically gained, proceeding
to an exhaustive contemplation of things in the light it afforded, and
ending with the stronger conviction of its truth which observation,
experience, and life could afford, he had all the time been lecturing on
the various branches of philosophy according to the scheme of academical
instruction transmitted from his predecessors. Nor can it be considered
anything but a gain that he was thus induced to expound his views with
regard to those topics, and in connexion with those problems, which were
the traditional forms of philosophical utterance. His lectures ranged
over a wide field: he delivered annually lectures on psychology and on
logic (the latter including a survey of the entirety of philosophical
research under the title _Encyclopädie der Philosophie_), then at longer
intervals lectures on metaphysics, philosophy of nature, philosophy of
art, philosophy of religion, rarely on history of philosophy and ethics.
In these lectures he expounded his peculiar views in a stricter form,
and during the last decade of his life he embodied the substance of
those courses in his _System der Philosophie_, of which only two volumes
have appeared (vol. i. _Logik_, 1st ed., Leipzig, 1874, 2nd ed., 1880;
vol. ii. _Metaphysik_, 1879). The third and concluding volume, which was
to treat in a more condensed form the principal problems of practical
philosophy, of philosophy of art and religion, never appeared. A small
pamphlet on psychology, containing the last form in which he had begun
to treat the subject in his lectures (abruptly terminated through his
death on the 1st of July 1881) during the summer session of 1881, has
been published by his son. Appended to this volume is a complete list of
Lotze's writings, compiled by Professor Rehnisch of Göttingen.

  To understand this series of Lotze's writings, it is necessary to
  begin with his definition of philosophy. This is given after his
  exposition of logic has established two points, viz. the existence in
  our mind of certain laws and forms according to which we connect the
  material supplied to us by our senses, and, secondly, the fact that
  logical thought cannot be usefully employed without the assumption of
  a further set of connexions, not logically necessary, but assumed to
  exist between the data of experience and observation. These connexions
  of a real not formal character are handed to us by the separate
  sciences and by the usage and culture of everyday life. Language has
  crystallized them into certain definite notions and expressions,
  without which we cannot proceed a single step, but which we have
  accepted without knowing their exact meaning, much less their origin.
  In consequence the special sciences and the wisdom of common life
  entangle themselves easily and frequently in contradictions. A problem
  of a purely formal character thus presents itself, viz. this--to try
  to bring unity and harmony into the scattered thoughts of our general
  culture, to trace them to their primary assumptions and follow them
  into their ultimate consequences, to connect them all together, to
  remodel, curtail or amplify them, so as to remove their apparent
  contradictions, and to combine them in the unity of an harmonious view
  of things, and especially to investigate those conceptions which form
  the initial assumptions of the several sciences, and to fix the limits
  of their applicability. This is the formal definition of philosophy.
  Whether an harmonious conception thus gained will represent more than
  an agreement among our thoughts, whether it will represent the real
  connexion of things and thus possess objective not merely subjective
  value, cannot be decided at the outset. It is also unwarranted to
  start with the expectation that everything in the world should be
  explained by one principle, and it is a needless restriction of our
  means to expect unity of method. Nor are we able to start our
  philosophical investigations by an inquiry into the nature of human
  thought and its capacity to attain an objective knowledge, as in this
  case we would be actually using that instrument the usefulness of
  which we were trying to determine. The main proof of the objective
  value of the view we may gain will rather lie in the degree in which
  it succeeds in assigning to every element of culture its due position,
  or in which it is able to appreciate and combine different and
  apparently opposite tendencies and interests, in the sort of justice
  with which it weighs our manifold desires and aspirations, balancing
  them in due proportions, refusing to sacrifice to a one-sided
  principle any truth or conviction which experience has proven to be
  useful and necessary. The investigations will then naturally divide
  themselves into three parts, the first of which deals with those to
  our mind inevitable forms in which we are obliged to think about
  things, if we think at all (metaphysics), the second being devoted to
  the great region of facts, trying to apply the results of metaphysics
  to these, specially the two great regions of external and mental
  phenomena (cosmology and psychology), the third dealing with those
  standards of value from which we pronounce our aesthetical or ethical
  approval or disapproval. In each department we shall have to aim first
  of all at views clear and consistent within themselves, but, secondly,
  we shall in the end wish to form some general idea or to risk an
  opinion how laws, facts and standards of value may be combined in one
  comprehensive view. Considerations of this latter kind will naturally
  present themselves in the two great departments of cosmology and
  psychology, or they may be delegated to an independent research under
  the name of religious philosophy. We have already mentioned the final
  conception in which Lotze's speculation culminates, that of a personal
  Deity, Himself the essence of all that merits existence for its own
  sake, who in the creation and government of a world has voluntarily
  chosen certain laws and forms through which His ends are to be
  realized. We may add that according to this view nothing is real but
  the living spirit of God and the world of living spirits which He has
  created; the things of this world have only reality in so far as they
  are the appearance of spiritual substance, which underlies everything.
  It is natural that Lotze, having this great and final conception
  always before him, works under its influence from the very beginning
  of his speculations, permitting us, as we progress, to gain every now
  and then a glimpse of that interpretation of things which to him
  contains the solution of our difficulties.

  The key to Lotze's theoretical philosophy lies in his metaphysics, to
  the exposition of which important subject the first and last of his
  larger publications have been devoted. To understand Lotze's
  philosophy, a careful and repeated perusal of these works is
  absolutely necessary. The object of his metaphysics is so to remodel
  the current notions regarding the existence of things and their
  connexions with which the usage of language supplies us as to make
  them consistent and thinkable. The further assumption, that the
  modified notions thus gained have an objective meaning, and that they
  somehow correspond to the real order of the existing world which of
  course they can never actually describe, depends upon a general
  confidence which we must have in our reasoning powers, and in the
  significance of a world in which we ourselves with all the necessary
  courses of our thoughts have a due place assigned. The principle
  therefore of these investigations is opposed to two attempts
  frequently repeated in the history of philosophy, viz.: (1) the
  attempt to establish general laws or forms, which the development of
  things must have obeyed, or which a Creator must have followed in the
  creation of a world (Hegel); and (2) the attempt to trace the genesis
  of our notions and decide as to their meaning and value (modern
  theories of knowledge). Neither of these attempts is practicable. The
  world of many things surrounds us; our notions, by which we manage
  correctly or incorrectly to describe it, are also ready made. What
  remains to be done is, not to explain how such a world manages to be
  what it is, nor how we came to form these notions, but merely this--to
  expel from the circle and totality of our conceptions those abstract
  notions which are inconsistent and jarring, or to remodel and define
  them so that they may constitute a consistent and harmonious view. In
  this endeavour Lotze discards as useless and untenable many favourite
  conceptions of the school, many crude notions of everyday life. The
  course of things and their connexion is only thinkable by the
  assumption of a plurality of existences, the reality of which (as
  distinguished from our knowledge of them) can be conceived only as a
  multitude of relations. This quality of standing in relation to other
  things is that which gives to a thing its reality. And the nature of
  this reality again can neither be consistently represented as a fixed
  and hard substance nor as an unalterable something, but only as a
  fixed order of recurrence of continually changing events or
  impressions. But, further, every attempt to think clearly what those
  relations are, what we really mean, if we talk of a fixed order of
  events, forces upon us the necessity of thinking also that the
  different things which stand in relations or the different phases
  which follow each other cannot be merely externally strung together or
  moved about by some indefinable external power, in the form of some
  predestination or inexorable fate. The things themselves which exist
  and their changing phases must stand in some internal connexion; they
  themselves must be active or passive, capable of doing or suffering.
  This would lead to the view of Leibnitz, that the world consists of
  monads, self-sufficient beings, leading an inner life. But this idea
  involves the further conception of Leibnitz, that of a pre-established
  harmony, by which the Creator has taken care to arrange the life of
  each monad, so that it agrees with that of all others. This
  conception, according to Lotze, is neither necessary nor thoroughly
  intelligible. Why not interpret at once and render intelligible the
  common conception originating in natural science, viz. that of a
  system of laws which governs the many things? But, in attempting to
  make this conception quite clear and thinkable, we are forced to
  represent the connexion of things as a universal substance, the
  essence of which we conceive as a system of laws which underlies
  everything and in its own self connects everything, but imperceptible,
  and known to us merely through the impressions it produces on us,
  which we call things. A final reflection then teaches us that the
  nature of this universal and all-pervading substance can only be
  imagined by us as something analogous to our own mental life, where
  alone we experience the unity of a substance (which we call self)
  preserved in the multitude of its (mental) states. It also becomes
  clear that only where such mental life really appears need we assign
  an independent existence, but that the purposes of everyday life as
  well as those of science are equally served if we deprive the material
  things outside of us of an independence, and assign to them merely a
  connected existence through the universal substance by the action of
  which alone they can appear to us.

  The universal substance, which we may call the absolute, is at this
  stage of our investigations not endowed with the attributes of a
  personal Deity, and it will remain to be seen by further analysis in
  how far we are able--without contradiction--to identify it with the
  object of religious veneration, in how far that which to metaphysics
  is merely a postulate can be gradually brought nearer to us and become
  a living power. Much in this direction is said by Lotze in various
  passages of his writings; anything complete, however, on the subject
  is wanting. Nor would it seem as if it could be the intention of the
  author to do much more than point out the lines on which the further
  treatment of the subject should advance. The actual result of his
  personal inquiries, the great idea which lies at the foundation of his
  philosophy, we know. It may be safely stated that Lotze would allow
  much latitude to individual convictions, as indeed it is evident that
  the empty notion of an absolute can only become living and significant
  to us in the same degree as experience and thought have taught us to
  realize the seriousness of life, the significance of creation, the
  value of the beautiful and the good, and the supreme worth of personal
  holiness. To endow the universal substance with moral attributes, to
  maintain that it is more than the metaphysical ground of everything,
  to say it is the perfect realization of the holy, the beautiful and
  the good, can only have a meaning for him who feels within himself
  what real not imaginary values are clothed in those expressions.

  We have still to mention that aesthetics formed a principal and
  favourite study of Lotze's, and that he has treated this subject also
  in the light of the leading ideas of his philosophy. See his essays
  _Ueber den Begriff der Schönheit_ (Göttingen, 1845) and _Ueber
  Bedingungen der Kunstschönheit_, ibid. (1847); and especially his
  _Geschichte der Aesthetik in Deutschland_ (Munich, 1868).

  Lotze's historical position is of much interest. Though he disclaims
  being a follower of Herbart, his formal definition of philosophy and
  his conception of the object of metaphysics are similar to those of
  Herbart, who defines philosophy as an attempt to remodel the notions
  given by experience. In this endeavour he forms with Herbart an
  opposition to the philosophies of Fichte, Schelling and Hegel, which
  aimed at objective and absolute knowledge, and also to the criticism
  of Kant, which aimed at determining the validity of all human
  knowledge. But this formal agreement includes material differences,
  and the spirit which breathes in Lotze's writings is more akin to the
  objects and aspirations of the idealistic school than to the cold
  formalism of Herbart. What, however, with the idealists was an object
  of thought alone, the absolute, is to Lotze only inadequately
  definable in rigorous philosophical language; the aspirations of the
  human heart, the contents of our feelings and desires, the aims of art
  and the tenets of religious faith must be grasped in order to fill the
  empty idea of the absolute with meaning. These manifestations of the
  divine spirit again cannot be traced and understood by reducing (as
  Hegel did) the growth of the human mind in the individual, in society
  and in history to the monotonous rhythm of a speculative schematism;
  the essence and worth which is in them reveals itself only to the
  student of detail, for reality is larger and wider than philosophy;
  the problem, "how the one can be many," is only solved for us in the
  numberless examples in life and experience which surround us, for
  which we must retain a lifelong interest and which constitute the true
  field of all useful human work. This conviction of the emptiness of
  terms and abstract notions, and of the fulness of individual life, has
  enabled Lotze to combine in his writings the two courses into which
  German philosophical thought had been moving since the death of its
  great founder, Leibnitz. We may define these courses by the terms
  esoteric and exoteric--the former the philosophy of the school,
  cultivated principally at the universities, trying to systematize
  everything and reduce all our knowledge to an intelligible principle,
  losing in this attempt the deeper meaning of Leibnitz's philosophy;
  the latter the unsystematized philosophy of general culture which we
  find in the work of the great writers of the classical period,
  Lessing, Winkelmann, Goethe, Schiller and Herder, all of whom
  expressed in some degree their indebtedness to Leibnitz. Lotze can be
  said to have brought philosophy out of the lecture-room into the
  market-place of life. By understanding and combining what was great
  and valuable in those divided and scattered endeavours, he became the
  true successor of Leibnitz.

  The age in which Lotze lived and wrote in Germany was not one
  peculiarly fitted to appreciate the position he took up. Frequently
  misunderstood, yet rarely criticized, he was nevertheless greatly
  admired, listened to by devoted hearers and read by an increasing
  circle. But this circle never attained to the unity of a philosophical
  school. The real meaning of Lotze's teaching is reached only by
  patient study, and those who in a larger or narrower sense call
  themselves his followers will probably feel themselves indebted to him
  more for the general direction he has given to their thoughts, for the
  tone he has imparted to their inner life, for the seriousness with
  which he has taught them to consider even small affairs and practical
  duties, and for the indestructible confidence with which his
  philosophy permits them to disregard the materialism of science, the
  scepticism of shallow culture, the disquieting results of
  philosophical and historical criticism.

  See E. Pfleiderer, _Lotze's philosophische Weltanschauung nach ihren
  Grundzügen_ (Berlin, 1882; 2nd ed., 1884); E. von Hartmann, _Lotze's
  Philosophie_ (Leipzig, 1888); O. Caspari, _H. Lotze in seiner Stellung
  zu der durch Kant begründeten neuesten Geschichte der Philosophie_
  (Breslau, 1883; 2nd ed., 1894); R. Falckenberg, _Hermann Lotze_
  (Stuttgart, 1901); Henry Jones, _A Critical Account of the Philosophy
  of Lotze_ (Glasgow, 1895); Paul Lange, _Die Lehre vom Instincte bei
  Lotze und Darwin_ (Berlin, 1896); A. Lichtenstein, _Lotze und Wundt_
  (Bern, 1900).     (J. T. M.; H. St.)


  [1] See Vogt, _Physiologische Briefe_ (1845-1847); Moleschott, _Der
    Kreislauf des Lebens_ (1852); Büchner, _Kraft und Stoff_ (1855).

LOUBET, ÉMILE FRANÇOIS (1838-   ), 7th president of the French republic,
was born on the 30th of December 1838, the son of a peasant proprietor
at Marsanne (Drôme), who was more than once mayor of Marsanne. He was
admitted to the Parisian bar in 1862, and took his doctorate-in-law next
year. He was still a student when he witnessed the sweeping triumph of
the Republican party in Paris at the general election in 1863. He
settled down to the exercise of his profession in Montélimar, where he
married in 1869 Marie Louis Picard. He also inherited a small estate at
Grignan. At the crisis of 1870 he became mayor of Montélimar, and
thenceforward was a steady supporter of Gambetta's policy. Elected to
the Chamber of Deputies in 1876 by Montélimar he was one of the famous
363 who in June 1877 passed the vote of want of confidence in the
ministry of the duc de Broglie. In the general election of October he
was re-elected, local enthusiasm for him being increased by the fact
that the government had driven him from the mayoralty. In the Chamber he
occupied himself especially with education, fighting the clerical system
established by the Loi Falloux, and working for the establishment of
free, obligatory and secular primary instruction. In 1880 he became
president of the departmental council in Drôme. His support of the
second Jules Ferry ministry and his zeal for the colonial expansion of
France gave him considerable weight in the moderate Republican party. He
had entered the Senate in 1885, and he became minister of public works
in the Tirard ministry (December 1887 to March 1888). In 1892 President
Sadi Carnot, who was his personal friend, asked him to form a cabinet.
Loubet held the portfolio of the interior with the premiership, and had
to deal with the anarchist crimes of that year and with the great strike
of Carmaux, in which he acted as arbitrator, giving a decision regarded
in many quarters as too favourable to the strikers. He was defeated in
November on the question of the Panama scandals, but he retained the
ministry of the interior in the next cabinet under Alexandre Ribot,
though he resigned on its reconstruction in January. His reputation as
an orator of great force and lucidity of exposition and as a safe and
honest statesman procured for him in 1896 the presidency of the Senate,
and in February 1899 he was chosen president of the republic in
succession to Félix Fauré by 483 votes as against 279 recorded by Jules
Méline, his only serious competitor. He was marked out for fierce
opposition and bitter insult as the representative of that section of
the Republican party which sought the revision of the Dreyfus case. On
the day of President Faure's funeral Paul Déroulède met the troops under
General Roget on their return to barracks, and demanded that the general
should march on the Élysée. Roget sensibly took his troops back to
barracks. At the Auteuil steeplechase in June the president was struck
on the head with a cane by an anti-Dreyfusard. In that month President
Loubet summoned Waldeck-Rousseau to form a cabinet, and at the same time
entreated Republicans of all shades of opinion to rally to the defence
of the state. By the efforts of Loubet and Waldeck-Rousseau the Dreyfus
affair was settled, when Loubet, acting on the advice of General
Galliffet, minister of war, remitted the ten years' imprisonment to
which Dreyfus was condemned at Rennes. Loubet's presidency saw an acute
stage of the clerical question, which was attacked by Waldeck-Rousseau
and in still more drastic fashion by the Combes ministry. The French
ambassador was recalled from the Vatican in April 1905, and in July the
separation of church and state was voted in the Chamber of Deputies.
Feeling had run high between France and England over the mutual
criticisms passed on the conduct of the South African War and the
Dreyfus case respectively. These differences were composed by the
Anglo-French _entente_, and in 1904 a convention between the two
countries secured the recognition of French claims in Morocco in
exchange for non-interference with the English occupation of Egypt.
President Loubet was a typical example of the peasant-proprietor class,
and had none of the aristocratic, not to say monarchical, proclivities
of President Fauré. He inaugurated the Paris Exhibition of 1900,
received the tsar Nicholas II. in September 1901 and paid a visit to
Russia in 1902. He also exchanged visits with King Edward VII., with the
king of Italy and the king of Spain. The king of Spain's visit in 1905
was the occasion of an attempt on his life, a bomb being thrown under
his carriage as he was proceeding with his guest to the opera. His
presidency came to an end in January 1906, when he retired into private

LOUDON, ERNST GIDEON, FREIHERR VON (1717-1790), Austrian soldier, was
born at Tootzen in Livonia, on the 2nd of February 1717. His family, of
Scottish origin,[1] had been settled in that country since before 1400.
His father was a lieutenant-colonel, retired on a meagre pension from
the Swedish service, and the boy was sent in 1732 into the Russian army
as a cadet. He took part in Field Marshal Münnich's siege of Danzig in
1734, in the march of a Russian corps to the Rhine in 1735 and in the
Turkish war 1738-1739. Dissatisfied with his prospects he resigned in
1741 and sought military employment elsewhere. He applied first to
Frederick the Great, who declined his services. At Vienna he had better
fortune, being made a captain in Trenck's free corps. He took part in
its forays and marches, though not in its atrocities, until wounded and
taken prisoner in Alsace. He was shortly released by the advance of the
main Austrian army. His next active service, still under Trenck, was in
the Silesian mountains in 1745, in which campaign he greatly
distinguished himself as a leader of light troops. He was present also
at Soor. He retired shortly afterwards, owing to his distaste for the
lawless habits of his comrades in the irregulars, and after long waiting
in poverty for a regular commission he was at last made a captain in one
of the frontier regiments, spending the next ten years in half-military,
half-administrative work in the Carlstadt district. At Bunich, where he
was stationed, he built a church and planted an oak forest now called by
his name. He had reached the rank of lieutenant-colonel when the
outbreak of the Seven Years' War called him again into the field. From
this point began his fame as a soldier. Soon promoted colonel, he
distinguished himself repeatedly and was in 1757 made a
General-feldwacht-meister (major-general of cavalry) and a knight of the
newly founded order of Maria Theresa. In the campaign of 1758 came his
first opportunity for fighting an action as a commander-in-chief, and he
used it so well that Frederick the Great was obliged to give up the
siege of Olmütz and retire into Bohemia (action of Dom-stadtl, 30th of
June). He was rewarded with the grade of lieutenant-field-marshal and
having again shown himself an active and daring commander in the
campaign of Hochkirch, he was created a Freiherr in the Austrian
nobility by Maria Theresa and in the peerage of the Holy Roman Empire by
her husband the emperor Francis. Maria Theresa gave him, further, the
grand cross of the order she had founded and an estate near Kuttenberg
in Bohemia. He was placed in command of the Austrian contingent sent to
join the Russians on the Oder. At Kunersdorf he turned defeat into a
brilliant victory, and was promoted Feldzeugmeister and made
commander-in-chief in Bohemia, Moravia and Silesia. In 1760 he destroyed
a whole corps of Frederick's army under Fouqué at Landshut and stormed
the important fortress of Glatz. In 1760 he sustained a reverse at
Frederick's hands in the battle of Liegnitz (Aug. 15th, 1760), which
action led to bitter controversy with Daun and Lacy, the commanders of
the main army, who, Loudon claimed, had left his corps unsupported. In
1761 he operated, as usual, in Silesia, but he found his Russian allies
as timid as they had been after Kunersdorf, and all attempts against
Frederick's entrenched camp of Bunzelwitz (see SEVEN YEARS' WAR) failed.
He brilliantly seized his one fleeting opportunity, however, and stormed
Schweidnitz on the night of Sept. 30/October 1st, 1761. His tireless
activity continued to the end of the war, in conspicuous contrast with
the temporizing strategy of Daun and Lacy. The student of the later
campaigns of the Seven Years' War will probably admit that there was
need of more aggressiveness than Daun displayed, and of more caution
than suited Loudon's genius. But neither recognized this, and the last
three years of the war are marked by an ever-increasing friction between
the "Fabius" and the "Marcellus," as they were called, of the Austrian

After the peace, therefore, when Daun became the virtual
commander-in-chief of the army, Loudon fell into the background. Offers
were made, by Frederick the Great amongst others, to induce Loudon to
transfer his services elsewhere. Loudon did not entertain these
proposals, although negotiations went on for some years, and on Lacy
succeeding Daun as president of the council of war Loudon was made
inspector-general of infantry. Dissensions, however, continued between
Loudon and Lacy, and on the accession of Joseph II., who was intimate
with his rival, Loudon retired to his estate near Kuttenberg. Maria
Theresa and Kaunitz caused him, however, to be made commander-in-chief
in Bohemia and Moravia in 1769. This post he held for three years, and
at the end of this time, contemplating retirement from the service, he
settled again on his estate. Maria Theresa once more persuaded him to
remain in the army, and, as his estate had diminished in value owing to
agrarian troubles in Bohemia, she repurchased it from him (1776) on
generous terms. Loudon then settled at Hadersdorf near Vienna, and
shortly afterwards was made a field-marshal. Of this Carlyle (_Frederick
the Great_) records that when Frederick the Great met Loudon in 1776 he
deliberately addressed him in the emperor's presence as "Herr
Feldmarschall." But the hint was not taken until February 1778.

In 1778 came the War of the Bavarian Succession. Joseph and Lacy were
now reconciled to Loudon, and Loudon and Lacy commanded the two armies
in the field. On this occasion, however, Loudon seems to have in a
measure fallen below his reputation, while Lacy, who was opposed to
Frederick's own army, earned new laurels. For two years after this
Loudon lived quietly at Hadersdorf, and then the reverses of other
generals in the Turkish War called him for the last time into the field.
Though old and broken in health, he was commander-in-chief in fact as
well as in name, and he won a last brilliant success by capturing
Belgrade in three weeks, 1789. He died within the year, on the 14th of
July at Neu-Titschein in Moravia, still on duty. His last appointment
was that of commander-in-chief of the armed forces of Austria, which had
been created for him by the new emperor Leopold. Loudon was buried in
the grounds of Hadersdorf. Eight years before his death the emperor
Joseph had caused a marble bust of this great soldier to be placed in
the chamber of the council of war.

His son JOHANN LUDWIG ALEXIUS, Freiherr von Loudon (1762-1822) fought in
the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars with credit, and rose to the rank
of lieutenant-field-marshal.

  See memoir by v. Arneth in _Allgemeine deutsche Biographie_, s.v.
  "Laudon," and life by G. B. Malleson.


  [1] His name is phonetically spelt Laudon or Laudohn by Germans, and
    the latter form was that adopted by himself and his family. In 1759,
    however, he reverted to the original Scottish form.

LOUDOUN, JOHN CAMPBELL, 1ST EARL OF (1598-1663), Scottish politician,
eldest son of Sir James Campbell of Lawers, became Baron Loudoun in
right of his wife Margaret, granddaughter of Hugh Campbell, 1st Baron
Loudoun (d. 1622). He was created earl on the 12th of May 1633, but in
consequence of his opposition to Charles I.'s church policy in Scotland
the patent was stopped in Chancery. In 1637 he was one of the
supplicants against the introduction of the English liturgy; and with
John Leslie, 6th earl of Rothes, he took a leading part in the
promulgation of the Covenant and in the General Assembly which met at
Glasgow in the autumn of 1638. He served under General Leslie, and was
one of the Scottish commissioners at the Pacification of Berwick in June
1639. In November of that year and again in 1640 the Scottish estates
sent Loudoun with Charles Seton, 2nd earl of Dunfermline, to London on
an embassy to Charles I. Loudoun intrigued with the French ambassador
and with Thomas Savile, afterwards earl of Sussex, but without much
success. He was in London when John Stewart, earl of Traquair, placed in
Charles's hands a letter signed by Loudoun and six others and addressed
to Louis XIII. In spite of his protest that the letter was never sent,
and that it would in any case be covered by the amnesty granted at
Berwick, he was sent to the Tower. He was released in June, and two
months later he re-entered England with the Scottish invading army, and
was one of the commissioners at Ripon in October. In the following
August (1641) Charles opened parliament at Edinburgh in person, and in
pursuance of a policy of conciliation towards the leaders of the
Covenant Loudoun was made lord chancellor of Scotland, and his title of
earl of Loudoun was allowed. He also became first commissioner of the
treasury. In 1642 he was sent by the Scottish council to York to offer
to mediate in the dispute between Charles and the parliament, and later
on to Oxford, but in the second of these instances Charles refused to
accept his authority. He was constantly employed in subsequent
negotiations, and in 1647 was sent to Charles at Carisbrooke Castle, but
the "Engagement" to assist the king there made displeased the extreme
Covenanters, and Loudoun was obliged to retract his support of it. He
was now entirely on the side of the duke of Argyll and the preachers. He
assisted in the capacity of lord chancellor at Charles II.'s coronation
at Scone, and was present at Dunbar. He joined in the royalist rising of
1653, but eventually surrendered to General Monk. His estates were
forfeited by Cromwell, and a sum of money settled on the countess and
her heirs. At the Restoration he was removed from the chancellorship,
but a pension of £1000 granted him by Charles I. in 1643 was still
allowed him. In 1662 he was heavily fined. He died in Edinburgh on the
15th of March 1663.

  The earl's elder son, James (d. 1684), 2nd earl of Loudoun, passed his
  life out of Great Britain, and when he died at Leiden was succeeded by
  his son Hugh (d. 1731). The 3rd earl held various high positions in
  England and Scotland, being chosen one of the representative peers for
  Scotland at the union of the parliaments in 1707. He rendered good
  service to the government during the rising of 1715, especially at the
  battle of Sheriffmuir, and was succeeded as 4th earl by his son John
  (1705-1782), who fought against the Jacobites in 1745, was
  commander-in-chief of the British force in America in 1756 and died
  unmarried. The title then passed to James Mure Campbell (d. 1786), a
  grandson of the 2nd earl, and was afterwards borne by the marquesses
  of Hastings, descendants of the 5th earl's daughter and heiress, Flora
  (1780-1840). Again reverting to a female on the death of Henry, 4th
  marquess of Hastings, in 1868, it came afterwards to Charles (b.
  1855), a nephew of this marquess, who became 11th earl of Loudoun.

LOUDUN, a town of western France, capital of an arrondissement in the
department of Vienne, on an eminence overlooking a fertile plain, 45 m.
by rail S.W. of Tours. Pop. (1906) 3931. It was formerly surrounded by
walls, of which a single gateway and two towers remain. Of the old
castle of the counts of Anjou which was destroyed under Richelieu, the
site now forming a public promenade, a fine rectangular donjon of the
12th century is preserved; at its base traces of Roman constructions
have been found, with fragments of porphyry pavement, mosaics and mural
paintings. The Carmelite convent was the scene of the trial of Urban
Grandier, who was burnt alive for witchcraft in 1634; the old Romanesque
church of Sainte Croix, of which he was curé, is now used as a market.
The church of St Pierre-du-Marché, Gothic in style with a Renaissance
portal, has a lofty stone spire. There are several curious old houses in
the town. Théophraste Renaudot (d. 1653), founder of the _Gazette de
France_, was born at Loudun, where there is a statue of him. The
manufacture of lace and upholstery trimming and of farm implements is
carried on, and there is a considerable trade in agricultural products,
wine, &c. Loudun (_Laudunum_ in ancient times) was a town of importance
during the religious wars and gave its name in 1616 to a treaty
favourable to the Protestants.

LOUGHBOROUGH, a market town and municipal borough in the Loughborough
(Mid) parliamentary division of Leicestershire, England, near the river
Soar and on the Loughborough canal. Pop. (1901) 21,508. It is 110 m.
N.N.W. of London by the Midland railway, and is served by the Great
Central and a branch of the London and North-Western railways. The
neighbourhood is a rich agricultural district, and to the S.W. lies the
hilly tract known as Charnwood Forest. The church of All Saints stands
on rising ground, and is a conspicuous object for many miles round; it
is of Decorated work, and the tower is Perpendicular. The other churches
are modern. Public buildings include the town hall and exchange, town
offices, county hall and free library. The grammar school, founded in
1495 under the charity of Thomas Burton, occupies modern buildings in
pleasant grounds. There is also a girls' grammar school partly dependent
on the same foundation. The principal industry is hosiery making; there
are also engineering, iron and dye works and bell foundries. The great
bell for St Paul's cathedral, London, was cast here in 1881.
Loughborough was incorporated in 1888. Area, 3045 acres.

The manor of Loughborough (_Lucteburne, Lucteburg, Lughteburgh_) was
granted by William the Conqueror to Hugh Lupus, from whom it passed to
the Despensers. In 1226-1227 when it belonged to Hugh Despenser he
obtained various privileges for himself and his men and tenants there,
among which were quittance from suits at the county and hundred courts,
of sheriffs' aids and of view of frankpledge, and also a market every
Thursday and a fair on the vigil, day and morrow of St Peter ad vincula.
The market rights were purchased by the town in 1880 from the trustees
of Thomas Cradock, late lord of the manor. Edward II. visited the manor
several times when it belonged to his favourite, Hugh Despenser the
elder. Among the subsequent lords were Henry de Beaumont and Alice his
wife, Sir Edward Hastings, created Baron Hastings of Loughborough in
1558, Colonel Henry Hastings, created baron in 1645, and the earls of
Huntingdon. Alexander Wedderburn was created Baron Loughborough in 1780
when he became chief justice of the common pleas. During the 19th
century most of the manorial rights were purchased by the local board.
Loughborough was at first governed by a bailiff, afterwards by a local
board, and was finally incorporated in 1888 under a mayor, 6 aldermen
and 18 councillors. It has never been represented in parliament.
Lace-making was formerly the chief industry, but machines for making
lace set up in the town by John Heathcote were destroyed by the Luddites
in 1816, and the manufacture lost its importance. Bell-founding was
introduced in 1840. John Cleveland, the Royalist poet, was born at
Loughborough in 1613, John Howe the painter in 1630 and Richard Pulteney
the botanist in 1730.

  See _Victoria County History, Leicestershire_; W. G. D. Fletcher,
  _Chapters in the History of Loughborough_ (1883); Sir Thomas Pochin,
  "Historical Description of Loughborough" (1770) (vol. viii. of
  _Bibliotheca topographica Britannica_).

LOUGHREA, a market town of Co. Galway, Ireland, pleasantly situated on
the N. shore of Lough Rea, 116 m. W. from Dublin by a branch from
Attymon Junction on the Midland Great Western railway. Pop. (1901),
2815. There are slight remains of an Early English Carmelite friary
dating c. 1300, which escaped the Dissolution. Loughrea is the seat of
the Roman Catholic bishop of Clonfert, and has a cathedral built in
1900-1905. A part of the castle of Richard de Burgh, the founder of the
friary, still survives, and there are traces of the town fortifications.
In the neighbourhood are a cromlech and two ruined towers, and crannogs,
or ancient stockaded islands, have been discovered in the lough. Apart
from the surroundings of the lough, the neighbouring country is
peculiarly desolate.

LOUGHTON, an urban district in the Epping parliamentary division of
Essex, England, 11½ m. N.N.E. of Liverpool Street station, London, by
the Great Eastern railway. Pop. (1901), 4730. This is one of the
villages which has become the centre of a residential district, and is
frequented by holiday-makers from London, owing to its proximity to the
pleasant woodland scenery of Epping Forest. It lies on the eastern
outskirts of the Forest, near the river Roding. There are several modern
churches. The lordship of the manor was granted to Waltham Abbey. In the
vicinity are large earthworks, probably of British origin, known as
Loughton Camp.

LOUHANS, a town of east-central France in the old province of
Franche-Comté, now capital of an arrondissement in the department of
Saône-et-Loire, 34 m. N.N.E. of Mâcon by road. Pop. (1906), 3216. Its
church has a fine tower of the 15th century, of which the balustrade is
carved so as to form the first words of the Ave Maria. There are also a
hospital of the 17th century with a collection of ancient earthenware, a
town-hall of the 18th century and remains of ramparts of the 16th and
17th century. The town is the central market of the agricultural plain
of Bresse; chickens form the chief article of commerce. There is also a
large felt-hat manufactory.

LOUIS, or LEWIS (from the Frankish _Chlodowîch_, _Chlodwig_, Latinized
as _Chlodowius_, _Lodhuwicus_, _Lodhuvicus_, whence--in the Strassburg
oath of 842--O. Fr. _Lodhuwigs_, then _Chlovis_, _Loys_ and later
_Louis_, whence Span. _Luiz_ and--through the Angevin kings--Hungarian
_Lájos_; cf. Ger. _Ludwig_ or _Ludewig_, from O. H. Ger. _Hluduwîc_,
_Hludwîg_, _Ludhuwîg_, M. H. Ger. _Ludewîc_; Ital. _Lodovico_), a
masculine proper name, meaning "Fame-fight" or "Famous in fight," from
old Frankish _chlud_, _chlod_ (O. H. Ger. _hlud_, _hlod_), "fame," and
_wîch_ (O. H. Ger. _wîc_., _wîg_, A.S. _wîg_) "war," "battle" (cf. Gr.
[Greek: Klytsmachos]). The name has been borne by numerous European
sovereigns and others, of whom some are noticed below in the following
order: (1) Roman emperors and Frankish and German kings, (2) kings of
Bavaria, (3) kings of France, (4) kings of Hungary, (5) kings of Naples,
(6) Louis of Nassau. (Louis Philippe, king of the French, is dealt with

LOUIS I. (778-840), surnamed the "Pious," Roman emperor, third son of
the emperor Charlemagne and his wife Hildegarde, was born at Chasseneuil
in central France, and crowned king of Aquitaine in 781. He received a
good education; but as his tastes were ecclesiastical rather than
military, the government of his kingdom was mainly conducted by his
counsellors. Louis, however, gained sound experience in warfare in the
defence of Aquitaine, shared in campaigns against the Saxons and the
Avars, and led an army to Italy in 792. In 794 or 795 he married
Irmengarde, daughter of Ingram, count of Haspen. After the deaths of his
two elder brothers, Louis, at his father's command, crowned himself
co-emperor at Aix-la-Chapelle on the 11th of September 813, and was
formally associated in the government of the Empire, of which he became
sole ruler, in the following January. He earned the surname of "Pious"
by banishing his sisters and others of immoral life from court; by
attempting to reform and purify monastic life; and by showing great
liberality to the church. In October 816 he was crowned emperor at Reims
by Pope Stephen IV.; and at Aix in July 817, he arranged for a division
of his Empire among his sons. This was followed by a revolt of his
nephew, Bernard, king of Italy; but the rising was easily suppressed,
and Bernard was mutilated and killed. The emperor soon began to repent
of this cruelty, and when his remorse had been accentuated by the death
of his wife in 818, he pardoned the followers of Bernard and restored
their estates, and in 822 did public penance at Attigny. In 819 he
married Judith, daughter of Welf I., count of Bavaria, who in 823 bore
him a son Charles, afterwards called the Bald. Judith made unceasing
efforts to secure a kingdom for her child; and with the support of her
eldest step-son Lothair, a district was carved out for Charles in 829.
Discontent at this arrangement increased to the point of rebellion,
which broke out the following year, provoked by Judith's intrigues with
Bernard, count of Barcelona, whom she had installed as her favourite at
court. Lothair and his brother Pippin joined the rebels, and after
Judith had been sent into a convent and Bernard had fled to Spain, an
assembly was held at Compiègne, when Louis was practically deposed and
Lothair became the real ruler of the Empire. Sympathy was, however, soon
aroused for the emperor, who was treated as a prisoner, and a second
assembly was held at Nimwegen in October 830 when, with the concurrence
of his sons Pippin and Louis, he was restored to power and Judith
returned to court.

Further trouble between Pippin and his father led to the nominal
transfer of Aquitaine from Pippin to his brother Charles in 831. The
emperor's plans for a division of his dominions then led to a revolt of
his three sons. Louis met them in June 833 near Kolmar, but owing
possibly to the influence of Pope Gregory IV., who took part in the
negotiations, he found himself deserted by his supporters, and the
treachery and falsehood which marked the proceedings gave to the place
the name of _Lügenfeld_, or the "field of lies." Judith, charged with
infidelity, was again banished; Louis was sent into the monastery of St
Medard at Soissons; and the government of the Empire was assumed by his
sons. The emperor was forced to confess his sins, and declare himself
unworthy of the throne, but Lothair did not succeed in his efforts to
make his father a monk. Sympathy was again felt for Louis, and when the
younger Louis had failed to induce Lothair to treat the emperor in a
more becoming fashion, he and Pippin took up arms on behalf of their
father. The result was that in March 834 Louis was restored to power at
St Denis; Judith once more returned to his side and the kingdoms of
Louis and Pippin were increased. The struggle with Lothair continued
until the autumn, when he submitted to the emperor and was confined to
Italy. To make the restoration more complete, a great assembly at
Diedenhofen declared the deposition of Louis to have been contrary to
law, and a few days later he was publicly restored in the cathedral of
Metz. In December 838 Pippin died, and a new arrangement was made by
which the Empire, except Bavaria, the kingdom of Louis, was divided
between Lothair, now reconciled to his father, and Charles. The emperor
was returning from suppressing a revolt on the part of his son Louis,
provoked by this disposition, when he died on the 20th of June 840 on an
island in the Rhine near Ingelheim. He was buried in the church of St
Arnulf at Metz. Louis was a man of strong frame, who loved the chase,
and did not shrink from the hardships of war. He was, however, easily
influenced and was unequal to the government of the Empire bequeathed to
him by his father. No sustained effort was made to ward off the inroads
of the Danes and others, who were constantly attacking the borders of
the Empire. Louis, who is also called _Le Débonnaire_, counts as Louis
I., king of France.

  See _Annales Fuldenses_; _Annales Bertiniani_; Thegan, _Vita
  Hludowici_; the _Vita Hludowici_ attributed to Astronomus; Ermoldus
  Nigellus, _In honorem Hludowici imperatoris_; Nithard, _Historiarum
  libri_, all in the _Monumenta Germaniae historica_. _Scriptores_,
  Bände i. and ii. (Hanover and Berlin, 1826 fol.); E. Mühlbacher, _Die
  Regesten des Kaiserreichs unter den Karolingern_ (Innsbruck, 1881);
  and _Deutsche Geschichte unter den Karolingern_ (Stuttgart, 1886); B.
  Simson, _Jahrbücher des fränkischen Reichs unter Ludwig dem Frommen_
  (Leipzig, 1874-1876); and E. Dümmler, _Geschichte des ostfränkischen
  Reiches_ (Leipzig, 1887-1888).     (A. W. H.*)

LOUIS II. (825-875), Roman emperor, eldest son of the emperor Lothair
I., was designated king of Italy in 839, and taking up his residence in
that country was crowned king at Rome by Pope Sergius II. on the 15th of
June 844. He at once preferred a claim to the rights of an emperor in
the city, which was decisively rejected; but in 850 he was crowned joint
emperor at Rome by Pope Leo IV., and soon afterwards married his cousin,
Engelberga, a daughter of King Louis the German, and undertook the
independent government of Italy. He took the field against the Saracens;
quashed some accusations against Pope Leo; held a diet at Pavia; and on
the death of his father in September 855 became sole emperor. The
division of Lothair's dominions, by which he obtained no territory
outside Italy, aroused his discontent, and in 857 he allied himself with
Louis the German against his brother Lothair, king of Lorraine, and
King Charles the Bald. But after Louis had secured the election of
Nicholas I. as pope in 858, he became reconciled with his brother, and
received some lands south of the Jura in return for assistance given to
Lothair in his efforts to obtain a divorce from his wife, Teutberga. In
863, on the death of his brother Charles, Louis received the kingdom of
Provence, and in 864 came into collision with Pope Nicholas I. over his
brother's divorce. The archbishops, who had been deposed by Nicholas for
proclaiming this marriage invalid, obtained the support of the emperor,
who reached Rome with an army in February 864; but, having been seized
with fever, he made peace with the pope and left the city. In his
efforts to restore order in Italy, Louis met with considerable success
both against the turbulent princes of the peninsula and against the
Saracens who were ravaging southern Italy. In 866 he routed these
invaders, but could not follow up his successes owing to the want of a
fleet. So in 869 he made an alliance with the eastern emperor, Basil I.,
who sent him some ships to assist in the capture of Bari, the
headquarters of the Saracens, which succumbed in 871. Meanwhile his
brother Lothair had died in 869, and owing to his detention in southern
Italy he was unable to prevent the partition of Lorraine between Louis
the German and Charles the Bald. Some jealousy between Louis and Basil
followed the victory at Bari, and in reply to an insult from the eastern
emperor Louis attempted to justify his right to the title "emperor of
the Romans." He had withdrawn into Benevento to prepare for a further
campaign, when he was treacherously attacked in his palace, robbed and
imprisoned by Adelchis, prince of Benevento, in August 871. The landing
of fresh bands of Saracens compelled Adelchis to release his prisoner a
month later, and Louis was forced to swear he would take no revenge for
this injury, nor ever enter Benevento with an army. Returning to Rome,
he was released from his oath, and was crowned a second time as emperor
by Pope Adrian II. on the 18th of May 872. He won further successes
against the Saracens, who were driven from Capua, but the attempts of
the emperor to punish Adelchis were not very successful. Returning to
northern Italy, he died, somewhere in the province of Brescia, on the
12th of August 875, and was buried in the church of St Ambrose at Milan,
having named as his successor in Italy his cousin Carloman, son of Louis
the German. Louis was an excellent ruler, of whom it was said "in his
time there was great peace, because every one could enjoy his own

  See _Annales Bertiniani_, _Chronica S. Benedicti Casinensis_, both in
  the _Monumenta Germaniae historica, Scriptores_, Bände i. and iii.
  (Hanover and Berlin, 1826 fol.); E. Mühlbacher, _Die Regesten des
  Kaiserreichs unter den Karolingern_ (Innsbruck, 1881); Th. Sickel,
  _Acta regum et imperatorum Karolinorum, digesta et enarrata_ (Vienna,
  1867-1868); and E. Dümmler, _Geschichte des ostfränkischen Reiches_
  (Leipzig, 1887-1888).     (A. W. H.*)

LOUIS III. (c. 880-928), surnamed the "Blind," Roman emperor, was a son
of Boso, king of Provence or Lower Burgundy, and Irmengarde, daughter of
the emperor Louis II. The emperor Charles the Fat took Louis under his
protection on the death of Boso in 887; but Provence was in a state of
wild disorder, and it was not until 890, when Irmengarde had secured the
support of the Bavarian king Arnulf and of Pope Stephen V., that Louis
was recognized as king. In 900, after the death of the emperor Arnulf,
he went to Italy to obtain the imperial crown. He was chosen king of the
Lombards at Pavia, and crowned emperor at Rome in February 901 by Pope
Benedict IV. He gained a temporary authority in northern Italy, but was
soon compelled by his rival Berengar, margrave of Friuli, to leave the
country and to swear he would never return. In spite of his oath he went
again to Italy in 904, where he secured the submission of Lombardy; but
on the 21st of July 905 he was surprised at Verona by Berengar, who
deprived him of his sight and sent him back to Provence, where he passed
his days in enforced inactivity until his death in September 928. He
married Adelaide, possibly a daughter of Rudolph I., king of Upper
Burgundy. His eldest son, Charles Constantine, succeeded to no more than
the county of Vienne.

  See _Forschungen zur deutschen Geschichte_, Bände ix. and x.
  (Göttingen, 1862-1886); E. Dümmler, _Geschichte des ostfränkischen
  Reichs_ (Leipzig, 1887-1888); and _Gesta Berengarii imperatoris_
  (Halle, 1871); and F. de Gingins-la-Sarra. _Mémoires pour servir à
  l'histoire de Provence et de Bourgogne Jurane_ (Zürich, 1851).
       (A. W. H.*)

LOUIS IV., or V. (c. 1287-1347), surnamed the Bavarian, Roman emperor
and duke of Upper Bavaria, was the second son of Louis II., duke of
Upper Bavaria and count palatine of the Rhine, and Matilda, daughter of
the German king Rudolph I. Having lost his father in 1294 he inherited,
jointly with his elder brother Rudolph, Upper Bavaria and the
Palatinate, but passed his time mainly at the court of the Habsburgs in
Vienna, while his early experiences of warfare were gained in the
campaigns of his uncle, the German king Albert I. He was soon at
variance with his brother over their joint possessions. Albert taking
the part of Louis in this quarrel, Rudolph promised in 1301 to admit his
brother to a share in the government of Bavaria and the Palatinate. When
Albert was murdered in May 1308, Louis became a candidate for the German
throne; but his claim was not strongly supported. The new king, Henry
VII., was very friendly with Rudolph, and as the promise of 1301 had not
been carried out, Louis demanded a partition of their lands. Upper
Bavaria was accordingly divided in 1310, and Louis received the
north-western part of the duchy; but Rudolph refused to surrender any
part of the Palatinate. In 1310, on the death of Stephen I., duke of
Lower Bavaria, Louis undertook the guardianship of his two young sons.
This led to a war between the brothers, which lasted till June 1313,
when peace was made at Munich. Many of the nobles in Lower Bavaria,
however, angered at Louis, called in the aid of Frederick I. (the Fair),
duke of Austria; but he was defeated at Gammelsdorf on the 9th of
November 1313, a victory which not only led to peace, but conferred
considerable renown on Louis.

In August 1313 the German throne had again become vacant, and Louis was
chosen at Frankfort on the 20th of October 1314 by a majority of the
electors, and his coronation followed at Aix-la-Chapelle on the 25th of
November. A minority of princes had, however, supported Frederick of
Austria; and a war followed between the rivals, during which Louis was
supported by the cities and the districts of the middle and lower Rhine.
His embarrassments were complicated by a renewal of the dispute with his
brother; but when this had been disposed of in 1317 by Rudolph's
renunciation of his claims on upper Bavaria and the Palatinate in
consideration of a yearly subsidy, Louis was able to give undivided
attention to the war with Frederick, and obtained several fresh allies.
On the 28th of September 1322 a battle was fought at Mühldorf, which
ended in a complete victory for Louis, owing mainly to the timely aid of
Frederick IV. of Hohenzollern, burgrave of Nüremburg. Frederick of
Austria was taken prisoner, but the struggle was continued by his
brother Leopold until the latter's death in 1326. Attempts to enable the
two kings to rule Germany jointly failed, and about 1326 Frederick
returned to Austria, leaving Louis in undisputed possession of the
country. Before this conclusion, however, a new enemy had taken the
field. Supported by Philip V. of France in his desire to free Italy
entirely from German influence, Pope John XXII. refused to recognize
either Frederick or Louis, and asserted his own right to administer the
empire during a vacancy. After the battle of Mühldorf Louis sent
Berthold of Neifen, count of Marstetten, into Italy with an army, which
soon compelled the papal troops to raise the siege at Milan. The pope
threatened Louis with excommunication unless he resigned his kingdom
within three months. The king thereupon appealed to a general council,
and was placed under the papal ban on the 23rd of March 1324, a sentence
which he answered by publishing his charges against the pope. In the
contest Louis was helped by the Minorites, who were upholding against
John the principal of clerical poverty, and by the writings of Marsilius
of Padua (who dedicated to Louis his _Defensor pacis_), William of
Occam, John of Jandun and others. Taking the offensive, Louis met his
Ghibelline supporters at Trent and reached Italy in March 1327; and in
May he received the Lombard crown at Milan. Although the pope renewed
his fulminations Louis compelled Pisa to surrender, and was hailed with
great rejoicing in Rome. On the 17th of January 1328 he was crowned
emperor in St Peter's by Sciarra Colonna, a Roman noble; and he answered
the continued attacks of Pope John by pronouncing his deposition, and
proclaiming Peter of Corvara pope as Nicholas V. He then undertook an
expedition against John's ally, Robert, king of Naples, but, disunion
among his troops and scarcity of money and provisions, drove him again
to Rome, where, finding that his exactions had diminished his
popularity, he left the city, and after passing six months at Pisa,
returned to Germany in January 1330. The struggle with the pope was
renewed in Germany, and when a formidable league had been formed against
Louis, his thoughts turned to a reconciliation. He was prepared to
assent to very humiliating terms, and even agreed to abdicate; but the
negotiations, which were prolonged by further demands on the part of the
pope, were interrupted by his death in December 1334. John's successor,
Benedict XII., seemed more anxious to come to an arrangement, but was
prevented from doing so by the influence of Philip VI. of France.
Overtures for peace were made to Philip, but without success; and in
July 1337 Louis concluded an alliance with Edward III., king of England,
and made active preparations for war. During these years his attention
was also occupied by a quarrel with John, king of Bohemia, over the
possession of Tirol, by a campaign in Lower Bavaria, and a futile
expedition against Nicholas I., bishop of Constance. But although his
position was shaken by the indifferent success which attended these
campaigns, it was improved when the electors meeting at Rense in July
1338 banded themselves together to defend their elective rights, and
when the diet at Frankfort confirmed a decree which declared that the
German king did not need the papal approbation to make his election

Louis devoted considerable thought and time to extending the possessions
of the Wittelsbach family, to which he belonged. Tirol had for some time
been a subject of contention between the emperor and other princes. The
heiress of this county, Margaret Maultasch, had married John Henry,
margrave of Moravia, son of King John of Bohemia. Having quarrelled with
her husband, Margaret fled to the protection of Louis, who seized the
opportunity to declare her marriage void and to unite her in 1342 with
his son Louis. The emperor also increased his possessions by his own
marriage. In 1322 his first wife, Beatrice, daughter of Henry III.,
count of Glogau, had died after thirteen years of married life, and
Louis then married Margaret, daughter of William III., count of Holland.
When her brother, count William IV., died childless in 1345, the emperor
obtained possession of Holland, Zealand and Friesland. In 1341 he
recovered a portion of the Palatinate, and soon deserted Edward of
England and came to terms with Philip of France. The acquisition of the
territories, and especially of Tirol, had provided Louis with many
enemies, prominent among whom were John of Bohemia and his family, that
of Luxemburg. John, therefore, entered into an alliance with Pope
Clement VI. The course of the war which ensued in Germany was such as to
compel the emperor to submit to humiliating terms, though he stopped
short of accepting the election of Charles, margrave of Moravia
(afterwards the emperor Charles IV.) as German king in July 1346.
Charles consequently attacked Tirol; but Louis, who appeared to have
considerable chances of success, died suddenly at a bear-hunt near
Munich on the 11th of October 1347. He was buried in the Frauenkirche at
Munich, where a statue was erected to his memory in 1622 by Maximilian
I., elector of Bavaria, and where a second was unveiled in 1905. He had
seven sons, three of whom were subsequently electors of Brandenburg, and
ten daughters.

Various estimates have been formed of the character of Louis. As a
soldier he possessed skill as well as bravery, but he lacked
perseverance and decision in his political relations. At one time
haughtily defying the pope, at another abjectly craving his pardon, he
seems a very inglorious figure; and the fact that he remained almost
undisturbed in the possession of Germany in spite of the utmost efforts
of the popes, is due rather to the political and intellectual
tendencies of the time than to his own good qualities. Nevertheless he
ruled Bavaria with considerable success. He befriended the towns,
encouraged trade and commerce and gave a new system of laws to the
duchy. German took the place of Latin in the imperial charters, and
although not a scholar, the emperor was a patron of learning. Louis was
a man of graceful appearance, with ruddy countenance and prominent nose.

  BIBLIOGRAPHY.--Many of the authorities for the life and reign of Louis
  are found in the _Fontes rerum Germanicarum_, Bände i. and iv., edited
  by J. F. Böhmer (Stuttgart, 1843-1868). Among these is the _Vita
  Ludovici IV._, by an unknown author. A number of important documents
  are found in the _Regesta imperii_ 1314-1347, edited by J. F. Böhmer
  and J. Ficker (Innsbruck, 1865); _Acta imperii selecta_, edited by J.
  F. Böhmer and J. Ficker (Innsbruck, 1870); _Urkunden zur Geschichte
  des Römerzuges Königs Ludwigs des Bayern_, edited by J. Ficker
  (Innsbruck, 1865); _Urkundliche Beiträge zur Geschichte Kaisers
  Ludwigs IV._, edited by C. Höfler (Munich, 1839); _Vatikanische
  Urkunden zur Geschichte Kaisers Ludwigs des Bayern_, Bände v. and vi.
  (Stuttgart, 1877-1888); _Vatikanische Akten zur Deutschen Geschichte
  in der Zeit Kaisers Ludwigs des Bayern_, edited by S. Riezler
  (Innsbruck, 1891). In the _Forschungen zur Deutschen Geschichte_
  (Göttingen, 1862-1886), Band xx., is found _Urkunden zur Bairischen
  und Deutschen Geschichte 1256-1343_, edited by S. Riezler; and in Band
  xiii. is C. Häutle's _Beiträge zum Itinerar Kaiser Ludwigs_.

  The following may also be consulted: C. Gewoldus, _Defensio Ludovici
  IV. contra A. Bzovium_ (Ingolstadt, 1618); J. G. Herwartus, _Ludovicus
  IV. imperator defensus_ (Mainz, 1618); N. Burgundus, _Historia
  Bavarica sive Ludovicus IV. imperator_ (Ingolstadt, 1636). The best
  modern authorities are F. von Weech, _Kaiser Ludwig der Bayer und
  König Johann von Böhmen_ (Munich, 1860); S. Riezler, _Die
  literarischen Widersacher der Päpste zur Zeit Ludwigs des Bayern_
  (Leipzig, 1874); C. Mühling, _Die Geschichte der Doppelwahl des Jahres
  1314_ (Munich, 1882); R. Döbner, _Die Auseinandersetzung zwischen
  Ludwig IV. dem Bayern und Friedrich dem Schönen von Oesterreich_
  (Göttingen, 1875); W. Altmann, _Der Römerzug Ludwigs des Bayern_
  (Berlin, 1886); A. Chroust, _Beiträge zur Geschichte Ludwigs des
  Bayern und seiner Zeit_ (Gotha, 1877); K. Müller, _Der Kampf Ludwigs
  des Bayern mit der römischen Curie_ (Tübingen, 1879-1880); W. Preger,
  _Der Kirchenpolitische Kampf unter Ludwig dem Bayern_ (Munich, 1877);
  Sievers, _Die politischen Beziehungen Kaiser Ludwigs des Bayern zu
  Frankreich_ (Berlin, 1896); Steinberger, _Kaiser Ludwig der Bayer_
  (Münich, 1901); and Ueding, _Ludwig der Bayer und die
  niederrheinischen Städte_ (Paderborn, 1904).     (A. W. H.*)

LOUIS (804-876) surnamed the "German," king of the East Franks, was the
third son of the emperor Louis I. and his wife Irmengarde. His early
years were partly spent at the court of his grandfather Charlemagne,
whose special affection he is said to have won. When the emperor Louis
divided his dominions between his sons in 817, Louis received Bavaria
and the neighbouring lands, but did not undertake the government until
825, when he became involved in war with the Slavonic tribes on his
eastern frontier. In 827 he married Emma, daughter of Welf I., count of
Bavaria, and sister of his stepmother Judith; and he soon began to
interfere in the quarrels arising from Judith's efforts to secure a
kingdom for her own son Charles, and the consequent struggles of Louis
and his brothers with the emperor Louis I. (q.v.). When the elder Louis
died in 840 and his eldest son Lothair claimed the whole Empire, Louis
in alliance with his half-brother, king Charles the Bald, defeated
Lothair at Fontenoy on the 25th of June 841. In June 842 the three
brothers met on an island in the Sâone to negotiate a peace, and each
appointed forty representatives to arrange the boundaries of their
respective kingdoms. This developed into the treaty of Verdun concluded
in August 843, by which Louis received the bulk of the lands of the
Carolingian empire lying east of the Rhine, together with a district
around Spires, Worms and Mainz, on the left bank of the river. His
territories included Bavaria, where he made Regensburg the centre of his
government, Thuringia, Franconia and Saxony. He may truly be called the
founder of the German kingdom, though his attempts to maintain the unity
of the Empire proved futile. Having in 842 crushed a rising in Saxony,
he compelled the Abotrites to own his authority, and undertook campaigns
against the Bohemians, the Moravians and other tribes, but was not very
successful in freeing his shores from the ravages of Danish pirates. At
his instance synods and assemblies were held where laws were decreed
for the better government of church and state. In 853 and the following
years Louis made more than one attempt to secure the throne of
Aquitaine, which the people of that country offered him in their disgust
with the cruel misrule of Charles the Bald. But though he met with
sufficient success to encourage him to issue a charter in 858, dated
"the first year of the reign in West Francia," treachery and desertion
in his army, and the loyalty to Charles of the Aquitanian bishops
brought about the failure of the enterprise, which Louis renounced by a
treaty signed at Coblenz on the 7th of June 860.

In 855 the emperor Lothair died, and was succeeded in Italy by his
eldest son Louis II., and in the northern part of his kingdom by his
second son, Lothair. The comparative weakness of these kingdoms,
together with the disorder caused by the matrimonial troubles of
Lothair, afforded a suitable opening for the intrigues of Louis and
Charles the Bald, whose interest was increased by the fact that both
their nephews were without male issue. Louis supported Lothair in his
efforts to divorce his wife Teutberga, for which he received a promise
of Alsace, while Charles opposed the divorce. But in 865 Louis and
Charles meeting near Toul, renewed the peace of Coblenz, and doubtless
discussed the possibility of dividing Lothair's kingdom. In 868 at Metz
they agreed definitely to a partition; but when Lothair died in 869,
Louis was lying seriously ill, and his armies were engaged with the
Moravians. Charles the Bald accordingly seized the whole kingdom; but
Louis, having recovered, compelled him by a threat of war to agree to
the treaty of Mersen, which divided it between the claimants. The later
years of Louis were troubled by risings on the part of his sons, the
eldest of whom, Carloman, revolted in 861 and again two years later; an
example that was followed by the second son Louis, who in a further
rising was joined by his brother Charles. A report that the emperor
Louis II. was dead led to peace between father and sons. The emperor,
however, was not dead, but a prisoner; and as he was not only the
nephew, but also the son-in-law of Louis, that monarch hoped to secure
both the imperial dignity and the Italian kingdom for his son Carloman.
Meeting his daughter Engelberga, the wife of Louis II., at Trent in 872,
Louis made an alliance with her against Charles the Bald, and in 874
visited Italy doubtless on the same errand. The emperor, having named
Carloman as his successor, died in August 875, but Charles the Bald
reached Italy before his rival, and by persuading Carloman, when he did
cross the Alps, to return, secured the imperial crown. Louis was
preparing for war when he died on the 28th of September 876 at
Frankfort, and was buried at Lorsch, leaving three sons and three
daughters. Louis was in war and peace alike, the most competent of the
descendants of Charlemagne. He obtained for his kingdom a certain degree
of security in face of the attacks of Normans, Hungarians, Moravians and
others. He lived in close alliance with the Church, to which he was very
generous, and entered eagerly into schemes for the conversion of his
heathen neighbours.

  See _Annales Fuldenses_; _Annales Bertiniani_; Nithard, _Historiarum
  Libri_, all in the _Monumenta Germaniae historica_. _Scriptores_,
  Bände i. and ii. (Hanover and Berlin, 1826 seq.); E. Dümmler,
  _Geschichte des ostfränkischen Reiches_ (Leipzig, 1887-1888); Th.
  Sickel, _Die Urkunden Ludwigs des Deutschen_ (Vienna, 1861-1862); E.
  Mühlbacher, _Die Regesten des Kaiserreichs unter den Karolingern_
  (Innsbruck, 1881); and A. Krohn, _Ludwig der Deutsche_ (Saarbrücken,
  1872).     (A. W. H.*)

LOUIS I., king of Bavaria (1786-1868), son of the then prince,
afterwards duke and elector, Max Joseph of Zweibrücken and his wife
Princess Augusta of Hesse-Darmstadt ( -1796), was born at Strassburg on
the 25th of August 1786. He received a careful education at home,
afterwards (in 1803) going to the Bavarian national university of
Landshut and to Göttingen. As a young man he was drawn into the Romantic
movement then at its height; but both the classics and contemporary
classical poetry took hold upon his receptive mind (he visited Goethe in
1827). He had himself strong artistic tendencies, though his numerous
poems show but little proof of this, and as a patron of the arts he
proved himself as great as any who had ever occupied a German, throne,
and more than a mere dilettante. His first visit to Italy, in 1804, had
an important influence upon this side of his development.

But even in Italy the crown prince (his father had become elector in
1799 and king of Bavaria in 1805) did not forget his nationality. He
soon made himself leader of the small anti-French party in Bavaria.
Napoleon sought in vain to win him over, and Louis fell more and more
out of favour with him. Napoleon was even reported to have said: "Qui
m'empêche de laisser fusiller ce prince?" Their relations continued to
be strained, although in the campaigns of 1807 and 1809, in which
Bavaria was among the allies of France, Louis won his laurels in the

The crown prince was also averse from a Napoleonic marriage, and
preferred to marry (October 12, 1810) the Princess Therese of
Saxe-Hildburghausen (1792-1854). Three daughters and four sons were born
of this marriage, one of whom succeeded him as Maximilian II., while
another, Luitpold, became prince regent of Bavaria on the death of Louis

During the time that he was crown prince Louis resided chiefly at
Innsbruck or Salzburg as governor of the circle of the Inn and Salzach.
In 1815 he attended the Congress of Vienna, where he was especially
occupied in endeavouring to obtain the restoration of Alsace and
Lorraine to Germany; and later in the year he was with the allies in
Paris, using his influence to secure the return of the art treasures
carried off by the French.

After 1815 also the crown prince maintained his anti-French attitude,
and it was mainly his influence that in 1817 secured the fall of
Montgelas, the minister with French sympathies. Opposed to absolutism,
Louis took great interest in the work of organizing the Bavarian
constitution (1818) and defended it against Metternich and the Carlsbad
Decrees (1819); he was also one of the most zealous of the ardent
Philhellenes in Germany at the time. He succeeded to the crown of
Bavaria on the 12th of October 1825, and at once embarked upon a
moderate constitutional policy, in which he found himself in general
agreement with the parliament. Although he displayed a loyal attachment
to the Catholic Church, especially owing to his artistic sympathies, he
none the less opposed all its more exaggerated pretensions, especially
as represented by the Jesuits, whom he condemned as un-German. In the
year of his accession he abolished an old edict concerning the
censorship. He also furthered in many ways the internal administration
of the state, and especially that of the finances. His personal tastes,
apart from his activities as a Maecenas, being economical, he
endeavoured also to limit public expenditure, in a way which was not
always a benefit to the country. Bavaria's power of self-defence
especially was weakened by his economies and by his lack of interest in
the military aspect of things.

He was a warm friend of learning, and in 1826 transferred the university
of Landshut to Munich, where he placed it under his special protection.
Prominent scholars were summoned to it, mostly belonging to the Romantic
School, such as Goerres, Schubert and Schelling, though others were not
discouraged. In the course of his visits to Italy he formed friendships
with famous artists such as Thorwaldsen and Cornelius. He was especially
anxious to obtain works of art, mainly sculpture, for the famous Munich
collections which he started, and in this he had the advantage of the
assistance of the painter Martin Wagner. He also set on foot movements
for excavation and the collection of works of art in Greece, with
excellent results.

Under the influence of the July revolution of 1830, however, he also
began to be drawn into the current of reaction; and though he still
declared himself openly against absolutism, and never took up such a
hostile attitude towards constitutional ideas as his brother-in-law King
Frederick William IV., he allowed the reactionary system of surveillance
which commended itself to the German Confederation after 1830 to be
introduced into Bavaria (see BAVARIA: _History_). He continued, on the
other hand, to do much for the economic development of the country. As a
follower of the ideas of Friedrich List, he furthered the foundation of
the Zollverein in the year 1833 and the making of canals. Railways he
looked upon as a "necessary evil."

In external politics peace was maintained on the whole after 1825.
Temporary diplomatic complications arose between Bavaria and Baden in
connexion with Louis's favourite project of winning back the part then
belonging to Baden of the old Palatinate, the land of his birth, which
was always very dear to him.

Of European importance was his enthusiasm for the liberation of Greece
from the rule of Turkey. Not only did he erect the _Propyläen_ at Munich
in her honour, but he also helped her in the most generous way both with
money and diplomatic resources. And after his second son Otto had become
king of Greece in 1832, Greek affairs became from time to time the
central point of his foreign policy. In 1835 he made a visit to Greece,
partly political, partly inspired by his old interest in art. But his
son proved unequal to his task, and in 1862 was forced to abdicate (see
OTHO, KING OF GREECE). For this unfortunate issue Louis was not without
blame; for from the very first, owing to an exaggerated idealism and
love of antiquity, he had totally misunderstood the national character
of the Greeks and the problems involved in the attempts to govern them
by bureaucratic methods.

In Bavaria, too, his government became more and more conservative,
especially after Karl Abel became the head of the ministry in 1837. The
king had not yet, it is true, altogether committed himself to the
clerical ultras, and on the occasion of the dispute about the bishops in
Prussia in the same year had taken up a wise attitude of compromise. But
in Bavaria itself the strict Catholic party influenced affairs more and
more decisively. For a while, indeed, this opposition did not impair the
king's popularity, due to his amiable character, his extraordinary
services in beautifying his capital of Munich, and to his benevolence
(it has been reckoned that he personally received about 10,000 letters
asking for help every year, and that the money he devoted to charity
amounted to about a fifth of his income). The year 1846, however,
brought a change which had sad consequences. This was due to the king's
relations with the Spanish dancer Lola Montez, who appeared in Munich in
October 1846, and soon succeeded by her beauty and wit in fascinating
the king, who was always susceptible to feminine charms. The political
importance of this lay in the fact that the royal mistress began to use
her great influence against the clerical policy of the Abel ministry. So
when the king was preparing the way for ennobling her, in order to
introduce her into court circles, which were unwilling to receive her,
the ministry protested in the famous memorandum of the 11th of February
1847 against the king's demand for her naturalization as a Bavarian, the
necessary preliminary to her ennoblement. The position was still further
embittered by the fact that, owing to an indiscretion, the memorandum
became known to the public. Thereupon the king, irritated and outraged,
replaced Abel's Clerical ministry by a more accommodating Liberal one
under Zu Rhein under which Lola Montez without more difficulty became
Countess Landsberg. Meanwhile, the criticism and opposition of the
people, and especially of the students, was turned against the new
leader of the court of Munich. On top of this came the revolutionary
movement of 1848. The king's position became more and more difficult,
and under the pressure of popular opposition he was forced to banish the
countess. But neither this nor the king's liberal proclamation of the
6th of March succeeded in establishing peace, and in the capital
especially the situation became increasingly threatening. All this made
such a deep impression on the king, that on the 20th of March 1848 he
abdicated in favour of his son Maximilian.

He now retired entirely into private life, and continued to play the
Maecenas magnificently, frequently staying at his villa in Rome, the
Villa Malta, and enjoying extraordinary vigour of mind and body up to
the end of his days. His popularity, which had been shaken by the Montez
affair, he soon recovered, especially among artists. To him Munich owes
her finest art collections and most remarkable buildings. The monarch's
artistic sense led him not only to adorn his house with a number of
works of antique art, but also to study German medieval art, which he
did to good effect. To him Munich owes the acquisition of the famous
Rhenish collection of the Boisserée brothers. The king also worked with
great zeal for the care of monuments, and the cathedrals of Spires and
Cologne enjoyed his special care. He was also an unfailing supporter of
contemporary painting, in so far as it responded to his romantic
tendencies, and he gave a fresh impulse to the arts of working in metal
and glass. As visible signs of his permanent services to art Munich
possesses the Walhalla, the Glyptothek, the two Pinakotheken, the Odeon,
the University, and many other magnificent buildings both sacred and
profane. The rôle which the Bavarian capital now plays as the leading
art centre of Germany would have been an impossibility without the
splendid munificence of Louis I.

He died on the 28th of February 1868 at Nice, and on the 9th of March
was buried in Munich, amid demonstrations of great popular feeling.

The chief part of Louis's records is contained in seven sealed chests in
the archives of his family, and by the provisions of his will these were
not to be opened till the year 1918. These records contain an
extraordinarily large and valuable mass of historical material,
including, as one item, 246 volumes of the king's diary.

  BIBLIOGRAPHY.--Of the numerous pamphlets, especially of the years
  1846-1848, we need only mention here: P. Erdmann, _Lola Montez und die
  Jesuiten_ (1847); _Geheimbericht über Bayern_ (1847), published by
  Fowmier in _Deutsche Revue_, vol. 27. See also F. v. Ritter, _Beiträge
  zur Regierungsgeschichte König Ludwigs I._ (1825-1826) (2 vols.,
  1853-1855); Sepp, _Ludwig I. Augustus, König von Bayern und das
  Zeitalter der Wiedergeburt der Künste_ (1869; 2nd ed., 1903); Ottokar
  Lorenz, _Drei Bücher Geschichte_ (1876; 2nd ed., 1879); K. Th. v.
  Heigel, _Ludwig I._ (1872; 2nd ed., 1888); "Ludwig I. und Martin
  Wagner," _Neue historische Vorträge_ (1883); "Ludwig I.," _Allgemeine
  deutsche Biographie_ (1884); "Ludwig I. als Freund der Geschichte" and
  "Kronprinz Ludwig in den Feldzügen von 1807 und 1809," in _Historische
  Vorträge und Studien_ (1887); _Die Verlegung der Universität nach
  München_, Rektoratsrede (1887); "Ludwig I. und die Münchener
  Hochschule," _Quellen und Abhandlungen zur Geschichte Bayerns_, n.s.
  (1890); "Ludwig I. als Erzieher seines Volkes," ib.; Reidelbach,
  _Ludwig I. und seine Kunstschöpfungen_ (1887; 2nd ed., 1888); L.
  Trose, _Ludwig I. in seinen Briefen an seinen Sohn, den König Otto von
  Griechenland_ (1891); L. v. Kobell, _Unter den vier ersten Königen
  Bayerns_ (1894); A. Fournier, "Aus den Tagen der Lola Montez," _Neue
  Deutsche Rundschau_ (1901); M. Doeberé, "Ludwig I. und die deutsche
  Frage," _Festgabe für Heigel_ (1903); E. Füchs, _Lola Montez in der
  Karrikatüre_ (1904); L. Brunner, _Nürnberg 1848-1849_ (1907).
       (J. Hn.)

LOUIS II., king of Bavaria (1845-1886), son of his predecessor
Maximilian II. and his wife Maria, daughter of Prince William of
Prussia, was born at Nymphenburg on the 25th of August 1845. Together
with his brother Otto, three years younger than himself, Louis received,
in accordance with the wishes of his learned father, a simple and
serious education modelled on that of the German _Gymnasien_, of which
the classical languages are the chief feature. Of modern languages the
crown prince learnt only French, of which he remained fond all his life.
The practical value of the prince's training was small. It was not till
he was eighteen years old that he received his first pocket-money, and
at that age he had no ideas about money and its value. Military
instruction, physical exercises and sport, in spite of the crown
prince's strong physique, received little attention. Thus Louis did not
come enough into contact with young men of his own age, and consequently
soon developed a taste for solitude, which was found at an early age to
be combined with the romantic tendencies and musical and theatrical
tastes traditional in his family.

Louis succeeded to the throne on the 10th of March 1864, at the age of
eighteen. The early years of his reign were marked by a series of most
serious political defeats for Bavaria. In the Schleswig-Holstein
question, though he was opposed to Prussia and a friend of Duke
Frederick VIII. of Augustenburg, he did not command the material forces
necessary effectively to resist the powerful policy of Bismarck. Again,
in the war of 1866, Louis and his minister von der Pfordten took the
side of Austria, and at the conclusion of peace (August 22) Bavaria
had, in addition to the surrender of certain small portions of her
territory, to agree to the foundation of the North German Confederation
under the leadership of Prussia. The king's Bavarian patriotism, one of
the few steadfast ideas underlying his policy, was deeply wounded by
these occurrences, but he was face to face with the inevitable, and on
the 10th of August wrote a letter of reconciliation to King William of
Prussia. The defeat of Bavaria in 1866 showed clearly the necessity for
a reform of the army. Under the new Liberal ministry of Hohenlohe
(December 29, 1866--February 13, 1870) and under Prauckh as minister of
war, a series of reforms were carried through which prepared for the
victories of 1870. As regards his ecclesiastical policy, though Louis
remained personally true to the Catholic Church, he strove for a greater
independence of the Vatican. He maintained friendly relations with Ignaz
von Döllinger, the leader of the more liberal Catholics who opposed the
definition of papal infallibility, but without extending his protection
to the anti-Roman movement of the Old Catholics. In spite of this the
Old Bavarian opposition was so aroused by the Liberalism of the
Hohenlohe ministry that at the beginning of 1870 Louis had to form a
more Conservative cabinet under Count Bray-Steinburg. On the outbreak of
the Franco-Prussian War he at once took the side of Prussia, and gave
orders for mobilization. In 1871 it was he who offered the imperial
crown to the king of Prussia; but this was not done on his own
initiative. Bismarck not only determined the king of Bavaria to take the
decisive step which put an end to a serious diplomatic crisis, but
actually drafted the letter to King William which Louis copied and
despatched without changing a word. Louis placed very few difficulties
in the way of the new German Empire under the leadership of Prussia,
though his Bavarian particularism remained unchanged.

Though up till the beginning of the year 1880 he did not cease to give
some attention to state affairs, the king's interests lay in quite other
spheres. His personal idiosyncrasies had, in fact, developed meanwhile
in a most unhappy direction. His enthusiasm for all that is beautiful
soon led him into dangerous bypaths. It found its most innocent
expression in the earliest years of his reign when he formed an intimate
friendship with Richard Wagner, whom from May 1864 to December 1865 he
had constantly in his company. Louis was entirely possessed by the
soaring ideas of the master, and was energetic in their realization. He
not only established Wagner's material position at the moment by paying
18,000 gulden of debts for him and granting him a yearly income of 4000
gulden (afterwards increased to 8000), but he also proceeded to realize
the ambitious artistic plans of the master. A series of brilliant model
performances of the Wagnerian music-dramas was instituted in Munich
under the personal patronage of the king, and when the further plan of
erecting a great festival theatre in Munich for the performance of
Wagner's "music of the future" broke down in the face of the passive
resistance of the local circles interested, the royal enthusiast
conceived the idea of building at Bayreuth, according to Wagner's new
principles, a theatre worthy of the music-dramas. For a time Louis was
entirely under Wagner's influence, the fantastic tendencies of whose art
cast a spell over him, and there is extant a series of emotional letters
of the king to Wagner. Wagner, on the whole, used his influence in
artistic and not in political affairs.[1] In spite of this the
opposition to him became permanent. Public opinion in Bavaria for the
most part turned against him. He was attacked for his foreign origin,
his extravagance, his intrigues, his artistic utopias, and last but by
no means least, for his unwholesome influence over the king. Louis in
the end was compelled to give him up. But the relations between king and
artist were by no means at an end. In face of the war which was imminent
in 1866, and in the midst of the preparation for war, the king hastened
in May to Triebschen, near Lucerne, in order to see Wagner again.[2] In
1868 they were seen together in public for the last time at the festival
performances in Munich. In 1876 Wagner's _Ring des Nibelungen_ was
performed for the first time at Bayreuth in the presence of the king.
Later, in 1881, the king formed a similar friendship with Joseph Kainz
the actor, but it soon came to an end. In January 1867 the young king
became betrothed to Duchess Sophie of Bavaria (afterwards Duchesse
d'Alençon), daughter of Duke Max and sister of the empress of Austria;
but the betrothal was dissolved in October of the same year.

Though even in his later years he remained interested in lofty and
intellectual pursuits, as may be gathered, apart from his enthusiasm for
art and nature, from his wide reading in history, serious poetry and
philosophy, yet in his private life there became increasingly marked the
signs of moral and mental weakness which gradually gained the mastery
over his once pure and noble nature. A prominent feature was his blind
craving for solitude. He cut himself off from society, and avoided all
intercourse with his family, even with his devotedly affectionate
mother. With his ministers he came to communicate in writing only. At
the end he was surrounded only by inferior favourites and servants. His
life was now spent almost entirely in his castles far from the capital,
which irked him more and more, or in short and hasty journeys, in which
he always travelled incognito. Even the theatre he could now only enjoy
alone. He arranged private performances in his castles or in Munich at
fabulous cost, and appointed an official poet to his household. Later
his avoidance of society developed into a dread of it, accompanied by a
fear of assassination and delusions that he was being followed.

Side by side with this pathological development his inborn
self-consciousness increased apace, turning more and more to
megalomania, and impelling the weak-willed monarch to those
extraordinary displays of magnificence which can still be admired to-day
in the castles built or altered by him, such as Berg on the Starnberger
See, Linderhof, Herrenchiemsee, Hohenschwangau, Neuschwanstein, &c.,
which are among the most splendid buildings in Germany. It is
characteristic of the extravagance of the king's ideas that he adopted
as his model the style of Louis XIV. and fell into the habit of
imitating the _Roi Soleil_. He no longer stayed for any length of time
in one castle. Often he scoured the country in wild nocturnal rides, and
madness gained upon him apace. His mania for buying things and making
presents was comparatively harmless, but more serious matters were the
wild extravagance which in 1880 involved him in financial ruin, his fits
of destructive rage, and the tendency to the most cruel forms of
abnormal vice. None the less, at the time when the king's mental
weakness was increasing, his character still retained lovable
traits--his simple sense of beauty, his kindliness, and his highly
developed understanding of art and artistic crafts. Louis's love of
beauty also brought material profit to Bavaria.

But the financial and political dangers which arose from the king's way
of life were so great that interference became necessary. On the 8th of
June 1886 medical opinion declared him to be affected with chronic and
incurable madness and he was pronounced incapable of governing. On the
10th of June his uncle, Prince Luitpold, assumed the regency, and after
violent resistance the late king was placed under the charge of a mental
specialist. On the 13th of June 1886 he met with his death by drowning
in the Starnberger See, together with his doctor von Gudden, who had
unwisely gone for a walk alone with his patient, whose physical strength
was enormous. The details of his death will never be fully known, as the
only possible eye-witness died with him. An examination of the brain
revealed a condition of incurable insanity, and the faculty submitted a
report giving the terrible details of his malady. Louis's brother Otto,
who succeeded him as king of Bavaria, was also incurably insane.

  BIBLIOGRAPHY.--K. v. Heigel, _Ludwig II._ (1893); Luise v. Kobell,
  _Unter den vier ersten Königen Bayerns_ (1894); C. Bujer, _Ludwig II._
  (1897); Luise v. Kobell, "Wilhelm I. und Ludwig II." _Deutsche Revue,
  22; Ludwig II. und die Kunst_ (1898); _Ludwig II. und Bismarck_ (1870,
  1899); Anonym, _Endlich völlige Klarheit über den Tod des Königs
  Ludwig II. ..._ (1900); Freiherr v. Völderndorff, "Aus meiner
  Hofzeit," in _Velhagen und Klasings Monatshefte_ (1900); Francis
  Gerard, _The Romance of Ludwig II. of Bavaria_; J. Bainville, _Louis
  II. de Bavière_ (Paris, 1900); E. v. Possart, _Die
  Separatvorstellungen von König Ludwig II._ (1901); O. Bray-Steinburg,
  _Denkwürdigkeiten_ (1901); S. Röcke, _Ludwig II. und Richard Wagner_
  (1903); W. Busch, _Die Kämpfe über Reichsverfassung und Kaisertum_
  (1906); Chlodwig Hohenlohe, _Denkwürdigkeiten_ (2 vols., 1907); A. v.
  Ruville, _Bayern und die Wiederaufrichtung des Deutschen Reiches_
  (1909); K. A. v. Müller, _Bayern im Jahre 1866 und die Berufung des
  Fürsten Hohenlohe_ (1909); G. Kuntzel, _Bismarck und Bayern in der
  Zeit der Reichsgründung_ (1910); Hesselbarth, _Die Enstehung des
  deutsch-framözischen Krieges_ (1910); W. Strohmayer, "Die Ahnentafel
  Ludwigs II. und Ottos I.," _Archiv für Rassen- und
  Gesellschaftsbiologie_, vol. vii. (1910).     (J. Hn.)


  [1] It was on Wagner's advice that the king appointed Hohenlohe prime
    minister in 1866. See Hohenlohe-Schillingfurst, Prince Chlodwig zu,
    under HOHENLOHE. [ED.]

  [2] Hohenlohe (_Denkwürdigkeiten_) comments on the fact that the king
    did not even take the trouble to review the troops proceeding to the
    war. [ED.]

LOUIS II.[1] (846-879), king of France, called "le Bègue" or "the
Stammerer," was a son of Charles II. the Bald, Roman emperor and king of
the West Franks, and was born on the 1st of November 846. After the
death of his elder brother Charles in 866 he became king of Aquitaine,
and in October 877 he succeeded his father as king of the West Franks,
but not as emperor. Having made extensive concessions to the nobles both
clerical and lay, he was crowned king by Hincmar, archbishop of Reims,
on the 8th of December following, and in September 878 he took advantage
of the presence of Pope John VIII. at the council of Troyes to be
consecrated afresh. After a feeble and ineffectual reign of eighteen
months Louis died at Compiègne on the 10th or 11th of April 879. The
king is described as "un homme simple et doux, aimant la paix, la
justice et la religion." By his first wife, Ansgarde, a Burgundian
princess, he had two sons, his successors, Louis III. and Carloman; by
his second wife, Adelaide, he had a posthumous son, Charles the Simple,
who also became king of France.     (A. W. H.*)


  [1] The emperor Louis I. is counted as Louis I., king of France.

LOUIS III. (c. 863-882), king of France, was a son of Louis II. and with
his brother Carloman succeeded his father as king in April 879. A strong
party, however, cast some doubts upon the legitimacy of the young
princes, as the marriage of their parents had not been recognized by the
emperor Charles the Bald; consequently it was proposed to offer the
crown to the East Frankish ruler Louis, a son of Louis the German. But
this plan came to nothing, and in September 879 the brothers were
crowned at Ferrières by Ansègisus, archbishop of Sens. A few months
later they divided their kingdom, Louis receiving the part of France
north of the Loire. They acted together against the Northmen, over whom
in August 881 they gained a memorable victory. They also turned against
Boso who had been set up as king in Burgundy and Provence. On the 5th of
August 882 Louis died at St Denis. He left no sons and Carloman became
sole king.     (A. W. H.*)

LOUIS IV. (921-954), king of France, surnamed "d'Outremer"
(_Transmarinus_), was the son of Charles III. the Simple. In consequence
of the imprisonment of his father in 922, his mother Odgiva (Eadgyfu),
sister of the English king Æthelstan, fled to England with the young
Louis--a circumstance to which he owes his surname. On the death of the
usurper Rudolph (Raoul), Ralph of Burgundy, Hugh the Great, count of
Paris, and the other nobles between whom France was divided, chose Louis
for their king, and the lad was brought over from England and
consecrated at Laon on the 19th of June 936. Although his _de facto_
sovereignty was confined to the town of Laon and to some places in the
north of France, Louis displayed a zeal beyond his years in procuring
the recognition of his authority by his turbulent vassals. The beginning
of his reign was marked by a disastrous irruption of the Hungarians into
Burgundy and Aquitaine (937). In 939 Louis became involved in a struggle
with the emperor Otto the Great on the question of Lorraine, the nobles
of which district had sworn an oath of fidelity to the king of France.
When Louis married Gerberga, sister of Otto, and widow of Giselbert,
duke of Lorraine, there seemed to be a fair prospect of peace; but the
war was resumed, Otto supporting the rebel lords of the kingdom of
France, and peace was not declared until 942, at the treaty of
Visé-sur-Meuse. On the death of William Longsword, duke of Normandy, who
had been assassinated by Arnulf, count of Flanders, in December 942,
Louis endeavoured to obtain possession of the person of Richard, the
young son and heir of the late duke. After an unsuccessful expedition
into Normandy, Louis fell into the hands of his adversaries, and was for
some time kept prisoner at Rouen (945), and subsequently handed over to
Hugh the Great, who only consented to release him on condition that he
should surrender Laon. Menaced, however, by Louis' brother-in-law, Otto
the Great, and excommunicated by the council of Ingelheim (948), the
powerful vassal was forced to make submission and to restore Laon to his
sovereign. The last years of the reign were troubled by fresh
difficulties with Hugh the Great and also by an irruption of the
Hungarians into the south of France. Louis died on the 10th of September
954, and was succeeded by his son Lothair.

  The chief authority for the reign is the chronicler Flodoard. See also
  Ph. Lauer, _La Règne de Louis IV d'Outre-Mer_ (Paris, 1900); and A.
  Heil, _Die politischen Beziehungen zwischen Otto dem Grossen und
  Ludwig IV. von Frankreich_ (Berlin, 1904).     (R. Po.)

LOUIS V. (967-987), king of France, succeeded his father Lothair in
March 986 at the age of nineteen, and finally embroiled the Carolingian
dynasty with Hugh Capet and Adalberon, archbishop of Reims. From the
absence of any important event in his one year's reign the medieval
chroniclers designated him by the words "qui nihil fecit," i.e. "le
Fainéant" or "do-nothing." Louis died in May 987, his mother Emma being
accused of having poisoned him. He had married Adelaide, sister of
Geoffrey Grisegonelle, count of Anjou, but had no issue. His heir by
blood was Charles, duke of Lower Lorraine, son of Louis IV., but the
defection of the bishops and the treason of Adalberon (Ascelinus),
bishop of Laon, assured the success of Hugh Capet.

  See F. Lot, _Les Derniers Carolingiens_ (Paris, 1891); and the
  _Recueil des actes de Lothaire et de Louis V_, edited by L. Halphen
  and F. Lot (1908).     (R. Po.)

LOUIS VI. (1081-1137), king of France, surnamed "the Fat," was the son
of Philip I. of France and Bertha of Holland. He was also surnamed the
"Wide-awake" and "the Bruiser," and lost none of his energy when he
earned the nickname by which he is known in history. In 1098 Louis was
made a knight, and about the same time was associated with his father in
the government, which the growing infirmities of Philip left more and
more to his son, in spite of the opposition of Bertrada, the queen,
whose criminal union with Philip had brought the anathema of the church.
From 1100 to 1108 Louis by his victorious wars on the English and
brigands had secured the army on his side, while the court supported
Bertrada. Unable to make headway against him in war she attempted to
poison him, and contemporary chroniclers attributed to this poison the
pallor of his face, which seems to have been in remarkable contrast to
his stalwart, and later his corpulent figure. Louis' reign is one of the
most important in the history of France. He is little less than the
second founder of the Capetian dynasty. When the feeble and incompetent
Philip I. died (29th of July 1108) Louis was faced by feudal barons as
powerful as himself, and ready to rise against him. He was forced to
have himself hurriedly crowned at Orleans, supported by a handful of
vassals and some ecclesiastics. As king he continued the policy he had
followed during the previous eight years, of securing the roads leading
to Paris by putting down feudal brigands and destroying their
strongholds in the Île-de-France. The castle of the most notorious of
these, Hugues du Puiset, was three times taken and burned by the king's
men, but Hugues was spared to go back each time to his robber life,
until he died on a crusade. In the north, Thomas de Marle, son of
Enguerrand de Coucy, carried on a career of rapine and murder for almost
thirty years before the king succeeded in taking him prisoner (1130).
Twenty-four years of continuous war finally rooted out the robber barons
who lived on the plunder of the roads leading to Paris: the lords of
Montlhéri, who commanded the roads to Orleans, Melun and the south,
those of Montmorency near St Denis on the north (who had to restore what
they had robbed the abbey of St Denis), those of Le Puiset toward the
west, on the way to Chartres, and many others. Parallel with this
consolidation of his power in the ancestral domains Louis met
energetically the Anglo-Norman danger, warring with Henry I. of England
for twenty-five years. After the victory of Tinchebray (1106) Louis
supported the claims of William Clito, son of Robert, duke of Normandy,
against Henry I. A ruthless war followed, in which Louis was at times
reduced to the sorest straits. In 1119, at a council held at Reims under
the presidency of Pope Calixtus II., the enemies were reconciled; but
William Clito's claims were not satisfied, and in 1123 war began again
on a larger scale. Henry I. induced the emperor Henry V. to join in the
attack upon France; and, his heir having been drowned in the loss of the
"White Ship," won the count of Anjou by marrying his only daughter
Matilda to Geoffrey, the Angevin heir (1127). The invasion of Henry V.
was met by something like a national army, which gathered under Louis at
Reims. "For a few days at least, the lord of the Île-de-France was truly
a king of France" (Luchaire). Suger proudly gives the list of barons who
appeared. Henry V. came no farther than Metz. Royalty had won great
prestige. Even Theobald, count of Chartres, the king's greatest enemy,
the soul of feudal coalitions, came with his contingent. Shortly
afterwards (1126), Louis was able to overawe the great count of
Aquitaine, William IX., and force his vassal, the count of Auvergne, to
treat justly the bishop of Clermont. In Flanders Louis interfered upon
the assassination of Charles the Good. He caused the barons to elect as
their count in Arras the same William Clito who claimed Normandy, and
who was closely bound to the king. For a while Louis had Flanders
absolutely at his disposal, but he had hardly left William alone (1127)
when his brutal oppression roused both towns and nobles, who declared
that Louis had no right to interfere in Flanders. The death of William
Clito, and a savage war with his own seneschal, prevented Louis from
effectually resenting this attitude; but Thierry of Alsace, the new
count, consented in 1128 to receive from Louis the investiture of all
his French fiefs, and henceforth lived on good terms with him. In all
his wars--those mentioned are but a part of them--Louis fought in
person. Proud of his strength, reckless in the charge as on the march,
plunging into swollen rivers, entering blazing castles, he gained the
reputation of a national hero, the protector of the poor, the church,
the peasants and the towns. The communal movement grew during his reign,
and he encouraged it on the fiefs of his vassals in order to weaken
them; but the title "Father of the Communes" by which he was known in
history is not deserved, though he did grant some privileges to towns on
his domains. Neither was Louis the author of the movement for the
emancipation of the serfs, as was formerly claimed. His attitude toward
the movement was like that of his predecessors and contemporaries, to
favour emancipation when it promised greater chance of profit, greater
scope for exploitation of the peasants; otherwise to oppose it. He was a
great benefactor to the church, aided the new, reformed monastic
congregations of Cîteau, Prémontré and Fontevrault, and chose his two
chief ministers from the clergy. Étienne de Garlande, whom Louis raised
from obscurity to be archdeacon of Notre Dame at Paris, chancellor and
seneschal of France, was all-powerful with the king from 1108 to 1127.
His relatives monopolized the highest offices of the state. But the
queen Adelaide became his enemy; both Ivo of Chartres and St Bernard
bitterly attacked him; and the king suddenly stripped him of all his
offices and honours. Joining the rebellious barons, Étienne then led a
bitter war against the king for three years. When Louis had reduced him
to terms he pardoned him and restored him to the chancellorship (1132),
but not to his old power. Suger (q.v.), administrator of St Denis,
enters the scene toward the close of this reign, but his great work
belongs to the next. Louis VI. died on the 1st of August 1137, just a
few days after his son, Louis the Young, had set out for the far
south-west, the Aquitaine which had been won by the marriage with
Eleanor. His wife was Adelaide, or Alice, daughter of Humbert II., count
of Savoy, by whom he had seven sons and a daughter.

  See A. Luchaire, _Louis le Gros, annales de sa vie et son règne_
  (1890), and the same writer's volume, _Les Premiers Capétiens_, in E.
  Lavisse's _Histoire de France._     (J. T. S.*)

LOUIS VII. (c. 1121-1180), king of France, son of Louis VI. the Fat,
was associated with his father and anointed by Innocent II. in 1131. In
1137 he succeeded his father, and in the same year married at Bordeaux
Eleanor, heiress of William II., duke of Aquitaine. In the first part of
his reign he was vigorous and jealous of his prerogatives, but after his
crusade his religiosity developed to such an extent as to make him
utterly inefficient. His accession was marked by no disturbances, save
the risings of the burgesses of Orleans and of Poitiers, who wished to
organize communes. But soon he came into violent conflict with Pope
Innocent II. The archbishopric of Bourges became vacant, and the king
supported as candidate the chancellor Cadurc, against the pope's nominee
Pierre de la Châtre, swearing upon relics that so long as he lived
Pierre should never enter Bourges. This brought the interdict upon the
king's lands. At the same time he became involved in a war with
Theobald, count of Champagne, by permitting Rodolphe (Raoul), count of
Vermandois and seneschal of France, to repudiate his wife, Theobald's
niece, and to marry Petronille of Aquitaine, sister of the queen of
France. The war, which lasted two years (1142-44), was marked by the
occupation of Champagne by the royal army and the capture of Vitry,
where many persons perished in the burning of the church. Geoffrey the
Handsome, count of Anjou, by his conquest of Normandy threatened the
royal domains, and Louis VII. by a clever manoeuvre threw his army on
the Norman frontier and gained Gisors, one of the keys of Normandy. At
his court which met in Bourges Louis declared on Christmas Day 1145 his
intention of going on a crusade. St Bernard assured its popularity by
his preaching at Vézelay (Easter 1146), and Louis set out from Metz in
June 1147, on the overland route to Syria. The expedition was
disastrous, and he regained France in 1149, overcome by the humiliation
of the crusade. In the rest of his reign he showed much feebleness and
poor judgment. He committed a grave political blunder in causing a
council at Beaugency (on the 21st of March 1152) to annul his marriage
with Eleanor of Aquitaine, under pretext of kinship, but really owing to
violent quarrels during the crusade. Eleanor married Henry II. of
England in the following May, and brought him the duchy of Aquitaine.
Louis VII. led a half-hearted war against Henry for having married
without the authorization of his suzerain; but in August 1154 gave up
his rights over Aquitaine, and contented himself with an indemnity. In
1154 Louis married Constance, daughter of the king of Castile, and their
daughter Marguerite he affianced imprudently by the treaty of Gisors
(1158) to Henry, eldest son of the king of England, promising as dowry
the Vexin and Gisors. Five weeks after the death of Constance, on the
4th of October 1160, Louis VII. married Adèle of Champagne, and Henry
II. to counterbalance the aid this would give the king of France, had
the marriage of their infant children celebrated at once. Louis VII.
gave little sign of understanding the danger of the growing Angevin
power, though in 1159 he made an expedition in the south to aid Raymond
V., count of Toulouse, who had been attacked by Henry II. At the same
time the emperor Frederick I. in the east was making good the imperial
claims on Arles. When the schism broke out, Louis took the part of the
pope Alexander III., the enemy of Frederick, and after two comedy-like
failures of Frederick to meet Louis VII. at Saint Jean de Losne (on the
29th of August and the 22nd of September 1162), Louis definitely gave
himself up to the cause of Alexander, who lived at Sens from 1163 to
1165. Alexander gave the king, in return for his loyal support, the
golden rose. Louis VII. received Thomas Becket and tried to reconcile
him with King Henry II. He supported Henry's rebellious sons, but acted
slowly and feebly, and so contributed largely to the break up of the
coalition (1173-1174). Finally in 1177 the pope intervened to bring the
two kings to terms at Vitry. By his third wife, Adèle, Louis had an
heir, the future Philip Augustus, born on the 21st of August 1165. He
had him crowned at Reims in 1179, but, already stricken with paralysis,
he himself was not able to be present at the ceremony, and died on the
18th of September 1180. His reign from the point of view of royal
territory and military power, was a period of retrogression. Yet the
royal authority had made progress in the parts of France distant from
the royal domains. More direct and more frequent connexion was made with
distant feudatories, a result largely due to the alliance of the clergy
with the crown. Louis thus reaped the reward for services rendered the
church during the least successful portion of his reign.

  See R. Hirsch, _Studien zur Geschichte König Ludwigs VII. von
  Frankreich_ (1892); A. Cartellieri, _Philipp II. August von Frankreich
  bis zum Tode seines Vaters, 1165-1180_ (1891); and A. Luchaire in E.
  Lavisse's _Histoire de France_, tome iii. 1st part, pp. 1-81.
       (J. T. S.*)

LOUIS VIII. (1187-1226), king of France, eldest son of Philip Augustus
and of Isabella of Hainaut, was born in Paris on the 5th of September
1187. Louis was short, thin, pale-faced, with studious tastes, cold and
placid temper, sober and chaste in his life. He left the reputation of a
saint, but was also a warrior prince. In 1213 he led the campaign
against Ferrand, count of Flanders; in 1214, while Philip Augustus was
winning the victory of Bouvines, he held John of England in check, and
was victorious at La Roche-aux-Moines. In the autumn of 1215 Louis
received from a group of English barons, headed by Geoffrey de
Mandeville, a request to "pluck them out of the hand of this tyrant"
(John). Some 7000 French knights were sent over to England during the
winter and two more contingents followed, but it was only after
twenty-four English hostages had arrived in Paris that Louis himself
prepared to invade England. The expedition was forbidden by the papal
legate, but Louis set out from Calais on the 20th and landed at Stonor
on the 22nd of May 1216. In three months he had obtained a strong
foothold in eastern England, and in the end of July he laid siege to
Dover, while part of his army besieged Windsor with a view to securing
the safety of London. The pretexts on which he claimed the English crown
were set down in a memorandum drawn up by French lawyers in 1215. These
claims--that John had forfeited the crown by the murder of his nephew,
Arthur of Brittany, and that the English barons had the right to dispose
of the vacant throne--lost their plausibility on the death of King John
and the accession of his infant son as Henry III. in October 1216. The
papal legate, Gualo, who had forbidden the enterprise, had arrived in
England at the same time as Louis. He excommunicated the French troops
and the English rebels, and Henry III. found a valiant defender in
William Marshal, earl of Pembroke. After the "Fair of Lincoln," in which
his army was defeated, Louis was compelled to resign his pretensions,
though by a secret article of the treaty of Lambeth (September 1217) he
secured a small war indemnity. Louis had assisted Simon de Montfort in
his war against the Albigenses in 1215, and after his return to France
he again joined the crusade. With Simon's son and successor, Amauri de
Montfort, he directed the brutal massacre which followed the capture of
Marmande. Philip II., suspicious of his son until the close of his life,
took precautions to assure his obedience, narrowly watched his
administration in Artois, which Louis held from his mother Isabella,
and, contrary to the custom of the kings of France, did not associate
his son with him by having him crowned. Philip Augustus dying on the
14th of July 1223, Louis VIII. was anointed at Reims on the 6th of
August following. He surrounded himself with councillors whom his father
had chosen and formed, and continued his father's policy. His reign was
taken up with two great designs: to destroy the power of the
Plantagenets, and to conquer the heretical south of France. An
expedition conquered Poitou and Saintonge (1224); in 1226 he led the
crusade against the Albigenses in the south, forced Avignon to
capitulate and received the submission of Languedoc. While passing the
Auvergne on his return to Paris, he was stricken with dysentery, and
died at Montpensier on the 8th of November 1226. His reign, short as it
was, brought gains both to the royal domains and to the power of the
crown over the feudal lords. He had married in 1200 Blanche of Castile,
daughter of Alphonso IX. of Castile and granddaughter of Henry II. of
England, who bore him twelve children; his eldest surviving son was his
successor, Louis IX.

  See C. Petit-Dutaillis, _Étude sur la vie et le règne de Louis VIII._
  (Paris, 1894); and E. Lavisse, _Histoire de France_, tome iii. (1901).
       (M. Br.)

LOUIS IX. (1214-1270), king of France, known as Saint Louis, was born on
the 25th of April 1214, and was baptized at Poissy. His father, Louis
VIII., died in 1226, leaving the first minority since the accession of
the Capetians, but his mother, Queen Blanche of Castile, proved more
than a match for the feudal nobility. She secured her son's coronation
at Reims on the 29th of November 1226; and, mainly by the aid of the
papal legate, Romano Bonaventura, bishop of Porto (d. 1243), and of
Thibaut IV., count of Champagne, was able to thwart the rebellious plans
of Pierre Mauclerc, duke of Brittany, and Philippe Hurepel, a natural
son of Philip Augustus. Mauclerc's opposition was not finally overcome,
however, until 1234. Then in 1236 Thibaut, who had become king of
Navarre, turned against the queen, formed an alliance with Brittany,
marrying his daughter without royal consent to Jean le Roux, Mauclerc's
son, and attempted to make a new feudal league. The final triumph of the
regent was shown when the king's army assembled at Vincennes. His
summons met with such general and prompt obedience as to awe Thibaut
into submission without striking a blow. Thus the reign of Louis IX.
began with royal prerogatives fully maintained; the kingdom was well
under control, and Mauclerc and Thibaut were both obliged to go on
crusade. But the influence of the strong-willed queen-mother continued
to make itself felt to the close of her life. Louis IX. did not lack
independence of character, but his confidence in his mother had been
amply justified and he always acted in her presence like a child. This
confidence he withheld from his wife, Margaret, daughter of Raymond
Berenger, count of Provence, whom he married at Sens in May 1234. The
reign was comparatively uneventful. A rising of the nobles of the
south-west, stirred up by Isabella, widow of King John of England, and
her husband, Hugh de Lusignan, count of the Marche, upon the occasion of
the investment of Alphonse of Poitiers with the fiefs left him by Louis
VIII. as a result of the Albigensian crusade, reached threatening
dimensions in 1242, but the king's armies easily overran Count Hugh's
territories, and defeated Henry III. of England, who had come to his
aid, at Saintes. Isabella and her husband were forced to submit, and
Raymond VII., count of Toulouse, yielded without resistance upon the
advent of two royal armies, and accepted the peace of Lorris in January
1243. This was the last rising of the nobles in Louis's reign.

At the end of 1244, during an illness, Louis took the cross. He had
already been much distressed by the plight of John of Brienne, emperor
at Constantinople, and bought from him the crown of thorns, parts of the
true cross, the holy lance, and the holy sponge. The Sainte Chapelle in
Paris still stands as a monument to the value of these relics to the
saintly king. But the quarrel between the papacy and the emperor
Frederick II., in which Louis maintained a watchful neutrality--only
interfering to prevent the capture of Innocent IV. at Lyons--and the
difficulties of preparation, delayed the embarkation until August 1248.
His defeat and capture at Mansura, in February 1250, the next four years
spent in Syria in captivity, in diplomatic intrigues, and finally in
raising the fortifications of Caesarea and Joppa,--these events belong
to the history of the crusades (q.v.). His return to France was urgently
needed, as Blanche of Castile, whom he had left as regent, had died in
November 1252, and upon the removal of her strong hand feudal turbulence
had begun to show itself.

This period between his first and second crusades (1254-1269) is the
real age of Saint Louis in the history of France. He imposed peace
between warring factions of his nobility by mere moral force, backed up
by something like an awakened public opinion. His nobles often chafed
under his unrelenting justice but never dared rebel. The most famous of
his settlements was the treaty of Paris, drawn up in May 1258 and
ratified in December 1259, by which the claims of Henry III. of England
were adjusted. Henry renounced absolutely Normandy, Anjou, Touraine,
Maine and Poitou, and received, on condition of recognizing Louis as
liege suzerain, all the fiefs and domains of the king of France in the
dioceses of Limoges, Cahors and Perigueux, and the expectation of
Saintonge south of the Charente, and Agenais, if they should fall to the
crown of France by the death of Alphonse of Poitiers. In addition, Louis
promised to provide Henry with sufficient money to maintain 500 knights
for two years. This treaty was very unpopular in France, since the king
surrendered a large part of France that Henry had not won; but Louis was
satisfied that the absolute sovereignty over the northern provinces more
than equalled the loss in the south. Historians still disagree as to its
wisdom. Louis made a similar compromise with the king of Aragon in the
treaty of Corbeil, 1258, whereby he gave up the claims of kings of
France to Roussillon and Barcelona, which went back to the conquest of
Charlemagne. The king of Aragon in his turn gave up his claims to part
of Provence and Languedoc, with the exception of Narbonne. Louis's
position was strikingly shown in 1264 when the English barons submitted
their attempt to bind Henry III. by the Provisions of Oxford to his
arbitration. His reply in the "Dit" or Mise of Amiens was a flat denial
of all the claims of the barons and failed to avert the civil war. Louis
was more successful in preventing feuds between his own nobles: between
the counts of Brittany and Champagne over the succession to Navarre; the
dauphin of Vienne (Guigues VII.) and Charles of Anjou; the count of
Burgundy and the count of Châlons; Henry of Luxemburg and the duke of
Lorraine with the count of Bar. Upon the whole he maintained peace with
his neighbours, although both Germany and England were torn with civil
wars. He reluctantly consented to sanction the conquest of Naples by his
brother, Charles, duke of Anjou, and it is possible that he yielded here
in the belief that it was a step toward another crusade.

On the 24th of March 1267, Louis called to Paris such of his knights as
were not with Charles of Anjou in Naples. No one knew why he had called
them; but when the king in full assembly proclaimed his purpose of going
on a second crusade, few ventured to refuse the cross. Three years of
preparation followed; then on the 1st of July 1270 they sailed from
Aigues Mortes for Tunis, whither the expedition seems to have been
directed by the machinations of Charles of Anjou, who, it is claimed,
persuaded his brother that the key to Egypt and to Jerusalem was that
part of Africa which was his own most dangerous neighbour. After
seventeen days' voyage to Carthage, one month of the summer's heat and
plague decimated the army, and when Charles of Anjou arrived he found
that Louis himself had died of the plague on the 25th of August 1270.

Saint Louis stands in history as the ideal king of the middle ages. An
accomplished knight, physically strong in spite of his ascetic
practices, fearless in battle, heroic in adversity, of imperious
temperament, unyielding when sure of the justness of his cause,
energetic and firm, he was indeed "every inch a king." Joinville says
that he was taller by a head than any of his knights. His devotions
would have worn out a less robust saint. He fasted much, loved sermons,
regularly heard two masses a day and all the offices, dressing at
midnight for matins in his chapel, and surrounded even when he travelled
by priests on horseback chanting the hours. After his return from the
first crusade, he wore only grey woollens in winter, dark silks in
summer. He built hospitals, visited and tended the sick himself, gave
charity to over a hundred beggars daily. Yet he safeguarded the royal
dignity by bringing them in at the back door of the palace, and by a
courtly display greater than ever before in France. His naturally cold
temperament was somewhat relieved by a sense of humour, which however
did not prevent his making presents of haircloth shirts to his friends.
He had no favourite, nor prime minister. Louis was canonized in 1297.

As a statesman Louis IX. has left no distinct monument. The famous
"_Établissements_ of St Louis" has been shown in our own day to have
been private compilation. It was a _coutumier_ drawn up before 1273,
including, as well as some royal decrees, the civil and feudal law of
Anjou, Maine and the Orléanais. Recent researches have also denied Louis
the credit of having aided the communes. He exploited them to the full.
His standpoint in this respect was distinctly feudal. He treated his
clergy as he did his barons, enforcing the supremacy of royal justice,
and strongly opposing the exactions of the pope until the latter part of
his reign, when he joined forces with him to extort as much as possible
from the clergy. At the end of the reign most of the sees and
monasteries of France were in debt to the Lombard bankers. Finally, the
reign of Saint Louis saw the introduction of the pontifical inquisition
into France.

  There are numerous portraits of St Louis, but they are unauthentic and
  contradictory. In 1903 M. Salomon Reinach claimed to have found in the
  heads sculptured in the angles of the arches of the chapel at St
  Germain portraits of St Louis, his brothers and sisters, and Queen
  Marguerite, or Blanche, made between 1235 and 1240. This conjectured
  portrait somewhat resembles the modern type, which is based upon a
  statue of Charles V. once in the church of the Celestins in Paris, and
  which Lenoir mistakenly identified as that of Louis IX. The king had
  eleven children, six sons and five daughters, among them being his
  successor, Philip III., and Robert, count of Clermont, the ancestor of
  Henry IV.

  The best contemporary accounts of Louis IX. are the famous Memoirs of
  the Sire Jean de Joinville (q.v.), published by N. de Wailly for the
  _Soc. de l'Hist. de France_, under the title _Histoire de Saint Louis_
  (Paris, 1868), and again with translation (1874); English translation
  by J. Hutton (1868). See also William of Nangis, _Gesta Ludovici IX._,
  edited by M. Bouquet in vol. xx. of the _Recueil des historiens des
  Gaules et de la France_. Of modern works may be mentioned C. V.
  Langlois in E. Lavisse's _Histoire de France_, tome iii., with
  references to literature; Frederick Perry, _Saint Louis, the Most
  Christian King_ (New York, 1901); E. J. Davis, _The Invasion of Egypt
  by Louis IX. of France_ (1898); H. A. Wallon, _Saint Louis et son
  temps_ (1875); A. Lecoy de la Marche, _Saint Louis_ (Tours, 1891); and
  E. Berger, _Saint Louis et Innocent IV_ (Paris, 1893), and _Histoire
  de Blanche de Castille_ (1895). See also _The Court of a Saint_, by
  Winifred F. Knox (1909).     (J. T. S.*)

LOUIS X. (1289-1316), king of France and Navarre, called _le Hutin_ or
"the Quarreller," was the son of Philip IV. and of Jeanne of Navarre. He
was born at Paris on the 4th of October 1289, took the title king of
Navarre on the death of his mother, on the 2nd of April 1305, and
succeeded Philip IV. in France on the 29th of November 1314, being
crowned at Reims in August 1315. The origin of his surname is uncertain.
Louis X. is a somewhat indistinct figure among the kings of France, the
preponderating influence at court during his short reign being that of
his uncle, Charles of Valois. The reign began with reaction against the
policy of Philip IV. Private vengeance was wreaked on Enguerrand de
Marigny, who was hanged, Pierre de Latilli, bishop of Châlons and
chancellor, and Raoul de Presle, advocate of the parlement, who were
imprisoned. The leagues of the lesser country gentry, formed in 1314
before the accession of Louis, continued to demand the ancient
privileges of the nobility,--tourneys, private wars and judgment of
nobles not by king's officers but by their peers--and to protest against
the direct call by the king of their vassals to the royal army. Louis X.
granted them charters in which he made apparent concessions, but used
evasive formulas which in reality ceded nothing. There was a charter to
the Normans, one to the Burgundians, one to the Languedocians (1315).
Robert de Béthune, count of Flanders, refused to do homage, and his
French fiefs were declared confiscate by a court of his peers. In August
1315 Louis X. led an army toward Lille, but the flooded Lys barred his
passage, the ground was so soaked with rains that the army could not
advance, and it was thrown back, without a battle, on Tournai. Need of
money inspired one famous ordinance of this reign; in 1315 the serfs of
the royal domains were invited to buy their civil liberty,--an
invitation which did not meet with great enthusiasm, as the freedman was
merely freed for further exploitation, and Philip V. was obliged to
renew it in 1318. Louis X. died suddenly on the 5th of June 1316. His
first wife was Margaret, daughter of Robert II., duke of Burgundy; she
was accused of adultery and died a prisoner in the château Gaillard. By
her he had one daughter, Jeanne, wife of Philip, count of Evreux and
king of Navarre. By his second wife Clémence, daughter of Charles
Martel, titular king of Hungary, he left a posthumous son, King John I.

  See Ch. Dufayard, "La réaction feodale sous les fils de Philippe le
  Bel," in _Revue historique_ (1894); Paul Lehugeur, _Histoire de
  Philippe le Long, roi de France_ (Paris, 1897); and Joseph Petit,
  _Charles de Valois_ (Paris, 1900).     (J. T. S.*)

LOUIS XI. (1423-1483), king of France, the son of Charles VII. and his
queen, Marie of Anjou, was born on the 3rd of July 1423, at Bourges,
where his father, then nicknamed the "King of Bourges," had taken refuge
from the English. At the birth of Louis XI. part of France was in
English hands; when he was five years old, Joan of Arc appeared; he was
just six when his father was crowned at Reims. But his boyhood was spent
apart from these stirring events, in the castle of Loches, where his
father visited him rarely. John Gerson, the foremost theologian of
France, wrote a manual of instructions (still extant) for the first of
his tutors, Jean Majoris, a canon of Reims. His second tutor, Bernard of
Armagnac, was noted for his piety and humility. If, as has been claimed,
Louis owed to them any of his tendency to prefer the society of the
poor, or rather of the _bourgeois_, to that of the nobility, their
example was his best lesson in the craft of kingship. In June 1436, when
scarcely thirteen, he was married to Margaret (_c_. 1425-1445), daughter
of James I. of Scotland, a princess of about his own age, but sickly and
romantic, and in every way his opposite. Three years after this unhappy
marriage Louis entered upon his stormy political career. Sent by his
father in 1439 to direct the defence of Languedoc against the English,
and to put down the brigandage in Poitou, he was induced by the
rebellious nobles to betray his trust and place himself at the head of
the Praguerie (q.v.). Charles VII. pardoned him this rebellion, due to
his ambition and the seductive proposal of the nobles to make him
regent. The following year he was fighting the English, and in 1443
aided his father to suppress the revolt of the count of Armagnac. His
first important command, however, was in the next year, when he led an
army of from 15,000 to 20,000 mercenaries and brigands,--the product of
the Hundred Years' War,--against the Swiss of the canton of Basel. The
heroism of some two hundred Swiss, who for a while held thousands of the
French army at bay, made a great impression on the young prince. After
an ineffective siege of Basel, he made peace with the Swiss
confederation, and led his robber soldiers into Alsace to ravage the
country of the Habsburgs, who refused him the promised winter quarters.
Meanwhile his father, making a parallel campaign in Lorraine, had
assembled his first brilliant court at Nancy, and when Louis returned it
was to find the king completely under the spell of Agnes Sorel. He at
first made overtures to members of her party, and upon their rejection
through fear of his ambition, his deadly hatred of her and of them
involved the king. The death in 1445 of his wife Margaret, who was a
great favourite of Charles VII., made the rupture complete. From that
year until the death of the king father and son were enemies. Louis
began his rebellious career by a futile attempt to seduce the cities of
Agenais into treason, and then he prepared a plot to seize the king and
his minister Pierre de Brézé. Antoine de Chabannes, who was to be the
instrument of the plot, revealed it to Charles, and Louis was mildly
punished by being sent off to Dauphiné (1447). He never saw his father

Louis set out to govern his principality as though it were an
independent state. He dismissed the governor; he determined
advantageously to himself the boundaries between his state and the
territories of the duke of Savoy and of the papacy; and he enforced his
authority over perhaps the most unruly nobility in western Europe, both
lay and ecclesiastical. The right of private warfare was abolished; the
bishops were obliged to give up most of their temporal jurisdiction, the
scope of their courts was limited, and appeals to Rome were curtailed.
On the other hand, Louis granted privileges to the towns and
consistently used their alliance to overthrow the nobility. He watched
the roads, built new ones, opened markets, protected the only bankers of
the country, the Jews, and reorganized the administration so as to draw
the utmost revenue possible from the prosperity thus secured. His
ambition led him into foreign entanglements; he made a secret treaty
with the duke of Savoy which was to give him right of way to Genoa, and
made arrangements for a partition of the duchy of Milan. The alliance
with Savoy was sealed by the marriage of Louis with Charlotte, daughter
of Duke Lodovico, in 1452, in spite of the formal prohibition of Charles
VII. The king marched south, but withdrew again leaving his son
unsubdued. Four years later, as Charles came to the Bourbonnais, Louis,
fearing for his life, fled to Flanders to the court of Philip the Good,
duke of Burgundy, leaving Dauphiné to be definitely annexed to the crown
of France. The policy of the dauphin was reversed, his ten years' work
was undone. Meanwhile he was installed in the castle of Genappe, in
Brabant, where he remained until the death of his father. For this he
waited impatiently five years, keeping himself posted by spies of every
stage of the king's last illness, and thus laying himself open to the
accusation, believed in by Charles himself, that he had hastened the end
by poison, a charge which modern historians deny.

On the 15th of August 1461, Louis was anointed at Reims, and Philip of
Burgundy, as _doyen_ of the peers of France, placed the crown on his
head. For two months Philip acted as though the king were still his
protégé. But in the midst of the festivities with which he was
entertaining Paris, the duke found that Louis ventured to refuse his
candidates for office, and on the 24th of September the new king left
abruptly for Touraine. His first act was to strike at the faithful
ministers of Charles VII. Pierre de Brézé and Antoine de Chabannes were
captured and imprisoned, as well as men of sterling worth like Étienne
Chevalier. But the king's shrewdness triumphed before long over his
vengeance, and the more serviceable of the officers of Charles VII. were
for the most part soon reinstated, Louis' advisers were mostly men of
the middle class. He had a ready purse for men of talent, drawing them
from England, Scotland, Italy, Spain and Portugal. Such a motley throng
of competent men had never before been seen at the court of France.
Their origin, their previous crimes or virtues, their avarice or
brutality, were indifferent to him so long as they served him loyally.
Torture and imprisonment awaited them, whether of high or low degree, if
he fancied that they were betraying him. Among the most prominent of
these men in addition to Brézé, Chevalier and Chabannes, were Tristan
Lermite, Jean de Daillon, Olivier le Dain (the barber), and after 1472,
Philippe de Commines, drawn from the service of Charles the Bold of
Burgundy, who became his most intimate adviser and biographer.
Surrounded by men like these Louis fought the last great battle of
French royalty with feudalism.

Louis XI. began his reign with the same high-handed treatment of the
nobles which had marked his rule in Dauphiné, going so far as to forbid
them to hunt without his permission. He forced the clergy to pay
long-neglected feudal dues, and intrigued against the great houses of
Anjou and Orleans in Italy. The malcontent nobles soon began to plan
revolt. Discharged officers of Charles VII. like Jean Dunois and John
II. duke of Bourbon, stirred up hostility to the new men of the king,
and Francis II. duke of Brittany was soon embroiled with Louis over an
attempt to assert royal control over that practically independent duchy.
The dissatisfied nobility found their greatest ally in Charles the Bold,
afterwards duke of Burgundy, and in 1465 formed a "league of public
welfare" and declared war on their king. The nominal head was the king's
brother Charles, duke of Berry, then eighteen years old, a weak
character, the tool of the rebels as he was later the dupe of the king.
Every great noble in France was in the league, except Gaston de
Foix--who kept the south of France for the king,--and the counts of
Vendôme and Eu. The whole country seemed on the verge of anarchy. It was
saved by the refusal of the lesser gentry to rise, and by the alliance
of the king with the citizen class, which was not led astray by the
pretences of regard for the public weal which cloaked the designs of the
leaguers. After a successful campaign in the Bourbonnais, Louis fought
an indecisive battle with the Burgundians who had marched on Paris at
Montlhéry, on the 16th of July 1465, and then stood a short siege in
Paris. On the 28th of September he made a truce with Charles the Bold,
and in October the treaties of Conflans and Saint Maur-les-Fossés, ended
the war. The king yielded at all points; gave up the "Somme towns" in
Picardy, for which he had paid 200,000 gold crowns, to Philip the Good,
thus bringing the Burgundians close to Paris and to Normandy. Charles,
the king's brother, was given Normandy as an apanage, thus joining the
territories of the rebellious duke of Brittany with those of Charles the
Bold. The public weal was no longer talked about, while the kingdom was
plundered both by royal tax gatherers and by unsubdued feudal lords to
pay the cost of the war.

After this failure Louis set to work to repair his mistakes. The duke of
Bourbon was won over by the gift of the government of the centre of
France, and Dunois and Chabannes by restoring them their estates. Two
months after he had granted Normandy to Charles, he took advantage of a
quarrel between the duke of Brittany and his brother to take it again,
sending the duke of Bourbon "to aid" Charles, while Dunois and Chabannes
prepared for the struggle with Burgundy. The death of Duke Philip, on
the 15th of June 1467, gave Charles the Bold a free hand. He gained over
Edward IV. of England, whose sister Margaret he married; but while he
was celebrating the wedding Louis invaded Brittany and detached Duke
Francis from alliance with him. Normandy was completely reduced. The
king had won a great triumph. It was followed by his greatest mistake.
Eager as he always was to try diplomacy instead of war, Louis sent a
gift of 60,000 golden crowns to Charles and secured a safe conduct from
him for an interview. The interview took place on the 9th of October
1468 at Péronne. News came on the 11th that, instigated by the king of
France, the people of Liége had massacred their bishop and the ducal
governor. The news was false, but Charles, furious at such apparent
duplicity, took Louis prisoner, only releasing him, three days later, on
the king signing a treaty which granted Flanders freedom from
interference from the parlement of Paris, and agreeing to accompany
Charles to the siege of his own ally, Liége. Louis made light of the
whole incident in his letters, but it marked the greatest humiliation of
his life, and he was only too glad to find a scapegoat in Cardinal Jean
Balue, who was accused of having plotted the treason of Péronne. Balue
thereupon joined Guillaume de Harancourt, bishop of Verdun, in an
intrigue to induce Charles of France to demand Champagne and Brie in
accordance with the king's promise to Charles the Bold, instead of
distant Guienne where the king was determined to place him. The
discovery of this conspiracy placed these two high dignitaries in prison
(April 1469). Balue (q.v.) spent eleven years in prison quarters,
comfortable enough, in spite of the legend to the contrary, while
Harancourt was shut up in an iron cage until 1482. Then Louis, inducing
his brother to accept Guienne,--where, surrounded by faithful royal
officers, he was harmless for the time being,--undertook to play off the
Lancastrians against Edward IV. who, as the ally of Charles the Bold,
was menacing the coast of Normandy. Warwick, the king-maker, and Queen
Margaret were aided in the expedition which in 1470 again placed Henry
VI. upon the English throne. In the autumn Louis himself took the
offensive, and royal troops overran Picardy and the Maconnais to
Burgundy itself. But the tide turned against Louis in 1471. While Edward
IV. won back England by the battles of Barnet and Tewkesbury, Charles
the Bold besieged Amiens, and Louis was glad to make a truce, availing
himself of the double dealing of the constable, the count of Saint Pol,
who, trying to win an independent position for himself in Picardy,
refused his aid to Charles unless he would definitely join the French
nobility in another rising against the king. This rising was to be aided
by the invasion of France by John II. of Aragon, Yolande, duchess of
Savoy, and Edward IV. of England, who was to be given the old
Plantagenet inheritance. The country was saved a desperate civil war by
the death of the king's brother, Charles, the nominal head of the
coalition, on the 24th of May 1472. Louis' joy on receiving news of this
death knew no bounds. Charles the Bold, who had again invaded France,
failed to take Beauvais, and was obliged to make a lasting truce. His
projects were henceforth to be directed towards Germany. Louis then
forced the duke of Brittany to make peace, and turned against John V.
count of Armagnac, whose death at the opening of March 1473 ended the
power of one of the most dangerous houses of the south. The first period
of Louis' reign was closed, and with it closed for ever the danger of
dismemberment of France. John of Aragon continued the war in Roussillon
and Cerdagne, which Louis had seized ten years before, and a most
desperate rising of the inhabitants protracted the struggle for two
years. After the capture of Perpignan on the 10th of March 1475, the
wise and temperate government of Imbert de Batarnay and Boffile de Juge
slowly pacified the new provinces. The death of Gaston IV. count of Foix
in 1472 opened up the long diplomatic struggle for Navarre, which was
destined to pass to the loyal family of Albret shortly after the death
of Louis. His policy had won the line of the Pyrenees for France.

The overthrow of Charles the Bold was the second great task of Louis XI.
This he accomplished by a policy much like that of Pitt against
Napoleon. Louis was the soul of all hostile coalitions, especially
urging on the Swiss and Sigismund of Austria, who ruled Tirol and
Alsace. Charles's ally, Edward IV., invaded France in June 1475, but
Louis bought him off on the 29th of August at Picquigny--where the two
sovereigns met on a bridge over the Somme, with a strong grille between
them, Edward receiving 75,000 crowns, and a promise of a pension of
50,000 crowns annually. The dauphin Charles was to marry Edward's
daughter. Bribery of the English ministers was not spared, and in
September the invaders recrossed to England. The count of Saint Pol, who
had continued to play his double part, was surrendered by Charles to
Louis, and executed, as was also Jacques d'Armagnac, duke of Nemours.
With his vassals terrorized and subdued, Louis continued to subsidize
the Swiss and René II. of Lorraine in their war upon Charles. The defeat
and death of the duke of Burgundy at Nancy on the 5th of January 1477
was the crowning triumph of Louis' diplomacy. But in his eagerness to
seize the whole inheritance of his rival, Louis drove his daughter and
heiress, Mary of Burgundy, into marriage with Maximilian of Austria
(afterwards the emperor Maximilian I.), who successfully defended
Flanders after a savage raid by Antoine de Chabannes. The battle of
Guinegate on the 7th of August 1479 was indecisive, and definite peace
was not established until after the death of Mary, when by the treaty of
Arras (1482) Louis received Picardy, Artois and the Boulonnais, as well
as the duchy of Burgundy and Franche Comté. The Austrians were left in
Flanders, a menace and a danger. Louis failed here and in Spain; this
failure being an indirect cause of that vast family compact which
surrounded France later with the empire of Charles V. His interference
in Spain had made both John II. of Aragon and Henry IV. of Castile his
enemies, and so he was unable to prevent the marriage of their heirs,
Ferdinand and Isabella. But the results of these marriages could not be
foreseen, and the unification of France proved of more value than the
possession of so widespread an empire. This unification was completed
(except for Brittany) and the frontiers enlarged by the acquisition,
upon the death of René of Anjou in 1480, of the duchies of Anjou and
Bar, and in 1481 of Maine and Provence upon the death of Charles II.,
count of Maine. Of the inheritance of the house of Anjou only Lorraine
escaped the king.

Failure in Spain was compensated for in Italy. Without waging war Louis
made himself virtual arbiter of the fate of the principalities in the
north, and his court was always besieged by ambassadors from them. After
the death of Charles the Bold, Yolande, duchess of Savoy, was obliged to
accept the control of Louis, who was her brother. In Milan he helped to
place Lodovico il Moro in power in 1479, but he reaped less from this
supple tyrant than he had expected. Pope Sixtus IV. the enemy of the
Medici, was also the enemy of the king of France. Louis, who at the
opening of his reign had denounced the Pragmatic Sanction of 1438, had
played fast and loose with the papacy. When Sixtus threatened Florence
after the Pazzi conspiracy, 1478, Louis aided Lorenzo dei Medici to form
an alliance with Naples, which forced the papacy to come to terms.

More than any other king of France, Louis XI. was a "bourgeois king."
The upper bourgeois, the aristocracy of his "good cities," were his
allies both against the nobles and against the artisan class, whenever
they revolted, driven to desperation by the oppressive royal taxes which
furnished the money for his wars or diplomacy. He ruled like a modern
capitalist; placed his bribes like investments in the courts of his
enemies; and, while draining the land of enormous sums, was pitiless
toward the two productive portions of his realm, the country population
and the artisans. His heartlessness toward the former provoked even an
accomplice like Commines to protest. The latter were kept down by
numerous edicts, tending to restrict to certain privileged families the
rank of master workman in the gilds. There was the paternalism of a
Frederick the Great in his encouragement of the silk industry,--"which
all idle people ought to be made to work at,"--in his encouragement of
commerce through the newly acquired port of Marseilles and the opening
up of market placed. He even dreamed of a great trading company "of two
hundred thousand livres or more," to monopolize the trade of the
Mediterranean, and planned to unify the various systems of weights and
measures. In 1479 he called a meeting of two burgesses from each "good
city" of his realm to consider means for preventing the influx of
foreign coin. Impatient of all restraint upon his personal rule, he was
continually in violent dispute with the parlement of Paris, and made
"justice" another name for arbitrary government; yet he dreamed of a
unification of the local customary laws (_coûtumes_) of France. He was
the perfect model of a tyrant. The states-general met but once in his
reign, in 1468, and then no talk of grievances was allowed; his object
was only to get them to declare Normandy inalienable from the crown.
They were informed that the king could raise his revenue without
consulting them. Yet his budgets were enormously greater than ever
before. In 1481 the _taille_ alone brought in 4,600,000 livres, and even
at the peaceful close of his reign his whole budget was 4,655,000
livres--as against 1,800,000 livres at the close of his father's reign.

The king who did most for French royalty would have made a sorry figure
at the court of a Louis XIV. He was ungainly, with rickety legs. His
eyes were keen and piercing, but a long hooked nose lent grotesqueness
to a face marked with cunning rather than with dignity. Its ugliness was
emphasized by the old felt hat which he wore,--its sole ornament the
leaden figure of a saint. Until the close of his life, when he tried to
mislead ambassadors as to the state of his health by gorgeous robes, he
wore the meanest clothes. Dressed in grey like a pilgrim, and
accompanied by five or six trustworthy servants, he would set out on his
interminable travels, "ambling along on a good mule." Thus he traversed
France, avoiding all ceremony, entering towns by back streets, receiving
ambassadors in wayside huts, dining in public houses, enjoying the loose
manners and language of his associates, and incidentally learning at
first hand the condition of his people and the possibilities of using or
taxing them--his needs of them rather than theirs of him. He loved to
win men, especially those of the middle class, by affability and
familiarity, employing all his arts to cajole and seduce those whom he
needed. Yet his honied words easily turned to gall. He talked rapidly
and much, sometimes for hours at a time, and most indiscreetly. He was
not an agreeable companion, violent in his passions, nervous, restless,
and in old age extremely irascible. Utterly unscrupulous, and without a
trace of pity, he treated men like pawns, and was content only with
absolute obedience.

But this Machiavellian prince was the genuine son of St Louis. His
religiosity was genuine if degenerate. He lavished presents on
influential saints, built shrines, sent gifts to churches, went on
frequent pilgrimages and spent much time in prayer--employing his
consummate diplomacy to win celestial allies, and rewarding them richly
when their aid secured him any advantage. St Martin of Tours received
1200 crowns after the capture of Perpignan. He tried to bribe the saints
of his enemies, as he did their ministers. An unfaltering faith taught
him the value of religion--as a branch of politics. Finally, more in the
spirit of orthodoxy, he used the same arts to make sure of heaven. When
the ring of St Zanobius and the blood of Cape Verde turtles gave him no
relief from his last illness, he showered gifts upon his patron saints,
secured for his own benefit the masses of his clergy, and the most
potent prayers in Christendom, those of the two most effective saints of
his day, Bernardin of Doulins and Francis of Paolo.

During the last two or three years of his life Louis lived in great
isolation, "seeing no one, speaking with no one, except such as he
commanded," in the château of Plessis-les-Tours, that "spider's nest"
bristling with watch towers, and guarded only by the most trusty
servitors. A swarm of astrologers and physicians preyed upon his
fears--and his purse. But, however foolish in his credulity, he still
made his strong hand felt both in France and in Italy, remaining to the
last "the terrible king." His fervent prayers were interrupted by
instructions for the regency which was to follow. He died on the 30th of
August 1483, and was buried, according to his own wish, without royal
state, in the church at Cléry, instead of at St Denis. He left a son,
his successor, Charles VIII., and two daughters.

  See the admirable résumé by Charles Petit-Dutaillis in Lavisse's
  _Histoire de France_, tome iv. pt. ii. (1902), and bibliographical
  indications given there. Michelet's wonderful depiction in his
  _Histoire de France_ (livres 13 to 17) has never been surpassed for
  graphic word-painting, but it is inaccurate in details, and superseded
  in scholarship. Of the original sources for the reign the _Lettres de
  Louis XI_. (edited by Charavay and Vaesen, 8 vols., 1883-1902), the
  celebrated _Mémoires_ of Philippe de Commines and the _Journal_ of
  Jean de Royl naturally come first. The great mass of literature on the
  period is analysed in masterly fashion by A. Molinier, _Sources de
  l'histoire de France_ (tome v. pp. 1-146), and to this exhaustive
  bibliography the reader is referred for further research. See also C.
  Hare, _The Life of Louis XI_. (London, 1907).     (J. T. S.*)

LOUIS XII. (1462-1515), king of France, was grandson of Louis of
Orleans, the brother of Charles VI., and son of the poet prince, Charles
of Orleans, who, after the battle of Agincourt, spent twenty-five years
of captivity in England. Louis was duke of Orleans until his accession
to the throne, and he was fourteen years old when Louis XI. gave him the
hand of his second daughter, Joan the Lame. In the first years of the
reign of Charles VIII., Louis made a determined stand against the
government of the Beaujeus, stirred up coalitions of the feudal nobles
against them, and was finally defeated and taken prisoner at St Aubin du
Cormier in 1488. Charles VIII. set him at liberty in 1491. These
successive checks tamed him a little. In the Italian expedition of 1494
he commanded the vanguard of the royal army, occupied Genoa, and
remained in the north of Italy, menacing Milan, on which he was already
dreaming of asserting his rights. The children of Charles VIII. having
died in infancy, he became heir-presumptive to the throne, and succeeded
Charles in 1499. Louis was then thirty-six years old, but he seems to
have grown old prematurely. He was fragile, narrow-shouldered and of a
sickly constitution. His intelligence was mediocre, his character weak,
and he allowed himself to be dominated by his wife, Anne of Brittany,
and his favourite the Cardinal d'Amboise. He was a good king, full of
moderation and humanity, and bent upon maintaining order and improving
the administration of justice. He enjoyed a genuine popularity, and in
1506 the estates of Tours conferred on him the surname of _Père du
Peuple_. His foreign policy, which was directed wholly towards Italy,
was for the most part unskilful; to his claims on Naples he added those
on Milan, which he based on the marriage of his grandfather, Louis of
Orleans, with Valentina Visconti. He led in person several armies into
Italy, and proved as severe and pitiless towards his enemies as he was
gentle and clement towards his subjects. Louis had two daughters. After
his accession he had divorced his virtuous and ill-favoured queen, Joan,
and had married, in 1499, Anne of Brittany, the widow of Charles VIII.
On her death in January 1514, in order to detach England from the
alliance against him, he married on the 9th of October 1514, Mary Tudor,
sister of Henry VIII. of England (see MARY, queen of France). He died on
the 1st of January 1515.

  For a bibliography of the printed sources see Henri Hauser, _Les
  Sources de l'histoire de France, XVI^e siècle_, vol. 1. (Paris, 1906).
  The principal secondary authorities are De Maulde, _Histoire de Louis
  XII_. (Paris, 1889-1893); Le Roux de Lincy, _Vie de la reine Anne de
  Bretagne_ (Paris, 1860); H. Lemonnier, _Les Guerres d'Italie_ (Paris,
  1903) in the _Histoire de France_ by E. Lavisse.     (J. I.)

LOUIS XIII. (1601-1643), king of France, was the son of Henry IV. and of
Marie de' Medici. He became king on his father's assassination in 1610;
but his mother at once seized the full powers of regent. She determined
to reverse the policy of her husband and to bring France into alliance
with Spain and the Austrian house, upon which power Henry had been
meditating an attack at the time of his death. Two marriages were
designed to cement this alliance. Louis was to marry Anne of Austria,
daughter of the Spanish king, Philip III., and the Spanish prince,
afterwards Philip IV., himself was to marry the Princess Elizabeth, the
king's sister. Notwithstanding the opposition of the Protestants and
nobles of France, the queen carried through her purpose and the
marriages were concluded in 1615. The next years were full of civil war
and political intrigue, during which the queen relied upon the Marshal
d'Ancre. Louis XIII. was a backward boy, and his education had been much
neglected. We have the fullest details of his private life, and yet his
character remains something of a mystery. He was fond of field sports
and seemed to acquiesce in his mother's occupation of power and in the
rule of her favourites. But throughout his life he concealed his
purposes even from his closest friends; sometimes it seems as if he were
hardly conscious of them himself. In 1617 he was much attached to
Charles d'Albert, sieur de Luynes; and with his help he arrested Marshal
d'Ancre, and on his resistance had him assassinated. From this time to
her death the relation between the king and his mother was one of
concealed or open hostility. The article on FRANCE must be consulted for
the intricate events of the following years.

The decisive incident for his private life as well as for his reign was
the entrance of Cardinal Richelieu, hitherto the queen's chief adviser,
into the king's council in 1624. Henceforth the policy of France was
directed by Richelieu, who took up in its main features the system of
Protestant alliances and opposition to the power of Austria and Spain,
which had been begun by Henry IV. and had been interrupted by the
queen-mother during the regency; while he asserted the power of the
crown against all rivals at home. This policy had remarkable results for
the king's private life. It not only brought him into unremitting
conflict with the Protestants and the nobles of France, but also made
him the enemy of his mother, of his brother Gaston of Orleans, who made
himself the champion of the cause of the nobles, and sometimes even of
his wife. It is not easy to define his relations to Richelieu. He was
convinced of his loyalty and of his genius, and in the end always
supported his policy. But he disliked the friction with his family
circle which this policy produced. In the difficulty with which he
expressed himself and in a certain indecision of character the king was
curiously unlike his father, the frank and impetuous Henry of Navarre,
and his absolute son Louis XIV. He took a great interest in all the
externals of war. He was present, and is said to have played an
important part at the passage of Susa in 1629, and also eagerly
participated in the siege of Rochelle, which surrendered in the same
year. But for the most part his share in the great events of the reign
was a passive one. The one all-important fact was that he supported his
great minister. There were certain occasions when it seemed as if that
support would be denied. The chief of these was what is known as the
"Day of Dupes" (1630). Then the queen-mother and the king's brother
passionately attacked the minister, and for a moment it was believed
that Richelieu was dismissed and that the queen-mother and a Spanish
policy had triumphed. But the sequel only strengthened the power of the
minister. He regained his ascendancy over the king, punished his enemies
and forced Marie de' Medici and Gaston of Orleans to sue for pardon. In
1631 Gaston fled to Lorraine and the queen-mother to Brussels. Gaston
soon returned, to plot, to fail and to sue for pardon again and again;
but Marie de'Medici ended her life in exile.

Richelieu's position was much strengthened by these incidents, but to
the end of life he had to struggle against conspiracies which were
designed to deprive him of the king's support, and usually Gaston of
Orleans had some share in these movements. In 1632 the duke of
Montmorency's conspiracy brought its leader to the scaffold. But the
last great effort to overthrow Richelieu was closely connected with the
king. Louis XIII. had from the beginning of his reign had
favourites--young men for the most part with whom he lived freely and
intimately and spoke of public affairs lightly and unreservedly; and who
in consequence often exaggerated their influence over him. Henri
d'Effiat, marquis de Cinq-Mars, was the last of these favourites. The
king is said to have allowed him to speak hostilely of Richelieu and
even to recall the assassination of Marshal d'Ancre. Cinq-Mars believed
himself secure of the king's favour. He entered into negotiations with
Spain and was secretly supported by Gaston of Orleans. But Richelieu
discovered his treasonous relations with Spain and by this means
defeated his plot. Louis was reconciled to his minister. "We have lived
too long together to be separated" he is reported to have said
(September 1642). Yet when Richelieu died in December of the same year
he allowed himself to speak of him in a jealous and satirical tone. He
died himself a few months later (May 1643).

His nature was timid, lethargic and melancholy, and his court was not
marked by the scandals which had been seen under Henry IV. Yet
Mademoiselle de la Fayette and Madame d'Hautefort and others are said to
have been his mistresses. His brother Gaston survived him, but gave
unexpectedly little trouble during the wars of the Fronde which ensued
on the death of Louis XIII.

  The chief source of information on Louis XIII.'s life is to be found
  in the contemporary memoirs, of which the chief are: Bassompierre,
  Fontenay-Mareuil, Gaston d'Orléans, Montrésor, Omer Talon. Richelieu's
  own Memoirs are chiefly concerned with politics and diplomacy. Of
  modern works those most directly bearing on the king's personal life
  are R. de Beauchamp, _Louis XIII. d'après sa correspondance avec le
  cardinal de Richelieu_; G. Hanotaux, _Histoire du cardinal de
  Richelieu_ (1893-1896); Rossignol, _Louis XIII. avant Richelieu_; M.
  Topin, _Louis XIII. et Richelieu_ (1876). See too Professor R. Lodge,
  _Richelieu_; J. B. H. R. Capefigue, _Richelieu, Mazarin et la Fronde_
  (1835-1836); and Dr J. H. Bridges, _Richelieu, Mazarin and Colbert_

  For full bibliography see G. Monod, _Bibliographie de l'histoire de
  France_; _Cambridge Modern History_, vol. iv. ("The Thirty Years'
  War"); Lavisse et Rambaud, _Histoire générale_, vol. v. ("Guerres de
  religion").     (A. J. G.*)

LOUIS XIV. (1638-1715), king of France, was born at
Saint-Germain-en-Laye on the 5th of September 1638. His father, Louis
XIII., had married Anne of Austria, daughter of Philip III., king of
Spain, in 1615, but for twenty years the marriage had remained without
issue. The childlessness of the king was a constant threat to the policy
of his great minister Richelieu; for the king's brother and heir, Gaston
of Orleans, was a determined opponent of that policy. The birth of the
prince who was destined to reign as Louis XIV. was therefore hailed as a
triumph, not less important than any of those won by diplomacy or arms.
The death of his father made Louis XIV. king on the 14th of May 1643,
but he had to wait sixteen years before he began to rule. Power lay for
some time in the hands of the queen-mother and in those of her minister,
Cardinal Mazarin, who found it difficult to maintain the power of the
throne and the integrity of French territory during the domestic
troubles of the Fronde and the last stages of the Thirty Year's War. The
minister was hated as a foreigner, and the childhood of the king
weakened the royal authority. Twice the court had to flee from Paris;
once when there was a rumour of intended flight the populace was
admitted to see the king in his bed. The memory of these humiliations
played their part in developing later the autocratic ideas of Louis.
Mazarin, in spite of all disadvantages, triumphed alike over his
domestic and his foreign opponents. The Fronde was at an end by 1653;
the peace of Westphalia (1648) and the peace of the Pyrenees (1659)
marked the success of the arms and of the diplomacy of France. Louis
XIV. was now twenty-one years of age and was anxious to rule as well as
to reign. The peace of the Pyrenees was a decisive event in his personal
history as well as in that of France, for one of its most important
stipulations referred to his marriage. He had already been strongly
attracted to one of the nieces of Mazarin, but reasons of state
triumphed over personal impulse; and it was agreed that the new
friendship with Spain should be cemented by the marriage of Louis to his
cousin, the Infanta Maria Theresa. A large dowry was stipulated for; and
in consideration of this the king promised to forgo all claims that his
wife might otherwise possess to the Spanish crown or any part of its
territories. The dowry was never paid, and the king held himself free of
his promise.

The marriage took place at once, and the king entered Paris in triumph
in 1660. Mazarin died in the next year; but so strong was the feeling
that the kings of France could only rule through a first minister that
it was generally expected that Mazarin would soon have a successor. The
king, however, at once announced his intention of being his own first
minister; and from this resolution he never swerved. Whatever great
qualities he may have lacked he certainly possessed industry and
patience in the highest degree. He built up a thoroughly personal system
of government, and presided constantly over the council and many of its
committees. He was fond of gaiety and of sport; but neither ever turned
him away from the punctual and laborious discharge of his royal duties.
Even the greatest of his ministers found themselves controlled by the
king. Fouquet, the finance minister, had accumulated enormous wealth
during the late disturbances, and seemed to possess power and ambition
too great for a subject. Louis XIV. found it necessary almost to
conspire against him; he was overthrown and condemned to perpetual
imprisonment. Those who had most of the king's confidence afterwards
were Colbert for home affairs; Lionne for diplomacy; Louvois for war;
but as his reign proceeded he became more self-confident and more
intolerant of independence of judgment in his ministers.

His court was from the first one of great brilliance. In art and in
literature, the great period, which is usually called by the king's
name, had in some respects passed its zenith when he began to reign. But
France was unquestionably the first state in Europe both in arms and
arts, and within France the authority of the king was practically
undisputed. The nation, proud of its pre-eminence and weary of civil
war, saw in the king its true representative and the guarantee of its
unity and success. Louis was singularly well fitted by his physical and
intellectual gifts for the rôle of _Grand Monarque_ and he played it to
perfection. His wife Maria Theresa bore him children but there was no
community of tastes between them, and the chief influence at court is to
be found not in the queen but in the succession of avowed mistresses.
Mademoiselle de la Vallière held the position from 1662 to 1670; she was
then ousted by Madame de Montespan, who had fiercely intrigued for it,
and whose proud and ambitious temper offered a great contrast to her
rival. She held her position from 1670 to 1679 and then gave place to
the still more famous Madame de Maintenon, who ruled, however, not as
mistress but as wife. The events that brought about this incident form
the strangest episode in the king's private life. Madame de Maintenon
was the widow of the dramatist Scarron, and first came into relationship
with the king as governess to his illegitimate children. She was a woman
of unstained life and strongly religious temperament; and it was by this
that she gained so great an influence over the king. Through her
influence the king was reconciled to his wife, and, when Maria Theresa
died in 1683, Madame de Maintenon shortly afterwards (in 1684) became
the king's wife, though this was never officially declared. Under her
influence the court lost most of its gaiety, and religion came to
exercise much control over the life and the policy of the king.

The first years of the king's rule were marked by the great schemes of
Colbert for the financial, commercial, industrial and naval
reorganization of France, and in these schemes Louis took a deep
interest. But in 1667 began the long series of wars, which lasted with
little real intermission to the end of the reign (see FRANCE). In the
steps that led to these wars and in their conduct the egotistic ambition
and the vanity of the king played an important part; though he never
showed real military skill and took no share in any military operations
except in certain sieges. The War of Devolution (or the Queen's War) in
1667-68 to enforce the queen's claim to certain districts in the Spanish
Netherlands, led to the Dutch War (1672-78), and in both these wars the
supremacy of the French armies was clearly apparent. The next decade
(1678-1688) was the real turning-point in the history of the reign, and
the strength of France was seriously diminished. The chief cause of this
is to be found in the revocation of the Edict of Nantes. The church had
always opposed this settlement and had succeeded in altering it in many
points. Now the new religious zeal and the autocratic temper of Louis
XIV. came to the support of the church. The French Huguenots found their
privileges decreased, and then, in 1685, the edict was altogether
withdrawn. The results were ruinous to France. It was not only that she
lost many thousands of her best citizens, but this blow against
Protestantism deprived her of those Protestant alliances in Europe which
had been in the past her great diplomatic support. Then the English
Revolution came in 1688 and changed England from a wavering ally into
the most determined of the enemies of France.

The war with the Grand Alliance, of which King William III. was the
heart and soul, lasted from 1688 to 1697; and the treaty of Ryswick,
which brought it to an end, deprived France of certain territories on
her frontier. But Louis saw in the Spanish question a chance of more
than making up for this loss. The Spanish king Charles II. was dying,
and the future of the possessions of Spain was doubtful. The astute
diplomacy of Louis succeeded in winning the inheritance for his grandson
Philip. But this involved France and Europe in an immense war (1700) and
by the peace of Utrecht (1713), though the French prince retained the
Spanish crown, France had again to make concessions of territory.

Louis XIV. had shown wonderful tenacity of purpose during this
disastrous war, and sometimes a nobler and more national spirit than
during the years of his triumphs. But the condition of France was
terrible. She was burdened with debt; the reforms of Colbert were
ruined; and opposition to the king's régime began to make itself felt.
Peace brought some relief to France, but the last years of the king's
life were gloomy in the extreme. His numerous descendants seemed at one
time to place the succession beyond all difficulty. But his eldest son,
the dauphin, died in April 1711; his eldest grandson the duke of
Burgundy in February 1712; and his great-grandson the duke of Brittany
in March 1712. The heir to the throne was now the duke of Burgundy's
son, the duke of Anjou, afterwards Louis XV. The king died on the 1st of
September 1715, after the longest recorded reign in European history.
The judgment of posterity has not repeated the flattering verdict of his
contemporaries; but he remains the model of a great king in all that
concerns the externals of kingship.

  The reign of Louis XIV. is particularly rich in memoirs describing the
  life of the court. The chief are Madame de Motteville's memoirs for
  the period of the Fronde, and the letters cf Madame de Sévigné and the
  memoirs of Saint-Simon for the later period. The king's ideas are best
  seen in the _Mémoires de Louis XIV. pour l'instruction du dauphin_
  (edited by Dreyss, 2 vols.). His private life is revealed in the
  letters of Madame de Maintenon and in those of Madame, Duchesse
  d'Orléans. Of the ordinary historians of France Michelet is fullest on
  the private life of the king. Mention may also be made of Voltaire,
  _Siècle de Louis XIV._; P. Clément, _Histoire de la vie et de
  l'administration de Colbert_; Sainte-Beuve, _Causeries de lundi_. Full
  bibliographies of the reign will be found in G. Monod's
  _Bibliographie de l'histoire de France_; vol. v. ("The Age of Louis
  XIV.") of the _Cambridge Modern History_; and vol. vi. ("Louis XIV.")
  of the _Histoire générale_ of Lavisse and Rambaud.     (A. J. G.*)

LOUIS XV. (1710-1774), king of France, was the great-grandson of Louis
XIV. and the third son of Louis, duke of Burgundy, and Marie Adelaide,
princess of Savoy. The first son had died in 1705, and in 1712 the
second son, the duke of Brittany, as well as his father and mother, was
carried off by a mysterious disease. Louis was thus unexpectedly brought
into the line of the succession, and was only five years old when Louis
XIV. died. The dead king had endeavoured by his will to control the
administration even after his death by a carefully selected council of
regency, in which the duke of Orleans should have only the nominal
presidency; but with the help of the parlement of Paris the arrangement
was at once set aside, and the duke was declared regent with full
traditional powers. The duke had capacity, but his life was so
licentious that what influence he had upon the king was for evil.
Fleury, bishop of Fréjus, was appointed his tutor, and the little king
was sincerely attached to him. The king attained his legal majority at
the age of thirteen, shortly before the death of the duke of Orleans.
His first minister was the incapable duke of Bourbon, who in 1725
procured the repudiation of the Spanish princess, to whom the king had
been betrothed, and his marriage to Maria Leszczynska, daughter of the
exiled king of Poland, then resident in Alsace. In 1726 the duke of
Bourbon was displaced by the king's tutor, Bishop (afterwards Cardinal)
Fleury, who exercised almost absolute power, for the king took little
interest in affairs of state. His administration was successful and
peaceful until the year 1734, when a disputed succession in Poland
brought about the interference of France on behalf of the queen's
father. France was unsuccessful in her immediate object, but at the
peace of Vienna (1735) secured the possession of Lorraine. Up to this
point the reign had been prosperous; but from this time on it is a
record of declining national strength, which was not compensated by some
days of military glory. Fleury's great age (he died still in office at
the age of ninety) prevented him from really controlling the policy of
France and of Europe. In 1740 the war of the Austrian Succession broke
out and France drifted into it as an ally of Frederick of Prussia and
the enemy of England, and of Maria Theresa of Austria.

On Fleury's death in 1743 no one took his place, and the king professed
to adopt the example of Louis XIV. and to establish a personal
autocracy. But he was not strong enough in will or intellect to give
unity to the administration. The marquis d'Argenson writes that at the
council table Louis "opened his mouth, said little and thought not at
all," and again that "under the appearance of personal monarchy it was
really anarchy that reigned." He had followed too in his domestic life
the example of his predecessors. The queen for some time seems to have
secured his affections, and she bore him seven children. But soon we
hear of the royal mistresses. The first to acquire notoriety was the
duchess of Châteauroux, the third sister of one family who held this
position. She was at least in part the cause of the only moment of
popularity which the king enjoyed. She urged him to take part personally
in the war. France had just received a humiliating check at Dettingen,
and the invasion of the north-eastern frontier was feared. The king went
to Metz in 1744, and his presence there did something to ward off the
danger. While the nation felt genuine gratitude for his energy and its
success, he was reported to have fallen dangerously ill. The king, of
whom it was said that the fear of hell was the only part of religion
which had any reality for him, now dismissed the duchess of Châteauroux
and promised amendment. Prayers were offered everywhere for his
recovery, and the country was swept by a delirium of loyal enthusiasm,
which conferred on him the title of _Louis le bien aimé_. But his future
life disappointed all these hopes. The duchess of Châteauroux died in
the same year, but her place was taken in 1745 by Madame de Pompadour.
This woman had philanthropic impulses and some real interest in art and
letters; but her influence on public affairs was a fatal one. She had
many rivals during her lifetime and on her death in 1764 she was
succeeded by Madame du Barry (q.v.). But the mention of these three
women gives no idea of the degradation of the king's life. There has
doubtless been exaggeration as to certain details, and the story of his
seraglio at the _Parc aux cerfs_ is largely apocryphal. But it would be
difficult to mention the name of any European king whose private life
shows such a record of vulgar vice unredeemed by higher aims of any
kind. He was not without ambition, but without sufficient tenacity of
purpose to come near to realizing it. To the last he maintained the
pretence of personal rule, but the machinery of government fell out of
gear, and the disorder of the finances was never remedied before the
revolution of 1789.

The peace of Aix-la-Chapelle (1748), which ended the war of the Austrian
Succession, brought no gains to France in spite of her victories at
Fontenoy and Raucoux; and the king was blamed for the diplomatic
failure. The interval between this war and the Seven Years' War (1756)
saw that great reversal of alliances which is sometimes called the
"Diplomatic Revolution"; whereby France repudiated the alliance of
Frederick the Great and joined hands with her old enemy Austria. The
intrigues of Madame de Pompadour played in this change an important
though not a decisive part. It was the cause of immense disasters to
France; for after a promising beginning, both by land and sea, France
suffered reverses which lost her both India and Canada and deprived her
of the leading position which she had so long held in Europe. Her
humiliation was declared by the peace of Paris (1763).

The article on the history of France (q.v.) shows how there arose during
the last years of Louis XV.'s reign a strong reaction against the
monarchy and its methods. Military success had given it its strength;
and its prestige was ruined by military failure. In the parlements,
provincial and Parisian; in religion and in literature, a note of
opposition is struck which was never to die until the monarchy was
overthrown. France annexed Corsica in 1768, but this was felt to be the
work of the minister Chauvelin, and reflected no credit on the king. He
died in 1774 of smallpox. If the reign of his predecessor shows us
almost the ideal of personal monarchy we may see in that of Louis XV.
all the vices and errors exemplified which lie in wait for absolute
hereditary rule which has survived the period of its usefulness.

  For the king's life generally see the memoirs of Saint-Simon,
  d'Argenson, Villars and Barbier, and for the details of his private
  life E. Boutaric, _Correspondance secrète de Louis XV._; Madame de
  Pompadour's _Correspondance_ published by P. Malassi; Dietric, _Les
  Maîtresses de Louis XV._; and Fleury, _Louis XV. intimes et les
  petites maîtresses_ (1909).

  For the system of secret diplomacy and organized espionage, known as
  the _Secret du roi_, carried on under the auspices of Louis XV., see
  Albert duc de Broglie, _Le Secret du roi. Correspondance secrète de
  Louis XV. avec ses agents diplomatiques 1752-1774_ (Paris, 1878); and
  for a general account of the reign, H. Carré, _La France sous Louis
  XV._ (Paris, 1891). For other works, general and special, see G.
  Monod, _Bibliographie de la France_, and the bibliography in the
  _Histoire générale_ of Lavisse and Rambaud, vol. vii., and the
  _Cambridge Modern History_, vol. vi.     (A. J. G.*)

LOUIS XVI. (1754-1793), king of France, was the son of Louis, dauphin of
France, the son of Louis XV., and of Marie Joseph of Saxony, and was
born at Versailles on the 23rd of August 1754, being baptized as Louis
Augustus. His father's death in 1765 made him heir to the throne, and in
1770 he was married to Marie Antoinette, daughter of the empress Maria
Theresa. He was just twenty years old when the death of Louis XV. on the
10th of May 1774 placed him on the throne. He began his reign under good
auspices, with Turgot, the greatest living French statesman, in charge
of the disorganized finances; but in less than two years he had yielded
to the demand of the vested interests attacked by Turgot's reforms, and
dismissed him. Turgot's successor, Necker, however, continued the régime
of reform until 1781, and it was only with Necker's dismissal that the
period of reaction began. Marie Antoinette then obtained that ascendancy
over her husband which was partly responsible for the extravagance of
the ministry of Calonne, and brought on the Revolution by the resulting
financial embarrassment.[1] The third part of his reign began with the
meeting of the states-general on the 4th of May 1789, which marked the
opening of the Revolution. The revolt of Paris and the taking of the
Bastille on the 14th of July were its results. The suspicion, not
without justification, of a second attempt at a _coup d'état_ led on the
6th of October to the "capture" of the king and royal family at
Versailles by a mob from Paris, and their transference to the Tuileries.
In spite of the growing radicalism of the clubs, however, loyalty to the
king remained surprisingly strong. When he swore to maintain the
constitution, then in progress of construction, at the festival of the
federation on the 14th of July 1790, he was at the height of his
popularity. Even his attempted flight on the 20th of June 1791 did not
entirely turn the nation against him, although he left documents which
proved his opposition to the whole Revolution. Arrested at Varennes, and
brought back to Paris, he was maintained as a constitutional king, and
took his oath on the 13th of September 1791. But already a party was
forming in Paris which demanded his deposition. This first became
noticeable in connexion with the affair of the Champ de Mars on the 17th
of July 1791. Crushed for a time the party gained strength through the
winter of 1791-1792. The declaration of war against the emperor Francis
II., nephew of Marie Antoinette, was forced upon the king by those who
wished to discredit him by failure, or to compel him to declare himself
openly an enemy to the Revolution. Their policy proved effective. The
failure of the war, which intensified popular hatred of the Austrian
queen, involved the king; and the invasion of the Tuileries on the 20th
of June 1792 was but the prelude to the conspiracy which resulted, on
the 10th of August, in the capture of the palace and the "suspension" of
royalty by the Legislative Assembly until the convocation of a national
convention in September. On the 21st of September 1792 the Convention
declared royalty abolished, and in January it tried the king for his
treason against the nation, and condemned him to death. He was executed
on the 21st of January 1793.

Louis XVI. was weak in character and mentally dull. His courage and
dignity during his trial and on the scaffold has left him a better
reputation than he deserves. His diary shows how little he understood,
or cared for, the business of a king. Days on which he had not shot
anything at the hunt were blank days for him. The entry on the 14th of
July 1789 was "nothing"! The greater part of his time was spent hunting.
He also amused himself making locks, and a little at masonry. Awkward
and uncourtly, at heart shy, he was but a poor figurehead for the
stately court of France. At first he did not care for Marie Antoinette,
but after he came under her influence, her thoughtless conduct
compromised him, and it was largely she who encouraged him in underhand
opposition to the Revolution while he pretended to accept it. The only
point on which he had of his own initiative shown a strong objection to
revolutionary measures was in the matter of the civil constitution of
the clergy. A devoted and sincere Roman Catholic, he refused at first to
sanction a constitution for the church in France without the pope's
approval, and after he had been compelled to allow the constitution to
become law he resolved to oppose the Revolution definitely by intrigues.
His policy was both feeble and false. He was singularly unfortunate even
when he gave in, delaying his acquiescence until it had the air of a
surrender. It is often said that Louis XVI. was the victim of the faults
of his predecessors. He was also the victim of his own.

Having lost his elder son in 1789 Louis left two children, Louis
Charles, usually known as Louis XVII., and Marie Thérèse Charlotte
(1778-1851), who married her cousin, Louis, duke of Angoulême, son of
Charles X., in 1799. The "orphan of the Temple," as the princess was
called, was in prison for three years, during which time she remained
ignorant of the fate which had befallen her parents. She died on the
19th of October 1851. Her life by G. Lenôtre has been translated into
English by J. L. May (1908).

  Droz, _Histoire du règne de Louis XVI._ (3 vols., Paris, 1860), a sane
  and good history of the period; and Arsène Houssaye, _Louis XVI._
  (Paris, 1891). See also the numerous memoirs of the time, and the
  marquis de Ségur's _Au couchant de la monarchie, Louis XVI. et Turgot_

  For bibliographies see G. Monod, _Bibl. de la France_; Lavisse et
  Rambaud, _Hist. Univ._, vols. vii. and viii.; and the _Cambridge Modem
  History_, vol. viii.     (R. A.*)


  [1] The responsibility of Marie Antoinette for the policy of the king
    before and during the Revolution has been the subject of much
    controversy. In general it may be said that her influence on politics
    has been much exaggerated. (See MARIE ANTOINETTE.) [ED.]

LOUIS XVII. (1785-1795?), titular king of France, second son of Louis
XVI. and Marie Antoinette, was born at Versailles on the 27th of March
1785, was christened the same day Louis Charles, and given the title of
duke of Normandy. Louis Charles became dauphin on the death of his elder
brother on the 4th of June 1789. It is only with his incarceration in
the Temple on the 13th of August 1792, that his history, apart from that
of his parents, becomes of interest. The royal party included, beside
the king and queen, their daughter Marie Thérèse Charlotte (Madame
Royale), the king's sister Madame Élisabeth, the valet Cléry and others.
The prisoners were lodged at first in the smaller Tower, but were
removed to the larger Tower on the 27th of October. Louis Charles was
then separated from his mother and aunt to be put in his father's
charge, except for a few hours daily, but was restored to the women when
Louis was isolated from his family at the beginning of his trial in

On the 21st of January 1793 Louis became, for the royalists, king of
France, and a week later the comte de Provence arrogated to himself the
title of regent. From that moment began new plots for the escape of the
prisoners from the Temple, the chief of which were engineered by the
Chevalier de Jarjayes,[1] the baron de Batz,[2] and the faithful Lady
Atkyns.[3] On the 3rd of July the little dauphin was again separated
from his mother, this time to be given into the keeping of the cobbler
Antoine Simon[4] who had been named his guardian by the Committee of
General Security. The tales told by the royalist writers of the
barbarous cruelty inflicted by Simon and his wife on the child are not
proven. Marie Jeanne, in fact, took great care of the child's person,
and there is documentary evidence to prove that he had air and food. But
the Simons were obviously grotesquely unfit guardians for a prince, and
they doubtless caused much suffering to the impressionable child, who
was made on occasion to eat and drink to excess, and learnt the language
of the gutter. But the scenes related by A. de Beauchesne of the
physical martyrdom of the child are not supported by any other
testimony, though he was at this time seen by a great number of people.
On the 6th of October Pache, Chaumette, Hébert and others visited him
and secured from him admissions of infamous accusations against his
mother, with his signature to a list of her alleged crimes since her
entry in the Temple, and next day he was confronted with his sister
Marie Thérèse for the last time.

Simon's wife now fell ill, and on the 19th of January 1794 the Simons
left the Temple, after securing a receipt for the safe transfer of their
prisoner, who was declared to be in good health. A large part of the
Temple records from that time onwards were destroyed under the
Restoration, so that exact knowledge of the facts is practically
impossible. Two days after the departure of the Simons the prisoner is
said by the Restoration historians to have been put in a dark room which
was barricaded like the cage of a wild animal. The story runs that food
was passed through the bars to the child, who survived in spite of the
accumulated filth of his surroundings. Robespierre[5] visited Marie
Thérèse on the 11th of May, but no one, according to the legend, entered
the dauphin's room for six months until Barras visited the prison after
the 9th Thermidor (July 27, 1794). Barras's account of the visit
describes the child as suffering from extreme neglect, but conveys no
idea of the alleged walling in. It is nevertheless certain that during
the first half of 1794 he was very strictly secluded; he had no special
guardian, but was under the charge of guards changed from day to day.
The child made no complaint to Barras of his treatment, probably because
he feared to do so. He was then cleansed and re-clothed, his room
cleaned, and during the day he was visited by his new attendant, a
creole and a compatriot of Joséphine de Beauharnais, named Jean Jacques
Christophe Laurent (1770-1807), who had from the 8th of November onwards
assistance for his charge from a man named Gomin. The child was now
taken out to walk on the roof of the Tower. From about the time of
Gomin's entrance the prisoner was inspected, not by delegates of the
Commune, but by representatives of the civil committee of the 48
sections of Paris. The rare recurrence of the same inspectors would
obviously facilitate fraud, if any such were intended. From the end of
October onwards the child maintained an obstinate silence, explained by
Laurent as a determination taken on the day he made his deposition
against his mother. On the 19th of December 1794 he was visited by three
commissioners from the Committee of General Security--J. B. Harmand de
la Meuse, J. B. C. Mathieu and J. Reverchon--who extracted no word from
him. On Laurent's retirement Étienne Lasne was appointed on the 31st of
March 1795 to be the child's guardian. In May 1795 the prisoner was
seriously ill, and a doctor, P. J. Desault, well acquainted with the
dauphin, having visited him seven months earlier, was summoned. Desault
died suddenly, not without suspicion of poison, on the 1st of June, and
it was some days before doctors Pelletan and Dumangin were called. Then
it was announced that on the 8th Louis Charles died. Next day an autopsy
was held at which it was stated that a child apparently about ten years
of age, "which the commissioners told us was the late Louis Capet's
son," had died of a scrofulous affection of long standing. He was buried
on the 10th in the cemetery of Ste Marguerite, but no stone was erected
to mark the spot.

The weak parts of this story are the sudden and unexplained departure of
the Simons; the subsequent useless cruelty of treating the child like a
wild beast and keeping him in a dark room practically out of sight
(unless any doubt of his identity was possible), while his sister was in
comparative comfort; the cause of death, declared to be of long
standing, but in fact developed with such rapidity; the insufficient
excuse provided for the child's muteness under Gomin's régime (he had
answered Barras) and the irregularities in the formalities in attending
the death and the funeral, when a simple identification of the body by
Marie Thérèse would have prevented any question of resuscitated
dauphins. Both Barras and Harmand de la Meuse are said to have given
leave for the brother and sister to see each other, but the meeting was
never permitted. The argument from the sudden disappearance of persons
in a position to know something of the truth is of a less convincing
character. It may be noted that the more famous of the persons alleged
by partisans of subsequent pretenders to have been hustled out of the
world for their connexion with the secret are the empress Joséphine, the
due d'Enghien and the duc de Berri.

Immediately on the announcement of the dauphin's death there arose a
rumour that he had escaped. Simien-Despréaux, one of Louis XVIII.'s own
authors, stated at a later period (1814) that Louis XVII. was living and
that among the signatories of the treaty of April 13th were some who
possessed proofs of his existence; and Eckard, one of the mainstays of
the official account, left among his unpublished papers a statement that
many members of "an assembly of our wise men" obstinately named Louis
XVII. as the prince whom their wishes demanded. Unfortunately the
removal of the child suited the plans of the comte de Provence (now
Louis XVIII. for the _émigrés_) as well as it suited the revolutionary
government, and no serious attempt was made by the royal family to
ascertain the truth, though they paid none of the tributes to the memory
of the dead king which might reasonably have been expected, had they
been convinced of his death. Even his sister wore no mourning for him
until she arrived at Vienna and saw that this was expected of her. In
spite of the massive literature which has accumulated on the subject,
neither his death in the Temple nor his escape therefrom has been
definitely established, though a very strong presumption is established
in favour of the latter.

Some forty candidates for his honours were forthcoming under the
Restoration. The most important of these pretenders were Karl Wilhelm
Naundorff and the comte de Richemont. Naundorff's story rested on a
series of complicated intrigues. According to him Barras determined to
save the dauphin in order to please Joséphine Beauharnais, the future
empress, having conceived the idea of using the dauphin's existence as a
means of dominating the comte de Provence in the event of a restoration.
The dauphin was concealed in the fourth storey of the Tower, a wooden
figure being substituted for him. Laurent, to protect himself from the
consequences of the substitution, replaced the wooden figure by a deaf
mute, who was presently exchanged for the scrofulous child of the death
certificate. The deaf mute was also concealed in the Temple. It was not
the dead child, but the dauphin who left the prison in the coffin,
whence he was extracted by his friends on the way to the cemetery.
Richemont's tale that the woman Simon, who was genuinely attached to
him, smuggled him out in a basket, is simple and more credible, and does
not necessarily invalidate the story of the subsequent operations with
the deaf mute and the scrofulous patient, Laurent in that case being
deceived from the beginning, but it renders them extremely unlikely. A
third pretender, Eleazar Williams, did not affect to know anything of
his escape. He possessed, he said, no consciousness of his early years,
only emerging from idiocy at the age of thirteen, when he was living
with an Indian family in New York State. He was a missionary to the
Indians when the prince de Joinville, son of Louis Philippe, met him,
and after some conversation asked him to sign a document abdicating his
rights in favour of Louis Philippe, in return for which he, the dauphin
(alias Eleazar Williams), was to receive the private inheritance which
was his. This Eleazar refused to do. The wildness of this tale refutes

Richemont (Henri Ethelbert Louis Victor Hébert) was in prison in Milan
for seven years and began to put forward his claims in Paris in 1828. In
1833 he was again arrested, was brought to trial in the following year
and was condemned to twelve years' imprisonment. He escaped after a few
months and left the country, to return in 1840. He died at Gleize on the
10th of August 1853, the name of Louis Charles de France being inscribed
on his tomb until the government ordered its removal.

Naundorff, or Naündorff, who had arrived from nowhere in Berlin in 1810,
with papers giving the name Karl Wilhelm Naundorff, in order to escape
the persecutions of which he declared himself the object, settled at
Spandau in 1812 as a clockmaker, and married in 1818 Johanna Einert. In
1822 he removed to Brandenburg, and in 1828 to Crossen, near Frankfort.
He was imprisoned from 1825 to 1828 for coining, though apparently on
insufficient evidence, and in 1833 came to push his claims in Paris,
where he was recognized as the dauphin by many persons formerly
connected with the court of Louis XVI. Expelled from France in 1836, the
day after bringing a suit against the duchess of Angoulême for the
restitution of the dauphin's private property, he lived in exile till
his death at Delft on the 10th of August 1845, and his tomb was
inscribed "Louis XVII., roi de France et de Navarre (Charles Louis, duc
de Normandie)." The Dutch authorities who had inscribed on his death
certificate the name of Charles Louis de Bourbon, duc de Normandie
(Louis XVII.) permitted his son to bear the name de Bourbon, and when
the family appealed in 1850-1851, and again in 1874, for the restitution
of their civil rights as heirs of Louis XVI. no less an advocate than
Jules Favre pleaded their cause. Of all the pretenders Naundorff has the
best case. He was certainly not the Jew of Prussian Poland which his
enemies declared him to be, and he has to this day a circle of devoted
adherents. Since he was sincerely convinced of his own rights, it is
surprising that he put forward no claim in 1814.

If the dauphin did escape, it seems probable that he perished shortly
afterwards or lived in a safe obscurity. The account of the substitution
in the Temple is well substantiated, even to the names of the
substitutes. The curious imbroglio deceived royalists and republicans
alike. Lady Atkyns was trying by every possible means to get the dauphin
out of his prison when he was apparently already in safe hands, if not
outside the Temple walls. A child was in fact delivered to her agents,
but he was a deaf mute. That there was fraud, and complicated fraud, in
the guardians of the dauphin may be taken as proved by a succession of
writers from 1850 onwards, and more recently by Frédéric Barbey, who
wisely attempts no ultimate solution. When the partisans of Richemont or
Naundorff come to the post-Temple careers of their heroes, they become
in most cases so uncritical as to be unconvincing.

  The official version of the dauphin's history as accepted under the
  Restoration was drawn up by Simien Despréaux in his uncritical _Louis
  XVII._ (1817), and is found, fortified by documents, in M. Eckard's
  _Mémoires historiques sur Louis XVII_. (1817) and in A. de
  Beauchesne's _Louis XVII., sa vie, son agonie, sa mort. Captivité de
  la famille royale au Temple_ (2 vols., 1852, and many subsequent
  editions), containing copies of original documents, and essential to
  the study of the question, although its sentimental pictures of the
  boy martyr can no longer be accepted. L. de la Sicotière, "Les faux
  Louis XVII.," in _Revue des questions historiques_ (vol. xxxii.,
  1882), deals with the pretenders Jean Marie Hervagault, Mathurin
  Bruneau and the rest; see also Dr Cabanes, _Les Morts mystérieuses de
  l'histoire_ (1901), and revised catalogue of the J. Sanford Saltus
  collection of Louis XVII. books (New York, 1908). Catherine Welch, in
  _The Little Dauphin_ (1908) gives a résumé of the various sides of the

  Madame Royale's own account of the captivity of the Temple was first
  printed with additions and suppressions in 1817, and often
  subsequently, the best edition being that from her autograph text by
  G. Lenôtre, _La Fille de Louis XVI., Marie Thérèse Charlotte de
  France, duchesse d'Angoulême, le Temple, l'échange, l'exil_ (1907).
  There are two collections of writings on the subject: _Marie Thérèse
  de France_, compiled (1852) by the marquis de Pastoret, and comprising
  beside the memoir written by Marie Thérèse herself, articles by M. de
  Montbel, Sainte-Beuve, J. Lemoine, La Guéronnière and extracts from
  Joseph Weber's memoirs; and _Mémoires de Marie Thérèse duchesse
  d'Angoulême_, comprising extracts from the narratives of Charles Goret
  (_Mon Témoignage_, 1852), of C. F. Beaulieu (_Mémoire adressée à la
  nation_, 1795), of L. G. Michaud (_Opinion d'un Français_, 1795) and
  of Mme de Tourzel (_Mémoires_ 1883). Cf. A. Lanne, _La Soeur de Louis
  XVII._, and the articles on "Madame Royale," on the "Captivité de la
  famille royale au Temple" and on the "Mise en liberté de Madame" in M.
  Tourneux's _Bibliographie de l'histoire de Paris pendant la révolution
  française_ (vol. iv., 1906, and vol. i., 1890).

  _Naündorff._--For the case of Naündorff see his own narrative, _Abrégé
  de l'histoire des infortunes du Dauphin_ (London, 1836; Eng. trans.,
  1838); also Modeste Gruau de la Barre, _Intrigues dévoilées ou Louis
  XVII._ ... (3 vols., Rotterdam, 1846-1848); O. Friedrichs,
  _Correspondance intime et inédite de Louis XVII._ (Naündorff)
  1834-1838 (2 vols., 1904); _Plaidoirie de Jules Favre devant la cour
  d'appel de Paris pour les héritiers de feu Charles-Guillaume
  Naündorff_ (1874); H. Provins, _Le Dernier roi légitime de France_ (2
  vols., the first of which consists of destructive criticism of
  Beauchesne and his followers, 1889); A. Lanne, "Louis XVII. et le
  secret de la Révolution," _Bulletin mensuel_ (1893 et seq.) of the
  Société des études sur la question Louis XVII., also _La Légitimité_
  (Bordeaux, Toulouse, 1883-1898). See further the article "Naündorff"
  in M. Tourneux, _Bibl. de la ville de Paris pendant la Révolution_,
  vol. iv. (1906).

  _Williams._--J. H. Hanson, _The Lost Prince: Facts tending to prove
  the Identity of Louis XVII. of France and the Rev. Eleazer Williams_
  (London and New York, 1854).

  _De Richemont._--_Mémoires du duc de Normandie, fils de Louis XVI.,
  écrits et publiés par lui-même_ (Paris, 1831), compiled, according to
  Quérard, by E. T. Bourg, called Saint Edme; Morin de Guérivière,
  _Quelques souvenirs_ ... (Paris, 1832); and J. Suvigny, _La
  Restauration convaincue ... ou preuves de l'existence du fils de Louis
  XVI._ (Paris, 1851).

  The widespread interest taken in Louis XVII. is shown by the fact that
  since 1905 a monthly periodical has appeared in Paris on this subject,
  entitled _Revue historique de la question Louis XVII._, also by the
  promised examination of the subject by the Société d'Histoire
  contemporaine.     (M. Br.)


  [1] F. A. Regnier de Jarjayes (1745-1822). See P. Gaulot, _Un Complot
    sous la Terreur_.

  [2] Jean, baron de Batz (1761-1822), attempted to carry off the
    dauphin in 1794. See G. Lenôtre, _Un Conspirateur royaliste pendant
    la Terreur, le baron de Batz_ (1896).

  [3] Charlotte Walpole (c. 1785-1836), an English actress who married
    in 1779 Sir Edward Atkyns, and spent most of her life in France. She
    expended large sums in trying to secure the escape of the prisoners
    of the Temple. See F. Barbey, _A Friend of Marie Antoinette_ (Eng.
    ed. 1906).

  [4] Antoine Simon (1736-1794) married Marie Jeanne Aladame, and
    belonged to the section of the Cordeliers. They owed their position
    to Anaxagoras Chaumette, procureur of the Commune, and to the fact
    that Simon had prevented one of the attempts of the baron de Batz.
    Simon was sent to the guillotine with Robespierre in 1794, and two
    years later Marie Jeanne entered a hospital for incurables in the rue
    de Sèvres, where she constantly affirmed the dauphin's escape. She
    was secretly visited after the Restoration by the duchess of
    Angoulême. On the 16th of November 1816, she was interrogated by the
    police, who frightened her into silence about the supposed
    substitution of another child for the dauphin. She died in 1819. See
    G. Lenôtre, _Vieilles maisons, vieux papiers_ (2nd series, 1903).

  [5] In a bulletin dated May 17-24, Paris, and enclosed by Francis
    Drake (June 17, 1794) at Milan to Lord Grenville, it is stated (Hist.
    MSS. Comm. Fortescue Papers at Dropmore, vol. ii. 576-577) that
    Robespierre in the night of 23-24 May fetched the king (the dauphin)
    from the Temple and took him to Meudon. "The fact is certain,
    although only known to the Committee of Public Safety. It is said to
    be ascertained that he was brought back to the Temple the night of
    24-25th, and that this was a test to assure the ease of seizing him."
    This police report at least serves to show the kind of rumour then

LOUIS XVIII. (LOUIS LE DÉSIRÉ) (1755-1824). Louis-Stanislas-Xavier,
comte de Provence, third son of the dauphin Louis, son of Louis XV., and
of Maria Josepha of Saxony, was born at Versailles on the 17th of
November 1755. His education was supervised by the devout duc de la
Vauguyon, but his own taste was for the writings of Voltaire and the
encyclopaedists. On the 14th of May 1771 took place his marriage with
Louise-Marie-Joséphine of Savoy, by whom he had no children. His
position at court was uncomfortable, for though ambitious and conscious
of possessing greater abilities than his brother (Louis XVI.), his scope
for action was restricted; he consequently devoted his energies largely
to intrigue, especially against Marie Antoinette, whom he hated.[1]
During the long absence of heirs to Louis XVI., "Monsieur," as heir to
the throne, courted popularity and took an active part in politics, but
the birth of a dauphin (1781) was a blow to his ambitions.[2] He opposed
the revival of the _parlements_, wrote a number of political
pamphlets,[3] and at the Assembly of Notables presided, like the other
princes of the blood, over a bureau, to which was given the name of the
_Comité des sages_; he also advocated the double representation of the
_tiers_. At the same time he cultivated literature, entertaining poets
and writers both at the Luxembourg and at his château of Brunoy (see
Dubois-Corneau, _Le Comte de Provence à Brunoy_, 1909), and gaining a
reputation for wit by his verses and _mots_ in the salon of the charming
and witty comtesse de Balbi, one of Madame's ladies, who had become his
mistress,[4] and till 1793 exerted considerable influence over him. He
did not emigrate after the taking of the Bastille, but, possibly from
motives of ambition, remained in Paris. Mirabeau thought at one time of
making him chief minister in his projected constitutional government
(see _Corr. de Mirabeau et La Marck_, ed. Bacourt, i. 434, 436, 442),
but was disappointed by his caution and timidity. The _affaire Favras_
(Dec. 1789) aroused great feeling against Monsieur, who was believed by
many to have conspired with Favras, only to abandon him (see Lafayette's
_Mems._ and _Corr. of Mirabeau_). In June 1791, at the time of the
flight to Varennes, Monsieur also fled by a different route, and, in
company with the comte d'Avaray[5]--who subsequently replaced Mme de
Balbi as his confidant, and largely influenced his policy during the
emigration--succeeded in reaching Brussels, where he joined the comte
d'Artois and proceeded to Coblenz, which now became the headquarters of
the emigration.

Here, living in royal state, he put himself at the head of the
counter-revolutionary movement, appointing ambassadors, soliciting the
aid of the European sovereigns, and especially of Catherine II. of
Russia. Out of touch with affairs in France and surrounded by violent
anti-revolutionists, headed by Calonne and the comte d'Artois, he
followed an entirely selfish policy, flouting the National Assembly (see
his reply to the summons of the National Assembly, in Daudet, _op. cit._
i. 96), issuing uncompromising manifestoes (Sept. 1791, Aug. 1792, &c.),
and obstructing in every way the representatives of the king and
queen.[6] After Valmy he had to retire to Hamm in Westphalia, where, on
the death of Louis XVI., he proclaimed himself regent; from here he went
south, with the idea of encouraging the royalist feeling in the south of
France, and settled at Verona, where on the death of Louis XVII. (8th of
June 1795) he took the title of Louis XVIII. At this time ended his
_liaison_ with Mme de Balbi, and the influence of d'Avaray reached its
height. From this time onward his life is a record of constant
wanderings, negotiations and conspiracies. In April 1796 he joined
Condé's army on the German frontier, but was shortly requested to leave
the country, and accepted the hospitality of the duke of Brunswick at
Blanckenberg till 1797, when, this refuge being no longer open to him,
the emperor Paul I. permitted him to settle at Mittau in Courland, where
he stayed till 1801. All this time he was in close communication with
the royalists in France, but was much embarrassed by the conflicting
policy pursued by the comte d'Artois from England, and was largely at
the mercy of corrupt and dishonest agents.[7] At Mittau was realized his
cherished plan of marrying Madame Royale, daughter of Louis XVI., to the
duc d'Angoulême, elder son of the comte d'Artois. From Mittau, too, was
sent his well-known letter to Bonaparte (1799) calling upon him to play
the part of Monk, a proposal contemptuously refused (E. Daudet, _Hist.
de l'émigration_, ii. 371, 436), though Louis in turn declined to accept
a pension from Bonaparte, and later, in 1803, though his fortunes were
at their lowest ebb, refused to abdicate at his suggestion and accept an

Suddenly expelled from Mittau in 1801 by the capricious Paul I., Louis
made his way, in the depth of winter, to Warsaw, where he stayed for
three years. All this time he was trying to convert France to the
royalist cause, and had a "_conseil royal_" in Paris, founded at the end
of 1799 by Royer-Collard, Montesquiou and Clermont-Gallerande, the
actions of which were much impeded by the activity of the rival
committee of the comte d'Artois (see E. Daudet, _op. cit._ ii., and
Remâcle, _Bonaparte et les Bourbons_, Paris, 1899), but after 1800, and
still more after the failure of the royalist conspiracy of Cadoudal,
Pichegru and Moreau, followed by the execution of the duc d'Enghien
(March 1804), and the assumption by Napoleon of the title of emperor
(May 1804), the royalist cause appeared quite hopeless. In September
1804 Louis met the comte d'Artois at Calmar in Sweden, and they issued a
protest against Napoleon's action, but being warned that he must not
return to Poland, he gained permission from Alexander I. again to retire
to Mittau. After Tilsit, however (1807), he was again forced to depart,
and took refuge in England, where he stayed first at Gosfield in Essex,
and afterwards (1809 onwards) at Hartwell in Buckinghamshire. In 1810
his wife died, and in 1811 d'Avaray died, his place as favourite being
taken by the comte de Blacas.[8] After Napoleon's defeats in 1813 the
hopes of the royalists revived, and Louis issued a fresh manifesto, in
which he promised to recognize the results of the Revolution.
Negotiations were also opened with Bernadotte, who seemed willing to
support his cause, but was really playing for his own hand.

In March 1814 the Allies entered Paris, and thanks to Talleyrand's
negotiations the restoration of the Bourbons was effected, Louis XVIII.
entering Paris on the 2nd of May 1814, after issuing the declaration of
St Ouen, in which he promised to grant the nation a constitution
(_octroyer une charte_). He was now nearly sixty, wearied by adversity,
and a sufferer from gout and obesity. But though clear-sighted, widely
read and a good diplomatist, his impressionable and sentimental nature
made him too subject to personal and family influences. His concessions
to the reactionary and clerical party of the _émigrés_, headed by the
comte d'Artois and the duchesse d'Angoulême, aroused suspicions of his
loyalty to the constitution, the creation of his _Maison militaire_
alienated the army, and the constant presence of Blacas made the
formation of a united ministry impossible. After the Hundred Days,
during which the king was forced to flee to Ghent, the dismissal of
Blacas was made one of the conditions of his second restoration. On the
8th of July he again entered Paris, "in the baggage train of the allied
armies," as his enemies said, but in spite of this was received with the
greatest enthusiasm[9] by a people weary of wars and looking for
constitutional government. He was forced to retain Talleyrand and Fouché
in his first ministry, but took the first opportunity of ridding himself
of them when the elections of 1815 assured him of a strong royalist
majority in the chamber (the _chambre introuvable_, a name given it by
Louis himself). At this time he came into contact with the young comte
(afterwards duc) Decazes, prefect of the police under Fouché, and
minister of police in Richelieu's ministry, who now became his favourite
and gained his entire confidence (see E. Daudet, _Louis XVIII. et le duc
Decazes_). Having obtained a ministry in which he could trust, having as
members the duc de Richelieu and Decazes, the king now gave it his loyal
support and did his best to shield his ministers from the attacks of the
royal family. In September 1816, alarmed at the violence of the _chambre
introuvable_, he was persuaded to dissolve it. An attempt on the part of
the Ultras to regain their ascendancy over the king, by conniving at the
sudden return of Blacas from Rome to Paris,[10] ended in failure.

The events and ministerial changes of Louis XVIII.'s reign are described
under the article FRANCE: _History_, but it may be said here that the
king's policy throughout was one of prudence and common sense. His
position was more passive than active, and consisted in giving his
support as far as possible to the ministry of the day. While Decazes
was still in power, the king's policy to a large extent followed his,
and was rather liberal and moderate, but after the assassination of the
duc de Berry (1820), when he saw that Decazes could no longer carry on
the government, he sorrowfully acquiesced in his departure, showered
honours upon him, and transferred his support to Richelieu, the head of
the new ministry. In the absence of Decazes a new favourite was found to
amuse the king's old age, Madame du Cayla (Zoé Talon, comtesse du
Cayla), a protégée of the vicomte Sosthène de la Rochefoucauld and
consequently a creature of the Ultras. As the king became more and more
infirm, his power of resistance to the intrigues of the Ultras became
weaker. The birth of a posthumous son to the duc de Berry (Sept. 1820),
the death of Napoleon (5th of May 1821) and the resignation of Richelieu
left him entirely in their hands, and after Villèle had formed a
ministry of a royalist character the comte d'Artois was associated with
the government, which passed more and more out of the king's hands. He
died on the 16th of September 1824, worn out in body, but still
retaining flashes of his former clear insight and scepticism. The
character of Louis XVIII. may be summed up in the words of Bonaparte,
quoted by Sorel (_L'Europe et la Rév. fr._ viii. 416 footnote), "C'est
Louis XVI. avec moins de franchise et plus d'esprit." He had all the
Bourbon characteristics, especially their love of power, combined with a
certain nobility of demeanour, and a consciousness of his dignity as
king. But his nature was cold, unsympathetic and calculating, combined
with a talent for intrigue, to which was added an excellent memory and a
ready wit. An interesting judgment of him is contained in _Queen
Victoria's Letters_, vol. i., in a letter of Leopold I., king of the
Belgians, to the queen before her accession, dated the 18th of November
1836, "Poor Charles X. is dead.... History will state that Louis XVIII.
was a most liberal monarch, reigning with great mildness and justice to
his end, but that his brother, from his despotic and harsh disposition,
upset all the other had done and lost the throne. Louis XVIII. was a
clever, hard-hearted man, shackled by no principle, very proud and
false. Charles X. an honest man, a kind friend," &c. &c. This seems
fairly just as a personal estimate, though it does not do justice to
their respective political rôles.

  BIBLIOGRAPHY.--There is no trustworthy or complete edition of the
  writings and correspondence of Louis XVIII. The _Mémoires de Louis
  XVIII. recueillis et mis en ordre par M. le duc de D. ..._ (12 vols.,
  Paris, 1832-1833) are compiled by Lamothe-Langon, a well-known
  compiler of more or less apocryphal memoirs. From the hand of Louis
  XVIII. are: _Relation d'un voyage à Bruxelles et à Coblentz_, 1791
  (Paris, 1823, with dedication to d'Avaray); and _Journal de
  Marie-Thérèse de France, duchesse d'Angoulême, corrigé et annoté par
  Louis XVIII._, ed. Imbert de St Amand (Paris, 1896). Some of his
  letters are contained in collections, such as _Lettres d'Artwell;
  correspondance politique et privée de Louis XVIII., roi de France_
  (Paris, 1830; letters addressed to d'Avaray); _Lettres et instructions
  de Louis XVIII. au comte de Saint-Priest_, ed. Barante (Paris, 1845);
  _Talleyrand et Louis XVIII., corr. pendant le congrès de Vienne,
  1814-1815_, ed. Pallain (1881; trans., 2 vols., 1881); see also the
  corr. of Castlereagh, Metternich, J. de Maistre, the Wellington
  Dispatches, &c., and such collections as _Corr. diplomatique de Pozzo
  di Borgo avec le comte de Nesselrode_ (2 vols., 1890-1897), the
  correspondence of C. de Rémusat, Villèle, &c. The works of E. Daudet
  are of the greatest importance, and based on original documents; the
  chief are: _La Terreur Blanche_ (Paris, 1878); _Hist. de la
  restauration 1814-1830_ (1882); _Louis XVIII. et le duc Decazes_
  (1899); _Hist. de l'émigration_, in three studies: (i.) _Les Bourbons
  et la Russie_ (1886), (ii.) _Les Émigrés et la seconde coalition_
  (1886), (iii.) _Coblenz_, 1789-1793 (1890). Developed from these with
  the addition of much further material is his _Hist. de l'émigration_
  (3 vols., 1904-1907). Also based on original documents is E. Romberg
  and A. Malet, _Louis XVIII. et les cent-jours à Gand_ (1898). See also
  G. Stenger, _Le Retour des Bourbons_ (1908); Cte. L. de Remâcle,
  _Bonaparte et les Bourbons. Relations secrèts des agents du cte. de
  Provence sous le consulat_ (Paris, 1899). For various episodes, see
  Vicomte de Reiset, _La Comtesse de Balbi_ (Paris, 1908; contains a
  long bibliography, chiefly of memoirs concerning the emigration, and
  is based on documents); J. B. H. R. Capefigue, _La Comtesse du Cayla_
  (Paris, 1866); J. Turquan, _Les Favorites de Louis XVIII._ (Paris,
  1900); see also the chief memoirs of the period, such as those of
  Talleyrand, Chateaubriand, Guizot, duc de Broglie, Villèle, Vitrolles,
  Pasquier, the comtesse de Boigne (ed. Nicoullaud, Paris, 1907), the
  Vicomte L. F. Sosthène de la Rochefoucauld (15 vols., Paris,
  1861-1864); and the writings of Benjamin Constant, Chateaubriand, &c.

  General Works.--See the histories of France, the Emigration, the
  Restoration and especially the very full bibliographies to chapters
  i., ii. and iii. of _Cambridge Modern History_, and Lavisse and
  Rambaud, _Hist. générale_, vol. x.     (C. B. P.)


  [1] See Arneth and Geffroy, _Corr. de Marie-Thérèse avec le comte de
    Mercy-Argenteau_, vol. i., "Mercy to Maria Theresa, June 22nd, 1771,"
    also i. 261, ii. 186, 352, 393. Marie Antoinette says (ii. 393): "...
    à un caractère très faible, il joint une marche souterraine, et
    quelquefois très basse."

  [2] See his letters to Gustavus III. of Sweden in A. Geffroy,
    _Gustave III et la cour de France_, vol. ii. appendix.

  [3] Two pamphlets at least are ascribed to him: "Les Mannequins,
    conte ou histoire, comme l'on voudra" (against Turgot; anon., Paris,
    1776) and "Description historique d'un monstre symbolique pris vivant
    sur les bords du lac Fagua, près de Santa-Fé, par les soins de
    Francisco Xaveiro de Neunris" (against Calonne; Paris, 1784) (A.
    Debidour in _La Grande Encyclopédie_).

  [4] It has frequently been alleged that his relations with Mme de
    Balbi, and indeed with women generally, were of a platonic nature. De
    Reiset (_La Comtesse de Balbi_, pp. 152-161) produces evidence to
    disprove this assertion.

  [5] Antoine-Louis-François de Bésiade, comte, afterwards duc,
    d'Avaray. In spite of his loyalty and devotion, the effect of his
    influence on Louis XVIII. may be gathered from a letter of J. de
    Maistre to Blacas, quoted by E. Daudet, _Hist. de l'émigration_, ii.
    11: "celui qui n'a pu dans aucun pays aborder aucun homme politique
    sans l'aliéner n'est pas fait pour les affaires."

  [6] See Klinckowström, _Le Comte de Fersen et la cour de France_.
    Fersen says (i. 7), "Monsieur ferait mieux seul, mais il est
    entièrement subjugué par l'autre" (i.e. the comte d'Artois, who was
    in turn under the influence of Calonne). See Daudet, _op. cit._ vol.

  [7] See E. Daudet, _La Conjuration de Pichegru_ (Paris, 1901).

  [8] Pierre-Louis-Casimir, comte (afterwards duc) de Blacas d'Aulps,
    was as rigidly royalist as d'Avaray, but more able. E. Daudet, _Hist.
    de l'émigration_, i. 458, quotes a judgment of him by J. de Maistre:
    "Il est né homme d état et ambassadeur."

    [9] See account by Decazes in E. Daudet, _Louis XVIII. et le duc
    Decazes_, pp. 48-49, and an interesting "secret and confidential"
    letter of Castlereagh to Liverpool (July 8, 1815) in the unpublished
    Foreign Office records: "The king sent for the duke and me this
    evening to the Thuilleries.... We found him in a state of great
    emotion and exaltation at the reception he had met with from his
    subjects, which appears to have been even more animated than on his
    former entrance. Indeed, during the long audience to which we were
    admitted, it was almost impossible to converse, so loud were the
    shouts of the people in the Thuilleries Gardens, which were full,
    though it was then dark. Previous to the king's dismissing us, he
    carried the duke and me to the open window. Candles were then
    brought, which enabled the people to see the king with the duke by
    his side. They ran from all parts of the Gardens, and formed a solid
    mass of an immense extent, rending the air with acclamations. The
    town is very generally illuminated, and I understand from men who
    have traversed the principal streets that every demonstration of joy
    was manifested by the inhabitants."

    [10] It is as yet not proved that Blacas returned from his embassy in
    response to a summons from the Ultras. But whether it was on his own
    initiative or not, there can be no doubt as to the hopes which they
    built on his arrival (see Daudet, _Louis XVIII. et le duc Decazes_).

LOUIS I. (1326-1382), called "the great," king of Hungary and Poland,
was the third son of Charles Robert, king of Hungary, and Elizabeth,
daughter of the Polish king, Ladislaus Lokietek. In 1342 he succeeded
his father as king of Hungary and was crowned at Székesfehérvár on the
21st of July with great enthusiasm. Though only sixteen he understood
Latin, German and Italian as well as his mother tongue. He owed his
relatively excellent education to the care of his mother, a woman of
profound political sagacity, who was his chief counsellor in diplomatic
affairs during the greater part of his long reign. Italian politics
first occupied his attention. As a ruler of a rising great power in
search of a seaboard he was the natural adversary of the Venetian
republic, which already aimed at making the Adriatic a purely Venetian
sea and resented the proximity of the Magyars in Dalmatia. The first
trial of strength began in 1345, when the city of Zara placed herself
under the protection of Hungary and was thereupon invested by the
Venetians. Louis fought a battle beneath the walls of Zara (July 1st,
1346), which has been immortalized by Tintoretto, but was defeated and
compelled to abandon the city to the republic. The struggle was renewed
eleven years later when Louis, having formed, with infinite trouble, a
league of all the enemies of Venice, including the emperor, the
Habsburgs, Genoa and other Italian towns, attacked his maritime rival
with such vigour that she sued for peace, and by the treaty of Zara
(February 18th, 1358) ceded most of the Dalmatian towns and renounced
the title of duke of Dalmatia and Croatia, hitherto borne by the doge.
Far more important than the treaty itself was the consequent voluntary
submission of the independent republic of Ragusa to the suzerainty of
the crown of St Stephen the same year, Louis, in return for an annual
tribute of 500 ducats and a fleet, undertaking to defend Ragusa against
all her enemies. Still more glorious for Hungary was Louis's third war
with Venice (1378-1381), when he was again aided by the Genoese. At an
early stage of the contest Venice was so hardly pressed that she offered
to do homage to Hungary for all her possessions. But her immense
resources enabled her to rally her forces, and peace was finally
concluded between all the powers concerned at the congress of Turin
(1381), Venice virtually surrendering Dalmatia to Louis and undertaking
to pay him an annual tribute of 7000 ducats. The persistent hostility of
Venice is partially attributable to her constant fear lest Louis should
inherit the crown of Naples and thus threaten her trade and her
sea-power from two sides simultaneously. Louis's younger brother Andrew
had wedded Joanna, granddaughter and heiress of old King Robert of
Naples, on whose death, in 1343, she reigned in her own right, refused
her consort any share in the government, and is very strongly suspected
of having secured his removal by assassination on the night of the 19th
of September 1345. She then married Prince Louis of Taranto, and strong
in the double support of the papal court at Avignon and of the Venetian
republic (both of whom were opposed to Magyar aggrandisement in Italy)
questioned the right of Louis to the two Sicilies, which he claimed as
the next heir of his murdered brother. In 1347, and again in 1350, Louis
occupied Naples and craved permission to be crowned king, but the papal
see was inexorable and he was compelled to withdraw. The matter was not
decided till 1378 when Joanna, having made the mistake of recognizing
the antipope Clement VII., was promptly deposed and excommunicated in
favour of Prince Charles of Durazzo, who had been brought up at the
Hungarian court. Louis, always inexhaustible in expedients, determined
to indemnify himself in the north for his disappointments in the south.
With the Habsburgs, Hungary's natural rivals in the west, Louis
generally maintained friendly relations. From 1358 to 1368, however, the
restless ambition of Rudolph, duke of Austria, who acquired Tirol and
raised Vienna to the first rank among the cities of Europe, caused Louis
great uneasiness. But Louis always preferred arbitration to war, and
the peace congresses of Nagyszombat (1360) and of Pressburg (1360)
summoned by him adjusted all the outstanding differences between the
central European powers. Louis's diplomacy, moreover, was materially
assisted by his lifelong alliance with his uncle, the childless Casimir
the Great of Poland, who had appointed him his successor; and on
Casimir's death Louis was solemnly crowned king of Poland at Cracow
(Nov. 17, 1370). This personal union of the two countries was more
glorious than profitable. Louis could give little attention to his
unruly Polish subjects and was never very happy among them. Immovably
entrenched behind their privileges, they rendered him only the minimum
of service; but he compelled their representatives, assembled at Kassa,
to recognize his daughter Maria and her affianced husband, Count
Sigismund of Brandenburg, as their future king and queen by locking the
gates of the city and allowing none to leave it till they had consented
to his wishes (1374). Louis is the first European monarch who came into
collision with the Turks. He seems to have arrested their triumphant
career (c. 1372), and the fine church erected by him at Maria-Zell is a
lasting memorial of his victories. From the first he took a just view of
the Turkish peril, but the peculiar local and religious difficulties of
the whole situation in the Balkans prevented him from dealing with it
effectually (see HUNGARY, _History_). Louis died suddenly at Nagyszombat
on the 10th of September 1382. He left two daughters Maria and Jadwiga
(the latter he destined for the throne of Hungary) under the
guardianship of his widow, the daughter of the valiant ban of Bosnia,
Stephen Kotromaníc, whom he married in 1353, and who was in every way
worthy of him.

  See _Rationes Collectorum Pontif. in Hungaria, 1281-1375_ (Budapest,
  1887); Dano Gruber, _The Struggle of Louis I. with the Venetians for
  Dalmatia_ (Croat.) (Agram, 1903); Antal Pór, _Life of Louis the Great_
  (Hung.) (Budapest, 1892); and _History of the Hungarian Nation_
  (Hung.) (vol. 3, Budapest, 1895).     (R. N. B.)

LOUIS II. (1506-1526), king of Hungary and Bohemia, was the only son of
Wladislaus II., king of Hungary and Bohemia, and the French princess
Anne of Candale. Prematurely born at Buda on the 1st of July 1506, it
required all the resources of medical science to keep the sickly child
alive, yet he developed so precociously that at the age of thirteen he
was well bearded and moustached, while at eighteen his hair was silvery
white. His parts were good and he could speak and write six languages at
a very early age, but the zeal of his guardians and tutors to make a man
of him betimes nearly ruined his feeble constitution, while the riotous
life led by him and his young consort, Maria of Austria, whom he wedded
on the 13th of January 1522, speedily disqualified him for affairs, so
that at last he became an object of ridicule at his own court. He was
crowned king of Hungary on the 4th of June 1508, and king of Bohemia on
the 11th of May 1509, and was declared of age when he succeeded his
father on the 11th of December 1521. But during the greater part of his
reign he was the puppet of the magnates and kept in such penury that he
was often obliged to pawn his jewels to get proper food and clothing.
His guardians, Cardinal Bakócz and Count George of Brandenburg-Anspach,
shamefully neglected him, squandered the royal revenues and distracted
the whole kingdom with their endless dissensions. Matters grew even
worse on the death of Bakócz, when the magnates István Báthory, János
Zapolya and István Verböczy fought each other furiously, and used the
diets as their tools. Added to these troubles was the ever-present
Turkish peril, which became acute after the king, with insensate levity,
arrested the Ottoman envoy Berham in 1521 and refused to unite with
Suleiman in a league against the Habsburgs. Nevertheless in the last
extremity Louis showed more of manhood than any of his counsellors. It
was he who restored something like order by intervening between the
magnates and the gentry at the diet of 1525. It was he who collected in
his camp at Tolna the army of 25,000 men which perished utterly on the
fatal field of Mohács on the 29th of August 1526. He was drowned in the
swollen stream of Csele on his flight from the field, being the second
prince of the house of Jagiello who laid down his life for Hungary.

  See _Rerum Hungaricarum libri_ (vol. 2, ed. Ferencz Toldy, Budapest,
  1867); and József Podhradczky, _King Louis_ (Hung.) (Budapest, 1860).
       (R. N. B.)

LOUIS, the name of three kings of Naples, members of the house of Anjou.

LOUIS I., duke of Anjou and count of Maine (1339-1384), was the second
son of John II., king of France, and was born at Vincennes on the 23rd
of July 1339. Having been given the duchy of Anjou in 1356 he led a wing
of the French army at the battle of Poitiers and was sent to England as
a hostage after the conclusion of the treaty of Brétigny in 1360, but he
broke his parole in 1363 and so brought about King John's return into
captivity. He took part in the war against England which was renewed in
1369, uniting the rival houses of Foix and Armagnac in the common cause,
and in other ways rendering good service to his brother, King Charles V.
Anjou's entrance into the troubled politics of Italy was one result of
the papal schism which opened in 1378. Anxious to secure the support of
France, the antipope Clement VII. persuaded the queen of Naples, Joanna
I., to name Louis as her heir, and about the same time the death of
Charles V. (September 1380) placed the duke in the position of regent of
France. Neglecting France to prosecute his ambitions in Italy, he
collected money and marched on Naples; but although helped by Amadeus
VI., count of Savoy, he was unable to drive his rival, Charles, duke of
Durazzo, from Naples. His army was destroyed by disease and Louis
himself died at Biseglia, near Bari, on the 20th of September 1384,
leaving two sons, his successor, Louis II., and Charles, duke of

LOUIS II., duke of Anjou (1377-1417), born at Toulon on the 7th of
October 1377, took up the struggle for Naples after his father's death
and was crowned king by Clement VII. in 1389. After carrying on the
contest for some years his enemies prevailed and he was compelled to
take refuge in France, where he took part in the intestine strife which
was desolating that kingdom. A few years later he made other attempts to
secure the kingdom of Naples, which was now in the possession of
Ladislas, a son of his father's foeman, Charles of Durazzo, and he
gained a victory at Roccoserra in May 1411. Soon, however, he was again
driven back to France, and after sharing anew in the civil wars of his
country he died at Angers on the 29th of April 1417. His wife was
Yolande, a daughter of John I., king of Aragon, and his son was his
successor, Louis III.

LOUIS III., duke of Anjou (1403-1434), born on the 25th of September
1403, made in his turn an attempt to conquer Naples. This was in 1420,
and he had met with considerable success in his task when he died at
Cosenza on the 15th of November 1434. In 1424 Louis received from King
Charles VII. the duchy of Touraine.

Another titular king of Naples of this name was Louis, a son of Philip,
prince of Taranto. In 1346 he became the husband of Joanna I., queen of
Naples, and in 1352 he was crowned king. After making an attempt to
conquer Sicily he died on the 26th of May 1362.

LOUIS (893-911), surnamed the "Child," king of the Franks, son of the
emperor Arnulf, was born at Ottingen, designated by Arnulf as his
successor in Germany in 897, and crowned on the 4th of February 900.
Although he never received the imperial crown, he is sometimes referred
to as the emperor Louis IV. His chief adviser was Hatto I., archbishop
of Mainz; and during his reign the kingdom was ravaged by Hungarians and
torn with internal strife. He appears to have passed his time in
journeys from place to place, and in 910 was the nominal leader of an
expedition against the Hungarians which was defeated near Augsburg.
Louis, who was the last of the German Carolingians, died in August or
September 911 and was buried at Regensburg.

  See Regino von Prüm, "Chronicon," in the _Monumenta Germaniae
  historica. Scriptores_, Band i. (Hanover and Berlin, 1826); E.
  Dümmler, _Geschichte des ostfränkischen Reichs_ (Leipzig, 1887-1888);
  O. Dietrich, _Beiträge zur Geschichte Arnolfs von Kärnthen und Ludwigs
  des Kindes_ (Berlin, 1890); and E. Mühlbacher, _Die Regesten des
  Kaiserreichs unter den Karolingern_ (Innsbruck, 1881).     (A. W. H.*)

LOUIS OF NASSAU (1538-1574), son of William, count of Nassau, and
Juliana von Stolberg, and younger brother of William the Silent, took an
active part in the revolt of the Netherlands against Spanish domination.
He was one of the leaders of the league of nobles who signed the
document known as "the Compromise" in 1566, and a little later was a
member of the deputation who presented the petition of grievances called
"the Request" to the regent, Margaret of Parma. It was on this occasion
that the appellation of "the Beggars" (_les Gueux_) was first given to
the opponents of King Philip's policy. On the arrival of Alva at
Brussels, Count Louis, with his brother William, withdrew from the
Netherlands and raised a body of troops in defence of the patriot cause.
In the spring of 1568 Louis invaded Friesland, and at Heiligerlee, on
the 23rd of May, completely defeated a Spanish force under Count
Aremberg, who was killed. Alva then advanced to meet the invaders with a
large army, and at Jemmingen (July 21), with very slight loss,
annihilated the levies of Louis, who himself escaped by swimming from
the field across an estuary of the Ems. He now joined the army of his
brother William, which had in October to beat a hasty retreat before
Alva's superior skill. Then Louis, in company with his brothers William
and Henry, made his way across the French frontier to the camp of the
Huguenot leader, Admiral Coligny. Louis took an active part in the
campaign and fought heroically at Jarnac and Moncontour. In 1572 Louis,
not deterred by previous disaster, raised a small force in France, and,
suddenly entering Hainaut, captured Mons (May 23). Here he was besieged
by Don Frederick of Toledo, Alva's natural son, who blockaded all
approach to the town. William made an attempt to relieve his brother,
but failed, and Mons had to surrender (September 17). Louis, who was
sick with fever, withdrew to his ancestral home, Dillenburg, to recruit
his health, and then once more to devote his energies to the raising of
money and troops for another invasion of the Netherlands. In the hope of
drawing away the Spaniards from the siege of Leiden by a diversion in
the south, Louis, with his brothers John and Henry, at the head of a
force of mixed nationalities and little discipline, crossed the frontier
near Maastricht, and advanced as far as the Mookerheide near Nijmwegen.
Here he was attacked by a body of Spanish veterans under an experienced
leader, Sancho d'Avila, and speedily routed. In the disorderly flight
both Louis and his younger brother Henry, refusing to abandon the field,
lost their lives. Their bodies were never recovered. Thus perished at
the age of thirty-six one of the most chivalrous and gifted of a gallant
band of brothers, four of whom laid down their lives in their country's

  See P. J. Blok, _Lodewijk von Nassau, 1538-1574_ (The Hague, 1689),
  and the _Cambridge Modern History_, vol. iii. chs. vi. and vii., and
  bibliography (1904); also A. J. Van der Aa, _Biographisch woordenboek
  der Nederlanden_ (22 vols., Haarlem, 1852-1878).

LOUIS, JOSEPH DOMINIQUE, BARON (1755-1837), French statesman and
financier, was born at Toul (Meurthe) on the 13th of November 1755. At
the outbreak of the Revolution the abbé Louis (he had early taken
orders) had already some reputation as a financial expert. He was in
favour of the constitutional movement, and on the great festival of
federation (July 14, 1790) he assisted Talleyrand, then bishop of Autun,
to celebrate mass at the altar erected in the Champ de Mars. In 1792,
however, he emigrated to England, where he spent his time studying
English institutions and especially the financial system of Pitt.
Returning to France on the establishment of the Consulate he served
successively in the ministry of war, the council of state, and in the
finance department in Holland and in Paris. Made a baron of the empire
in 1809 he nevertheless supported the Bourbon restoration and was
minister of finance in 1814-1815. Baron Louis was deputy from 1815 to
1824 and from 1827 to 1832. He resumed the portfolio of finance in 1815,
which he held also in the Decazes ministry of 1818; he was the first
minister of finance under the government of Louis Philippe, and held the
same portfolio in 1831-1832. In 1832 he was made a peer of France and he
died on the 26th of August 1837.

LOUIS PHILIPPE I., king of the French (1773-1850), was the eldest son of
Louis Philip Joseph, duke of Orleans (known during the Revolution as
Philippe Egalité) and of Louise Marie Adelaide de Bourbon, daughter of
the duc de Penthièvre, and was born at the Palais Royal in Paris on the
6th of October 1773. On his father's side he was descended from the
brother of Louis XIV., on his mother's from the count of Toulouse,
"legitimated" son of Louis XIV. and Madame de Montespan. The legend that
he was a supposititious child, really the son of an Italian police
constable named Chiapponi, is dealt with elsewhere (see MARIA STELLA,
countess of Newborough). The god-parents of the duke of Valois, as he
was entitled till 1785, were Louis XVI. and Queen Marie Antoinette; his
governess was the famous Madame de Genlis, to whose influence he
doubtless owed many of the qualities which later distinguished him: his
wide, if superficial knowledge, his orderliness, and perhaps his
parsimony. Known since 1785 as the duc de Chartres, he was sixteen at
the outbreak of the Revolution, into which--like his father--he threw
himself with ardour. In 1790 he joined the Jacobin Club, in which the
moderate elements still predominated, and was assiduous in attendance at
the debates of the National Assembly. He thus became a _persona grata_
with the party in power; he was already a colonel of dragoons, and in
1792 he was given a command in the army of the North. As a
lieutenant-general, at the age of eighteen, he was present at the
cannonade of Valmy (Sept. 20) and played a conspicuous part in the
victory of Jemappes (Nov. 6).

The republic had meanwhile been proclaimed, and the duc de Chartres, who
like his father had taken the name of _Egalité_, posed as its zealous
adherent. Fortunately for him, he was too young to be elected deputy to
the Convention, and while his father was voting for the death of Louis
XVI. he was serving under Dumouriez in Holland. He shared in the
disastrous day of Neerwinden (March 18, 1793); was an accomplice of
Dumouriez in the plot to march on Paris and overthrow the republic, and
on the 5th of April escaped with him from the enraged soldiers into the
Austrian lines. He was destined not to return to France for twenty
years. He went first, with his sister Madame Adelaide, to Switzerland
where he obtained a situation for a few months as professor in the
college of Reichenau under an assumed name,[1] mainly in order to escape
from the fury of the _émigrés_. The execution of his father in November
1793 had made him duke of Orleans, and he now became the centre of the
intrigues of the Orleanist party. In 1795 he was at Hamburg with
Dumouriez, who still hoped to make him king. With characteristic caution
Louis Philippe refused to commit himself by any overt pretensions, and
announced his intention of going to America; but in the hope that
something might happen in France to his advantage, he postponed his
departure, travelling instead through the Scandinavian countries as far
north as Lapland. But in 1796, the Directory having offered to release
his mother and his two brothers, who had been kept in prison since the
Terror, on condition that he went to America, he set sail for the United
States, and in October settled in Philadelphia, where in February 1797
he was joined by his brothers the duc de Montpensier and the comte de
Beaujolais. Two years were spent by them in travels in New England, the
region of the Great Lakes, and of the Mississippi; then the news of the
_coup d'état_ of 18 Brumaire decided them to return to Europe. They
returned in 1800, only to find Napoleon Bonaparte's power firmly
established. Immediately on his arrival, in February 1800, the duke of
Orleans, at the suggestion of Dumouriez, sought an interview with the
comte d'Artois, through whose instrumentality he was reconciled with the
exiled king Louis XVIII., who bestowed upon his brothers the order of
the Saint Esprit. The duke, however, refused to join the army of Condé
and to fight against France, an attitude in which he persisted
throughout, while maintaining his loyalty to the king.[2] He settled
with his brothers at Twickenham, near London, where he lived till
1807--for the most part in studious retirement.

On the 18th of May 1807 the duc de Montpensier died at Christchurch in
Hampshire, where he had been taken for change of air, of consumption.
The comte de Beaujolais was ill of the same disease and in 1808 the duke
took him to Malta, where he died on the 29th of May. The duke now, in
response to an invitation from King Ferdinand IV., visited Palermo
where, on the 25th of November 1809 he married Princess Maria Amelia,
the king's daughter. He remained in Sicily until the news of Napoleon's
abdication recalled him to France. He was cordially received by Louis
XVIII.; his military rank was confirmed, he was named colonel-general of
hussars, and such of the vast Orleans estates as had not been sold were
restored to him by royal ordinance. The object may have been, as M.
Debidour suggests, to compromise him with the revolutionary parties and
to bind him to the throne; but it is more probable that it was no more
than an expression of the good will which the king had shown him ever
since 1800. The immediate effect was to make him enormously rich, his
wealth being increased by his natural aptitude for business until, after
the death of his mother in 1821, his fortune was reckoned at some

Meanwhile, in the heated atmosphere of the reaction, his sympathy with
the Liberal opposition brought him again under suspicion. His attitude
in the House of Peers in the autumn of 1815 cost him a two years' exile
to Twickenham; he courted popularity by having his children educated _en
bourgeois_ at the public schools; and the Palais Royal became the
rendezvous of all the leaders of that middle-class opinion by which he
was ultimately to be raised to the throne.

His opportunity came with the revolution of 1830. During the three "July
days" the duke kept himself discreetly in the background, retiring first
to Neuilly, then to Raincy. Meanwhile, Thiers issued a proclamation
pointing out that a Republic would embroil France with all Europe, while
the duke of Orleans, who was "a prince devoted to the principles of the
Revolution" and had "carried the tricolour under fire" would be a
"citizen king" such as the country desired. This view was that of the
rump of the chamber still sitting at the Palais Bourbon, and a
deputation headed by Thiers and Laffitte waited upon the duke to invite
him to place himself at the head of affairs. He returned with them to
Paris on the 30th, and was elected by the deputies lieutenant-general of
the realm. The next day, wrapped in a tricolour scarf and preceded by a
drummer, he went on foot to the Hôtel de Ville--the headquarters of the
republican party--where he was publicly embraced by Lafayette as a
symbol that the republicans acknowledged the impossibility of realizing
their own ideals and were prepared to accept a monarchy based on the
popular will. Hitherto, in letters to Charles X., he had protested the
loyalty of his intentions,[3] and the king now nominated him
lieutenant-general and then, abdicating in favour of his grandson the
comte de Chambord appointed him regent. On the 7th of August, however,
the Chamber by a large majority declared Charles X. deposed, and
proclaimed Louis Philippe "King of the French, by the grace of God and
the will of the people."

The career of Louis Philippe as King of the French is dealt with
elsewhere (see FRANCE: _History_). Here it must suffice to note
something of his personal attitude towards affairs and the general
effects which this produced. For the trappings of authority he cared
little. To conciliate the revolutionary passion for equality he was
content to veil his kingship for a while under a middle-class disguise.
He erased the royal lilies from the panels of his carriages; and the
Palais Royal, like the White House at Washington, stood open to all and
sundry who cared to come and shake hands with the head of the state.
This pose served to keep the democrats of the capital in a good temper,
and so leave him free to consolidate the somewhat unstable foundation of
his throne and to persuade his European fellow-sovereigns to acknowledge
in him not a revolutionary but a conservative force. But when once his
position at home and abroad had been established, it became increasingly
clear that he possessed all the Bourbon tenaciousness of personal power.
When a "party of Resistance" came into office with Casimir-Périer in
March 1831, the speech from the throne proclaimed that "France has
desired that the monarchy should become national, it does not desire
that it should be powerless"; and the migration of the royal family to
the Tuileries symbolized the right of the king not only to reign but to
rule. Republican and Socialist agitation, culminating in a series of
dangerous risings, strengthened the position of the king as defender of
middle-class interest; and since the middle classes constituted the
_pays légal_ which alone was represented in Parliament, he came to
regard his position as unassailable, especially after the suppression of
the risings under Blanqui and Barbès in 1839. Little by little his
policy, always supported by a majority in a house of representatives
elected by a corrupt and narrow franchise, became more reactionary and
purely dynastic. His position in France seeming to be unassailable, he
sought to strengthen it in Europe by family alliances. The fact that his
daughter Louise was the consort of Leopold I., king of the Belgians, had
brought him into intimate and cordial relations with the English court,
which did much to cement the _entente cordiale_ with Great Britain.
Broken in 1840 during the affair of Mehemet Ali (q.v.) the entente was
patched up in 1841 by the Straits Convention and re-cemented by visits
paid by Queen Victoria and Prince Albert to the Château d'Eu in 1843 and
1845 and of Louis Philippe to Windsor in 1844, only to be irretrievably
wrecked by the affair of the "Spanish marriages," a deliberate attempt
to revive the traditional Bourbon policy of French predominance in
Spain. If in this matter Louis Philippe had seemed to sacrifice the
international position of France to dynastic interests, his attempt to
re-establish it by allying himself with the reactionary monarchies
against the Liberals of Switzerland finally alienated from him the
French Liberal opinion on which his authority was based. When, in
February 1848, Paris rose against him, he found that he was practically
isolated in France.

Charles X., after abdicating, had made a dignified exit from France,
marching to the coast surrounded by the cavalry, infantry and artillery
of his Guard. Louis Philippe was less happily situated. Escaping with
the queen from the Tuileries by a back entrance, he made his way with
her in disguise to Honfleur, where the royal couple found refuge in a
gardener's cottage. They were ultimately smuggled out of the country by
the British consul at Havre as Mr and Mrs Smith,[4] arriving at Newhaven
"unprovided with anything but the clothes they wore." They settled at
Claremont, placed at their disposal by Queen Victoria, under the
_incognito_ of count and countess of Neuilly. Here on the 26th of August
1850, Louis Philippe died.

The character of Louis Philippe is admirably traced by Queen Victoria in
a memorandum of May 2, 1855, in which she compares him with Napoleon
III. She speaks of his "vast knowledge upon all and every subject," and
"his great activity of mind." He was, unlike Napoleon, "_thoroughly
French_ in character, possessing all the liveliness and talkativeness of
that people." But she also speaks of the "tricks and over-reachings"
practised by him, "who in great as well as in small things took a
pleasure in being cleverer and more cunning than others, often when
there was no advantage to be gained by it, and which was,
unfortunately, strikingly displayed in the transactions connected with
the Spanish marriages, which led to the king's downfall, and ruined him
in the eyes of all Europe" (_Letters_, pop. ed., iii. 122).

Louis Philippe had eight children. His eldest son, the popular Ferdinand
Philippe, duke of Orleans (b. 1810), who had married Princess Helena of
Mecklenburg, was killed in a carriage accident on the 13th of July 1842,
leaving two sons, the comte de Paris and the duc de Chartres. The other
children were Louise, consort of Leopold I., king of the Belgians;
Marie, who married Prince Alexander of Württemberg and died in 1839;
Louis Charles, duc de Nemours; Clementine, married to the duke of
Coburg-Kohary; François Ferdinand, prince de Joinville; Henri Eugène,
duc d'Aumale (q.v.); Antoine Philippe, duc de Montpensier, who married
the Infanta, younger sister of Queen Isabella of Spain.

  AUTHORITIES.--F. A. Gruyer, _La Jeunesse du roi Louis-Philippe,
  d'après les pourtraits et des tableaux_ (Paris, 1909), édition de
  luxe, with beautiful reproductions of portraits, miniatures, &c.;
  Marquis de Flers, _Louis-Philippe, vie anecdotique, 1773-1850_ (Paris,
  1891); E. Daudet, _Hist. de l'émigration_ (3 vols., Paris, 1886-1890).
  Of general works on Louis Philippe's reign may be mentioned Louis
  Blanc, _Hist. de Dix Ans, 1830-1840_ (5 vols., Paris, 1841-1844), from
  the republican point of view; J. O. d'Haussonville, _Hist. de la
  politique extérieure de la monarchie de juillet, 1830-1848_ (2 vols.,
  Paris, 1850); V. de Nouvion, _Hist. de Louis-Philippe_ (4 vols.,
  Paris, 1857-1861); F. Guizot, _France under Louis Philippe, 1841-1847_
  (Eng. trans., 1865); Karl Hillebrand, _Geschichte Frankreichs von der
  Thronbesteigung Louis Philippes, 1830-1841_ (2 vols., Gotha,
  1877-1879); V. du Bled, _Hist. de la monarchie de juillet_ (2 vols.,
  Paris, 1887); P. Thureau-Dangin, _Hist. de la monarchie de juillet_
  (Paris, 1887, &c.); A. Malet, "La France sous la monarchie de
  juillet," in Lavisse and Rambaud's _Hist. Générale_, vol. x. ch. x.
  (Paris, 1898); G. Weill, _La France sous la monarchie de juillet_
  (Paris, 1902); Émile Bourgeois, "The Orleans Monarchy," ch. xv. of
  vol. x., and "The Fall of Constitutionalism in France," ch. ii. of
  vol. xi. of the _Cambridge Modern History_ (Cambridge, 1907 and 1909).
  Further works will be found in the bibliographies attached by M.
  Bourgeois to his chapters (vol. x. p. 844, vol. xi. p. 874; the latter
  including works on the revolution of 1848 and the Second Republic). To
  the list of published correspondence and memoirs there mentioned may
  be added the _Chronique_ of the duchesse de Dino (Paris, 1909).

  Louis Philippe himself published the _Journal du duc de Chartres,
  1790-1791; Mon Journal, événements de 1815_ (2 vols., 1849);
  _Discours, allocutions et réponses de S. M. Louis-Philippe,
  1830-1846_; and after his death was issued his _Correspondance,
  mémoire et discours inédits_ (Paris, 1863).     (W. A. P.)


  [1] As M. Chabaud de la Tour. He was examined as to his fitness
    before being appointed. Gruyer, p. 165.

  [2] This at least was his own claim and the _Orleanist_ view. The
    matter became a question of partisan controversy, the legitimists
    asserting that he frequently offered to serve against France, but
    that his offers were contemptuously refused. A. Debidour in the
    article "Louis-Philippe" in _La Grande Encyclopédie_ supports the
    latter view; but see Gruyer, _La Jeunesse_, and E. Daudet, "Une
    réconciliation de famille en 1800," in the _Revue des Deux Mondes_,
    Sept. 15, 1905, p. 301. M. Daudet gives the account of the interview
    left by the comte d'Artois, and he also makes it clear that Louis
    Philippe, while protesting his loyalty to the head of his house, did
    not disguise his opinion that a Restoration would only be possible if
    the king accepted the essential changes made by the Revolution.

  [3] To say that these protestations were hypocritical is to assume
    too much. Personal ambition doubtless played a part; but he must have
    soon realized that the French people had wearied of "legitimism" and
    that a regency in the circumstances was impossible.

  [4] There is a vivid account in Mr Featherstonhaugh to Lord
    Palmerston, Havre, March 3, 1848, in _The Letters of Queen Victoria_
    (pop. ed., ii. 156).

LOUISBURG, a town and port of entry of Cape Breton county, Nova Scotia,
Canada, on the Sydney & Louisburg railway, 39 m. from Sydney. Pop.
(1901) 1588. Under the French _régime_, Louisburg was second only to
Quebec. A fortress was erected at enormous expense, and the city was the
centre of the cod-fisheries. The fortress was, however, captured in 1745
by the American colonists, under Sir William Pepperrell (1696-1759),
assisted by the British fleet, and again in 1758 by a British land and
sea force under General Jeffrey Amherst (1717-1797) and Admiral
Boscawen. The jealousy of the British settlement of Halifax led to its
almost utter destruction, and only a few case-mates now remain. Under
English rule a fishing village grew up on the other side of the harbour,
and has now become the winter shipping port of the Dominion Coal
Company. The harbour is deep, spacious and open all the year round,
though occasionally blocked by drift ice in the spring.

LOUISE [AUGUSTE WILHELMINE AMALIE LUISE] (1776-1810), queen of Prussia,
was born on the 10th of March 1776 in Hanover, where her father, Prince
Charles of Mecklenburg-Strelitz, was field-marshal of the household
brigade. Her mother was a princess of Hesse-Darmstadt. In 1793 Louise
met at Frankfort the crown prince of Prussia, afterwards King Frederick
William III., who was so fascinated by her beauty, and by the nobleness
of her character, that he asked her to become his wife. They were
married on the 24th of December of the same year. As queen of Prussia
she commanded universal respect and affection, and nothing in Prussian
history is more pathetic than the dignity and unflinching courage with
which she bore the sufferings inflicted on her and her family during the
war between Prussia and France. After the battle of Jena she went with
her husband to Königsberg, and when the battles of Eylau and Friedland
had placed Prussia absolutely at the mercy of France, she made a
personal appeal to Napoleon at his headquarters in Tilsit, but without
success. Early in 1808 she accompanied the king from Memel to
Königsberg, whence, towards the end of the year, she visited St
Petersburg, returning to Berlin on the 23rd of December 1809. During the
war Napoleon attempted to destroy the queen's reputation, but the only
effect of his charges in Prussia was to make her more deeply beloved. On
the 19th of July 1810 she died in her husband's arms, while visiting her
father in Strelitz. She was buried in the garden of the palace at
Charlottenburg, where a mausoleum, containing a fine recumbent statue by
Rauch, was built over her grave. In 1840 her husband was buried by her
side. The Louise Foundation (Luisenstift) for the education of girls was
established in her honour, and in 1814 Frederick William III. instituted
the Order of Louise (Luisenorden). In 1880 a statue of Queen Louise was
erected in the Thiergarten at Berlin.

  See F. Adami, _Luise, Königin von Preussen_ (7th ed., 1875); E. Engel,
  _Königin Luise_ (1876); A. Kluckhohn, _Luise, Königin von Preussen_
  (1876); Mommsen and Treitschke, _Königin Luise_ (1876); in English,
  Hudson, _Life and Times of Louisa, Queen of Prussia_ (1874); G. Horn,
  _Das Buch von der Königin Luise_ (Berlin, 1883); A. Lonke, _Königin
  Luise von Preussen_ (Leipzig, 1903); H. von Petersdorff, "Königin
  Luise," _Frauenleben_, Bd. i. (Bielefeld, 1903, 2nd ed., 1904).

LOUISE OF SAVOY (1476-1531), duchess of Angoulême, mother of Francis I.
of France, was daughter of a cadet of the house of Savoy, Philip, count
of Bresse, afterwards duke of Savoy. Through her mother, Marguerite de
Bourbon, she was niece of Pierre de Bourbon, sire de Beaujeu, afterwards
duke of Bourbon. At the age of twelve she was married to Charles of
Valois, count of Angoulême, great-grandson of King Charles V. The count
died in 1496, leaving her the mother of two children, Marguerite (b.
1492) and Francis (b. 1494). The accession of Louis XII., who was
childless, made Francis of Angoulême the heir-presumptive to the throne
of France. Louise brought her children to the court, and received
Amboise as her residence. She lived henceforth in fear lest Louis should
have a son; and in consequence there was a secret rivalry between her
and the queen, Anne of Brittany. Finally, her son became king on the 1st
of January 1515 by the death of Louis XII. From him Louise received the
county of Angoulême, which was erected into a duchy, the duchy of Anjou,
and the counties of Maine and Beaufort. She was then given the title of
"Madame." From 1515 to her death, she took the chief share in the
government. The part she played has been variously judged, and is not
yet completely elucidated. It is certain that Louise had a clear head,
practical good sense and tenacity. In the critical situation after the
battle of Pavia (1525) she proved herself equal to the emergency,
maintained order in the kingdom, and manoeuvred very skilfully to detach
Henry VIII. of England from the imperial alliance. But she appears to
have been passionate, exceedingly rapacious and ever careful of her own
interest. In her malignant disputes with the constable de Bourbon on the
question of his wife's succession, she goaded him to extreme measures,
and her rapacity showed itself also in her dealings with the
_surintendant des finances_, J. de Beaune, baron de Samblançay (d.
1527), who diverted the money intended for the French soldiers in Italy
into the coffers of the queen, and suffered death in consequence. She
died in 1531, and Francis reunited to the crown her domains, which
comprised the Bourbonnais, Beaujolais, Auvergne, la Marche, Angoumois,
Maine and Anjou.

  There is extant a _Journal_ of Louise of Savoy, the authenticity of
  which seems certain. It consists of brief notes--generally very exact
  and sometimes ironical--which go as far as the year 1522. The only
  trustworthy text is that published by Guichenon in his _Histoire
  généalogique de la maison de Savoie_ (ed. of 1778-1780, vol. iv.).

  See _Poésies de François I^er et de Louise de Savoie ..._, ed. by
  Champollion-Figeac (1847); De Maulde, _Louise de Savoie et François
  I^er_ (1895); G. Jacqueton, _La Politique extérieure de Louise de
  Savoie ..._ (1892); H. Hauser, "Étude critique sur le Journal de
  Louise de Savoie," in the _Revue historique_, vol. 86 (1904).

LOUISIADE ARCHIPELAGO, a chain of islands in the Pacific Ocean,
extending south-eastward from the easternmost promontory of New Guinea,
and included in the Australian territory of Papua (British New Guinea).
The islands number over eighty, and are interspersed with reefs. They
are rich in tropical forest products, and gold has been discovered on
the chief island, Tagula or South-east (area 380 sq. m.) and on Misima
or St Aignan. The natives are of Papuan type, and practise cannibalism.
The islands were probably observed by Torres in 1606, but were named by
L. A. de Bougainville in 1768 after Louis XV.

LOUISIANA, one of the Southern States of the United States of America,
lying on the N. coast of the Gulf of Mexico. Beginning on the N., its
boundary follows eastward the parallel of 33° N., separating Louisiana
from Arkansas; then descends the Mississippi river, separating it from
the state of Mississippi, southward to 31°; passes eastward on this
parallel to the Pearl river, still with the state of Mississippi on the
E.; and descends this river to the Gulf. On the W. the Sabine river,
from the Gulf to 32° N., and, thence to the parallel of 33°, a line a
little W. of (and parallel to) the meridian of 94° W., separate
Louisiana from Texas. Including islands in the Gulf, the stretch of
latitude is approximately 4° and of longitude 5°. The total area is
48,506 sq. m., of which 3097 sq. m. are water surface (including 1060
sq. m. of landlocked coastal bays called "lakes"). The coast line is
about 1500 m.

  _Physical Features._--Geologically Louisiana is a very recent
  creation, and belongs to the "Coastal Plain Province." Most of the
  rocks or soils composing its surface were formed as submarine
  deposits; the easternmost and southernmost parts are true river
  deposits. These facts are the key to the state's chorography. The
  average elevation of the state above the sea is only about 75 ft., and
  practically the only parts more than 400 ft. high are hills in Sabine,
  Claiborne and Vernon parishes. The physiographic features are few and
  very simple. The essential elements are five[1]: diluvial plains,
  coast marshes, prairies, "bluffs" and "pine-hills" (to use the local
  nomenclature). These were successive stages in the geologic process
  which has created, and is still actively modifying, the state. They
  are all seen, spread from N. to S., west of the Mississippi, and also,
  save only the prairies, in the so-called "Florida parishes" E. of the

  These different elements in the region W. of the Mississippi are
  arranged from N. to S. in the order of decreasing geologic age and
  maturity. Beginning with elevations of about 400 ft. near the Arkansas
  line, there is a gentle slope toward the S.E. The northern part can
  best be regarded as a low plateau (once marine sediments) sloping
  southward, traversed by the large diluvial valleys of the Mississippi,
  Red and Ouachita rivers, and recut by smaller tributaries into smaller
  plateaus and rather uniform flat-topped hills. The "bluffs" (remnants
  of an eroded plain formed of alluvion deposits over an old, mature and
  drowned topography) run through the second tier of parishes W. of the
  Mississippi above the Red river. Below this river prairie areas become
  increasingly common, constituting the entire S.W. corner of the state.
  They are usually only 20 to 30 ft. above the sea in this district,
  never above 70, and are generally treeless except for marginal timber
  along the sluggish, meandering streams. One of their peculiar
  features--the sandy circular "mounds," 2 to 10 ft. high and 20 to 30
  or even 50 ft. in diameter, sometimes surmounted by trees in the midst
  of a treeless plain and sometimes arranged in circles and on radii,
  and decreasing in size with distance from the centre of the field--has
  been variously explained. The mounds were probably formed by some
  gentle eruptive action like that exhibited in the "mud hills" along
  the Mississippi below New Orleans; but no explanation is generally
  accepted. The prairies shade off into the coast marshes. This fringe
  of wooded swamp and sea marsh is generally 20 to 30, but in places
  even 50 and 60 m. in width. Where the marsh is open and grassy,
  flooded only at high tides or in rainy seasons, and the ground firm
  enough to bear cattle, it is used as range. Considerable tracts have
  also been diked and reclaimed for cotton, sugar and especially for
  rice culture. The tidal action of the gulf is so slight and the
  marshes are so low that perfect drainage cannot be obtained through
  tide gates, which must therefore be supplemented by pumping machinery
  when rains are heavy or landward winds long prevail. Slight ridges
  along the streams and bayous which traverse it, and occasional patches
  of slightly elevated prairie, relieve in a measure the monotonous
  expanse. It is in and along the borders of this coast swamp region
  that most of the rice and much of the sugar cane of the state are
  grown. Long bar-like "islands" (conspicuous high land rising above the
  marsh and prairie)--Orange, Petite Anse, Grand Cote, Cote Blanche and
  Belle Isle--offer very interesting topographical and geological
  problems. "Trembling prairies"--land that trembles under the tread of
  men or cattle--are common near the coast. Most of the swamp fringe is
  reclaimable. The marshes encroach most upon the parishes of St
  Charles, Orleans and Plaquemines. In St Charles the cultivable strip
  of land along the river is only about 3 m. wide. In Orleans the city
  of New Orleans occupies nearly all the high ground and encroaches on
  the swamps. In Plaquemines there is practically no cultivable land
  below Forts Jackson and St Philip, and above there is only a narrow

  The alluvial lands include the river flood plains. The principal
  rivers are the Mississippi, which flows nearly 600 m. through and
  along the border of the state, the Red river, the Ouachita (or
  Washita), Sabine and Pearl; all except the last are navigable at all
  stages of the water. There are many "bayous," several of which are of
  great importance, both for navigation and for drainage. They may be
  characterized as secondary outlets of the rivers or flood
  distributaries. Among them are Bayou Teche, Bayou Plaquemine,
  Atchafalaya Bayou,[2] Bayou Lafourche and Bayou Boeuf. Almost all
  secondary water-courses, particularly if they have sluggish currents,
  are known as bayous. Some might well be called lakes, and others
  rivers. The alluvial portion of the state, especially below the mouth
  of the Red river, is an intricate network of these bayous, which,
  before their closure by a levee system, served partially, in time of
  flood, to carry off the escaping surplus of river waters. They are
  comparatively inactive at all seasons; indeed, the action of the tides
  and back-waters and the tangle of vegetation in the sombre swamps and
  forests through which they run, often render their currents almost
  imperceptible at ordinary water. Navigable waters are said to
  penetrate all but four of the parishes of the state, their total
  length approximating 3800 m.

  Each of the larger streams, as well as a large proportion of the
  smaller ones, is accompanied by a belt of bottom land, of greater or
  less width, lying low as regards the stream, and liable to overflow at
  times of high water. These flood plains form collectively what is
  known as the alluvial region, which extends in a broad belt down the
  Mississippi, from the mouth of the Ohio to the Gulf of Mexico, and up
  the Ouachita and its branches and the Red river to and beyond the
  limits of the state. Its breadth along the Mississippi within
  Louisiana ranges from 10 to 50 or 60 m., and that along the Red river
  and the Ouachita has an average breadth of 10 m. Through its great
  flood-plain the Mississippi river winds upon the summit of a ridge
  formed by its own deposits. In each direction the country falls away
  in a succession of minor undulations, the summits of the ridges being
  occupied by the streams and bayous. Nearly all of this vast
  flood-plain lies below the level of high water in the Mississippi,
  and, but for the protection afforded by the levees, every considerable
  rise of its waters would inundate vast areas of fertile and cultivated
  land. The low regions of Louisiana, including the alluvial lands and
  the coast swamps, comprise about 20,000 sq. m., or nearly one-half the
  area of the state. The remainder consists of the uplands of prairie
  and forest.

  The alluvial region of the state in 1909 was mainly protected against
  overflow from the Mississippi river by 754 m. of levee on the
  Mississippi river within the state, and 84 m. on the Mississippi
  river, Cypress and Amos Bayou in Arkansas, forming part of the general
  system which extends through other states, 1000 m. up to the highlands
  about the junction of the Ohio river. The state and the national
  government co-operate in the construction and maintenance of this
  system, but the Federal government did not give material aid (the only
  exception being the grant of swamp lands in 1850) until the
  exceptionally disastrous flood in 1882. For about a century and a half
  before that time, levee building had been undertaken in a more or less
  spasmodic and tentative way, first by riparian proprietors, then by
  local combinations of public and private interests, and finally by the
  state, acting through levee districts, advised by a Board of
  Engineers. The Federal government, after its participation in the
  work, acted through a Board of Engineers, known as the "Mississippi
  River Commission." The system of 754 m. of Mississippi river levees,
  within the state, was built almost entirely after 1866, and represents
  an expenditure of about $43,000,000 for primary construction alone; of
  this sum, the national government contributed probably a third (the
  state expended about $24,000,000 on levees before the Civil War). Some
  of the levees, especially those in swampy regions where outlet bayous
  are closed, are of extraordinary solidity and dimensions, being 20 to
  40 ft. high, or even more, across streams or bayous--formerly
  outlets--with bases of 8 or 10 ft. to one of height. The task of
  maintenance consists almost entirely in closing the gaps which occur
  when the banks on which the levees are built cave into the river.
  Levee systems on some of the interior or tributary rivers, aggregating
  some 602 m., are exclusively built and maintained by the state.
  Louisiana also contributes largely to the 84 m. of levee in Arkansas,
  necessary to its security from overflow. The improvement of bayous,
  channels, the construction of canals and the drainage of swamp lands
  also contribute to the protection of the state.

  The lakes are mainly in three classes. First come the coast lagoons,
  many of which are merely landlocked salt-water bays, the waters of
  which rise and fall with the tides. Of this class are Pontchartrain,
  Borgne, Maurepas and Sabine. These are simply parts of the sea which
  have escaped the filling-in process carried on by the great river and
  the lesser streams. A second class, called "ox-bow" lakes, large in
  numbers but small in area, includes ordinary cut-off meanders along
  the Mississippi and Red rivers. A third class, those upon the Red
  river and its branches, are caused mainly by the partial stoppage of
  the water above Shreveport by the "raft," a mass of drift such as
  frequently gathers in western rivers, which for a distance of 45 m.
  almost completely closed the channel until it was broken up by
  government engineers. These lakes are much larger at flood season than
  at other times, and have been much reduced in size by the cutting of a
  channel through the raft. Lakes of this class are sometimes formed by
  the choking of the mouth of feeble tributaries by silt deposited by
  the Red river where the currents meet.

  _Mineral Resources._--Mineral resources are few, but important. In the
  Tertiary region are found small quantities of iron ore and an
  indifferent brown coal. The important mineral products are salt,
  sulphur, petroleum and natural gas. The deposit of rock salt on Petite
  Anse Island, in the coast swamp region, has been extensively worked
  since its discovery during the Civil War. The deposit is in places
  1000 ft. thick, and yields salt of extraordinary purity (sometimes 99%
  pure). There are large deposits also on Orange Island (in places at
  least 1800 ft. thick), on Week's Island, on Belle Isle and probably
  beneath the intervening marshes. In 1907 Louisiana ranked sixth among
  the salt-producing states of the country (after New York, Michigan,
  Ohio, Kansas and California), its output being valued at $226,892,
  only a few hundred dollars more than that of Texas. Near Lake Charles,
  at Sulphur, are very extraordinary sulphur deposits. The beds lie
  several (for the most part four to six) hundred feet underground and
  are of disputed origin. Many regard them as products of an extinct
  volcano; according to others they are of vegetable origin (they are
  found in conjunction with gypsum). They were discovered before 1870 by
  searchers after petroleum, but their exploitation remained in the
  experimental stage until about 1900. The sulphur is dissolved by
  superheated water forced down pipes, and the water with sulphur in
  solution is forced upward by hot air pressure through other pipes; the
  sulphur comes, 99% pure, to the surface of the ground, where it is
  cooled in immense bins, and then broken up and loaded directly upon
  cars for shipment. These mines divide with the Sicilian mines the
  control of the sulphur market of the world. The value of the sulphur
  taken from the mines of Louisiana in 1907 was a little more than
  $5,000,000. Evidences of petroleum were discovered long ago, in the
  very field where in recent years the Beaumont and Vinton wells were
  bored. In 1909 Jennings was the chief field in Louisiana, lesser
  fields being at Welsh, Anse la Butte, Caddo and Vinton. The Jennings
  field, one of the greatest in the United States, produced up to and
  including 1907 more than 26,000,000 barrels of high-grade oil,
  twelve-thirteenths of which came from an area of only 50 acres, one
  well producing a tenth of the entire output. In 1907 the state
  produced 5,000,221 barrels of petroleum, valued at $4,063,033. Natural
  gas is found in Caddo parish, about 20 m. N. of Shreveport. The depth
  of the wells is from 840 to 2150 ft.; two wells completed in 1907 had
  a daily capacity estimated at 35,000,000 to 50,000,000 ft. Shreveport,
  Oil City, Blanchard, Mooringsport, Bossier City and Texarkana are
  supplied with natural gas by pipe lines from this field. Kaolin is
  found in the state; in 1907 the total value of all clay products was

  _Climate._--The climate is semi-tropical and exceptionally equable
  over large areas. In the S. and S.E. the equable temperature is
  largely the effect of the network of bays, bayous and lakes, and
  throughout the state the climate is materially influenced by the
  prevailing southerly winds from the Gulf of Mexico. Some daily
  variation in the temperature of adjoining localities is caused by a
  dark soil in the one and a light soil in the other, but the
  differences of mean annual temperature are almost wholly due to
  differences of latitude and elevation. The mean annual temperature for
  a period of nineteen years (Jan. 1888 to Dec. 1906) ranged from 70° F.
  at Port Eads, in the extreme S.E., to 65° F. at Lake Providence, in
  the N.E. The mean temperature of July, the hottest month, is
  comparatively uniform over the state, varying only from 81° to 83°;
  the mean for January, the coldest month, varies from 46° in the
  extreme north to 56° in the extreme south. Even in the coldest
  localities eight or nine months are wholly free from frost, and in the
  coast parishes frost occurs only a few days in each year. Rainfall is
  usually heavy in the S.E., but it decreases toward the N.W. As much as
  85.6 in. have fallen within a year at New Orleans, but in this
  locality the average for a year is about 57.6 in.; at Shreveport the
  average is 46 in., and for the entire state it is 55 in. Much more
  rain falls in summer than in any other season, but in some parts the
  heaviest rainfall is in the spring and in others in the winter. A
  light fall of snow is not uncommon in the northern parishes, but in
  the southern part of the state snow falls not oftener than once in
  three to five years. Hailstorms are infrequent everywhere, but
  especially so in the south. Only a fourth to a half of the days of
  the different months are wholly or partly clear even in the north, and
  in the same district the monthly means of relative humidity vary from
  65 to 70.

  [Illustration: Map of Louisiana.]

  _Fauna._--The entire state is included within the Austro-riparian life
  zone; the higher portions fall within the Carolinian area and the
  lower portions, including the Gulf and the Mississippi embayment
  almost to the N.E. corner of the state, constitute a special
  semi-tropical region. The native fauna of the state resembles in its
  general features that of the other Gulf states. The feral fauna was
  once rather varied. Black bears, wolves and deer are not yet extinct,
  and more rarely a "wild cat" (lynx) or "panther" (puma) is seen in the
  swamps. Of smaller mammals, raccoons, squirrels and opossums are very
  common. Every bayou contains alligators; and reptiles of various
  species, such as turtles, lizards, horned toads, rattlesnakes and
  moccasins are abundant. Shrimps, frogs (of great commercial
  importance), terrapin, clams and oysters are common. Only in very
  recent years have oysters, though plentiful, become of competitive
  importance in the national market; they are greatly favoured by state
  protective legislation. In 1904 a state oyster commission was created
  to supplant the independent control by the parishes. An important
  boundary dispute with Mississippi arose over beds lying near the state
  line. The state leases the beds at a low annual rental in tracts
  (limited for each person, firm or corporation to 1000 acres), and
  draws from them a considerable revenue. The avifauna is varied and
  abundant, comprising eagles, vultures (protected by law), hawks, owls,
  pelicans, cranes, turkeys, geese, "partridges" (called quail or "Bob
  White" elsewhere), ducks, &c., besides numerous smaller species, many
  of which are brilliant of plumage but harsh of voice.

  _Flora._--Heavy rainfall, high temperature and fertile soil combine to
  cover the greater part of the state, and particularly the alluvial
  regions and the coast swamps, with a most luxuriant subtropical
  vegetation, both arborescent and herbaceous. Louisiana is justly
  celebrated for the beauty and fragrance of its flowers. The range of
  temperature is not sufficient to give the variety of annual wild
  flowers of more northern climates; nevertheless flowers cover the
  bottom lands and uplands in great profusion. The upland flora is the
  more diversified. Flowering annuals are mainly aquatic. Water lilies,
  water hyacinths, which are an obstruction in many streams, and irises
  in rich variety give colour to the coast wastes and sombre bayous.
  Notable among the flora are roses, japonicas, hibiscus shrubs of
  various species, poinsettias, tea olives, crepe myrtle, jasmines,
  magnolias, camellias, oleanders, chrysanthemums, geraniums and
  plumbagos. The value and variety of the timber are very great. Much of
  the river swamp region is covered with cypress trees festooned with
  Spanish moss. The most common species in the alluvial regions and, to
  a less degree, in the drier portions of the swamps and in the stream
  bottoms of the prairies are various oaks, black, sweet and tupelo gum,
  holly, cotton-wood, poplar, magnolia sweet bay, the tulip tree,
  catalpa, black walnut, pecans, hickories, ash, beech and short-leaf
  pine. On drier and higher soils are the persimmon, sassafras, red
  maple, elm, black haw, hawthorn, various oaks (in all 10 species
  occur), hickories and splendid forests of long-leaf and loblolly
  yellow pine.

  _Forestry._--These forests are the greatest and finest of their kind
  remaining in the United States. In 1898 it was estimated by Henry
  Gannett (followed by the Federal census of 1900) that the timbered
  area covered 28,300 sq. m. Professor C. S. Sargent estimated in 1884
  that the stand of short-leaf and long-leaf pines aggregated
  respectively 21,625 and 26,558 million feet. The timber product of
  1900 ($17,294,444) was almost ten times that of 1880 ($1,764,640); and
  in 1905 the product value ($35,192,374) was more than twice that of
  1900. Nevertheless, in 1900 the cypress forests remained practically
  untouched, only slight impression had been made upon the pine areas,
  and the hard-wood forests, except that they had been culled of their
  choicest oak, remained in their primal state (U.S. census). Between
  1900 and 1905 furniture factories and planing mills became somewhat
  important. Pond pine occurs only near the Pearl river. Curly pine is
  fairly abundant. The eastern pine belt is composed of the long-leaf
  pine, interspersed with some loblolly. It covers an area of about 3900
  sq. m. The south-western pine belt contains the heaviest growth of
  long-leaf pine timber in the world, covering an area of about 4200 sq.
  m., and occasionally interspersed with short-leaf pine. The short-leaf
  growth is especially heavy in the north-western portion of the state,
  while the long-leaf is found mainly in large masses N. and S. of the
  Red river around Alexandria as a centre. The cypress forests of the
  alluvial and overflowed lands in the S. of the state are among the
  largest and the most heavily timbered known. The hard-woods are found
  in the river bottoms throughout the state.

_Agriculture and Soils._--Agriculture is the chief industry of the
State. In 1900 26.2% of the land was in farms, and of this area about
two-fifths was improved. The size of the average farm decreased in the
two preceding decades from 171.3 to 95.4 acres. The percentage of farms
operated by owners (i.e. owners, part owners, owners and tenants, and
managers) fell from 64.8 to 42.1% from 1880 to 1900, and the percentage
operated by cash tenants increased from 13.8 in 1880 to 24.9 in 1900,
and by share tenants from 21.5 in 1880 to 33.0 in 1900; the percentage
of farms operated by white farmers was 49.8 in 1900. The value of farm
property, $198,536,906 in 1900, increased 79.8% in the preceding decade.
The value of live stock in the latter year was $28,869,506. The total
value of all farm products in 1899 was $72,667,302, of which $59,276,092
was the value of the distinctive crops--cotton, sugar and rice. The
state bureau of agriculture in 1903 estimated that of the total area
14.9 millions of acres were timber land, 5.7 millions pasture and marsh,
and 5.0 millions cultivated farm land.

In the N. there are many sandy districts in the uplands, also sandy
clays; in the "second bottoms" of the streams fertile sandy loams;
abundant tertiary marls in the north-central region; some gypsum in the
cretaceous "islands"; and some fossiliferous marls with decomposed
limestones. The prairies of south-western Louisiana have much yellow
marl underlying them. Alluvial soil and bluff, the location of which has
been indicated, are of primary agricultural importance. Reclaimed
marsh-land and fresh alluvium (the so-called "front-lands" on rivers and
bayous) are choice soil for Indian corn, sugar-cane, perique tobacco,
semi-tropical fruits and cotton. The bluff lands are simply old alluvium
now well drained and above all floods. The prairies of the S.W. are
devoted almost exclusively to rice. On the hills yellow-leaf tobacco can
be grown. Cereals and forage plants can be successfully grown
everywhere, and varied and profitable agriculture is possible even on
the "pine-barrens" or uplands of the N.; but more intelligent and more
intensive farming is necessary than that practised by the average
"piney-woods" farmer. The alluvial section of lower Louisiana is mostly
devoted to sugar, and farther northward to Indian corn and cotton.

  Cotton is the principal crop. In 1907 Louisiana ranked eighth in
  acreage of cotton (1,622,000 acres) among the states of the United
  States, and in 1907-1908 the cotton crop (675,428 bales) was eighth
  among the crops of the states. The average yield per acre varies from
  about .45 to .75 bale according to the season. In good seasons and
  exceptional localities the yield may approach a bale per acre, as in
  Assumption parish, and in the Mississippi valley at the junction of
  Louisiana, Mississippi and Arkansas. For many years there has been a
  reaction against the all-cotton farming system. In general, the small
  cotton farmer was at the mercy of the commission merchant, to whom he
  mortgaged his crops in advance; but this evil has lessened, and in
  some districts the system of advancing is either non-existent or very
  slightly developed.

  In 1907-1908 all the sugar produced from cane grown in the United
  States came from Louisiana (335,000 long tons) and Texas (12,000
  tons); in the same year cane sugar from Hawaii amounted to 420,000
  tons, from Porto Rico to 217,000 tons and from the Philippines to
  135,000 tons; and the total yield of beet sugar from the United States
  was 413,954 tons. Of all the cane grown, an amount between one-sixth
  and one-quarter--and that the best--must be reserved for seed every
  other year, and this is a great handicap to the state in competing
  with other cane regions and with the sugar beet. Of the total sugar
  consumption of the country in 1899-1904 Louisiana produced somewhat
  more than a fifteenth. Since about 1880 there have been central
  factories, and their increase has been a very prominent factor in the
  development of the industry, as it has been in Cuba. Though very much
  of the region S. of the Red river is fairly well suited to
  sugar-growing, it is still true that sugar cannot, over much of this
  area, be grown to so great advantage as other crops. Its hold upon the
  delta region is, however, almost unchallenged, especially since the
  rice farmers have found in the prairie lands that excel the delta for
  their purposes. Sugar is grown also in St Landry and the eastern part
  of Attakapas--a name formerly loosely applied to what are now St Mary,
  Iberia, Vermilion, St Martin and Lafayette parishes. Though introduced
  with success from Santo Domingo about the middle of the 18th century,
  the sugar industry practically dates from 1796, when Étienne Boré
  first succeeded in crystallizing and clarifying the syrup. Steam
  motive power was first introduced on the plantations in 1822. The
  average product of the ten seasons 1894-1904 was 299,745 tons. A state
  sugar experiment station is maintained at Audubon Park in New Orleans,
  its work embracing the development of seedlings, the improvement of
  cane varieties, the study of fungus diseases of the cane, the
  improvement of mill methods and the reconciliation of such methods
  (for example, the use of sulphur as a bleaching and clarifying agent)
  with the requirements of "pure food" laws. Good work has also been
  done by the Audubon sugar school of the state university, founded "for
  the highest scientific training in the growing of sugar cane and in
  the technology of sugar manufacture."

  Tobacco might be grown profitably over a large part of the state, but
  in reality very little is grown. The strong, black perique of the
  delta--cultivated very generally in the lower alluvial region before
  the Civil War, but now almost exclusively in St James parish--is a
  famous leaf, grown since early colonial times. Bright or yellow plug
  and smoking leaf are grown on the pine uplands and pine "flats," and a
  small amount of cigar tobacco on the flats, prairies and "bluffs." The
  total value of the tobacco crop of 35,000 lb. in 1907 was only
  $10,000, an amount exceeded by each of the other 24 tobacco-growing
  states, and the crop was about one-twentieth of 1% of the product of
  the whole United States.

  Rice farming, which had its beginning immediately after the Civil War
  and first became prominent in the 'seventies, has developed enormously
  since 1880. From 1879 to 1899 the product increased twenty-five fold.
  Formerly the grain was raised by preference in the river bottoms,
  which still yield, almost invariably, the earliest rice of the season
  and perhaps the finest. The "buckshot clays" of the backlands, which
  are so stiff that they can scarcely be ploughed until flooded and
  softened, and are remarkably retentive of moisture, are ideal rice
  soil; but none of the alluvial lands has an underlying hardpan, and
  they cannot as a rule be drained sufficiently to make the use of heavy
  harvesting machinery possible. In 1880 the prairies of the S.W. were
  opened to settlement by the railway. These prairies are traversed by
  ridges, which facilitate irrigation, and are underlaid by an
  impervious subsoil, which facilitates both effective storage and
  drainage. Thus the use of machinery became possible, and this
  revolutionized the entire industry. The year 1884 may be taken as the
  initial date of the new period, and the grain is now harvested exactly
  as is wheat in the west-central states. Previously the grain had
  ordinarily been cut with sickles and harvested by hand. The farms were
  also small, usually from 5 to 10 acres. They are now very much larger.
  All the prairies district--the centre of which is Crowley--is becoming
  one great rice field. Some rice also is grown on the lowlands of the
  Mississippi valley, notably in Plaquemines, Jefferson and Lafourche
  parishes. In the decade 1881-1890 Louisiana produced about half of the
  total yield of the country, and from 1891 to 1900 about five-sevenths.
  In 1904 and 1906 the Louisiana crop, about one-half of the total yield
  of the country, was larger than that of any other state; but in 1905
  and in 1907 (6,192,955 lb. and 7,378,000 lb. respectively) the
  Louisiana crop was second in size to that of Texas. Carolina and
  Honduras rices were practically the only varieties until after 1896.
  Since that time select Japanese species, chosen for superior milling
  qualities, have been widely introduced, as the market prejudice in
  favour of head rice made the large percentage of broken rice a heavy
  handicap to the farmers. Hundreds of varieties have been tested by the
  state and federal agricultural experiment stations. A strong tendency
  to run to red rice (hardier, but not so marketable) has been a second
  great difficulty to overcome.

  Irrigation is almost entirely confined to rice farms. In the prairie
  region there is abundant water at depths of 100 to 400 ft. beneath the
  surface, but this was little used for irrigation for the first few
  years of the development of this field, when water was pumped from the
  streams and canals. In 1902 nearly one-eighth of the acreage irrigated
  was by systems supplied from wells. The irrigated rice area increased
  92.9% from 1899 to 1902, and the construction cost of irrigation works
  ($4,747,359 in 1902; $12.25 per irrigated acre) 87.7% in the same
  years. This increase was almost wholly in the prairie parishes. Of the
  total irrigated area for rice of 387,580 acres in 1902, 310,670 acres
  were in the parishes of Calcasieu, Acadia and Vermilion. In the
  Mississippi valley water is taken from the river by flumes in the
  levees or by siphons. The danger of floods and the difficulty of
  drainage make the extension of the practice unprofitable, and the
  opening of the prairies has made it unnecessary.

  Many of the fruits of warm-temperate and semi-tropical lands, whether
  native or exotic, including oranges, olives, figs, grape-fruit,
  kumquats and pomegranates are cultivated. Oranges are grown especially
  on the coast. There are many fine groves on the Mississippi below New
  Orleans. The fig is a common door-yard tree as in other Gulf and South
  Atlantic states, and is never killed down by frost. Louisiana produced
  in 1899 only a fifth as great a value in sub-tropic fruits as Arizona
  and Texas combined. Orchard fruits are fairly varied, but, compared
  with other states, unimportant; and the production of small fruits is
  comparatively small, the largest crop being strawberries. Oranges and
  pears are seriously damaged by insect and fungus pests. The total
  value of fruit products in 1899 was $412,933. Among nuts the native
  pecan is exceptionally abundant, the product (637,470 lb. in 1899)
  being much greater than that of any other state save Texas.

  The total value of cereal products in 1899 was $14,491,796, including
  Indian corn valued at $10,327,723 and rice valued at $4,044,489; in
  1907 it was more than $27,300,000, including Indian corn valued at
  $19,600,000, rice valued at $7,378,000 and oats valued at $223,000.
  Indian corn is grown only for home use. Dairying interests are not
  largely developed, and in Texas and the adjoining states the "Texas
  fever" and "charbon" have done great damage to cattle. Forage crops
  are little grown, though soil conditions are favourable. Cowpeas are a
  common fertilizer. Garden trucking is very slightly developed, but has
  been successful where it has been tried. The state maintains a crop
  pest commission, the duties of which include the inspection of all
  nursery stock sold in the state.

_Manufactures._--The state's manufacturing interests have during the
last few decades grown greatly in importance. From 1890 to 1900 the
capital invested, the cost of materials used and the value of output (in
1900, $121,181,683) increased respectively 225.4, 147.3 and 109.6%. The
value of the factory products in 1900 was $111,397,919; in 1905 it was
$186,379,592. Slightly above one-half of the product of 1900 was from
New Orleans, and in 1905 about 45.4%. A constitutional amendment of 1902
exempted from parochial and municipal taxes between 1900 and 1910
practically all factories and mines in the state, employing at least
five hands. Manufacturing industries are for the most part closely
related to the products of the soil, about two-thirds of the value of
all manufactures in 1900 and in 1905 being represented by sugar and
molasses refining, lumber and timber products, cotton-seed oil and cake,
and rice cleaned and polished.

  Rice is milled at New Orleans, Crowley, Abbeville, Gayden, Jennings
  and Lake Charles. Ramie fibre and jute are available for coarse cloth;
  cotton weaving is almost non-existent. The lumber industry is centred
  chiefly in Calcasieu parish. Lake Charles, Westlake, Bogalusa, Bon
  Ami, Carson, Fisher, Fullerton, Leesville, Oakdale and Pickering were
  the leading sawmill towns of the state in 1908. Of the rarer woods
  particular mention may be made of curly pine, yielding a wood of
  beautiful figure and polish; magnolia, hard, close-grained, of fine
  polish and of great lasting qualities; and cypress, light, strong,
  easily worked and never-rotting. The timber cut of 1900 was officially
  stated as 1,214,387 M. ft. B.M., of which two-thirds were of yellow
  pine and most of the remainder of cypress. In some localities,
  especially in the "Florida parishes," small quantities of rosin and
  turpentine are taken from the long-leaf pine, but this industry was
  unimportant in Louisiana before 1908. Sawdust, slabs, stumps and large
  quantities of logs are wasted. Other manufactures with a product value
  in 1905 of between $4,000,000 and $1,000,000 were: bags (not paper);
  foundry and machine-shop products; planing-mill products; railway
  cars, construction and repairs; malt liquors; men's clothing;
  cooperage; food preparations; roasted and ground coffee and spice;
  fertilizers; cigars and cigarettes; cotton goods; and manufactured

  _Communications._--The length of railway in the state was 1740 m. in
  1890 and 4943.55 m. at the end of 1908. By the state constitution of
  1898 and by amendments of 1902 and 1904 tax exemptions for ten years
  were granted to newly-built railroads completed before 1909. The
  principal roads are the Missouri Pacific (St Louis, Iron Mountain &
  Southern, New Orleans & North-western and St Louis, Watkins & Gulf),
  the Southern Pacific (Morgan's Louisiana & Texas Railroad & Steamship
  Co. and the Louisiana Western), the Texas & Pacific, the Kansas City
  Southern, the Vicksburg, Shreveport & Pacific, the Louisiana Railway &
  Navigation Co., the Yazoo & Mississippi Valley, the Illinois Central,
  and the Louisiana & Arkansas. The Illinois Central, the first railway
  giving Louisiana connexion with the north, and of immense importance
  in the trade of New Orleans, has only about 100 m. of double track in
  the state. The problem of inland waterways has always been a most
  important one in northern, eastern and southern Louisiana, where there
  are systems of improved bayous, lakes and canals which, with the
  levees, make this region something like Holland, on a greater scale.
  Many bayous are convertible by improvement into excellent drainage and
  irrigation canals. The canal system is especially well developed in
  the parishes of the Mississippi delta, where, at the close of 1907,
  there were about 50 m. of these waterways of decided commercial
  importance. They serve the trade of Lake Pontchartrain and the Florida
  parishes, the lumber, coal, fish, oyster and truck trade of New
  Orleans, and to some extent are the highway of a miscellaneous
  coasting trade. The most important canal is probably the new
  Atchafalaya Bay canal (14 ft. deep), opened in 1907, connecting the
  Atchafalaya river and Morgan City with the Gulf of Mexico. In 1907
  active preliminary work was begun on the Louisiana section of a great
  interstate inland waterway projected by the national government
  between the Mississippi and Rio Grande rivers, almost parallel to the
  Gulf Coast and running through the rice and truck-farm districts from
  the Teche to the Mermenton river (92 m.). The competition of the water
  lines is felt by all the railways, and the importance of water
  transportation is rapidly increasing. A state railroad commission,
  organized in 1899, has power to regulate railway, steamer,
  sleeping-car, express, telephone and telegraph rates within the state.
  Foreign commerce is almost wholly centred at New Orleans.

_Population._--The population of the state increased in the ten decades
from 1810 to 1910 successively by 100.4, 40.6, 63.4, 46.9, 36.7, 2.7,
29.3, 19.0, 23.5 and 19.9%. In 1910 it was 1,656,388 (36.5 per sq.
m.).[3] In 1900 47.1% was of negro blood, as compared with 51.5 in
1890. In 1910 there were nine cities with more than 5000 inhabitants
each: New Orleans (339, 075); Shreveport (28,015); Baton Rouge (14,897),
the capital; Lake Charles (11,449); Alexandria (11,213); Monroe
(10,209); New Iberia (7449); Morgan (5477); Crowley (5099). The urban
element is larger than in any other southern state, owing to the large
population of New Orleans. The Acadians (see § _History_ below) to-day
are settled mainly in St Mary, Acadia and Vermilion parishes; lesser
numbers are in Avoyelles and St Landry; and some are scattered in
various other parishes. The parishes of St Mary, Iberia, Vermilion, St
Martin and Lafayette are known as the Attakapas country from an Indian
name. A colony of Germans sent over by John Law to the Arkansas removed
to the Mississippi above New Orleans, and gave to its bank the name of
the "German Coast," by which it is still known. In recent years there
has been an immigration of Italians into Louisiana, which seems likely
to prove of great social and economic importance. The industrial
activity of the state has required more labour than has been available.
The negroes have moved more and more from the country to the towns,
where they easily secure work at good wages. Owing to the inadequate
supply of labour two important immigration leagues of business men were
formed in 1904 and 1905, and in 1907 the state government began
officially to attempt to secure desirable foreign immigration, sending
agents abroad to foster it. Roman Catholics greatly predominate among
religious denominations, having in 1906 477,774 members out of a total
of 778,901 for all denominations; in the same year there were 185,554
Baptists, 79,464 Methodists, 9070 Protestant Episcopalians and 8350

_Administration._--Since the admission of the state to the Union in 1812
there have been eight state constitutions (not counting that of 1861)
admirably illustrating--and not less the Territorial government
preceding them--the development of American democracy and the problems
connected with the negroes. Under the Territorial government the
legislative officers were not at first elective. The "parishes" date
from 1807; they were based on an earlier Spanish division for religious
purposes--whence the names of saints in parish nomenclature. The
constitution of 1812 allowed the General Assembly to name the governor
from the two candidates receiving the highest number of votes; gave the
governor large powers of appointment, even of local functionaries; and
required a property qualification for various offices, and even for
voters. The constitution of 1845 made the popular suffrage final in the
choice of the governor, abolished property qualifications, and began to
pare executive powers for the benefit of the General Assembly or the
people. From it dates also the constitutional recognition of the public
schools. In 1852 even the judges of the supreme court were placed among
the officers chosen by popular vote. The constitutions of 1864 and 1868
were of importance primarily as bearing on negro status and national
politics. That of 1879 showed a profound distrust of legislative action,
bred of reconstruction experiences. Nearly all special legislation was
forbidden. The last constitution (1898, with 26 amendments 1898-1906),
unlike all others after that of 1812, was not submitted to the people
for ratification.

  Under this constitution sessions of the General Assembly are biennial
  (meeting the second Monday in May in even-numbered years) and are
  limited to sixty days. The number of senators is fixed by the
  constitution at 39; the number of representatives is to be not more
  than 116 or less than 98. Any elector is eligible for election as a
  representative if he has been a citizen of the state for five years
  and a resident of the district or parish from which he is elected for
  two years immediately preceding the election; a change of residence
  from the district or parish from which he was elected vacates the seat
  of a representative or senator. A senator must be at least 25 years of
  age. Members of the legislature are elected for four years. Revenue or
  appropriation bills originate in the House of Representatives, but may
  be amended by the Senate. Contingent appropriations are forbidden, and
  the constitution contains a long list of subjects on which special
  laws may not be passed. The chief executive officers have four-year
  terms, neither the governor nor the treasurer being eligible for
  immediate re-election. The governor must be at least 30 years old and
  must have been a citizen of the United States and a resident of the
  state for 10 years next preceding his election. Within five days after
  the passage of any bill by the General Assembly he may veto this
  measure, which then becomes a law only if passed by a two-thirds vote
  of all members elected to each house of the General Assembly. The
  lieutenant governor (and then the secretary of state) succeeds to the
  office of governor if the governor is removed, dies or leaves the
  state. The five judges of the supreme court of the state are elected
  by the people for a term of twelve years. The supreme court is almost
  without exception a court of appeal with jurisdiction in cases
  involving at least $2000, in cases of divorce, in suits regarding
  adoption, legitimacy and custody of children and as regards the
  legality and constitutionality of taxes, fines, &c. The supreme court
  appoints courts of appeal to judge cases involving less than $2000.
  The constitution prohibits lotteries and the sale of lottery tickets.

  The suffrage clauses are of particular interest, as they accomplish
  the practical disfranchisement of the negroes. The constitution
  requires that a voter must (in addition to other qualifications)
  either be able to show conclusively ability to read and write, or be
  the owner of property within the state assessed at not less than $300,
  on which, if personalty, all taxes are paid. But it excepts from these
  requirements--thus letting down the bars for illiterate whites
  excluded with negroes by the foregoing clauses--persons who were
  entitled to vote in some state on or before the 1st of January 1867
  (i.e. before the adoption of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments
  of the United States Constitution); also the sons or grandsons of such
  voters, not under 21 years of age, on the 12th of May 1898; and males
  of foreign birth who have resided in the state for five years next
  preceding the date of application for registration and who were
  naturalized prior to 1898. The constitution provides that no person
  less than 60 years of age shall be permitted to vote unless he has
  paid an annual poll-tax of one dollar for the two years next preceding
  the year in which he offers to vote. Convicts not pardoned with an
  explicit restoration of suffrage privileges are disfranchised--a rare
  clause in the United States. Suffrage was by this constitution first
  extended to women tax-payers in questions "submitted to the
  tax-payers, as such." The creation of a railroad commission was
  ordered and the preparation of a code of criminal law.

  The Louisiana Board of Levee Commissioners was organized in 1865. The
  state board of health was the first one effectively organized (1855)
  in the United States. It encountered many difficulties, and until the
  definite proof of the stegomyia hypothesis of yellow-fever inoculation
  made by the United States army surgeons in Cuba in 1900, the greatest
  problem seemed insoluble. Since that time conditions of health in New
  Orleans have been revolutionized (in 1907 state control of maritime
  quarantine on the Mississippi was supplanted by that of the national
  government), and smaller cities and towns have been stimulated to take
  action by her example. Sanitary institutes are held by the state board
  at various towns each year for the instruction of the public. Boards
  of appraisers and equalization oversee the administration of the tax
  system; the cost of collection, owing to the fee system for payment of
  collectors, was higher than in any other state of the Union until
  1907, when the fees were greatly reduced. The state assessment in 1901
  totalled $301,215,222 and in 1907 was $508,000,000. Schools and levees
  absorb about half of all revenues, leaving half for the payment of
  interest on the state debt (bonded debt on 1st of April 1908,
  $11,108,300) and for expenses of government. A general primary
  election law for the selection, by the voters, of candidates for state
  office came into effect in 1906.

_Law._--Louisiana has been peculiar among the states of the Union in the
history of the development of its legal system. In Louisiana alone (as
the state is known to-day), out of all the territory acquired from
France as the Louisiana Purchase in 1803, was the civil law so
established under French and Spanish rule that it persisted under
American dominion. In all the other states formed from the Purchase, the
civil law, never existent practically, was early expressly abrogated,
and the common law of England established in its place. After O'Reilly
established his power in 1769 (see _History_, below), the Spanish law
was supreme. All the old codes of the Peninsula, as well as the laws of
the Indies and special royal decrees and schedules, were in force in the
colony. The United States left the task of altering the laws to the
people, as far as there was no conflict between them and the
Constitution of the United States and fundamental American legal
customs. Copies of the Spanish codes were very rare, and some of them
could not be had in the colonies. Discussions of the Roman Institute and
Pandects were common in the deliberations of the courts. Great confusion
prevailed in the first years of American dominion owing to the
diversities of languages and the grafting of such Anglo-Saxon
institutions as the jury upon the older system. A provisional code of
judicial procedure, prepared by Edward Livingston, was in effect in 1805
to 1825. The earliest digest, completed in 1808, was mainly a
compilation of Spanish laws. The project of the _Code Napoléon_,
however--the _code_ itself not being available in Louisiana, though
promulgated in France in 1804--was used by the compilers in the
arrangement and substance of their work; and the French traditions of
the colony, thus illustrated, were naturally introduced more and more
into the organic commentaries and developments that grew up around the
_Code Napoléon_. This evolution was little marked, so similar in large
parts were the systems of France and Spain (although in other parts, due
to the Gothic element in the Spanish, they were very different)--a
similarity which explains the facility with which O'Reilly and his
successors introduced the Spanish laws after 1769. The Louisiana code of
1808 was not, however, exhaustive; and the courts continued to go back
to the old Spanish sources whenever the digest was inconclusive. Thus so
late as 1819, when the legislature ordered the compilation of such parts
of King Alfonso's _Siete Partidas_ (the most common authority in the
colony) as were considered in force, this compilation filled a
considerable volume. In 1821 the legislature authorized Livingston to
prepare the "Livingston Code" of criminal law and procedure, completed
in 1824 (in French and English) and published in 1833, but never adopted
by the state. In 1825 legislative sanction was given to the greater part
of a civil code prepared by a commission (including Livingston)
appointed in 1821, and the French element became steadily more
important. In its present form the law shows plainly the Latin and
English elements. English law has largely moulded, for example, criminal
and commercial law and the law of evidence; the development of the law
of corporations, damages, prohibitions and such extraordinary remedies
as the mandamus has been very similar to that in other states; while in
the fusion of law and equity, and the law of successions, family
relations, &c., the civil law of Spain and France has been unaffected.

  _Education._--Schooling was very scant before the creation of the
  public schools in 1854. Very little was done for education in the
  French and Spanish period, although the Spanish governors made
  commendable efforts in this regard; the first American Territorial
  legislature began the incorporation of feeble "colleges" and
  "academies." To some of these the state gave financial aid
  ($1,613,898) before 1845. The public schools were flourishing at the
  outbreak of the Civil War. War and reconstruction threw upon them the
  new burden of the black children. The constitution of 1879 was
  illiberal in this respect, but a healthier public opinion soon
  prevailed. The money given by the state to the public schools is
  distributed among the parishes according to their school population,
  and the constitution of 1898 set a generous _minimum_ to such aid. An
  annual poll-tax is also collected for the schools from every adult
  male. Local taxes, besides, are imposed, and these are becoming
  heavier. The parishes retain primary control of the schools.
  Institutes, summer schools and rural libraries have been introduced.
  The salaries of white teachers advanced from a monthly average of
  $38.87 in 1903 to $61.84 in 1906. The average attendance of enrolled
  black and white pupils is practically identical, but the enrolment of
  whites (about 52% in 1902) is somewhat higher and that of the blacks
  about a third lower than their ratio in the population. The school
  term for white children is much longer than for negroes, and white
  teachers are paid much better salaries--in 1906 the average monthly
  salary of a negro teacher was $29.15. The total enrolment is very low.
  But progress is now being made very rapidly in the improvement of the
  educational system. Higher schools include: the State University and
  Agricultural and Mechanical College (1860) at Baton Rouge (q.v.);
  Tulane University of Louisiana (1864) in New Orleans; Jefferson
  College (1864; Roman Catholic) at Convent; the College of the
  Immaculate Conception (1847; Roman Catholic) in New Orleans; St
  Charles College (1835; Roman Catholic) at Grand Couteau; St Joseph's
  College (1849; Roman Catholic) at Baton Rouge; the following colleges
  for women--Silliman Collegiate Institute (1852; Presbyterian) at
  Clinton, Mansfield Female College (1854; Methodist Episcopal, South)
  at Mansfield, the H. Sophie Newcomb Memorial College for women (a part
  of Tulane University) in New Orleans and the Louisiana Female College
  (1856; Baptist) at Keatchie; the State Normal School of Louisiana
  (1884) at Natchitoches and the New Orleans Normal and Training School;
  the South-western Louisiana Industrial Institute at Lafayette; the
  Louisiana Industrial Institute at Ruston; and, among schools for
  negroes, the Peabody State Normal and Industrial School at Alexandria
  and New Orleans University (1873; Methodist Episcopal), Luther College
  (Evangelical Lutheran), Leland University (1870; Baptist), Straight
  University (Congregational) and Southern University (1883; aided by
  the state), all in New Orleans.

  _Charitable and Penal Institutions._--The State Board of Charities and
  Correction, for which the constitution of 1898 first made provision,
  and which was organized under an act of 1904, is composed of six
  members, appointed by the governor for six years, with the governor as
  _ex-officio_ chairman. The members of the board serve gratuitously,
  but elect a salaried secretary. The board has no administrative or
  executive power, but makes annual inspections of all public
  charitable, correctional or reformatory institutions, all private
  institutions which receive aid from, or are used by municipal or
  parochial authorities, and all private asylums for the insane; and
  reports annually to the governor on the actual condition of the
  institutions. Any suggestions as to improvements in institutions must
  be approved by the majority of the governing body of that institution
  before they may be put into effect. The charitable institutions
  include two charity hospitals--at New Orleans (1832) and Shreveport;
  an Eye, Ear, Nose and Throat Hospital, a Hôtel Dieu, the Touro
  Infirmary and a Home for Incurables, all at New Orleans; an Institute
  for the Deaf and Dumb (for whites--there is no state provision for
  negro deaf and dumb) and an Institute for the Blind, both at Baton
  Rouge; an Insane Hospital at Jackson and another at Pineville; and the
  Louisiana Retreat for the Insane at New Orleans. At Monroe there is a
  State Reform School, and at New Orleans a Coloured Industrial Home and
  School. There is also a state home for disabled Confederate soldiers
  at New Orleans on Bayou St John. The State Penitentiary is at Baton
  Rouge, and a House of Detention at New Orleans; and there are parish
  prisons. State convicts, and all places in which they are confined or
  employed, are under the supervision of a Board of Control appointed by
  the governor. This board may allow commutation or diminution of
  sentence for good behaviour, meritorious services or exemplary
  conduct. The leasing or hiring of state convicts is prohibited by the
  constitution, but parish convicts may be hired or leased for farm and
  factory work, work on roads and levees, and other public undertakings.
  Such convicts are classified according to physical ability and a
  minimum rate is fixed for their hire, for not more than ten hours a
  day. Many state convicts are employed in levee construction, and there
  are convict farms at Angola, Hope, Oakley and Monticello.

_History._--The early history of Louisiana belongs to the romance of
American history. It is possible that the mouth of the Mississippi was
discovered in 1519 by Alonso Alvarez de Piñeda, but this interpretation
of his vague manuscript remains conjectural; and that it was discovered
by the expedition of Panfilo de Narvaez cannot be established. That
Hernando de Soto entered the borders of the present state of Louisiana,
and that his burial place in the Mississippi was where that river takes
the waters of the Red, are probable enough, but incapable of conclusive
proof. Survivors of de Soto's expedition, however, descended the
Mississippi to its mouth in 1542. Spain set up no claim to the region,
and when Robert Cavalier, Sieur de la Salle, came down the river in 1682
from the French possessions to the north, he took possession in the name
of France, which hereby gained her first title to the vast drainage
basin of the Mississippi. In honour of Louis XIV. the new possession was
named "Louisiana"--a name then and until 1812 applied to a much larger
area than that of the present state. La Salle attempted to settle a
colony in 1684, but missed the Mississippi's mouth and landed in Texas,
where he was murdered in 1687 by some of his followers. In 1697, after
Ryswick, Pierre le Moyne d'Iberville (1662-1706) was chosen to lead
another colony, which reached the Gulf coast early in 1699. Soon after
Iberville had built Fort Maurepas (near the present city of Biloxi,
Mississippi) in 1699, a fort was erected on the Mississippi river about
40 m. above the mouth.

This was the earliest settlement in what is now the state of Louisiana.
It was unhealthy and unprosperous. From 1712 to 1717 "Louisiana," or the
French possessions of the Mississippi valley, was held by Antoine Crozat
(1655-1738) as a private grant from the king. It proved as great a drain
upon his purse as it had proved to the crown, and he willingly parted
with it to the so-called "Western Company," afterwards incorporated with
the great Company of the Indies. The head of this company was John Law,
who, after spreading glowing accounts of the new land, launched his
famous "Mississippi scheme" (see LAW, JOHN). The company accomplished
much for the colony of Louisiana. Jean Baptiste le Moyne, Sieur de
Bienville (1680-1768), a brother of Iberville, was sent out as governor.
For forty years he was the life of the colony. One of his first acts was
to found the city of New Orleans on its present site in 1718. In this
same year seven vessels were sent from France with stores and
immigrants; eleven followed during the next year. Five hundred negroes
from the Guinea coast were imported in 1719, and many hundreds more soon
followed. The Law company eventually came to an end fatal to its
creditors in France, but its misfortunes did not check the prosperity of
"Louisiana." The company retained its grant of the colony until 1731,
when it reverted to the crown. Meantime New Orleans had become the seat
of government in 1722. In 1766 an official census showed a total
population of 5552. The years of royal rule were uneventful. Cotton
culture began in 1740, and sugar-cane was successfully introduced from
Santo Domingo by the Jesuits in 1751. Tafia rum and a waxy, sticky sugar
syrup subsequently became important products; but not until the end of
the century were the means found to crystallize sugar and so give real
prosperity to the industry.

By a secret treaty of the 3rd of November 1762, "Louisiana" was
transferred from France to Spain. This treaty was not made public for a
year and a half, and Spain did not take full possession of the colony
until 1769. By a treaty between Spain and France on the one hand and
Great Britain and Portugal on the other, signed at Paris in February
1763, all that portion lying E. of the Mississippi river, the Iberville
river, and Lakes Maurepas and Pontchartrain was ceded to Great Britain.
The international interests thus created, and others that sprang from
them, heavily burdened the diplomacy, and even threatened the safety of
the United States after they were placed in possession of the eastern
bank of the Mississippi down to 31° in 1783.

The news of the cession of the colony to Spain roused strong discontent
among the colonists. Antonio de Ulloa (1716-1795), a distinguished
Spanish naval officer and scholar, came to New Orleans in 1766 to take
possession for his king. Merchants, people, and many civil officers held
toward him from the beginning a hostile attitude; the military,
especially, refused to pass into the Spanish service as stipulated in
the treaty; and Ulloa was compelled to continue in an ambiguous and
anomalous position--which his lack of military force probably first
compelled him to assume--ruling the colony through the French governor,
Philippe Aubry (who loyally supported him throughout), without publicly
exhibiting his powers. The fear of Spanish commercial laws powerfully
stimulated resistance to the transfer, and though Ulloa made commercial
and monetary concessions, they were not sufficient. When the colonists
found protests at Paris unavailing, they turned to the idea of
independence, but sought in vain the armed support of the British at
Pensacola. Nevertheless they compelled Ulloa to leave the colony or
exhibit his credentials. He took his leave in November 1768. The open
resistance by the colonists (October 1768) was a carefully planned
revolt. There is no doubt that the men who led the Creole opposition
contemplated independence, and this gives the incident peculiar
interest. In the summer of 1769 Alejandro O'Reilly came to New Orleans
with a strong military force (3600 troops). Beginning his rule with an
affability that allayed suspicions and securing from Aubry proofs
against the popular leaders, he invited them to a reception and arrested
them while they were his guests. Five were put to death and others were
imprisoned at Havana. O'Reilly put down the rebellion with determination
and in accord with the instructions of his king. Regarded without
republican sympathies, and in the light of 18th-century doctrines of
allegiance, his acts, however severe, in no way deserve the stigma of
cruelty ordinarily put upon them. He was liberal and enlightened in his
general rule.

Among the incidents of these troubled years was the arrival in Louisiana
(after 1765) of some hundreds of French exiles from Acadia, who made
their homes in the Attakapas country. There their descendants live
to-day, still somewhat primitively, and still in somewhat of the glamour
thrown over land and people by the _Evangeline_ of Longfellow.

On the 18th of August 1769 Louisiana was formally transferred to Spain.
Spanish law and Spanish tongue replaced the French officially, but the
colony remained essentially French. The Spanish rulers made efforts to
govern wisely and liberally, showing great complaisance, particularly in
heeding the profit of the colony, even at the expense of Spanish
colonial commercial regulations. The judicial system was much improved,
a better grade of officials became the rule, many French Creoles were
appointed to office, intermarriages of French and Spanish and even
English were encouraged by the highest officials, and in general a
liberal and conciliatory policy was followed, which made Louisiana under
Spanish rule quiet and prosperous. Bernardo de Galvez (1756-1794), a
brilliant young officer of twenty-one, when he became the governor of
the colony, was one of the most liberal of the Spanish rulers and of all
the most popular. During the American War of Independence he gave
valuable aid to the United States; and when Spain finally joined in the
war against Great Britain, Galvez, in a series of energetic and
brilliant campaigns (1779-1781), captured all the important posts in the
British colony of West Florida. The chief interest of the Spanish period
lies in the advance of settlement in the western territories of the
United States, the international intrigues--British, French and
Spanish--involving the future of the valley, the demand of the United
States for free navigation on the Mississippi, and the growing
consciousness of the supreme importance of the river and New Orleans to
the Union. With the Spanish governor Estevan Miro, who succeeded Galvez
in 1785, James Wilkinson of Kentucky, arrested at New Orleans with a
flat-boat of supplies in 1787, intrigued, promising him that Kentucky
would secede from the United States and would join the Spanish; but
Wilkinson was unsuccessful in his efforts to carry out this plan. In
1794 Spain, hard pressed by Great Britain and France, turned to the
United States, and by the treaty of 1794 the Mississippi river was
recognized by Spain as the western boundary of the United States,
separating it from Louisiana, and free navigation of the Mississippi was
granted to citizens of the United States, to whom was granted for three
years the right "to deposit their merchandise and effects in the port of
New Orleans, and to export them from thence without paying any other
duty than a fair price for the hire of the stores." At the expiration of
the three years the Spanish governor refused the use of New Orleans as a
place of deposit, and contrary to the treaty named no other port in its
place. Spanish rule, however, came unexpectedly to an end by the
retrocession of Louisiana to France in 1800; and French dominion gave
way in turn in 1803--as the result of a chain of events even more
unexpected, startling, and for the United States fortunate--to the rule
of the last-named country. On the 30th of November 1803 the
representatives of the French republic received formal possession from
the Spanish governor, and on the 20th of December lower Louisiana was
transferred to the United States. (See LOUISIANA PURCHASE.)

By an Act of Congress of the 25th of March 1804,[4] that portion of the
Louisiana Purchase S. of 33° was organized as the Territory of Orleans,
and was given a government less democratic than might otherwise have
been the case, because it was intended to prepare gradually for
self-government the French and Spanish inhabitants of the territory, who
desired immediate statehood. The foreign slave-trade was forbidden by
this organic act. English was made the official language. The
introduction of English law, and the changes made in the judicial and
legal systems of Louisiana after 1804 have already been described.

The machinations of Aaron Burr are of interest in connexion with
Louisiana annals, and likewise the settlement and revolutionizing of
West Florida by Americans. In November 1811 a convention met at New
Orleans and framed a constitution under which, on the 30th of April
1812, the Territory of Orleans became the state of Louisiana. A few days
later the portion of West Florida between the Mississippi and Pearl
rivers (the present "Florida Parishes") was included in its boundaries,
making them as they are to-day. In this same year the first steamboat
reached New Orleans. It descended the Ohio and Mississippi from
Pittsburg, whence there had already been a thriving river trade to New
Orleans for about thirty years. During the War of 1812 a decisive
victory was won by the American forces at Chalmette, near New Orleans,
on the 8th of January 1815. Up to 1860 the development of the state in
population, agriculture and commerce was very rapid. Donaldsonville was
the (nominal) capital in 1825-1831, Baton Rouge in 1849-1864 and again
after 1882. At other times New Orleans has been the capital, and here
too have always been various state offices which in other states
ordinarily are in the state capital.

By an ordinance of secession passed on the 26th of January 1861,
Louisiana joined the Confederate States. In the first year there was
very little military activity in the state, but in April 1862 Admiral D.
G. Farragut, with a powerful fleet, ascended the Mississippi past Forts
Jackson and St Philip, which defended the approach to New Orleans, and a
military force under General B. F. Butler occupied that city. The
navigation of the river being secured by this success and by later
operations in the north ending in July 1863 with the capture of
Vicksburg and Port Hudson, the state was wholly at the mercy of the
Union armies. The intervening months were signalized by the capture of
Baton Rouge in May 1862--the Confederates vainly attempting to recapture
it in August. Later, in April 1864, the Confederates under General
Richard Taylor won a success against the Unionists under General N. P.
Banks at Sabine Cross Roads near Mansfield and were themselves repulsed
at Pleasant Hill, these battles being incidental to a campaign
undertaken by the Union forces to crush opposition in western Louisiana.
A large portion of the state was occupied by them in 1862-1865. There
were various minor skirmishes in 1862 and 1863 (including the capture of
the Federal camp at Berwick Bay in June 1863).

As early as December 1862 the Union military government, at President
Lincoln's direction, had ordered elections for Congress, and the men
chosen were admitted in February 1863. In March 1864 also a state
government to supersede the military rule was established under the
president's auspices. By 1863 two parties had arisen among the loyal
classes: one of radicals, who demanded the calling of a constitutional
convention and the abolition of slavery; the other of conservatives. The
former prevailed, and by a convention that assembled in April 1864 a
constitution was framed closely following that of 1852 but repudiating
the debt incurred by Louisiana as one of the Confederate states and
abolishing slavery. Two-thirds of the delegates were from New Orleans.
The legislature was ordered to establish free schools for the blacks,
and was empowered to give them the suffrage: neither of these
provisions, however, was carried out. The extent of the Union control is
shown by the fact that the legislature of 1864 represented half of the
area and two-thirds of the population of the state. The army stood at
the back of the new government, and by the end of 1864 Louisiana was
apparently "reconstructed." But in 1864 the opposition of Congress to
presidential reconstruction had clearly developed, so that the electoral
votes of Louisiana (like those of Tennessee) for president were not
counted. By the spring of 1866 the ex-Confederates had succeeded in
gaining possession of most of the local government and most of the state
offices, although not of the governorship. The Republican party
naturally became extremely radical. The radicals wished to have negro
suffrage in order to get possession of the government. They, therefore,
wanted still another constitutional convention. A clause in the
constitution of 1864 provided for the reconvening of the convention in
certain circumstances, but this clause referred only to necessities
prior to the establishment of a government, and had therefore
determined. Nevertheless, the radicals, because it was impossible to
call a convention through the medium of the state government, took
advantage of this clause to reconvoke the old convention at New Orleans.
The day set was the 30th of July 1866. The ex-Confederate party
determined to prevent the gathering, but the idea of interference by
force seems to have been abandoned. A street riot was precipitated,
however, incidental to a procession of armed negroes; the metropolitan
police fired upon the assembled convention; and altogether some 200
persons, mostly negroes, were killed. This incident raised the crucial
question of national politics in 1866: namely, whether the states
reconstructed by the president should not again be reconstructed.

This being settled affirmatively, Louisiana was reconstructed with
vigour. A constitution of 1868 gave suffrage to the blacks, and
disfranchised all whites made ineligible to office under the proposed
Fourteenth Amendment to the national Constitution, and also
(practically) those who had by word, pen or vote defended secession.
Then the state ratified the Fourteenth Amendment, and was declared
readmitted to the Union in July 1868. Probably no other southern state
suffered equally with Louisiana from the corruption of "carpet-bag,"
"scalawag," negro legislatures. For four years (1868-1872) the
government expenses increased to ten times their normal volume, taxation
was enormously increased, and about $57,000,000 of debt was created. But
a quarrel broke out among the Republicans (1872), the result of which
was the installation of two governors and legislatures, one supported by
the Democrats and Liberal Republicans and the other by the radical
Republicans, the former being certainly elected by the people. The
rivalry of these two state governments, clashes of arms, the recognition
by the Federal authorities of the radical Republican government
(Pinchback and Kellogg, successively governors) followed. One historic
clash in New Orleans (on the 14th of September 1874) between the "White
League" ("White Man's Party") and the Republican police is commemorated
by a monument, and the day is regarded by Louisianans as a sort of state
independence-day. Finally, in 1876, Francis Tillon Nicholls (b. 1834), a
Democrat, was chosen governor, but the Republican candidate, S. B.
Packard, claimed the election, and with a Republican legislature for a
time occupied the State House. In the national election of 1876 there
were double returns (Republican: 75,315 for Hayes and 70,508 for Tilden;
and Democratic: 83,723 for Tilden and 77,174 for Hayes) from Louisiana,
which, as was the case with the double electoral returns from Florida,
Oregon and South Carolina, were adjudicated by the Electoral Commission
in favour of the Republican electors voting for Hayes. Civil war being
threatened within the state President Hayes sent to Louisiana a
commission composed of Wayne McVeagh, Gen. J. R. Hawley, Charles B.
Lawrence, J. M. Harlan, and John C. Brown, ex-Governor of Tennessee,
which was instructed to promote "an acknowledgment of one government
within the state." The rival legislatures united, organizing under the
Nicholls government, which the commission found was upheld by public
opinion. The president ordered the withdrawal of Federal troops from the
capitol on the 20th of April 1877, and the white party was thus left in

After 1877 the state prospered markedly in all material respects. Of
subsequent political events perhaps the most notable, besides the
practical disfranchisement of the negroes, are those connected with the
Louisiana State Lottery Company (1868-1893). For the renewal of its
privileges in 1890 the company finally agreed to give the state
$1,250,000 yearly, and despite strenuous opposition by a powerful party
the legislature voted a renewal, but this measure was vetoed by the
governor. The United States government, however, forbade lotteries the
use of the mails, and the company withdrew its offers. The constitution
of 1898 prohibits lotteries and the sale of lottery tickets within the
state. In 1891 the lynching of eleven Italians at New Orleans gave rise
to grave difficulties involving Italy, the United States, and the state
of Louisiana. Since 1900 a white Republican Party has made some headway
in Louisiana politics, but in national and state elections the state has
been uninterruptedly and overwhelmingly Democratic since 1877.


_French Domination 1682-1762._

  A. le Moyne, Sieur de Sauvolle (died in office)   1699-1701
  J. B. le Moyne, Sieur de Bienville                1701-1713
  M. de Muys, appointed 1707, died en route,
     Bienville continuing to serve.
  Lamothe Cadillac                                  1713-1716
  Sieur de Bienville, acting governor               1716-1717
  De l'Épinay                                       1717-1718
  Sieur de Bienville                                1718-1724
  Boisbriant, _ad interim_                          1724-1726
  Périer                                            1726-1733
  Sieur de Bienville                                1733-1743
  Marquis de Vaudreuil                              1743-1753
  L. Billouart, Chevalier de Kerlerec               1753-1763
  D'Abbadie                                         1763-1765
  Philippe Aubry                                    1765-1769

_Spanish Domination 1762 (1769)-1803._

  Antonio de Ulloa[6]                               1766-1768
  Alejandro O'Reilly[7]                             1769-1770
  Luis de Unzaga                                    1770-1777
  Bernardo de Galvez[8]                             1777-1785
  Estevan Miró (_ad interim_ 1785-1786)             1785-1791
  F. L. Hector, Baron de Carondelet  30 Dec.        1791-1797
  M. Gayoso de Lemos (died in office)               1797-1799
  Francisco Bouligny, José M. Vidal, acting
     military and civil-political governors         1799
  Sebastian de Casa Calvo de la Puerta, Marquis
  de Casa Calvo                                     1799-1801
  Juan M. de Salcedo                                1801-1803

_French Domination 1800-1803._[9]

  Laussat, Colonial Prefect              30 Nov.-20 Dec. 1803

_American Domination since 1803._

    _Territorial Period._

  William C. C. Claiborne (appointed 1803)          1804-1812

    _Statehood Period._

  William C. C. Claiborne, Democratic Republican    1812-1816
  Jacques Villeré, Democratic Republican            1816-1820
  Thomas B. Robertson, Democratic Republican
     (resigned)                                     1820-1822
  Henry S. Thibodaux, Democratic Republican
     (acting)                                       1822-1824
  Henry S. Johnson, Democratic Republican           1824-1828
  Pierre Derbigny, Democratic Republican (died
     in office)                                     1828-1829
  Armand Beauvais and Jacques Dupré (acting)        1829-1831
  André B. Roman, Whig                              1831-1835
  Edward D. White, Whig                             1835-1839
  André B. Roman, Whig                              1839-1843
  Alfred Mouton, Whig                               1843-1846
  Isaac Johnson, Democrat                           1846-1850
  Joseph Walker, Democrat                           1850-1853
  Paul O. Hébert, Democrat                          1853-1856
  Robert C. Wickliffe, Democrat                     1856-1860
  Thomas O. Moore, Democrat                         1860-1862
  George F. Shepley, Military Governor              1862-1864
  Henry W. Allen, Confederate                       1864-1865
  Michael Hahn, Unionist and Military               1864-1865
  James M. Wells, Democrat (acting)                 1865-1867
  Benjamin F. Flanders, Military                    1867
  Joshua Baker, Military                            1867-1868
  Henry C. Warmoth, Republican                      1868-1873
  Pinckney B. S. Pinchback, Republican (acting)     1873
  John McEnery,[10] Democrat-Liberal Republican     1873
  William P. Kellogg, Radical Republican            1873-1877
  Stephen B. Packard,[11] Radical Republican
     (contestant)                                   1877
  Francis T. Nicholls, Democrat                     1877-1880
  Louis A. Wiltz, Democrat (died in office)         1880-1881
  Samuel D. McEnery, Democrat (Lieutenant-Governor,
     succeeded)                                     1881-1884
  Samuel D. McEnery, Democrat                       1884-1888
  Francis T. Nicholls, Democrat                     1888-1892
  Murphy J. Foster, Democrat                        1892-1900
  William W. Heard, Democrat                        1900-1904
  Newton C. Blanchard, Democrat                     1904-1908
  Jared Y. Sanders,[12] Democrat                    1908

  BIBLIOGRAPHY.--Compare the bibliography under NEW ORLEANS and consult
  also the following. For general description: _The Geology and
  Agriculture of Louisiana_ (Baton Rouge, Agric. Exper. Station, pts.
  1-6, 1892-1902); also publications of U.S. Geological Survey, _e.g.
  Water Supply and Irrigation Papers_, No. 101, "Underground Waters of
  Southern Louisiana." For fauna and flora: publications of U.S.
  Biological Survey (Department of Agriculture, Bibliographies). For
  climate: U.S. Department of Agriculture, _Climate and Crop Service_,
  Louisiana series (monthly). For soil and agriculture: the above state
  geological report and material on irrigation in publications of the
  U.S. Geological Survey and in the U.S. Census publications; also
  Commissioners of Agriculture of the State of Louisiana, _Annual
  Report_ (Baton Rouge, biennial until 1899); State Agricultural
  Society, _Proceedings_ (annual); Louisiana State University and
  Agricultural and Mechanical College, _Bulletin of the Agricultural
  Experiment Station_ and _Biennial Report_ of same (Baton Rouge); U.S.
  Department of Agriculture, various publications of the divisions of
  botany, agrostology, pomology, forestry, farmers' bulletins, &c. For
  manufactures and other industries: primarily the publications of the
  national Census, 1900, and preceding decades. For commerce and
  communications: Railroad Commissioners of Louisiana, _Annual Report_
  (New Orleans, 1900 ff.); U.S. Interstate Commerce Commission,
  _Statistics of Railways_ (annual, Washington); on river navigation and
  river improvements, especially of the Mississippi, an enormous mass of
  material in the _Annual Reports_ of the Chief of Engineers, U.S. Army
  (consult _Index to Reports_ of same, 1866-1900, 3 vols., Washington,
  1902, and cp. article on MISSISSIPPI RIVER); on river commerce see
  _U.S. Census of 1880_, vol. 4 (report on steam navigation of the
  United States by T. C. Purdy), and _Census of 1890_ (report on
  transportation by T. J. Vivian; Rivers of the Mississippi Valley). For
  population: various national censuses and _Bulletins_ of the Bureau of
  Census, 1900, e.g. No. 8, "Negroes in the United States"; on the
  Acadians, _In Acadia, The Acadians in Song and Story_ (New Orleans,
  1893; compiled by M. A. Johnston). For pictures of Creole life and
  traits, George W. Cable, _The Creoles of Louisiana_ (New York, 1884),
  and his later writings; but Mr Cable's views of the Creoles are very
  unpopular in Louisiana; for other views of them, and for a guide to
  the English and Creole literature of Louisiana, consult Alcée Fortier,
  _Louisiana Studies--Literature, Customs and Dialects, History and
  Education_ (New Orleans, 1894). For administration: see reports of the
  various executive officers of the state (Baton Rouge); the various
  constitutions are printed in the report of the Secretary of State, as
  well as in B. Perley Poore's _Constitutions_ (2 vols., Washington,
  1877); a special account of the government of the territorial period
  may be found in D. Y. Thomas, _History of Military Government in Newly
  Acquired Territory of the United States_ (Columbia University Studies
  in History, Economics and Public Law, vol. xx. No. 2, 1904); for the
  Civil War and Reconstruction period compare below, also American
  Historical Association, _Annual Report_, 1892; (for courts during
  Civil War); also John R. Ficklen, _History and Civil Government of
  Louisiana_ (Chicago, New York, c. 1899), a brief and popular account;
  on education, in addition to the Biennial Reports of the Board of
  Education, consult annual reports of the U.S. Commissioner of

  For history: the standard work is that of Charles E. A. Gayarré,
  coming down to the war, based on deep and scholarly research, and
  greatly altered in successive editions. The style is that of the
  classic school, that of Prescott and Motley, full of colour,
  characterization and spirit. The editions are as follows: _Romance of
  the History of Louisiana_ (New York, 1837, 1848); _Histoire de la
  Louisiane_ (2 vols., Nouvelle Orléans, 1846-1847); _Louisiana: its
  Colonial History and Romance_ (N.Y., 1851); _Louisiana: its History as
  a French Colony_, Third Series of Lectures (N.Y., 1852); then, based
  upon the preceding, _History of Louisiana: The French Domination_ (2
  vols., N.Y., 1854) and _The Spanish Domination_ (N.Y., 1854); _The
  American Domination_ (N.Y., 1867); and third edition (4 vols., New
  Orleans, 1885). More important for the recent period is Alcée Fortier;
  _A History of Louisiana_ (N.Y., 4 vols., 1904) devoting two volumes to
  American domination. The _History and General Description of New
  France_ of P. F. X. de Charlevoix (best ed. by J. G. Shea, New York,
  1866, 6 vols.) is a famous old work, but now negligible. Judge F. X.
  Martin's _History of Louisiana_ (2 vols., New Orleans, 1827-1829,
  later ed. by J. F. Condon, continued to 1861, New Orleans, 1882) is
  also valuable and supplements Gayarré. Le Page du Pratz, author of
  _Histoire de la Louisiane_ (3 vols., Paris, 1758; 2 vols., London,
  1763), was the first historian of Louisiana. Berquin-Duvallon, _Vue de
  la colonie espagnole du Mississippi_ (Paris, 1805; published in
  English under the name of John Davis, New York, 1806); L. N. Baudry de
  Lozières, _Voyage à la Louisiane_ (Paris, 1802) and _Second Voyage à
  la Louisiane_ (Paris, 1803) may be mentioned among the travels just
  preceding, and A. Stoddard, _Sketches of Louisiana_ (New York, 1811),
  among those just following the establishment of American dominion. The
  _Histoire de la Louisiane, et de la cession de colonie par la France
  aux États-Unis_ (Paris, 1829; in English, Philadelphia, 1830) by
  Barbé-Marbois has great importance in diplomatic history. The rarest
  and most valuable of early memoirs and much archive material are
  embodied in Benj. F. French's _Historical Collections of Louisiana_ (5
  series, N.Y., 1846-1853) and _Historical Collections of Louisiana and
  Florida_, New Series (N.Y., 1869, 1875). Documentary materials on the
  greater "Louisiana" between the Gulf of Mexico and Canada will be
  found in the _Jesuit Relations_, edited by R. G. Thwaites (Cleveland,
  1896 ff.); and on early voyages in Pierre Margry, _Découvertes et
  établissements des Français_ (6 vols., Paris, 1879-1888). John G. Shea
  published an edition of Louis Hennepin's _Description of Louisiana ...
  Translated from the Edition of 1683_, &c. (New York, 1880). On this
  greater "Louisiana" the student should also, consult the works of
  Francis Parkman. And see publications of the Louisiana Historical
  Society (New Orleans). Of brief general histories there is that of J.
  R. Ficklen above cited, another by the same author in collaboration
  with Grace King (New Orleans, 1902) and another (more valuable) by
  Albert Phelps (Boston, 1905), in the American Commonwealth Series. For
  the Reconstruction period see bibliography under UNITED STATES.


  [1] A sixth, less characteristic, might be included, viz. the "pine
    flats," generally wet, which are N. of Lake Pontchartrain, between
    the alluvial lands and the pine hills, and, in the S.E. corner of the
    state, between the hills and the prairie.

  [2] The original channel of the Red river. It has been so useful in
    relieving the Mississippi of floods, that the Red river may possibly
    be permanently diverted again into the bayou artificially.

  [3] The population was 76,556 in 1810; 153,407 in 1820; 215,739 in
    1830; 352,411 in 1840; 517,762 in 1850; 708,002 in 1860; 726,915 in
    1870; 939,946 in 1880; 1,118,588 in 1890; and 1,381,825 in 1900.

  [4] Other acts bearing on Territorial government are those of the
    31st of October 1803 and the 23rd of March 1805.

  [5] Terms of _actual service in Louisiana_; Gayarré is the authority
    for the French and Spanish period.

  [6] Did not openly assume power or supersede Aubry.

  [7] Captain-general charged to establish order and settle Unzaga as

  [8] At first, till 1779, only acting governor.

  [9] Actual exercise of power 20 days.

  [10] Counted out by partisan returning-board and not recognized by
    U.S. government.

  [11] Not recognized by U.S. government.

  [12] Elected U.S. Senator 1910; accepted, but afterward withdrew.

LOUISIANA, a city of Pike county, Missouri, U.S.A., situated below the
mouth of the Salt river, on the western bank of the Mississippi, about
90 m. N. of St. Louis. Pop. (1900) 5131, including 1075 negroes and 161
foreign-born; (1910) 4454; there is also a considerable suburban
population. Louisiana is served by the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy and
the Chicago & Alton railways, and by several lines of river steamboats.
The river is spanned here by a railway bridge. The city is laid out
fairly regularly in the river valley and on bluffs along the river, and
has attractive residential districts, commanding good views. It has very
active and varied industries, and is a trade centre for a large grain-
and fruit-producing and stock-raising region, and has one of the largest
nurseries in the United States. Louisiana was laid out in 1818, was the
county-seat from that date until 1825, was incorporated as a town in
1845 and was chartered as a city in 1849.

LOUISIANA PURCHASE, a large portion of the area of the United States of
America, purchased from the French Republic in 1803. The territory to
which France held explorer's title originally included the entire valley
of the Mississippi (see Louisiana); but the "Louisiana" which was ceded
by her to Spain in 1762 (England refusing it, preferring the Floridas),
retroceded to France in 1800,[1] and ceded by Napoleon to the United
States--in violation of his pledge to Spain that he would not alienate
the province--embraced only the portion W. of the river and the island
of New Orleans on the E. (and, as might be claimed with some show of
argument, West Florida to the Perdido river).

With the settlement of the trans-Alleghany region, the freedom of the
Mississippi had become of vital importance to the western settlements,
and Spain had recognized these interests in her treaty with the United
States of 1795, by guaranteeing freedom of navigation and the privilege
of deposit at New Orleans. The transfer of Louisiana from a weak
neighbour to so powerful and ambitious a state as France was naturally
unwelcome to the United States, and Robert R. Livingston, the American
minister in Paris, was instructed by Secretary-of-State Madison to
endeavour to prevent the consummation of the retrocession; or, should
that be irrevocable, to endeavour to buy the Floridas (either from
France, if they had passed with Louisiana, or through her goodwill from
Spain)--or at least West Florida--and if possible New Orleans, so as to
give the United States a secure position on the Mississippi, and insure
the safety of her commerce. The United States was also trying to collect
claims of her merchants for spoliations by French cruisers during the
late war between France and Great Britain. In his preliminary
propositions Livingston lightly suggested to Talleyrand a cession of
Louisiana to satisfy these claims; following it with the more serious
demand that France should pledge observance of the Spanish concession to
the Mississippi trade. This pledge Napoleon readily gave. But during
these negotiations a suspension by the Spanish governor of the right of
deposit aroused extreme apprehension in America and resulted in warlike
votes in Congress. Of these, and of London reports of a British
expedition against New Orleans preparing in anticipation of the imminent
rupture of the peace of Amiens, Livingston made most capable use; and
pressed for a cession of West Florida, New Orleans and Louisiana north
of the Arkansas river. But without New Orleans Louisiana was of little
present worth, and Napoleon--the collapse of whose American colonial
schemes seemed involved in his failure in Santo Domingo, who was
persuaded he could not hold Louisiana against Great Britain, and who was
already turning from projects of colonial empire toward his later
continental policy--suddenly offered to Livingston the whole of the
province. Livingston disclaimed wanting the part below the Arkansas. In
even mentioning Louisiana he had gone outside his instructions. At this
stage James Monroe became associated with him in the negotiations. They
were quickly closed, Barbé Marbois acting for Napoleon, and by three
conventions signed on the 30th of April 1803 the American ministers,
without instructions, boldly accepted for their country a territory
approximately 1,000,000 sq. m. in area--about five times the area of
continental France. For this imperial domain, perhaps the richest
agricultural region of the world, the United States paid 60,000,000
francs ($11,250,000) outright, and assumed the claims of her citizens
against France to the extent of 20,000,000 francs ($3,750,000)
additional; the interest payments incidental to the final settlement
raising the total eventually to $27,267,622, or about four cents an

Different writers have emphasized differently the various factors in
this extraordinary diplomatic episode. Unquestionably the western people
were ready to war for the navigation of the Mississippi; but, that being
guaranteed, it seems certain that France might peaceably have taken and
held the western shore. The acquisition was not a triumph of American
diplomacy, but a piece of marvellous diplomatic good fortune; for the
records abundantly prove, as Madison said, that the cause of success was
a sudden policy of Napoleon, forced by European contingencies.
Livingston alone of the public men concerned showed indubitably before
the event a conception of the feasibility and desirability of the
acquisition of a vast territory beyond the Mississippi. Jefferson had
wished to buy the Floridas, but alarmed by the magnitude of the cession,
declared his belief that the United States had no power to acquire
Louisiana. Though such strict construction of the constitution was a
cardinal dogma of the Democratic party, this dogma was abandoned
outright in practice, Jefferson finding "but one opinion as to the
necessity of shutting up the constitution" (or amending it, which was
not done) and seeking justification of the means in the end. The
Federalist party, heretofore broad-constructionists, became
strict-constructionists under the temptation of factious politics, and a
very notable political struggle was thus precipitated--notable among
other things for strong expressions of sectionalism. The net result was
the establishment of the doctrine of "implied powers" in interpreting
the constitution; a doctrine under which the Supreme Court presently
found power to acquire territory implied in the powers to wage war and
make peace, negotiate treaties, and "dispose of and make all needful
rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property
belonging to the United States."

The exact limits of the acquisition were not definitely drawn. The
French archives show that Napoleon regarded the Rio Grande as the W.
boundary of the territory of which he was to take possession, and the
United States up to 1819 ably maintained the same claim. She also
claimed all West Florida as part of Louisiana--which, in the usage of
the second half of the 18th century, it apparently was not. When she
acquired the Floridas in 1819-1821 she abandoned the claim to Texas. The
line then adopted between the American and Spanish possessions on the W.
followed the Sabine river from the Gulf of Mexico to the parallel of 32°
N., ran thence due N. to the Red river, followed this to the meridian of
100° W. and this line N. to the Arkansas river, thence along this to its
source, thence N. to the parallel of 42°, and along this line to the
Pacific. Such is the accepted description of the W. boundary of the
Louisiana Purchase--waiving Texas--thus retrospectively determined,
except that that boundary ran with the crest of the Rocky Mountains N.
of its intersection with the parallel of 42°. No portion of the Purchase
lay west of the mountains, although for some years after 1870 the
official maps of the United States government erroneously included
Oregon as so acquired--an error finally abandoned by 1900.

On the 20th of December 1803, at New Orleans, the United States took
possession of the lower part of the province, and on the 9th of March
1804, at St Louis, of the upper. The entire region then contained
possibly 80,000 residents. The treaty of cession required the
incorporation of Louisiana in the Union, and the admission of its
inhabitants, "as soon as possible, according to the principles of the
Federal Constitution, to the enjoyment of all the rights, advantages and
immunities of citizens of the United States." By act of the 26th of
March 1804 the region below 33° N. was organized as the Territory of
Orleans (see Louisiana), and that above as the District of Louisiana.
The region above 33°, renamed in 1805 the Territory of Louisiana, and in
1812 the Territory of Missouri, was divided as time went on into many
Indian reservations, territories and states. Thus were carved from the
great domain of the Purchase Louisiana, Missouri, Arkansas, Iowa,
Minnesota, North and South Dakota, Nebraska and Oklahoma in their
entirety, and much the greatest part of Kansas, Colorado, Wyoming and
Montana. There is justification for the saying of Thiers that the United
States were "indebted for their birth and for their greatness"--at least
for an early assurance of greatness--"to the long struggle between
France and England." The acquisition of so vast a territory proved thus
of immense influence in the history of the United States. It made it
possible for them to hold a more independent and more dignified position
between France and England during the Napoleonic wars; it established
for ever in practice the doctrine of implied powers in the
interpretation of the Federal Constitution; it gave the new republic a
grand basis for material greatness; assured its dominance in North
America; afforded the field for a magnificent experiment in expansion,
and new doctrines of colonization; fed the national land hunger;
incidentally moulded the slavery issue; and precipitated its final

It is generally agreed that after the Revolution and the Civil War, the
Louisiana Purchase is the greatest fact in American history. In 1904 a
world's fair, the Louisiana Purchase Exposition, was held at St Louis in
commemoration of the cession. After one hundred years the wilderness
then acquired had become the centre of the power and wealth of the
Union. It contained in 1903 15,000,000 inhabitants, and its taxable
wealth alone was four hundred times the fifteen millions given to

  AUTHORITIES.--The official literature is in the _American State
  Papers, Foreign Relations_, vol. 2, and _Public Lands_, vol. 2;
  diplomatic papers reprinted in _House Document 431, 57^th Congress,
  2nd Session_ (1903); to which add the _Histoire de la Louisiane et de
  la cession_ (Paris, 1829; Eng. trans., Philadelphia, 1830), by
  François Barbé-Marbois. This book abounds in supposed "speeches" of
  Napoleon, and "sayings" by Napoleon and Livingston that would have
  been highly prophetic in 1803, though no longer so in 1829. They have
  been used liberally and indiscriminatingly by the most prominent
  American historians. See also T. Donaldson, _The Public Domain, House
  Miscellaneous Document 45, pt. 4, 47^th Congress_, _2nd Session_. For
  the boundary discussions by J. Q. Adams and Don L. de Onis, 1818-1819,
  _American State Papers, Foreign Relations_, vol. 4; also in Onis's
  _Official Correspondence between Don Luis de Onis_ ... _and John
  Quincy Adams_, &c. (London, 1818), or _Memoria sobre las negociaciones
  entre España y los Estados Unidos que dieron motivo al tratado de
  1819_ (Madrid, 1820). See also discussion and map in _U.S. Census,
  1900, Bulletin 74_; and the letters of Thomas Jefferson, James
  Madison, Rufus King and other statesmen of the time. By far the best
  general account of the diplomacy is in Henry Adams's _History of the
  United States_, vols. 1 and 2; and of Western conditions and American
  sentiment in J. B. McMaster's _History of the United States_, vols. 2
  and 3. Consult also Justin Winsor, _Narrative and Critical History_,
  vol. 7; and various valuable periodical articles, especially in the
  _American Historical Review_, by F. J. Turner and others. Reference
  may be made to B. Hermann, _The Louisiana Purchase_ (Washington,
  1898), and Theodore Roosevelt's _Winning of the West_, vol. 4. Of the
  various special but popular accounts (by J. K. Hosmer, Ripley
  Hitchcock, R. Blanchard, K. E. Winship, &c.), not one is worthy of its
  subject, and all contain various inaccuracies.


  [1] By the treaty of San Ildefonso, signed the 1st of October 1800.
    This was never ratified by Charles IV. of Spain, but the treaty of
    Madrid of the 21st of March 1801, which confirmed it, was signed by
    him on the 15th of October 1802.

LOUISVILLE, the largest city of Kentucky, U.S.A., and the county-seat of
Jefferson county, on the Ohio river, 110 m. by rail and 130 m. by water
S.W. of Cincinnati. Pop. (1890) 161,129; (1900) 204,731, of whom 21,427
were foreign-born (including 12,383 Germans and 4198 Irish) and 39,139
were negroes; (1910 census) 223,928.

Louisville occupies 40 sq. m. of a plain, about 70 sq. m. in extent,
about 60 ft. above the low-water mark of the river, and nearly enclosed
by hills. The city extends for 8 m. along the river (spanned here by
three bridges), which falls 26 ft. in 2 m., but for 6 m. above the
rapids spreads out into a beautiful sheet of quiet water about 1 m.
wide. The streets intersect at right angles, are from 60 to 120 ft.
wide, and are, for the most part, well-shaded. The wholesale district,
with its great tobacco warehouses, is largely along Main Street, which
runs E. and W. not far from the river; and the heart of the shopping
district is along Fourth Street in the dozen blocks S. of Main Street.
Adjoining the shopping district on the S. is the old residence section;
the newer residences are on "The Highlands" at the E. end and also at
the W. end. The city is served by the Baltimore & Ohio South-Western,
the Chesapeake & Ohio, the Pittsburg, Cincinnati, Chicago & St Louis,
the Louisville, Henderson & St Louis, the Illinois Central, the Chicago,
Indiana & Louisville, the Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St Louis, the
Southern and the Louisville & Nashville railways; by steamboat lines to
Memphis, Cairo, Evansville, Cincinnati and Pittsburg; by an extensive
system of inter-urban electric lines; and by ferries to Jeffersonville
and New Albany, Indiana, two attractive residential suburbs.

Many of the business houses are old-fashioned and low. The principal
public buildings are the United States government building, the
Jefferson county court house and the city hall. In front of the court
house stands a bronze statue of Thomas Jefferson, designed by Moses
Ezekiel (b. 1844), and inside of the court house a marble statue of
Henry Clay by Joel T. Hart (1810-1870). There are few or no large
congested tenement-house districts; most of the wage-earners own their
own homes or rent cottages. Louisville has an extensive park system,
most of which was acquired after 1889 and is on the outskirts. From the
heart of the city South Parkway, 150 ft. wide, extends S. 6 m. to the
entrance to Iroquois Park (670 acres) on a wooded hill. At the E. end of
Broadway is Cherokee Park (nearly 330 acres), near which is the
beautiful Cave Hill Cemetery, containing the grave of George Rogers
Clark, the founder of the city, and the graves of several members of the
family of George Keats, the poet's brother, who lived in Louisville for
a time; and at the W. end of Broadway, Shawnee Park (about 170 acres),
with a long sandy river beach frequented by bathers. Central Park
occupies the space of two city squares in the old fashionable residence
districts. Through the efforts of a Recreation League organized in 1901
a few playgrounds are set apart for children. Louisville is a noted
racing centre and has some fine tracks; the Kentucky Derby is held here
annually in May.

The United States government has a marine hospital, and a life-saving
station at the rapids of the river. The state has a school for the
blind, in connexion with which is the American Printing House for the
Blind. There are state hospitals and many other charitable institutions.

The principal educational institutions are the university of Louisville,
which has a College of Liberal Arts (1907), a law department (1847), and
a medical department (1837)--with which in 1907 were consolidated the
Hospital College of Medicine (1873), the Medical Department of Kentucky
University (1898), the Louisville Medical College (1869), and the
Kentucky School of Medicine (1850); the Southern Baptist Theological
Seminary (1859); the Presbyterian Theological Seminary of Kentucky,
which was formed in 1901 by the consolidation of the Theological
Seminary of the Presbyterian Church at Danville (1853) and the
Louisville Presbyterian Theological Seminary (1893); the Louisville
College of Pharmacy (1871), and the Louisville College of Dentistry
(1887), a department of Central University. There are many musical
clubs, and a spring festival for which a local chorus furnishes the
nucleus, is held annually. The Louisville Public Library was established
in 1902, and 1904 acquired the library, the small museum (containing the
Troost collection of minerals) and the art gallery of the Polytechnic
Society of Louisville (1878), which for many years had maintained the
only public library in the city. The principal newspapers are the
_Courier Journal_ (Democratic, morning), the _Herald_ (Republican,
morning), the _Evening Post_ (Independent Democratic), and the _Times_
(Democratic, evening). The _Courier Journal_ is one of the most
influential newspapers in the South. Henry Watterson became editor in
1868, when the _Courier_ (1843), established and owned by Walter N.
Haldeman, was consolidated with the _Journal_ (1830), of which Watterson
had become editor in 1867, and with the _Democrat_ (1844).

  The richness of the surrounding country in agricultural produce,
  timber, coal and iron, and its transport facilities have made
  Louisville a large commercial and manufacturing centre. The
  leaf-tobacco market is the largest in the world, most of the
  leaf-tobacco produced in Kentucky, which in 1900 was 34.9% of the
  entire crop of the United States, being handled in Louisville; the
  city's trade in whisky, mules and cement[1] is notably large, and that
  in pork, wheat, Indian corn, coal and lumber is extensive. The total
  value of the manufactured products increased from $54,515,226 in 1890
  to $78,746,390 in 1900 or 44.4%, and between 1900 and 1905 the value
  of the factory-made product increased from $66,110,474 to $83,204,125,
  an increase of 25.9%. Large quantities of fine bourbon whisky are
  distilled here; in 1905 the value of the factory product of the city
  was $3,878,004. The most valuable manufacture in the same year was
  smoking and chewing tobacco (especially plug tobacco) and snuff valued
  at $11,635,367--which product with that of cigars and cigarettes
  ($1,225,347) constituted 15.5% of the value of the factory products of
  the city. Other important manufactures in 1905 were: packed meats,
  particularly pork; men's clothing, especially "Kentucky jeans"; flour
  and grist mill products; cotton-seed oil and cake; leather, especially
  sole leather; foundry and machine shop products; steam-railway cars;
  cooperage; malt liquors; carriages and wagons, especially farm wagons;
  and carriage and wagon materials; agricultural implements, especially
  ploughs; and plumbers' supplies, including cast-iron gas and water
  pipes. Besides, there were many other manufactures.

  The city's water-supply is taken from the Ohio river a few miles above
  the city limits, and purified by large filtering plants. Nearly all
  the capital stock of the water-works company is owned by the

  Louisville is governed under a charter of 1893, which is in the form
  of an act of the state legislature for the government of cities of the
  first class (Louisville is the only city of the first class in the
  state). The mayor is elected for four years, and appoints, subject to
  the approval of the board of aldermen, the controller and the members
  of the two principal executive boards--the board of public works and
  the board of public safety. The legislative power is vested in a
  general council composed of 12 aldermen and 24 councilmen. Both
  aldermen and councilmen serve without pay, and are elected on a
  general ticket for a term of two years; not more than two councilmen
  may be residents of the same ward, but there is no such limitation in
  regard to aldermen. The treasurer, tax-receiver, auditor, judge of the
  police court, clerk of the police court, members of the board of
  school trustees (1 from each legislative district) and members of the
  park commission are elected by popular vote; the assessor, by the
  general council. The duration of franchises given by the city is
  limited to 20 years.

_History._--The site of the city was probably visited by La Salle in
1669 or 1670. In July 1773, Captain Thomas Bullitt,[2] acting under a
commission from the College of William and Mary, surveyed a tract of
2000 acres, lying opposite the Falls of the Ohio, and laid out a town
site upon this tract. Colonel William Preston, county surveyor of
Fincastle county, within which the 2000-acre tract lay, refused to
approve Captain Bullitt's survey, and had the lands resurveyed in the
following year, nevertheless the tract was conveyed in December 1773 by
Lord Dunmore to his friend Dr John Connolly, a native of Lancaster
county, Pennsylvania, who had served in the British army, as commander
of Fort Pitt (under Dunmore's appointment), was an instigator of Indian
troubles which culminated in the Battle of Point Pleasant, and was
imprisoned from 1775 until nearly the close of the War of American
Independence for attempting under Dunmore's instructions to organize the
"Loyal Foresters," who were to be sent against the rebellious colonists
in the West. The city of Louisville was laid out on the upper half of
this Connolly tract. It is possible that there was a settlement on what
was afterward called Corn Island (which has now practically
disappeared), at the Falls of the Ohio, as early as 1775; in May 1778,
General George Rogers Clark, while proceeding, by way of the Ohio river,
against the British posts in the Illinois territory, landed on this
island and built block-houses for his stores and cabins for about twenty
families of emigrants who had come with him. These emigrants (or the
greater part of them) removed to the mainland in the winter of
1778-1779, and established themselves in a fort built within the present
limits of Louisville. A town government was organized by them in April
1779, the settlement at this time being known as "the Falls of the
Ohio." On the 14th of May 1780, the legislature of Virginia, in response
to a petition of the inhabitants, declared that Connolly had forfeited
his title, and incorporated the settlement under the name of Louisville,
in recognition of the assistance given to the colonies in the War of
Independence by Louis XVI. of France. In 1828 Louisville was chartered
as a city; in 1851 it received a second city charter; in 1870, a third;
and in 1893, a fourth. The city's growth was greatly promoted by the
introduction of successful steam navigation on the Ohio in 1811 and
still further by the opening of the canal around the rapids (generally
called the "Falls of the Ohio"). This canal, which is 2½ m. in length
and is known as the Louisville and Portland canal, was authorized by the
legislature in 1825 and was opened in December 1830; between 1855 and
1872 Congress made appropriations for enlarging it, and in 1874 it
passed entirely under Federal control. The first railway to serve the
city, the Louisville & Frankfort, was completed in 1851. The 6th of
August is locally known as "Bloody Monday"; on this day in 1855 some
members of the Know Nothing Party incited a riot that resulted in the
loss of several lives and of considerable property. In March 1890 a
tornado caused great loss in life and property in the city. General
Clark made his home in Louisville and the vicinity after his return from
the Illinois country in 1779. Louisville was also the early home of the
actress Mary Anderson; John James Audubon lived here in 1808-1812; and 5
m. E. of the city are the old home and the grave (with a monument) of
Zachary Taylor.

  See Reuben T. Durrett, _The Centenary of Louisville_ (Louisville,
  1893), being No. 8 of the Filson Club Publications; J. S. Johnston
  (ed.), _Memorial History of Louisville_ (Chicago, 1896); and L. V.
  Rule, "Louisville, the Gateway City to the South," in L. P. Powell's
  _Historic Towns of the Southern States_ (New York, 1900).


  [1] Louisville cement, one of the best-known varieties of natural
    cement, was first manufactured in Shipping Port, a suburb of
    Louisville, in 1829 for the construction of the Louisville & Portland
    Canal; the name is now applied to all cement made in the Louisville
    District in Kentucky and Indiana. There is a large Portland cement
    factory just outside the city.

  [2] Captain Thomas Bullitt (1730-1778), a Virginian, commanded a
    company under Washington at Great Meadows (July 4, 1754), was in
    Braddock's disastrous expedition in 1755, and after the defeat of
    Major James Grant in 1758 saved his disorganized army by a cleverly
    planned attack upon the pursuers. He became Adjutant-General of
    Virginia after the peace of 1763, and took part in the movements
    which forced Lord Dunmore to leave Norfolk. Subsequently he served in
    South Carolina under Colonel Lee.

LOULÉ, a town of southern Portugal, in the district of Faro (formerly
the province of Algarve); beautifully situated in an inland hilly
district, 10 m. N.N.W. of the seaport of Faro and 5 m. from São João da
Venda on the Lisbon-Faro railway. Pop. (1900) 22,478. Apart from Lisbon,
Oporto and Braga, Loulé is the most populous town in the kingdom. It is
surrounded by walls and towers dating from the Moorish period. The
neighbouring church of Nossa Senhora da Piedade is a favourite resort of
pilgrims. Basket-making is the principal industry; leather, porcelain
and various products of the palm, agave and esparto grass are also

LOURDES, a town of south-western France in the department of
Hautes-Pyrénées, at the foot of the Pyrenees, 12 m. S.S.W. of Tarbes on
the main line of the Southern railway between that town and Pau. Pop.
(1906) 7228. Lourdes is divided into an old and a new town by the Gave
de Pau, which at this point leaves the valley of Argelès and turns
abruptly to the west. The old quarter on the right bank surrounds on
three sides a scarped rock, on which stands the fortress now used as a
prison. Its large square keep of the 14th century is the chief survival
of feudal times. Little is left of the old fortifications except a tower
of the 13th or 14th century, surmounting a gateway known as the Tour de
Garnabie. The old quarter is united with the new town by a bridge which
is continued in an esplanade leading to the basilica, the church of the
Rosary and the Grotto, with its spring of healing water. The present
fame of Lourdes is entirely associated with this grotto, where the
Virgin Mary is believed in the Roman Catholic world to have revealed
herself repeatedly to a peasant girl named Bernadette Soubirous in 1858.
A statue of the Virgin stands on a rock projecting above the grotto, the
walls of which are covered with crutches and other votive offerings; the
spot, which is resorted to by multitudes of pilgrims from all quarters
of the world, is marked by a basilica built above the grotto and
consecrated in 1876. In addition the church of the Rosary, a rich
building in the Byzantine style, was erected in front of and below the
basilica from 1884 to 1889. Not far from the grotto are several other
caves, where prehistoric remains have been found. The Hospice de
Notre-Dame de Douleurs is the chief of the many establishments provided
for the accommodation of pilgrims.

Lourdes is a fortified place of the second class; and is the seat of the
tribunal of first instance of the arrondissement of Argelès. There are
marble and slate quarries near the town. The pastures of the
neighbourhood support a breed of Aquitaine cattle, which is most highly
valued in south-western France.

The origin of Lourdes is uncertain. From the 9th century onwards it was
the most important place in Bigorre, largely owing to the fortress which
is intimately connected with its history. In 1360 it passed by the
treaty of Brétigny from French to English hands, and its governor was
murdered by Gaston Phoebus viscount of Béarn, for refusing to surrender
it to the count of Anjou. Nevertheless the fortress did not fall into
the possession of the French till 1406 after a blockade of eighteen
months. Again during the wars of religion the castle held out
successfully after the town had been occupied by the troops of the
Protestant captain Gabriel, count of Montgomery. From the reign of Louis
XIV. to the beginning of the 19th century the castle was used as a state
prison. Since the visions of Bernadette Soubirous, their authentication
by a commission of enquiry appointed by the bishop of Tarbes, and the
authorization by the pope of the cult of Our Lady of Lourdes, the
quarter on the left bank of the Gave has sprung up and it is estimated
that 600,000 pilgrims annually visit the town. The chief of the
pilgrimages, known as the national pilgrimage, takes place in August.

Several religious communities have been named after Our Lady of Lourdes.
Of these one, consisting of sisters of the third order of St Francis,
called the Congregation of Our Lady of Lourdes (founded 1877), has its
headquarters in Rochester, Minnesota. Another, the Order of Our Lady of
Lourdes, was founded in 1883 for work in the archdiocese of New Orleans.

  See G. Marès, _Lourdes et ses environs_ (Bordeaux, 1894); Fourcade,
  _L'Apparition de la grotte de Lourdes_ (Paris, 1862) and _L'Apparition
  ... considérée au point de vue de l'art chrétien_ (Bordeaux, 1862);
  Boissarie, _Lourdes, histoire médicale_ (Paris, 1891); Bertrin, _Hist.
  critique des événements de Lourdes_ (2nd ed., Paris, 1905), written
  under authority of the bishop of Tarbes; H. Lasserre, _Miraculous
  Episodes of Lourdes_ (London, 1884, tr.); R. F. Clarke, _Lourdes and
  its Miracles_ (_ib_., 1889) and _Medical Testimony to the Miracles_
  (_ib_., 1892); D. Barbé, _Lourdes hier, aujourd'hui, demain_ (Paris,
  1893; Eng. trans. by A. Meynell, London, 1894); J. R. Gasquet, _The
  Cures at Lourdes_ (London, 1895); _Les Pèlerinages de Lourdes.
  Cantiques, insignes, costumes_ (Lourdes, 1897); W. Leschner, _The
  Origin of Lourdes_ (London, 1900). Zola's _Lourdes_ (Paris, 1894), a
  criticism from the sceptical point of view, in the form of a realistic
  novel, has called forth many replies from the Catholic side.

LOURENÇO MARQUES, capital of Portuguese East Africa, or Mozambique, on
the north bank of the Espirito Santo or English river, Delagoa Bay, and
396 m. by rail via Pretoria from Johannesburg. Pop. (1904) 9849, of whom
4691 were Europeans and 1690 Asiatics. The town is situated close to the
mouth of the river in 25° 53´ S. and 32° 30´ E., and is built upon a
low-lying spit of sand, formerly surrounded by swamps. The streets are
regularly laid out and adorned by several fine buildings. The principal
thoroughfare, the Avenida Aguiar, 2 m. long, goes from the centre of the
town to Reuben Point. The harbour is well equipped with piers, quays,
landing sheds and electric cranes, which enable large steamers to
discharge cargoes direct into the railway trucks. The depth of water at
low tide is 18 ft. The streets are lit by electricity and there is an
electric tramway system 7 m. in extent. At Reuben Point, which marks the
spot where the English river enters the bay, are the lighthouse,
barracks and the private residences of the wealthy citizens. At its
mouth the English river is about 2 m. across. Lourenço Marques is the
nearest seaport to the Rand gold mines. The port is 8374 m. from
Southampton via Cape Town and 7565 m. via the Suez canal. It is served
by British, Portuguese and German liners, the majority of the goods
imported being shipped at Southampton, Lisbon or Hamburg. Over 50% of
the import trade of Johannesburg is with Lourenço Marques. Great Britain
and British possessions take some 40% of the import trade, Portugal,
Germany, Norway, Sweden and America coming next in order. Most of the
imports, being forwarded to the Transvaal, figure also as exports. The
chief articles of import are food-stuffs and liquors, iron, mineral
oils, inks and dyes, timber and live stock. These all form part of the
transit trade. There is practically no export trade by sea save in coal,
which is brought chiefly from the collieries at Middelburg in the
Transvaal. At Port Matolla, 20 m. from the town, on the river of that
name, one of the feeders of the English river, is a flourishing timber
trade. The average value of the total trade of Lourenço Marques for the
five years 1897-1899 and 1902-1903 (1900 and 1901 being years during
which trade was disorganized by the Anglo-Boer War) was over £3,500,000.
In 1905 the value of the trade of the port was £5,682,000; of this total
the transit trade was worth over £4,500,000 and the imports for local
consumption £1,042,000. The retail trade, and trade with the natives, is
almost entirely in the hands of Indians. The chief import for local
consumption is cheap wine from Portugal, bought by the Kaffirs to the
extent of over £500,000 yearly. These natives form the bulk of the
Africans who work in the Rand gold mines.

Lourenço Marques is named after a Portuguese navigator, who with a
companion (Antonio Calderia) was sent in 1544 by the governor of
Mozambique on a voyage of exploration. They explored the lower courses
of the rivers emptying their waters into Delagoa Bay, notably the
Espirito Santo. The various forts and trading stations which the
Portuguese established, abandoned and re-occupied on the north bank of
the river were all called Lourenço Marques. The existing town dates from
about 1850, the previous settlement having been entirely destroyed by
the natives. In 1871 the town was described as a poor place, with narrow
streets, fairly good flat-roofed houses, grass huts, decayed forts and
rusty cannon, enclosed by a wall 6 ft. high then recently erected and
protected by bastions at intervals. The growing importance of the
Transvaal led, however, to greater interest being taken in Portugal in
the port. A commission was sent by the Portuguese government in 1876 to
drain the marshy land near the settlement, to plant the blue gum tree,
and to build a hospital and a church. It was not, however, until the end
of the 19th century that any marked development took place in the town,
and up to 1903 cargo had to be discharged in tugs and lighters.

In 1873-1877 Mr Burgers, president of the Transvaal, endeavoured,
unsuccessfully, to get a railway built from Pretoria to Delagoa Bay. In
1878-1879 a survey was taken for a line from Lourenço Marques to the
Transvaal, and in 1883 the Lisbon cabinet granted to Colonel Edward
McMurdo, an American citizen, a concession--which took the place of
others which had lapsed--for the building of a railway from Lourenço
Marques to the Transvaal frontier, the Boer government having agreed
(1883) to continue the line to Pretoria. Under this concession Colonel
McMurdo formed in London in 1887 a company--the Delagoa Bay and East
African Railway Company--to construct the line. Meantime a secret
agreement had been come to between President Kruger and Portugal for the
concession to the Transvaal of a "steam tramway" parallel to the
projected railway, should the company not complete the line in the time
specified. The company, however, built the line to the frontier shown on
the Portuguese maps of 1883 within the time limit, the railway being
opened on the 14th of December 1888. The frontier by this date had been
fixed at Komati Poort, 5 m. farther from the coast. Portugal had
previously agreed to grant the company "a reasonable extension of time"
to complete the line if the frontier should be traced farther inland
than shown on the 1883 maps. The Lisbon government required the
extension to Komati Poort to be completed in eight months (five of which
were in the rainy season), an impossible stipulation. The railway not
being finished, the Portuguese seized the line on the 25th of June 1889
and cancelled the concession. Portugal in so doing acted, to all
appearance, under pressure from the Transvaal. Great Britain and America
at once protested, Portugal admitted the illegality of her act and
consented to refer the amount of compensation to the decision of three
Swiss jurists. This was in 1890, when Portugal paid £28,000 on account.
It was not until the 29th of March 1900 that the award was made known.
The arbitrators ordered Portugal to pay--in addition to the £28,000--a
sum, including interest, of £950,000. The damages were promptly paid.
Meantime the railway had been continued from Komati Poort and was opened
for through traffic to Pretoria on the 8th of July 1895. In 1906-1910
another railway (47 m. long) was built from Lourenço Marques due west to
the Swaziland frontier, being a link in a new line to shorten the
distance by rail between the Rand and the sea by some 60 m.

  See also DELAGOA BAY and the authorities there cited. The text of the
  railway arbitration award was published in French at Berne in 1900.
  Annual reports on the trade of Lourenço Marques are issued by the
  British Foreign Office.

LOUSE (O. Eng. _lús_, cf. Du. _luis_, Ger. _Laus_, Dan. and Swed.
_lus_), a term applied to small wingless insects, parasitic upon birds
and mammals, and belonging strictly speaking to the order Anoplura,
often included among the Hemiptera, though the term is frequently
extended to the bird-lice constituting the suborder Mallophaga, formerly
included among the Neuroptera. Both agree in having nothing that can be
termed a metamorphosis; they are active from the time of their exit from
the egg to their death, gradually increasing in size, and undergoing
several moults or changes of skin. The true lice (or Anoplura) are found
on the bodies of many Mammalia, and occasion by their presence
intolerable irritation. The number of genera is few. Two species of
_Pediculus_ are found on the human body, and are known ordinarily as the
head-louse (_P. capitis_) and the body-louse (_P. vestimenti_); _P.
capitis_ is found on the head, especially of children. The eggs, laid on
the hairs, and known as "nits," hatch in about eight days, and the lice
are full grown in about a month. Such is their fecundity that it has
been asserted that one female (probably of _P. vestimenti_) may in eight
weeks produce five thousand descendants. Want of cleanliness favours
their multiplication in a high degree--the idea once existed, and is
probably still held by the very ignorant, that they are directly
engendered from dirt. The irritation is caused by the rostrum of the
insect being inserted into the skin, from which the blood is rapidly
pumped up. A third human louse, known as the crab-louse (_Phthirius
pubis_) is found amongst the hairs on other parts of the body,
particularly those of the pubic region, but probably never on the head.
The louse of monkeys is now generally considered as forming a separate
genus (_Pedicinus_), but the greater part of those infesting domestic
and wild quadrupeds are mostly grouped in the large genus
_Haematopinus_, and very rarely is the same species found on different
kinds of animals.

The bird-lice (Mallophaga) are far more numerous in species, although
the number of genera is comparatively small. With the exception of the
genus _Trichodectes_, the various species of which are found on
mammalia, all infest birds (as their English names implies) (see
BIRD-LOUSE). Louse-infestation is known as phthiriasis in medical and
veterinary terminology.

  AUTHORITIES.--The following works are the most important: Denny,
  _Monographia Anoplurorum Britanniae_ (London, 1843); Giebel, _Insecta
  Epizoa_ (which contains the working-up of Nitzsch's posthumous
  materials; Leipzig, 1874); van Beneden, _Animal Parasites_ (London,
  1876); Piaget, _Les Pédiculines_ (Leiden, 1880); Mégnin, _Les
  Parasites et les maladies parasitaires_ (Paris, 1880); Neumann,
  _Parasites and Parasitic Diseases of Domesticated Animals_ (1892);
  Osborn, _Pediculi and Mallophaga affecting Man and the Lower Animals_
  (Washington, 1891; U.S. Dept. Agr.); Enderlein, "Läuse-Studien,"
  _Zool. Anz._ xxviii. (1904).

LOUTH, a maritime county in the province of Leinster, Ireland, bounded
N.E. by Carlingford Bay and Co. Down, E. by the Irish Sea, S.W. by
Meath, and N.W. by Monaghan and Armagh. It is the smallest county in
Ireland, its area being 202,731 acres or about 317 sq. m. The greater
part of the surface is undulating, with occasionally lofty hills; in the
north-east, on the borders of Carlingford Lough, there is a mountain
range approaching 2000 ft. in height. Many of the hills are finely
wooded, and towards the sea the scenery, in the more elevated districts,
is strikingly picturesque. With the exception of the promontory of
Clogher Head, which rises abruptly to a height of 180 ft., the coast is
for the most part low and sandy. The narrow and picturesque Carlingford
Lough is navigable beyond the limits of the county, and Carlingford and
Greenore are well-known watering-places on the county Louth shore. The
Bay of Dundalk stretches to the town of that name and affords convenient
shelter. The principal rivers, the Fane, the Lagan, the Glyde and the
Dee, flow eastwards. None of these is navigable, but the Boyne, which
forms the southern boundary of the county, is navigable for large
vessels as far as Drogheda.

  Almost all this county is occupied by an undulating lowland of
  much-folded Silurian shales and fine-grained sandstones; but
  Carboniferous Limestone overlies these rocks north and east of
  Dundalk. Dolerite and gabbro, in turn invaded by granite, have broken
  through the limestone north of Dundalk Bay, and form a striking and
  mountainous promontory. There is now no doubt that these rocks, with
  those on the adjacent moorland of Slieve Gullion, belong to the early
  Cainozoic igneous series, and may be compared with similar masses in
  the Isle of Skye. A raised beach provides a flat terrace at Greenore.
  Lead ore has been worked in the county, as in the adjacent parts of
  Armagh and Monaghan.

  In the lower regions the soil is a very rich deep mould, admirably
  adapted both for cereals and green crops. The higher mountain regions
  are covered principally with heath. Agriculture generally is in an
  advanced condition, and the farms are for the most part well drained.
  The acreage of tillage is but little below that of pasture. Oats,
  barley, flax, potatoes and turnips are all satisfactorily cultivated.
  Cattle, sheep, pigs and poultry represent the bulk of the live stock.
  Linen manufactures are of some importance. The deep-sea and coast
  fishery has its headquarters at Dundalk, and the salmon fisheries at
  Dundalk (Castletown river) and Drogheda (river Boyne). These
  fisheries, together with oyster beds in Carlingford Lough, are of
  great value. The county is traversed from S. to N. by the Great
  Northern railway, with a branch westward from Dundalk; while the same
  town is connected with the port of Greenore by a line owned by the
  London & North-Western railway of England. From Greenore the London &
  North-Western railway passenger steamers run regularly to Holyhead.
  The town of Ardee is served by a branch from the Great Northern line
  at Dromin.

  The population (71,914 in 1891; 65,820 in 1901) decreases at about an
  average rate, and a considerable number of the inhabitants emigrate.
  Of the total population about 92% are Roman Catholics. The principal
  towns are Dundalk (pop. 13,076), Drogheda (12,760) and Ardee (1883).
  The county includes six baronies and sixty-four parishes. Assizes are
  held at Dundalk and quarter sessions at Ardee, Drogheda and Dundalk.
  Louth was represented by two county and ten borough members in the
  Irish parliament; the two present divisions are the north and south,
  each returning one member. The county is in the Protestant dioceses of
  Armagh and Clogher and the Roman Catholic diocese of Armagh.

The territory which afterwards became the county Louth was included in
the principality of Uriel, Orgial or Argial, which comprehended also the
greater part of Meath, Monaghan and Armagh. The chieftain of the
district was conquered by John de Courcy in 1183, and Louth or Uriel was
among the shires generally considered to have been created by King John,
and peopled by English settlers. Until the time of Elizabeth it was
included in the province of Ulster. County Louth is rich in antiquarian
remains. There are ancient buildings of all dates, and spears, swords,
axes of bronze, ornaments of gold, and other relics have been discovered
in quantities. Among Druidical remains is the fine cromlech of
Ballymascanlan, between Dundalk and Greenore. Danish raths and other
forts are numerous. It is said that there were originally twenty
religious houses in the county. Of the remains of these the most
interesting are at Monasterboice and Mellifont, both near Drogheda. At
the former site are two churches, the larger dating probably from the
9th century, the smaller from the 13th; a fine round tower, 110 ft. in
height, but not quite perfect; and three crosses, two of which, 27 and
15 ft. in height respectively, are adorned with moulding, sculptured
figures and tracery, and are among the finest in Ireland. At Mellifont
are the remains of the first Cistercian monastery founded in Ireland, in
1142, with a massive gatehouse, an octagonal baptistery and
chapter-house. Carlingford and Drogheda have monastic remains, and at
Dromiskin is a round tower, in part rebuilt. Ardee, an ancient town,
incorporated in 1376, has a castle of the 13th century. At Dunbar a
charter of Charles II. (1679) gave the inhabitants the right to elect a
sovereign. Louth, 5½ m. S.W. from Dundalk, is a decayed town which gave
its name to the county, and contains ruins of an abbey to which was
attached one of the most noted early schools in Ireland.

LOUTH, a market-town and municipal borough in the E. Lindsey or Louth
parliamentary division of Lincolnshire, England, on the river Lud, 141½
m. N. of London by the Grimsby branch of the Great Northern railway.
Pop. (1901) 9518. By a canal, completed in 1763, there is water
communication with the Humber. The Perpendicular church of St James,
completed about 1515, with a spire 300 ft. in height, is one of the
finest ecclesiastical buildings in the county. Traces of a building of
the 13th century are perceptible. There are a town hall, a corn exchange
and a market-hall, an Edward VI. grammar school, which is richly
endowed, a commercial school founded in 1676, a hospital and several
almshouses. Thorpe Hall is a picturesque building dated 1584. In the
vicinity are the ruins of a Cistercian abbey (Louth Park). The
industries include the manufacture of agricultural implements,
iron-founding, brewing, malting, and rope and brick-making. The town is
governed by a mayor, 6 aldermen and 18 councillors. Area, 2749 acres.

Louth (_Ludes, Loweth_) is first mentioned in the Domesday record as a
borough held, as it had been in Saxon times, by the bishop of Lincoln,
who had a market there. The see retained the manor until it was
surrendered by Bishop Holbeach to Henry VIII., who granted it to Edward,
earl of Lincoln, but it was recovered by the Crown before 1562. Louth
owed much of its early prosperity to the adjacent Cistercian abbey of
Louth Park, founded in 1139 by Alexander bishop of Lincoln. The borough
was never more than prescriptive, though burgesses were admitted
throughout the middle ages and until 1711, their sole privilege being
freedom from tolls. The medieval government of the town was by the manor
court under the presidency of the bishop's high steward, the custom
being for the reeve to be elected by eighteen ex-reeves. The original
parish church was built about 1170. During the 13th and 14th centuries
nine religious gilds were founded in the town. Fear of confiscation of
the property of these gilds seems to have been one of the chief local
causes of the Lincolnshire Rebellion, which broke out here in 1536. The
disturbance began by the parishioners seizing the church ornaments to
prevent their surrender. The bishop's steward, who arrived to open the
manorial court for the election of a reeve, agreed to ride to ask the
king the truth about the jewels, but this did not satisfy the people,
who, while showing respect to a royal commission, seized and burnt the
papers of the bishop's registrar. After swearing several country
gentlemen to their cause, the rebels dispersed, agreeing to meet on the
following day under arms. Edward VI. in 1551 incorporated Louth under
one warden and six assistants, who were to be managers of the school
founded by the same charter. This was confirmed in 1564 by Elizabeth,
who granted the manor of Louth to the corporation with all rights and
all the lands of the suppressed gilds at an annual fee-farm rent of £84.
James I. gave the commission of the peace to the warden and one
assistant in 1605; a further charter was obtained in 1830. Louth has
never been a parliamentary borough. The markets said to have been held
from ancient times and the three fairs on the third Sunday after Easter
and the feasts of St Martin and St James were confirmed in 1551. Louth
was a seat of the wool trade as early as 1297; the modern manufactures
seem to have arisen at the end of the 18th century, when, according to
the charter of 1830, there was a great increase in the population,
manufactures, trade and commerce of the town.

  See E. H. R. Tatham, _Lincolnshire in Roman Times_ (Louth, 1902);
  Richard W. Goulding, _Louth Old Corporation Records_ (Louth, 1891).

LOUVAIN (Flem. _Leuven_), a town of Belgium in the province of Brabant,
of which it was the capital in the 14th century before the rise of
Brussels. Pop. (1904) 42,194. Local tradition attributes the
establishment of a permanent camp at this spot to Julius Caesar, but
Louvain only became important in the 11th century as a place of
residence for the dukes of Brabant. In 1356 Louvain was the scene of the
famous _Joyeuse Entrée_ of Wenceslas which represented the principal
charter of Brabant. At that time it had a population of at least 50,000
and was very prosperous as the centre of the woollen trade in central
Belgium. The gild of weavers numbered 2400 members. The old walls of
Louvain were 4½ m. in circumference, and have been replaced by
boulevards, but within them there is a considerable extent of cultivated
ground. Soon after the _Joyeuse Entrée_ a serious feud began between the
citizens and the patrician class, and eventually the duke threw in his
lot with the latter. After a struggle of over twenty years' duration the
White Hoods, as the citizens called themselves, were crushed. In 1379
they massacred seventeen nobles in the town hall, but this crime brought
down on them the vengeance of the duke, to whom in 1383 they made the
most abject and complete surrender. With this civil strife the
importance and prosperity of Louvain declined. Many weavers fled to
Holland and England, the duke took up his residence in the strong castle
of Vilvorde, and Brussels prospered at the expense of Louvain. What it
lost in trade it partially recovered as a seat of learning, for in 1423,
Duke John IV. of Brabant founded there a university and ever since
Louvain University has enjoyed the first place in Belgium. It has always
prided itself most on its theological teaching. In 1679 the university
was established in the old Cloth Workers' Hall, a building dating from
1317, with long arcades and graceful pillars supporting the upper
storeys. The library contains 70,000 volumes and some 500 manuscripts.
Attached to the university are four residential colleges at which the
number of students average two thousand. In the 16th century when the
university was at the height of its fame it counted six thousand.

The most remarkable building in Louvain is the Hôtel de Ville, one of
the richest and most ornate examples of pointed Gothic in the country.
If less ornate than that of Oudenarde it is more harmonious in its
details. It was the work of Mathieu de Layens, master mason, who worked
at it from 1448 to 1463. The building is one of three storeys each with
ten pointed windows forming the façade facing the square. Above is a
graceful balustrade behind which is a lofty roof, and at the angles are
towers perforated for the passage of the light. The other three sides
are lavishly decorated with statuary. The interior is not noteworthy.

Opposite the Hôtel de Ville is the fine church of St Pierre, in the form
of a cross with a low tower to which the spire has never been added. The
existing edifice was built on the site of an older church between 1425
and 1497. It contains seven chapels, in two of which are fine pictures
by Dierich Bouts formerly attributed to Memling. Much of the iron and
brass work is by Jean Matseys. There is also an ancient tomb, being the
monument of Henry I., duke of Brabant, who died in 1235. There are four
other interesting churches in Louvain, viz. Ste Gertrude, St Quentin, St
Michael and St Jacques. In the last-named is a fine De Crayer
representing St Hubert. Some ruins on a hill exist of the old castle of
the counts of Louvain whose title was merged in the higher style of the
dukes of Brabant.

LOUVER, LOUVRE or LUFFER, in architecture, the lantern built upon the
roof of the hall in ancient times to allow the smoke to escape when the
fire was made on the pavement in the middle of the hall. The term is
also applied to the flat overlapping slips of wood, glass, &c., with
which such openings are closed, arranged to give ventilation without the
admission of rain. Openings fitted with louvers are now utilized for the
purposes of ventilation in schools and manufactories.

  The word has been derived from the French _l'ouvert_, the "open"
  space. This, Minsheu's guess, is now generally abandoned. The Old
  French form, of which the English is an adaptation, was _lover_ or
  _lovier_. The medieval Latin _lodium_, _lodarium_, is suggested as the
  ultimate origin. Du Cange (_Glossarium_, s.v. "lodia") defines it as
  _lugurium_, i.e. a small hut. The English form "louvre" is due to a
  confusion with the name of the palace in Paris. The origin of that
  name is also unknown; _louverie_, place of wolves, is one of the
  suggestions, the palace being supposed to have originally been a
  hunting-box (see PARIS).

LOUVET, JEAN (c. 1370-c. 1440), called the president of Provence,
occupied the position of president of the Chambre des Comptes at Aix in
1415. Towards the end of that year he went to Paris with Louis II. of
Anjou, king of Sicily, attached himself to the dauphin Charles, and
after having been chief steward of the household to Queen Isabella he
turned against her. He was one of the principal agents of the Armagnac
party, and became the most influential adviser of Charles VII. during
the first years of his reign. But his rapacity gained him enemies, and
when the constable Arthur, earl of Richmond, attained a preponderating
influence over Charles VII. Louvet retired to his captaincy of Avignon.
He still remained a personage of importance in his exile, and played an
influential part even in his last years.

  See Vallet de Viriville in the _Nouvelle Biographie générale_, and G.
  du Fresne de Beaucourt, _Histoire de Claries VII._ (1881-1891).
       (J. V.*)

LOUVET DE COUVRAI, JEAN BAPTISTE (1760-1797), French writer and
politician, was born in Paris on the 12th of June 1760, the son of a
stationer. He became a bookseller's clerk, and first attracted attention
with a not very moral novel called _Les Amours du chevalier de Faublas_
(Paris, 1787-1789). The character of the heroine of this book, Lodoïska,
was taken from the wife of a jeweller in the Palais Royal, with whom he
had formed a _liaison_. She was divorced from her husband in 1792 and
married Louvet in 1793. His second novel, _Émilie de Varmont_, was
intended to prove the utility and necessity of divorce and of the
marriage of priests, questions raised by the Revolution. Indeed all his
works were directed to the ends of the Revolution. He attempted to have
one of his unpublished plays, _L'Anobli conspirateur_, performed at the
Théâtre Français, and records naïvely that one of its managers, M.
d'Orfeuil, listened to the reading of the first three acts "with mortal
impatience," exclaiming at last: "I should need cannon in order to put
that piece on the stage." A "sort of farce" at the expense of the army
of the _émigrés, La Grande Revue des armées noire el blanche_, had,
however, better success: it ran for twenty-five nights.

Louvet was, however, first brought into notice as a politician by his
_Paris justifié_, in reply to a "truly incendiary" pamphlet in which
Mounier, after the removal of the king to Paris in October 1789, had
attacked the capital, "at that time blameless," and argued that the
court should be established elsewhere. This led to Louvet's election to
the Jacobin Club, for which, as he writes bitterly in his Memoirs, the
qualifications were then "a genuine _civisme_ and some talent." A
self-styled _philosophe_ of the true revolutionary type, he now threw
himself ardently into the campaign against "despotism" and "reaction,"
i.e. against the moderate constitutional royalty advocated by Lafayette,
the Abbé Maury and other "Machiavellians." On the 25th of December 1791
he presented at the bar of the Assembly his _Pétition contre les
princes_, which had "a prodigious success in the senate and the empire."
Elected deputy to the Assembly for the department of Loiret, he made his
first speech in January 1792. He attached himself to the Girondists,
whose vague deism, sentimental humanitarianism and ardent republicanism
he fully shared, and from March to November 1792 he published, at
Roland's expense, a bi-weekly _journal-affiche_, of which the title, _La
Sentinelle_, proclaimed its mission to be to "enlighten the people on
all the plots" at a time when, Austria having declared war, the court
was "visibly betraying our armies." On the 10th of August he became
editor of the _Journal des débats_, and in this capacity, as well as in
the Assembly, made himself conspicuous by his attacks on Robespierre,
Marat and the other Montagnards, whom he declares he would have
succeeded in bringing to justice in September but for the poor support
he received from the Girondist leaders. It is more probable, however,
that his ill-balanced invective contributed to their ruin and his own;
for him Robespierre was a "royalist," Marat "the principal agent of
England," the Montagnards Orleanists in masquerade. His courageous
attitude at the trial of Louis XVI., when he supported the "appeal to
the people," only served still further to discredit the Girondists. He
defended them, however, to the last with great courage, if with little
discretion; and after the crisis of the 31st of May 1793 he shared the
perils of the party who fled from Paris (see Girondists). His wife,
"Lodoïska," who had actively cooperated in his propaganda, was also in

After the fall of Robespierre, he was recalled to the Convention, when
he was instrumental in bringing Carrier and the others responsible for
the _Noyades_ of Nantes to justice. His influence was now considerable;
he was elected a member of the Committee of the Constitution, president
of the Assembly, and member of the Committee of Public Safety, against
the overgrown power of which he had in earlier days protested. His
hatred of the Mountain had not made him reactionary; he was soon
regarded as one of the mainstays of the "Jacobins," and _La Sentinelle_
reappeared, under his auspices, preaching union among republicans. Under
the Directory (1795) he was elected a member of the Council of Five
Hundred, of which he was secretary, and also a member of the Institute.
Meanwhile he had returned to his old trade and set up a bookseller's
shop in the Palais Royal. But, in spite of the fact that he had once
more denounced the Jacobins in _La Sentinelle_, his name had become
identified with all that the combative spirits of the _jeunesse dorée_
most disliked; his shop was attacked by the "young men" with cries of
"_À bas la Loupe, à bas la belle Lodoïska, à bas les gardes du corps de
Louvet!_" he and his wife were insulted in the streets and the theatres:
"_À bas les Louvets et les Louvetants!_" and he was compelled to leave
Paris. The Directory appointed him to the consulship at Palermo, but he
died on the 25th of August 1797 before taking up his post.

  In 1795 Louvet published a portion of his Memoirs under the title of
  _Quelques notices pour l'histoire et le récit de mes périls depuis le
  31 mai 1793_. They were mainly written in the various hiding-places in
  which Louvet took refuge, and they give a vivid picture of the
  sufferings of the proscribed Girondists. They form an invaluable
  document for the study of the psychology of the Revolution; for in
  spite of their considerable literary art, they are artless in their
  revelation of the mental and moral state of their author, a
  characteristic type of the honest, sentimental, somewhat hysterical
  and wholly unbalanced minds nurtured on the abstractions of the
  _philosophes_. The first complete edition of the _Mémoires de Louvet
  de Couvrai_, edited, with preface, notes and tables, by F. A. Aulard,
  was published at Paris in 1889.

LOUVIERS, a town of north-western France, capital of an arrondissement
in the department of Eure, 17½ m. S.S.E. of Rouen by road. Pop. (1906)
9449. Louviers is pleasantly situated in a green valley surrounded by
wooded hills, on the Eure, which here divides into several branches. The
old part of the town, built of wood, stands on the left bank of the
river; the more modern portions, in brick and hewn stone, on the right.
There are spacious squares, and the place is surrounded by boulevards.
The Gothic church of Notre-Dame has a south portal which ranks among the
most beautiful works of the kind produced in the 15th century; it
contains fine stained glass of the 15th and 16th centuries and other
works of art. The hôtel-de-ville, a large modern building, contains a
museum and library. The chief industry is cloth and flannel manufacture.
There are wool-spinning and fulling mills, thread factories and
manufactories of spinning and weaving machinery, and enamel ware;
leather-working, dyeing, metal-founding and bell-founding are also
carried on. The town is the seat of a sub-prefect and has a court of
first instance, a tribunal of commerce, a chamber of arts and
manufactures, and a council of trade arbitrators.

  Louviers (_Lovera_) was originally a _villa_ of the dukes of Normandy
  and in the middle ages belonged to the archbishops of Rouen; its
  cloth-making industry first arose in the beginning of the 13th
  century. It changed hands once and again during the Hundred Years'
  War, and from Charles VII. it received extensive privileges, and the
  title of Louviers le Franc for the bravery of its inhabitants in
  driving the English from Pont de l'Arche, Verneuil and Harcourt. It
  passed through various troubles successively at the period of the
  League of the Public Weal under Louis XI., in the religious wars (when
  the parlement of Rouen sat for a time at Louviers) and in the wars of
  the Fronde.

  See G. Petit, _Hist. de Louviers_ (Louviers, 1877).

statesman, war minister of Louis XIV., was born at Paris on the 18th of
January 1641. His father, Michel le Tellier (q.v.), married him to an
heiress, the marquise de Courtenvaux, and instructed him in the
management of state business. The young man won the king's confidence,
and in 1666 he succeeded his father as war minister. His talents were
perceived by Turenne in the war of Devolution (1667-68), who gave him
instruction in the art of providing armies. After the peace of
Aix-la-Chapelle, Louvois devoted himself to organizing the French army.
The years between 1668 and 1672, says Camille Rousset, "were years of
preparation, when Lionne was labouring with all his might to find
allies, Colbert to find money, and Louvois soldiers for Louis." The work
of Louvois in these years is bound up with the historical development of
the French army and of armies in general (see ARMY). Here need only be
mentioned Louvois's reorganization of the military orders of merit, his
foundation of the Hôtel des Invalides, and the almost forcible enrolment
of the nobility and gentry of France, in which Louvois carried out part
of Louis's measures for curbing the spirit of independence by service in
the army or at court. The success of his measures is to be seen in the
victories of the great war of 1672-78. After the peace of Nijmwegen
Louvois was high in favour, his father had been made chancellor, and the
influence of Colbert was waning. The ten years of peace between 1678 and
1688 were distinguished in French history by the rise of Madame de
Maintenon, the capture of Strassburg and the revocation of the Edict of
Nantes, in all of which Louvois bore a prominent part. The surprise of
Strassburg in 1681 in time of peace was not only planned but executed by
Louvois and Monclar. A saving clause in the revocation of the Edict of
Nantes, which provided for some liberty of conscience, if not of
worship, Louvois sharply annulled with the phrase "Sa majesté veut qu'on
fasse sentir les dernières rigueurs à ceux qui ne voudront pas se faire
de sa religion." He claimed also the credit of inventing the
dragonnades, and mitigated the rigour of the soldiery only in so far as
the licence accorded was prejudicial to discipline. Discipline, indeed,
and complete subjection to the royal authority was the political faith
of Louvois. Colbert died in 1683, and had been replaced by Le Pelletier,
an adherent of Louvois, in the controller-generalship of finances, and
by Louvois himself in his ministry for public buildings, which he took
that he might be the minister able to gratify the king's two favourite
pastimes, war and building. Louvois was able to superintend the
successes of the first years of the war of the League of Augsburg, but
died suddenly of apoplexy after leaving the king's cabinet on July 16,
1691. His sudden death caused a suspicion of poison. Louvois was one of
the greatest of the rare class of great war ministers. French history
can only point to Carnot as his equal. Both had to organize armies out
of old material on a new system, both were admirable contrivers of
campaigns, and both devoted themselves to the material well-being of the
soldiers. In private life and in the means employed for gaining his
ends, Louvois was unscrupulous and shameless.

  The principal authority for Louvois's life and times is Camille
  Rousset's _Histoire de Louvois_ (Paris, 1872), a great work founded on
  the 900 volumes of his despatches at the Depôt de la Guerre. Saint
  Simon from his class prejudices is hardly to be trusted, but Madame de
  Sévigné throws many side-lights on his times. _Testament politique de
  Louvois_ (1695) is spurious.

LOUYS, PIERRE (1870-   ), French novelist and poet, was born in Paris
on the 10th of December 1870. When he was nineteen he founded a review,
_La Conque_, which brought him into contact with the leaders of the
Parnassians, and counted Swinburne, Maeterlinck, Mallarmé and others
among its contributors. He won notoriety by his novel _Aphrodite_
(1896), which gave a vivid picture of Alexandrian morals at the
beginning of the Christian era. His _Chansons de Bilitis, roman
lyrique_ (1894), which purported to be a translation from the Greek, is
a glorification of Sapphic love, which in subject-matter is
objectionable in the highest degree; but its delicate decadent prose is
typical of a modern French literary school, and some of the "songs" were
set to music by Debussy and others. Later books are: _La Femme et le
pantin_ (1898); _Les Aventures du roi Pausole_ (1900); _Sanguines_
(1903); _Archipel_ (1906). Louÿs married in 1899 Louise de Heredia,
younger daughter of the poet.

LOVAT, SIMON FRASER, 12TH BARON (c. 1667-1747), Scottish chief and
Jacobite intriguer, was born about 1667 and was the second son of Thomas
Fraser, third son of the 8th Lord Lovat. The barony of Lovat dates from
about 1460, in the person of Hugh Fraser, a descendant of Simon Fraser
(killed at Halidon Hill in 1338) who acquired the tower and fort of
Lovat near Beauly, Inverness-shire, and from whom the clan Fraser was
called "Macshimi" (sons of Simon). Young Simon was educated at King's
College, Aberdeen, and his correspondence afterwards gives proof, not
only of a command of good English and idiomatic French, but of such an
acquaintance with the Latin classics as to leave him never at a loss for
an apt quotation from Virgil or Horace. Whether Lovat ever felt any real
loyalty to the Stuarts or was actuated by self-interest it is difficult
to determine, but that he was a born traitor and deceiver there can be
no doubt. One of his first acts on leaving college was to recruit three
hundred men from his clan to form part of a regiment in the service of
William and Mary, in which he himself was to hold a command,--his object
being to have a body of well-trained soldiers under his influence, whom
at a moment's notice he might carry over to the interest of King James.
Among other outrages in which he was engaged about this time was a rape
and forced marriage committed on the widow of the 10th Lord Lovat with
the view apparently of securing his own succession to the estates; and
it is a curious instance of influence that, after being subjected by him
to horrible ill-usage, she is said to have become seriously attached to
him. A prosecution, however, having been instituted against him by Lady
Lovat's family, Simon retired first to his native strongholds in the
Highlands, and afterwards to France, where he found his way in July 1702
to the court of St Germain. In 1699, on his father's death, he assumed
the title of Lord Lovat. One of his first steps towards gaining
influence in France seems to have been to announce his conversion to the
Catholic faith. He then proceeded to put the project of restoring the
exiled family into a practical shape. Hitherto nothing seems to have
been known among the Jacobite exiles of the efficiency of the
Highlanders as a military force. But Lovat saw that, as they were the
only part of the British population accustomed to the independent use of
arms, they could be at once put in action against the reigning power.
His plan therefore was to land five thousand French troops at Dundee,
where they might reach the north-eastern passes of the Highlands in a
day's march, and be in a position to divert the British troops till the
Highlands should have time to rise. Immediately afterwards five hundred
men were to land on the west coast, seize Fort William or Inverlochy,
and thus prevent the access of any military force from the south to the
central Highlands. The whole scheme indicates Lovat's sagacity as a
military strategist, and his plan was continuously kept in view in all
future attempts of the Jacobites, and finally acted on in the outbreak
of 1745. The advisers of the Pretender seem to have been either slow to
trust their coadjutor or to comprehend his project. At last, however, he
was despatched (1703) on a secret mission to the Highlands to sound
those of the chiefs who were likely to rise, and to ascertain what
forces they could bring into the field. He found, however, that there
was little disposition to join the rebellion, and he then apparently
made up his mind to secure his own safety by revealing all that he knew
to the government of Queen Anne. He persuaded the duke of Queensberry
that his rival, the duke of Atholl, was in the Jacobite plot, and that
if Queensberry supported him he could obtain evidence of this at St
Germain. Queensberry foolishly entered into the intrigue with him
against Atholl, but when Lovat had gone to France with a pass from
Queensberry the affair was betrayed to Atholl by Robert Ferguson, and
resulted in Queensberry's discomfiture. The story is obscure, and is
complicated by partisanship on either side; but Lovat was certainly
playing a double game. His agility, however, was not remunerative. On
returning to Paris suspicions got afloat as to Lovat's proceedings, and
he was imprisoned in the castle of Angoulême. He remained nearly ten
years under supervision, till in November 1714 he made his escape to
England. For some twenty-five years after this he was chiefly occupied
in lawsuits for the recovery of his estates and the re-establishment of
his fortune, in both of which objects he was successful. The intervals
of his leisure were filled up by Jacobite and Anti-Jacobite intrigues,
in which he seems to have alternately, as suited his interests, acted
the traitor to both parties. But he so far obtained the confidence of
the government as to secure the appointments of sheriff of Inverness and
of colonel of an independent company. His disloyal practices, however,
soon led to his being suspected; and he was deprived of both his
appointments. When the rebellion of 1745 broke out, Lovat acted with
characteristic duplicity. He represented to the Jacobites--what was
probably in the main true--that though eager for their success his weak
health and advanced years prevented him from joining the standard of the
prince in person, while to the Lord President Forbes he professed his
cordial attachment to the existing state of things, but lamented that
his son, in spite of all his remonstrances, had joined the Pretender,
and succeeded in taking with him a strong force from the clan of the
Frasers. The truth was that the lad was unwilling to go, but was
compelled by his father. Lovat's false professions of fidelity did not
long deceive the government, and after the battle of Culloden he was
obliged to retreat to the Highlands, after seeing from a distant height
his castle of Dounie burnt by the royal army. Even then, broken down by
disease and old age, carried on a litter and unable to move without
assistance, his mental resources did not fail; and in a conference with
several of the Jacobite leaders he proposed that they should raise a
body of three thousand men, which would be enough to make their
mountains impregnable, and at length force the government to give them
advantageous terms. The project was not carried out, and Lovat, after
enduring incredible hardships in his wanderings, was at last arrested on
an island in Loch Morar. He was conveyed in a litter to London, and
after a trial of five days sentence of death was pronounced on the 19th
of March 1747. His execution took place on the 9th of April. His conduct
to the last was dignified and even cheerful. Just before submitting his
head to the block he repeated the line from Horace--

  "Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori."

His son SIMON FRASER, Master of Lovat (1726-1782) (not to be confused
with another Simon Fraser who saw somewhat similar service and was
killed in 1777 at the battle of Saratoga), was a soldier, who at the
beginning of the Seven Years' War raised a corps of Fraser Highlanders
for the English service, and at the outbreak of the American War of
Independence raised another regiment which took a prominent part in it.
He fought under Wolfe in Canada, and also in Portugal, and rose to be a
British major-general. The family estates were restored to him, but the
title was not revived till 1837. On his death without issue, and also of
his successor, his half-brother Archibald Campbell Fraser (1736-1815),
the Lovat estates passed to the Frasers of Strichen, Aberdeenshire. The
16th Baron Lovat (b. 1871) raised a corps of mounted infantry (Lovat's
Scouts) in the Boer war of 1899-1902.

  See _Memoirs of Lord Lovat_ (1746 and 1767); J. Hill Burton, _Life of
  Simon, Lord Lovat_ (1847); J. Anderson, _Account of the Family of
  Frizell or Fraser_ (Edinburgh, 1825); A. Mackenzie, _History of the
  Frasers of Lovat_ (Inverness, 1896); Mrs A. T. Thomson, _Memoirs of
  the Jacobites_ (1845-6); and W. C. Mackenzie, _Simon Fraser, Lord
  Lovat_ (1908).

LOVE-BIRD, a name somewhat indefinitely bestowed, chiefly by dealers and
their customers, on some of the smaller short-tailed parrots, from the
affection which examples of opposite sexes exhibit towards each other.
By many ornithologists the birds thus named, brought almost entirely
from Africa and South America, have been retained in a single genus,
_Psittacula_, though those belonging to the former country were by
others separated as _Agapornis_. This separation, however, was neither
generally approved nor easily justified, until Garrod (_Proc. Zool.
Society_, 1874, p. 593) assigned good anatomical ground, afforded by the
structure of the carotid artery, for regarding the two groups as
distinct, and thus removed the puzzle presented by the geographical
distribution of the species of _Psittacula_ in a large sense, though
Huxley (_op. cit._ 1868, p. 319) had suggested one way of meeting the
difficulty. As the genus is now restricted, only one of the six species
of _Psittacula_ enumerated in the _Nomenclator Avium_ of Sclater and
Salvin is known to be found outside the Neotropical Region, the
exception being the Mexican _P. cyanopygia_, and not one of the seven
recognized by the same authors as forming the nearly allied genus
_Urochroma_. On the other hand, of _Agapornis_, from which the so-called
genus _Poliopsitta_ can scarcely be separated, five if not six species
are known, all belonging to the Ethiopian Region, and all but one, _A.
cana_ (which is indigenous to Madagascar, and thence has been widely
disseminated), are natives of Africa. In this group probably comes also
_Psittinus_, with a single species from the Malayan Subregion. One of
the birds most commonly called love-birds, but with no near relationship
to any of the above, being a long-tailed though very small parrot, is
the budgerigar (_Melopsittacus undulatus_) now more familiar in Europe
than most native birds, as it is used to "tell fortunes" in the streets,
and is bred by hundreds in aviaries. Its native country is Australia.
     (A. N.)

LOVEDALE, a mission station in the Victoria East division of the Cape
province, South Africa. It lies 1720 ft. above the sea on the banks of
the Tyumie (Chumie) tributary of the Keiskama river, some 2 m. N. of
Alice, a town 88 m. N.W. by rail of East London. The station was founded
in 1824 by the Glasgow Missionary Society and was named after Dr John
Love, one of the leading members of, and at the time secretary to, the
society. The site first chosen was in the Ncera valley. But in 1834 the
mission buildings were destroyed by the Kaffirs. On rebuilding, the
station was removed somewhat farther north to the banks of the Tyumie.
In 1846 the work at Lovedale was again interrupted, this time by the War
of the Axe (see CAPE COLONY: _History_). On this occasion the buildings
were converted into a fort and garrisoned by regular troops. Once more,
in 1850, the Kaffirs threatened Lovedale and made an attack on the
neighbouring Fort Hare,[1] built during the previous war.

Until 1841 the missionaries had devoted themselves almost entirely to
evangelistic work; in that year the Lovedale Missionary Institute was
founded by the Rev. W. Govan, who, save for brief intervals, continued
at its head until 1870. He was then succeeded by the Rev. James Stewart
(1831-1905), who had joined the mission in 1867, having previously
(1861-1863), and partly in company with David Livingstone, explored the
Zambezi regions. To Stewart, who remained at the head of the institute
till his death, is due the existing organization at Lovedale. The
institute, in addition to its purely church work--in which no sectarian
tests are allowed--provides for the education of natives of both sexes
in nearly all branches of learning (Stewart discontinued the teaching of
Greek and Latin, adopting English as the classic); it also takes
European scholars, no colour distinction being allowed in any department
of the work. The institute gives technical training in many subjects and
maintains various industries, including such diverse enterprises as
farming and printing-works. It also maintains a hospital. The school
buildings rival in accommodation and completeness those of the schools
in large English cities. The sum paid in fees by scholars (of whom fully
nine-tenths were Kaffirs) in the period 1841-1908 was £84,000. The
educational and industrial methods initiated at Lovedale have been
widely adopted by other missionary bodies. Lovedale is now a branch o£
the work of the United Free Church of Scotland.

  See R. Young, _African Wastes Reclaimed and Illustrated in the Story
  of the Lovedale Mission_ (London, 1902); J. Stewart, _Lovedale, Past
  and Present_ (London, 1884), and _Dawn in the Dark Continent_ (London,
  1903); J. Wells, _Stewart of Lovedale_ (London, 1908).


  [1] This fort was named after Colonel John Hare (d. 1846) of the 27th
    Regiment, from 1838 lieutenant-governor of the eastern provinces and
    commander of the first division of the field force in the War of the

LOVELACE, RICHARD (1618-1658), English poet, was born at Woolwich in
1618. He was a scion of a Kentish family, and inherited a tradition of
military distinction, maintained by successive generations from the time
of Edward III. His father, Sir William Lovelace, had served in the Low
Countries, received the honour of knighthood from James I., and was
killed at Grolle in 1628. His brother, Francis Lovelace, the "Colonel
Francis" of _Lucasta_, served on the side of Charles I., and defended
Caermarthen in 1644. His mother's family was legal; her grandfather had
been chief baron of the exchequer. Richard was educated at the
Charterhouse and at Gloucester Hall, Oxford, where he matriculated in
1634. Through the request of one of the queen's ladies on the royal
visit to Oxford he was made M.A., though only in his second year at the
university. Lovelace's fame has been kept alive by a few songs and the
romance of his career, and his poems are commonly spoken of as careless
improvisations, and merely the amusements of an active soldier. But the
unhappy course of his life gave him more leisure for verse-making than
opportunity of soldiering. Before the outbreak of the civil war in 1642
his only active service was in the bloodless expedition which ended in
the Pacification of Berwick in 1640. On the conclusion of peace he
entered into possession of the family estates at Bethersden, Canterbury,
Chart and Halden in Kent. By that time he was one of the most
distinguished of the company of courtly poets gathered round Queen
Henrietta, who were influenced as a school by contemporary French
writers of _vers de société_. He wrote a comedy, _The Scholar_, when he
was sixteen, and a tragedy, _The Soldier_, when he was twenty-one. From
what he says of Fletcher, it would seem that this dramatist was his
model, but only the prologue and epilogue to his comedy have been
preserved. When the rupture between king and parliament took place,
Lovelace was committed to the Gatehouse at Westminster for presenting to
the Commons in 1642 a petition from Kentish royalists in the king's
favour. It was then that he wrote his most famous song, "To Althea from
Prison." He was liberated, says Wood, on bail of £40,000 (more probably
£4000), and throughout the civil war was a prisoner on parole, with this
security in the hands of his enemies. He contrived, however, to render
considerable service to the king's cause. He provided his two brothers
with money to raise men for the Royalist army, and befriended many of
the king's adherents. He was especially generous to scholars and
musicians, and among his associates in London were Henry Lawes and John
Gamble, the Cottons, Sir Peter Lely, Andrew Marvell and probably Sir
John Suckling. He joined the king at Oxford in 1645, and after the
surrender of the city in 1646 he raised a regiment for the service of
the French king. He was wounded at the siege of Dunkirk, and with his
brother Dudley, who had acted as captain in his brother's command,
returned to England in 1648. It is not known whether the brothers took
any part in the disturbances in Kent of that year, but both were
imprisoned at Petre House in Aldersgate. During this second imprisonment
he collected and revised for the press a volume of occasional poems,
many if not most of which had previously appeared in various
publications. The volume was published in 1649 under the title of
_Lucasta_, his poetical name--contracted from _Lux Casta_--for a lady
rashly identified by Wood as Lucy Sacheverell, who, it is said, married
another during his absence in France, on a report that he had died of
his wounds at Dunkirk. The last ten years of Lovelace's life were passed
in obscurity. His fortune had been exhausted in the king's interest, and
he is said to have been supported by the generosity of friends. He died
in 1658 "in a cellar in Longacre," according to Aubrey, who, however,
possibly exaggerates his poverty. A volume of Lovelace's _Posthume
Poems_ was published in 1659 by his brother Dudley. They are of inferior
merit to his own collection.

  The world has done no injustice to Lovelace in neglecting all but a
  few of his modest offerings to literature. But critics often do him
  injustice in dismissing him as a gay cavalier, who dashed off his
  verses hastily and cared little what became of them. It is a mistake
  to class him with Suckling; he has neither Suckling's easy grace nor
  his reckless spontaneity. We have only to compare the version of any
  of his poems in _Lucasta_ with the form in which it originally
  appeared to see how fastidious was his revision. In many places it
  takes time to decipher his meaning. The expression is often
  elliptical, the syntax inverted and tortuous, the train of thought
  intricate and discontinuous. These faults--they are not of course to
  be found in his two or three popular lyrics, "Going to the Wars," "To
  Althea from Prison," "The Scrutiny"--are, however, as in the case of
  his poetical master, Donne, the faults not of haste but of
  over-elaboration. His thoughts are not the first thoughts of an
  improvisatore, but thoughts ten or twenty stages removed from the
  first, and they are generally as closely packed as they are

  His poems were edited by W. C. Hazlitt in 1864.

LOVELL, FRANCIS LOVELL, VISCOUNT (1454-1487), supporter of Richard III.,
was son of John, 8th Baron Lovell. As a young man he served under
Richard of Gloucester in the expedition to Scotland in 1480. After the
death of Edward IV. he became one of his patron's strongest supporters.
He had been created a viscount on the 4th of January 1483, and whilst
still Protector Richard made him Chief Butler. As soon as Richard became
king, Lovell was promoted to be Lord Chamberlain. Lovell helped in the
suppression of Buckingham's rebellion, and as one of Richard's most
trusted ministers was gibbeted in Collingbourne's couplet with Catesby
and Ratcliffe:--

  "The catte, the ratte and Lovell our dogge
   Rulyth all England under a hogge."

He had command of the fleet which was to have stopped Henry Tudor's
landing in 1485, but fought for Richard at Bosworth and after the battle
fled to sanctuary at Colchester. Thence he escaped next year to organize
a dangerous revolt in Yorkshire. When that failed he fled to Margaret of
Burgundy in Flanders. As a chief leader of the Yorkist party he had a
foremost part in Lambert Simnel's enterprise. With John de la Pole, earl
of Lincoln, he accompanied the pretender to Ireland and fought for him
at Stoke on the 16th of June 1487. He was seen escaping from the battle,
but was never afterwards heard of; Bacon relates that according to one
report he lived long after in a cave or vault (_Henry VII._, p. 37, ed.
Lumby). More than 200 years later, in 1708, the skeleton of a man was
found in a secret chamber in the family mansion at Minster Lovell in
Oxfordshire. It is supposed that Francis Lovell had hidden himself there
and died of starvation.

  Collingbourne's couplet is preserved by Fabyan, _Chronicle_, p. 672.
  For the discovery at Minster Lovell see _Notes and Queries_, 2nd ser.
  i. and 5th ser. x.     (C. L. K.)

LOVER, SAMUEL (1797-1868), Irish novelist, artist, songwriter and
musician, was born in Dublin on the 24th of February 1797. His father
was a stockbroker. Lover began life as an artist, and was elected in
1828 a member of the Royal Hibernian Academy--a body of which two years
afterwards he became secretary. He acquired repute as a miniature
painter, and a number of the local aristocracy sat to him for their
portraits. His love for music showed itself at an early age. At a dinner
given to the poet Tom Moore in 1818 Lover sang one of his own songs,
which elicited special praise from Moore. One of his best-known
portraits was that of Paganini, which was exhibited at the Royal
Academy. He attracted attention as an author by his _Legends and Stories
of Ireland_ (1832), and was one of the first writers for the _Dublin
University Magazine_. He went to London about 1835, where, among others,
he painted Lord Brougham in his robes as lord chancellor. His gifts
rendered him popular in society; and he appeared often at Lady
Blessington's evening receptions. There he sang several of his songs,
which were so well received that he published them (_Songs and Ballads_,
1839). Some of them illustrated Irish superstitions, among these being
"Rory O'More," "The Angel's Whisper," "The May Dew" and "The Four-leaved
Shamrock." In 1837 appeared _Rory O'More, a National Romance_, which at
once made him a reputation as a novelist; he afterwards dramatized it
for the Adelphi Theatre, London. In 1842 was published his best-known
work, _Handy Andy, an Irish Tale_. Meanwhile his pursuits had affected
his health; and in 1844 he gave up writing for some time, substituting
instead public entertainments, called by him "Irish Evenings,"
illustrative of his own works. These were successful both in Great
Britain and in America. In addition to publishing numerous songs of his
own, Lover edited a collection entitled _The Lyrics of Ireland_, which
appeared in 1858. He died on the 6th of July 1868. Besides the novels
already mentioned he wrote _Treasure Trove_ (1844), and _Metrical Tales
and Other Poems_ (1860).

  His _Life_ was written in 1874 by Bayle Bernard.

LOVERE, a town of Lombardy, Italy, in the province of Bergamo, at the
north-west end of the Lago d'Iseo, 522 ft. above sea-level. Pop. (1901)
3306. It is a picturesque town, the houses having the overhanging wooden
roofs of Switzerland united with the heavy stone arcades of Italy, while
the situation is beautiful, with the lake in front and the semicircle of
bold mountains behind. The church of Santa Maria in Valvendra, built in
1473, has frescoes by Floriano Ferramola of Brescia (d. 1528). The
Palazzo Tadini contains a gallery of old pictures, some sculptures by
Benzoni and Canova, and a zoological collection. Lovere possesses a
silk-spinning factory, and the Stablimento Metallurgico Gregorini, a
large iron-work and cannon foundry, employs 1600 workmen. Lovere is
reached by steamer from Sarnico at the south end of the lake, and there
is a steam tramway through the Val Camonica, which is highly cultivated,
and contains iron- and silk-works. From Cividate, the terminus, the road
goes on to Edolo (2290 ft.), whence passes lead into Tirol and the

LOW, SETH (1850-   ), American administrator and educationist, was born
in Brooklyn, New York, on the 18th of January 1850. He studied in the
Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn and in Columbia University, where he
graduated in 1870. He became a clerk (1870) and then a partner (1875) in
his father's tea and silk-importing house, A. A. Low & Brothers, which
went out of business in 1888. In 1878 he organized, and became president
of, the Brooklyn Bureau of Charities. In 1882-1886 he was mayor of the
city of Brooklyn, being twice elected on an independent ticket; and by
his administration of his office he demonstrated that a rigid "merit"
civil-service system was practicable--in September 1884 the first
municipal civil-service rules in the United Service were adopted in
Brooklyn. He was president of Columbia University from 1890 to 1901, and
did much for it by his business administration, his liberality (he gave
$1,000,000 for the erection of a library) and his especial interest in
the department of Political Science. In his term Columbia became a
well-organized and closely-knit university. Its official name was
changed from Columbia College to Columbia University. It was removed to
a new site on Morningside Heights, New York City. The New York College
for the Training of Teachers became its Teachers' College of Columbia; a
Faculty of Pure Science was added; the Medical School gave up its
separate charter to become an integral part of the university; Barnard
College became more closely allied with the university; relations were
entered into between the university and the General, Union and Jewish
theological seminaries of New York City and with Cooper Union, the
Metropolitan Museum of Fine Arts and the American Museum of Natural
History; and its faculty and student body became less local in
character. Dr Low was a delegate to the Hague Peace Conference in 1899.
He was prominent among those who brought about the chartering of Greater
New York in 1897, and in this year was an unsuccessful candidate, on an
independent ticket, for mayor of New York City; in 1900, on a fusion
ticket, he was elected mayor and served in 1901-1903.

LOW, WILL HICOK (1853-   ), American artist and writer on art, was born
at Albany, New York, on the 31st of May 1853. In 1873 he entered the
atelier of J. L. Gérôme in the École des Beaux Arts at Paris,
subsequently joining the classes of Carolus-Duran, with whom he remained
until 1877. Returning to New York, he became a member of the Society of
American Artists in 1878 and of the National Academy of Design in 1890.
His pictures of New England types, and illustrations of Keats, brought
him into prominence. Subsequently he turned his attention to
decoration, and executed panels and medallions for the Waldorf-Astoria
Hotel, New York, a panel for the Essex County Court House, Newark, New
Jersey, panels for private residences and stained-glass windows for
various churches, including St Paul's Methodist Episcopal Church,
Newark, N.J. He was an instructor in the schools of Cooper Union, New
York, in 1882-1885, and in the school of the National Academy of Design
in 1889-1892. Mr Low, who is known to a wider circle as the friend of R.
L. Stevenson, published some reminiscences, _A Chronicle of Friendships,
1873-1900_ (1908). In 1909 he married Mary (Fairchild), formerly the
wife of the sculptor MacMonnies.

LOWBOY, a small table with one or two rows of drawers, so called in
contradistinction to the tallboy, or double chest of drawers. Both were
favourite pieces of the 18th century, both in England and America; the
lowboy was most frequently used as a dressing-table, but sometimes as a
side-table. It is usually made of oak, walnut or mahogany, with brass
handles and escutcheons. The more elegant examples of the Chippendale
period have cabriole legs, claw-and-ball feet and carved knees, and are
sometimes sculptured with the favourite shell motive beneath the centre

LOW CHURCHMAN, a term applied to members of the Church of England or its
daughter churches who, while accepting the hierarchical and sacramental
system of the Church, do not consider episcopacy as essential to the
constitution of the Church, reject the doctrine that the sacraments
confer grace _ex opere operato_ (e.g. baptismal regeneration) and lay
stress on the Bible as the sole source of authority in matters of faith.
They thus differ little from orthodox Protestants of other
denominations, and in general are prepared to co-operate with them on
equal terms.

The name was used in the early part of the 18th century as the
equivalent of "Latitudinarian," i.e. one who was prepared to concede
much latitude in matters of discipline and faith, in contradistinction
to "High Churchman," the term applied to those who took a high view of
the exclusive authority of the Established Church, of episcopacy and of
the sacramental system. It subsequently fell into disuse, but was
revived in the 19th century when the Tractarian movement had brought the
term "High Churchman" into vogue again in a modified sense, i.e. for
those who exalted the idea of the Catholic Church and the sacramental
system at the expense both of the Establishment and of the exclusive
authority of Scripture. "Low Churchman" now became the equivalent of
"Evangelical," the designation of the movement, associated with the name
of Simeon, which laid the chief stress on the necessity of personal
"conversion." "Latitudinarian" gave place at the same time to "Broad
Churchman," to designate those who lay stress on the ethical teaching of
the Church and minimize the value of orthodoxy. The revival of
pre-Reformation ritual by many of the High Church clergy led to the
designation "ritualist" being applied to them in a somewhat contemptuous
sense; and "High Churchman" and "Ritualist" have often been wrongly
treated as convertible terms. Actually many High Churchmen are not
Ritualists, though they tend to become so. The High Churchman of the
"Catholic" type is further differentiated from the "old-fashioned High
Churchman" of what is sometimes described as the "high and dry" type of
the period anterior to the Oxford Movement.

LOWE, SIR HUDSON (1769-1844), English general, was the son of an army
surgeon, John Lowe, and was born at Galway on the 28th of July 1769. His
mother was a native of that county. His childhood was spent in various
garrison towns but he was educated chiefly at Salisbury grammar school.
He obtained a post as ensign in the East Devon Militia before his
twelfth year, and subsequently entered his father's regiment, the 50th,
then at Gibraltar (1787) under Governor-General O'Hara. After the
outbreak of war with France early in 1793, Lowe saw active service
successively in Corsica, Elba, Portugal and Minorca, where he was
entrusted with the command of a battalion of Corsican exiles, called
The Corsican Rangers. With these he did good work in Egypt in 1800-1801.
After the peace of Amiens, Lowe, now a major, became assistant
quartermaster-general; but on the renewal of war with France in 1803 he
was charged, as lieutenant-colonel, to raise the Corsican battalion
again and with it assisted in the defence of Sicily. On the capture of
Capri he proceeded thither with his battalion and a Maltese regiment;
but in October 1808 Murat organized an attack upon the island, and Lowe,
owing to the unsteadiness of the Maltese troops and the want of succour
by sea, had to agree to evacuate the island. The terms in which Sir
William Napier and others have referred to Lowe's defence of Capri are
unfair. His garrison consisted of 1362 men, while the assailants
numbered between 3000 and 4000. In the course of the year 1809 Lowe and
his Corsicans helped in the capture of Ischia and Procida, as well as of
Zante, Cephalonia and Cerigo. For some months he acted as governor of
Cephalonia and Ithaca, and later on of Santa Maura. He returned to
England in 1812, and in January 1813 was sent to inspect a Russo-German
legion then being formed, and he accompanied the armies of the allies
through the campaigns of 1813 and 1814, being present at thirteen
important battles. He won praise from Blücher and Gneisenau for his
gallantry and judgment. He was chosen to bear to London the news of the
first abdication of Napoleon in April 1814. He was then knighted and
became major-general; he also received decorations from the Russian and
Prussian courts. Charged with the duties of quartermaster-general of the
army in the Netherlands in 1814-1815, he was about to take part in the
Belgian campaign when he was offered the command of the British troops
at Genoa; but while still in the south of France he received (on the 1st
of August 1815) news of his appointment to the position of custodian of
Napoleon, who had surrendered to H.M.S. "Bellerophon" off Rochefort.
Lowe was to be governor of St Helena, the place of the ex-emperor's

On his arrival there at Plantation House he found that Napoleon had
already had scenes with Admiral Cockburn, of H.M.S. "Northumberland,"
and that he had sought to induce the former governor, Colonel Wilks, to
infringe the regulations prescribed by the British government (see
_Monthly Review_, January 1901). Napoleon and his followers at Longwood
pressed for an extension of the limits within which he could move
without surveillance, but it was not in Lowe's power to grant this
request. Various matters, in some of which Lowe did not evince much
tact, produced friction between them. The news that rescue expeditions
were being planned by the Bonapartists in the United States led to the
enforcement of somewhat stricter regulations in October 1816, Lowe
causing sentries to be posted round Longwood garden at sunset instead of
at 9 P.M. This was his great offence in the eyes of Napoleon and his
followers. Hence their efforts to calumniate Lowe, which had a
surprising success. O'Meara, the British surgeon, became Napoleon's man,
and lent himself to the campaign of calumny in which Las Cases and
Montholon showed so much skill. In one of the suppressed passages of his
_Journal_ Las Cases wrote that the exiles had to "reduce to a system our
demeanour, our words, our sentiments, even our privations, in order that
we might thereby excite a lively interest in a large portion of the
population of Europe, and that the opposition in England might not fail
to attack the ministry." As to the privations, it may be noted that Lowe
recommended that the government allowance of £8000 a year to the
Longwood household should be increased by one-half. The charges of
cruelty brought against the governor by O'Meara and others have been
completely refuted; and the most that can be said against him is that he
was occasionally too suspicious in the discharge of his duties. After
the death of Napoleon in May 1821, Lowe returned to England and received
the thanks of George IV. On the publication of O'Meara's book he
resolved to prosecute the author, but, owing to an unaccountable delay,
the application was too late. This fact, together with the reserved
behaviour of Lowe, prejudiced the public against him, and the government
did nothing to clear his reputation. In 1825-1830 he commanded the
forces in Ceylon, but was not appointed to the governorship when it
fell vacant in 1830. In 1842 he became colonel of his old regiment, the
50th; he also received the G.C.M.G. He died in 1844.

  See W. Forsyth, _History of the Captivity of Napoleon at St Helena_ (3
  vols., London, 1853); Gourgaud, _Journal inédite de Sainte-Hélène_
  (1815-1818; 2 vols., Paris, 1899); R. C. Seaton, _Napoleon's Captivity
  in relation to Sir Hudson Lowe_ (London, 1903); Lieut.-Col. Basil
  Jackson, _Notes and Reminiscences of a Staff-Officer_ (London, 1903);
  the earl of Rosebery, _Napoleon; the Last Phase_ (London 1900); J. H.
  Rose, _Napoleonic Studies_ (London, 1904).     (J. Hl. R.)

LÖWE, JOHANN KARL GOTTFRIED (1796-1869), German composer, was born at
Löbejün, near Halle, on the 30th of November 1796, and was a choir-boy
at Köthen from 1807 to 1809, when he went to the Franke Institute at
Halle, studying music with Türk. The beauty of Löwe's voice brought him
under the notice of Madame de Staël, who procured him a pension from
Jérôme Bonaparte, then king of Westphalia; this stopped in 1813, on the
flight of the king. He entered the University of Halle as a theological
student, but was appointed cantor at Stettin in 1820, and director of
the town music in 1821, in which year he married Julie von Jacob, who
died in 1823. His second wife, Auguste Lange, was an accomplished
singer, and they appeared together in his oratorio performances with
great success. He retained his office at Stettin for 46 years, when,
after a stroke of paralysis, he was somewhat summarily dismissed. He
retired to Kiel, and died on the 20th of April 1869. He undertook many
concert tours during his tenure of the post at Stettin, visiting Vienna,
London, Sweden, Norway and Paris. His high soprano voice (he could sing
the music of the "Queen of Night" in _Die Zauberflöte_ as a boy) had
developed into a fine tenor. Löwe was a voluminous composer, and wrote
five operas, of which only one, _Die drei Wünsche_, was performed at
Berlin in 1834, without much success; seventeen oratorios, many of them
for male voices unaccompanied, or with short instrumental interludes
only; choral ballads, cantatas, three string quartets, a pianoforte
trio; a work for clarinet and piano, published posthumously; and some
piano solos. But the branch of his art by which he is remembered, and in
which he must be admitted to have attained perfection, is the solo
ballad with pianoforte accompaniment. His treatment of long narrative
poems, in a clever mixture of the dramatic and lyrical styles, was
undoubtedly modelled on the ballads of Zumsteeg, and has been copied by
many composers since his day. His settings of the "Erlkönig" (a very
early example), "Archibald Douglas," "Heinrich der Vogler," "Edward" and
"Die Verfallene Mühle," are particularly fine.

LOWELL, ABBOTT LAWRENCE (1856-   ), American educationalist, was born in
Boston, Massachusetts on the 13th of December 1856, the great-grandson
of John Lowell, the "Columella of New England," and on his mother's
side, a grandson of Abbott Lawrence. He graduated at Harvard College in
1877, with highest honours in mathematics; graduated at the Harvard Law
School in 1880; and practised law in 1880-1897 in partnership with his
cousin, Francis Cabot Lowell (b. 1855), with whom he wrote _Transfer of
Stock in Corporations_ (1884). In 1897 he became lecturer and in 1898
professor of government at Harvard, and in 1909 succeeded Charles
William Eliot as president of the university. In the same year he was
president of the American Political Science Association. In 1900 he had
succeeded his father, Augustus Lowell (1830-1901), as financial head of
the Lowell Institute of Boston. He wrote _Essays on Government_ (1889),
_Governments and Parties in Continental Europe_ (2 vols., 1896),
_Colonial Civil Service_ (1900; with an account by H. Morse Stephens of
the East India College at Haileybury), and _The Government of England_
(2 vols., 1908).

His brother, PERCIVAL LOWELL (1855-   ), the well-known astronomer,
graduated at Harvard in 1876, lived much in Japan between 1883 and 1893,
and in 1894 established at Flagstaff, Arizona, the Lowell Observatory,
of whose _Annals_ (from 1898) he was editor. In 1902 he became
non-resident professor of astronomy at the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology. He wrote several books on the Far East, including _Chosön_
(1885), _The Soul of the Far East_ (1886), _Noto, an Unexplored Corner
of Japan_ (1891), and _Occult Japan_ (1895), but he is best known for
his studies of the planet Mars--he wrote _Mars_ (1895), _Mars and Its
Canals_ (1907), and _Mars, the Abode of Life_ (1908)--and his contention
that the "canals" of Mars are a sign of life and civilization on that
planet (see MARS). He published _The Evolution of Worlds_ in 1909.

LOWELL, CHARLES RUSSELL (1835-1864), American soldier, was born on the
2nd of January 1835 in Boston, Massachusetts. His mother, Anna Cabot
Jackson Lowell (1819-1874), a daughter of Patrick Tracy Jackson, married
Charles Russell Lowell, a brother of James Russell Lowell; she wrote
verse and books on education. Her son graduated at Harvard in 1854,
worked in an iron mill in Trenton, New Jersey, for a few months in 1855,
spent two years abroad, and in 1858-1860 was local treasurer of the
Burlington & Missouri river railroad. In 1860 he took charge of the
Mount Savage Iron Works, in Cumberland, Maryland. He entered the Union
army in June 1861 (commission May 14) as captain of the 3rd (afterwards
6th) U.S. cavalry; on the 15th of April 1863 he became colonel of the
2nd Massachusetts cavalry; he was wounded fatally at Cedar Creek on the
19th of October 1864, when he was promoted brigadier-general of U.S.
Volunteers, and died on the next day at Middletown, Va. Lowell married
in October 1863, Josephine Shaw (1843-1905), a sister of Colonel R. G.
Shaw. Her home when she was married was on Staten Island, and she became
deeply interested in the social problems of New York City. She was a
member of the State Charities Aid Society, and from 1877 to 1889 was a
member of the New York State Board of Charities, being the first woman
appointed to that board. She founded the Charity Organization Society of
New York City in 1882, and wrote _Public Relief and Private Charity_
(1884) and _Industrial Arbitration and Conciliation_ (1893).

  See Edward E. Emerson (ed.), _The Life and Letters of Charles Russell
  Lowell_ (Boston, 1907).

LOWELL, JAMES RUSSELL (1819-1891), American author and diplomatist, was
born at Elmwood, in Cambridge, Massachusetts, on the 22nd of February
1819, the son of Charles Lowell (1782-1861).[1] On his mother's side he
was descended from the Spences and Traills, who made their home in the
Orkney Islands, his great-grandfather, Robert Traill, returning to
England on the breaking out of hostilities in 1775. He was brought up in
a neighbourhood bordering on the open country, and from his earliest
years he found a companion in nature; he was also early initiated into
the reading of poetry and romance, hearing Spenser and Scott in
childhood, and introduced to old ballads by his mother. He had for
schoolmaster an Englishman who held by the traditions of English
schools, so that before he entered Harvard College he had a more
familiar acquaintance with Latin verse than most of his fellows--a
familiarity which showed itself later in his mock-pedantic accompaniment
to _The Biglow Papers_ and his macaronic poetry. He was a wide reader,
but a somewhat indifferent student, graduating at Harvard without
special honours in 1838. During his college course he wrote a number of
trivial pieces for a college magazine, and shortly after graduating
printed for private circulation the poem which his class asked him to
write for their graduation festivities.

He was uncertain at first what vocation to choose, and vacillated
between business, the ministry, medicine and law. He decided at last to
practise law, and after a course at the Harvard law school, was admitted
to the bar. While studying for his profession, however, he contributed
poems and prose articles to various magazines. He cared little for the
law, regarding it simply as a distasteful means of livelihood, yet his
experiments in writing did not encourage him to trust to this for
support. An unhappy adventure in love deepened his sense of failure, but
he became betrothed to Maria White in the autumn of 1840, and the next
twelve years of his life were deeply affected by her influence. She was
a poet of delicate power, but also possessed a lofty enthusiasm, a high
conception of purity and justice, and a practical temper which led her
to concern herself in the movements directed against the evils of
intemperance and slavery. Lowell was already looked upon by his
companions as a man marked by wit and poetic sentiment; Miss White was
admired for her beauty, her character and her intellectual gifts, and
the two became thus the hero and heroine among a group of ardent young
men and women. The first-fruits of this passion was a volume of poems,
published in 1841, entitled _A Year's Life_, which was inscribed by
Lowell in a veiled dedication to his future wife, and was a record of
his new emotions with a backward glance at the preceding period of
depression and irresolution. The betrothal, moreover, stimulated Lowell
to new efforts towards self-support, and though nominally maintaining
his law office, he threw his energy into the establishment, in company
with a friend, Robert Carter, of a literary journal, to which the young
men gave the name of _The Pioneer_. It was to open the way to new ideals
in literature and art, and the writers to whom Lowell turned for
assistance--Hawthorne, Emerson, Whittier, Poe, Story and Parsons, none
of them yet possessed of a wide reputation--indicate the acumen of the
editor. Lowell himself had already turned his studies in dramatic and
early poetic literature to account in another magazine, and continued
the series in _The Pioneer_, besides contributing poems; but after the
issue of three monthly numbers, beginning in January 1843, the magazine
came to an end, partly because of a sudden disaster which befell
Lowell's eyes, partly through the inexperience of the conductors and
unfortunate business connexions.

The venture confirmed Lowell in his bent towards literature. At the
close of 1843 he published a collection of his poems, and a year later
he gathered up certain material which he had printed, sifted and added
to it, and produced _Conversations on some of the Old Poets_. The
dialogue form was used merely to secure an undress manner of approach to
his subject; there was no attempt at the dramatic. The book reflects
curiously Lowell's mind at this time, for the conversations relate only
partly to the poets and dramatists of the Elizabethan period; a slight
suggestion sends the interlocutors off on the discussion of current
reforms in church and state and society. Literature and reform were
dividing the author's mind, and continued to do so for the next decade.
Just as this book appeared Lowell and Miss White were married, and spent
the winter and early spring of 1845 in Philadelphia. Here, besides
continuing his literary contributions to magazines, Lowell had a regular
engagement as an editorial writer on _The Pennsylvania Freeman_, a
fortnightly journal devoted to the Anti-Slavery cause. In the spring of
1845 the Lowells returned to Cambridge and made their home at Elmwood.
On the last day of the year their first child, Blanche, was born, but
she lived only fifteen months. A second daughter, Mabel, was born six
months after Blanche's death, and lived to survive her father; a third,
Rose, died an infant. Lowell's mother meanwhile was living, sometimes at
home, sometimes at a neighbouring hospital, with clouded mind, and his
wife was in frail health. These troubles and a narrow income conspired
to make Lowell almost a recluse in these days, but from the retirement
of Elmwood he sent forth writings which show how large an interest he
took in affairs. He contributed poems to the daily press, called out by
the Slavery question; he was, early in 1846, a correspondent of the
London _Daily News_, and in the spring of 1848 he formed a connexion
with the _National Anti-Slavery Standard_ of New York, by which he
agreed to furnish weekly either a poem or a prose article. The poems
were most frequently works of art, occasionally they were tracts; but
the prose was almost exclusively concerned with the public men and
questions of the day, and forms a series of incisive, witty and
sometimes prophetic diatribes. It was a period with him of great mental
activity, and is represented by four of his books which stand as
admirable witnesses to the Lowell of 1848, namely, the second series of
_Poems_, containing among others "Columbus," "An Indian Summer Reverie,"
"To the Dandelion," "The Changeling"; _A Fable for Critics_, in which,
after the manner of Leigh Hunt's _The Feast of the Poets_, he
characterizes in witty verse and with good-natured satire American
contemporary writers, and in which, the publication being anonymous, he
included himself; _The Vision of Sir Launfal_, a romantic story
suggested by the Arthurian legends--one of his most popular poems; and
finally _The Biglow Papers_.

Lowell had acquired a reputation among men of letters and a cultivated
class of readers, but this satire at once brought him a wider fame. The
book was not premeditated; a single poem, called out by the recruiting
for the abhorred Mexican war, couched in rustic phrase and sent to the
_Boston Courier_, had the inspiriting dash and electrifying rat-tat-tat
of this new recruiting sergeant in the little army of Anti-Slavery
reformers. Lowell himself discovered what he had done at the same time
that the public did, and he followed the poem with eight others either
in the _Courier_ or the _Anti-Slavery Standard_. He developed four
well-defined characters in the process--a country farmer, Ezekiel
Biglow, and his son Hosea; the Rev. Homer Wilbur, a shrewd old-fashioned
country minister; and Birdofredum Sawin, a Northern renegade who enters
the army, together with one or two subordinate characters; and his
stinging satire and sly humour are so set forth in the vernacular of New
England as to give at once a historic dignity to this form of speech.
(Later he wrote an elaborate paper to show the survival in New England
of the English of the early 17th century.) He embroidered his verse with
an entertaining apparatus of notes and mock criticism. Even his index
was spiced with wit. The book, a caustic arraignment of the course taken
in connexion with the annexation of Texas and the war with Mexico, made
a strong impression, and the political philosophy secreted in its lines
became a part of household literature. It is curious to observe how
repeatedly this arsenal was drawn upon in the discussions in America
about the "Imperialistic" developments of 1900. The death of Lowell's
mother, and the fragility of his wife's health, led Lowell, with his
wife, their daughter Mabel and their infant son Walter, to go to Europe
in 1851, and they went direct to Italy. The early months of their stay
were saddened by the death of Walter in Rome, and by the news of the
illness of Lowell's father, who had a slight shock of paralysis. They
returned in November 1852, and Lowell published some recollections of
his journey in the magazines, collecting the sketches later in a prose
volume, _Fireside Travels_. He took some part also in the editing of an
American edition of the _British Poets_, but the low state of his wife's
health kept him in an uneasy condition, and when her death (27th October
1853) released him from the strain of anxiety, there came with the grief
a readjustment of his nature and a new intellectual activity. At the
invitation of his cousin, he delivered a course of lectures on English
poets before the Lowell Institute in Boston in the winter of 1855. This
first formal appearance as a critic and historian of literature at once
gave him a new standing in the community, and was the occasion of his
election to the Smith Professorship of Modern Languages in Harvard
College, then vacant by the retirement of Longfellow. Lowell accepted
the appointment, with the proviso that he should have a year of study
abroad. He spent his time mainly in Germany, visiting Italy, and
increasing his acquaintance with the French, German, Italian and Spanish
tongues. He returned to America in the summer of 1856, and entered upon
his college duties, retaining his position for twenty years. As a
teacher he proved himself a quickener of thought amongst students,
rather than a close and special instructor. His power lay in the
interpretation of literature rather than in linguistic study, and his
influence over his pupils was exercised by his own fireside as well as
in the relation, always friendly and familiar, which he held to them in
the classroom. In 1856 he married Miss Frances Dunlap, a lady who had
since his wife's death had charge of his daughter Mabel.

In the autumn of 1857 _The Atlantic Monthly_ was established, and Lowell
was its first editor. He at once gave the magazine the stamp of high
literature and of bold speech on public affairs. He held this position
only till the spring of 1861, but he continued to make the magazine the
vehicle of his poetry and of some prose for the rest of his life; his
prose, however, was more abundantly presented in the pages of _The
North American Review_ during the years 1862-1872, when he was
associated with Mr Charles Eliot Norton in its conduct. This magazine
especially gave him the opportunity of expression of political views
during the eventful years of the War of the Union. It was in _The
Atlantic_ during the same period that he published a second series of
_The Biglow Papers_. Both his collegiate and editorial duties stimulated
his critical powers, and the publication in the two magazines, followed
by republication in book form, of a series of studies of great authors,
gave him an important place as a critic. Shakespeare, Dryden, Lessing,
Rousseau, Dante, Spenser, Wordsworth, Milton, Keats, Carlyle, Thoreau,
Swinburne, Chaucer, Emerson, Pope, Gray--these are the principal
subjects of his prose, and the range of topics indicates the catholicity
of his taste. He wrote also a number of essays, such as "My Garden
Acquaintance," "A Good Word for Winter," "On a Certain Condescension in
Foreigners," which were incursions into the field of nature and society.
Although the great bulk of his writing was now in prose, he made after
this date some of his most notable ventures in poetry. In 1868 he issued
the next collection in _Under the Willows and other Poems_, but in 1865
he had delivered his "Ode recited at the Harvard Commemoration," and the
successive centennial historical anniversaries drew from him a series of
stately odes.

In 1877 Lowell, who had mingled so little in party politics that the
sole public office he had held was the nominal one of elector in the
Presidential election of 1876, was appointed by President Hayes minister
resident at the court of Spain. He had a good knowledge of Spanish
language and literature, and his long-continued studies in history and
his quick judgment enabled him speedily to adjust himself to these new
relations. Some of his despatches to the home government were published
in a posthumous volume--_Impressions of Spain_. In 1880 he was
transferred to London as American minister, and remained there till the
close of President Arthur's administration in the spring of 1885. As a
man of letters he was already well known in England, and he was in much
demand as an orator on public occasions, especially of a literary
nature; but he also proved himself a sagacious publicist, and made
himself a wise interpreter of each country to the other. Shortly after
his retirement from public life he published _Democracy and other
Addresses_, all of which had been delivered in England. The title
address was an epigrammatic confession of political faith as hopeful as
it was wise and keen. The close of his stay in England was saddened by
the death of his second wife in 1885. After his return to America he
made several visits to England. His public life had made him more of a
figure in the world; he was decorated with the highest honours Harvard
could pay officially, and with degrees of Oxford, Cambridge, St Andrews,
Edinburgh and Bologna. He issued another collection of his poems,
_Heartsease and Rue_, in 1888, and occupied himself with revising and
rearranging his works, which were published in ten volumes in 1890. The
last months of his life were attended by illness, and he died at Elmwood
on the 12th of August 1891. After his death his literary executor,
Charles Eliot Norton, published a brief collection of his poems, and two
volumes of added prose, besides editing his letters.

The spontaneity of Lowell's nature is delightfully disclosed in his
personal letters. They are often brilliant, and sometimes very
penetrating in their judgment of men and books; but the most constant
element is a pervasive humour, and this humour, by turns playful and
sentimental, is largely characteristic of his poetry, which sprang from
a genial temper, quick in its sympathy with nature and humanity. The
literary refinement which marks his essays in prose is not conspicuous
in his verse, which is of a more simple character. There was an apparent
conflict in him of the critic and the creator, but the conflict was
superficial. The man behind both critical and creative work was so
genuine, that through his writings and speech and action he impressed
himself deeply upon his generation in America, especially upon the
thoughtful and scholarly class who looked upon him as especially their
representative. This is not to say that he was a man of narrow
sympathies. On the contrary, he was democratic in his thought, and
outspoken in his rebuke of whatever seemed to him antagonistic to the
highest freedom. Thus, without taking a very active part in political
life, he was recognized as one of the leaders of independent political
thought. He found expression in so many ways, and was apparently so
inexhaustible in his resources, that his very versatility and the ease
with which he gave expression to his thought sometimes stood in the way
of a recognition of his large, simple political ideality and the
singleness of his moral sight.

  WRITINGS.--The _Works of James Russell Lowell_, in ten volumes (Boston
  and New York, Houghton, Mifflin & Co., 1890); _édition de luxe_, 61
  vols. (1904); _Latest Literary Essays and Addresses_ (1891); _The Old
  English Dramatists_ (1892); _Conversations on some of the Old Poets_
  (Philadelphia, David M'Kay; reprint of the volume published in 1843
  and subsequently abandoned by its author, 1893); _The Power of Sound:
  a Rhymed Lecture_ (New York, privately printed, 1896); _Lectures on
  English Poets_ (Cleveland, The Rowfant Club, 1899).

  MEMOIRS.--_Letters of James Russell Lowell_, edited by Charles Eliot
  Norton, in two volumes (New York, Harper & Brothers, 1899); _Life of
  James Russell Lowell_ (2 vols.), by Horace E. Scudder (Houghton,
  Mifflin & Co., 1901); _James Russell Lowell and his Friends_ (Boston,
  1899), by Edward Everett Hale.     (H. E. S.*)


  [1] See under LOWELL, JOHN.

LOWELL, JOHN (1743-1802), American jurist, was born in Newburyport,
Massachusetts, on the 17th of June 1743, and was a son of the Reverend
John Lowell, the first pastor of Newburyport, and a descendant of
Perceval Lowle or Lowell (1571-1665), who emigrated from Somersetshire
to Massachusetts Bay in 1639 and was the founder of the family in New
England. John Lowell graduated at Harvard in 1760, was admitted to the
bar in 1763, represented Newburyport (1776) and Boston (1778) in the
Massachusetts Assembly, was a member of the Massachusetts Constitutional
Convention of 1779-1780 and, as a member of the committee appointed to
draft a constitution, secured the insertion of the clause, "all men are
born free and equal," which was interpreted by the supreme court of the
state in 1783 as abolishing slavery in the state. In 1781-1783 he was a
member of the Continental Congress, which in 1782 made him a judge of
the court of appeals for admiralty cases; in 1784 he was one of the
commissioners from Massachusetts to settle the boundary line between
Massachusetts and New York; in 1789-1801 he was a judge of the U.S.
District Court of Massachusetts; and from 1801 until his death in
Roxbury on the 6th of May 1802 he was a justice of the U.S. Circuit
Court for the First Circuit (Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts and
Rhode Island).

His son, JOHN LOWELL (1769-1840), graduated at Harvard in 1786, was
admitted to the bar in 1789 (like his father, before he was twenty years
old), and retired from active practice in 1803. He opposed French
influence and the policies of the Democratic party, writing many
spirited pamphlets (some signed "The Boston Rebel," some "The Roxbury
Farmer"), including: _The Antigallican_ (1797), _Remarks on the Hon. J.
Q. Adams's Review of Mr Ames's Works_ (1809), _New England Patriot,
being a Candid Comparison of the Principles and Conduct of the
Washington and Jefferson Administrations_ (1810), _Appeals to the People
on the Causes and Consequences of War with Great Britain_ (1811) and _Mr
Madison's War_ (1812). These pamphlets contain an extreme statement of
the anti-war party and defend impressment as a right of long standing.
After the war Lowell abandoned politics, and won for himself the title
of "the Columella of New England" by his interest in agriculture--he was
for many years president of the Massachusetts Agricultural Society. He
was a benefactor of the Boston Athenaeum and the Massachusetts General

Another son of the first John Lowell, FRANCIS CABOT LOWELL (1775-1817),
the founder in the United States of cotton manufacturing, was born in
Newburyport on the 7th of April 1775, graduated at Harvard in 1793,
became a merchant in Boston, and, during the war of 1812, with his
cousin (who was also his brother-in-law), Patrick Tracy Jackson, made
use of the knowledge of cotton-spinning gained by Lowell in England
(whither he had gone for his health in 1810) and devised a power loom.
Experiments were successfully carried on at Waltham in 1814. Lowell
worked hard to secure a protective tariff on cotton goods. The city of
Lowell, Massachusetts, was named in his honour. He died in Boston on the
10th of August 1817.

CHARLES LOWELL (1782-1861), brother of the last named, was born in
Boston, graduated at Harvard in 1800, studied law and then theology, and
after two years in Edinburgh and one year on the Continent was from 1806
until his death pastor of the West Congregational (Unitarian) Church of
Boston, a charge in which Cyrus A. Bartol was associated with him after
1837. Charles Lowell had a rare sweetness and charm, which reappeared in
his youngest son, James Russell Lowell (q.v.).

Francis Cabot Lowell's son, JOHN LOWELL (1799-1836), was born in Boston,
travelled in India and the East Indies on business in 1816 and 1817, in
1832 set out on a trip around the world, and on the 4th of March 1836
died in Bombay. By a will made, said Edward Everett, "on the top of a
palace of the Pharaohs," he left $237,000 to establish what is now known
as the Lowell Institute (q.v.).

  See the first lecture delivered before the Institute, Edward Everett's
  _A Memoir of Mr John Lowell, Jr._ (Boston, 1840).

A grandson of Francis Cabot Lowell, EDWARD JACKSON LOWELL (1845-1894),
graduated at Harvard in 1867, was admitted to the Suffolk county (Mass.)
bar in 1872, and practised law for a few years. He wrote _The Hessians
and the Other German Auxiliaries of Great Britain in the Revolutionary
War_ (1884), _The Eve of the French Revolution_ (1892) and the chapter,
"The United States of America 1775-1782: their Political Relations with
Europe," in vol. vii. (1888) of Winsor's _Narrative and Critical History
of America_.

LOWELL, a city and one of the county-seats (Cambridge being the other)
of Middlesex county, Massachusetts, U.S.A., situated in the N.E. part of
the county at the confluence of the Concord and Merrimack rivers, about
25 m. N.W. of Boston. Pop. (1890) 77,696; (1900) 94,969, of whom 40,974
were foreign-born (14,674 being French Canadian, 12,147 Irish, 4485
English Canadian, 4446 English, 1203 Greek, 1099 Scotch); (1910 census),
106,294. Lowell is served by the Boston & Maine and the New York, New
Haven & Hartford railways, and by inter-urban electric lines. The area
of Lowell is 14.1 sq. m., much the larger part of which is S. of the
Merrimack. The city is irregularly laid out. Its centre is Monument
Square, in Merrimack Street, where are a granite monument to the first
Northerners killed in the Civil War, Luther C. Ladd and A. O. Whitney
(both of Lowell), whose regiment was mobbed in Baltimore on the 19th of
April 1861 while marching to Washington; and a bronze figure of Victory
(after one by Rauch in the Valhalla at Ratisbon), commemorating the
Northern triumph in the Civil War. The Lowell textile school, opened in
1897, offers courses in cotton manufacturing, wool manufacturing,
designing, chemistry and dyeing, and textile engineering; evening
drawing schools and manual training in the public schools have
contributed to the high degree of technical perfection in the factories.
The power gained from the Pawtucket Falls in the Merrimack river has
long been found insufficient for these. A network of canals supplies
from 14,000 to 24,000 h.p.; and a small amount is also furnished by the
Concord river, but about 26,000 h.p. is supplied by steam. In factory
output ($46,879,212 in 1905; $41,202,984 in 1900) Lowell ranked fifth in
value in 1905 and fourth in 1900 among the cities of Massachusetts; more
than three-tenths of the total population are factory wage-earners, and
nearly 19 % of the population are in the cotton mills. Formerly Lowell
was called the "Spindle City" and the "Manchester of America," but it
was long ago surpassed in the manufacture of textiles by Fall River and
New Bedford: in 1905 the value of the cotton product of Lowell,
$19,340,925, was less than 60 % of the value of cotton goods made at
Fall River. Woollen goods made in Lowell in 1905 were valued at
$2,579,363; hosiery and knitted goods, at $3,816,964; worsted goods, at
$1,978,552. Carpets and textile machinery are allied manufactures of
importance. There are other factories for machinery, patent medicines,
boots and shoes, perfumery and cosmetics, hosiery and rubber heels.
Lowell was the home of the inventor of rubber heels, Humphrey

The founders of Lowell were Patrick Tracy Jackson (1780-1847), Nathan
Appleton (1779-1861), Paul Moody (1779-1831) and the business manager
chosen by them, Kirk Boott (1790-1837). The opportunity for developing
water-power by the purchase of the canal around Pawtucket Falls
(chartered for navigation in 1792) led them to choose the adjacent
village of East Chelmsford as the site of their projected cotton mills;
they bought the Pawtucket canal, and incorporated in 1822 the Merrimack
Manufacturing Company; in 1823 the first cloth was actually made, and in
1826 a separate township was formed from part of Chelmsford and was
named in honour of Francis Cabot Lowell, who with Jackson had improved
Cartwright's power loom, and had planned the mills at Waltham. In 1836
Lowell was chartered as a city. Lowell annexed parts of Tewksbury in
1834, 1874, 1888 and 1906, and parts of Dracut in 1851, 1874 and 1879.
Up to 1840 the mill hands, with the exception of English dyers and
calico printers, were New England girls. The "corporation," as the
employers were called, provided from the first for the welfare of their
employees, and Lowell has always been notably free from labour

  The character of the early employees of the mills, later largely
  displaced by French Canadians and Irish, and by immigrants from
  various parts of Europe, is clearly seen in the periodical, _The
  Lowell Offering_, written and published by them in 1840-1845. This
  monthly magazine, organized by the Rev. Abel Charles Thomas
  (1807-1880), pastor of the First Universalist Church, was from October
  1840 to March 1841 made up of articles prepared for some of the many
  improvement circles or literary societies; it then became broader in
  its scope, received more spontaneous contributions, and from October
  1842 until December 1845 was edited by Harriot F. Curtis (1813-1889),
  known by her pen name, "Mina Myrtle," and by Harriet Farley
  (1817-1907), who became manager and proprietor, and published
  selections from the _Offering_ under the titles _Shells from the
  Strand of the Sea of Genius_ (1847) and _Mind among the Spindles_
  (1849), with an introduction by Charles Knight. In 1854 she married
  John Intaglio Donlevy (d. 1872). Famous contributors to the _Offering_
  were Harriet Hanson (b. 1825) and Lucy Larcom (1824-1893). Harriet
  Hanson wrote _Early Factory Labor in New England_ (1883) and _Loom and
  Spindle_ (1898), an important contribution to the industrial and
  social history of Lowell. She was prominent in the anti-slavery and
  woman suffrage agitations in Massachusetts, and wrote _Massachusetts
  in the Woman Suffrage Movement_ (1881). She married in 1848 William
  Stevens Robinson (1818-1876), who wrote in 1856-1876 the political
  essays signed "Warrington" for the _Springfield Republican_. Lucy
  Larcom,[1] born in Beverly, came to Lowell in 1835, where her widowed
  mother kept a "corporation" boarding-house, and where she became a
  "doffer," changing bobbins in the mills. She wrote much, especially
  for the _Offering_; became an ardent abolitionist and (in 1843) the
  friend of Whittier; left Lowell in 1846, and taught for several years,
  first in Illinois, and then in Beverly and Norton, Massachusetts. _An
  Idyl of Work_ (1875) describes the life of the mills and _A New
  England Girlhood_ (1889) is autobiographical; she wrote many stories
  and poems, of which _Hannah Binding Shoes_ is best known.

  Benjamin F. Butler was from boyhood a resident of Lowell, where he
  began to practise law in 1841. James McNeill Whistler was born here in
  1834, and in 1907 his birthplace in Worthen Street was purchased by
  the Art Association to be used as its headquarters and as an art
  museum and gallery; it was dedicated in 1908, and in the same year a
  replica of Rodin's statue of Whistler was bought for the city.

  See S. A. Drake, _History of Middlesex County_, 2, p. 53 et seq.
  (Boston, 1880); _Illustrated History of Lowell, Massachusetts_
  (Lowell, 1897); the books of Harriet H. Robinson and Lucy Larcom
  already named as bearing on the industrial conditions of the city
  between 1835 and 1850; and the famous description in the fourth
  chapter of Dickens's _American Notes_.


  [1] See D. D. Addison, _Lucy Larcom; Life, Letters and Diary_
    (Boston, 1897).

LOWELL INSTITUTE, an educational foundation in Boston, Massachusetts,
U.S.A., providing for free public lectures, and endowed by the bequest
of $237,000 left by John Lowell, junior, who died in 1836. Under the
terms of his will 10% of the net income was to be added to the
principal, which in 1909 was over a million dollars. None of the fund
was to be invested in a building for the lectures; the trustees of the
Boston Athenaeum were made visitors of the fund; but the trustee of the
fund is authorized to select his own successor, although in doing so he
must "always choose in preference to all others some male descendant of
my grandfather John Lowell, provided there is one who is competent to
hold the office of trustee, and of the name of Lowell," the sole trustee
so appointed having the entire selection of the lecturers and the
subjects of lectures. The first trustee was John Lowell junior's cousin,
John Amory Lowell, who administered the trust for more than forty years,
and was succeeded in 1881 by his son, Augustus Lowell, who in turn was
succeeded in 1900 by his son Abbott Lawrence Lowell, who in 1909 became
president of Harvard University.

The founder provided for two kinds of lectures, one popular, "and the
other more abstruse, erudite and particular." The popular lectures have
taken the form of courses usually ranging from half a dozen to a dozen
lectures, and covering almost every subject. The fees have always been
large, and many of the most eminent men in America and Europe have
lectured there. A large number of books have been published which
consist of those lectures or have been based upon them. As to the
advanced lectures, the founder seems to have had in view what is now
called university extension, and in this he was far in advance of his
time; but he did not realize that such work can only be done effectively
in connexion with a great school. In pursuance of this provision public
instruction of various kinds has been given from time to time by the
Institute. The first freehand drawing in Boston was taught there, but
was given up when the public schools undertook it. In the same way a
school of practical design was carried on for many years, but finally,
in 1903, was transferred to the Museum of Fine Arts. Instruction for
working men was given at the Wells Memorial Institute until 1908, when
the Franklin Foundation took up the work. A Teachers' School of Science
is maintained in co-operation with the Natural History Society. For many
years advanced courses of lectures were given by the professors of the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, but in 1904 they were superseded
by an evening school for industrial foremen. In 1907, under the title of
"Collegiate Courses," a number of the elementary courses in Harvard
University were offered free to the public under the same conditions of
study and examination as in the university.

  For the earlier period, see Harriett Knight Smith, _History of the
  Lowell Institute_ (Boston, 1898).

LÖWENBERG, a town of Germany, in the Prussian province of Silesia, on
the Bober, 39 m. E. of Görlitz by rail. Pop. 5682. It is one of the
oldest towns in Silesia; its town hall dates from the 16th century, and
it has a Roman Catholic church built in the 13th century and restored in
1862. The town has sandstone and gypsum quarries, breweries and woollen
mills, and cultivates fruit and vegetables. Löwenberg became a town in
1217 and has been the scene of much fighting, especially during the
Napoleonic wars. Near the town is the village and estate of Hohlstein,
the property of the Hohenzollern family.

LÖWENSTEIN, a town of Germany, in the kingdom of Württemberg, capital of
the mediatized county of that name, situated under the north slope of
the Löwenstein range, 6 m. from Heilbronn. Pop. 1527. It is dominated by
the ruined castle of the counts of Löwenstein, and enclosed by medieval
walls. The town contains many picturesque old houses. There is also a
modern palace. The cultivation of vines is the chief industry, and there
is a brine spring (Theusserbad).

Löwenstein was founded in 1123 by the counts of Calw, and belonged to the
Habsburgs from 1281 to 1441. In 1634 the castle was destroyed by the
imperialists. The county of Löwenstein belonged to a branch of the family
of the counts of Calw before 1281, when it was purchased by the German
king Rudolph I., who presented it to his natural son Albert. In 1441
Henry, one of Albert's descendants, sold it to the elector palatine of
the Rhine, Frederick I., and later it served as a portion for Louis (d.
1524), a son of the elector by a morganatic marriage, who became a count
of the Empire in 1494. Louis's grandson Louis II. (d. 1611) inherited the
county of Wertheim and other lands by marriage and called himself count
of Löwenstein-Wertheim; his two sons divided the family into two
branches. The heads of the two branches, into which the older and
Protestant line was afterwards divided, were made princes by the king of
Bavaria in 1812 and by the king of Württemberg in 1813; the head of the
younger, or Roman Catholic line, was made a prince of the Empire in 1711.
Both lines are flourishing, their present representatives being Ernst (b.
1854) prince of Löwenstein-Wertheim-Freudenberg, and Aloyse (b. 1871)
prince of Löwenstein-Wertheim-Rosenberg. The lands of the family were
mediatized after the dissolution of the Empire in 1806. The area of the
county of Löwenstein was about 53 sq. m.

  See C. Rommel, _Grundzüge einer Chronik der Stadt Löwenstein_
  (Löwenstein, 1893).

LOWESTOFT, a municipal borough, seaport and watering-place in the
Lowestoft parliamentary division of Suffolk, England, 117½ m. N.E. from
London by the Great Eastern railway. Pop. (1901) 29,850. It lies on
either side of the formerly natural, now artificial outlet of the river
Waveney to the North Sea, while to the west the river forms Oulton Broad
and Lothing Lake. The northern bank is the original site. South
Lowestoft arose on the completion of harbour improvements, begun in
1844, when the outlet of the Waveney, reopened in 1827, was deepened.
The old town is picturesquely situated on a lofty declivity, which
includes the most easterly point of land in England. The church of St
Margaret is Decorated and Perpendicular. South Lowestoft has a fine
esplanade, a park (Bellevue) and other adjuncts of a watering-place.
Bathing facilities are good. There are two piers enclosing a harbour
with a total area of 48 acres, having a depth of about 16 ft. at high
tide. The fisheries are important and some 600 smacks belong to the
port. Industries include ship and boat building and fitting, and motor
engineering. The town is governed by a mayor, 8 aldermen and 24
councillors. Area 2178 acres.

Lowestoft (Lothu Wistoft, Lowistoft, Loistoft) owes its origin to its
fisheries. In 1086 it was a hamlet in the demesne of the royal manor of
Lothingland. The men of Lowestoft as tenants on ancient demesne of the
crown possessed many privileges, but had no definite burghal rights
until 1885. For several centuries before 1740 the fisheries were the
cause of constant dispute between Lowestoft and Yarmouth. During the
last half of the 18th century the manufacture of china flourished in the
town. A weekly market on Wednesdays was granted to John, earl of
Richmond, in 1308 together with an eight days' fair beginning on the
vigil of St Margaret's day, and in 1445 John de la Pole, earl of
Suffolk, one of his successors as lord of the manor, received a further
grant of the same market and also two yearly fairs, one on the feast of
St Philip and St James and the other at Michaelmas. The market is still
held on Wednesdays, and in 1792 the Michaelmas fair and another on
May-day were in existence. Now two yearly fairs for small wares are held
on the 13th of May and the 11th of October. In 1643 Cromwell performed
one of his earlier exploits in taking Lowestoft, capturing large
supplies and making prisoners of several influential royalists. In the
war of 1665 the Dutch under Admiral Opdam were defeated off Lowestoft by
the English fleet commanded by the duke of York.

  See _Victoria County History, Suffolk_; E. Gillingwater, _An
  Historical Account of the Town of Lowestoft_ (ed. 1790).

LOWIN, JOHN (1576-1659), English actor, was born in London, the son of a
carpenter. His name frequently occurs in Henslowe's Diary in 1602, when
he was playing at the Rose Theatre in the earl of Worcester's company,
and he was at the Blackfriars in 1603, playing with Shakespeare, Burbage
and the others, and owning--by 1608--a share and a half of the twenty
shares in that theatre. About 1623 he was one of the managers. He lived
in Southwark, and Edward Alleyn speaks of his dining with him in 1620.
"Lowin in his latter days kept an inn (the Three Pigeons) at Brentford,
where he deyed very old." Two of his favourite parts were Falstaff, and
Melanteus in _The Maid's Tragedy_.

LOWLAND, in physical geography, any broad expanse of land with a general
low level. The term is thus applied to the landward portion of the
upward slope from oceanic depths to continental highlands, to a region
of depression in the interior of a mountainous region, to a plain of
denudation or to any region in contrast to a highland. The Lowlands and
Highlands of Scotland are typical.

LOWNDES, THOMAS (1692-1748), founder of the Lowndean professorship of
astronomy at Cambridge university, England, was born in 1692, both his
father and mother being Cheshire landowners. In 1725 he was appointed
provost marshal of South Carolina, a post he preferred to fill by
deputy. In 1727 Lowndes claimed to have taken a prominent part in
inducing the British government to purchase Carolina, but he surrendered
his patent when the transfer of the colony to the crown was completed.
His patent was renewed in 1730, but he resigned it in 1733. He then
brought various impractical schemes before the government to check the
illicit trade in wool between Ireland and France; to regulate the paper
currency of New England; and to supply the navy with salt from brine,
&c. He died on the 12th of May 1748. By his will he left his inherited
Cheshire properties to the university of Cambridge for the foundation of
a chair of astronomy and geometry.

LOWNDES, WILLIAM THOMAS (1798-1843), English bibliographer, was born
about 1798, the son of a London bookseller. His principal work, _The
Bibliographer's Manual of English Literature_--the first systematic work
of the kind--was published in four volumes in 1834. It took Lowndes
fourteen years to compile, but, despite its merits, brought him neither
fame nor money. Lowndes, reduced to poverty, subsequently became
cataloguer to Henry George Bohn, the bookseller and publisher. In 1839
he published the first parts of _The British Librarian_, designed to
supplement his early manual, but owing to failing health did not
complete the work. Lowndes died on the 31st of July 1843.

LOW SUNDAY, the first Sunday after Easter, so called because of its
proximity to the "highest" of all feasts and Sundays, Easter. It was
also known formerly as White Sunday, being still officially termed by
the Roman Catholic Church _Dominica in albis_, "Sunday in white
garments," in allusion to the white garments anciently worn on this day
by those who had been baptized and received into the Church just before
Easter. Alb Sunday, Quasimodo and, in the Greek Church, Antipascha, and
[Greek: ê deuteroprotê Kuriakê] (literally "second-first Sunday," i.e.
the second Sunday after the first) were other names for the day.

LOWTH, ROBERT (1710-1787), English divine and Orientalist, was born at
Winchester on the 27th of November 1710. He was the younger son of
William Lowth (1661-1732), rector of Buriton, Hampshire, a theologian of
considerable ability. Robert was educated on the foundation of
Winchester College, and in 1729 was elected to a scholarship at New
College, Oxford. He graduated M.A. in 1737, and in 1741 he was appointed
professor of poetry at Oxford, in which capacity he delivered the
_Praelectiones Academicae de Sacra Poesi Hebraeorum_. Bishop Hoadly
appointed him in 1744 to the rectory of Ovington, Hampshire, and in 1750
to the archdeaconry of Winchester. In 1753 he was collated to the
rectory of East Woodhay, Hampshire, and in the same year he published
his lectures on Hebrew poetry. In 1754 he received the degree of doctor
of divinity from his university, and in 1755 he went to Ireland for a
short time as first chaplain to the lord-lieutenant, the 4th duke of
Devonshire. He declined a presentation to the see of Limerick, but
accepted a prebendal stall at Durham and the rectory of Sedgefield. In
1758 he published his _Life of William of Wykeham_; this was followed in
1762 by _A Short Introduction to English Grammar_. In 1765, the year of
his election into the Royal Societies of London and Göttingen, he
engaged in controversy with William Warburton on the book of Job, in
which he was held by Gibbon to have had the advantage. In June 1766
Lowth was consecrated bishop of St David's, and about four months
afterwards he was translated to Oxford, where he remained till 1777,
when he became bishop of London and dean of the Chapel Royal. In 1778
appeared his last work, _Isaiah, a new Translation, with a Preliminary
Dissertation, and Notes, Critical, Philological, and Explanatory_. He
declined the archbishopric of Canterbury in 1783, and died at Fulham on
the 3rd of November 1787.

  The _Praelectiones_, translated in 1787 by G. Gregory as _Lectures on
  the Sacred Poetry of the Hebrews_, exercised a great influence both in
  England and on the continent. Their chief importance lay in the idea
  of looking at the sacred poetry as poetry, and examining it by the
  ordinary standards of literary criticism. Lowth's aesthetic criticism
  was that of the age, and is now in great part obsolete, a more natural
  method having been soon after introduced by Herder. The principal
  point in which Lowth's influence has been lasting is his doctrine of
  poetic parallelism, and even here his somewhat mechanical
  classification of the forms of Hebrew sense-rhythm, as it should
  rather be called, is open to serious objections. Editions of the
  _Lectures_ and of the _Isaiah_ have been numerous, and both have been
  translated into German. A volume of _Sermons and other Remains_, with
  memoir by the topographer, Peter Hall (1802-1849), was published in
  1834, and an edition of the _Popular Works_ of Robert Lowth in 3 vols.
  appeared in 1843.

LOXODROME (from Gr. [Greek: loxos], oblique, and [Greek: dromos],
course), the line on the earth's surface making a constant angle with
the meridian.

LOYALISTS or TORIES, in America, the name given to the colonists who
were loyal to Great Britain during the War of Independence. In New
England and the Middle Colonies loyalism had a religious as well as a
political basis. It represented the Anglican as opposed to the
Calvinistic influence. With scarcely an exception the Anglican ministers
were ardent Loyalists, the writers and pamphleteers were the ministers
and teachers of that faith, and virtually all the military or civil
leaders were members of that church. The Loyalists north of Maryland
represented the old Tory traditions. In the southern colonies, where
Anglicanism predominated, the division did not follow religious lines so
closely. In Virginia and South Carolina the Whig leaders were almost
without exception members of the established church. Out of twenty
Episcopal ministers in South Carolina only five were Loyalists. Although
many of the wealthy Anglican planters of the tide-water section fought
for the mother country, the Tories derived their chief support from the
non-Anglican Germans and Scotch in the upper country. The natural
leaders in these colonies were members of the same church as the
governor and vied with him in their zeal for the support of that church.
Since religion was not an issue, the disputes over questions purely
political in character, such as taxation, distribution of land and
appointment of officials, were all the more bitter. The settlers on the
frontier were snubbed both socially and politically by the low-country
aristocracy, and in North Carolina and South Carolina were denied courts
of justice and any adequate representation in the colonial assembly.
Naturally they refused to follow such leaders in a war in defence of
principles in which they had no material interest. They did not drink
tea and had little occasion for the use of stamps, since they were not
engaged in commerce and had no courts in which to use legal documents.
The failure of the British officers to realize that conditions in the
south differed from those in the north, and the tendency on their part
to treat all Dissenters as rebels, were partly responsible for the
ultimate loss of their southern campaign. The Scotch-Irish in the south,
influenced perhaps by memories of commercial and religious oppression in
Ulster, were mostly in sympathy with the American cause.

Taking the Thirteen Colonies as a whole, loyalism drew its strength
largely from the following classes: (1) the official class--men holding
positions in the civil, military and naval services, and their immediate
families and social connexions, as, for example, Lieutenant-Governor
Bull in South Carolina, Governor Dunmore in Virginia and Governor Tryon
in New York; (2) the professional classes--lawyers, physicians, teachers
and ministers, such as Benjamin Kissam, Peter Van Schaack and Dr Azor
Betts of New York and Dr Myles Cooper, president of King's College (now
Columbia University); (3) large landed proprietors and their tenants,
e.g. William Wragg in South Carolina and the De Lanceys, De Peysters and
Van Cortlandts in New York; (4) the wealthy commercial classes in New
York, Albany, Philadelphia, Baltimore and Charleston, whose business
interests would be affected by war; (5) natural conservatives of the
type of Joseph Galloway of Pennsylvania, and numerous political trimmers
and opportunists. Before 1776 the Loyalists may be divided into two
groups. There was a minority of extremists led by the Anglican ministers
and teachers, who favoured an unquestioning obedience to all British
legislation. The moderate majority disapproved of the mother country's
unwise colonial policy and advocated opposition to it through legally
organized bodies. Many even sanctioned non-importation and
non-exportation agreements, and took part in the election of delegates
to the First Continental Congress. The aggressive attitude of Congress,
the subsequent adoption of the Declaration of Independence, and the
refusal to consider Lord Howe's conciliatory propositions finally forced
them into armed opposition. Very few really sanctioned the British
policy as a whole, but all felt that it was their first duty to fight
for the preservation of the empire and to leave constitutional questions
for a later settlement. John Adams's estimate that one-third of all the
people in the thirteen states in 1776 were Loyalists was perhaps
approximately correct. In New England the number was small, perhaps
largest in Connecticut and in the district which afterwards became the
state of Vermont. New York was the chief stronghold. The "De Lancey
party" or the "Episcopalian party" included the majority of the wealthy
farmers, merchants and bankers, and practically all communicants of the
Anglican church. New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland and
Virginia contained large and influential Loyalist minorities; North
Carolina was about equally divided; South Carolina probably, and Georgia
certainly, had Loyalist majorities. Some of the Loyalists joined the
regular British army, others organized guerilla bands and with their
Indian allies inaugurated a reign of terror on the frontier from New
York to Georgia. New York alone furnished about 15,000 Loyalists to the
British army and navy, and about 8500 militia, making in all 23,500
Loyalist troops. This was more than any other colony supplied, perhaps
more than all the others combined. Johnson's "Loyal Greens" and Butler's
"Tory Rangers" served under General St Leger in the Burgoyne campaign of
1777, and the latter took part in the Wyoming and Cherry Valley
massacres of 1778. The strength of these Loyalists in arms was weakened
in New York by General Sullivan's success at Newtown (now Elmira) on the
29th of August 1779, and broken in the north-west by George Rogers
Clark's victories at Kaskaskia and Vincennes in 1778 and 1779, and in
the south by the battles of King's Mountain and Cowpens in 1780. Severe
laws were passed against the Loyalists in all the states. They were in
general disfranchised and forbidden to hold office or to practise law.
Eight of the states formally banished certain prominent Tories either
conditionally or unconditionally, and the remaining five, Connecticut,
New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland and Virginia, did practically the same
indirectly. Social and commercial ostracism forced many others to flee.
Their property was usually confiscated for the support of the American
cause. They went to England, to the West Indies, to the Bahamas, to
Canada and to New York, Newport, Charleston and other cities under
British control. According to a trustworthy estimate 60,000 persons went
into exile during the years from 1775 to 1787. The great majority
settled in Nova Scotia and in Upper and Lower Canada, where they and
their descendants became known as "United Empire Loyalists." Those who
remained in the United States suffered for many years, and all the laws
against them were not finally repealed until after the War of 1812. The
British government, however, endeavoured to look after the interests of
its loyal colonists. During the war a number of the prominent Loyalists
(e.g. Joseph Galloway) were appointed to lucrative positions, and
rations were issued to many Loyalists in the cities, such as New York,
which were held by the British. During the peace negotiations at Paris
the treatment of the Loyalists presented a difficult problem, Great
Britain at first insisting that the United States should agree to remove
their disabilities and to act toward them in a spirit of conciliation.
The American commissioners, knowing that a treaty with such provisions
would not be accepted at home, and that the general government had,
moreover, no power to bind the various states in such a matter, refused
to accede; but in the treaty, as finally ratified, the United States
agreed (by Article V.) to recommend to the legislatures of the various
states that Loyalists should "have free liberty to go to any part or
parts of any of the thirteen United States, and therein to remain twelve
months, unmolested in their endeavours to obtain the restitution of such
of their estates, rights and properties as may have been confiscated,"
that acts and laws in the premises be reconsidered and revised, and that
restitution of estates, &c., should be made. The sixth article provided
"that there shall be no future confiscations made, nor any prosecutions
commenced against any person" for having taken part in the war; and that
those in confinement on such charges should be liberated. In Great
Britain opponents of the government asserted that the Loyalists had
virtually been betrayed; in America the treaty aroused opposition as
making too great concessions to them. Congress made the promised
recommendations, but they were unheeded by the various states, in spite
of the advocacy by Alexander Hamilton and others of a conciliatory
treatment of the Loyalists; and Great Britain, in retaliation, refused
until 1796 to evacuate the western posts as the treaty prescribed.
Immediately after the war parliament appointed a commission of five to
examine the claims of the Loyalists for compensation for services and
losses; and to satisfy these claims and to establish Loyalists in Nova
Scotia and Canada the British government expended fully £6,000,000.

  See C. H. van Tyne, _The Loyalists in the American Revolution_ (New
  York, 1902), which contains much valuable information but does not
  explain adequately the causes of loyalism. More useful in this respect
  is the monograph by A. C. Flick, _Loyalism in New York daring the
  American Revolution_ (New York, 1901). On the biographical side see
  Lorenzo Sabine, _Biographical Sketches of Loyalists of the American
  Revolution_ (2 vols., Boston, 1864); on the literary side, M. C.
  Tyler, _Literary History of the American Revolution_, 1763-1783 (2
  vols., New York, 1897).

LOYALTY, allegiance to the sovereign or established government of one's
country, also personal devotion and reverence to the sovereign and royal
family. The English word came into use in the early part of the 15th
century in the sense of fidelity to one's oath, or in service, love,
&c.; the later and now the ordinary sense appears in the 16th century.
The O. Fr. _loialtê_, mod. _loyauté_, is formed from _loial_, loyal,
Scots _leal_, Lat. _legalis_, legal, from _lex_, law. This was used in
the special feudal sense of one who has full legal rights, a _legalis
homo_ being opposed to the _exlex_, _utlegatus_, or outlaw. Thence in
the sense of faithful, it meant one who kept faithful allegiance to his
feudal lord, and so loyal in the accepted use of the word.

LOYALTY ISLANDS (Fr. _Iles Loyalty_ or _Loyauté_), a group in the South
Pacific Ocean belonging to France, about 100 m. E. of New Caledonia,
with a total land area of about 1050 sq. m. and 20,000 inhabitants. It
consists of Uea or Uvea (the northernmost), Lifu (the largest island,
with an area of 650 sq. m.), Tiga and several small islands and Maré or
Nengone. They are coral islands of comparatively recent elevation, and
in no place rise more than 250 ft. above the level of the sea. Enough of
the rocky surface is covered with a thin coating of soil to enable the
natives to grow yams, taro, bananas, &c., for their support; cotton
thrives well, and has even been exported in small quantities, but there
is no space available for its cultivation on any considerable scale.
Fresh water, rising and falling with the tide, is found in certain large
caverns in Lifu, and by sinking to the sea-level a supply may be
obtained in any part of the island. The chief product of the islands are
bananas; the chief export sandal-wood.

The Loyalty islanders are Melanesians; the several islands have each its
separate language, and in Uea one tribe uses a Samoan and another a New
Hebridean form of speech. The Loyalty group was discovered at the
beginning of the 19th century, and Dumont d'Urville laid down the
several islands in his chart. For many years the natives had a
reputation as dangerous cannibals, but they are now among the most
civilized Melanesians. Christianity was introduced into Maré by native
teachers from Rarotonga and Samoa; missionaries were settled by the
London Missionary Society at Maré in 1854, at Lifu in 1859 and at Uea in
1865: Roman Catholic missionaries also arrived from New Caledonia; and
in 1864 the French, considering the islands a dependency of that
colony, formally instituted a commandant. An attempt was made by this
official to put a stop to the English missions by violence; but the
report of his conduct led to so much indignation in Australia and in
England that the emperor Napoleon, on receipt of a protest from Lord
Shaftesbury and others, caused a commission of inquiry to be appointed
and free liberty of worship to be secured to the Protestant missions. A
further persecution of Christians in Uea, during 1875, called forth a
protest from the British government.

LOYOLA, ST IGNATIUS OF (1491-1556), founder of the Society of Jesus.
Inigo Lopez de Recalde, son of Beltran, lord of the noble houses of
Loyola and Oñaz, was born, according to the generally accepted opinion,
on the 24th of December 1491 at the castle of Loyola, which is situated
on the river Urola, about 1 m. from the town of Azpeitia, in the
province of Guipuzcoa. He was the youngest of a family of thirteen. As
soon as he had learnt the elements of reading and writing, he was sent
as a page to the court of Ferdinand and Isabella; afterwards, until his
twenty-sixth year, he took service with Antonio Maurique, duke of
Nagera, and followed the career of arms. He was free in his relations
with women, gambled and fought; but he also gave indications of that
courage, constancy and prudence which marked his after life. In a
political mission to settle certain disputes in the province he showed
his dexterity in managing men.

Despite the treaty of Noyon (1516), Charles V. kept Pampeluna, the
capital of Navarre. André de Foix, at the head of the French troops,
laid siege to the town in 1521 and Ignatius was one of the defending
garrison. In the hour of danger, the claims of religion reasserted
themselves on the young soldier, and, following a custom when no priest
was at hand, he made his confession to a brother officer, who in turn
also confessed to him. During the final assault on the 19th of May 1521
a cannon ball struck him, shattering one of his legs and badly wounding
the other. The victorious French treated him kindly for nearly two
weeks, and then sent him in a litter to Loyola. The doctors declared
that the leg needed to be broken and set again; and the operation was
borne without a sign of pain beyond a clenching of his fist. His vanity
made him order the surgeons to cut out a bone which protruded below the
knee and spoilt the symmetry of his leg. He was lame for the rest of his
days. Serious illness followed the operations, and, his life being
despaired of, he received the last sacraments on the 28th of June. That
night, however, he began to mend, and in a few days he was out of
danger. During convalescence two books that were to influence his life
were brought to him. These were a Castilian translation of _The Life of
Christ_ by Ludolphus of Saxony, and the popular _Flowers of the Saints_,
a series of pious biographies. He gradually became interested in these
books, and a mental struggle began. Sometimes he would pass hours
thinking of a certain illustrious lady, devising means of seeing her and
of doing deeds that would win her favour; at other times the thoughts
suggested by the books got the upper hand. He began to recognize that
his career of arms was over: so he would become the knight of Christ. He
determined to make the pilgrimage to Jerusalem and to practise all the
austerities that he read of in _The Flowers of the Saints_. Expiating
his sins was not so much his aim as to accomplish great deeds for God.
During the struggle that went on in his soul, he began to take note of
his psychological state; and this was the first time that he exercised
his reason on spiritual things; the experience thus painfully gained he
found of great use afterwards in directing others. One night while he
lay awake, he tells us, he saw the likeness of the Blessed Virgin with
her divine Son; and immediately a loathing seized him for the former
deeds of his life, especially for those relating to carnal desires; and
he asserts that for the future he never yielded to any such desires.
This was the first of many visions. Ignatius proposed after returning
from Jerusalem to join the Carthusian order at Seville as a lay brother.
About the same time Martin Luther was in the full course of his protest
against the papal supremacy and had already burnt the pope's bull at
Worms. The two opponents were girding themselves for the struggle; and
what the Church of Rome was losing by the defection of the Augustinian
was being counterbalanced by the conversion of the founder of the
Society of Jesus.

As soon as Ignatius had regained strength, he started ostensibly to
rejoin the duke of Nagera, but in reality to visit the great Benedictine
abbey of Montserrato, a famous place of pilgrimage. On the way, he was
joined by a Moor, who began to jest at some of the Christian doctrines,
especially at the perpetual virginity of the Blessed Virgin. Ignatius
was no controversialist; and the Moor rode off victorious. The
chivalrous nature of Ignatius was aroused. Seized with a longing to
pursue and kill the Moor on account of his insulting language, Ignatius,
still doubting as to his best course, left the matter to his mule, which
at the dividing of the ways took the path to the abbey, leaving the open
road which the Moor had taken. Before reaching Montserrato, Ignatius
purchased some sackcloth for a garment and hempen shoes, which, with a
staff and gourd, formed the usual pilgrim's dress. Approaching the abbey
he resolved to do as his favourite hero Amadis de Gaul did--keep a vigil
all night before the Lady altar and then lay aside his worldly armour to
put on that of Christ. He arrived at the abbey just about the feast of
St Benedict (the 21st of March 1522), and there made a confession of his
life to a priest belonging to the monastery. He found in use for the
pilgrims a translation of the _Spiritual Exercises_ of the former abbot,
Garcia di Cisneros (d. 1510); and this book evidently gave Ignatius the
first idea of his more famous work under the same title. Leaving his
mule to the abbey, and giving away his worldly clothes to a beggar, he
kept his watch in the church during the night of the 24th-25th of March,
and placed on the Lady altar his sword and dagger. Early the next
morning he received the Holy Eucharist and left before any one could
recognize him, going to the neighbouring town of Manresa, where he first
lived in the hospice. Here began a series of heavy spiritual trials
which assailed him for many months. Seven hours a day he spent on his
knees in prayer and three times a day he scourged his emaciated body.
One day, almost overcome with scruples, he was tempted to end his
miseries by suicide. At another time, for the same reason, he kept an
absolute fast for a week. He tells us that, at this time, God wrought
with him as a master with a schoolboy whom he teaches. But his energies
were not confined to himself. He assisted others who came to him for
spiritual advice; and seeing the fruit reaped from helping his
neighbour, he gave up the extreme severities in which he had delighted
and began to take more care of his person, so as not needlessly to
offend those whom he might influence for good.

During his stay at Manresa, he lived for the most part in a cell at the
Dominican convent; and here, evidently, he had severe illnesses. He
recounts the details of at least two of these attacks, but says nothing
about the much-quoted swoon of eight days, during which he is supposed
to have seen in vision the scheme of the future Society. Neither does he
refer in any way to the famous cave in which, according to the Ignatian
myth, the _Spiritual Exercises_ were written. Fortunately we have the
first-hand evidence of his autobiography, which is a surer guide than
the lines written by untrustworthy disciples. Ignatius remained at
Manresa for about a year, and in the spring of 1523 set out for
Barcelona on his way to Rome, where he arrived on Palm Sunday. After two
weeks he left, having received the blessing of Pope Adrian VI., and
proceeded by Padua to Venice, where he begged his bread and slept in the
Piazza di San Marco until a rich Spaniard gave him shelter and obtained
an order from the doge for a passage in a pilgrim ship bound for Cyprus,
whence he could get to Jaffa. In due course Ignatius arrived at
Jerusalem, where he intended to remain, in order continuously to visit
the holy places and help souls. For this end he had obtained letters of
recommendation to the guardian, to whom, however, he only spoke of his
desire of satisfying his devotion, not hinting his other motive. The
Franciscans gave him no encouragement to remain; and the provincial
threatened him with excommunication if he persisted. Not only had the
friars great difficulty in supporting themselves, but they dreaded an
outbreak from the fanatical Turks who resented some imprudent
manifestations of Loyola's zeal. Ignatius returned to Venice in the
middle of January 1524; and, determining to devote himself for a while
to study, he set out for Barcelona, where he arrived in Lent. Here he
consulted Isabella Roser, a lady of high rank and piety, and also the
master of a grammar school. These both approved his plan; the one
promised to teach him without payment and the other to provide him with
the necessaries of life. Here, in his thirty-third year, he began to
learn Latin, and after two years his master urged him to go to Alcalá to
begin philosophy. During his stay of a year and a half in this
university, besides his classes, he found occasion to give to some
companions his _Spiritual Exercises_ in the form they had then taken and
certain instructions in Christian doctrine. On account of these
discourses Ignatius came into conflict with the Inquisition. He and his
companions were denounced as belonging to the sects of _Sagati_ and
_Illuminati_. Their mode of life and dress was peculiar and hinted at
innovation. But, always ready to obey authority, Ignatius was able to
disarm any charges that, now and at other times, were brought against
him. The Inquisition merely advised him and his companions to dress in a
less extraordinary manner and to go shod. Four months later he was
suddenly cast into prison; and, after seventeen days, he learnt that he
was falsely accused of sending two noble ladies on a pilgrimage to Jaen.
During their absence, from the 21st of April 1527 to the 1st of June, he
remained in prison, and was then set free with a prohibition against
instructing others until he had spent four years in study.

Seeing his way thus barred at Alcalá, he went with his companions to
Salamanca. Here the Dominicans, doubting the orthodoxy of the
new-comers, had them put into prison, where they were chained foot to
foot and fastened to a stake set up in the middle of the cell. Some days
afterwards Ignatius was examined and found without fault. His patience
won him many friends; and when he and his companions remained in prison
while the other prisoners managed to escape, their conduct excited much
admiration. After twenty-two days they were called up to receive
sentence. No fault was found in their life and teaching; but they were
forbidden to define any sins as being mortal or venial until they had
studied for four years. Hampered again by such an order, Ignatius
determined to go to Paris to continue his studies. Up to the present he
was far from having any idea of founding a society. The only question
before him now was whether he should join an order, or continue his
wandering existence. He decided upon Paris for the present, and before
leaving Salamanca he agreed with his companions that they should wait
where they were until he returned; for he only meant to see whether he
could find any means by which they all might give themselves to study.
He left Barcelona and, travelling on foot to Paris, he arrived there in
February 1528. The university of Paris had reached its zenith at the
time of the council of Constance (1418), and was now losing its
intellectual leadership under the attacks of the Renaissance and the
Reformation. In 1521 the university had condemned Luther's _Babylonish
Captivity_, and in 1527 Erasmus's _Colloquies_ met with the same fate.
Soon after his arrival, Ignatius may have seen in the Place de Grève the
burning of Louis de Berquin for heresy.[1] At this period there were
between twelve and fifteen thousand students attending the university,
and the life was an extraordinary mixture of licentiousness and devout
zeal. When Ignatius arrived in Paris, he lodged at first with some
fellow-countrymen; and for two years attended the lectures on humanities
at the collège de Montaigu, supporting himself at first by the charity
of Isabella Roser; but, a fellow-lodger defrauding him of his stock, he
found himself destitute and compelled to beg his bread. He retired to
the hospice of St Jacques; and, following the advice of a Spanish monk,
spent his vacations in Flanders, where he was helped by the rich Spanish
merchants. At Bruges he became acquainted with the famous Spanish
scholar, Juan Luis Vives, with whom he lodged. In the summer of 1530 he
went to London, where he received alms more abundantly than elsewhere.
As he could only support himself at Paris with difficulty, it was
impossible to send for his companions in Salamanca. Others, however,
joined him in Paris, and to some of them he gave the _Spiritual
Exercises_, with the result that the Inquisition made him give up
speaking on religious subjects during the time he was a student. At the
end of 1529 he came into contact with the men who were eventually to
become the first fathers of the Society of Jesus. He won over the
Savoyard Pierre Lefèvre (Faber), whose room he shared, and the Navarrese
Francis Xavier, who taught philosophy in the college of St Barbara.
Afterwards he became acquainted with the young Castilian, Diego Laynez,
who had heard of him at Acalá and found him out in Paris. With Laynez
came two other young men, the Toledan Alfonso Salmeron and the
Portuguese Simon Rodriguez. Nicholas Bobadilla, a poor Spaniard who had
finished his studies, was the next to join him. The little company of
seven determined to consecrate their union by vows. On the 15th of
August 1534, the Feast of the Assumption, they assembled in the crypt of
the church of St Mary on Montmartre, and Faber, the only one who was a
priest, said Mass. They then took the vows of poverty and chastity, and
pledged themselves to go to the Holy Land as missionaries or for the
purpose of tending the sick; or if this design should prove
impracticable, to go to Rome and place themselves at the disposal of the
pope for any purpose. But, whatever may have been the private opinion of
Ignatius, there was on this occasion no foundation of any society. The
vows were individual obligations which could be kept quite apart from
membership in a society. A provision was made that if, after waiting a
year at Venice, they were unable to go to Jerusalem, this part of the
vow should be cancelled and they should at once betake themselves to

At this time Ignatius was again suffering from his former imprudent
austerities; and he was urged to return for a while to his native air.
He left Paris for Spain in the autumn of 1535, leaving Faber in charge
of his companions to finish their studies. During the absence of
Ignatius, Faber gained three more adherents. But before leaving Paris
Ignatius heard once more that complaints had been lodged against him at
the Inquisition; but these like the others were found to be without any
foundation. When he arrived near Loyola he would not go to the castle,
but lived at the public hospice at Azpeitia, and began his usual life of
teaching Christian doctrine and reforming morals. Falling ill again he
went to other parts of Spain to transact business for his companions.
Then, sailing from Valencia to Genoa, he made his way to Venice, where
he arrived during the last days of 1535. Here he waited for a year until
his companions could join him, and meanwhile he occupied himself in his
usual good works, gaining several more companions and meeting Giovanni
Piero Caraffa, afterwards Paul IV., who had lately founded the
Theatines. What happened between the two does not appear; but henceforth
Caraffa seems to have borne ill will towards Ignatius and his
companions. At Venice Ignatius was again accused of heresy, and it was
said that he had escaped from the Inquisition in Spain and had been
burnt in effigy at Paris. These charges he met successfully by insisting
that the nuncio should thoroughly inquire into the matter.

After a journey of fifty-four days his companions arrived at Venice in
January 1537; and here they remained until the beginning of Lent, when
Ignatius sent them to Rome to get money for the proposed voyage to
Palestine. He himself stayed behind, as he feared that, if he went with
them, Caraffa at Rome, together with Dr Ortiz, a German opponent in
Paris and now Charles V.'s ambassador at the Vatican, would prejudice
the pope against them. But Ortiz proved a friend and presented them to
Paul III., who gave them leave to go to Palestine to preach the Gospel,
bestowing upon them abundant alms. He likewise gave licence for those
not yet priests to be ordained by any catholic bishop on the title of
poverty. They had returned to Venice where Ignatius and the others were
ordained priests on the 24th of June 1537, after having renewed their
vows of poverty and chastity to the legate Verallo. Ignatius, now a
priest, waited for eighteen months before saying Mass, which he did for
the first time on the 25th of December 1538 in the church of Santa Maria
Maggiore in Rome.

The year of waiting passed away without any chance of going to the Holy
Land. Finding it impossible to keep this part of their vow, the fathers
met at Vicenza, where Ignatius was staying in a ruined monastery; and
here after deliberation it was determined that he, Laynez and Faber
should go to Rome to place the little band at the disposal of the pope.
It was now that the Society began to take some visible form. A common
rule was devised and a name adopted. Ignatius declared that having
assembled in the name of Jesus, the association should henceforth bear
the name of the "Company of Jesus." The word used shows Loyola's
military ideal of the duties and methods of the nascent society.

On the road to Rome a famous vision took place, as to which we have the
evidence of Ignatius himself. In a certain church, a few miles before
Rome, whilst in prayer he was aware of a stirring and a change in his
soul; and so openly did he see God the Father placing him with Christ,
that he could not dare to doubt that God the Father had so placed him.
Subsequent writers add that Christ, looking at him with a benign
countenance, said: "I shall be propitious to you"; while others add the
significant words, "at Rome." Ignatius, however, says nothing about so
important a matter; indeed he understood the vision to mean that many
things would be adverse to them, and told his companions when they
reached the city that he saw the windows there closed against him. He
also said: "We must of necessity proceed with caution; and we must not
make the acquaintance of women unless they be of very high rank." They
arrived in Rome in October 1537; and lived at first in a little cottage
in a vineyard and near the Trinità dei Monti. The pope appointed Faber
to teach Holy Scripture, and Laynez scholastic theology, in the
university of the Sapienza. Ignatius was left free to carry on his
spiritual work, which became so large that he was obliged to call his
other companions to Rome. During the absence of the pope, a certain
hermit began to spread heresy and was opposed by Ignatius and his
companions. In revenge the hermit brought up the former accusations
concerning the relations to the Inquisition, and proclaimed Ignatius and
his friends to be false, designing men and no better than concealed
heretics. The matter was examined and the legate ordered the suit to be
quashed. But this did not suit Ignatius. It was necessary for his own
good repute and the future of his work that a definitive sentence should
be pronounced and his name cleared once and for all. The legate
demurred; but on the pope's return sentence was formally given in his

The life of Ignatius is now mainly identified with the formation and
growth of his Society (see JESUITS), but his zeal found other outlets in
Rome. He founded institutions for rescuing fallen women, started
orphanages and organized catechetical instructions. He obtained, after
difficulty, the official recognition of his Society from Paul III. on
the 27th of September 1540, and successfully steered it through many
perils that beset it in its early days. He was unanimously elected the
first general in April 1541; and on the 22nd of that month received the
first vows of the Society in the church of San Paolo _fuori la mura_.
Two works now chiefly occupied the remainder of his life: the final
completion of the _Spiritual Exercises_ and the drawing up of the
_Constitutions_, which received their final form after his death. These
two are so constantly connected that the one cannot be understood
without the other. The _Constitutions_ are discussed in the article on
the Jesuits. In these he taught his followers to respond to the call; by
the _Spiritual Exercises_ he moulded their character.

  The _Book of the Spiritual Exercises_ has been one of the world-moving
  books. In its strict conception it is only an application of the
  Gospel precepts to the individual soul. Its object is to convince a
  man of sin, of justice and of judgment. The idea of the book is not
  original to Ignatius At Montserrato he had found in use a popular
  translation of the _Exercitatorio de la vida spiritual_ (1500),
  written in Latin by Abbot Garcias de Cisneros (d. 1510), and divided
  into three ways or periods during which purity of soul, enlightenment
  and union are to be worked for; a fourth part is added on
  contemplation. This book evidently afforded the root idea of the
  Ignatian and more famous book. But the differences are great. While
  taking the title, the idea of division by periods and the subjects of
  most of the meditations from the older work, Ignatius skilfully
  adapted it to his own requirements. Above all the methods of the two
  are essentially different. The Benedictine work follows the old
  monastic tradition of the direct intercourse of the soul with God.
  Ignatius, with his military instinct and views of obedience,
  intervenes with a director who gives the exercises to the person who
  in turn receives them. If this introduction of the director is
  essential to the end for which Ignatius framed his _Exercises_, in it
  we also find dangers. A director, whose aim is only the personal
  advantage of the one who is receiving the exercises, will be the
  faithful interpreter of his founder's intentions: but in the case of
  one whose _esprit de corps_ is unbalanced, the temporary and pecuniary
  advantage of the Society may be made of more importance than that of
  the exercitant. Another danger may come when minuteness of direction
  takes away the wholesome sense of responsibility. Apart from these
  abuses the _Spiritual Exercises_ have proved their value over and over
  again, and have received the sincerest form of flattery in countless
  imitations. The original parts of the book are principally to be found
  in the meditations, which are clearly Ignatian in conception as well
  as method. These are _The Reign of Christ_, wherein Christ as an
  earthly king calls his subjects to war: and _Two Standards_, one of
  Jesus Christ and the other of Lucifer. Besides these there are various
  additions to the series of meditations, which are mostly the practical
  results of the experiences which Ignatius went through in the early
  stages of his conversion. He gives various methods of prayer; methods
  of making an election; his series of rules for the discernment of
  spirits; rules for the distribution of alms and the treatment of
  scruples; tests of orthodoxy. These additions are skilfully worked
  into the series of meditations; so that when the exercitant by
  meditation has moved his soul to act, here are practical directions at

  The exercises are divided into four series of meditations technically
  called "weeks," each of which may last as long as the director
  considers necessary to achieve the end for which each week is
  destined. But the whole period is generally concluded in the space of
  a month. The first week is the foundation, and has to do with the
  consideration of the end of man, sin, death, judgment and hell. Having
  purified the soul from sin and obtained a detestation thereof, the
  second week treats of the kingdom of Christ, and is meant to lead the
  soul to make an election of the service of God. The third and fourth
  weeks are intended to confirm the soul in the new way chosen, to teach
  how difficulties can be overcome, to inflame it with the love of God
  and to help it to persevere.

  _The Book of the Spiritual Exercises_ was not written at Manresa,
  although there is in that place an inscription testifying to the
  supposed fact. Ignatius was constantly adding to his work as his own
  personal experience increased, and as he watched the effects of his
  method on the souls of those to whom he gave the exercises. The latest
  critics, even those of the Society itself, give 1548 as the date when
  the book received its final touches; though Father Roothaan gives
  Rome, the 9th of July 1541, as the date at the end of the ancient MS.
  version. Ignatius wrote originally in Spanish, but the book was twice
  translated into Latin during his lifetime. The more elegant version
  (known as the common edition) differs but slightly from the Spanish.
  Francisco Borgia, while duke of Gandia, petitioned Paul III. to have
  the book examined and approved. The pope appointed censors for both
  translations, who found the work to be replete with piety and
  holiness, highly useful and wholesome. Paul III. on receiving this
  report confirmed it on the 31st of July 1548 by the breve _Pastoralis
  officii cura_. This book, which is rightly called the spiritual arm of
  the Society, was the first book published by the Jesuits.

The progress of the Society of Jesus in Loyola's lifetime was rapid (see
JESUITS). Having always had an attraction for a life of prayer and
retirement, in 1547 he tried to resign the generalship, and again in
1550, but the fathers unanimously opposed the project. One of his last
trials was to see in 1556 the election as pope of his old opponent
Caraffa, who soon showed his intention of reforming certain points in
the Society that Ignatius considered vital. But at this difficult crisis
he never lost his peace of mind. He said: "If this misfortune were to
fall upon me, provided it happened without any fault of mine, even if
the Society were to melt away like salt in water, I believe that a
quarter of an hour's recollection in God would be sufficient to console
me and to re-establish peace within me." It is clear that Ignatius never
dreamed of putting his Society before the church nor of identifying the
two institutions.

In the beginning of 1556 Ignatius grew very weak and resigned the active
government to three fathers, Polanco, Madrid and Natal. Fever laid hold
of him, and he died somewhat suddenly on the 31st of July 1556, without
receiving or asking for the last sacraments. He was beatified in 1609 by
Paul V. and canonized in 1628 by Gregory XV. His body lies under the
altar in the north transept of the Gesù in Rome.

His portrait is well known. The olive complexion, a face emaciated by
austerities, the large forehead, the brilliant and small eyes, the high
bald head tell their own tale. He was of medium height and carried
himself so well that his lameness was hardly noticeable. His character
was naturally impetuous and enthusiastic, but became marked with great
self-control as he gradually brought his will under his reason. There
was always that love of overcoming difficulty inherent in a chivalrous
nature; and this also accounts for that desire of surpassing every one
else that marked his early days. Whilst other Christians, following St
Paul, were content to do all things for the glory of God, Ignatius set
himself and his followers to strive after the greater glory. Learning by
his own experience and errors, he wisely developed a sovereign prudence
which nicely adjusted means to the end in view. He impressed on his
followers the doctrine that in all things the end was to be considered.
Never would Ignatius have countenanced so perverted an idea as that the
end justified the means, for with his spiritual light and zeal for God's
glory he saw clearly that means in themselves unjust were opposed to the
very end he held in view. As a ruler he displayed the same common sense.
Obedience he made one of his great instruments, yet he never intended it
to be a galling yoke. His doctrine on the subject is found in the
well-known letter to the Portuguese Jesuits in 1553, and if this be read
carefully together with the _Constitutions_ his meaning is clear. If he
says that a subject is to allow himself to be moved and directed, under
God, by a superior just as though he were a corpse or as a staff in the
hands of an old man, he is also careful to say that the obedience is
only due in all things "wherein it cannot be defined (as it is said)
that any kind of sin appears." The way in which his teaching on
obedience is practically carried out is the best corrective of the false
ideas that have arisen from misconceptions of its nature. His high ideas
on the subject made him a stern ruler. There are certain instances in
his life which, taken by themselves, show a hardness in treating
individuals who would not obey; but as a rule, he tempered his authority
to the capacity of those with whom he had to deal. When he had to choose
between the welfare of the Society and the feelings of an individual it
was clear to which side the balance would fall.

There was in his character a peculiar mixture of conservatism and a keen
sense of the requirements of the day. In intellectual matters he was not
in advance of his day. The Jesuit system of education, set forth in the
_Ratio studiorum_, owes nothing to him. While he did not reject any
approved learning, he abhorred any intellectual culture that destroyed
or lessened piety. He wished to secure uniformity in the judgment of the
Society even in points left open and free by the church: "Let us all
think in the same way, let us all speak in the same manner if possible."
Bartole, the official biographer of Ignatius, says that he would not
permit any innovation in the studies; and that, were he to live five
hundred years, he would always repeat "no novelties" in theology, in
philosophy or in logic--not even in grammar. The revival of learning had
led many away from Christ; intellectual culture must be used as a means
of bringing them back. The new learning in religion had divided
Christendom; the old learning of the faith, once delivered to the
saints, was to reconcile them. This was the problem that faced Ignatius,
and in his endeavour to effect a needed reformation in the individual
and in society his work and the success that crowned it place him among
the moral heroes of humanity.

  BIBLIOGRAPHY.--The Ignatian literature is very large. Fortunately we
  have in the _Acta quaedam_ what is in effect the autobiography of the
  saint. This has been translated into English under the title of _The
  testament of Ignatius Loyola, being sundry acts of our Father
  Ignatius, under God, the first founder of the Society of Jesus, taken
  down from the Saint's own lips by Luis Gonzales_ (London, 1900); and
  the above account of Ignatius is taken in most places directly from
  this, which is not only the best of all sources but also a valuable
  corrective of the later and more imaginative works. Next to the _Acta
  quaedam_ comes in value Polanco's Vita Ignatii Loiolae, which is
  published in the _Monumenta historica Societatis Jesu_ now in
  progress. Polanco was the saint's secretary towards the end of his
  life. Ribadeneira, who as a youth had been associated with the
  founder, wrote his _Vida del S. Ignacio de Loyola_ (Madrid, 1594),
  based on an early Latin work (Naples, 1572). Bartole, the official
  biographer, wrote his _Della vita e dell' instituto di S. Ignatio_
  (Rome, 1650, 1659); Genelli wrote _Das Leben des heiligen Ignatius von
  Loyola_ (Innsbruck, 1848); Nicolas Orlandinus gives a life in the
  first volume of the _Historiae Societatis Jesu_ (Rome, 1615). It would
  be impossible to give a list even of the other lives, most of which
  are without value as histories, being written mainly for edification.
  But the student may be referred to the modern books Henri Joli's _St
  Ignace de Loyola_ (Paris, 1899), which is based on the best
  authorities, and to H. Müller's curious _Les Origines de la Compagnie
  de Jésus_ (Paris, 1898), in which the author tries to establish a
  Mahommedan origin for many of the ideas adopted by the saint.

  The literature connected with the _Spiritual Exercises_ is also large.
  It will be sufficient here to mention: _A Book of Spiritual Exercises,
  written by Garcias de Cisneros_ (London, 1876); the official Latin
  text in the third volume of the Avignon edition of the _Constitutions_
  (1830); Roothaan's _Exercitia spiritualia S. P. Ignatii de Loyola, cum
  versione litterali ex autographo Hispanico, notis illustrata_ (Namur,
  1841); Diertino, _Historia exercitiorum S. P. Ignatii de Loyola_
  (1887). Especially worthy of notice is P. Watrigant's _La Genèse des
  exercices de Saint Ignace de Loyola_, republished from _Les Études_
  (20th May, 20th July, 20th October 1897).     (E. Tn.)


  [1] Louis de Berquin, who died on the 17th of April 1529, belonged to
    a noble family of Artois. He was a man of exemplary life and a friend
    of Erasmus and the humanists, besides being a _persona grata_ at the
    court of Louise of Savoy and Francis I. His main offence was that he
    attacked the monks and clergy, and that he advocated the reading of
    the Scriptures by the people in the vulgar tongue.--(W. A. P.)

LOZENGE (from the Fr. _losenge_, or _losange_; the word also appears in
Span. _losanje_, and Ital. _losanga_; perhaps derived from a word
meaning a stone slab laid on a grave, which appears in forms such as
Provençal _lousa_, Span. _losa_, the ultimate origin of which is
unknown, the Lat. _lapis_, stone, or _laus_, praise, in the sense of
epitaph, have been suggested), properly a four equal-sided figure,
having two acute and two obtuse angles, a rhomb or "diamond." The figure
is frequently used as a bearing in heraldry and especially as a shield
so shaped on which the arms of a widow or spinster are emblazoned. It is
used also to denote the diamond-shaped facets of a precious stone when
cut, also the diamond panes of a casement window. In the 14th century
the "lozenge pattern" was a favourite design for decoration. The word is
also applied to a small tablet of sugar, originally diamond shaped,
containing either medical drugs or some simple flavouring, or to a
tablet of any concentrated substance, such as a meat-lozenge. In the
reign of James I. of Scotland (1406-1437) a Scotch gold coin having a
lozenge-shaped shield with the arms of Scotland on the obverse side was
called a "lozenge-lion."

LOZÈRE, a department of south-eastern France belonging to the central
plateau, composed of almost the whole of Gévaudan and of some portions
of the old dioceses of Uzès and Alais, districts all formerly included
in the province of Languedoc. Pop. (1906) 128,016. Area, 1999 sq. m. It
is bounded N. by Cantal and Haute-Loire, E. by Ardèche and Gard, S. by
Gard and Aveyron and W. by Aveyron and Cantal. Lozère is mountainous
throughout and in average elevation is the highest of all the French
departments. It has three distinct regions--the Cévennes proper to the
south-east, the _causses_ to the south-west and the mountain tracts
which occupy the rest of its area. The Cévennes begin (within Lozère)
with Mont Aigoual, which rises to a height of more than 5100 ft.;
parallel to this are the mountains of Bougès, bold and bare on their
southern face, but falling gently with wooded slopes towards the Tarn
which roughly limits the Cévennes on the north. To the north of the Tarn
is the range of Lozère, including the peak of Finiels, the highest point
of the department (5584 ft.). Farther on occurs the broad marshy plateau
of Montbel, which drains southward to the Lot, northwards to the Allier,
eastward by the Chassezac to the Ardèche. From this plateau extend the
mountains of La Margeride, undulating granitic tablelands partly clothed
with woods of oak, beech and fir, and partly covered with pastures, to
which flocks are brought from lower Languedoc in summer. The highest
point (Truc de Randon) reaches 5098 ft. Adjoining the Margeride hills on
the west is the volcanic range of Aubrac, a pastoral district where
horned cattle take the place of sheep; the highest point is 4826 ft.
The _causses_ of Lozère, having an area of about 564 sq. m., are
calcareous, fissured and arid, but separated from each other by deep and
well-watered gorges, contrasting with the desolate aspect of the
plateaus. The _causse_ of Sauveterre, between the Lot and the Tarn,
ranges from 3000 to 3300 ft. in height; that of Méjan has nearly the
same average altitude, but has peaks some 1000 ft. higher. Between these
two causses the Tarn valley is among the most picturesque in France.
Lozère is watered entirely by rivers rising within its own boundaries,
being in this respect unique. The climate of Lozère varies greatly with
the locality. The mean temperature of Mende (50° F.) is below that of
Paris; that of the mountains is always low, but on the _causses_ the
summer is scorching and the winter severe; in the Cévennes the climate
becomes mild enough at their base (656 ft.) to permit the growth of the
olive. Rain falls in violent storms, causing disastrous floods. On the
Mediterranean versant there are 76 in., in the Garonne basin 46 and in
that of the Loire only 28. Sheep and cattle-rearing and cheese-making
are the chief occupations. Bees are kept, and, among the Cévennes,
silkworms. Large quantities of chestnuts are exported from the Cévennes,
where they form an important article of diet. In the valley of the Lot
wheat and fruit are the chief products; elsewhere rye is the chief
cereal, and oats, barley, meslin and potatoes are also grown. Fruit
trees and leguminous plants are irrigated by small canals (_béals_) on
terraces made and maintained with much labour. Lead, zinc and antimony
are found. Saw-milling, the manufacture of wooden shoes and
wool-spinning are carried on; otherwise industries are few and
unimportant. Of mineral springs, those of Bagnols-les-Bains are most
frequented. The line of the Paris-Lyon company from Paris to Nîmes
traverses the eastern border of the department, which is also served by
the Midi railway with the line from Neussargues to Béziers via
Marvéjols. The arrondissements are Mende, Florac and Marvéjols; the
cantons number 24, the communes 198. Lozère forms the diocese of Mende
and part of the ecclesiastical province of Albi. It falls within the
region of the XVI. army corps, the circumscriptions of the _académie_
(educational division) of Montpellier and the appeal court of Nîmes.
Mende (q.v.) is its most important town.

LUANG-PRABANG, a town of French Indo-China, capital of the Lao state of
that name, on the left bank of the Me Kong river. It lies at the foot of
the pagoda hill which rises about 200 ft. above the plain on the
promontory of land round which the Nam Kan winds to the main river. It
has a population of about 9000 and contains the "palace" of the king of
the state and several pagodas. In 1887 it was taken and sacked by the
Haw or Black Flags, robber bands of Chinese soldiery, many of them
survivors of the Taiping rebellion. In 1893 Siam was compelled to
renounce her claims to the left bank of the Me Kong, including
Luang-Prabang and the magnificent highlands of Chieng Kwang. That
portion of the state which was on the right bank of the Me Kong was not
affected by the treaty, except in so far as a portion of it fell within
the sixteen miles' zone within which Siam agreed not to keep troops.
Trade is in the hands of Chinese or Shan traders; hill rice and other
jungle products are imported from the surrounding districts by the Kha
or hill people. The exports, which include rubber, gum benjamin, silk,
wax, sticklac, cutch, cardamon, a little ebony, cinnamon, indigo,
rhinoceros and deer horns, ivory and fish roe, formerly all passed by
way of Paklai to the Me Nam, and so to Bangkok, but have now almost
entirely ceased to follow that route, the object of the French
government being to deflect the trade through French territory.
Luang-Prabang is the terminus of navigation on the upper Me Kong and the
centre of trade thereon.

LUBAO, a town in the south-western part of the province of Pampanga,
Luzon, Philippine Islands, about 30 m. N.W. of Manila. Pop. (1903)
19,063. Lubao is served by the Manila & Dagupan railway, and has water
communication with Manila by tidal streams and Manila Bay. Its products
are, therefore, readily marketed. It lies in a low, fertile plain,
suited to the growing of rice and sugar. Many of the inhabitants occupy
themselves in the neighbouring nipa swamps, either preparing the nipa
leaves for use in house construction, or distilling "nipa-wine" from the
juice secured by tapping the blossom stalks. The language is Pampangan.

LÜBBEN, a town of Germany, in the Prussian province of Brandenburg, on
the Spree, 47 m. S.S.E. of Berlin, on the railway to Görlitz. Pop.
(1905) 7173. It is the chief town of the Spreewald, and has saw-mills
and manufactories of hosiery, shoes and paper, and is famous for its
_gurken_, or small pickling cucumbers. The poet Paul Gerhardt
(1607-1676) was pastor here and is buried in the parish church.

LÜBECK, a state and city (_Freie und Hansestadt Lübeck_) of Germany. The
_principality_ of Lübeck, lying north of the state, is a constituent of
the grand-duchy of Oldenburg (q.v.). The state is situated on an arm of
the Baltic between Holstein and Mecklenburg-Schwerin. It consists of the
city of Lübeck, the town of Travemünde, 49 villages and the country
districts, embraces 115 sq. m. of territory, and had a population in
1907 of 109,265, of which 93,978 were included in the city and its
immediate suburbs. The state lies in the lowlands of the Baltic, is
diversified by gently swelling hills, and watered by the Trave and its
tributaries, the Wakenitz and the Stecknitz. The soil is fertile, and,
with the exception of forest land (14% of the whole area), is mostly
devoted to market gardening. Trade is centred in the city of Lübeck.

The constitution of the free state is republican, and, by the
fundamental law of 1875, amended in 1905 and again in 1907, consists of
two assemblies. (1) The Senate of fourteen members, of whom eight must
belong to the learned professions, and six of these again must be
jurists, while of the remaining six, five must be merchants. The Senate
represents the sovereignty of the state and is presided over by the
_Oberbürgermeister_, who during his two years' term of office bears the
title of "magnificence." (2) The House of Burgesses (Bürgerschaft), of
120 members, elected by free suffrage and exercising its powers partly
in its collective capacity and partly through a committee of thirty
members. Purely commercial matters are dealt with by the chamber of
commerce, composed of a _praeses_, eighteen members and a secretary.
This body controls the exchange and appoints brokers, shipping agents
and underwriters. The executive is in the hands of the Senate, but the
House of Burgesses has the right of initiating legislation, including
that relative to foreign treaties; the sanction of both chambers is
required to the passing of any new law. Lübeck has a court of first
instance (_Amtsgericht_) and a high court of justice (_Landgericht_);
from the latter appeals lie to the Hanseatic court of appeal
(_Oberlandesgericht_) at Hamburg, and from this again to the supreme
court of the empire (_Reichsgericht_) in Leipzig. The people are nearly
all Lutherans, and education is compulsory between the ages of six and

The estimated revenue for the year 1908-1909 amounted to about £650,000,
and the expenditure to a like sum. The public debt amounted, in 1908, to
about £2,518,000. Lübeck has one vote in the federal council
(_Bundesrat_) of the German Empire, and sends one representative to the
imperial parliament (_Reichstag_).

_History of the Constitution._--At the first rise of the town justice was
administered to the inhabitants by the _Vogt_ (_advocatus_) of the count
of Holstein. Simultaneously with its incorporation by Henry the Lion,
duke of Saxony, who presented the city with its own mint toll and market,
there appears a magistracy of six, chosen probably by the _Vogt_ from the
_Schöffen_ (_scabini, probi homines_). The members of the town council
had to be freemen, born in lawful wedlock, in the enjoyment of estates in
freehold and of unstained repute. Vassals or servants of any lord, and
tradespeople, were excluded. A third of the number had annually to retire
for a year, so that two-thirds formed the sitting council. By the middle
of the 13th century there were two burgomasters (_magistri burgensium_).
Meanwhile, the number of magistrates (_consules_) had increased, ranging
from twenty to forty and upwards. The council appointed its own officers
in the various branches of the administration. In the face of so much
self-government the _Vogt_ presently disappeared altogether. There were
three classes of inhabitants, full freemen, half freemen and guests or
foreigners. People of Slav origin being considered unfree, all
intermarriage with them tainted the blood; hence nearly all surnames
point to Saxon, especially Westphalian, and even Flemish descent. The
magistracy was for two centuries almost exclusively in the hands of the
merchant aristocracy, who formed the companies of traders or "nations,"
such as the _Bergen-fahrer_, _Novgorod-fahrer_, _Riga-fahrer_ and
_Stockholm-fahrer_. From the beginning, however, tradesmen and
handicraftsmen had settled in the town, all of them freemen of German
parentage and with property and houses of their own. Though not eligible
for the council, they shared to a certain extent in the self-government
through the aldermen of each corporation or gild, of which some appear as
early as the statutes of 1240. Naturally, there arose much jealousy
between the gilds and the aristocratic companies, which exclusively ruled
the republic. After an attempt to upset the merchants had been suppressed
in 1384, the gilds succeeded, under more favourable circumstances, in
1408. The old patrician council left the city to appeal to the Hansa and
to the imperial authorities, while a new council with democratic
tendencies, elected chiefly from the gilds, took their place. In 1416,
however, owing to the pressure brought to bear by the Hansa, by the
emperor Sigismund and by Eric, king of Denmark, there was a restoration.
The aristocratic government was again expelled under the dictatorship of
Jürgen Wullenweber (c. 1492-1537), till the old order was re-established
in 1535. In the constitution of 1669, under the pressure of a large
public debt, the great companies yielded a specified share in the
financial administration to the leading gilds of tradesmen. Nevertheless,
the seven great companies continued to choose the magistrates by
co-optation among themselves. Three of the four burgomasters and two of
the senators, however, had henceforth to be graduates in law. The
constitution, set aside only during the French occupation, has
subsequently been slowly reformed. From 1813 the popular representatives
had some share in the management of the finances. But the reform
committee of 1814, whose object was to obtain an extension of the
franchise, had made little progress, when the events of 1848 led to the
establishment of a representative assembly of 120 members, elected by
universal suffrage, which obtained a place beside the senatorial
government. The republic has given up its own military contingent, its
coinage and its postal dues to the German Empire; but it has preserved
its municipal self-government and its own territory, the inhabitants of
which enjoy equal political privileges with the citizens.

_The City of Lübeck._--Lübeck, the capital of the free state, was
formerly the head of the Hanseatic League. It is situated on a gentle
ridge between the rivers Trave and Wakenitz, 10 m. S.W. of the mouth of
the former in the bay of Lübeck, 40 m. by rail N.E. of Hamburg, at the
junction of lines to Eutin, Büchen, Travemünde and Strassburg (in
Mecklenburg-Schwerin) and consists of an inner town and three suburbs.
The former ramparts between the Trave and the old town ditch have been
converted into promenades. The city proper retains much of its ancient
grandeur, despite the tendency to modernize streets and private houses.
Foremost among its buildings must be mentioned its five chief churches,
stately Gothic edifices in glazed brick, with lofty spires and replete
with medieval works of art--pictures, stained glass and tombs. Of them,
the Marienkirche, built in the 13th century, is one of the finest
specimens of early Gothic in Germany. The cathedral, or _Domkirche_,
founded in 1173, contains some curious sarcophagi and a magnificent
altarpiece in one of the chapels, while the churches of St James
(_Jakobikirche_), of St Peter (_Petrikirche_) and of St Aegidius
(_Aegidienkirche_) are also remarkable. The _Rathaus_ (town hall) of red
and black glazed brick, dating from various epochs during the middle
ages, is famous for its staircase, the vaulted wine cellar of the city
council beneath and magnificent wood carving. There should also be
mentioned the _Schiffershaus_; the medieval gates (Holstentor, Burgtor);
and the Hospital of the Holy Ghost, remarkable for ancient frescoes and
altars in rich wood carving, the entrance hall of which is a
13th-century chapel, restored in 1866 and decorated in 1898. The museum
preserves the most remarkable municipal archives in existence as well as
valuable collections of historical documents.

The poet, Emanuel Geibel (1889), and the painter, Johann Friedrich
Overbeck (1789-1869), were natives of Lübeck. This city is famous for
the number and wealth of its charitable institutions. Its position as
the first German emporium of the west end of the Baltic has been to some
extent impaired by Hamburg and Bremen since the construction of the
North Sea and Baltic Canal, and by the rapid growth and enterprise of
Stettin. In order to counterbalance their rivalry, the quays have been
extended, a canal was opened in 1900 between the Trave and the Elbe, the
river up to the wharves has been deepened to 23 ft. or more. The river
is kept open in winter by ice-breakers. A harbour was made in 1899-1900
on the Wakenitz Canal for boats engaged in inland traffic, especially on
the Elbe and Elbe-Trave Canal. Lübeck trades principally with Denmark,
Sweden, Finland, Russia, the eastern provinces of Prussia, Great Britain
and the United States. The imports amounted in value to about £4,850,000
in 1906 and the exports to over £10,000,000. The chief articles of
import are coal, grain, timber, copper, steel and wine, and the exports
are manufactured goods principally to Russia and Scandivania. The
industries are growing, the chief being breweries and distilleries,
saw-mills and planing-mills, shipbuilding, fish-curing, the manufacture
of machinery, engines, bricks, resin, preserves, enamelled and tin
goods, cigars, furniture, soap and leather. Pop. (1885) 55,399; (1905)

_History._--Old Lübeck stood on the left bank of the Trave, where it is
joined by the river Schwartau, and was destroyed in 1138. Five years
later Count Adolphus II. of Holstein founded new Lübeck, a few miles
farther up, on the peninsula Buku, where the Trave is joined on the
right by the Wakenitz, the emissary of the lake of Ratzeburg. An
excellent harbour, sheltered against pirates, it became almost at once a
competitor for the commerce of the Baltic. Its foundation coincided with
the beginning of the advance of the Low German tribes of Flanders,
Friesland and Westphalia along the southern shores of the Baltic--the
second great emigration of the colonizing Saxon element. In 1140 Wagria,
in 1142 the country of the Polabes (Ratzeburg and Lauenburg), had been
annexed by the Holtsaetas (the Transalbingian Saxons). From 1166 onwards
there was a Saxon count at Schwerin. Frisian and Saxon merchants from
Soest, Bardowiek and other localities in Lower Germany, who already
navigated the Baltic and had their factory in Gotland, settled in the
new town, where Wendish speech and customs never entered. About 1157
Henry the Lion, duke of Saxony, forced his vassal, the count of
Holstein, to give up Lübeck to him; and in 1163 he removed thither the
episcopal see of Oldenburg (Stargard), founding at the same time the
dioceses of Ratzeburg and Schwerin. He issued the first charter to the
citizens, and constituted them a free Saxon community having their own
magistrate, an advantage over all other towns of his dominions. He
invited traders of the north to visit his new market free of toll and
custom, providing his subjects were promised similar privileges in
return. From the beginning the king of Denmark granted them a settlement
for their herring fishery on the coast of Schoonen. Adopting the
statutes of Soest in Westphalia as their code, Saxon merchants
exclusively ruled the city. In concurrence with the duke's _Vogt_
(_advocatus_) they recognized only one right of judicature within the
town, to which nobles as well as artisans had to submit. Under these
circumstances the population grew rapidly in wealth and influence by
land and sea, so that, when Henry was attainted by the emperor,
Frederick I., who came in person to besiege Lübeck in 1181, this
potentate, "in consideration of its revenues and its situation on the
frontier of the Empire," fixed by charter, dated the 19th of September
1188, the limits, and enlarged the liberties, of the free town. In the
year 1201 Lübeck was conquered by Waldemar II. of Denmark. But in 1223
it regained its liberty, after the king had been taken captive by the
count of Schwerin. In 1226 it was made a free city of the Empire by
Frederick II., and its inhabitants took part with the enemies of the
Danish king in the victory of Bornhövede in July 1227. The citizens
repelled the encroachments of their neighbours in Holstein and in
Mecklenburg. On the other hand their town, being the principal emporium
of the Baltic by the middle of the 13th century, acted as the firm ally
of the Teutonic knights in Livonia. Emigrants founded new cities and new
sees of Low German speech among alien and pagan races; and thus in the
course of a century the commerce of Lübeck had supplanted that of
Westphalia. In connexion with the Germans at Visby, the capital of
Gotland, and at Riga, where they had a house from 1231, the people of
Lübeck with their armed vessels scoured the sea between the Trave and
the Neva. They were encouraged by papal bulls in their contest for the
rights of property in wrecks and for the protection of shipping against
pirates and slave-hunters. Before the close of the century the statutes
of Lübeck were adopted by most Baltic towns having a German population,
and Visby protested in vain against the city on the Trave having become
the court of appeal for nearly all these cities, and even for the German
settlement in Russian Novgorod. In course of time more than a hundred
places were embraced in this relation, the last vestiges of which did
not disappear until the beginning of the 18th century. From about 1299
Lübeck presided over a league of cities, Wismar, Rostock, Stralsund,
Greifswald and some smaller ones, and this Hansa of towns became heir to
a Hansa of traders simultaneously on the eastern and the western sea,
after Lübeck and her confederates had been admitted to the same
privileges with Cologne, Dortmund and Soest at Bruges and in the
steelyards of London, Lynn and Boston. The union held its own, chiefly
along the maritime outskirts of the Empire, rather against the will of
king and emperor, but nevertheless Rudolph of Habsburg and several of
his successors issued new charters to Lübeck. As early as 1241 Lübeck,
Hamburg and Soest had combined to secure their highways against robber
knights. Treaties to enforce the public peace were concluded in 1291 and
1338 with the dukes of Brunswick, Mecklenburg and Pomerania, and the
count of Holstein. Though the great federal armament against Waldemar
IV., the destroyer of Visby, was decreed by the city representatives
assembled at Cologne in 1367, Lübeck was the leading spirit in the war
which ended with the surrender of Copenhagen and the peace concluded at
Stralsund on the 24th of May 1370. Her burgomaster, Brun Warendorp, who
commanded the combined naval and land forces, died on the field of
battle. In 1368 the seal of the city, a double-headed eagle, which in
the 14th century took the place of the more ancient ship, was adopted as
the common seal of the confederated towns (_civitates maritimae_), some
seventy in number. Towards the end of the 15th century the power of the
Hanseatic League began to decline, owing to the rise of Burgundy in the
west, of Poland and Russia in the east and the emancipation of the
Scandinavian kingdom from the union of Calmar. Still Lübeck, even when
nearly isolated, strove to preserve its predominance in a war with
Denmark (1501-12), supporting Gustavus Vasa in Sweden, lording it over
the north of Europe during the years 1534 and 1535 in the person of
Jürgen Wullenweber, the democratic burgomaster, who professed the most
advanced principles of the Reformation, and engaging with Sweden in a
severe naval war (1536-70).

But the prestige and prosperity of the town were beginning to decline.
Before the end of the 16th century the privileges of the London
Steelyard were suppressed by Elizabeth. As early as 1425 the herring, a
constant source of early wealth, began to forsake the Baltic waters.
Later on, by the discovery of a new continent, commerce was diverted
into new directions. Finally, with the Thirty Years' War, misfortunes
came thick. The last Hanseatic diet met at Lübeck in 1630, shortly after
Wallenstein's unsuccessful attack on Stralsund; and from that time
merciless sovereign powers stopped free intercourse on all sides. Danes
and Swedes battled for the possession of the Sound and for its heavy
dues. The often changing masters of Holstein and Lauenburg abstracted
much of the valuable landed property of the city and of the chapter of
Lübeck. Towards the end of the 18th century there were signs of
improvement. Though the Danes temporarily occupied the town in 1801, it
preserved its freedom and gained some of the chapter lands when the
imperial constitution of Germany was broken up by the act of February
1803, while trade and commerce prospered for a few years. But in
November 1806, when Blücher, retiring from the catastrophe of Jena, had
to capitulate in the vicinity of Lübeck, the town was sacked by the
French. Napoleon annexed it to his empire in December 1810. But it rose
against the French in March 1813, was re-occupied by them till the 5th
of December, and was ultimately declared a free and Hanse town of the
German Confederation by the act of Vienna of the 9th of June 1815. The
Hanseatic League, however, having never been officially dissolved,
Lübeck still enjoyed its traditional connexion with Bremen and Hamburg.
In 1853 they sold their common property, the London Steelyard; until
1866 they enlisted by special contract their military contingents for
the German Confederation, and down to 1879 they had their own court of
appeal at Lübeck. Lübeck joined the North German Confederation in 1866,
profiting by the retirement from Holstein and Lauenburg of the Danes,
whose interference had prevented as long as possible a direct railway
between Lübeck and Hamburg. On the 27th of June 1867 Lübeck concluded a
military convention with Prussia, and on the 11th of August 1868 entered
the German Customs Union (_Zollverein_), though reserving to itself
certain privileges in respect of its considerable wine trade and
commerce with the Baltic ports.

  See E. Deecke, _Die Freie und Hansestadt Lübeck_ (4th ed., Lübeck,
  1881) and _Lübische Geschichten und Sagen_ (Lübeck, 1891); M.
  Hoffmann, _Geschichte der Freien und Hansestadt Lübeck_ (Lübeck,
  1889-1892) and _Chronik von Lübeck_ (Lübeck, 1908); _Die Freie und
  Hansestadt Lübeck_, published by _Die geographische Gesellschaft in
  Lübeck_ (Lübeck, 1891); C. W. Pauli, _Lübecksche Zustände im
  Mittelalter_ (Lübeck, 1846-1878); J. Geffcken, _Lübeck in der Mitte
  des 16^ten Jahrhunderts_ (Lübeck, 1905); P. Hasse, _Die Anfange
  Lübecks_ (Lübeck, 1893); H. Bödeker, _Geschichte der Freien und
  Hansestadt Lübeck_ (Lübeck, 1898); A. Holm, _Lübeck, die Freie und
  Hansestadt_ (Bielefeld, 1900); G. Waitz, _Lübeck unter Jürgen
  Wullenweber_ (Berlin, 1855-1856); Klug, _Geschichte Lübecks während
  der Vereinigung mit dem französischen Kaiserreich_ (Lübeck, 1857); F.
  Frensdorff, _Die Stadt- und Gerichtsverfassung Lübecks im 12. und 13.
  Jahrhundert_ (Lübeck, 1861); the _Urkundenbuch der Stadt Lübeck_
  (Lübeck, 1843-1904); the _Lübecker Chroniken_ (Leipzig, 1884-1903);
  and the _Zeitschrift des Vereins für lübeckische Geschichte_ (Lübeck,
  1860 fol.).     (R. P.; P. A. A.)

LUBLIN, a government of Russian Poland, bounded N. by Siedlce, E. by
Volhynia (the Bug forming the boundary), S. by Galicia, and W. by Radom
(the Vistula separating the two). Area, 6499 sq. m. The surface is an
undulating plain of Cretaceous deposits, 800 to 900 ft. in altitude, and
reaching in one place 1050 ft. It is largely covered with forests of
oak, beech and lime, intersected by ravines and thinly inhabited. A
marshy lowland extends between the Vistula and the Wieprz. The
government is drained by the Vistula and the Bug, and by their
tributaries the Wieprz, San and Tanev. Parts of the government, being of
black earth, are fertile, but other parts are sandy. Agriculture is in
good condition. Many Germans settled in the government before
immigration was stopped in 1887; in 1897 they numbered about 26,000.
Rye, oats, wheat, barley and potatoes are the chief crops, rye and wheat
being exported. Flax, hemp, buckwheat, peas, millet and beetroot are
also cultivated. Horses are carefully bred. In 1897 the population was
1,165,122, of whom 604,886 were women. The Greek Orthodox (chiefly
Little Russians in the south-east) amounted to 20.1% of the whole; Roman
Catholics (i.e. Poles) to 62.8%; Jews to 14.2%; and Protestants to 2.8%.
The urban population was 148,196 in 1897. The estimated population in
1906 was 1,362,500. Industrial establishments consist chiefly of
distilleries, sugar-works, steam flour-mills, tanneries, saw-mills and
factories of bent-wood furniture. Domestic industries are widely
developed in the villages. River navigation employs a considerable
portion of the population. The government is divided into ten districts,
the chief towns of which, with their populations in 1897, are--Lublin,
capital of the province (50,152); Biegoray (6286); Cholm (19,236);
Hrubieszow (10,699); Yanów (7927); Krasnystaw or Kraznostav (8879);
Lubartow (5249); Nova-Alexandrya or Pulawy (3892); Samostye (12,400);
and Tomaszów (6224).

LUBLIN, a town of Russian Poland, capital of the government of the same
name, 109 m. by rail S.E. of Warsaw, on a small tributary of the Wieprz.
Pop. (1873) 28,900; (1897) 50,152. It is the most important town of
Poland after Warsaw and Lodz, being one of the chief centres of the
manufacture of thread-yarn, linen and hempen goods and woollen stuffs;
there is also trade in grain and cattle. It has an old citadel, several
palaces of Polish nobles and many interesting churches, and is the
headquarters of the XIV. army corps, and the see of a Roman Catholic
bishop. The cathedral dates from the 16th century. Of the former
fortifications nothing remains except the four gates, one dating from

Lublin was in existence in the 10th century, and has a church which is
said to have been built in 986. During the time the Jagellon dynasty
ruled over Lithuania and Poland it was the most important city between
the Vistula and the Dnieper, having 40,000 inhabitants (70,000 according
to other authorities) and all the trade with Podolia, Volhynia and Red
Russia. Indeed, the present town is surrounded with ruins, which prove
that it formerly covered a much larger area. But it was frequently
destroyed by the Tatars (e.g. 1240) and Cossacks (e.g. 1477). In
1568-1569 it was the seat of the stormy convention at which the union
between Poland and Lithuania was decided. In 1702 another convention was
held in Lublin, in favour of Augustus II. and against Charles XII. of
Sweden, who carried the town by assault and plundered it. In 1831 Lublin
was taken by the Russians. The surrounding country is rich in
reminiscences of the struggle of Poland for independence.

LUBRICANTS. Machines consist of parts which have relative motion and
generally slide and rub against each other. Thus the axle of a cart or
railway vehicle is pressed against a metallic bearing surface supporting
the body of the vehicle, and the two opposed surfaces slide upon each
other and are pressed together with great force. If the metallic
surfaces be clean, the speed of rubbing high, and the force pressing the
surfaces together considerable, then the latter will abrade each other,
become hot and be rapidly destroyed. It is possible, however, to prevent
the serious abrasion of such opposing surfaces, and largely to reduce
the frictional resistance they oppose to relative motion by the use of
_lubricants_ (Lat. _lubricare_, _lubricus_, slippery). These substances
are caused to insinuate themselves between the surfaces, and have the
property of so separating them as to prevent serious abrasion. The solid
and semi-solid lubricants seem to act as rollers between the surfaces,
or form a film between them which itself suffers abrasion or friction.
The liquid lubricants, however, maintain themselves as liquid films
between the surfaces, upon which the bearing floats. The frictional
resistance is then wholly in the fluid. Even when lubricants are used
the friction, i.e. the resistance to motion offered by the opposing
surfaces, is considerable. In the article Friction will be found a
statement of how friction is measured and the manner in which it is
expressed. The coefficient of friction is obtained by dividing the force
required to cause the surfaces to slide over each other by the load
pressing them together. For clean unlubricated surfaces this coefficient
may be as great as 0.3, whilst for well-lubricated cylindrical bearings
it may be as small as 0.0006. Engineers have, therefore, paid particular
attention to the design of bearings with the object of reducing the
friction, and thus making use of as much as possible of the power
developed by prime movers. The importance of doing this will be seen
when it is remembered that the energy wasted is proportional to the
coefficient of friction, and that the durability of the parts depends
upon the extent to which they are separated by the lubricant and thus
prevented from injuring each other.

There is great diversity in the shapes of rubbing surfaces, the loads
they have to carry vary widely, and the speed of rubbing ranges from
less than one foot to thousands of feet per minute. There is also a
large number of substances which act as lubricants, some being liquids
and others soft solids. In many instruments or machines where the
surfaces in contact which have to slide upon each other are only lightly
pressed together, and are only occasionally given relative motion, the
lubricant is only needed to prevent abrasion. Microscopes and
mathematical instruments are of this kind. In such cases, the lubricant
which keeps the surfaces from abrading each other is a mere
contamination film, either derived from the air or put on when the
surfaces are finished. When such lubricating films are depended upon,
the friction surfaces should be as hard as possible and, if practicable,
of dissimilar metals. In the absence of a contamination film, most
metals, if rubbed when in contact, will immediately adhere to each
other. A large number of experiments have been made to ascertain the
coefficient of friction under these imperfect conditions of lubrication.
Within wide limits of load, the friction is proportional to the pressure
normal to the surfaces and is, therefore, approximately independent of
the area of the surfaces in contact. Although the static coefficient is
often less than the kinetic at very low speeds, within wide limits the
latter coefficient decreases with increasing speed. These laws apply to
all bearings the velocity of rubbing of which is very small, or which
are lubricated with solid or semi-solid materials.

When the speed of rubbing is considerable and the contamination film is
liable to be destroyed, resort is had to lubricants which possess the
power of keeping the surfaces apart, and thereby reducing the friction.
The constant application of such substances is necessary in the case of
such parts of machine tools as slide rests, the surfaces of which only
move relatively to each other at moderate speeds, but which have to
carry heavy loads. In all ordinary cases, the coefficient of friction of
flat surfaces, such as those of slide blocks or pivot bearings, is high,
owing to the fact that the lubricant is not easily forced between the
surfaces. In the case of cylindrical bearing surfaces, such as those of
journals and spindles, owing to the fact that the radius of the bearing
surface is greater than that of the journal or spindle, the lubricant,
if a liquid, is easily drawn in and entirely separates the surfaces (see
LUBRICATION). Fortunately, cylindrical bearings are by far the most
common and important form of bearing, and they can be so lubricated that
the friction coefficient is very low. The lubricant, owing to its
viscosity, is forced between the surfaces and keeps them entirely apart.
This property of viscosity is one of the most important possessed by
liquid lubricants. Some lubricants, such as the oils used for the light
spindles of textile machinery, are quite thin and limpid, whilst others,
suitable for steam engine cylinders and very heavy bearings, are, at
ordinary temperatures, as thick as treacle or honey. Generally speaking,
the greater the viscosity of the lubricant the greater the load the
bearing will carry, but with thick lubricants the frictional coefficient
is correspondingly high. True lubricants differ from ordinary liquids of
equal viscosity inasmuch as they possess the property of "oiliness."
This is a property which enables them to maintain an unbroken film
between surfaces when the loads are heavy. It is possessed most markedly
by vegetables and animal oils and fats, and less markedly by mineral
oils. In the case of mineral lubricating oils from the same source, the
lower the specific gravity the greater the oiliness of the liquid, as a
rule. Mixtures of mineral oil with animal or vegetable oil are largely
used, one class of oil supplying those qualities in which the other is
deficient. Thus the mineral oils, which are comparatively cheap and
possess the important property of not becoming oxidized into gummy or
sticky substances by the action of the air, which also are not liable to
cause spontaneous ignition of cotton waste, &c., and can be manufactured
of almost any desired viscosity, but which on the other hand are
somewhat deficient in the property of oiliness, are mixed with animal or
vegetable oils which possess the latter property in marked degree, but
are liable to gum and become acid and to cause spontaneous ignition,
besides being comparatively expensive and limited in quantity. Oils
which become acid attack the bearings chemically, and those which
oxidize may become so thick that they fail to run on to the bearings

The following table shows that the permissible load on bearings varies

            Description of Bearing.                   Load in lb.
                                                      per sq. in.

    Hard steel bearings on which the load is inter-
        mittent, such as the crank pins of shearing
        machines                                         3000
    Bronze crosshead neck journals                       1200
    Crank pins of large slow engines                   800-900
    Crank pins of marine engines                       400-500
    Main crank-shaft bearings, slow marine               600
    Main crank-shaft bearings, fast marine               400
    Railway coach journals                             300-400
    Fly-wheel shaft journals                           150-200
    Small engine crank pins                            150-200
    Small slide blocks, marine engines                   100
    Stationary engine slide block                       25-125
    Stationary engine slide block, usually              30-60
    Propeller thrust bearings                           50-70
    Shafts in cast iron steps, high speed                  15

  _Solid Lubricants._--Solid substances, such as graphite or plumbago,
  soapstone, &c., are used as lubricants when there is some objection to
  liquids or soft solids, but the surfaces between which they are placed
  should be of very hard materials. They are frequently mixed with oils
  or greases, the lubricating properties of which they improve.

  _Semi-solid Lubricants._--The contrast in lubricating properties
  between mineral and fatty oils exists also in the case of a pure
  mineral grease like vaseline and an animal fat such as tallow, the
  latter possessing in a far greater degree the property of greasiness.
  A large number of lubricating greases are made by incorporating or
  emulsifying animal and vegetable fats with soap and water; also by
  thickening mineral lubricating oils with soap. Large quantities of
  these greases are used with very good results for the lubrication of
  railway waggon axles, and some of them are excellent lubricants for
  the bearings of slow moving machinery. Care must be taken, however,
  that they do not contain excess of water and are not adulterated with
  such useless substances as china clay; also, that they melt as a
  whole, and that the oil does not run down and leave the soap. This is
  liable to occur with badly made greases, and hot bearings are the
  result. Except in special cases, greases should not be used for
  quick-running journals, shafts or spindles, on account of the high
  frictional resistance which they offer to motion. In the case of fats
  and greases whose melting points are not much above the temperature of
  surrounding objects it generally happens that the lubricating films
  are so warmed by friction that they actually melt and act as oils.
  These lubricants are generally forced into the bearings by a form of
  syringe fitted with a spring piston, or are squeezed between the faces
  by means of a screw-plug.

  _Liquid Lubricants._--Generally speaking, all bearings which it is
  necessary should run with as little friction as possible must be
  supplied with liquid lubricants. These may be of animal, vegetable or
  mineral origin. The mineral oils are mixtures of hydrocarbons of
  variable viscosity, flashing-point, density and oiliness. They are
  obtained by distillation from American, Russian and other petroleums.
  The fixed oils obtained from animal and vegetable substances are not
  volatile without decomposition, and are found ready made in the
  tissues of animals and plants. Animal oils are obtained from the
  adipose tissue by simple heat or by boiling with water. They are
  usually either colourless or yellow. The oils of plants occur usually
  in the seeds or fruit, and are obtained either by expression or by
  means of solvents such as ether or petroleum. They are of various
  shades of yellow and green, the green colour being due to the presence
  of chlorophyll. The fundamental difference between fixed oils and
  mineral oils exists in their behaviour towards oxygen. Mineral oils at
  ordinary temperatures are indifferent to oxygen, but all fixed oils
  combine with it and thicken or gum more or less, generating heat at
  the same time. Such oils are, therefore, dangerous if dropped upon
  silk, cotton or woollen waste or other combustible fibrous materials,
  which are thus rendered liable to spontaneous ignition.

  Liquid lubricants are used for all high speed bearings. In some cases
  the rubbing surfaces work in a bath of the lubricant, which can then
  reach all the rubbing parts with certainty. Small engines for motor
  cars or road waggons are often lubricated in this way. In the case of
  individual bearings, such as those of railway vehicles, a pad of
  cotton, worsted and horse hair is kept saturated with the lubricant
  and pressed against the under side of the journal. The journal is thus
  kept constantly wetted with oil, and the film is forced beneath the
  brass as the axle rotates. In many cases, oil-ways and grooves are cut
  in the bearings, and the lubricant is allowed to run by gravity into
  them and thus finds its way between the opposing surfaces. To secure a
  steady feed various contrivances are adopted, the most common being a
  wick of cotton or worsted used as a siphon. In cases where it is
  important that little if any wear should take place, the lubricant is
  forced by means of a pump between the friction surfaces and a constant
  film of oil is thereby maintained between them.

  For the spindles of small machines such as clocks, watches and other
  delicate mechanisms, which are only lubricated at long intervals and
  are often exposed to extremes of temperature, the lubricant must be a
  fluid oil as free as possible from tendency to gum or thicken by
  oxidation or to corrode metal, and must often have a low
  freezing-point. It must also possess a maximum of "oiliness." The
  lubricants mostly used for such purposes are obtained from porpoise or
  dolphin jaw oils, bean oil, hazel nut oil, neatsfoot oil, sperm oil or
  olive oil. These oils are exposed for some time to temperatures as low
  as the mechanism is required to work at, and the portion which remains
  fluid is separated and used. Free acid should be entirely eliminated
  by chemical refining. A little good mineral oil may with advantage be
  mixed with the fatty oil.

  For all ordinary machinery, ranging from the light ring spindles of
  textile mills to the heavy shafts of large engines, mineral oils are
  almost universally employed, either alone or mixed with fatty oils,
  the general rule being to use pure mineral oils for bath, forced or
  circulating pump lubrication, and mixed oils for drop, siphon and
  other less perfect methods of lubrication. Pure mineral oils of
  relatively low viscosity are used for high speeds and low pressures,
  mixed oils of greater viscosity for low speeds and high pressures. In
  selecting oils for low speeds and great pressures, viscosity must be
  the first consideration, and next to that "oiliness." If an oil of
  sufficiently high viscosity be used, a mineral oil may give a result
  as good or better than a pure fixed oil; a mixed oil may give a better
  result than either. If a mineral oil of sufficient viscosity be not
  available, then a fixed oil or fat may be expected to give the best

  In special cases, such as in the lubrication of textile machines,
  where the oil is liable to be splashed upon the fabric, the primary
  consideration is to use an oil which can be washed out without leaving
  a stain. Pure fixed oils, or mixtures composed largely of fixed oils,
  are used for such purposes.

  In other special cases, such as marine engines working in hot places,
  mixtures are used of mineral oil with rape or other vegetable oil
  artificially thickened by blowing air through the heated oil, and
  known as "blown" oil or "soluble castor oil."

  In the lubrication of the cylinders and valves of steam, gas and oil
  engines, the lubricant must possess as much viscosity as possible at
  the working temperature, must not evaporate appreciably and must not
  decompose and liberate fatty acids which would corrode the metal and
  choke the steam passages with metallic soaps; for gas and oil engines
  the lubricant must be as free as possible from tendency to decompose
  and deposit carbon when heated. For this reason steam cylinders and
  valves should be lubricated with pure mineral oils of the highest
  viscosity, mixed with no more fixed oil than is necessary to ensure
  efficient lubrication. Gas and oil engines also should be lubricated
  with pure mineral oils wherever possible.

  For further information on the theory and practice of lubrication and
  on the testing of lubricants, see _Friction and Lost Work in Machinery
  and Mill Work_, by R. H. Thurston (1903); and _Lubrication and
  Lubricants_, by L. Archbutt and R. M. Deeley (1906).     (R. M. D.)

LUBRICATION. Our knowledge of the action of oils and other viscous
fluids in diminishing friction and wear between solid surfaces from
being purely empirical has become a connected theory, based on the known
properties of matter, subjected to the definition of mathematical
analysis and verified by experiment. The theory was published in 1886
(_Phil. Trans._, 1886, 177, pp. 157-234); but it is the purpose of this
article not so much to explain its application, as to give a brief
account of the introduction of the misconceptions that so long
prevailed, and of the manner in which their removal led to its general

Friction, or resistance to tangential shifting of matter over matter,
whatever the mode and arrangement, differs greatly according to the
materials, but, like all material resistance, is essentially limited.
The range of the limits in available materials has a primary place in
determining mechanical possibilities, and from the earliest times they
have demanded the closest attention on the part of all who have to do
with structures or with machines, the former being concerned to find
those materials and their arrangements which possess the highest limits,
and the latter the materials in which the limits are least. Long before
the reformation of science in the 15th and 16th centuries both these
limits had formed the subject of such empirical research as disclosed
numerous definite although disconnected circumstances under which they
could be secured; and these, however far from the highest and lowest,
satisfied the exigencies of practical mechanics at the time, thus
initiating the method of extending knowledge which was to be
subsequently recognized as the only basis of physical philosophy. In
this purely empirical research the conclusion arrived at represented the
results for the actual circumstance from which they were drawn, and thus
afforded no place for theoretical discrepancies. However, in the
attempts at generalization which followed the reformation of science,
opportunity was afforded for such discrepancies in the mere enunciation
of the circumstances in which the so-called laws of friction of motion
are supposed to apply. The circumstances in which the great amount of
empirical research was conducted as to the resistance between the clean,
plane, smooth surfaces of rigid bodies moving over each other under
pressure, invariably include the presence of air at atmospheric pressure
around, and to some extent between, the surfaces; but this fact had
received no notice in the enunciation of these laws, and this
constitutes a theoretical departure from the conditions under which the
experience had been obtained. Also, the theoretical division of the law
of frictional resistance into two laws--one dealing with the limit of
rest, and the other asserting that the friction of motion, which is
invariably less in similar circumstances than that of rest, is
independent of the velocity of sliding--involves the theoretical
assumption that there is no asymptotic law of diminution of the
resistance, since, starting from rest, the rate of sliding increases.
The theoretical substitution of ideal rigid bodies with geometrically
regular surfaces, sliding in contact under pressure at the common
regular surface, for the aërated surfaces in the actual circumstances,
and the theoretical substitution of the absolute independence of the
resistance of the rate of sliding for the limited independence in the
actual circumstances, prove the general acceptance of the
conceptions--(1) that matter can slide over matter under pressure at a
geometrically regular surface; (2) that, however much the resistance to
sliding under any particular pressure (the coefficient of friction) may
depend on the physical properties of the materials, the sliding under
pressure takes place at the geometrically regular surface of contact of
the rigid bodies; and (3) as the consequence of (1) and (2), that
whatever the effect of a lubricant, such as oil, might have, it could be
a physical surface effect. Thus not only did these general theoretical
conceptions, resulting from the theoretical laws of friction, fail to
indicate that the lubricant may diminish the resistance by the mere
mechanical separation of the surfaces, but they precluded the idea that
such might be the case. The result was that all subsequent attempts to
reduce the empirical facts, where a lubricant was used, to such general
laws as might reveal the separate functions of the complex circumstances
on which lubrication depends, completely failed. Thus until 1883 the
science of lubrication had not advanced beyond the empirical stage.

This period of stagnation was terminated by an accidental phenomenon
observed by Beauchamp Tower, while engaged on his research on the
friction of the journals of railway carriages. His observation led him
to a line of experiments which proved that in these experiments the
general function of the lubricant was the mechanical separation of the
metal surfaces by a layer of fluid of finite thickness, thus upsetting
the preconceived ideas as expressed in the laws of the friction of
motion. On the publication of Tower's reports (_Proc. Inst. M.E._,
November 1883), it was recognized by several physicists (_B.A. Report_,
1884, pp. 14, 625) that the evidence they contained afforded a basis for
further study of the actions involved, indicating as it did the
circumstances--namely, the properties of viscosity and cohesion
possessed by fluids--account of which had not been taken in previous
conclusions. It also became apparent that continuous or steady
lubrication, such as that of Tower's experiments, is only secured when
the solid surfaces separated by the lubricant are so shaped that the
thickness at the ingoing side is greater than that at the outgoing side.

When the general equations of viscous fluids had been shown as the
result of the labours of C. L. M. H. Navier,[1] A. L. Cauchy,[2] S. D.
Poisson,[3] A. J. C. Barré de St Venant,[4] and in 1845 of Sir G.
Gabriel Stokes,[5] to involve no other assumption than that the
stresses, other than the pressure equal in all directions, are linear
functions of the distortional rates of strain multiplied by a constant
coefficient, it was found that the only solutions of which the equations
admitted, when applied to fluids flowing between fixed boundaries, as
water in a pipe, were singular solutions for steady or steady periodic
motion, and that the conclusions they entailed, that the resistance
would be proportional to the velocity, were for the most part directly
at variance with the common experience that the resistances varied with
the square of the velocity. This discrepancy was sometimes supposed to
be the result of eddies in the fluid, but it was not till 1883 that it
was discovered by experiments with colour bands that, in the case of
geometrically similar boundaries, the existence or non-existence of such
eddies depended upon a definite relation between the mean velocity (U)
of the fluid, the distance between the boundaries, and the ratio of the
coefficient of viscosity to the density ([mu]/[rho]), expressed by
UD[rho]/[mu] = K, where K is a physical constant independent of units,
which has a value between 1900 and 2000, and for parallel boundaries D
is four times the area of the channel divided by the perimeter of the
section (_Phil. Trans._, 1883, part iii. 935-982). K is thus a criterion
at which the law of resistance to the mean flow changes suddenly (as U
increases), from being proportional to the flow, to a law involving
higher powers of the velocity at first, but as the rates increase
approaching an asymptote in which the power is a little less that the

This sudden change in the law of resistance to the flow of fluid between
solid boundaries, depending as it does on a complete change in the
manner of the flow--from direct parallel flow to sinuous eddying
motion--serves to determine analytically the circumstances as to the
velocity and the thickness of the film under which any fluid having a
particular coefficient of viscosity can act the part of a lubricant. For
as long as the circumstances are such that UD[rho]/[mu] is less than K,
the parallel flow is held stable by the viscosity, so that only one
solution is possible--that in which the resistance is the product of
[mu] multiplied by the rate of distortion, as [mu](du/dy); in this case
the fluid has lubricating properties. But when the circumstances are
such that UD[rho]/[mu] is greater than K, other solutions become
possible, and the parallel flow becomes unstable, breaks down into
eddying motion, and the resistance varies as [rho]u^n, which
approximates to [rho]u^(1.78) as the velocity increases; in this state
the fluid has no lubricating properties. Thus, within the limits of the
criterion, the rate of displacement of the momentum of the fluid is
insignificant as compared with the viscous resistance, and may be
neglected; while outside this limit the direct effects of the eddying
motion completely dominate the viscous resistance, which in its turn may
be neglected. Thus K is a criterion which separates the flow of fluid
between solid surfaces as definitely as the flow of fluid is separated
from the relative motions in elastic solids, and it is by the knowledge
of the limit on which this distinction depends that the theory of
viscous flow can with assurance be applied to the circumstance of

Until the existence of this physical constant was discovered, any
theoretical conclusions as to whether in any particular circumstances
the resistance of the lubricant would follow the law of viscous flow or
that of eddying motion was impossible. Thus Tower, being unaware of the
discovery of the criterion, which was published in the same year as his
reports, was thrown off the scent in his endeavour to verify the
evidence he had obtained as to the finite thickness of the film by
varying the velocity. He remarks in his first report that, "according to
the theory of fluid motion, the resistance would be as the square of the
velocity, whereas in his results it did not increase according to this
law." The rational theory of lubrication does not, however, depend
solely on the viscosity within the interior of fluids, but also depends
on the surface action between the fluid and the solid. In many respects
the surface actions, as indicated by surface tension, are still obscure,
and there has been a general tendency to assume that there may be
discontinuity in the velocity at the common surface. But whatever these
actions may be in other respects, there is abundant evidence that there
is no appreciable discontinuity in the velocity at the surfaces as long
as the fluid has finite thickness. Hence in the case of lubrication the
velocities of the fluid at the surfaces of the solids are those of the
solid. In as far as the presence of the lubricant is necessary, such
properties as cause oil in spite of its surface tension to spread even
against gravity over a bright metal surface, while mercury will
concentrate into globules on the bright surface of iron, have an
important place in securing lubrication where the action is
intermittent, as in the escapement of a clock. If there is oil on the
pallet, although the pressure of the tooth causes this to flow out
laterally from between the surfaces, it goes back again by surface
tension during the intervals; hence the importance of using fluids with
low surface tension like oil, or special oils, when there is no other
means of securing the presence of the lubricant.

  The differential equations for the equilibrium of the lubricant are
  what the differential equations of viscous fluid in steady motion
  become when subject to the conditions necessary for lubrication as
  already defined--(1) the velocity is below the critical value; (2) at
  the surfaces the velocity of the fluid is that of the solid; (3) the
  thickness of the film is small compared with the lateral dimensions of
  the surfaces and the radii of curvature of the surfaces. By the first
  of these conditions all the terms having [rho] as a factor may be
  neglected, and the equations thus become the equations of equilibrium
  of the fluid; as such, they are applicable to fluid whether
  incompressible or elastic, and however the pressure may affect the
  viscosity. But the analysis is greatly simplified by omitting all
  terms depending on compressibility and by taking [mu] constant; this
  may be done without loss of generality in a qualitative sense. With
  these limitations we have for the differential equation of the
  equilibrium of the lubricant:--

        dp                         du   dv   dw  \
    0 = -- - [mu]²u, &c., &c., 0 = -- + -- + --  |
        dx                         dx   dy   dz  |
                                                  >  (1)
                     / du   dv \                 |
    0 = p_yx - [mu] (  -- + --  ), &c., &c.      |
                     \ dy   dx /                 /

  These are subject to the boundary conditions (2) and (3). Taking x as
  measured parallel to one of the surfaces in the direction of relative
  motion, y normal to the surface and z normal to the plane of xy by
  condition (3), we may without error disregard the effect of any
  curvature in the surfaces. Also v is small compared with u and w, and
  the variations of u and w in the directions x and z are small compared
  with their variation in the direction y. The equations (1) reduce to

        dp       d²u      dp      dp       d²w      du   dv   dw  \
    0 = -- - [mu]---, 0 = --, 0 = -- - [mu]---, 0 = -- + -- + --  |
        dx       dy²      dy      dz       dy²      dx   dy   dz  |
                                                                   >  (2)
                   du                 dw                          |
    0 = p_yx - [mu]--, 0 = p_yz - [mu]--, p_xz = 0.               |
                   dy                 dy                          /

  For the boundary conditions, putting f(x, z) as limiting the lateral
  area of the lubricant, the conditions at the surfaces may be expressed

    when y = 0,  u = U0,  w = 0,  v = 0            \
                                          dh       |
    when y = h,  u = U1,  w = 0, v1, = U1 -- + V1   >  (3)
                                          dx       |
    when f(x, z) = 0,  p = p0                      /

  Then, integrating the equations (2) over y, and determining the
  constants by equations (3), we have, since by the second of equations
  (2) p is independent of y,

          1   dp               h - y       y   \
    u = ----- -- (y - h)y + U0 ----- + U1 ---  |
        2[mu] dx                 h         h   |
                                                >  (4)
          1   dp                               |
    w = ----- -- (y - h)y                      |
        2[mu] dz                               /

  Then, differentiating equations (4) with respect to x and z
  respectively, and substituting in the 4th of equations (2), and
  integrating from y = 0 to y = h, so that only the values of v at the
  surfaces may be required, we have for the differential equation of
  normal pressure at any point x, z, between the boundaries:--
                                          _                  _
     d   /   dp\     d   /  dp\          |           dh       |
    --- ( h³ -- ) + --- ( h³-- ) = 6[mu] | (U0 + U1) -- + 2V1 |  (5)
    dx   \   dz/    dz   \  dz/          |_          dx      _|

  Again differentiating equations (4), with respect to x and z
  respectively, and substituting in the 5th and 6th of equations (2),
  and putting f_x and f_z for the intensities of the tangential stresses
  at the lower and upper surfaces:--

                         1     h  dp  \
    f_x = [mu](U1 + U0) --- ± --- --  |
                         h     2  dx  |
                                       >  (6)
             h  dp                    |
    f_z = ± --- --                    |
             2  dx                    /

  Equations (5) and (6) are the general equations for the stresses at
  the boundaries at x, z, when h is a continuous function of x and z,
  [mu] and [rho] being constant.

  For the integration of equations (6) to get the resultant stresses and
  moments on the solid boundaries, so as to obtain the conditions of
  their equilibrium, it is necessary to know how x and z at any point on
  the boundary enter into h, as well as the equation f(x, z) = 0, which
  determines the limits of the lubricating film. If y, the normal to one
  of the surfaces, has not the same direction for all points of this
  surface, in other words, if the surface is not plane, x and z become
  curvilinear co-ordinates, at all points perpendicular to y. Since, for
  lubrication, one of the surfaces must be plane, cylindrical, or a
  surface of revolution, we may put x = R[theta], y = r - R, and z
  perpendicular to the plane of motion. Then, if the data are
  sufficient, the resultant stresses and moments between the surfaces
  are obtained by integrating the intensity of the stress and moments of
  intensity of stress over the surface.

  This, however, is not the usual problem that arises. What is generally
  wanted is to find the thickness of the film where least (h0) and its
  angular position with respect to direction of load, to resist a
  definite load with a particular surface velocity. If the surfaces are
  plane, the general solution involves only one arbitrary constant, the
  least thickness (h0); since in any particular case the variation of h
  with x is necessarily fixed, as in this case lubrication affords no
  automatic adjustment of this slope. When both surfaces are curved in
  the plane of motion there are at least two arbitrary constants, h0,
  and [phi] the angular position of h0 with respect to direction of
  load; while if the surfaces are both curved in a plane perpendicular
  to the direction of motion as well as in the plane of motion, there
  are three arbitrary constants, h0, [phi]0, z0. The only constraint
  necessary is to prevent rotation in the plane of motion of one of the
  surfaces, leaving this surface free to move in any direction and to
  adjust its position so as to be in equilibrium under the load.

The integrations necessary for the solutions of these problems are
practicable--complete or approximate--and have been effected for
circumstances which include the chief cases of practical lubrication,
the results having been verified by reference to Tower's experiments. In
this way the verified theory is available for guidance outside the
limits of experience as well as for determining the limiting conditions.
But it is necessary to take into account certain subsidiary theories.
These limits depend on the coefficient of viscosity, which diminishes as
the temperature increases. The total work in overcoming the resistance
is spent in generating heat in the lubricant, the volume of which is
very small. Were it not for the escape of heat by conduction through the
lubricant and the metal, lubrication would be impossible. Hence a
knowledge of the empirical law of the variation of the viscosity of the
lubricant with temperature, the coefficients of conduction of heat in
the lubricant and in the metal, and the application of the theory of the
flow of heat in the particular circumstances, are necessary adjuncts to
the theory of lubrication for determining the limits of lubrication. Nor
is this all, for the shapes of the solid surfaces vary with the
pressure, and more particularly with the temperature.

  The theory of lubrication has been applied to the explanation of the
  slipperiness of ice (_Mem. Manchester Lit. and Phil. Soc._, 1899).
       (O. R.)


  [1] _Mém. de l'Acad._ (1826), 6, p. 389.

  [2] _Mém. des sav. étrang._ l. 40.

  [3] _Mém. de l'Acad._ (1831), 10, p. 345.

  [4] _B.A. Report_ (1846).

  [5] _Cambridge Phil. Trans._ (1845 and 1857).

LUCAN [MARCUS ANNAEUS LUCANUS], (A.D. 39-65), Roman poet of the Silver
Age, grandson of the rhetorician Seneca and nephew of the philosopher,
was born at Corduba. His mother was Acilia; his father, Marcus Annaeus
Mela, had amassed great wealth as imperial procurator for the provinces.
From a memoir which is generally attributed to Suetonius we learn that
Lucan was taken to Rome at the age of eight months and displayed
remarkable precocity. One of his instructors was the Stoic philosopher,
Cornutus, the friend and teacher of Persius. He was studying at Athens
when Nero recalled him to Rome and made him quaestor. These friendly
relations did not last long. Lucan is said to have defeated Nero in a
public poetical contest; Nero forbade him to recite in public, and the
poet's indignation made him an accomplice in the conspiracy of Piso.
Upon the discovery of the plot he is said to have been tempted by the
hope of pardon to denounce his own mother. Failing to obtain a reprieve,
he caused his veins to be opened, and expired repeating a passage from
one of his poems descriptive of the death of a wounded soldier. His
father was involved in the proscription, his mother escaped, and his
widow Polla Argentaria survived to receive the homage of Statius under
Domitian. The birthday of Lucan was kept as a festival after his death,
and a poem addressed to his widow upon one of these occasions and
containing information on the poet's work and career is still extant
(Statius's _Silvae_, ii. 7, entitled _Genethliacon Lucani_).

Besides his principal performance, Lucan's works included poems on the
ransom of Hector, the nether world, the fate of Orpheus, a eulogy of
Nero, the burning of Rome, and one in honour of his wife (all mentioned
by Statius), letters, epigrams, an unfinished tragedy on the subject of
Medea and numerous miscellaneous pieces. His minor works have perished
except for a few fragments, but all that the author wrote of the
_Pharsalia_ has come down to us. It would probably have concluded with
the battle of Philippi, but breaks off abruptly as Caesar is about to
plunge into the harbour of Alexandria. The _Pharsalia_ opens with a
panegyric of Nero, sketches the causes of the war and the characters of
Caesar and Pompey, the crossing of the Rubicon by Caesar, the flight of
the tribunes to his camp, and the panic and confusion in Rome, which
Pompey has abandoned. The second book describes the visit of Brutus to
Cato, who is persuaded to join the side of the senate, and his marriage
a second time to his former wife Marcia, Ahenobarbus's capitulation at
Corfinium and the retirement of Pompey to Greece. In the third book
Caesar, after settling affairs in Rome, crosses the Alps for Spain.
Massilia is besieged and falls. The fourth book describes the victories
of Caesar in Spain over Afranius and Petreius, and the defeat of Curio
by Juba in Africa. In the fifth Caesar and Antony land in Greece, and
Pompey's wife Cornelia is placed in security at Lesbos. The sixth book
describes the repulses of Caesar round Dyrrhachium, the seventh the
defeat of Pompey at Pharsalia, the eighth his flight and assassination
in Egypt, the ninth the operations of Cato in Africa and his march
through the desert, and the landing of Caesar in Egypt, the tenth the
opening incidents of the Alexandrian war. The incompleteness of the work
should not be left out of account in the estimate of its merits, for,
with two capital exceptions, the faults of the _Pharsalia_ are such as
revision might have mitigated or rendered. No such pains, certainly,
could have amended the deficiency of unity of action, or supplied the
want of a legitimate protagonist. The _Pharsalia_ is not true to
history, but it cannot shake off its shackles, and is rather a metrical
chronicle than a true epic. If it had been completed according to the
author's design, Pompey, Cato and Brutus must have successively enacted
the part of nominal hero, while the real hero is the arch-enemy of
liberty and Lucan, Caesar. Yet these defects, though glaring, are not
fatal or peculiar to Lucan. The false taste, the strained rhetoric, the
ostentatious erudition, the tedious harangues and far-fetched or
commonplace reflections so frequent in this singularly unequal poem, are
faults much more irritating, but they are also faults capable of
amendment, which the writer might not improbably have removed. Great
allowance should also be made in the case of one who is emulating
predecessors who have already carried art to its last perfection.
Lucan's temper could never have brooked mere imitation; his
versification, no less than his subject, is entirely his own; he avoids
the appearance of outward resemblance to his great predecessor with a
persistency which can only have resulted from deliberate purpose, but he
is largely influenced by the declamatory school of his grandfather and
uncle. Hence his partiality for finished antithesis, contrasting
strongly with his generally breathless style and turbid diction.
Quintilian sums up both aspects of his genius with pregnant brevity,
"Ardens et concitatus et sententiis clarissimus," adding with equal
justice, "Magis oratoribus quam poetis annumerandus." Lucan's oratory,
however, frequently approaches the regions of poetry, e.g. the
apotheosis of Pompey at the beginning of the ninth book, and the passage
in the same book where Cato, in the truest spirit of the Stoic
philosophy, refuses to consult the oracle of Jupiter Ammon. Though in
many cases Lucan's rhetoric is frigid, hyperbolical, and out of keeping
with the character of the speaker, yet his theme has a genuine hold upon
him; in the age of Nero he celebrates the republic as a poet with the
same energy with which in the age of Cicero he might have defended it as
an orator. But for him it might almost have been said that the Roman
republic never inspired the Roman muse.

Lucan never speaks of himself, but his epic speaks for him. He must have
been endowed with no common ambition, industry and self-reliance, an
enthusiastic though narrow and aristocratic patriotism, and a faculty
for appreciating magnanimity in others. But the only personal trait
positively known to us is his conjugal affection, a characteristic of
Seneca also.

Lucan, together with Statius, was preferred even to Virgil in the middle
ages. So late as 1493 his commentator Sulpitius writes: "Magnus profecto
est Maro, magnus Lucanus; adeoque prope par, ut quis sit major possis
ambigere." Shelley and Southey, in the first transport of admiration,
thought Lucan superior to Virgil; Pope, with more judgment, says that
the fire which burns in Virgil with an equable glow breaks forth in
Lucan with sudden, brief and interrupted flashes. Of late,
notwithstanding the enthusiasm of isolated admirers, Lucan has been
unduly neglected, but he has exercised an important influence upon one
great department of modern literature by his effect upon Corneille, and
through him upon the classical French drama.

  AUTHORITIES.--The _Pharsalia_ was much read in the middle ages, and
  consequently it is preserved in a large number of manuscripts, the
  relations of which have not yet been thoroughly made out. The most
  recent critical text is that of C. Hosius (2nd ed. 1906), and the
  latest complete commentaries are those of C. E. Haskins (1887, with a
  valuable introduction by W. E. Heitland) and C. M. Francken (1896).
  There are separate editions of book i. by P. Lejay (1894) and book
  vii. by J. P. Postgate (1896). Of earlier editions those of Oudendorp
  (which contains the continuation of the _Pharsalia_ to the death of
  Caesar by Thomas May, 1728), Burmann (1740), Bentley (1816,
  posthumous) and Weber (1829) may be mentioned. There are English
  translations by C. Marlowe (book i. only, 1600), Sir F. Gorges (1614),
  Thomas May (1626), N. Rowe (1718) and Sir E. Ridley (2nd ed. 1905),
  the two last being the best.     (R. G.; J. P. P.)

LUCANIA, in ancient geography, a district of southern Italy, extending
from the Tyrrhenian Sea to the Gulf of Tarentum. To the north it
adjoined Campania, Samnium and Apulia, and to the south it was separated
by a narrow isthmus from the district of Bruttii. It thus comprised
almost all the modern province of the Basilicata, with the greater part
of the province of Salerno and a portion of that of Cosenza. The precise
limits were the river Silarus on the north-west, which separated it from
Campania, and the Bradanus, which flows into the Gulf of Tarentum, on
the north-east; while the two little rivers Laus and Crathis, flowing
from the ridge of the Apennines to the sea on the west and east, marked
the limits of the district on the side of the Bruttii.

Almost the whole is occupied by the Apennines, here an irregular group
of lofty masses. The main ridge approaches the western sea, and is
continued from the lofty knot of mountains on the frontiers of Samnium,
nearly due south to within a few miles of the Gulf of Policastro, and
thenceforward is separated from the sea by only a narrow interval till
it enters the district of the Bruttii. Just within the frontier of
Lucania rises Monte Pollino, 7325 ft., the highest peak in the southern
Apennines. The mountains descend by a much more gradual slope to the
coastal plain of the Gulf of Tarentum. Thus the rivers which flow to the
Tyrrhenian Sea are of little importance compared with those that descend
towards the Gulf of Tarentum. Of these the most important are--the
Bradanus (Bradano), the Casuentus (Basiento), the Aciris (Agri), and the
Siris (Sinno). The Crathis, which forms at its mouth the southern limit
of the province, belongs almost wholly to the territory of the Bruttii,
but it receives a tributary, the Sybaris (Coscile), from the mountains
of Lucania. The only considerable stream on the western side is the
Silarus (Sele), which constitutes the northern boundary, and has two
important tributaries in the Calor (Calore) and the Tanager (Negro)
which joins it from the south.

The district of Lucania was so called from the people bearing the name
Lucani (Lucanians) by whom it was conquered about the middle of the 5th
century B.C. Before that period it was included under the general name
of Oenotria, which was applied by the Greeks to the southernmost
portion of Italy. The mountainous interior was occupied by the tribes
known as Oenotrians and Chones, while the coasts on both sides were
occupied by powerful Greek colonies which doubtless exercised a
protectorate over the interior (see MAGNA GRAECIA). The Lucanians were a
southern branch of the Samnite or Sabelline race, who spoke the Osca
Lingua (q.v.). We know from Strabo that they had a democratic
constitution save in time of war, when a dictator was chosen from among
the regular magistrates. A few Oscan inscriptions survive, mostly in
Greek characters, from the 4th or 3rd century B.C., and some coins with
Oscan legends of the 3rd century (see Conway, Italic Dialects, p. 11
sqq.; Mommsen, _C.I.L._ x. p. 21; Roehl, _Inscriptiones Graecae
Antiquissimae_, 547). The Lucanians gradually conquered the whole
country (with the exception of the Greek towns on the coast) from the
borders of Samnium and Campania to the southern extremity of Italy.
Subsequently the inhabitants of the peninsula, now known as Calabria,
broke into insurrection, and under the name of Bruttians established
their independence, after which the Lucanians became confined within the
limits already described. After this we find them engaged in hostilities
with the Tarentines, and with Alexander, king of Epirus, who was called
in by that people to their assistance, 326 B.C. In 298 B.C. (Livy x. 11
seq.) they made alliance with Rome, and Roman influence was extended by
the colonies of Venusia (291 B.C.), Paestum (273), and above all
Tarentum (272). Subsequently they were sometimes in alliance, but more
frequently engaged in hostilities, during the Samnite wars. On the
landing of Pyrrhus in Italy (281 B.C.) they were among the first to
declare in his favour, and found themselves exposed to the resentment of
Rome when the departure of Pyrrhus left his allies at the mercy of the
Romans. After several campaigns they were reduced to subjection (272
B.C.). Notwithstanding this they espoused the cause of Hannibal during
the Second Punic War (216 B.C.), and their territory during several
campaigns was ravaged by both armies. The country never recovered from
these disasters, and under the Roman government fell into decay, to
which the Social War, in which the Lucanians took part with the Samnites
against Rome (90-88 B.C.) gave the finishing stroke. In the time of
Strabo the Greek cities on the coast had fallen into insignificance, and
owing to the decrease of population and cultivation the malaria began to
obtain the upper hand. The few towns of the interior were of no
importance. A large part of the province was given up to pasture, and
the mountains were covered with forests, which abounded in wild boars,
bears and wolves. There were some fifteen independent communities, but
none of great importance.

For administrative purposes under the Roman empire, Lucania was always
united with the district of the Bruttii. The two together constituted
the third region of Augustus.

  The towns on the east coast were--Metapontum, a few miles south of the
  Bradanus; Heraclea, at the mouth of the Aciris; and Siris, on the
  river of the same name. Close to its southern frontier stood Sybaris,
  which was destroyed in 510 B.C., but subsequently replaced by Thurii.
  On the west coast stood Posidonia, known under the Roman government as
  Paestum; below that came Elea or Velia, Pyxus, called by the Romans
  Buxentum, and Laus, near the frontier of the province towards
  Bruttium. Of the towns of the interior the most considerable was
  Potentia, still called Potenza. To the north, near the frontier of
  Apulia, was Bantia (Aceruntia belonged more properly to Apulia); while
  due south from Potentia was Grumentum, and still farther in that
  direction were Nerulum and Muranum. In the upland valley of the
  Tanagrus were Atina, Forum Popilii and Consilinum; Eburi (Eboli) and
  Volceii (Buccino), though to the north of the Silarus, were also
  included in Lucania. The Via Popillia traversed the district from N.
  to S., entering it at the N.W. extremity; the Via Herculia, coming
  southwards from the Via Appia and passing through Potentia and
  Grumentum, joined the Via Popillia near the S.W. edge of the district:
  while another nameless road followed the east coast and other roads of
  less importance ran W. from Potentia to the Via Popillia, N.E. to the
  Via Appia and E. from Grumentum to the coast at Heraclea.     (T. As.)

LUCARIS, CYRILLUS (1572-1637), Greek prelate and theologian, was a
native of Crete. In youth he travelled, studying at Venice and Padua,
and at Geneva coming under the influence of the reformed faith as
represented by Calvin. In 1602 he was elected patriarch of Alexandria,
and in 1621 patriarch of Constantinople. He was the first great name in
the Orthodox Eastern Church since 1453, and dominates its history in the
17th century. The great aim of his life was to reform the church on
Calvinistic lines, and to this end he sent many young Greek theologians
to the universities of Switzerland, Holland and England. In 1629 he
published his famous _Confessio_, Calvinistic in doctrine, but as far as
possible accommodated to the language and creeds of the Orthodox Church.
It appeared the same year in two Latin editions, four French, one German
and one English, and in the Eastern Church started a controversy which
culminated in 1691 in the convocation by Dositheos, patriarch of
Jerusalem, of a synod by which the Calvinistic doctrines were condemned.
Lucaris was several times temporarily deposed and banished at the
instigation of his orthodox opponents and of the Jesuits, who were his
bitterest enemies. Finally, when Sultan Murad was about to set out for
the Persian War, the patriarch was accused of a design to stir up the
Cossacks, and to avoid trouble during his absence the sultan had him
killed by the Janissaries (June 1637). His body was thrown into the sea,
recovered and buried at a distance from the capital by his friends, and
only brought back to Constantinople after many years.

The orthodoxy of Lucaris himself continued to be a matter of debate in
the Eastern Church, even Dositheos, in view of the reputation of the
great patriarch, thinking it expedient to gloss over his heterodoxy in
the interests of the Church.

  See the article "Lukaris" by Ph. Meyer in Herzog-Hauck,
  _Realencyklop._ (3rd ed., Leipzig, 1902), which gives further

LUCARNE, a French architectural term for a garret window, also for the
lights or small windows in spires.

LUCAS, SIR CHARLES (d. 1648), English soldier, was the son of Sir Thomas
Lucas of Colchester, Essex. As a young man he saw service in the
Netherlands under the command of his brother, and in the "Bishops' War"
he commanded a troop of horse in King Charles I.'s army. In 1639 he was
made a knight. At the outbreak of the Civil War Lucas naturally took the
king's side, and at the first cavalry fight, Powick Bridge, he was
wounded. Early in 1643 he raised a regiment of horse, with which he
defeated Middleton at Padbury on July 1st. In January 1644 he commanded
the forces attacking Nottingham, and soon afterwards, on Prince Rupert's
recommendation, he was made lieutenant-general of Newcastle's Northern
army. When Newcastle was shut up in York, Lucas and the cavalry remained
in the open country, and when Rupert's relieving army crossed the
mountains into Yorkshire he was quickly joined by Newcastle's squadrons.
At Marston Moor Lucas swept Fairfax's Yorkshire horse before him, but
later in the day he was taken prisoner. Exchanged during the winter, he
defended Berkeley Castle for a short time against Rainsborough, but was
soon in the field again. As lieutenant-general of all the horse he
accompanied Lord Astley in the last campaign of the first war, and,
taken prisoner at Stow-on-the-Wold, he engaged not to bear arms against
parliament in the future. This parole he must be held to have broken
when he took a prominent part in the seizure of Colchester in 1648. That
place was soon invested, and finally fell, after a desperate resistance,
to Fairfax's army. The superior officers had to surrender "at mercy,"
and Lucas and Sir George Lisle were immediately tried by court martial
and sentenced to death. The two Royalists were shot the same evening in
the Castle of Colchester.

  See Lloyd, _Memoirs of Excellent Personages_ (1669); and Earl de Grey,
  _A Memoir of the Life of Sir Charles Lucas_ (1845).

LUCAS, CHARLES (1713-1771), Irish physician and politician, was the son
of a country gentleman of small means in Co. Clare. Charles opened a
small business as an apothecary in Dublin, and between 1735 and 1741 he
began his career as a pamphleteer by publishing papers on professional
matters which led to legislation requiring inspection of drugs. Having
been elected a member of the common council of Dublin in 1741 he
detected and exposed encroachments by the aldermen on the electoral
rights of the citizens, and entered upon a controversy on the subject,
but failed in legal proceedings against the aldermen in 1744. With a
view to becoming a parliamentary candidate for the city of Dublin he
issued in 1748-1749 a series of political addresses in which he
advocated the principles of Molyneux and Swift; and he made himself so
obnoxious to the government that the House of Commons voted him an enemy
to the country, and issued a proclamation for his arrest, thus
compelling him to retire for some years to the continent. Having studied
medicine at Paris, Lucas took the degree of M.D. at Leiden in 1752. In
the following year he started practice as a physician in London, and in
1756 he published a work on medicinal waters, the properties of which he
had studied on the continent and at Bath. The essay was reviewed by Dr
Johnson, and although it was resented by the medical profession it
gained a reputation and a considerable practice for its author. In 1760
he renewed his political pamphleteering; and having obtained a pardon
from George III., he proceeded to Dublin, where he received a popular
welcome and a Doctor's degree from Trinity College. He was elected
member for the city of Dublin in 1761, his colleague in the
representation being the recorder, Henry Grattan's father. On the
appointment of Lord Halifax as lord lieutenant in the same year Lucas
wrote him a long letter (19th of Sept. 1761, MSS. Irish State Paper
Office) setting forth the grievances which Ireland had suffered in the
past, chiefly on account of the exorbitant pensions enjoyed by
government officials. The cause of these evils he declared to be the
unrepresentative character of the Irish constitution; and among the
remedies he proposed was the shortening of parliaments. Lucas brought in
a bill in his first session to effect this reform, but was defeated on
the motion to have the bill sent to England for approval by the privy
council; and he insisted upon the independent rights of the Irish
parliament, which were afterwards in fuller measure successfully
vindicated by Grattan. He also defended the privileges of the Irish
Protestants in the press, and especially in the _Freeman's Journal_,
founded in 1763. His contributions to the press, and his _Addresses to
the Lord Mayor_ and other political pamphlets made him one of the most
popular writers in Ireland of his time, although he was anti-catholic in
his prejudices, and although, as Lecky observes, "there is nothing in
his remains to show that he possessed any real superiority either of
intellect or knowledge, or even any remarkable brilliancy of
expression." He died on the 4th of November 1771, and was accorded a
public funeral. As an orator Charles Lucas appears to have had little
power, and he made no mark in the House of Commons.

  See R. R. Madden, _Hist. of Irish Periodical Literature from the End
  of the 17th to the Middle of the 19th Century_ (2 vols., London,
  1867); Francis Hardy, _Memoirs of the Earl of Charlemont_ (2 vols.,
  London, 1812); W. E. H. Lecky, _History of Ireland in the Eighteenth
  Century_, vols. i. and ii. (5 vols., London, 1892).

LUCAS, JOHN SEYMOUR (1849-   ), English painter, was born in London, and
was a student in the Royal Academy Schools. He was elected an associate
of the academy in 1886 and academician in 1898, and became a constant
exhibitor of pictures of historical and domestic incidents, notably of
the Tudor and Stuart periods, painted with much skill and with close
attention to detail. One of his most important works is a panel in the
Royal Exchange, presented by the corporation of London, representing
William the Conqueror granting the first charter to the city; and one of
his earlier pictures, "After Culloden: Rebel Hunting," is in the
National Gallery of British Art.

LUCAS VAN LEYDEN (c. 1494-1533), Dutch painter, was born at Leiden,
where his father Huig Jacobsz gave him the first lessons in art. He then
entered the painting-room of Cornelis Engelbrechtszen of Leiden, and
soon became known for his capacity in making designs for glass,
engraving copper-plates, painting pictures, portraits and landscapes in
oil and distemper. According to van Mander he was born in 1494, and
painted at the age of twelve a "Legend of St Hubert" for which he was
paid a dozen florins. He was only fourteen when he finished a plate
representing Mahomet taking the life of Sergius, the monk, and at
fifteen he produced a series of nine plates for a "Passion," a
"Temptation of St Anthony," and a "Conversion of St Paul." The list of
his engravings in 1510, when, according to van Mander, he was only
sixteen, includes subjects as various as a celebrated "Ecce Homo," "Adam
and Eve expelled from Paradise," a herdsman and a milkmaid with three
cows, and a little naked girl running away from a barking dog. Whatever
may be thought of the tradition embodied in van Mander's pages as to the
true age of Lucas van Leyden, there is no doubt that, as early as 1508,
he was a master of repute as a copperplate engraver. It was the time
when art found patrons among the public that could ill afford to buy
pictures, yet had enough interest in culture to satisfy itself by means
of prints. Lucas van Leyden became the representative man for the public
of Holland as Dürer for that of Germany; and a rivalry grew up between
the two engravers, which came to be so close that on the neutral market
of Italy the products of each were all but evenly quoted. Vasari
affirmed that Dürer surpassed Lucas as a designer, but that in the use
of the graver they were both unsurpassed, a judgment which has not been
reversed. But the rivalry was friendly. About the time when Dürer
visited the Netherlands Lucas went to Antwerp, which then flourished as
an international mart for productions of the pencil and the graver, and
it is thought that he was the master who took the freedom of the Antwerp
gild in 1521 under the name of Lucas the Hollander. In Dürer's diary
kept during his travels in the Low Countries, we find that at Antwerp he
met Lucas, who asked him to dinner, and that Dürer accepted. He valued
the art of Lucas at its true figure, and exchanged the Dutchman's prints
for eight florins' worth of his own. In 1527 Lucas made a tour of the
Netherlands, giving dinners to the painters of the gilds of Middleburg,
Ghent, Malines and Antwerp. He was accompanied during the trip by
Mabuse, whom he imitated in his style as well as in his love of rich
costume. On his return home he fell sick and remained ailing till his
death in 1533, and he believed that poison had been administered to him
by some envious comrade.

A few days before his death Lucas van Leyden was informed of the birth
of a grandson, first-born of his only daughter Gretchen. Gretchen's
fourth son JEAN DE HOEY followed the profession of his grandfather, and
became well known at the Parisian court as painter and chamberlain to
the king of France, Henry IV.

  As an engraver Lucas van Leyden deserves his reputation. He has not
  the genius, nor had he the artistic tact, of Dürer; and he displays
  more cleverness of expression than skill in distribution or in
  refinement in details. But his power in handling the graver is great,
  and some of his portraits, especially his own, are equal to anything
  by the master of Nüremberg. Much that he accomplished as a painter has
  been lost, because he worked a good deal upon cloth in distemper. In
  1522 he painted the "Virgin and Child with the Magdalen and a Kneeling
  Donor," now in the gallery of Munich. His manner was then akin to that
  of Mabuse. The "Last Judgment" in the town-gallery of Leiden is
  composed on the traditional lines of Cristus and Memling, with
  monsters in the style of Jerom Bosch and figures in the stilted
  attitudes of the South German school; the scale of colours in yellow,
  white and grey is at once pale and gaudy, the quaintest contrasts are
  produced by the juxtaposition of alabaster flesh in females and
  bronzed skin in males, or black hair by the side of yellow, or
  rose-coloured drapery set sharply against apple-green or black; yet
  some of the heads are painted with great delicacy and modelled with
  exquisite feeling. Dr Waagen gave a favourable opinion of a triptych
  now at the Hermitage at St Petersburg, executed, according to van
  Mander, in 1531, representing the "Blind Man of Jericho healed by
  Jesus Christ." Here too the German critic observed the union of faulty
  composition with great finish and warm flesh-tints with a gaudy scale
  of colours. The same defects and qualities will be found in such
  specimens as are preserved in public collections, among which may be
  mentioned the "Card Party" at Wilton House, the "Penitent St Jerome"
  in the gallery of Berlin, and the hermits "Paul" and "Anthony" in the
  Liechtenstein collection at Vienna. There is a characteristic
  "Adoration of the Magi" at Buckingham Palace.

LUCCA (anc. _Luca_), a town and archiepiscopal see of Tuscany, Italy,
capital of the province of Lucca, 13 m. by rail N.E. of Pisa. Pop.
(1901) 43,566 (town); 73,465 (commune). It is situated 62 ft. above the
level of the sea, in the valley of the Serchio, and looks out for the
most part on a horizon of hills and mountains. The fortifications,
pierced by four gates, were begun in 1504 and completed in 1645, and
long ranked among the most remarkable in the peninsula. They are still
well-preserved and picturesque, with projecting bastions planted with

The city has a well-built and substantial appearance, its chief
attraction lying in the numerous churches, which belong in the main to a
well-marked basilican type, and present almost too richly decorated
exteriors, fine apsidal ends and quadrangular campaniles, in some cases
with battlemented summits, and windows increasing in number as they
ascend. In style they are an imitation of the Pisan. It is remarkable
that in the arcades a pillar generally occupies the middle of the
façade. The cathedral of St Martin was begun in 1063 by Bishop Anselm
(later Pope Alexander II.); but the great apse with its tall columnar
arcades and the fine campanile are probably the only remnants of the
early edifice, the nave and transepts having been rebuilt in the Gothic
style in the 14th century, while the west front was begun in 1204 by
Guidetto (lately identified with Guido Bigarelli of Como), and "consists
of a vast portico of three magnificent arches, and above them three
ranges of open galleries covered with all the devices of an exuberant
fancy." The ground plan is a Latin cross, the nave being 273 ft. in
length and 84 ft. in width, and the transepts 144 ft. in length. In the
nave is a little octagonal temple or chapel, which serves as a shrine
for the most precious of the relics of Lucca, a cedar-wood crucifix,
carved, according to the legend, by Nicodemus, and miraculously conveyed
to Lucca in 782. The Sacred Countenance (_Volto Santo_), as it is
generally called, because the face of the Saviour is considered a true
likeness, is only shown thrice a year. The chapel was built in 1484 by
Matteo Civitali, a local sculptor of the early Renaissance (1436-1501);
he was the only master of Tuscany outside Florence who worked thoroughly
in the Florentine style, and his creations are among the most charming
works of the Renaissance. The cathedral contains several other works by
him--the tomb of P. da Noceto, the altar of S. Regulus and the tomb of
Ilaria del Carretto by Jacopo della Quercia of Siena (described by
Ruskin in _Modern Painters_, ii.), the earliest of his extant works
(1406), and one of the earliest decorative works of the Renaissance. In
one of the chapels is a fine Madonna by Fra Bartolommeo; in the
municipal picture gallery are a fine "God the Father" and another
Madonna by him; also some sculptures by Civitali, and some good wood
carving, including choir stalls. In the cathedral choir is good stained
glass of 1485. The church of St Michael, founded in the 8th century, and
built of marble within and without, has a lofty and magnificent western
façade (1188)--an architectural screen rising much above the roof of the
church. The interior is good but rather bare. The church of St Martino
at Arliano near Lucca belongs to the first half of the 8th century; it
is of basilican plan (see G. T. Rivoira, _Origini dell' Architettura
Lombarda_, iii. [Rome, 1901] 138). St Frediano or Frigidian dates
originally from the 7th century, but was built in the Romanesque style
in 1112-1147, though the interior, originally with four aisles and nave,
shows traces of the earliest structure; the front occupies the site of
the ancient apse; in one of its chapels is the tomb of Santa Zita,
patroness of servants and of Lucca itself. In S. Francesco, a fine
Gothic church, is the tomb of Castruccio Castracane. San Giovanni
(originally of the 12th century), S. Cristoforo, San Romano (rebuilt in
the 17th century, by Vincenzo Buonamici), and Santa Maria Forisportam
(of the 12th century) also deserve mention.

Among the secular buildings are the old ducal palace, begun in 1578 by
Ammanati, and now the residence of the prefect and seat of the
provincial officers and the public picture gallery; the early
Renaissance Palazzo Pretorio, or former residence of the podestà, now
the seat of the civil and correctional courts; the palace, erected in
the 15th century by a member of the Guinigi family, of brick, in the
Italian Gothic style, and now serving as a poor-house; the 16th-century
palace of the marquis Guidiccioni, now used as a depository for the
archives, the earliest documents going back to A.D. 790. The Palazzo
Mansi contains a collection of Dutch pictures. There are several other
fine late 16th-century palaces. The principal market-place in the city
(_Piazza del Mercato_) has taken possession of the arena of the ancient
amphitheatre, the outer arches of which can still be seen in the
surrounding buildings. The whole building, belonging probably to the
early Empire, measured 135 by 105 yds., and the arena 87½ by 58 yds. The
outline of the ancient theatre can be traced in the Piazza delle Grazie,
and some of its substructure walls are preserved. The ancient forum was
on the site of the Piazza S. Michele in the centre of the town; remains
of a small public building or shrine were found not far off in 1906 (L.
Pernier in _Notizie degli Scavi_, 1906, p. 117). The rectangular
disposition of the streets in the centre of the town is a survival of
Roman times. Besides the academy of sciences, which dates from 1584,
there are several institutions of the same kind--a royal philomathic
academy, a royal academy of arts and a public library of 50,000 volumes.
The archiepiscopal library and archives are also important, while the
treasury contains some fine goldsmith's work, including the 14th-century
Croce dei Pisani, made by the Pisans for the cathedral.

The river Serchio affords water-power for numerous factories. The most
important industries are the manufacture of jute goods (carried on at
Ponte a Moriano in the Serchio valley, 6 m. N. of Lucca), tobacco, silks
and cottons. The silk manufacture, introduced at Lucca about the close
of the 11th century, and in the early part of the 16th the means of
subsistence for 30,000 of its inhabitants, now gives employment (in
reeling and throwing) to only about 1500. The bulk of the population is
engaged in agriculture. The water supply is maintained by an aqueduct
built in 1823-1832 with 459 arches, from the Pisan mountains.

The ancient Luca, commanding the valley of the Serchio, is first
mentioned as the place to which Sempronius retired in 218 B.C. before
Hannibal; but there is some doubt as to the correctness of Livy's
statement, for, though there were continual wars with the Ligurians,
after this time, it is not mentioned again until we are told that in 177
B.C. a Latin colony was founded there in territory offered by the Pisans
for the purpose.[1] It must have become a municipium by the _lex Julia_
of 90 B.C., and it was here that Julius Caesar in 56 B.C. held his
famous conference with Pompey and Crassus, Luca then being still in
Liguria, not in Etruria. A little later a colony was conducted hither by
the triumvirs or by Octavian; whether after Philippi or after Actium is
uncertain. In the Augustan division of Italy Luca was assigned to the
7th region (Etruria); it is little mentioned in the imperial period
except as a meeting-point of roads--to Florentia (see Clodia, Via), Luna
and Pisae. The road to Parma given in the itineraries, according to some
authorities, led by Luna and the Cisa pass (the route taken by the
modern railway from Sarzana to Parma), according to others up the
Serchio valley and over the Sassalbo pass (O. Cuntz in _Jahreshefte des
oesterr. arch. Instituts_, 1904, 53). Though plundered and deprived of
part of its territory by Odoacer, Luca appears as an important city and
fortress at the time of Narses, who besieged it for three months in A.D.
553, and under the Lombards it was the residence of a duke or marquis
and had the privilege of a mint. The dukes gradually extended their
power over all Tuscany, but after the death of the famous Matilda the
city began to constitute itself an independent community, and in 1160 it
obtained from Welf VI., duke of Bavaria and marquis of Tuscany, the
lordship of all the country for 5 m. round, on payment of an annual
tribute. Internal discord afforded an opportunity to Uguccione della
Faggiuola, with whom Dante spent some time there, to make himself master
of Lucca in 1314, but the Lucchesi expelled him two years afterwards,
and handed over their city to Castruccio Castracane, under whose
masterly tyranny it became "for a moment the leading state of Italy,"
until his death in 1328 (his tomb is in S. Francesco). Occupied by the
troops of Louis of Bavaria, sold to a rich Genoese Gherardino Spinola,
seized by John, king of Bohemia, pawned to the Rossi of Parma, by them
ceded to Martino della Scala of Verona, sold to the Florentines,
surrendered to the Pisans, nominally liberated by the emperor Charles
IV. and governed by his vicar, Lucca managed, at first as a democracy,
and after 1628 as an oligarchy, to maintain "its independence alongside
of Venice and Genoa, and painted the word Libertas on its banner till
the French Revolution." In the beginning of the 16th century one of its
leading citizens, Francesco Burlamacchi, made a noble attempt to give
political cohesion to Italy, but perished on the scaffold (1548); his
statue by Ulisse Cambi was erected on the Piazza San Michele in 1863. As
a principality formed in 1805 by Napoleon in favour of his sister Elisa
and her husband Bacchiocchi, Lucca was for a few years wonderfully
prosperous. It was occupied by the Neapolitans in 1814; from 1816 to
1847 it was governed as a duchy by Maria Luisa, queen of Etruria, and
her son Charles Louis; and it afterwards formed one of the divisions of

The bishops of Lucca, who can be traced back to 347, received
exceptional marks of distinction, such as the pallium in 1120, and the
archiepiscopal cross from Alexander II. In 1726 Benedict XIII. raised
their see to the rank of an archbishopric, without suffragans.

  See A. Mazzarosa, _Storia di Lucca_ (Lucca, 1833); E. Ridolfi, _L'Arte
  in Lucca studiata nella sua Cattedrale_ (1882); _Guidi di Lucca; La
  Basilica di S. Michele in Foro in Lucca_.     (T. As.)


  [1] Some confusion has arisen owing to the similarity of the names
    Luca and Luna; the theory of E. Bormann in _Corp. Inscrip. Latin_.
    (Berlin, 1888), xi. 295 is here followed.

LUCCA, BAGNI DI (Baths of Lucca, formerly _Bagno a Corsena_), a commune
of Tuscany, Italy, in the province of Lucca, containing a number of
famous watering-places. Pop. (1901) 13,685. The springs are situated in
the valley of the Lima, a tributary of the Serchio; and the district is
known in the early history of Lucca as the Vicaria di Val di Lima. Ponte
Serraglio (16 m. N. of Lucca by rail) is the principal village (pop.
1312), but there are warm springs and baths also at Villa, Docce Bassi,
Bagno Caldo, &c. The springs do not seem to have been known to the
Romans. Bagno a Corsena is first mentioned in 1284 by Guidone de
Corvaia, a Pisan historian (Muratori, _R.I.S._ vol. xxii.). Fallopius,
who gave them credit for the cure of his own deafness, sounded their
praises in 1569; and they have been more or less in fashion since. The
temperature of the water varies from 98° to 130° Fahr.; in all cases it
gives off carbonic acid gas and contains lime, magnesium and sodium
products. In the village of Bagno Caldo there is a hospital constructed
largely at the expense of Nicholas Demidoff in 1826. In the valley of
the Serchio, 3 m. below Ponte a Serraglio, is the medieval Ponte del
Diavolo (1322) with its lofty central arch.

LUCCEIUS, LUCIUS, Roman orator and historian, friend and correspondent
of Cicero. A man of considerable wealth and literary tastes, he may be
compared with Atticus. Disgusted at his failure to become consul in 60,
he retired from public life, and devoted himself to writing a history of
the Social and Civil Wars. This was nearly completed, when Cicero
earnestly requested him to write a separate history of his (Cicero's)
consulship. Cicero had already sung his own praises in both Greek and
Latin, but thought that a panegyric by Lucceius, who had taken
considerable interest in the affairs of that critical period, would have
greater weight. Cicero offered to supply the material, and hinted that
Lucceius need not sacrifice laudation to accuracy. Lucceius almost
promised, but did not perform. Nothing remains of any such work or of
his history. In the civil war he took the side of Pompey; but, having
been pardoned by Caesar, returned to Rome, where he lived in retirement
until his death.

  Cicero's _Letters_ (ed. Tyrrell and Purser), especially _Ad Fam._ v.
  12; and Orelli, _Onomasticon Tullianum_.

LUCCHESINI, GIROLAMO (1751-1825), Prussian diplomatist, was born at
Lucca on the 7th of May 1751, the eldest son of Marquis Lucchesini. In
1779 he went to Berlin where Frederick the Great gave him a court
appointment, making use of him in his literary relations with Italy.
Frederick William II., who recognized his gifts for diplomacy, sent him
in 1787 to Rome to obtain the papal sanction for the appointment of a
coadjutor to the bishop of Mainz, with a view to strengthening the
German Fürstenbund. In 1788 he was sent to Warsaw, and brought about a
rapprochement with Prussia and a diminution of Russian influence at
Warsaw. He was accredited ambassador to the king and republic of Poland
on the 12th of April 1789. Frederick William was at that time
intriguing with Turkey, then at war with Austria and Russia. Lucchesini
was to rouse Polish feeling against Russia, and to secure for Prussia
the concourse of Poland in the event of war with Austria and Russia. All
his power of intrigue was needed in the conduct of these hazardous
negotiations, rendered more difficult by the fact that Prussian policy
excluded the existence of a strong Polish government. A Prusso-Polish
alliance was concluded in March 1790. Lucchesini had been sent in
January of that year to secure the alliance of Saxony against Austria,
and in September he was sent to Sistova, where representatives of the
chief European powers were engaged in settling the terms of peace
between Austria and Turkey, which were finally agreed upon on the 4th of
August 1791. Before he returned to Warsaw the Polish treaty of which he
had been the chief author had become a dead letter owing to the
engagements made between Prussia and Austria at Reichenbach in July
1790, and Prussia was already contemplating the second partition of
Poland. He was recalled at the end of 1791, and in July 1792 he joined
Frederick William in the invasion of France. He was to be Prussian
ambassador in Paris when the allied forces should have reinstated the
authority of Louis XVI. He was opposed alike to the invasion of France
and the Austrian alliance, but his prepossessions did not interfere with
his skilful conduct of the negotiations with Kellermann after the allies
had been forced to retire by Dumouriez's guns at Valmy, nor with his
success in securing the landgrave of Hesse-Darmstadt's assistance
against France. In 1793 he was appointed ambassador to Vienna, with the
ostensible object of securing financial assistance for the Rhenish
campaign. He accompanied Frederick William through the Polish campaign
of 1793-94, and in the autumn returned to Vienna. His anti-Austrian bias
made him extremely unpopular with the Austrian court, which asked in
vain for his recall in 1795. In 1797, after a visit to Italy in which he
had an interview with Napoleon at Bologna, these demands were renewed
and acceded to. In 1800 he was sent by Frederick William III. on a
special mission to Paris. Despatches in which he expressed his distrust
of Bonaparte's peaceful professions and his conviction of the danger of
the continuance of a neutral policy were intercepted by the first
consul, who sought his recall, but eventually accepted him as regular
ambassador (1802). He consistently sought friendly relations between
France and Prussia, but he warned his government in 1806 of Napoleon's
intention of restoring Hanover to George III. and of Murat's aggressions
in Westphalia. He was superseded as ambassador in Paris in September
just before the outbreak of war. After the disaster of Jena on the 14th
of October he had an interview with Duroc near Wittenberg to seek terms
of peace. After two unsuccessful attempts at negotiation, the first
draft being refused by Napoleon, the second by Frederick William, he
joined the Prussian court at Königsberg only to learn that his services
were no longer required. He then joined the court of Elisa, grand
duchess of Tuscany, at Lucca and Florence, and after Napoleon's fall
devoted himself to writing. He died on the 20th of October 1825.

  He published in 1819 three volumes, _Sulle cause et gli effetti della
  confederazione rhenana_, at Florence, but revealed little that was not
  already available in printed sources. His memoirs remained in MS. His
  despatches are edited by Bailleu in _Preussen und Frankreich_
  (Leipzig, 1887, _Publikationen aus den preussischen Staatsarchiven_).

LUCENA, a town of southern Spain, in the province of Cordova, 37 m.
S.S.E. of Cordova, on the Madrid-Algeciras railway. Pop. (1900) 21,179.
Lucena is situated on the Cascajar, a minor tributary of the Genil. The
parish church dates from the beginning of the 16th century. The chief
industries are the manufacture of matches, brandy, bronze lamps and
pottery, especially the large earthenware jars (_tinajas_) used
throughout Spain for the storage of oil and wine, some of which hold
more than 300 gallons. There is considerable trade in agricultural
produce, and the horse fair is famous throughout Andalusia. Lucena was
taken from the Moors early in the 14th century; it was in the attempt to
recapture it that King Boabdil of Granada was taken prisoner in 1483.

LUCERA, a town and episcopal see of Apulia, Italy, 12½ m. W.N.W. by rail
of Foggia. Pop. (1901) 16,962. It is situated upon a lofty plateau, the
highest point of which (823 ft.), projecting to the W., was the ancient
citadel, and is occupied by the well-preserved castle erected by
Frederick II., and rebuilt by Pierre d'Angicourt about 1280. The
cathedral, originally Romanesque, but restored after 1300 is in the
Gothic style; the façade is good, and so is the ciborium. The interior
was restored in 1882. The town occupies the site of the ancient Luceria,
the key of the whole country. According to tradition the temple of
Minerva, founded by Diomede, contained the Trojan Palladium, and the
town struck numerous bronze coins; but in history it is first heard of
as on the Roman side in the Samnite Wars (321 B.C.), and in 315 or 314
B.C. a Latin colony was sent here. It is mentioned in subsequent
military history, and its position on the road from Beneventum, via
Aecae (mod. _Troja_) to Sipontum, gave it some importance. Its wool was
also renowned. It now contains no ancient remains above ground, though
several mosaic pavements have been found and there are traces of the
foundations of an amphitheatre outside the town on the E. The town-hall
contains a statue of Venus, a mosaic and some inscriptions (but cf. Th.
Mommsen's remarks on the local neglect of antiquities in _Corp. Inscr.
Lat._ ix. 75). In 663 it was destroyed by Constans II., and was only
restored in 1223 by Frederick II., who transported 20,000 Saracens
hither from Sicily. They were at first allowed religious freedom, but
became Christians under compulsion in 1300. Up to 1806 Lucera was the
capital of the provinces of Basilicata and Molise.     (T. As.)

LUCERNE (Ger. _Luzern_; Ital. _Lucerna_), one of the cantons of central
Switzerland. Its total area is 579.3 sq. m., of which 530.2 sq. m. are
classed as "productive" (forests covering 120.4 sq. m., and vineyards
.04 sq. m.). It contains no glaciers or eternal snows, its highest
points being the Brienzer Rothhorn (7714 ft.) and Pilatus (6995 ft.),
while the Rothstock summit (5453 ft.) and the Kaltbad inn, both on the
Rigi, are included in the canton, the loftiest point of the Rigi range
(the Kulm) being entirely in Schwyz. The shape of the canton is an
irregular quadrilateral, due to the gradual acquisition of rural
districts by the town, which is its historical centre. The northern
portion, about 15½ sq. m., of the Lake of Lucerne is in the canton. Its
chief river is the Reuss, which flows through it for a short distance
only receiving the Kleine Emme that flows down through the Entlebuch. In
the northern part the Wigger, the Suhr and the Wynen streams flow
through shallow valleys, separated by low hills. The canton is fairly
well supplied with railways. The lakes of Sempach and Baldegg are wholly
within the canton, which also takes in small portions of those of
Hallwil and of Zug.

In 1900 the population numbered 146,519, of which 143,337 were
German-speaking, 2204 Italian-speaking and 747 French-speaking, while
134,020 were Romanists, 12,085 Protestants and 319 Jews. Its capital is
Lucerne (q.v.); the other towns are Kriens (pop. 5951), Willisau (4131),
Ruswil (3928), Littau (3699), Emmen (3162) and Escholzmatt (3127). The
peasants are a fine race, and outside the chief centres for foreign
visitors have retained much of their primitive simplicity of manners and
many local costumes. In the Entlebuch particularly the men are of a
robust type, and are much devoted to wrestling and other athletic
exercises. That district is mainly pastoral and is famous for its butter
and cheese. Elsewhere in the canton the pastoral industry (including
swine-breeding) is more extended than agriculture, while chiefly in and
around Lucerne there are a number of industrial establishments. The
_industrie des étrangers_ is greatly developed in places frequented by
foreign visitors. The population as a whole is Conservative in politics
and devotedly Romanist in religion. But owing to the settlement of many
non-Lucerne hotel-keepers and their servants in the town of Lucerne the
capital is politically Radical.

The canton ranks officially third in the Swiss confederation next after
Zürich and Bern. It was formerly in the diocese of Constance, and is now
in that of Basel. It contains 5 administrative districts and 107
communes. The existing cantonal constitution dates in its main features
from 1875. The legislature or _Grossrath_ consists of members elected in
55 electoral circles, in the proportion of 1 to every 1000 souls (or
fraction over 500) of the Swiss population, and lasts for 4 years. On
the 4th of April 1909 proportional representation was adopted for
elections of members of the _Grossrath_. Since 1905 the executive of 7
members is elected by a popular vote for 4 years, as are the 2 members
of the federal _Ständerath_ and the 7 members of the federal
_Nationalrath_. Five thousand citizens can demand a facultative
referendum as to all legislative projects and important financial
decrees, or as to the revision of the cantonal constitution, while the
same number can also revoke the mandate of the cantonal legislature
before its proper term of office has ended, though this revocation does
not affect the executive. Four thousand citizens have the right of
"initiative" as to constitutional amendments or legislative projects.

The canton is composed of the various districts which the town acquired,
the dates being those at which the particular region was finally
secured--Weggis (1380), Rothenburg, Kriens, Horw, Sempach and Hochdorf
(all in 1394), Wolhusen and the Entlebuch (1405), the so-called
"Habsburger region" to the N.E. of the town of Lucerne (1406), Willisau
(1407), Sursee and Beromünster (1415), Malters (1477) and Littau (1481),
while in 1803, in exchange for Hitzkirch, Merenschwand (held since 1397)
was given up.     (W. A. B. C.)

LUCERNE, the capital of the Swiss canton of the same name. It is one of
the principal tourist centres of Switzerland, being situated on the St
Gotthard railway line, by which it is 59 m. from Basel and 180 m. from
Milan. Its prosperity has always been bound up with the St Gotthard
Pass, so that the successive improvements effected on that route (mule
path in the 13th century, carriage road 1820-1830, and railway tunnel in
1882) have had much effect on its growth. It is beautifully situated on
the banks of the river Reuss, just as it issues from the Lake of
Lucerne, while to the south-west rises the rugged range of Pilatus,
balanced on the east by the more smiling ridge of the Rigi and the calm
waters of the lake. The town itself is very picturesque. On the rising
ground to its north still stand nine of the towers that defended the old
town wall on the Musegg slope. The Reuss is still crossed by two quaint
old wooden bridges, the upper being the Kapellbrücke (adorned by many
paintings illustrating the history of Switzerland and the town and
clinging to the massive Wasserthurm) and the lower the Mühlenbrücke
(also with paintings, this time of the Dance of Death). The old
Hofbrücke (on the site of the Schweizerhof quay) was removed in 1852,
when the process of embanking the shore of the lake began, the result
being a splendid series of quays, along which rise palatial hotels. The
principal building is the twin-towered Hofkirche (dedicated to St Leger
or Leodegar) which, though in its present form it dates only from
1633-1635, was the centre round which the town gradually gathered;
originally it formed part of a Benedictine monastery, but since 1455 has
been held by a college of secular canons. It has a fine 17th-century
organ. The 16th-century town-hall (Rathhaus) now houses the cantonal
museum of antiquities of all dates. Both the cantonal and the town
libraries are rich in old books, the latter being now specially devoted
to works (MS. or printed) relating to Swiss history before 1848. The
Lion monument, designed by Thorwaldsen, dedicated in 1821, and
consisting of a dying lion hewn out of the living sandstone,
commemorates the officers and men of the Swiss Guard (26 officers and
about 760 men) who were slain while defending the Tuileries in Paris in
1792, and is reflected in a clear pool at its foot. In the immediate
neighbourhood is the Glacier Garden, a series of potholes worn in the
sandstone rock bed of an ancient glacier. Among modern buildings are the
railway station, the post office and the Museum of War and Peace, all in
the new quarter on the left bank of the Reuss. In the interior of the
town are many quaint old private houses. In 1799 the population numbered
but 4337, but had doubled by 1840. Since then the rise has been rapid
and continuous, being 29,255 in 1900. The vast majority are
German-speaking (in 1900 there were 1242 Italian-speaking and 529
French-speaking persons) and Romanists (in 1900 there were 4933
Protestants and 299 Jews).

The nucleus of the town was a Benedictine monastery, founded about 750
on the right bank of the Reuss by the abbey of Murbach in Alsace, of
which it long remained a "cell." It is first mentioned in a charter of
840 under the name of "Luciaria," which is probably derived from that of
the patron saint of the monastery, St Leger or Leodegar (in O. Ger.
_Leudegar_ or _Lutgar_)--the form "Lucerrun" is first found in 1252.
Under the shadow of this monastery there grew up a small village. The
germs of a municipal constitution appear in 1252, while the growing
power of the Habsburgs in the neighbourhood weakened the ties that bound
Lucerne to Murbach. In 1291 the Habsburgs finally purchased Lucerne from
Murbach, an act that led a few weeks later to the foundation of the
Swiss Confederation, of which Lucerne became the fourth member (the
first town to be included) in 1332. But it did not get rid of all traces
of Habsburg domination till after the glorious victory of Sempach
(1386). That victory led also to the gradual acquisition of territory
ruled by and from the town. At the time of the Reformation Lucerne clave
to the old faith, of which ever since it has been the great stronghold
in Switzerland. The papal nuncio resided here from 1601 to 1873. In the
16th century, as elsewhere in Switzerland, the town government fell into
the hands of an aristocratic oligarchy, whose power, though shaken by
the great peasant revolt (1653) in the Entlebuch, lasted till 1798.
Under the Helvetic republic (1798-1803) Lucerne was the seat of the
central government, under the Act of Mediation (1803-1814) one of the
six "Directorial" cantons and from 1815 to 1848 one of the three ruling
cantons. The patrician government was swept away by the cantonal
constitution of 1831. But in 1841 the Conservatives regained power,
called in the Jesuits (1844) and so brought about the Sonderbund War
(1847) in which they were defeated, the decisive battle taking place at
Gisikon, not far from Lucerne. Since 1848 Lucerne has been in disfavour
with the Radicals who control the federal government, and has not been
chosen as the site of any great federal institution. The Radicals lost
power in the canton in 1871, after which date the Conservatives became
predominant in the canton, though in the town the Radicals were in the

  See J. J. Blumer, _Staats- und Rechtsgeschichte d. Schweiz.
  Demokratien_ (3 vols., St Gall, 1850-1859); A. L. Gassmann, _Das
  Volkslied im Luzerner Wiggerthal u. Hinterland_ (Basel, 1906);
  _Geschichtsfreund_ (organ of the Historical Society of the Forest
  Cantons) from 1843. A. von Liebenau, _Charakterbilder aus Luzern's
  Vergangenheit_ (2 vols., Lucerne, 1884-1891); T. von Liebenau, _Das
  alte Luzern_ (Lucerne, 1881) and "Der luzernische Bauernkrieg vom
  1653" (3 articles in vols. xviii.-xx., 1893-1895, of the _Jahrbuch f.
  Schweizerische Geschichte_); _Heimathkunde für den Kanton Luzern_ (6
  vols., Lucerne, 1867-1883); A. Lütolf, _Sagen, Bräuche, Legenden aus
  d. Fünf Orten_ (Lucerne, 1862); K. Pfyffer, _Der Kanton Luzern_ (2
  vols., 1858-1859) and _Geschichte d. Stadt u. Kanton Luzern_ (2 vols.,
  new ed., 1861); A. P. von Segesser, _Rechtsgeschichte d. Stadt u.
  Republik Luzern_ (4 vols., 1850-1858) and _45 Jahre (1841-1887) im
  Luzernischen Staatsdienst_ (Bern, 1887); J. Sowerby, _The Forest
  Cantons of Switzerland_ (London, 1892).     (W. A. B. C.)

LUCERNE, LAKE OF, the name usually given by foreigners to the principal
lake of Central Switzerland. In French it is called the _Lac des Quatre
Cantons_, and in German the _Vierwaldstättersee_, this term being often
wrongly translated "Lake of the Four Forest Cantons," whereas it means
the "Lake of the Four Valleys"--_valles_--which form the four Cantons of
Lucerne, Unterwalden, Uri and Schwyz. It takes its name from the town of
Lucerne, which is situated at its west end, just where the Reuss issues
from the lake, after having entered it at Flüelen at the east end and so
practically formed it; the Muota enters the lake at Brunnen (northern
shore) and the two mountain streams called the Engelberg and the Sarnen
Aa at Buochs and Alpnachstad respectively (S.). The lake is generally
supposed to be, on the whole, the most beautiful in Switzerland. This is
partly due to the steep limestone mountains between which it lies, the
best known being the Rigi (5906 ft.) to the N., and Pilatus (6995 ft.)
to the S.W., and to the great promontories that thrust themselves into
its waters, such as those of Horw (S.), of Bürgenstock (S.), of
Meggenhorn (N.) and of Seelisberg (S.), and partly to the irregularity
of its shape. It is, in fact, composed of four main basins (with two
side basins), which represent four different valleys, orographically
distinct, and connected only by narrow and tortuous channels. There is,
first, the most easterly basin, the _Bay of Uri_, extending from Flüelen
on the south to Brunnen on the north. At Brunnen the great delta of the
Muota forces the lake to the west, so that it forms the _Bay of Gersau_
or the _Gulf of Buochs_, extending from the promontory of Seelisberg
(E.) to that of the Bürgenstock (W.). Another narrow strait between the
two "Noses" (_Nasen_) leads westwards to the _Basin of Weggis_, enclosed
between the Rigi (N.) and the Bürgenstock promontory (S.). This last
named bay forms the eastern arm of what is called the Cross of Lucerne,
the western arm of which is formed by the Bay of Lucerne, while the
northern arm is the Bay of Küssnacht and the southern that of
_Hergiswil_, prolonged S.W. by the _Bay of Alpnach_, with which it is
joined by a very narrow channel, spanned by the Acher iron bridge. The
Bay of Uri offers the sternest scenery, but is the most interesting, by
reason of its connexion with early Swiss history--at Brunnen the
Everlasting League of 1315 was really made, while the legendary place of
meeting of the founders of Swiss freedom was the meadow of the Rütli on
the west (purchased by the Confederation in 1859), and the site of
Tell's leap is marked by the Chapel of Tell (E.). Nearly opposite
Brunnen, close to the west shore, an isolated rock (the _Schillerstein_
or _Mythenstein_) now bears an inscription in honour of Friedrich
Schiller, the author of the famous play of _William Tell_ (1804). In the
Bay of Gersau the most interesting spot is the village of Gersau (N.),
which formed an independent republic from 1390 to 1798, but in 1818 was
finally united to the canton of Schwyz. In the next basin to the west is
Weggis (N.), also for long in the middle ages a small independent state;
to the S.E. of Weggis, on the north shore of the lake, is Vitznau,
whence a rack railway (1871) leads up to the top of the Rigi (4¼ m.),
while S.W. of Weggis, on the south shore of the lake, is Kehrsiten,
whence an electric railway leads up to the great hotels on the
Bürgenstock promontory (2854 ft.). The town of Lucerne is connected with
Flüelen by the main line of the St Gotthard railway (32 m.), though only
portions of this line (from Lucerne to Küssnacht, 10½ m., and from
Brunnen to Flüelen, 7 m.) run along the shore; Brunnen is also connected
with Flüelen by the splendid carriage road known as the Axenstrasse (7¼
m.) and is the starting-point of an electric line (1905) up to Morschach
(S.E.) and the great hotels of Axenstein and Axenfels near it. On the
promontory between Lucerne and Küssnacht stands the castle of New
Habsburg (modern), while from Küssnacht a carriage road leads through
the remains of the "Hollow Way" (_Hohle Gasse_), the scene of the
legendary murder of Gessler by William Tell. The west shore of the
southern arm, or the basin of Hergiswil and the Bay of Alpnach, is
traversed from Horw to Alpnachstad by the Brünig railway (5½ m.), which
continues towards Sarnen (Obwalden) and the Bernese Oberland, S.W. from
Alpnachstad, whence a rack railway leads N.W. up Pilatus (2¾ m.).
Opposite Hergiswil, but on the east shore of the Basin of Hergiswil, is
Stanstad, the port of Stans (Nidwalden), which is connected by an
electric line with Engelberg (14 m.). The first steamer was placed on
the lake in 1835. Lucerne is the only town of importance, but several
spots serve as ports for neighbouring towns or large villages (Brunnen
for Schwyz, Flüelen for Altdorf, Stanstad for Stans, Alpnachstad for
Sarnen). Most of the villages on the shores are frequented in summer by
visitors (Gersau also in winter), especially Hertenstein, Weggis,
Gersau, Brunnen, Beckenried and Hergiswil, while great hotels,
commanding magnificent views, have been built on heights above it, such
as the Bürgenstock, Seelisberg, and near Morschach, above Brunnen,
besides those on the Rigi, Pilatus and the Stanserhorn. The area of the
lake is about 44½ sq. m., its length about 24 m., its greatest width
only 2 m. and its greatest depth 702 ft., while the surface of the water
is 1434 ft. above sea-level. Of the total area about 15½ sq. m. are in
the Canton of Lucerne, 13 sq. m. in that of Nidwalden, 7½ sq. m. in that
of Uri, 7½ sq. m. in that of Schwyz, and about 1 sq. m. in that of
Obwalden.     (W. A. B. C.)

LUCERNE, PURPLE MEDICK or ALFALFA, known botanically as _Medicago
sativa_, a plant of the natural order Leguminosae. In England it is
still commonly called "lucerne," but in America "alfalfa," an Arabic
term ("the best fodder"), which, owing to its increasing cultivation in
the western hemisphere, has come into widening usage since the
introduction of the plant by the Spaniards. It is an erect perennial
herb with a branched hollow stem 1 to 2 ft. high, trifoliolate leaves,
short dense racemes of small yellow, blue or purple flowers, and downy
pods coiled two or three times in a loose spiral. It has a
characteristic long tap-root, often extending 15 ft. or more into the
soil. It is a native of the eastern Mediterranean region, but was
introduced into Italy in the 1st century A.D., and has become more
widely naturalized in Europe; it occurs wild in hedges and fields in
Britain, where it was first cultivated about 1650. It seems to have been
taken from Spain to Mexico and South America in the 16th century, but
the extension of its cultivation in the Western States of the American
Union practically dates from the middle of the 19th century, and in
Argentina its development as a staple crop is more recent. It is much
cultivated as a forage crop in France and other parts of the continent
of Europe, but has not come into such general use in Britain, where,
however, it is frequently met with in small patches in districts where
the soil is very light, with a dry subsoil. Its thick tap-roots
penetrate very deeply into the soil; and, if a good cover is once
obtained, the plants will yield abundant cuttings of herbage for eight
or ten years, provided they are properly top-dressed and kept free from
perennial weeds. The time to cut it is, as with clover and sainfoin,
when it is in early flower.

[Illustration: Lucerne (_Medicago sativa_), ½ nat. size.

  1, Flower, enlarged.
  2, Half-ripe fruit, ¾ nat. size.
  3, Fruit, enlarged.]

In the United States alfalfa has become the staple leguminous forage
crop throughout the western half of the country. Some idea of the
increase in its cultivation may be obtained from the figures for Kansas,
where in 1891 alfalfa was cultivated over 34,384 acres, while in 1907
the number was 743,050. The progress of irrigation has been an important
factor in many districts. The plant requires a well-drained soil (deep
and permeable as possible), rich in lime and reasonably free from weeds.

  See, for practical directions as to cultivation, _Farmers' Bulletin_
  339 of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, by J. M. Westgate
  (Washington, December 1908).

LUCHAIRE, DENIS JEAN ACHILLE (1846-1908), French historian, was born in
Paris on the 24th of October 1846. In 1879 he became a professor at
Bordeaux and in 1889 professor of medieval history at the Sorbonne; in
1895 he became a member of the _Académie des sciences morales et
politiques_, where he obtained the Jean Reynaud prize just before his
death on the 14th of November 1908. The most important of Achille
Luchaire's earlier works is his _Histoire des institutions monarchiques
de la France sous les premiers Capétiens_ (1883 and again 1891); he also
wrote a _Manuel des institutions françaises: période des Capétiens
directs_ (1892); _Louis VI. le Gros, annales de sa vie et de son règne_
(1890); and _Étude sur les actes de Louis VII._ (1885). His later
writings deal mainly with the history of the papacy, and took the form
of an elaborate work on Pope Innocent III. This is divided into six
parts: (1.) _Rome et Italie_ (1904); (ii.) _La Croisade des Albigeois_
(1905); (iii.) _La Papauté et l'empire_ (1905); (iv.) _La Question
d'Orient_ (1906); (v.) _Les Royautés vassales du Saint-Siège_ (1908);
and (vi.) _Le Concile de Latran et la réforme de l'Église_ (1908). He
wrote two of the earlier volumes of E. Lavisse's _Histoire de France_.

chain of islands belonging to Japan, stretching from a point 80 m. S. of
Kiushiu to a point 73 m. from the N.E. coast of Formosa, and lying
between 24° and 30° N. and 123° and 130° E. Japanese cartographers
reckon the Luchu islands as 55, having a total coast-line of 768 m., an
area of 935 sq. m., and a population of about 455,000. They divide them
into three main groups, of which the northern is called Oshima-shoto;
the central, Okinawa-gunto; and the southern, Sakishima-retto. The terms
_shoto_, _gunto_ and _retto_ signify "archipelago," "cluster of islands"
and "string of islands" respectively. The last-named group is subdivided
into Miyako-gunto and Yayeyama-gunto. The principal islands of these
various groups are:--


  Amami-Oshima                34  m. long and 17  m. broad
  Tokuno-shima                16       "       8½     "


  Okinawa-shima (Great Luchu) 63½ m. long and 14½ m. broad
  Kume-shima                   9¾      "       7½     "
  Okinoerabu-shima             9½      "       5      "
  Ihiya-shima                  5       "       2½     "


  Miyako-shima                12¼ m. long and 12  m. broad
  Erabu-shima                  4¾      "       3½     "


  Ishigaki-shima              24½ m. long and 14½ m. broad
  Iriomoto-shima              14½      "      14      "
  Yonakuni-shima               7(1/3)  "       3½     "

The remaining islands of the archipelago are of very small size,
although often thickly populated. Almost at the extreme north of the
chain are two islands with active volcanoes: Nakano-shima (3485 ft.) and
Suwanose-shima (2697 ft.), but the remaining members of the group give
no volcanic indications, and the only other mountain of any size is
Yuwan-dake (2299 ft.) in Amami-Oshima. The islands "are composed chiefly
of Palaeozoic rocks--limestones and quartzites found in the west, and
clay, slate, sandstone and pyroxenite or amphibolite on the east....
Pre-Tertiary rocks have been erupted through these. The outer
sedimentary zone is of Tertiary rocks."[1] The capital is Shuri in
Okinawa, an old-fashioned place with a picturesque castle. The more
modern town of Nafa, on the same island, possesses the principal harbour
and has considerable trade.

  The scenery of Luchu is unlike that of Japan. Though so close to the
  tropics, the islands cannot be said to present tropical features: the
  bamboo is rare; there is no high grass or tangled undergrowth; open
  plains are numerous; the trees are not crowded together; lakes are
  wanting; the rivers are insignificant; and an unusual aspect is
  imparted to the scenery by numerous coral crags. The temperature in
  Nafa ranges from a mean of 82° F. in July to 60° in January. The
  climate is generally (though not in all the islands) pleasant and
  healthy, in spite of much moisture, the rainfall being very heavy.

  The fauna includes wild boars and deer, rats and bats. Excellent small
  ponies are kept, together with cattle, pigs and goats. The majority of
  the islands are infested with venomous snakes called _habu_
  (_Trimeresurus_), which attain a length of 6 to 7 ft. and a diameter
  of from 2½ to 3 in. Their bite generally causes speedy death, and in
  the island of Amami-Oshima they claim many victims every year. The
  most important cultivated plant is the sugar-cane, which provides the
  principal staple of trade.

  Luchu is noted for the production of particularly durable
  vermilion-coloured lacquer, which is much esteemed for table utensils
  in Japan. The islands also manufacture certain fabrics which are
  considered a speciality. These are _Riukiu-tsumugi_, a kind of fine
  pongee; the so-called _Satsuma-gasuri_, a cotton fabric greatly used
  for summer wear; _basho-fu_, or banana-cloth (called also
  _aka-basho_), which is woven from the fibre of a species of banana;
  and _hoso-jofu_, a particularly fine hempen stuff, made in
  Miyako-shima, and demanding such difficult processes that six months
  are required to weave and dye a piece 9½ yds. long.

  _People._--Although the upper classes in Luchu and Japan closely
  resemble each other, there are palpable differences between the lower
  classes, the Luchuans being shorter and better proportioned than the
  Japanese; having higher foreheads, eyes not so deeply set, faces less
  flattened, arched and thick eyebrows, better noses, less marked
  cheek-bones and much greater hairiness. The last characteristic has
  been attributed to the presence of Ainu blood, and has suggested a
  theory that when the Japanese race entered south-western Japan from
  Korea, they drove the Ainu northwards and southwards, one portion of
  the latter finding their way to Luchu, the other to Yezo. Women of the
  upper class never appear in public in Luchu, and are not even alluded
  to in conversation, but women of the lower orders go about freely with
  uncovered faces. The Luchu costume resembles that of Japan, the only
  marked difference being that the men use two hairpins, made of gold,
  silver, pewter or wood, according to the rank of the wearer. Men shave
  their faces until the age of twenty-five, after which moustache and
  beard are allowed to grow, though the cheeks are kept free from hair.
  Their burial customs are peculiar and elaborate, and their large
  sepulchres, generally mitre-shaped, and scattered all over the
  country, according to Chinese fashion, form a striking feature of the
  landscape. The marriage customs are also remarkable. Preliminaries are
  negotiated by a middleman, as in China and Japan, and the subsequent
  procedure extends over several days. The chief staple of the people's
  diet is the sweet potato, and pork is the principal luxury. An ancient
  law, still in force, requires each family to keep four pigs. In times
  of scarcity a species of sago (obtained from the _Cycas revoluta_) is
  eaten. There is a remarkable absence of religious influence in Luchu.
  Places of worship are few, and the only function discharged by
  Buddhist priests seems to be to officiate at funerals. The people are
  distinguished by gentleness, courtesy and docility, as well as by
  marked avoidance of crime. With the exception of petty thefts, their
  Japanese administrators find nothing to punish, and for nearly three
  centuries no such thing as a lethal weapon has been known in Luchu.
  Professor Chamberlain states that the Luchuan language resembles the
  Japanese in about the same degree as Italian resembles French, and
  says that they are sister tongues, many words being identical, others
  differing only by letter changes which follow certain fixed analogies,
  and sentences in the one being capable of translation into the other
  word for word, almost syllable for syllable.

_History._--Tinsunshi, "Grandson of Heaven," is the mythical founder of
the Luchu monarchy. Towards the close of the 12th century his
descendants were driven from the throne by rebellion, but the old
national party soon found a victorious leader in Shunten, son of
Tametomo, a member of the famous Minamoto family, who, having been
expelled from Japan, had come to Luchu and married there. The
introduction of the arts of reading and writing are assigned to
Shunten's reign. Chinese invasions of Luchu may be traced back to A.D.
605, but they did not result in annexation; and it was in 1372 that
China first obtained from the Luchuans recognition of supremacy. Luchuan
relations with Japan had long been friendly, but at the end of the 16th
century the king refused Japan assistance against Korea, and in 1609 the
prince of Satsuma invaded the islands with 3000 men, took the capital by
storm, captured the king and carried him off to Kagoshima. A few years
later he was restored to his throne on condition of acknowledging
Japanese suzerainty and paying tribute. The Luchuans nevertheless
continued to pay tribute to China also.

The Chinese government, however, though taking a benevolent interest in
the welfare of the islanders, never attempted to bring them under
military sway. The incongruity of this state of affairs did not force
itself upon Japan's attention so long as her own empire was divided into
a number of semi-independent principalities. But in 1879 the Japanese
government, treating Luchu as an integral part of the mikado's
dominions, dethroned its prince, pensioned him as the other feudal
chiefs had been pensioned, and converted Luchu into a prefecture under
the name of Okinawa. This name signifies "extended rope," and alludes to
the attenuated nature of the archipelago. China remonstrating, a
conference was held in Peking, when plenipotentiaries of the two empires
signed an agreement to the effect that the archipelago should be divided
equally between the claimants. The Chinese government, however, refused
to ratify this compromise, and the Japanese continued their measures for
the effective administration of all the islands. Ultimately (1895)
Formosa also came into Japan's possession, and her title to the whole
chain of islands ceased to be disputed.

Though Captain Broughton, of H.M.S. "Providence," was wrecked on
Miyako-shima and subsequently visited Nafa in 1797, it was not till the
"Alceste" and "Lyra" expedition in 1816-1817, under Captains Basil Hall
and Murray Maxwell, that detailed information was obtained about Luchu.
The people at that time showed a curious mixture of courtesy and
shyness. From 1844 efforts were made by both Catholic (French) and
Protestant missionaries to Christianize them, but though hospitable they
made it clear that these efforts were unwelcome. Further visits were
made by British vessels under Captain Beechey (1826) and Sir Edward
Belcher (1845). The American expedition under Commodore M. C. Perry
(1853) added largely to knowledge of the islands, and concluded a treaty
with the Luchuan government.

  See Basil Hall, _Account of a Voyage of Discovery to the West Coast of
  Corea and the Great Loo-choo Island_ (London, 1818); Comm. M. C.
  Perry, _Narrative of the Expedition of an American Squadron to the
  China Seas and Japan_, 1852-1854 (Washington, 1856); B. H.
  Chamberlain, "The Luchu Islands and their Inhabitants," in the
  _Geographical Journal_, vol. v. (1895); "Contributions to a
  Bibliography of Luchu," in _Trans. Asiatic Soc. Japan_, xxiv. (1896);
  C. S. Leavenworth, "History of the Loo-choo Islands," _Journ. China
  Br. Royal Asiatic Soc._ xxxvi. (1905).


  [1] Note in _Geographical Journal_, xx., on S. Yoshiwara, "Raised
    Coral Reefs in the Islands of the Riukiu Curve," in _Journ. Coll. of
    Science, Imp. Univ., Tokyo_ (1901).

LUCIA (or LUCY), ST, virgin and martyr of Syracuse, whose name figures
in the canon of the mass, and whose festival is celebrated on the 13th
of December. According to the legend, she lived in the reign of
Diocletian. Her mother, having been miraculously cured of an illness at
the sepulchre of St Agatha in Catania, was persuaded by Lucia to
distribute all her wealth to the poor. The youth to whom the daughter
had been betrothed forthwith denounced her to Pascasius, the prefect,
who ordered that she should be taken away and subjected to shameful
outrage. But it was found that no force which could be applied was able
to move her from the spot on which she stood; even boiling oil and
burning pitch had no power to hurt her, until at last she was slain with
the sword. The most important documents concerning St Lucy are the
mention in the _Martyrologium Hieronymianum_ and the ancient inscription
discovered at Syracuse, in which her festival is indicated. Many
paintings represent her bearing her eyes in her hand or on a salver.
Some artists have even represented her blind, but nothing in her _Acta_
justifies this representation. It is probable that it originated in a
play upon words (Lucia, from Lat. _lux_, light), just as St Clair is
invoked in cases of eye-disease.

  See O. Caietanus, _Vitae sanctorum Siculorum_, i. 114-121 (Palermo,
  1657); Ioannes de Ioanne, _Acta sincera sanctae Luciae_ (Palermo,
  1758); _Analecta Bollandiana_, xxii. 492; Cahier, _Caractéristiques
  des saints_, i. 105 (Paris, 1867).     (H. De.)

LUCIAN (d. 312), Christian martyr, was born, like the famous, heathen
writer of the same name, at Samosata. His parents, who were Christians,
died when he was in his twelfth year. In his youth he studied under
Macarius of Edessa, and after receiving baptism he adopted a strictly
ascetic life, and devoted himself with zeal to the continual study of
scripture. Settling at Antioch when Malchion was master of the Greek
school he became a presbyter, and, while supporting himself by his skill
as a rapid writer, became celebrated as a teacher, so that he is
regarded as the founder of the famous theological school of Antioch. He
did not escape suspicion of heresy, and is represented as the connecting
link between Paul of Samosata and Arius. Indeed, on the deposition of
the former (A.D. 268) he was excluded from ecclesiastical fellowship by
three successive bishops of Antioch, while Arius seems to have been
among his pupils (Theodoret, _Hist. Eccl._ i. 3, 4). He was, however,
restored before the outbreak of persecution, and the reputation won by
his high character and learning was confirmed by his courageous
martyrdom. He was carried to Nicomedia before Maximin Daza, and
persisting in his faith perished on the 7th of January 312, under
torture and hunger, which he refused to satisfy with food offered to
idols. His defence is preserved by Rufinus (ix. 6; on Eusebius, _Hist.
Eccl._ ix. 9). His remains were conveyed to Drepanum in Bithynia, and
under Constantine the town was founded anew in his honour with the name
of Helenopolis, and exempted from taxes by the emperor (A.D. 327) (see
_Chron. Pasch._, Bonn ed., p. 527). Here in 387, on the anniversary of
his death, Chrysostom delivered the panegyrical homily from which, with
notices in Eusebius, Theodoret and the other ecclesiastical historians,
the life by Jerome (_Vir. Ill._ cap. 77), but especially from the
account by S. Metaphrastes (cited at length in Bernhardy's notes to
Suidas, _s.v._ [Greek: notheuei]), the facts above given are derived.
See also, for the celebration of his day in the Syriac churches, Wright,
_Cat. of Syr._ MSS. p. 283.

  Jerome says that Lucian wrote _Libelli de fide_ and several letters,
  but only a short fragment of one epistle remains (_Chron. Pasch._, ed.
  Dindorf, i. 516). The authorship of a confession of faith ascribed to
  Lucian and put forth at the semi-Arian synod of Antioch (A.D. 341) is
  questioned. Lucian's most important literary labour was his edition of
  the Greek Old Testament corrected by the Hebrew text, which, according
  to Jerome (_Adv. Ruf._ ii. 77), was in current use from Constantinople
  to Antioch. That the edition of Lucian is represented by the text used
  by Chrysostom and Theodoret, as well as by certain extant MSS., such
  as the Arundelian of the British Museum, was proved by F. Field
  (_Prol. ad Origenis Hexapla_, cap. ix.).

  Before the publication of Field's _Hexapla_, Lagarde had already
  directed his attention to the Antiochian text (as that of Lucian may
  be called) and ultimately published the first part (Genesis, 2 Esdras,
  Esther) of a provisional reconstructed text. The distinguishing marks
  of the Lucianic recension are thus summarized by S. R. Driver, _Notes
  on Heb. Text of Samuel_, p. li. seq.: (1) The substitution of synonyms
  for the words employed by the Septuagint; (2) the occurrence of double
  renderings; (3) the occurrence of renderings "which presuppose a
  Hebrew original self-evidently superior in the passages concerned to
  the existing Massoretic text," a peculiarity which makes it very
  important for the criticism of the Hebrew Bible. From a statement of
  Jerome in his preface to the gospels it seems probable that Lucian had
  also a share in fixing the Syrian recension of the New Testament text,
  but of this it is impossible to speak with certainty. He was
  associated in his work with the Hebraist Dorotheus.

  See, generally, A. Harnack's art. in Hauck-Herzog, _Realencyk_. vol.
  xi., and for "remains" Routh, Rel. Sac. iv. 3-17. A full account of
  his recension of the Septuagint is given in H. B. Swete's
  _Introduction to the Old Testament in Greek_, p. 81 sqq.; and a good
  account of his doctrinal position in the prolegomena to the volume on
  _Athanasius_ in the series of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (p.
  xxviii.) and A. Harnack's _History of Dogma_, especially vol. iv.

LUCIAN [[Greek: Loukianos]] (c. A.D. 120-180), Greek satirist of the
Silver Age of Greek literature, was born at Samosata on the Euphrates in
northern Syria. He tells us in the _Somnium_ or _Vita Luciani_, 1, that,
his means being small, he was at first apprenticed to his maternal
uncle, a statuary, or rather sculptor of the stone pillars called
Hermae. Having made an unlucky beginning by breaking a marble slab, and
having been well beaten for it, he absconded and returned home. Here he
had a dream or vision of two women, representing Statuary and
Literature. Both plead their cause at length, setting forth the
advantages and the prospects of their respective professions; but the
youth chooses [Greek: Paideia], and decides to pursue learning. For some
time he seems to have made money as a [Greek: rhêtôr], following the
example of Demosthenes, on whose merits and patriotism he expatiates in
the dialogue _Demosthenis Encomium_. He was very familiar with the rival
schools of philosophy, and he must have well studied their teachings;
but he lashes them all alike, the Cynics, perhaps, being the chief
object of his derision. Lucian was not only a sceptic; he was a scoffer
and a downright unbeliever. He felt that men's actions and conduct
always fall far short of their professions and therefore he concluded
that the professions themselves were worthless, and a mere guise to
secure popularity or respect. Of Christianity he shows some knowledge,
and it must have been somewhat largely professed in Syria at the close
of the 2nd century.[1] In the _Philopatris_ (q.v.), though the dialogue
so called is generally regarded as spurious, there is a statement of the
doctrine of the Trinity,[2] and the "Galilaean who had ascended to the
third heaven" (12), and "renewed" ([Greek: anekainisen]) by the waters
of baptism, may possibly allude to St Paul. The doctrines of the [Greek:
Logos] and the "Light of the world," and that God is in heaven making a
record of the good and bad actions of men,[3] seem to have come from
the same source, though the notion of a written catalogue of human
actions to be used in judgment was familiar to Aeschylus and Euripides.

As a satirist and a wit Lucian occupies in prose literature the unique
position which Aristophanes holds in Greek poetry. But whether he is a
mere satirist, who laughs while he lashes, or a misanthrope, who hates
while he derides, is not very clear. In favour of the former view it may
be said that the two main objects of his ridicule are mythology and the
sects of philosophy; in favour of the latter, his bitter exposure of
imposture and chicanery in the _Alexander_, and the very severe attacks
he makes on the "humbug" of philosophy,[4] which he everywhere assails
with the most acrimonious and contemptuous epithets.

As a writer Lucian is fluent, easy and unaffected, and a close follower
of the best Attic models, such as Plato and the orators. His style is
simpler than Plutarch's, and some of his compositions, especially the
_Dialogues of the Gods_ (pp. 204-287) and _of the Marine Deities_
(288-327), and, above all, the _Dialogues of the Dead_ (329-454), are
models of witty, polished and accurate Greek composition. Not less
clever, though rather lax in morality, are the [Greek: hetairikoi
dialogoi] (pp. 280-325), which remind us somewhat of the letters of
Alciphron. The sarcasms on the popular mythology, the conversations of
Pluto, Hermes, Charon and others of the powers in Hades, show a positive
disbelief in any future state of existence. The model Lucian followed in
these dialogues, as well in the style as in the sparkling and playful
repartee, was the Platonic conversations, founded on the drama, of which
the dialogue may be called the prose representative. Aristotle never
adopted it, perhaps regarding it as beneath the true dignity of
philosophy. The dialogue, in fact, was revived and improved by
Lucian,[5] the old traditions of the [Greek: logopoioi] and [Greek:
logographoi], and, above all, the immense influence of rhetoric as an
art, having thrown some discredit on a style of composition which, as
introduced by Plato, had formed quite a new era in Greek prose
composition. For rhetoric loved to talk, expatiate and declaim, while
dialectic strove to refute by the employment of question and answer,
often in the briefest form.

Lucian evinces a perfect mastery over a language as wonderful in its
inflections as in its immense and varied vocabulary; and it is a
well-merited praise of the author to say that to a good Greek scholar
the pages of Lucian are almost as easy and as entertaining as an English
or French novel. It is true that he employs some forms and compounds
which were not in use in the time of Plato or Demosthenes, and, as one
who lived under Roman rule, has a tendency towards Latinisms. But his
own sentiments on the propriety of diction are shown by his reproof to
Lexiphanes, "if anywhere you have picked up an out-of-the-way word, or
coined one which you think good, you labour to adapt the sense of it,
and think it a loss if you do not succeed in dragging it in somewhere,
even when it is not really wanted."

Lucian founded his style, or obtained his fluency, from the successful
study of rhetoric, by which he appears to have made a good income from
composing speeches which attracted much attention. At a later period in
life he seems to have held a lucrative legal office in Egypt, which he
retained till his death.

His extant works are so numerous that of some of the principal only a
short sketch can be given. More than 80 pieces have come down to us
under his name (including three collections of 71 shorter dialogues), of
which about 20 are spurious or of doubtful authorship. To understand
them aright we must remember that the whole moral code, the entire "duty
of man," was included, in the estimation of the pagan Greek, in the
various schools of philosophy. As these were generally rivals, and the
systems they taught were more or less directly antagonistic, truth
presented itself to the inquirer, not as one, but as manifold. The
absurdity and the impossibility of this forms the burden of all Lucian's
writings. He could only form one conclusion, viz. that there is no such
thing as truth.

One of the best written and most amusing treatises of antiquity is
Lucian's _True History_, forming a rather long narrative in two books,
which suggested Swift's _Gulliver's Travels_, Rabelais's _Voyage of
Pantagruel_ and Cyrano de Bergerac's _Journey to the Moon_. It is
composed, the author tells us in a brief introduction, not only as a
pastime and a diversion from severer studies, but avowedly as a satire
on the poets and logographers who had written so many marvellous tales.
He names Ctesias and Homer; but Hellanicus and Herodotus, perhaps other
[Greek: logopoioi] still earlier, appear to have been in his mind.[6]
The only true statement in his _History_, he wittily says (p. 72), is
that it contains nothing but lies from beginning to end.

The main purport of the story is to describe a voyage to the moon. He
set out, he tells us, with fifty companions, in a well-provisioned ship,
from the "Pillars of Hercules," intending to explore the western ocean.
After eighty days' rough sailing they came to an island on which they
found a Greek inscription, "This was the limit of the expedition of
Heracles and Dionysus"; and the visit of the wine-god seemed attested by
some miraculous vines which they found there. After leaving the island
they were suddenly carried up, ship and all, by a whirlwind into the
air, and on the eighth day came in sight of a great round island shining
with a bright light (p. 77), and lying a little above the moon. In a
short time they are arrested by a troop of gigantic "horse-vultures" and
brought as captives to the "man in the moon," who proves to be Endymion.
He is engaged in a war with the inhabitants of the sun, which is ruled
by King Phaëthon, the quarrel having arisen from an attempt to colonize
the planet Venus (Lucifer). The voyagers are enlisted as "Moonites," and
a long description follows of the monsters and flying dragons engaged in
the contest. A fight ensues, in which the slaughter is so great that the
very clouds are tinged with red (p. 84). The long description of the
inhabitants of the moon is extremely droll and original. After
descending safely into the sea, the ship is swallowed by a huge "sea
serpent" more than 100 miles long. The adventures during the long
confinement in the creature's belly are most amusing; but at last they
sail out through the chinks between the monster's teeth, and soon find
themselves at the "Fortunate Islands." Here they meet with the spirits
of heroes and philosophers of antiquity, on whom the author expatiates
at some length. The tale comes to an abrupt end with an allusion to
Herodotus in the promise that he "will tell the rest in his next books."

Another curious and rather long treatise is entitled [Greek: Loukios hê
Onos], the authorship of which is regarded as doubtful. Parts of the
story are coarse enough; the point turns on one Lucius visiting in a
Thessalian family, in which the lady of the house was a sorceress.
Having seen her changed into a bird by anointing herself with some
potent drug, he resolves to try a similar experiment on himself, but
finds that he has become an ass, retaining, however, his human senses
and memory. The mistake arose from his having filched the wrong
ointment; however, he is assured by the attendant, Palaestra, that if he
can but procure roses to eat, his natural form will be restored. In the
night a party of bandits break into the house and carry off the stolen
goods into the mountains on the back of the unfortunate donkey, who gets
well beaten for stumbling on the rough road. Seeing, as he fancies, some
roses in a garden, he goes in quest of them, and again gets beaten as a
thief by the gardener (p. 585). After many adventures with the bandits,
he attempts to run away, but is caught. A council is held, and he is
condemned to die together with a captive girl who had essayed to escape
on his back. Suddenly, however, soldiers appear, and the bandits are
arrested (p. 595). Again the ass escapes "to the great and populous city
of Beroea in Macedonia" (p. 603). Here he is sold to a strolling
conjurer, afterwards to a market-gardener; and both experiences are
alike painful. Again he passes into the possession of a cook, where he
gets fat and sleek on food more suited to his concealed humanity than
the hard fare he has of late lived upon (p. 614). At last, during an
exhibition in the theatre, he sees some roses being carried past, and,
making a successful rush to devour them, he recovers his former shape.
"I am Lucius," he exclaims to the wondering president of the exhibition,
"and my brother's name is Caius. It was a Thessalian witch that changed
me into a donkey." Thus all ends well, and he returns safe to his

The treatise _On the Syrian Goddess_ (Mylitta, the moon-goddess, the
Semitic Aphrodite) is written in the Ionic dialect in imitation perhaps
of the style of Herodotus, though the resemblance is by no means close.
The writer professes to be an Assyrian (p. 452), and to describe the
wonders in the various temples of Palestine and Syria; he descants on
the eunuchs of Syria and the origin of the self-imposed privation of
manhood professed and practised by the Galli. The account of the
temples, altars and sacrifices is curious, if really authentic; after
the manner of Pausanias it is little more than a list, with the reasons
in most cases added, or the origin of the custom explained.

_De Morte Peregrini_ is a narrative of one Proteus, a Cynic, who after
professing various doctrines, and among them those of Christianity,
ended his own life by ascending a burning pyre (see PEREGRINUS PROTEUS).

_Bis accusatus_ ("Twice Accused") is a dialogue beginning with a satire
on the folly of the popular notion that the gods alone are happy. Zeus
is represented as disproving this by enumerating the duties that fall to
their lot in the government of the world, and Hermes remarks on the vast
crowds of philosophers of rival sects, by whose influence the respect
and worship formerly paid to the gods have seriously declined. A trial
is supposed to be held under the presidency of the goddess [Greek:
Dikê], between the Academy, the Porch, the schools of the Cynics and
Epicureans, and Pleasure, Revelry, Virtue, Luxury, &c., as variously
impugned or defended by them. Then Conversation and Rhetoric come before
the court, each having an action for defamation to bring against Syrus
the essayist, who of course is Lucian himself (p. 823). His defence is
heard, and in both cases he is triumphantly acquitted. This essay is
brilliant from its clever parodies of Plato and Demosthenes, and the
satire on the Socratic method of arguing by short questions and answers.

The _Lover of Lying_ ([Greek: Philopseudês]) discusses the reason why
some persons seem to take pleasure in falsehood for its own sake. Under
the category of lying all mythology (e.g. that of Homer and Hesiod) is
included, and the question is asked, why the hearers of such stories are
amused by them? Quack remedies, charms and miraculous cures are included
among the most popular kinds of falsehood; witchcraft, spiritualism,
exorcism, expulsion of devils, spectres, are discussed in turn, and a
good ghost story is told in p. 57. An anecdote is given of Democritus,
who, to show his disbelief in ghosts, had shut himself up in a tomb, and
when some young men, dressed up with death's heads, came to frighten him
at night, he did not even look up, but called out to them, "Stop your
joking" (p. 59). This treatise, a very interesting one, concludes with
the reflection that truth and sound reason are the only remedies for
vain and superstitious terrors.

The dialogue _Navigium seu Vota_ ("The Ship or the Wishes") gives an
apparently authentic account of the measurements and fittings of an
Egyptian ship which has arrived with a cargo of corn at the Peiraeus,
driven out of its course to Italy by adverse winds. The full length is
180 ft., the breadth nearly 50, the depth from deck to the bottom of the
hold 43 ft. The "wishes" turn on a party of friends, who have been to
see the ship, declaring what they would most desire to possess. One
would have the ship filled with gold, another a fine house with gold
plate; a third would be a "tyrant" with a large force devoted to his
interests; a fourth would like to make himself invisible, enter any
house that he pleased, and be transported through the air to the objects
of his affection. After hearing them all, the first speaker, Lycinus
(Lucian), says that he is content with the privilege of laughing
heartily at the vanity of human wishes, especially when they are those
of professed philosophers.

The dialogue between Philo and Lycinus, _Convivium seu Lapithae_, is a
very amusing description of a banquet, at which a party of dignified
philosophers quarrelled over their viands at a marriage feast, and came
to blows. The style is a good imitation of Plato, and the scene reminds
one of the "clients' dinner" in the fifth satire of Juvenal. Matters
come to a climax by the attempt of one of the guests, Zenothemis, to
secure for himself a fatter fowl which had been served to his next
neighbour Hermon. Each seizes his bird and hits the other with it in the
face, at the same time pulling his beard. Then a general fight ensues.
The story is a satire on philosophy, the favourite topic of a writer who
believed neither in gods nor in men.

The _Piscator_ ("Fisherman"), a dialogue between Lucian, Socrates,
Pythagoras, Empedocles, Plato and others, commences with a general
attack on the author as the enemy of philosophy. Socrates proposes that
the culprit should be tried, and that Philosophia should assist in the
prosecution. Lucian declares that he does not know where such a person
lives, long as he has been looking for her (11). She is found at last,
but declares Lucian has never disparaged her, but only impostors and
pretenders under her name (15). He makes a long defence (pp. 598-606),
abusing the philosophers in the sort of language in which some schools
of theologians abuse the monks of the middle ages (34). The trial is
held in the Acropolis of Athens, and the sham philosophers, dreading a
verdict against them, throw themselves from the rock. A Cynic flings
away his scrip in the hurry, and on examination it is found to contain,
not books or loaves of bread, but gold coins, dice and fragrant essences
(44). At the end Lucian baits his hook with a fig and a gold coin, and
catches gluttonous strollers in the city while seated on the wall of the

The _Voyage Home_ ([Greek: Kataplous]) opens with the complaint that
Charon's boat is kept waiting for Hermes, who soon appears with his
troop of ghosts. Among them is a [Greek: tyrannos], one Megapenthes,
who, as his name is intended to express, mourns greatly over the life he
has just left. Amusing appeals are made by other souls for leave to
return to life, and even bribes are offered to the presiding goddess of
destiny, but Clotho is inexorable. The moral of the piece is closely
like that of the parable of Dives and Lazarus: the rich and prosperous
bewail their fate, while the poor and afflicted find rest from their
troubles, and have no desire to return to them. The [Greek: tyrannos]
here is the man clothed in purple and fine linen, and Lucian shows the
same bitter dislike of tyrants which Plato and the tragic writers
display. The heavy penalty is adjudged to Megapenthes that he may ever
remember in the other world the misdeeds done in life.

The _Sales of Lives_ is an auction held by Zeus to see what price the
lives of philosophers of the rival sects will bring. A Pythagorean, who
speaks in the Ionic dialect, first undergoes an examination as to what
he can teach, and this contains an enumeration of the doctrines usually
ascribed to that sect, including metempsychosis. He is valued at 7s.
6d., and is succeeded by Diogenes, who avows himself the champion of
truth, a cosmopolitan (8), and the enemy of pleasure. Socrates brings
two talents, and is purchased by Dion, tyrant of Syracuse (19).
Chrysippus, who gives some specimens of his clever quibbles,[7] is
bought for fifty pounds, Aristotle for nearly a hundred, while Pyrrho
the sceptic (or one of his school), who professes to "know nothing,"
brings four pounds, "_because_ he is dull and stupid and has no more
sense than a grub" (27). But the man raises a doubt, "whether or not he
has really been bought," and refuses to go with the purchaser till he
has fully considered the matter.

_Timon_ is a very amusing and witty dialogue. The misanthrope, once
wealthy, has become a poor farm-labourer, and reproaches Zeus for his
indifference to the injustice of man. Zeus declares that the noisy
disputes in Attica have so disgusted him that he has not been there for
a long time (9). He tells Hermes to conduct Plutus to visit Timon, and
see what can be done to help him. Plutus, who at first refuses to go, is
persuaded after a long conversation with Hermes, and Timon is found by
them digging in his field (31). Poverty is unwilling to resign her
votary to wealth; and Timon himself is with difficulty persuaded to turn
up with his mattock a crock of gold coins. Now that he has once more
become rich, his former flatterers come cringing with their
congratulations and respects, but they are all driven off with broken
heads or pelted with stones. Between this dialogue and the _Plutus_ of
Aristophanes there are many close resemblances.

_Hermotimus_ (pp. 739-831) is one of the longer dialogues, Hermotimus, a
student of the Stoic philosophy for twenty years (2), and Lucian
(Lycinus) being the interlocutors. The long time--forty years at the
least--required for climbing up to the temple of virtue and happiness,
and the short span of life, if any, left for the enjoyment of it, are
discussed. That the greatest philosophers do not always attain perfect
indifference, the Stoic _ultimatum_, is shown by the anecdote of one who
dragged his pupil into court to make him pay his fee (9), and again by a
violent quarrel with another at a banquet (11). Virtue is compared to a
city with just and good and contented inhabitants; but so many offer
themselves as guides to the right road to virtue that the inquirer is
bewildered (26). What is truth, and who are the right teachers of it?
The question is argued at length, and illustrated by a peculiar custom
of watching the pairs of athletes and setting aside the reserved
combatant ([Greek: paredros]) at the Olympian games by the marks on the
ballots (40-43). This, it is argued, cannot be done till all the ballots
have been examined; so a man cannot select the right way till he has
tried all the ways to virtue. But to know the doctrines of all the sects
is impossible in the term of a life (49). To take a taste of each, like
trying a sample of wine, will not do, because the doctrines taught are
not, like the crock of wine, the same throughout, but vary or advance
day by day (59). A suggestion is made (68) that the searcher after truth
should begin by taking lessons in the science of discrimination, so as
to be a good judge of truth before testing the rival claims. But who is
a good teacher of such a science? (70). The general conclusion is that
philosophy is not worth the pursuit. "If I ever again," says Hermotimus,
"meet a philosopher on the road, I will shun him, as I would a mad dog."

The _Anacharsis_ is a dialogue between Solon and the Scythian
philosopher, who has come to Athens to learn the nature of the Greek
institutions. Seeing the young men performing athletic exercises in the
Lyceum, he expresses his surprise at such a waste of energy. This gives
Socrates an opportunity of descanting at length on training as a
discipline, and emulation as a motive for excelling. Love of glory,
Solon says, is one of the chief goods in life. The argument is rather
ingenious and well put; the style reminds us of the minor essays of

The _Alexander_ or _False Prophet_ is the subject of a separate article

These are the chief of Lucian's works. Many others, e.g. _Prometheus_,
_Menippus_, _Life of Demonax_, _Toxaris_, _Zeus Tragoedus_, _The Dream
or the Cock_, _Icaromenippus_ (an amusing satire on the physical
philosophers), are of considerable literary value.     (F. A. P.)

  BIBLIOGRAPHY.--Editio princeps (Florence, 1496); valuable editions
  with notes by T. Hemsterhuis and J. F. Reitz (1743-1746, with _Lexicon
  Lucianeum_ by C. C. Reitz) and J. T. Lehmann (1822-1831). Editions of
  the text by C. Jacobitz (1886-1888) and J. Sommerbrodt (1886-1899).
  The scholia have been edited by H. Rabe in the Teubner series (1906).
  There are numerous editions of separate portions of Lucian's works and
  translations in most European languages; amongst the latter may be
  mentioned the German version by C. M. Wieland (1788), with valuable
  notes and commentaries: English; one by several hands (1711), for
  which Dryden had previously written an unsatisfactory life of the
  author, by T. Francklin (1780) and W. Tooke (1820): and French; of
  _The Ass_, by P. L. Courier, with full bibliography by A. J. Pons
  (1887), and of the complete works by E. Talbot (1866) and Belin de
  Ballu (1789; revised ed. by L. Humbert, 1896). A complete modern
  English translation, racy and colloquial, appeared in 1905, _The Works
  of Lucian of Samosata_, by H. W. Fowler and F. G. Fowler. On Lucian
  generally, the best work is M. Croiset's _Essai sur la vie et les
  oeuvres de Lucien_ (1882); see also E. Egger, "Parallèle de Lucien et
  Voltaire," in _Mémoires de littérature ancienne_ (1862); C. Martha,
  _Les Moralistes sous l'empire romain_ (1866); H. W. L. Hime, _Lucian,
  the Syrian Satirist_ (1900); Sir R. C. Jebb, _Essays and Addresses_
  (1907); "Lucian," by W. L. Collins in Blackwood's _Ancient Classics
  for English Readers_; the Prolegomena to editions of select works with
  notes by Sommerbrodt; and the exhaustive bibliography of the earlier
  literature in Engelmann, _Scriptores Graeci_ (1880). On some special
  questions see E. Rohde, _Über Lucians Schrift_ [Greek: Loukios hê
  Onos] (Leipzig, 1869); C. Buerger, _De Lucio Patrensi_ (Berlin, 1887);
  J. Bernays, _Lucian und die Kyniker_ (Berlin, 1879); C. G. Jacob,
  _Characteristik Lucians von Samosata_ (Hamburg, 1832); C. F. Hermann,
  _Charakteristik Lucians_ (Göttingen, 1849); P. M. Bolderman, _Studia
  Lucianea_ (Leiden, 1893); R. Helm, "Lucian und die
  Philosophenschulen," in _Neue Jahrb. f. das klassische Altertum_
  (1901), pp. 188, 263, 367.


  [1] In the _Alexander_ (25) we are told that the province of Pontus,
    due north of Syria, was "full of Christians."

  [2] _Philopatris_, 12, [Greek: hypsimedonta Theon megan ambroton
    ouraniôna, huion Patros, Pneuma ek patros ekporeuomenon, hen ek tpiôn
    kai ex henos tria], a passage which bears on the controverted
    procession "a Patre Filioque."

  [3] _Philopatris_, 13. Aesch. _Eum._ 265, [Greek: deltographô de
    pant' epôpa phreni].

  [4] In _Hermotimus_ (51) Hermotimus says to Lycinus (who must be
    assumed to represent Lucian himself), [Greek: hybristês aei su, kai
    ouk oid' ho ti pathôn miseis philosophian kai es tous philosophountas
    aposkôpteis]. In _Icaromenippus_ (5; see also 29) he says he always
    guessed who were the best physical philosophers "by their sour-faced
    looks, their paleness of complexion and the length of their beards."

  [5] He says (speaking as [Greek: Syros] in _Bis accusatus_, 34) that
    he found dialogue somewhat out of repute from the too numerous
    questions (i.e. employed by Plato), and brought it up to a more human
    and natural standard, substituting banter and repartee for dialectic
    quibbles and close logical reasoning.

  [6] He says (p. 127) that he saw punished in Hades, more severely
    than any other sinners, writers of false narratives, among whom were
    Ctesias of Cnidus and Herodotus. Yet in the short essay inscribed
    _Herodotus_ (p. 831), he wishes it were possible for him to imitate
    the many excellencies of that writer.

  [7] E.g. "A stone is a body; a living creature is a body; you are a
    living creature; therefore you are a stone." Again: "Is _every_ body
    possessed of life?" "No." "Is a stone possessed of life?" "No." "Are
    _you_ a body?" "Yes." "A _living_ body?" "Yes." "Then, if a living
    body, you are not a stone."

LUCIFER (d. 370/1), bishop of Cagliari (hence called _Caralitanus_), an
ardent supporter of the cause of Athanasius. After the unfavourable
result of the synod of Arles in 353 he volunteered to endeavour to
obtain a new and impartial council. He was accordingly sent by Pope
Liberius, with Pancratius the presbyter and Hilarius the deacon, but
could not prevent the condemnation of Athanasius, which was renewed at
Milan in 355. For his own persistent adherence to the orthodox creed he
was banished to Germanicia in Commagene; he afterwards lived at
Eleutheropolis in Palestine, and finally in the upper Thebaid. His exile
came to an end with the publication of Julian's edict in 362. From 363
until his death in 371 he lived at Cagliari in a state of voluntary
separation from ecclesiastical fellowship with his former friends
Eusebius of Vercelli, Athanasius and the rest, on account of their mild
decision at the synod of Alexandria in 362 with reference to the
treatment of those who had unwillingly Arianized under the persecutions
of Constantius. Lucifer was hardly sufficiently educated to appreciate
the real question at issue, and the sect which he thus founded did not
continue long after his death. It is doubtful whether it ever formulated
any distinctive doctrine; certainly it developed none of any importance.
The memory of Lucifer is still cherished in Sardinia; but, although
popularly regarded there as a saint, he has never been canonized.

  The controversial writings of Lucifer, dating from his exile, are
  chiefly remarkable for their passionate zeal, and for the boldness and
  violence of the language addressed to the reigning emperor, whom he
  did not scruple to call the enemy of God and a second Saul, Ahab and
  Jeroboam. Their titles, in the most probable chronological order, are
  _De non parcendis in Deum delinquentibus_, _De regibus apostaticis_,
  _Ad Constantium Augustum pro Athanasio libri ii._, _De non conveniendo
  cum haereticis and Moriendum esse pro Filio Dei_. Their quotations of
  Scripture are of considerable value to the critical student of the
  Latin text before Jerome. They were first collected and edited by
  Tilius (Paris, 1568); the best edition is that of W. Hartel in the
  Vienna _Corpus, Script. Eccl. Lat._ (1886). See also G. Krüger,
  _Lucifer Bischof von Cagliari und das Schisma der Luciferianer_
  (Leipzig, 1886); F. G. Kenyon, _Textual Criticism_, pp. 181, 221.

LUCIFER (the Latinized form of Gr. [Greek: phôsphoros], "light-bearer"),
the name given to the "morning star," i.e. the planet Venus when it
appears above the E. horizon before sunrise, and sometimes also to the
"evening star," i.e. the same planet in the W. sky after sundown, more
usually called Hesperus (q.v.). The term "day star" (so rendered in the
Revised Version) was used poetically by Isaiah for the king of Babylon:
"How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art
thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations" (Is. xiv.
12, Authorized Version). The words ascribed to Christ in Luke x. 18: "I
beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven" (cf. Rev. ix. 1), were
interpreted by the Christian Fathers as referring to the passage in
Isaiah; whence, in Christian theology, Lucifer came to be regarded as
the name of Satan before his fall. This idea finds its most magnificent
literary expression in Milton's _Paradise Lost_. In this sense the name
is most commonly associated with the familiar phrase "as proud as

LUCILIUS, GAIUS (c. 180-103 B.C.), the earliest Roman satirist, of whose
writings only fragments remain, was born at Suessa Aurunca in Campania.
The dates assigned by Jerome for his birth and death are 148 and 103 or
102 B.C. But it is impossible to reconcile the first of these dates with
other facts recorded of him, and the date given by Jerome must be due to
an error, the true date being about 180 B.C. We learn from Velleius
Paterculus that he served under Scipio at the siege of Numantia in 134.
We learn from Horace that he lived on the most intimate terms of
friendship with Scipio and Laelius, and that he celebrated the exploits
and virtues of the former in his satires. Fragments of those books of
his satires which seem to have been first given to the world (books
xxvi.-xxix.) clearly indicate that they were written in the lifetime of
Scipio. Some of these bring the poet before us as either corresponding
with, or engaged in controversial conversation with, his great friend.
One line--

  Percrepa pugnam Popilli, facta Corneli cane--

in which the defeat of M. Popillius Laenas, in 138, is contrasted with
the subsequent success of Scipio, bears the stamp of having been written
while the news of the capture of Numantia was still fresh. It is in the
highest degree improbable that Lucilius served in the army at the age of
fourteen; it is still more unlikely that he could have been admitted
into the familiar intimacy of Scipio and Laelius at that age. It seems a
moral impossibility that between the age of fifteen and nineteen--i.e.
between 133 and 129, the year of Scipio's death--he could have come
before the world as the author of an entirely new kind of composition,
and one which, to be at all successful, demands especially maturity of
judgment and experience. It may further be said that the well-known
words of Horace (_Satires_, ii. 1, 33), in which he characterizes the
vivid portraiture of his life, character and thoughts, which Lucilius
bequeathed to the world,

                       quo fit ut omnis
  Votiva pateat veluti descripta tabella
  Vita senis,[1]

lose much of their force unless _senis_ is to be taken in its ordinary
sense--which it cannot be if Lucilius died at the age of forty-six. He
spent the greater part of his life at Rome, and died, according to
Jerome, at Naples. Lucilius belonged to the equestrian order, a fact
indicated by Horace's notice of himself as "infra Lucili censum." Though
not himself belonging to any of the great senatorial families, he was in
a position to associate with them on equal terms. This circumstance
contributed to the boldness, originality and thoroughly national
character of his literary work. Had he been a "semi-Graecus," like
Ennius and Pacuvius, or of humble origin, like Plautus, Terence or
Accius, he would scarcely have ventured, at a time when the senatorial
power was strongly in the ascendant, to revive the rôle which had proved
disastrous to Naevius; nor would he have had the intimate knowledge of
the political and social life of his day which fitted him to be its
painter. Another circumstance determining the bent of his mind was the
character of the time. The origin of Roman political and social satire
is to be traced to the same disturbing and disorganizing forces which
led to the revolutionary projects and legislation of the Gracchi.

The reputation which Lucilius enjoyed in the best ages of Roman
literature is proved by the terms in which Cicero and Horace speak of
him. Persius, Juvenal and Quintilian vouch for the admiration with which
he was regarded in the first century of the empire. The popularity which
he enjoyed in his own time is attested by the fact that at his death,
although he had filled none of the offices of state, he received the
honour of a public funeral. His chief claim to distinction is his
literary originality. He may be called the inventor of poetical satire,
as he was the first to impress upon the rude inartistic medley, known to
the Romans by the name of _satura_, that character of aggressive and
censorious criticism of persons, morals, manners, politics, literature,
&c. which the word satire has ever since denoted. In point of form the
satire of Lucilius owed nothing to the Greeks. It was a legitimate
development of an indigenous dramatic entertainment, popular among the
Romans before the first introduction of the forms of Greek art among
them; and it seems largely also to have employed the form of the
familiar epistle. But the style, substance and spirit of his writings
were apparently as original as the form. He seems to have commenced his
poetical career by ridiculing and parodying the conventional language of
epic and tragic poetry, and to have used the language commonly employed
in the social intercourse of educated men. Even his frequent use of
Greek words, phrases and quotations, reprehended by Horace, was probably
taken from the actual practice of men, who found their own speech as yet
inadequate to give free expression to the new ideas and impressions
which they derived from their first contact with Greek philosophy,
rhetoric and poetry. Further, he not only created a style of his own,
but, instead of taking the substance of his writings from Greek poetry,
or from a remote past, he treated of the familiar matters of daily life,
of the politics, the wars, the administration of justice, the eating and
drinking, the money-making and money-spending, the scandals and vices,
which made up the public and private life of Rome in the last quarter of
the 2nd century B.C. This he did in a singularly frank, independent and
courageous spirit, with no private ambition to serve, or party cause to
advance, but with an honest desire to expose the iniquity or
incompetence of the governing body, the sordid aims of the middle class,
and the corruption and venality of the city mob. There was nothing of
stoical austerity or of rhetorical indignation in the tone in which he
treated the vices and follies of his time. His character and tastes were
much more akin to those of Horace than of either Persius or Juvenal. But
he was what Horace was not, a thoroughly good hater; and he lived at a
time when the utmost freedom of speech and the most unrestrained
indulgence of public and private animosity were the characteristics of
men who took a prominent part in affairs. Although Lucilius took no
active part in the public life of his time, he regarded it in the spirit
of a man of the world and of society, as well as a man of letters. His
ideal of public virtue and private worth had been formed by intimate
association with the greatest and best of the soldiers and statesmen of
an older generation.

  The remains of Lucilius extend to about eleven hundred, mostly
  unconnected lines, most of them preserved by late grammarians, as
  illustrative of peculiar verbal usages. He was, for his time, a
  voluminous as well as a very discursive writer. He left behind him
  thirty books of satires, and there is reason to believe that each
  book, like the books of Horace and Juvenal, was composed of different
  pieces. The order in which they were known to the grammarians was not
  that in which they were written. The earliest in order of composition
  were probably those numbered from xxvi. to xxix., which were written
  in the trochaic and iambic metres that had been employed by Ennius and
  Pacuvius in their _Saturae_. In these he made those criticisms on the
  older tragic and epic poets of which Horace and other ancient writers
  speak. In them too he speaks of the Numantine War as recently
  finished, and of Scipio as still living. Book i., on the other hand,
  in which the philosopher Carneades, who died in 128, is spoken of as
  dead, must have been written after the death of Scipio. Most of the
  satires of Lucilius were written in hexameters, but, so far as an
  opinion can be formed from a number of unconnected fragments, he seems
  to have written the trochaic tetrameter with a smoothness, clearness
  and simplicity which he never attained in handling the hexameter. The
  longer fragments produce the impression of great discursiveness and
  carelessness, but at the same time of considerable force. He appears,
  in the composition of his various pieces, to have treated everything
  that occurred to him in the most desultory fashion, sometimes adopting
  the form of dialogue, sometimes that of an epistle or an imaginary
  discourse, and often to have spoken in his own name, giving an account
  of his travels and adventures, or of amusing scenes that he had
  witnessed, or expressing the results of his private meditations and
  experiences. Like Horace he largely illustrated his own observations
  by personal anecdotes and fables. The fragments clearly show how often
  Horace has imitated him, not only in expression, but in the form of
  his satires (see for instance i. 5 and ii. 2), in the topics which he
  treats of, and the class of social vices and the types of character
  which he satirizes. For students of Latin literature, the chief
  interest of studying the fragments of Lucilius consists in the light
  which they throw on the aims and methods of Horace in the composition
  of his satires, and, though not to the same extent, of his epistles.
  They are important also as materials for linguistic study; and they
  have considerable historical value.

  Editions by F. D. Gerlach (1846), L. Müller (1872), C. Lachmann (1876,
  posthumous), F. Marx (1905); see also L. Müller, _Leben und Werke des
  Lucilius_ (1876); "Luciliana," by H. A. J. Munro, in the _Journal of
  Philology_, vii. (1877); Mommsen, _Hist. of Rome_, bk. iv. ch. 13;
  "Luciliana," by A. E. Housman, in _Classical Quarterly_ (April, 1907);
  C. Cichorius, _Untersuchungen zu Lucilius_ (Berlin, 1908).
       (W. Y. S.; X.)


  [1] "And so it happens that the whole life of the old man stands
    clearly before us, as if it were represented on a votive picture."

LUCILIUS JUNIOR, a friend and correspondent of the younger Seneca,
probably the author of _Aetna_, a poem on the origin of volcanic
activity, variously attributed to Virgil, Cornelius Severus (epic poet
of the Augustan age) and Manilius. Its composition has been placed as
far back as 44 B.C., on the ground that certain works of art, known to
have been removed to Rome about that date, are referred to as being at a
distance from the city. But as the author appears to have known and made
use of the _Quaestiones Naturales_ of Seneca (written A.D. 65), and no
mention is made of the great eruption of Vesuvius (A.D. 79), the time of
its composition seems to lie between these two dates. In favour of the
authorship of Lucilius are the facts that he was a friend of Seneca and
acquainted with his writings; that he had for some time held the office
of imperial procurator of Sicily, and was thus familiar with the
locality; that he was the author of a poem on Sicilian subjects. It is
objected that in the 79th letter of Seneca, which is the chief authority
on the question, he apparently asks that Lucilius should introduce the
hackneyed theme of Aetna merely as an episode in his contemplated poem,
not make it the subject of separate treatment. The sources of the Aetna
are Posidonius of Apamea, and perhaps the pseudo-Aristotelian _De
Mundo_, while there are many reminiscences of Lucretius. It has come
down in a very corrupt state, and its difficulties are increased by the
unpoetical nature of the subject, the straining after conciseness, and
the obtrusive use of metaphor.

  Editions by J. Scaliger (1595), F. Jacob (1826), H. A. J. Munro
  (1867), M. Haupt (in his edition of Virgil, 1873), E. Bährens (in
  _Poetae latini minores_, ii), S. Sudhaus (1898), R. Ellis (1901,
  containing a bibliography of the subject); see also M. Haupt's
  _Opuscula_, i. 40, ii. 27, 162, iii. 437 (notes, chiefly critical); R.
  Ellis in _Journal of Philology_, xvi. 292; P. R. Wagler, _De Aetna
  poemate quaestiones criticae_ (1884); B. Kruczkiewicz, _Poema de Aetna
  Monte_ (1883, in which the ancient view of the authorship of Virgil is
  upheld); L. Alzinger, _Studia in Aetnam collata_ (1896); R.
  Hildebrandt, _Beiträge zur Erklärung des Gedichtes Aetna_ (1900); J.
  Vessereau (text, translation and commentary, 1905); Teuffel-Schwabe,
  _Hist. of Roman Literature_ (Eng. trans. §§ 307, 308).

LUCINA, goddess of light, a title given to Juno and Diana as presiding
over childbirth and bringing children into the light of the world. The
full name is _lucina dea_, "the light-bringing goddess" (_lux_, light,
hence adj. _lucinus_). It is also given to Hecate (Tibullus 3. 4. 13),
as the bringer of terrible dreams, and is used metaphorically as a
synonym for child-birth (Virg. _Georg_, iii. 60; Ovid, _Ars. Amai._ iii.

LUCIUS, the name of three popes.

LUCIUS I., pope for eight months (253-254), spent a short period of his
pontificate in exile. He is referred to in several letters of Cyprian
(see _Epist._ lxviii. 5) as having been in agreem