Encyclopaedia Britannica_ 11th Edition_ _Map_ to _Mars_ Various 1401 downloads.pdf

The Project Gutenberg eBook of Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th
Edition, "Map" to "Mars"
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most
other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever.
You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project
Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org.
If you are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of
the country where you are located before using this eBook.

Title: Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, "Map" to "Mars"

Author: Various

Release date: May 3, 2013 [eBook #42638]
Most recently updated: October 23, 2024

Language: English

Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/42638

Credits: Produced by Marius Masi, Don Kretz and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ENCYCLOPAEDIA
BRITANNICA, 11TH EDITION, "MAP" TO "MARS" ***

Transcriber’s note: A few typographical errors have been corrected.
They appear in the text like this, and the explanation
will appear when the mouse pointer is moved over
the marked passage. Sections in Greek will yield a

transliteration when the pointer is moved over them,
and words using diacritic characters in the Latin
Extended Additional block, which may not display in
some fonts or browsers, will display an unaccented
version.

Links to other EB articles: Links to articles residing
in other EB volumes will be made available when the
respective volumes are introduced online.

THE ENCYCLOPÆDIA BRITANNICA

A DICTIONARY OF ARTS, SCIENCES,
LITERATURE AND GENERAL INFORMATION
ELEVENTH EDITION

VOLUME XVII SLICE VI

Map to Mars

Articles in This Slice

MAP MARIE LOUISE
MAPLE, SIR JOHN BLUNDELL MARIENBAD
MAPLE MARIENBERG (town of Saxony)
MAPU, ABRAHAM MARIENBURG (town of West Prussia)
MAQQARĪ MARIENWERDER
MAQRĪZĪ MARIE THÉRÈSE
MAR, EARLDOM OF MARIETTA (Georgia, U.S.A.)
MAR, JOHN ERSKINE (regent of MARIETTA (Ohio, U.S.A.)
Scotland)

MAR, JOHN ERSKINE (Scottish MARIETTE, AUGUSTE FERDINAND
politician) FRANÇOIS
MAR, JOHN ERSKINE (Scottish MARIGNAC, JEAN CHARLES
Jacobite) GALISSARD DE
MARA, GERTRUD ELISABETH MARIGNAN, BATTLE OF
MARABOUT MARIGNOLLI, GIOVANNI DE’
MARACAIBO (lake of Venezuela) MARIGNY, ENGUERRAND DE
MARACAIBO (city of Venezuela) MARIGNY, JEAN DE
MARĀGHA MARIGOLD
MARANHÃO MARIINSK
MARANO MARILLAC, CHARLES DE
MARASH MARINES
MARAT, JEAN PAUL MARINETTE
MARATHI MARINI, GIAMBATTISTA
MARATHON MARINO
MARAZION MARINUS (popes)
MARBLE MARINUS (philosopher)
MARBLEHEAD MARINUS OF TYRE
MARBLES MARIO, GIUSEPPE
MARBOT, JEAN BAPTISTE MARION, FRANCIS
ANTOINE MARCELIN
MARBURG (town of Austria) MARION, HENRI FRANÇOIS
MARBURG (town of Germany) MARION (Indiana, U.S.A.)
MARBURG, COLLOQUY OF MARION (Ohio, U.S.A.)
MARCA, PIERRE DE MARIONETTES
MARCANTONIO MARIOTTE, EDME
MARCASITE MARIPOSAN
MARCEAU-DESGRAVIERS, MARIS, JACOB
FRANÇOIS SÉVERIN
MARCEL, ÉTIENNE MARITIME PROVINCE
MARCELLINUS, ST MARITIME TERRITORY
MARCELLO, BENEDETTO MARIUPOL
MARCELLUS (popes) MARIUS OF AVENCHES
MARCELLUS (Roman plebeian MARIUS, GAIUS
family)

MARCESCENT MARIVAUX, PIERRE CARLET DE
CHAMBLAIN DE
MARCH, EARLS OF MARJORAM
MARCH, AUZIAS MARK, ST
MARCH, FRANCIS ANDREW MARK
MARCH (town in England) MARK, GOSPEL OF ST
MARCH (month) MARKBY, SIR WILLIAM
MARCH (of military troops) MARKET
MARCHE (province of France) MARKET BOSWORTH
MARCHE (town of Belgium) MARKET DRAYTON
MARCHENA MARKET HARBOROUGH
MARCHENA RUIZ DE CASTRO, MARKHAM, SIR CLEMENTS ROBERT
JOSÉ
MARCHES, THE MARKHAM, GERVASE
MARCHMONT, EARLS OF MARKHAM, MRS
MARCHPANE MARKHAM, WILLIAM
MARCIAN MARKHOR
MARCIANUS MARKIRCH
MARCION and THE MARCIONITE MARKLAND, JEREMIAH
CHURCHES
MARCOMANNI MARKO KRALYEVICH
MARCOS DE NIZA MARK SYSTEM
MARCOU, JULES MARL
MARCUS AURELIUS ANTONINUS MARLBOROUGH, EARLS AND DUKES
OF
MARCY, WILLIAM LEARNED MARLBOROUGH, JOHN CHURCHILL
MARDIN MARLBOROUGH (England)
MARDUK MARLBOROUGH (Massachusetts, U.S.A.)
MARE MARLITT, E.
MARE CLAUSUM and MARE MARLOW
LIBERUM
MAREE, LOCH MARLOWE, CHRISTOPHER
MAREMMA MARLOWE, JULIA
MARENGO MARLY-LE-ROI
MAREOTIS MARMALADE

MARE’S-TAIL MARMANDE
MARET, HUGUES-BERNARD MARMIER, XAVIER
MARGARET (female name) MARMONT, AUGUSTE FRÉDÉRIC
LOUIS VIESSE DE
MARGARET, ST (virgin and martyr) MARMONTEL, JEAN FRANÇOIS
MARGARET, ST (queen of Malcolm MARMORA
III.)
MARGARET (queen of Scotland) MARMORA, SEA OF
MARGARET (titular queen of MARMOSET
Scotland)
MARGARET (queen of Denmark) MARMOT
MARGARET OF ANJOU MARNE (river of France)
MARGARET OF AUSTRIA (duchess MARNE (department of France)
of Savoy)
MARGARET OF AUSTRIA (duchess MARNIAN EPOCH
of Parma)
MARGARET OF PROVENCE MAROCHETTI, CARLO
MARGARET MAULTASCH MARONITES
MARGARINE MAROONS
MARGARITA MAROS-VÁSÁRHELY
MARGATE MAROT, CLÉMENT
MARGGRAF, ANDREAS MAROT, DANIEL
SIGISMUND
MARGHELAN MARPLE
MARGRAVE MARPRELATE CONTROVERSY
MARGUERITE MARQUAND, HENRY GURDON
MARGUERITE DE VALOIS MARQUARDT, JOACHIM
MARGUERITTE, PAUL and MARQUESAS
VICTOR
MARHEINEKE, PHILIP KONRAD MARQUESS
MARIANA, JUAN DE MARQUETRY
MARIANAO MARQUETTE, JACQUES
MARIANAS (archipelago) MARQUETTE
MARIANAS (tribe of Indians) MARR, CARL
MARIANUS SCOTUS MARRADI, GIOVANNI

MARIA STELLA MARRĀKESH
MARIA THERESA MARRI
MARIAZELL MARRIAGE
MARIE AMÉLIE THÉRÈSE MARRUCINI
MARIE ANTOINETTE MARRUVIUM
MARIE DE FRANCE MARRYAT, FREDERICK
MARIE DE’ MEDICI MARS, MLLE [ANNE FRANÇOISE
HYPPOLYTE BOUTET]
MARIE GALANTE MARS
MARIE LESZCZYNSKA

MAP, a representation, on a plane and a reduced scale, of part or the
whole of the earth’s surface. If specially designed to meet the requirements of
seamen it is called a chart, if on an exceptionally large scale a plan. The words
map and chart are derived from mappa and charta, the former being the Latin
for napkin or cloth, the latter for papyrus or parchment. Maps were thus
named after the material upon which they were drawn or painted, and it
should be noted that even at present maps intended for use in the open air, by
cyclists, military men and others, are frequently printed on cloth. In Italian,
Spanish and Portuguese the word mappa has retained its place, by the side of
carta, for marine charts, but in other languages both kinds of maps1 are
generally known by a word derived from the Latin charta, as carte in French,
Karte in German, Kaart in Dutch. A chart, in French, is called carte
hydrographique, marine or des côtes; in Spanish or Portuguese carta de
marear, in Italian carta da navigare, in German Seekarte (to distinguish it
from Landkarte), in Dutch Zeekaart or Paskaart. A chart on Mercator’s

projection is called Wassende graadkaart in Dutch, carte réduite in French.
Lastly, a collection of maps is called an atlas, after the figure of Atlas, the
Titan, supporting the heavens, which ornamented the title of Lafreri’s and
Mercator’s atlases in the 16th century.

Classification of Maps.—Maps differ greatly, not only as to the scale on
which they are drawn, but also with respect to the fullness or the character of
the information which they convey. Broadly speaking, they may be divided
into two classes, of which the first includes topographical, chorographical and
general maps, the second the great variety designed for special purposes.

Topographical maps and plans are drawn on a scale sufficiently large to
enable the draughtsman to show most objects on a scale true to nature.2 Its
information should not only be accurate, but also conveyed intelligibly and
with taste. Exaggeration, however, is not always to be avoided, for even on the
British 1 in. ordnance map the roads appear as if they were 130 ft. in width.

Chorographical (Gr. χώρα, country or region) and general maps are either
reduced from topographical maps or compiled from such miscellaneous
sources as are available. In the former case the cartographer is merely called
upon to reduce and generalize the information given by his originals, to make
a judicious selection of place names, and to take care that the map is not
overcrowded with names and details. Far more difficult is his task where no
surveys are available, and the map has to be compiled from a variety of
sources. These materials generally include reconnaissance survey of small
districts, route surveys and astronomical observations supplied by travellers,
and information obtained from native sources. The compiler, in combining
these materials, is called upon to examine the various sources of information,
and to form an estimate of their value, which he can only do if he have
himself some knowledge of surveying and of the methods of determining
positions by astronomical observation. A knowledge of the languages in which
the accounts of travellers are written, and even of native languages, is almost
indispensable. He ought not to be satisfied with compiling his map from

existing maps, but should subject each explorer’s account to an independent
examination, when he will frequently find that either the explorer himself, or
the draughtsman employed by him, has failed to introduce into his map the
whole of the information available. Latitudes from the observations of
travellers may generally be trusted, but longitudes should be accepted with
caution; for so competent an observer as Captain Speke placed the capital of
Uganda in longitude 32° 44′ E., when its true longitude as determined by more
trustworthy observations is 32° 26′ E., an error of 18′. Again, on the map
illustrating Livingstone’s “Last Journals” the Luapula is shown as issuing
from the Bangweulu in the north-west, when an examination of the account of
the natives who carried the great explorer’s remains to the coast would have
shown that it leaves that lake on the south.

The second group includes all maps compiled for special purposes. Their
variety is considerable, for they are designed to illustrate physical and
political geography, travel and navigation, trade and commerce, and, in fact,
every subject connected with geographical distribution and capable of being
illustrated by means of a map. We thus have (1) physical maps in great
variety, including geological, orographical and hydrographical maps, maps
illustrative of the geographical distribution of meteorological phenomena, of
plants and animals, such as are to be found in Berghaus’s “Physical Atlas,” of
which an enlarged English edition is published by J. G. Bartholomew of
Edinburgh; (2) political maps, showing political boundaries; (3) ethnological
maps, illustrating the distribution of the varieties of man, the density of
population, &c.; (4) travel maps, showing roads or railways and ocean-routes
(as is done by Philips’ “Marine Atlas”), or designed for the special use of
cyclists or aviators; (5) statistical maps, illustrating commerce and industries;
(6) historical maps; (7) maps specially designed for educational purposes.

Scale of Maps.—Formerly map makers contented themselves with placing
upon their maps a linear scale of miles, deduced from the central meridian or
the equator. They now add the proportion which these units of length have to

nature, or state how many of these units are contained within some local
measure of length. The former method, usually called the “natural scale,” may
be described as “international,” for it is quite independent of local measures of
length, and depends exclusively upon the size and figure of the earth. Thus a
scale of 1 : 1,000,000 signifies that each unit of length on the map represents
one million of such units in nature. The second method is still employed in
many cases, and we find thus:—

1 in. = 1 statute mile (of 63,366 in.) corresponds to 1 : 63,366
6 in. = 1 ” ” ” ” 1 : 10,560
1 in. = 5 chains (of 858 in.) ” 1 : 4,890
1 in. = 1 nautical mile (of 73,037 in.) ” 1 : 73,037
1 in. = 1 verst (of 42,000 in.) ” 1 : 42,000
2 Vienna in. = 1 Austrian mile (of 288,000 in.) ” 1 : 144,000
1 cm. = 500 metres (of 100 cm.) ” 1 : 50,000

In cases where the draughtsman has omitted to indicate the scale we can
ascertain it by dividing the actual length of a meridian degree by the length of
a degree measure upon the map. Thus a degree between 50° and 51° measures
111,226,000 mm.; on the map it is represented by 111 mm. Hence the scale is
1 : 1,000,000 approximately.

The linear scale of maps can obviously be used only in the case of maps
covering a small area, for in the case of maps of greater extension
measurements would be vitiated owing to the distortion or exaggeration
inherent in all projections, not to mention the expansion or shrinking of the
paper in the process of printing. As an extreme instance of the misleading
character of the scale given on maps embracing a wide area we may refer to a
map of a hemisphere. The scale of that map, as determined by the equator or
centre meridian, we will suppose to be 1 : 125,000,000, while the encircling
meridian indicates a scale of 1 : 80,000,000; and a “mean” scale, equal to the
square root of the proportion which the area of the map bears to the actual
area of a hemisphere, is 1 : 112,000,000. In adopting a scale for their maps,
cartographers will do well to choose a multiple of 1000 if possible, for such a

scale can claim to be international, while in planning an atlas they ought to
avoid a needless multiplicity of scales.

Map Projections are dealt with separately below. It will suffice therefore to
point out that the ordinary needs of the cartographer can be met by conical
projections, and, in the case of maps covering a wide area, by Lambert’s equal
area projection. The indiscriminate use of Mercator’s projection, for maps of
the world, is to be deprecated owing to the inordinate exaggeration of areas in
high latitudes. In the case of topographical maps sheets bounded by meridians
and parallels are to be commended.

The meridian of Greenwich has been universally accepted as the initial
meridian, but in the case of most topographical maps of foreign countries
local meridians are still adhered to—the more important among which are:—

Paris (Obs. nationale) 2° 20′ 14″ E. of Greenwich.
Pulkova (St Petersburg) 30° 19′ 39″ E. ”
Stockholm 18° 3′ 30″ E. ”
Rome (Collegio Romano) 12° 28′ 40″ E. ”
Brussels (Old town) 4° 22′ 11″ E. ”
Madrid 3° 41′ 16″ W. ”
Ferro (assumed) 20° 0′ 0″ W. of Paris.

The outline includes coast-line, rivers, roads, towns, and in fact all objects
capable of being shown on a map, with the exception of the hills and of
woods, swamps, deserts and the like, which the draughtsman generally
describes as “ornament.” Conventional signs and symbols are universally used
in depicting these objects.

Delineation of the Ground.—The mole-hills and serrated ridges of medieval
maps were still in almost general use at the close of the 18th century, and are
occasionally met with at the present day, being cheaply produced, readily
understood by the unlearned, and in reality preferable to the uncouth and
misleading hatchings still to be seen on many maps. Far superior are those
scenographic representations which enable a person consulting the map to

identify prominent landmarks,
such as the Pic du Midi, which
rises like a pillar to the south of
Pau, but is not readily
discovered upon an ordinary
map. This advantage is still
fully recognized, for such views
of distant hills are still
commonly given on the margin
of marine charts for the
assistance of navigators;
military surveyors are
encouraged to introduce
sketches of prominent
landmarks upon their
reconnaissance plans, and the
general public is enabled to
consult “Picturesque Relief
Maps”—such as F. W.
Delkeskamp’s Switzerland Fig. 1.
(1830) or his Panorama of the
Rhine. Delineations such as these do not, however, satisfy scientific
requirements. All objects on a map are required to be shown as projected
horizontally upon a plane. This principle must naturally be adhered to when
delineating the features of the ground. This was recognized by J. Picard and
other members of the Academy of Science whom Colbert, in 1668, directed to
prepare a new map of France, for on David Vivier’s map of the environs of
Paris (1674, scale 1 : 86,400) very crude hachures bounding the rivers have
been substituted for the scenographic hills of older maps. Little progress in the
delineation of the ground, however, was made until towards the close of the
18th century, when horizontal contours and hachures regulated according to

the angle of inclination of all slopes, were adopted. These contours intersect
the ground at a given distance above or below the level of the sea, and thus
bound a series of horizontal planes (see fig. 1). Contours of this kind were
first utilized by M. S. Cruquius in his chart of the Merwede (1728); Philip
Buache (1737) introduced such contours or isobaths (Gr. ἶσος, equal; βαθύς,
deep) upon his chart of the Channel, and intended to introduce similar
contours or isohypses (ὔψος, height) for a representation of the land. Dupain-
Triel, acting upon a suggestion of his friend M. Ducarla, published his La
France considérée dans les différentes hauteurs de ses plaines (1791), upon
which equidistant contours at intervals of 16 toises found a place. The
scientific value of these contoured maps is fully recognized. They not only
indicate the height of the land, but also enable us to compute the declivity of
the mountain slopes; and if minor features of ground lying between two
contours—such as ravines, as also rocky precipices and glaciers—are
indicated, as is done on the Siegfried atlas of Switzerland, they fully meet the
requirements of the scientific man, the engineer and the mountain-climber. At
the same time it cannot be denied that these maps, unless the contours are
inserted at short intervals, lack graphic expression. Two methods are
employed to attain this: the first distinguishes the strata or layers by colours;
the second indicates the varying slopes by shades or hachures. The first of
these methods yields a hypsographical, or—if the sea-bottom be included, in
which case all contours are referred to a common datum line—a bathy
hypsographical map. Carl Ritter, in 1806, employed graduated tints,
increasing in lightness on proceeding from the lowlands to the highlands;
while General F. von Hauslab, director of the Austrian Surveys, in 1842,
advised that the darkest tints should be allotted to the highlands, so that they
might not obscure details in the densely peopled plains. The desired effect
may be produced by a graduation of the same colour, or by a polychromatic
scale—such as white, pale red, pale brown, various shades of green, violet and
purple, in ascending order. C. von Sonklar, in his map of the Hohe Tauern (1 :
144,000; 1864) coloured plains and valleys green; mountain slopes in five

shades of brown; glaciers blue or white. E. G. Ravenstein’s map of Ben Nevis
(1887) first employed the colours of the spectrum, viz. green to brown, in
ascending order for the land; blue, indigo and violet for the sea, increasing in
intensity with the height or the depth. At first cartographers chose their
colours rather arbitrarily. Thus Horsell, who was the first to introduce tints on
his map of Sweden and Norway (1 : 600,000; 1835), coloured the lowlands up
to 300 ft. in green, succeeded by red, yellow and white for the higher ground;
while A. Papen, on his hypsographical map of Central Europe (1857)
introduced a perplexing range of colours. At the present time compilers of
strata maps generally limit themselves to two or three colours, in various
shades, with green for the lowlands, brown for the hills and blue for the sea.
On the international map of the world, planned by Professor A. Penck on a
scale of 1 : 1,000,000, which has been undertaken by the leading governments
of the world, the ground is shown by contours at intervals of 100 metres (to be
increased to 200 and 500 metres in mountainous districts); the strata are in
graded tints, viz. blue for the sea, green for lowlands up to 300 metres, yellow
between 300 and 500 metres, brown up to 2000 metres, and reddish tints
beyond that height.

Fig. 2.

The declivities of the ground are still indicated in most topographical maps
by a system of strokes or hachures, first devised by L. Chr. Müller (Plan und
Kartenzeichnen, 1788) and J. G. Lehmann, who directed a survey of Saxony,
1780-1806, and published his Theorie der Bergzeichnung in 1799. By this
method the slopes are indicated by strokes or hachures crossing the contour
lines at right angles, in the direction of flowing water, and varying in thickness
according to the degree of declivity they represent (cf. for example, the map
of Switzerland in this work). The light is supposed to descend vertically upon
the country represented, and in a true scale of shade the intensity increases

with the inclination from 0° to 90°; but as such a scale does not sufficiently
differentiate the lesser inclinations which are the most important, the author
adopted a conventional scale, representing a slope of 45° or more, supposed to
be inaccessible, as absolutely black, the level surfaces, which reflect all the
light which falls upon them, as perfectly white, and the intervening slopes by
a proportion between black and white, as in fig. 2. The main principles of this
system have been maintained, but its details have been modified frequently to
suit special cases. Thus the French survey commission of 1828 fixed the
proportion of black to white at one and a half times the angle of slope; while
in Austria, where steep mountains constitute an important feature, solid black
has been reserved for a slope of 80°, the proportion of black to white varying
from 80 : 0 (for 50°) to 8 : 72 (for 5°). On the map of Germany (1 : 100,000) a
slope of 50° is shown in solid black while stippled hachures are used for
gentle slopes up to 10°. Instead of shading lines following the greatest slopes,
lines following the contours and varying in their thickness and in their
intervals apart, according to the slope of the ground to be represented, may be
employed. This method affords a ready and expeditious means of sketching
the ground, if the draughtsman limits himself to characteristically indicating
its features by what have been called “form lines.” This method can be
recommended in the case of plotting the results of an explorer’s route, or in
the case of countries of which we have no regular survey (cf. the map of
Afghanistan in this work).

Instead of supposing the light to fall vertically upon the surface it is often
supposed to fall obliquely, generally at an angle of 45° from the upper left-
hand corner. It is claimed for this method that it affords a means of giving a
graphic representation of Alpine districts where other methods of shading fail.
The Dufour map of Switzerland (1 : 100,000) is one of the finest examples of
this style of hill-shading. For use in the field, however, and for scientific work,
a contoured map like Siegfried’s atlas of Switzerland, or, in the case of hilly
country, a map shaded on the assumption of a vertical light, will prove more

useful than one of these, notwithstanding that truth to nature and artistic
beauty are claimed on their behalf.

Instead of shading by lines, a like effect may be produced by mezzotint
shading (cf. the map of Italy, or other maps, in this work, on a similar
method), and if this be combined with contour lines very satisfactory results
can be achieved. If this tint be printed in grey or brown, isohypses, in black or
red, show distinctly above it. The same combination is possible if hills
engraved in the ordinary manner are printed in colours, as is done in an
edition of the 1-inch ordnance map, with contours in red and hills hachured in
brown.

Efforts have been made of late years to improve the available methods of
representing ground, especially in Switzerland, but the so-called stereoscopic
or relief maps produced by F. Becker, X. Imfeld, Kümmerly, F. Leuzinger and
other able cartographers, however admirable as works of art, do not, from the
point of utility, supersede the combination of horizontal contours with shaded
slopes, such as have been long in use. There seems to be even less chance for
the combination of coloured strata and hachures proposed by K. Peucker,
whose theoretical disquisitions on aerial perspective are of interest, but have
not hitherto led to satisfactory practical results.3

The above remarks apply more particularly to topographic maps. In the
case of general maps on a smaller scale, the orographic features must be
generalized by a skilful draughtsman and artist. One of the best modern
examples of this kind is Vogel’s map of Germany, on a scale of 1 : 500,000.

Selection of Names and Orthography.—The nomenclature or “lettering” of
maps is a subject deserving special attention. Not only should the names be
carefully selected with special reference to the objects which the map is
intended to serve, and to prevent overcrowding by the introduction of names
which can serve no useful object, but they should also be arranged in such a
manner as to be read easily by a person consulting the map. It is an accepted

rule now that the spelling of names in countries using the Roman alphabet
should be retained, with such exceptions as have been familiarized by long
usage. In such cases, however, the correct native form should be added within
brackets, as Florence (Firenze), Leghorn (Livorno), Cologne (Cöln) and so on.
At the same time these corrupted forms should be eliminated as far as
possible. Names in languages not using the Roman alphabet, or having no
written alphabet should be spelt phonetically, as pronounced on the spot. An
elaborate universal alphabet, abounding in diacritical marks, has been devised
for the purpose by Professor Lepsius, and various other systems have been
adopted for Oriental languages, and by certain missionary societies, adapted
to the languages in which they teach. The following simple rules, laid down
by a Committee of the Royal Geographical Society, will be found sufficient as
a rule; according to this system the vowels are to be sounded as in Italian, the
consonants as in English, and no redundant letters are to be introduced. The
diphthong ai is to be pronounced as in aisle; au as ow in how; aw as in law.
Ch is always to be sounded as in church, g is always hard; y always represents
a consonant; whilst kh and gh stand for gutturals. One accent only is to be
used, the acute, to denote the syllable on which stress is laid. This system has
in great measure been followed throughout the present work, but it is obvious
that in numerous instances these rules must prove inadequate. The
introduction of additional diacritical marks, such as ˉ and ˜, used to express
quantity, and the diaeresis, as in aï, to express consecutive vowels, which are
to be pronounced separately, may prove of service, as also such letters as ä, ö
and ü, to be pronounced as in German, and in lieu of the French ai, eu or u.

The United States Geographic Board acts upon rules practically identical
with those indicated, and compiles official lists of place-names, the use of
which is binding upon government departments, but which it would hardly be
wise to follow universally in the case of names of places outside America.

Measurement on Maps

Measurement of Distance.—The shortest distance between two places on
the surface of a globe is represented by the arc of a great circle. If the two
places are upon the same meridian or upon the equator the exact distance
separating them is to be found by reference to a table giving the lengths of
arcs of a meridian and of the equator. In all other cases recourse must be had
to a map, a globe or mathematical formula. Measurements made on a
topographical map yield the most satisfactory results. Even a general map
may be trusted, as long as we keep within ten degrees of its centre. In the case
of more considerable distances, however, a globe of suitable size should be
consulted, or—and this seems preferable—they should be calculated by the
rules of spherical trigonometry. The problem then resolves itself in the
solution of a spherical triangle.

In the formulae which follow we suppose l and l′ to represent the
latitudes, a and b the co-latitudes (90 − l or 90° − l′), and t the difference
in longitude between them or the meridian distance, whilst D is the
distance required.

If both places have the same latitude we have to deal with an isosceles
triangle, of which two sides and the included angle are given. This
triangle, for the convenience of calculation, we divide into two right-
angled triangles. Then we have sin 1⁄2 D = sin a sin 1⁄2 t, and since sin a =
sin (90° − l) = cos t, it follows that

sin 1⁄2 D = cos l sin 1⁄2 t.

If the latitudes differ, we have to solve an oblique-angled spherical
triangle, of which two sides and the included angle are given. Thus,

cos D − cos a cos b
cos t =
sin a sin b

cos D = cos a cos b + sin a sin b cos t
= sin l sin l′ + cos l cos l′ cos t.

In order to adapt this formula to logarithms, we introduce a subsidiary
angle p, such that cot p = cot l cos t; we then have

cos D = sin l cos (l′ − p) / sin p.

In the above formulae our earth is assumed to be a sphere, but when
calculating and reducing to the sea-level, a base-line, or the side of a
primary triangulation, account must be taken of the spheroidal shape of
the earth and of the elevation above the sea-level. The error due to the
neglect of the former would at most amount to 1%, while a reduction to
the mean level of the sea necessitates but a trifling reduction, amounting,
in the case of a base-line 100,000 metres in length, measured on a plateau
of 3700 metres (12,000 ft.) in height, to 57 metres only.

These orthodromic distances are of course shorter than those measured
along a loxodromic line, which intersects all parallels at the same angle.
Thus the distance between New York and Oporto, following the former
(great circle sailing), amounts to 3000 m., while following the rhumb, as
in Mercator sailing, it would amount to 3120 m.

These direct distances may of course differ widely with the distance
which it is necessary to travel between two places along a road, down a
winding river or a sinuous coast-line. Thus, the direct distance, as the
crow flies, between Brig and the hospice of the Simplon amounts to 4.42
geogr. m. (slope nearly 9°), while the distance by road measures 13.85
geogr. m. (slope nearly 3°). Distances such as these can be measured only
on a topographical map of a fairly large scale, for on general maps many
of the details needed for that purpose can no longer be represented. Space
runners for facilitating these measurements, variously known as
chartometers, curvimeters, opisometers, &c., have been devised in great
variety. Nearly all these instruments register the revolution of a small
wheel of known circumference, which is run along the line to be
measured.

The Measurement of Areas is easily effected if the map at our disposal
is drawn on an equal area projection. In that case we need simply cover
the map with a network of squares—the area of each of which has been
determined with reference to the scale of the map—count the squares,
and estimate the contents of those only partially enclosed within the
boundary, and the result will give the area desired. Instead of drawing
these squares upon the map itself, they may be engraved or etched upon
glass, or drawn upon transparent celluloid or tracing-paper. Still more
expeditious is the use of a planimeter, such as Captain Prytz’s “Hatchet
Planimeter,” which yields fairly accurate results, or G. Coradi’s “Polar
Planimeter,” one of the most trustworthy instruments of the kind.4

When dealing with maps not drawn on an equal area projection we
substitute quadrilaterals bounded by meridians and parallels, the areas for
which are given in the “Smithsonian Geographical Tables” (1894), in
Professor H. Wagner’s tables in the geographical Jahrbuch, or similar
works.

It is obvious that the area of a group of mountains projected on a
horizontal plane, such as is presented by a map, must differ widely from
the area of the superficies or physical surface of those mountains exposed
to the air. Thus, a slope of 45° having a surface of 100 sq. m. projected
upon a horizontal plane only measures 59 sq. m., whilst 100 sq. m. of the
snowclad Sentis in Appenzell are reduced to 10 sq. m. A hypsographical
map affords the readiest solution of this question. Given the area A of the
plane between the two horizontal contours, the height h of the upper
above the lower contour, the length of the upper contour l, and the area of
the face presented by the edge of the upper stratum t·h = A1, the slope α
is found to be tan α = h·l / (A − A1); hence its superficies, A = A2 sec α.
The result is an approximation, for inequalities of the ground bounded by
the two contours have not been considered.

The hypsographical map facilitates likewise the determination of the
mean height of a country, and this height, combined with the area, the
determination of volume, or cubic contents, is a simple matter.5

Relief Maps are intended to present a representation of the ground which
shall be absolutely true to nature. The object, however, can be fully attained
only if the scale of the map is sufficiently large, if the horizontal and vertical
scales are identical, so that there shall be no exaggeration of the heights, and if
regard is had, eventually, to the curvature of the earth’s surface. Relief maps
on a small scale necessitate a generalization of the features of the ground, as
in the case of ordinary maps, as likewise an exaggeration of the heights. Thus
on a relief on a scale of 1 : 1,000,000 a mountain like Ben Nevis would only
rise to a height of 1.3 mm.

The methods of producing reliefs vary according to the scale and the
materials available. A simple plan is as follows—draw an outline of the
country of which a map is to be produced upon a board; mark all points the
altitude of which is known or can be estimated by pins or wires clipped off so
as to denote the heights; mark river-courses and suitable profiles by strips of
vellum and finally finish your model with the aid of a good map, in clay or
wax. If contoured maps are available it is easy to build up a strata-relief,
which facilitates the completion of the relief so that it shall be a fair
representation of nature, which the strata-relief cannot claim to be. A
pantograph armed with cutting-files6 which carve the relief out of a block of
gypsum, was employed in 1893-1900 by C. Perron of Geneva, in producing
his relief map of Switzerland on a scale of 1 : 100,000. After copies of such
reliefs have been taken in gypsum, cement, statuary pasteboard, fossil dust
mixed with vegetable oil, or some other suitable material, they are painted. If
a number of copies is required it may be advisable to print a map of the
country represented in colours, and either to emboss this map, backed with
papier-mâché, or paste it upon a copy of the relief—a task of some difficulty.

Relief maps are frequently objected to on account of their cost, bulk and
weight, but their great use in teaching geography is undeniable.

Globes.7—It is impossible to represent on a plane the whole of the earth’s
surface, or even a large extent of it, without a considerable amount of
distortion. On the other hand a map drawn on the surface of a sphere
representing a terrestrial globe will prove true to nature, for it possesses, in
combination, the qualities which the ingenuity of no mathematician has
hitherto succeeded in imparting to a projection intended for a map of some
extent, namely, equivalence of areas of distances and angles. Nevertheless, it
should be observed that our globes take no account of the oblateness of our
sphere; but as the difference in length between the circumference of the
equator and the perimeter of a meridian ellipse only amounts to 0.16%, it
could be shown only on a globe of unusual size.

The method of manufacturing a globe is much the same as it was at the
beginning of the 16th century. A matrix of wood or iron is covered with
successive layers of papers, pasted together so as to form pasteboard. The
shell thus formed is then cut along the line of the intended equator into two
hemispheres, they are then again glued together and made to revolve round an
axis the ends of which passed through the poles and entered a metal meridian
circle. The sphere is then coated with plaster or whiting, and when it has been
smoothed on a lathe and dried, the lines representing meridians and parallels
are drawn upon it. Finally the globe is covered with the paper gores upon
which the map is drawn. The adaption of these gores to the curvature of the
sphere calls for great care. Generally from 12 to 24 gores and two small
segments for the polar regions printed on vellum paper are used for each
globe. The method of preparing these gores was originally found empirically,
but since the days of Albert Dürer it has also engaged the minds of many
mathematicians, foremost among whom was Professor A. G. Kästner of
Göttingen. One of the best instructions for the manufacture of globes we owe
to Altmütter of Vienna.8

Larger globes are usually on a stand the top of which supports an artificial
horizon. The globe itself rotates within a metallic meridian to which its axis is
attached. Other accessories are an hour-circle, around the north pole, a
compass placed beneath the globe, and a flexible quadrant used for finding the
distances between places. These accessories are indispensable if it be
proposed to solve the problems usually propounded in books on the “use of
the globes,” but can be dispensed with if the globe is to serve only as a map of
the world. The size of a globe is usually given in terms of its diameter. To find
its scale divide the mean diameter of the earth (1,273,500 m.) by the diameter
of the globe; to find its circumference multiply the diameter by π (3.1416).

Map Printing.—Maps were first printed in the second half of the 15th
century. Those in the Rudimentum novitiarum published at Lübeck in 1475 are
from woodcuts, while the maps in the first two editions of Ptolemy published
in Italy in 1472 are from copper plates. Wood engraving kept its ground for a
considerable period, especially in Germany, but copper in the end supplanted
it, and owing to the beauty and clearness of the maps produced by a
combination of engraving and etching it still maintains its ground. The
objection that a copper plate shows signs of wear after a thousand impressions
have been taken has been removed, since duplicate plates are readily produced
by electrotyping, while transfers of copper engravings, on stone, zinc or
aluminium, make it possible to turn out large editions in a printing-machine,
which thus supersedes the slow-working hand-press.9 These impressions from
transfers, however, are liable to be inferior to impressions taken from an
original plate or an electrotype. The art of lithography greatly affected the
production of maps. The work is either engraved upon the stone (which yields
the most satisfactory result at half the cost of copper-engraving), or it is drawn
upon the stone by pen, brush or chalk (after the stone has been “grained”), or
it is transferred from a drawing upon transfer paper in lithographic ink. In
chromolithography a stone is required for each colour. Owing to the great
weight of stones, their cost and their liability of being fractured in the press,
zinc plates, and more recently aluminium plates, have largely taken the place

of stone. The processes of zincography and of algraphy (aluminium printing)
are essentially the same as lithography. Zincographs are generally used for
producing surface blocks or plates which may be printed in the same way as a
wood-cut. Another process of producing such blocks is known as cerography
(Gr. κηρός), wax. A copper plate having been coated with wax, outline and
ornament are cut into the wax, the lettering is impressed with type, and the
intaglio thus produced is electrotyped.10 Movable types are utilized in several
other ways in the production of maps. Thus the lettering of the map, having
been set up in type, is inked in and transferred to a stone or a zinc-plate, or it
is impressed upon transfer-paper and transferred to the stone. Photographic
processes have been utilized not only in reducing maps to a smaller scale, but
also for producing stones and plates from which they may be printed. The
manuscript maps intended to be produced by photographic processes upon
stone, zinc or aluminium, are drawn on a scale somewhat larger than the scale
on which they are to be printed, thus eliminating all those imperfections which
are inherent in a pen-drawing. The saving in time and cost by adopting this
process is considerable, for a plan, the engraving of which takes two years,
can now be produced in two days. Another process, photo- or heliogravure,
for obtaining an engraved image on a copper plate, was for the first time
employed on a large scale for producing a new topographical map of the
Austrian Empire in 718 sheets, on a scale of 1 : 75,000, which was completed
in seventeen years (1873-1890). The original drawings for this map had to be
done with exceptional neatness, the draughtsman spending twelve months on
that which he would have completed in four months had it been intended to
engrave the map on copper; yet an average chart, measuring 530 by 630 mm.,
which would have taken two years and nine months for drawing and
engraving, was completed in less than fifteen months—fifty days of which
were spent in “retouching” the copper plate. It only cost £169 as compared
with £360 had the old method been pursued.

For details of the various methods of reproduction see Lithography;
Process, &c.

History of Cartography

A capacity to understand the nature of maps is possessed even by peoples
whom we are in the habit of describing as “savages.” Wandering tribes
naturally enjoy a great advantage in this respect over sedentary ones. Our
arctic voyagers—Sir E. W. Parry, Sir J. Ross, Sir F. L. MacClintock and others
—have profited from rough maps drawn for them by Eskimos. Specimens of
such maps are given in C. F. Hall’s Life with the Esquimaux (London, 1864).
Henry Youle Hind, in his work on the Labrador Peninsula (London, 1863)
praises the map which the Montagnais and Nasquapee Indians drew upon
bark. Similar essays at map-making are reported in connexion with
Australians, Maoris and Polynesians. Tupaya, a Tahitian, who accompanied
Captain Cook in the “Endeavour” to Europe, supplied his patron with maps;
Raraka drew a map in chalk of the Paumotu archipelago on the deck of
Captain Wilkes’s vessel; the Marshall islanders, according to Captain Winkler
(Marine Rundschau, Oct. 1893) possess maps upon which the bearings of the
islands are indicated by small strokes. Far superior were the maps found
among the semi-civilized Mexicans when the Spaniards first discovered and
invaded their country. Among them were cadastral plans of villages, maps of
the provinces of the empire of the Aztecs, of towns and of the coast.
Montezuma presented Cortes with a map, painted on Nequen cloth, of the
Gulf coast. Another map did the Conquistador good service on his campaign
against Honduras (Lorenzana, Historia de nueva España, Mexico, 1770; W.
H. Prescott, History of the Conquest of Mexico, New York, 1843). Peru, the
empire of the Incas, had not only ordinary maps, but also maps in relief, for
Pedro Sarmiento da Gamboa (History of the Incas, translated by A. R.
Markham, 1907) tells us that the 9th Inca (who died in 1191) ordered such
reliefs to be produced of certain localities in a district which he had recently
conquered and intended to colonize. These were the first relief maps on
record. It is possible that these primitive efforts of American Indians might

have been further developed, but the Spanish conquest put a stop to all
progress, and for a consecutive history of the map and map-making we must
turn to the Old World, and trace this history from Egypt and Babylon, through
Greece, to our own age.

The ancient Egyptians were famed as “geometers,” and as early as the days
of Rameses II. (Sesostris of the Greeks, 1333-1300 b.c.) there had been made
a cadastral survey of the country showing the rows of pillars which separated
the nomens as well as the boundaries of landed estates. It was upon a map
based upon such a source that Eratosthenes (276-196 b.c.) measured the
distance between Syene and Alexandria which he required for his
determination of the length of a degree. Ptolemy, who had access to the
treasures of the famous library of Alexandria was able, no doubt, to utilize
these cadastral plans when compiling his geography. It should be noted that
he places Syene only two degrees to the east of Alexandria instead of three
degrees, the actual meridian distance between the two places; a difference
which would result from an error of only 7° is the orientation of the map used
by Ptolemy. Scarcely any specimens of ancient Egyptian cartography have
survived. In the Turin Museum are preserved two papyri with rough drawings
of gold mines established by Sesostris in the Nubian Desert.11 These drawings
have been commented upon by S. Birch, F. Chabas, R. J. Lauth and other
Egyptologists, and have been referred to as the two most ancient maps in
existence. They can, however, hardly be described as maps, while in age they
are surpassed by several cartographical clay tablets discovered in Babylonia.
On another papyrus in the same museum is depicted the victorious return of
Seti I. (1366-1333) from Syria, showing the road from Pelusium to
Heroopolis, the canal from the Nile with crocodiles, and a lake (mod. Lake
Timsah) with fish in it. Apollonius of Rhodes who succeeded Eratosthenes as
chief librarian at Alexandria (196 b.c.) reports in his Argonautica (iv. 279) that
the inhabitants of Colchis whom, like Herodotus (ii., 104) he looks upon as
the descendants of Egyptian colonists, preserved, as heirlooms, certain graven
tablets (κύρβεις) on which land and sea, roads and towns were accurately

indicated.12 Eustathius (since 1160 archbishop of Thessalonica) in his
commentary on Dionysius Periegetes, mentions route-maps which Sesostris
caused to be prepared, while Strabo (i., 1. 5) dwells at length upon the wealth
of geographical documents to be found in the library of Alexandria.

A cadastral survey for purposes of taxation was already at work in
Babylonia in the age of Sargon of Akkad, 3800 b.c. In the British Museum
may be seen a series of clay tablets, circular in shape and dating back to 2300
or 2100 b.c., which contain surveys of lands. One of these depicts in a rough
way lower Babylonia encircled by a “salt water river,” Oceanus.

Development of Map-making among the Greeks.13—Ionian mercenaries and
traders first arrived in Egypt, on the invitation of Psammetichus I. about the
middle of the 7th century b.c. Among the visitors to Egypt, there were, no
doubt, some who took an interest in the science of the Egyptians. One of the
most distinguished among them was Thales of Miletus (640-543 b.c.), the
founder of the Ionian school of philosophy, whose pupil, Anaximander (611-
546 b.c.) is credited by Eratosthenes with having designed the first map of the
world. Anaximander looked upon the earth as a section of a cylinder, of
considerable thickness, suspended in the centre of the circular vault of the
heavens, an idea perhaps borrowed from the Babylonians, for Job (xxvi. 7)
already speaks of the earth as “hanging upon nothing.” Like Homer he looked
upon the habitable world (οἰκουμένη) as being circular in outline and
bounded by a circumfluent river. The geographical knowledge of
Anaximander was naturally more ample than that of Homer, for it extended
from the Cassiterides or Tin Islands in the west to the Caspian in the east,
which he conceived to open out into Oceanus. The Aegean Sea occupied the
centre of the map, while the line where ocean and firmament seemed to meet
represented an enlarged horizon.

Anaximenes, a pupil of Anaximander, was the first to reject the view that
the earth was a circular plane, but held it to be an oblong rectangle, buoyed up
in the midst of the heavens by the compressed air upon which it rested.

Circular maps, however, remained in the popular favour long after their
erroneousness had been recognized by the learned.

Even Hecataeus of Miletus (549-472 b.c.), the author of a Periodos or
description of the earth, of whom Herodotus borrowed the terse saying that
Egypt was the gift of the Nile, retained this circular shape and circumfluent
ocean when producing his map of the world, although he had at his disposal
the results of the voyage of Scylax of Caryanda from the Indus to the Red Sea,
of Darius’ campaign in Scythia (513), the information to be gathered among
the merchants from all parts of the world who frequented an emporium like
Miletus, and what he had learned in the course of his own extensive travels.
Hecataeus was probably the author of the “bronze tablets upon which was
engraved the whole circuit of the earth, the sea and rivers” (Herod, v. 49),
which Aristagoras, the tyrant of Miletus, showed to Cleomenes, the king of
Sparta, in 504, whose aid he sought in vain in a proposed revolt against
Darius, which resulted disastrously in 494 in the destruction of Miletus. The
map of the world brought upon the stage in Aristophanes’ comedy of The
Clouds (423 b.c.), whereon a disciple of the Sophists points out upon it the
position of Athens and of other places known to the audience, was probably of
the popular circular type, which Herodotus (iv. 36) not many years before had
derided and which was discarded by Greek cartographers ever after. Thus
Democritus of Abdera (b. c. 450, d. after 360), the great philosopher and
founder, with Leucippus, of the atomic theory, was also the author of a map of
the inhabited world which he supposed to be half as long again from west to
east, as it was broad.

Dicaearcus of Messana in Sicily, a pupil of Aristotle (326-296 b.c.), is the
author of a topographical account of Hellas, with maps, of which only
fragments are preserved; he is credited with having estimated the size of the
earth, and, as far as known he was the first to draw a parallel across a map.14
This parallel, or dividing line, called diaphragm (partition) by a commentator,
extended due east from the Pillars of Hercules, through the Mediterranean,

and along the Taurus and Imaus (Himalaya) to the eastern ocean. It divided
the inhabited world, as then known, into a northern and a southern half. In
compiling his map he was able to avail himself of the information obtained by
the bematists (surveyors who determined distances by pacing) who
accompanied Alexander the Great on his campaigns; of the results of the
voyage of Nearchus from the Indus to the Euphrates, and of the “Periplus” of
Scylax of Caryanda, which described the coast from between India and the
head of the Arabian Gulf. On the other hand he unwisely rejected the results
of the observations for latitude made by Pytheas in 326 b.c. at his native town,
Massilia, and during a subsequent voyage to northern Europe. In the end the
map of Dicaearcus resembled that of Democritus.

Scientific geography profited largely from the labours of Eratosthenes of
Cyrene, whom Ptolemy Euergetes appointed keeper of the famous library of
Alexandria in 247 b.c., and died in that city in 195 b.c. He won fame as
having been the first to determine the size of the earth by a scientific method.
Having determined the difference of latitude between Alexandria and Syene
which he erroneously believed to lie on the same meridian, and obtained the
distance of those places from each other from the surveys made by Egyptian
geometers, he concluded that a degree of the meridian measured 700 stadia.15

Eratosthenes is the author of a treatise which deals systematically with the
geographical knowledge of his time, but of which only fragments have been
preserved by Strabo and others. This treatise was intended to illustrate and
explain his map of the world. In this task he was much helped by the materials
collected in his library. Among the travellers of whose information he was
thus able to avail himself were Pytheas of Massilia, Patroclus, who had visited
the Caspian (285-282 b.c.), Megasthenes, who visited Palibothra on the
Ganges, as ambassador of Seleucus Nicator (302-291 b.c.), Timosthenus of
Rhodes, the commander of the fleet of Ptolemy Philadelphus (284-246 b.c.)
who wrote a treatise “On harbours,” and Philo, who visited Meroe on the
upper Nile. His map formed a parallelogram measuring 75,800 stadia from

Usisama (Ushant island) or Sacrum Promontorium in the west to the mouth of
the Ganges and the land of the Coniaci (Comorin) in the east, and 46,000
stadia from Thule in the north to the supposed southern limit of Libya. Across
it were drawn seven parallels, running through Meroe, Syene, Alexandria,
Rhodes, Lysimachia on the Hellespont, the mouth of the Borysthenes and
Thule, and these were crossed at right angles by seven meridians, drawn at
irregular intervals, and passing through the Pillars of Hercules, Carthage,
Alexandria, Thapsacus on the Euphrates, the Caspian gates, the mouth of the
Indus and that of the Ganges. The position of all the places mentioned was
supposed to have been determined by trustworthy authorities. The inhabited
world thus delineated formed an island of irregular shape, surrounded on all
sides by the ocean, the Erythrean Sea freely communicating with the western
ocean. In his text Eratosthenes ignored the popular division of the world into
Europe, Asia and Libya, and substituted for it a northern and southern
division, divided by the parallel of Rhodes, each of which he subdivided into
sphragides or plinthia—seals or plinths. The principles on which these
divisions were made remain an enigma to the present day.

This map of Eratosthenes, notwithstanding its many errors, such as the
assumed connexion of the Caspian with a northern ocean and the supposition
that Carthage, Sicily and Rome lay on the same meridian, enjoyed a high
reputation in his day. Even Strabo (c. 30 b.c.) adopted its main features, but
while he improved the European frontier, he rejected the valuable information
secured by Pytheas and retained the connexion between the Caspian and the
outer ocean. In the extreme east his information extended no further than that
of Eratosthenes, viz. to India and Taprobane (Ceylon) and the Sacae (Kirghiz).

Hipparchus, the famous astronomer, on the other hand, (c. 150 b.c.) proved
a somewhat captious critic. He justly objected to the arbitrary network of the
map of Eratosthenes. The parallels or climata16 drawn through places, of
which the longest day is of equal length and the decimation (distance) from
the equator is the same, he maintained, ought to have been inserted at equal

intervals, say of half an hour, and the meridians inserted on a like principle. In
fact, he demanded that maps should be based upon a regular projection,
several descriptions of which he had adopted for his star maps. He moreover
accuses Eratosthenes, (whose determination of a degree he accepts without
hesitation) with trusting too much to hypothesis in compiling his map instead
of having recourse to latitudes and longitudes deduced by astronomical
observations. Such observations, however, were but rarely available at the
time. A few latitudes had indeed been observed, but although Hipparchus had
shown how longitudes could be determined by the observation of eclipses,
this method was in reality not available for want of trustworthy time-keepers.
The determination of an ocean surrounding the inhabited earth he declared to
be based on a mere hypothesis and that it would be equally allowable to
describe the Erythraea as a sea surrounded by land. Hipparchus is not known
to have compiled a map himself.

About the same time Crates of Mallus (d. 145 b.c.) embodied the views of
the Stoic school of philosophy in a globe which has become typical as one of
the insignia of royalty. On this globe an equatorial and a meridional ocean
divide our earth into four quarters, each inhabited, thus anticipating the
discovery of North and South America and Australia.17

Fig. 2.—The Globe of Crates of Mallus.

The period between Eratosthenes and Marinus of Tyre was one of great
political importance. Carthage had been destroyed (146 b.c.), Julius Caesar
had carried on his campaign in Gaul (58-51 b.c.), Egypt had been occupied
(30 b.c.), Britannia conquered (a.d. 41-79), and the Roman empire had
attained its greatest extent and power under the emperor Trajan (a.d. 98-117).
But although military operations added to our knowledge of the world,
scientific cartography was utterly neglected.

Among Greek works written during this period there are several which
either give us an idea of the maps available at that time, or furnish information
of direct service to the compiler of a map. Among the latter a Periplus or
coastal guide of the Erythrean Sea, which clearly reveals the peninsular shape
of India (a.d. 90) and Arrian’s Periplus Ponti Euxeni (a.d. 131) which Festus
Avienus translated into Latin. Among travellers Eudoxus of Cyzicus occupies
a foremost rank, since, between 115-87 b.c. he visited India and the east coast
of Africa, which subsequently he attempted in vain to circumnavigate by
following the route of Hanno, along the west coast. Among geographers
should be mentioned Posidonius (135-51), the head of the Stoic school of

Rhodes, who is stated to be responsible for having reduced the length of a
degree to 500 stadia; Artemidorus of Ephesus, whose “Geographumena” (c.
100 b.c.) are based upon his own travels and a study of itineraries, and above
all, Strabo, who has already been referred to. Among historians who looked
upon geography as an important aid in their work are numbered Polybius (c.
210-120 b.c.), Diodorus Siculus (c. 30 b.c.) and Agathachidus of Cnidus (c.
120 b.c.) to whom we are indebted for a valuable account of the Erythrean Sea
and the adjoining parts of Arabia and Ethiopia. The Periegesis of Dionysius of
Alexandria is a popular description of the world in hexameters, of no
particular scientific value (c. a.d. 130). He as well as Artemidorus and others
accepted a circular or ellipsoidal shape of the world and a circumfluent ocean;
Strabo alone adhered to the scientific theories of Eratosthenes.

Fig. 3.—Ptolemy’s Map.

The credit of having returned to the scientific principles innovated by
Eratosthenes and Hipparchus is due to Marinus of Tyre (c. a.d. 120) which,
though no longer occupying the pre-eminent position of former times, was yet
an emporium of no inconsiderable importance, having extensive connexions
by sea and land. The map of Marinus and the descriptive accounts which
accompanied it have perished, but we learn sufficient concerning them from
Ptolemy to be able to appreciate their merits and demerits. Marinus was the

first who laid down the position of places on a projection according to their
latitude and longitude, but the projection used by him was of the rudest.
Parallels and meridians were represented by straight lines intersecting each
other at right angles, the relative proportions between degrees of longitude
and latitude being retained only along the parallel of Rhodes. The distortion of
the countries represented would thus increase with the distance, north and
south, from this central parallel. The number of places whose position had
been determined by astronomical observation was as yet very small, and the
map had thus to be compiled mainly from itineraries furnished by travellers or
the dead reckoning of seamen. The errors due to an exaggeration of distances
were still further increased on account of his assuming a degree to be equal to
500 stadia, as determined by Posidonius, instead of accepting the 700 stadia of
Eratosthenes. He was thus led to assume that the distance from the first
meridian drawn through the Fortunate islands to Sera (mod. Si-ngan-fu), the
capital of China, was equal to 225°, which Ptolemy reduced to 177°, but
which in reality only amount to 126°. A like overestimate of the distances
covering the march of Julius Maternus to Agisymba, which Marinus places
24° south of the equator, a latitude which Ptolemy reduces to 18°, but which is
probably no farther south than lat. 12° N. The map of Marinus was
accompanied by a list of places arranged according to latitude and longitude.
It must have been much in demand, for three editions of it were prepared.
Masudi (10th century) saw a copy of it and declared it to be superior to
Ptolemy’s map.

Fig. 4.

Ptolemy (q.v.) was the author of a Geography18 (c. a.d. 150) in eight books.
“Geography,” in the sense in which he uses the term, signifies the delineation
of the known world, in the shape of a map, while chorography carries out the
same objects in fuller detail, with regard to a particular country. In Book I. he
deals with the principles of mathematical geography, map projections, and
sources of information with special reference to his predecessor Marinus.
Books II. to VII. form an index to the maps. They contain about 8000 names,
with their latitudes and longitudes, and with their aid it is possible to
reconstruct the maps. These maps existed, as a matter of course, before such
an index could be compiled, but it is doubtful whether the maps in our
available manuscript, which are attributed to Agathodaemon, are copies of
Ptolemy’s originals or have been compiled, after their loss, from this index.
Book VIII. gives further details with reference to the principal towns of each
map, as to geographical position, length of day, climata, &c.

Ptolemy’s great merit consists in having accepted the views of Hipparchus
with respect to a projection suited for a map of the world. Of the two
projections proposed by him one is a modified conical projection with curved
parallels and straight meridians; in the second projection (see fig. 3) both

parallels and meridians are curved. The correct relations in the length of
degrees of latitude and longitude are maintained in the first case along the
latitude of Thule and the equator, in the second along the parallel of
Agisymba, the equator and the parallels of Meroe, Syene and Thule.
Following Hipparchus he divided the equator into 360° drawing his prime
meridian through the Fortunate Islands (Canaries). The 26 special maps are
drawn on a rectangular projection. As a map compiler Ptolemy does not take a
high rank. In the main he copied Marinus whose work he revised and
supplemented in some points, but he failed to realize the peninsular shape of
India, erroneously exaggerated the size of Taprobane (Ceylon), and suggested
that the Indian Ocean had no connexion with the western ocean, but formed
Mare Clausum. Ptolemy knew but of a few latitudes which had been
determined by actual observation, while of three longitudes resulting from
simultaneous observation of eclipses he unfortunately accepted the least
satisfactory, namely, that which placed Arbela 45° to the east of Carthage,
while the actual meridian distance only amounts to 34°. An even graver source
of error was Ptolemy’s acceptance of a degree of 500 instead of 700 stadia.
The extent to which the more correct proportion would have affected the
delineation of the Mediterranean is illustrated by fig. 4. But in spite of his
errors the scientific method pursued by Ptolemy was correct, and though he
was neglected by the Romans and during the middle ages, once he had
become known, in the 15th century, he became the teacher of the modern
world.

Map-Making among the Romans.—We learn from Cicero, Vitruvius,
Seneca, Suetonius, Pliny and others, that the Romans had both general and
topographical maps. Thus, Varro (De rustici) mentions a map of Italy
engraved on marble, in the temple of Tellus, Pliny, a map of the seat of war in
Armenia, of the time of the emperor Nero, and the more famous map of the
Roman Empire which was ordered to be prepared for Julius Caesar (44 b.c.),
but only completed in the reign of Augustus, who placed a copy of it,
engraved in marble, in the Porticus of his sister Octavia (7 b.c.). M. Vipsanius

Agrippa, the son-in-law of Augustus (d. 12 b.c.), who superintended the
completion of this famous map, also wrote a commentary illustrating it,
quotations from which of Ammianus Marcellinus of Antioch (d. 330), Pliny
and others, afford the only means of judging of its character. The map is
supposed to be based upon actual surveys or rather reconnaissances, and if it
be borne in mind that the Roman Empire at that time was traversed in all
directions by roads furnished with mile-stones, that the Agrimensores
employed upon such a duty were skilled surveyors, and that the official
reports of the commanders of military expeditions and of provincial governors
were available, this map, as well as the provincial maps upon which it was
based, must have been a work of superior excellence, the loss of which is
much to be regretted. A copy of it may possibly have been utilized by Marinus
and Ptolemy in their compilations. The Romans have been reproached for
having neglected the scientific methods of map-making advocated by
Hipparchus. Their maps, however, seem to have met the practical
requirements of political administration and of military undertakings.

Only two specimens of Roman cartography have come down to us, viz.
parts of a plan of Rome, of the time of the emperor Septimius Severus (a.d.
193-211), now in the Museo Capitolino, and an itinerarium scriptum, or road
map of the world, compressed within a strip 745 mm. in length and 34 mm.
broad. Of its character the reduced copy of one of its 12 sections (fig. 5)
conveys an idea. The map, apparently of the 3rd century, was copied by a
monk at Colmar, in 1265, who fortunately contented himself with adding a
few scriptural names, and having been acquired by the learned Conrad
Peutinger of Augsburg it became known as Tabula peutingeriana. The original
is now in the imperial library of Vienna.19

Fig. 5.—A Section of Peutinger’s Tabula.

Fig. 6.—The World according to Cosmas Indicopleustes (535).

Map-Making in the Middle Ages.—In scientific matters the early middle
ages were marked by stagnation and retrogression. The fathers of the church
did not encourage scientific pursuits, which Lactantius (4th century) declared
to be unprofitable. The doctrine of the sphericity of the earth was still held by
the more learned, but the heads of the church held it to be unscriptural. Pope
Zachary, when in 741 he condemned the views of Virgilius, the learned bishop

of Salzburg, an Irishman who had
been denounced as a heretic by St
Boniface, declares it to be perversa
et iniqua doctrina. Even after
Gerbert of Aurillac, better known as
Pope Sylvester II. (999-1063), Adam
of Bremen (1075), Albertus Magnus
(d. 1286), Roger Bacon (d. 1294),
and indeed all men of leading had
accepted as a fact and not a mere
hypothesis the geocentric system of
the universe and sphericity of the Fig. 7.—Map of Albi (8th century).
globe, the authors of maps of the
world, nearly all of whom were monks, still looked in the main to the Holy
Scriptures for guidance in outlining the inhabited world. We have to deal thus
with three types of these early maps, viz. an oblong rectangular, a circular and
an oval type, the latter being either a compromise between the two former, or
an artistic development of the circular type. In every instance the inhabited
world is surrounded by the ocean. The authors of rectangular maps look upon
the Tabernacle as an image of the world at large, and believe that such
expressions as the “four corners of the earth” (Isa. x. 12), could be reconciled
only with a rectangular world. On the other hand there was the expression
“circuit of the earth” (Isa. xl. 22), and the statement (Ezek. v. 5) that “God had
set Jerusalem in the midst of the nations and countries.” In nearly every case
the East occupies the top of the map. Neither parallels nor meridians are
indicated, nor is there a scale. Other features frequently met with are the
Paradise in the Far East, miniatures of towns, plants, animals, human beings
and monsters, and an indication of the twelve winds around the margin.

Fig. 8.—Anglo-Saxon Map of the World (9th century).

The oldest rectangular map of the world is contained in a most valuable
work written by Cosmas, an Alexandrian monk, surnamed Indicopleustes,
after returning from a voyage to India (535 a.d.), and entitled Christian
Topography. According to Cosmas (fig. 6) the inhabited earth has the shape of
an oblong rectangle surrounded by an ocean which breaks in in four great
gulfs—the Roman or Mediterranean, the Arabian, Persian and Caspian Sea.

Beyond this ocean lies another world, which was occupied by man before the
Deluge, and within which Cosmas placed the Terrestrial Paradise. Above this
rise the walls of the heavens like unto the tent of the Tabernacle. Far more
simple is a small map of the world of the 8th century found in a codex in the
library of Albi, an archiepiscopal seat in the department of Tarn. Its scanty
nomenclature is almost wholly derived from the “Historiae adversum
paganos” of Paulus Orosius (418). Far greater interest attaches to the so-called
Anglo-Saxon Map of the World in the British Museum (Cotton MSS.), where
it is bound up in a codex which also contains a copy of the Periegesis of
Priscianus. Map and Periegesis are copies by the same hand, but no other
connexion exists between them. More than half the nomenclature of the map
is derived from Orosius, an annotated Anglo-Saxon version of which had been
produced by King Alfred (871-901). The Anglo-Saxons of the time were of
course well acquainted with Island (first thus named in 870) Slesvic and
Norweci (Norway), and there is no need to have recourse to Adam of Bremen
(1076) to account for their presence upon this map. The broad features of the
map were derived no doubt from an older document which may likewise have
served as the basis for the map of the world engraved on silver for
Charlemagne, and was also consulted by the compilers of the Hereford and
Ebstorf maps (see fig. 11).

Fig. 9.—T map from Isidor of Seville’s Origines.

The map or diagram of which Leonardo Dati in his poem on the Sphere
(Della Spera) wrote in 1422 “un T dentre a uno O mostra il disegno” (a T
within an O shows the design) is one of the most persistent types among the
circular or wheel maps of the world. It perpetuates the tripartite division of the
world by the ancient Greeks and survives in the Royal Orb. A diagram of this
description will be found in Isidor of Seville’s Origines (630), see fig. 9.

T maps of more elaborate design illustrate the MS. copies of Sallust’s
Bellum jugurthinum; one of these taken from a codex of the 11th century in
the Leipzig town library is shown in fig. 10.

Fig. 10.—Map illustrating Sallust’s Bellum jugurthinum (11th century, Leipzig).

The outlines of several medieval maps resemble each other to such an
extent that there can be no doubt that they are derived from the same original
source. This source by some authors is assumed to have been the official map
of the Roman Empire, but if we compare the crude outline given to the
Mediterranean with the more correct delineation of Ptolemy, who was
certainly in a position to avail himself of these official sources, such an
assumption is untenable. The earliest delineation of the description has
already been referred to as the Anglo-Saxon map of the world. Next in the
order of age, follows the oval map which Henry, canon of Mayence Cathedral,
dedicated to Mathilda, consort of the emperor Henry V. (1110). Of far greater
importance is the map seen in Hereford Cathedral. It is the work of Richard of
Haldingham, and has a diameter of 134 cm. (53 ins.). The “survey” ordered by
Julius Caesar is referred to in the legend, evidently derived from the
Cosmography of Aethicus a work widely read at the time, but this does not

prove that the author was able to avail himself of a map based upon that
survey. A map essentially identical with that of Hereford, but larger—its
diameter is 15.6 cm. (6 in.), and consequently fuller of information—was
discovered in 1830 in the old monastery of Ebstorf in Hanover. Its date is
1484. Both maps abound in miniature pictures of towns, animals, fabulous
beings and other subjects. The Hereford map is surmounted by a picture of the
Day of Judgment. Similar in design, though much smaller of scale and oval in
form, are the maps which illustrate the popular Polychronicon of Ranulf
Higden, a monk of St Werburgh’s Abbey of Chester (d. 1363).

Fig. 11.—The Hereford Map (c. 1280).

Fig. 12.—The Map of Beatus (776).

Pomponius Mela tells us that beyond the Ethiopian Ocean which sweeps
round Africa in the south and the uninhabitable torrid zone, there lies an alter
orbis, or fourth part of the world inhabited by Antichthones. On a diagram
illustrating the origines of Isidore of Seville (d. 636) this country is shown, but
is described as a terra inhabitabilis. It is shown likewise upon a number of
maps which illustrate the Commentaries on the Apocalypse, by Beatus, a
Benedictine monk of the abbey of Valcavado at the foot of the hills of Liebana
in Asturia (776).

Our little map (fig. 12) is taken from a copy of Beatus’ work made in 1203,
and preserved at Burgo de Osma in Castille. Similar maps illustrating the
Commentaries exist at St Sever (1050), Paris (1203), and Tunis; others are
rectangular, the oldest being in Lord Ashburnham’s library (970). Beatus, too,

describes the southern land as inhabitabilis. The habitable world is divided
among the twelve apostles, whose portraits are given. On the maps illustrating
the encyclopaedic Liber floridus by Lambert, a canon of St Omer (1120), this
south land “unknown to the sons of Adam,” is stated to be inhabited
“according to the philosophers” by Antipodes. Lambert, indeed, seems to have
believed in the sphericity of the earth. Fig. 13 shows his map of the world
reduced from a MS. at Wolfenbüttel, to which is added a diagram of the zones
from a MS. at Ghent, which illustrates Macrobius’ commentary on Cicero’s
Somnium Scipionis. Diagrams illustrating the division of the world into
climata, are to be found in the opus majus of Roger Bacon (d. 1294) and in
Cardinal Pierre d’Ailly’s De imagine Mundi (1410).

Fig. 13.

Among countries represented on a larger scale on maps, Palestine not
unnaturally occupies a prominent place in this age of pilgrimages and
crusades (1095-1291). The maps which accompany St Jerome’s translation of
the Onomasticon of St Eusebius (388). The same subject is illustrated by a
picture-map in mosaic, portions of which were discovered in 1896 on the floor
of the church of Madaba to the east of the Dead Sea. This is the oldest original
of a map in existence, for it dates back to the 6th century. Among more recent

maps of Palestine, that by Petrus Vesconte (1320) is greatly superior to the
earlier maps. It illustrates Marino Sanuto’s Secreta fidelium crucis, in which
its author vainly appeals to Christendom to undertake another crusade. One of
the earliest plans of Jerusalem is contained in Gesta Francorum, a history of
the Crusades up to 1106, based upon information furnished by Fulcherius of
Chartres (c. 1109).

There existed, no doubt, special maps
of European countries, but the only
documents of that description are two
maps of Great Britain, the one of the
12th century, the other by Matthew of
Paris, the famous historiographer of the
monastery of St Albans (1236-1259).20

Celestial globes were known in the
time of Bede; they formed part of the
educational apparatus of the monastic
schools. Gerbert of Aurillac is known to
have made such globes (929). Their
manufacture is described by Alphonso
the Wise (1252), as also in De sphaera Fig. 14.—Matthew of Paris (1236-1259).
solida of G. Campanus of Novara
(1303). Terrestrial globes, however, are not referred to.

Map-making among the Arabians and other Nations of the East.—Bagdad
early became a famous seat of learning. Indian astronomers found apt pupils
there among the Arabs; the works of Ptolemy were translated into Arabic, and
in 827, in the reign of the caliph Abdullah al Mamun, an arc of the meridian
was measured in the plain of Mesopotamia. Most famous among these
Arabian astronomers were Al Batani (d. 998), Ibn Yunis of Cairo (d. 1008),
Zarkala (Azarchel), who determined the meridian distance between his
observatory in Toledo and Bagdad to amount to 51° 30′, an error of 3° only, as

compared with Ptolemy’s error of 18°, and Abul Hassan (1230) who reduced
the great axis of the Mediterranean to 44°.

Fig. 15.—Idrisi (1154).

Fig. 16.—Idrisi (1154).

Further materials serviceable to the compilers of maps were supplied by
numerous Arabian travellers and geographers, among whom Masudi (915-
940), Istakhri (950), Ibn Haukal (942-970), Al Biruni (d. 1038), Ibn Batuta
(1325-1356) and Abul Feda (1331-1370), occupy a foremost place, yet the
few maps which have reached us are crude in the extreme. Masudi, who saw
the maps in the Horismos or Rasm el Ard, a description of the world by Abu
Jafar Mahommed ben Musa of Khiva, the librarian of the caliph el Mamun
(833), declares them to be superior to the maps of Ptolemy or Marinus, but
maps of a later date by Istakhri (950) or Ibn al Wardi (1349) are certainly of a
most rudimentary type. Nor can Idrisi’s map of the world, which was
engraved for King Roger of Sicily upon a silver plate, or the rectangular map
in 70 sheets which accompanies his geography (Nushat-ul Mushtat) take rank

with Ptolemy’s work. These maps are based upon information collected
during many years at the instance of King Roger. The seven climates adopted
by Idrisi are erroneously supposed to be equal in latitudinal extent. The
Mediterranean occupies nearly half the inhabited world in longitude, and the
east coast of Africa is shown as if it extended due east.

The Arabians are not known to have produced a terrestrial globe, but
several of their celestial globes are to be found in our collections. The oldest
of these globes was made at Valentia, and is now in the museum of Florence.
Another globe (of 1225) is at Velletri; a third by Ibn Hula of Mosul (1275) is
the property of the Royal Asiatic Society of London; a fourth (1289) from the
observatory of Maragha, in the Dresden Museum, two globes of uncertain age
at Paris (see fig. 17) and another in London. All these globes are of metal
(bronze), or they might not have survived so many years.

The charts in use of the medieval navigators of the Indian Ocean—Arabs,
Persians or Dravidas—were equal in value if not superior to the charts of the
Mediterranean. Marco Polo mentions such charts; Vasco da Gama (1498)
found them in the hands of his Indian pilot, and their nature is fully explained
in the Mohit or encyclopaedia of the sea compiled from ancient sources by the
Turkish admiral Sidi Ali Ben Hosein in 1554.21 These charts are covered with
a close network of lines intersecting each other at right angles. The horizontal
lines are parallels, depending upon the altitude of the pole star, the Calves of
the Little Bear and the Barrow of the Great Bear above the horizon. This
altitude was expressed in isbas or inches each equivalent to 1° 42′ 50″. Each
isba was divided into zams or eights. The interval between two parallels thus
only amounted to 12′ 51″. These intervals were mistaken by the Portuguese
occasionally for degrees, which account for Malacca, which is in lat. 2′ 13″
N., being placed on Cantino’s Chart (1502) in lat. 14′ S. It may have been a
map of this kind which accounts for Ptolemy’s moderate exaggerations of the
size of Taprobana (Ceylon). A first meridian, separating a leeward from a
windward region, passed through Ras Kumhari (Comorin) and was thus

nearly identical with the first meridian of the Indian astronomers which passed
through the sacred city of Ujjain (Ozere of Ptolemy) or the meridian of Azin
of the Arabs. Additional meridians were drawn at intervals of zams, supposed
to be equal to three hours’ sail.

In China, maps in the olden time were engraved on bronze or stone, but
after the 10th century they were printed from wood-blocks. Among the more
important productions of more recent times, may be mentioned a map of the
empire, said to be based upon actual surveys by Yhang (721), who also
manufactured a celestial globe (an older globe by Ho-shing-tien, 4 metres in
circumference, was produced in 450), and an atlas of the empire on a large
scale by Thu-sie-pun (1311-1312) of which new enlarged editions with many
maps were published in the 16th century and in 1799. None of these maps was
graduated, which is all the more surprising as the Chinese astronomers are
credited with having made use of the gnomon as early as 1000 b.c. for
determining latitudes.

Fig. 17.—Globe in Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris

Fig. 18.—The Indian Ocean according to Mohit, as interpreted by Dr Tomaschek.

In the case of Japan, the earliest reference to a map is of 646, in which year
the emperor ordered surveys of certain provinces to be made.

Portolano Maps.—During the long period of stagnation in cartography,
which we have already dealt with, there survived among the seamen of the
Mediterranean charts of remarkable accuracy, illustrating the Portolani or
sailing directories in use among them. Charts of this description are first
mentioned in connexion with the Crusade of Louis XI. in 1270, but they
originated long before that time, and in the eastern part of the Mediterranean
they embody materials available even in the days before Ptolemy, while the
correct delineation of the west seems to be of a later date, and may have been
due to Catalan seamen. These charts are based upon estimated bearings and
distances between the principal ports or capes, the intervening coast-line being
filled in from more detailed surveys. The bearings were dependent upon the
seaman’s observation of the heavens, for these charts were in use long before
the compass had been introduced on board ship (as early as 1205, according to
Guiot de Provins) although it became fully serviceable only after the needle

had been attached to the compass card, an improvement probably introduced
by Flavio Gioja of Amalfi in the beginning of the 14th century. The compass
may of course have been used for improving these charts, but they originated
without its aid, and it is therefore misleading to describe them as Compass or
Loxodromic charts, and they are now known as Portolano charts.

Fig. 19.—The Eastern Mediterranean, by Petrus Vesconte (1311).

Fig. 20.—The Mediterranean.

a, According to A. Dulceti, 1339, and
b, On Mercator’s projection, according to modern maps.

None of these charts is graduated, and the horizontal and vertical lines
which cross many of them represent neither parallels nor meridians. Their

most characteristic feature, and one by which they can most readily be
recognized, is presented by groups or systems of rhumb-lines, each group of
these lines radiating from a common centre, the central group being generally
encircled by eight or sixteen satellite groups. In the course of time the centres
of radiation of all these groups had imposed upon them ornate rose dei venti,
or windroses, such as may still be seen upon our compass-cards. Each chart
was furnished with a scale of miles. These miles, however, were not the
ordinary Roman miles of 1000 paces or 5000 ft., but smaller miles of Greek or
Oriental origin, of which six were equal to five Roman miles, and as the latter
were equal to 1480 metres, the Portolano miles had a length of only 1233
metres, and 75.2 of the former, and 90.3 of the latter were equal to a degree.
The difference between these miles was known, however, only to the more
learned among the map-makers, and when the charts were extended to the
Atlantic seaboard the two were assumed to be identical.

Fig. 21.—Map illustrating Marino Sanuto’s Liber secretorum fidelium crucis.

On these old charts the Mediterranean is delineated with surprising fidelity.
The meridian distance between the Straits of Gibraltar and Beirut in Syria
amounts upon them to about 3000 Portolano miles, equal in lat. 36° N. to
40.9°, as compared with an actual difference of 41.2°, and a difference of 61°
assumed by Ptolemy. There exists, however, a serious error of orientation,
due, according to Professor H. Wagner, to the inexperience of the
cartographers who first combined the charts of the separate basins of the
Mediterranean so as to produce a chart of the whole. This accounts for
Gibraltar and Alexandria being shown as lying due east and west of each

other, although there is a difference of 5° of latitude between them, a fact
known long before Ptolemy.

The production of these charts employed numerous licensed draughtsmen
in the principal seaports of Italy and Catalonia, and among seamen these MS.
charts remained popular long after the productions of the printing-press had
become available. The oldest of these maps which have been preserved, the
so-called “Pisan chart,” which belongs probably to the middle of the 13th
century, and a set of eight charts, known by the name of its former owner, the
Cavaliere Tamar Luxoro, of somewhat later date, are both the work of
Genoese artists. Among more eminent Genoese cartographers are Joannes da
Carignano (d. 1344), Petrus Vesconte, who worked in 1311 and 1327, and is
the draughtsman of the maps illustrating Marino Sanuto’s Liber secretorum
fidelium crucis, which was to have roused Christendom to engage in another
crusade (figs. 19 and 21) Battista Beccario (1426, 1435) and Bartolomeo
Pareto (1455). Venice ranks next to Genoa as a centre of cartographic activity.
Associated with it are Francesco Pizigano (1367-1373), Francesco de Cesanis
(1421), Giacomo Giroldi (1422-1446), Andrea Bianco (1436-1448) Giovanni
Leardo (1442-1452), Alvise Cadamosto, who was associated with the
Portuguese explorers on the west coast of Africa (1454-1456) and whose
Portolano was printed at Venice in 1490, and Fra Mauro (1457).

Associated with Ancona are Grazioso Benincasa and his son Andreas,
whose numerous charts were produced between 1461 and 1508, and Count
Ortomano Freducci (1497-1538).

Fig. 22.—Fra Mauro (1457).

The earliest among Majorcan and Catalonian cartographers is Angelino
Dulcert (1325-1339) whom A. Managhi claims as a Genoese, whose true

name according to him was Angelino Dalorto. Other Catalans are Jahuda
Cresques, a Jew of Barcelona, the supposed author of the famous Catalan map
of the world (1375), Guglielmo Solerio (1384), Mecia de Viladestes (1413-
1433) Gabriel de Valleseche (1439-1447) and Pietro Roselli, a pupil of
Beccario of Genoa (1462).

These maps were originally intended for the use of seamen navigating the
Mediterranean and the coasts of the Atlantic, but in the course of time they
were extended to the mainland and ultimately developed into maps of the
whole world as then known. Thus Pizigano’s map of 1367 extends as far east
as the Gulf of Persia, whilst the Medicean map of 1356 (at Florence) is
remarkable on account of a fairly correct delineation of the Caspian, the Shari
river in Africa, and the correct direction given to the west coast of India,
which had already been pointed out in a letter of the friar Giovanni da
Montecorvino of 1252. Most of the expansions of Portolano maps into maps
of the world are circular in shape, and resemble the wheel maps of an earlier
period. This is the character of the map of Petrus Vesconte of 1320 (fig. 21),
of Giovanni Leardo (1448) and of a Catalan map of 1450. Jerusalem occupies
the centre of these maps, Arab sources of information are largely drawn upon,
while Ptolemy is neglected and contemporary travellers are ignored. Far
superior to these maps is Fra Mauro’s map (1457), for the author has availed
himself not only of the information collected by Marco Polo and earlier
travellers, but was able, by personal intercourse, to gather additional
information from Nicolo de’ Conti, who had returned from the east in 1440,
and more especially from Abyssinians who lived in Italy at that time. His
delineation of Abyssinia, though unduly spread over a wide area, is indeed
wonderfully correct.

Fig. 23.—Catalan Map of the World (1375).

Fig. 24.—Genoese Map (1457).

Very different in character is the Catalan map of 1375, for its author,
discarding Ptolemy, shows India as a peninsula. On the other hand, an
anonymous Genoese would-be reformer of maps (1457; fig. 24), still adheres
to the erroneous Ptolemaic delineation of southern Asia, and the same error is
perpetuated by Henricus Marvellus Germanus on a rough map showing the
Portuguese discoveries up to 1489. None of these maps is graduated, but if we
give the Mediterranean a length of 3000 Portolano miles, equivalent in 36° N.
to 41°, then the longitudinal extent of the old world as measured on the

Genoese map of 1457 would be 136° instead of 177° or more as given by
Ptolemy.

Fig. 25.—Claudius Clavus Swartha (1427).

The Revival of Ptolemy.—Ptolemy’s great work became known in western
Europe after Jacobus Angelus de Scarparia had translated it into Latin in 1410.
This version was first printed in 1475 at Vicenza, but its contents had become
known through MS. copies before this, and their study influenced the
construction of maps in two respects. They led firstly to the addition of degree
lines to maps, and secondly to the compilation of new maps of those countries
which had been inadequately represented by Ptolemy. Thus Claudius Clavus
Swartha (Niger), who was at Rome in 1424, compiled a map of the world,

extending westward as far as Greenland. The learned Cardinal Nicolaus
Krebs, of Cusa (Cues) on the Moselle, who died 1464, drew a map of
Germany which was first published in 1491; D. Nicolaus Germanus, a monk
of Reichenbach, in 1466 prepared a set of Ptolemy’s maps on a new projection
with converging meridians; and Paolo del Pozzo Toscanelli in 1474 compiled
a new chart on a rectangular projection, which was to guide the explorer
across the western ocean to Cathay and India.

Of the seven editions of Ptolemy which were published up to the close of
the 15th century, all except that of Vicenza (1475) contained Ptolemy’s 27
maps, while Francesco Berlinghieri’s version (Florence 1478), and two
editions published at Ulm (1482 and 1486), contained four or five modern
maps in addition, those of Ulm being by Nicolaus Germanus.

The geographical ideas which prevailed at the time Columbus started in
search of Cathay may be most readily gathered from two contemporary
globes, the one known as the Laon globe because it was picked up in 1860 at a
curiosity shop in that town, the other produced at Nuremberg in 1492 by
Martin Behaim.22 The Laon globe is of copper gilt, and has a diameter of 170
mm. The information which it furnishes, in spite of a legend intended to lead
us to believe that it presents us with the results of Portuguese explorations up
to the year 1493, is of more ancient date. The Nuremberg globe is a work of a
more ambitious order. It was undertaken at the suggestion of George
Holzschuher, a travelled member of the town council. The work was entrusted
to Martin Behaim, who had resided for six years in Portugal and the Azores,
and was believed to be a thoroughly qualified cosmographer. The globe is of
pasteboard covered with whiting and parchment, and has a diameter of 507
mm. The author followed Ptolemy not only in Asia, but also in the
Mediterranean. He did not avail himself of the materials available in his day.
Not even the coasts of western Africa are laid down correctly, although the
author claimed to have taken part in one of the Portuguese expeditions. The
ocean separating Europe from Asia is assumed as being only 126° wide, in

accordance with Toscanelli’s ideas of 1474. Very inadequate use has been
made of the travels of Marco Polo, Nicolo de’ Conti, and of others in the
east.23 On the other hand, the globe is made gay with flags and other
decorations, the work of George Glockendon, a well-known illuminator of the
time.

Fig. 26.

The maritime discoveries and surveys of that age of great discoveries were
laid down upon so-called “plane-charts,” that is, charts having merely
equidistant parallels indicated upon them, together with the equator, the
tropics and polar circles, or, in a more advanced stage, meridians also. The

astrolabe quadrant or cross-staff enabled the mariner to determine his latitude
with a certain amount of accuracy, but for his longitude he was dependent
upon dead reckoning, for although various methods for determining a
longitude were known, the available astronomical ephemerides were not
trustworthy, and errors of 30° in longitude were by no means rare. It was only
after the publication of Kepler’s Rudolphine Table (1626) that more exact
results could be obtained. A further difficulty arose in connexion with the
variation of the compass, which induced Pedro Reinel to introduce two scales
of latitude on his map of the northern Atlantic (1504; fig. 27).

Fig. 27.

The chart of the world by Juan de la Cosa, the companion of Columbus, is
the earliest extant which depicts the discoveries in the new world (1500),
Nicolaus de Canerio, a Genoese, and the map which Alberto Cantino caused
to be drawn at Lisbon for Hercules d’Este of Ferrara (1502), illustrating in
addition the recent discoveries of the Portuguese in the East. Other

cosmographers of distinction were Pedro Reinel (1504-1542), Nuno Garcia de
Toreno (1520), to whom we are indebted for 21 charts, illustrating Magellan’s
voyage, Diogo Ribero (maps of the world 1527, 1529),24 Alonzo de Santa
Cruz, of Seville, whose Isolario general includes charts of all parts of the
world (1541), John Rotz or Rut (1542), Sebastian Cabot (1544), as also
Nicolas Desliens, Pierre Desceliers, G. Breton and V. Vallard, all of Arques,
near Dieppe, whose charts were compiled between 1541 and 1554.

Of the many general maps of the world or of particular countries, a large
number illustrate such works as G. Reisch’s Margarita philosophica (1163),
the cosmographies of Peter Apianus or Bienewitz (1520, 1522, 1530), Seb.
Münster (1544), J. Honter (1546) and Gulielmus Postel (1561) or the
Geographia of Livio Sanuto (1588); others, and these the more numerous and
important, supplement the original maps of several editions of Ptolemy. Thus
the Roman edition of 1507, edited by Marcus Benaventura and Joa Cota,
contains 6 modern maps, and to these was added in 1508 Joh. Ruysch’s
famous map of the world on a modified conical projection. The next edition
published at Venice in 1511 contained a heart-shaped world by Bernhard
Sylvanus. The Strassburg Ptolemy of 1513 has a supplement of as many as 20
modern maps by Martin Waldseemüller or Ilacomilus, several among which
are copied from Portuguese originals. Waldseemüller was one of the most
distinguished cartographers of his day. He was born at Radolfzell in Baden in
1470, was associated with Ringmann at the gymnasium of St Dié, and died in
1521. He published in 1507 a huge map of the world, in 12 sheets, together
with a small globe of a diameter of 110 mm., the segments for which were
printed from wood-blocks. On these documents the new world is called
America, after Amerigo Vespucci, its supposed discoverer. In 1511
Waldseemüller published a large map of Europe, in 1513 he prepared his maps
for the Strassburg edition of Ptolemy, and in 1516 he engraved a copy of
Canerio’s map of the world. The Strassburg Ptolemy of 1522 contains
Waldseemüller’s maps,25 edited on a reduced scale by Laurentius Frisius,
together with three additional ones. The same set of maps is reprinted in the

Strassburg edition of 1524, newly translated by W. Pirckheimer with notes by
Joh. Müller Regiomontanus, and in the Lyon edition of 1535, edited by
Michael Servetus. The new maps of the Basel edition of 1540, twenty-one in
number, are by Sebastian Münster; Jacob Gastaldo supplied the Venice edition
of 1548 with 34 modern maps, and these with a few additions are repeated in
Girolamo Ruscelli’s Italian translation of Ptolemy published at Venice in
1561.

Equally interesting with these Ptolemaic supplements are collections like
that of Anton Lafreri, which contains reprints of 142 maps of all parts of the
world originally published between 1556 and 1572 (Geografica tavole
moderne, Rome, n.d.), or that of J. F. Camocio, published at Venice in 1576,
which contains 88 reprints.

The number of cartographers throughout Europe was considerable, and we
confine ourselves to mentioning a few leading men. Among them Germany is
then represented by G. Glockedon, the author of an interesting road-map of
central Europe (1501), Sebastian Münster (1489-1552), Elias Camerarius,
whose map of the mark of Brandenburg won the praise of Mercator; Wolfgang
Latz von Lazius, to whom we are indebted for maps of Austria and Hungary
(1561), and Philip Apianus, who made a survey of Bavaria (1553-1563),
which was published 1568 on the reduced scale of 1 : 144,000, and is fairly
described as the topographical masterpiece of the 16th century. For maps of
Switzerland we are indebted to Konrad Türst (1495-1497), Johann Stumpf
(1548) and Aegidius Tschudi (1538). A map of the Netherlands from actual
survey was produced by Jacob of Deventer (1536-1539). Leonardo da Vinci,
the famous artist, while in the service of Cesare Borgia as military engineer,
made surveys of several districts in central Italy. Other Italian cartographers of
merit were Giovanni Battiste Agnese of Venice, whose atlases (1517-1564)
enjoyed a wide popularity; Benedetto Bordone (1528); Giacomo Gastaldo,
cosmographer of the Venetian Republic (1534-1568), and his successor, Paolo
Forlani. New maps of Spain and Portugal appeared in 1560, the former being

due to Pedro de Medina, the latter to Fernando Alvarez Secco and Hernando
Alvaro. Among the French map-makers of this period may be mentioned
Oronce Finée (Finaeus), who in 1525 published a map of France, and Jean
Jolivet (c. 1560). Gregorio Lilly (1546) and Humphrey Lhuyd of Denbigh (d.
1510) furnished maps of the British Isles, Olaus Magnus (1539) of
Scandinavia, Anton Wied (1542), Sigismund von Herberstein (1549) and
Anthony Jenkinson (1562) of Muscovy.

The cylindrical and modified conical projections of Marinus and Ptolemy
were still widely used, the stereographical projection of Hipparchus, was for
the first time employed for terrestrial maps in the 16th century, but new
projections were introduced in addition to these. The earliest of these, a
trapeziform projection with equidistant parallels, by D. Nicolaus Germanus
(1466), naturally led to what is generally known as Flamsteed’s projection.
Joh. Stabius (1502) and his pupil J. Werner (1514) devised three heart-shaped
projections, one of which was equivalent. Petrus Apianus (1524) gave his map
an elliptical shape. H. Glareanus (1510) was the first to employ an equidistant
zenithal polar projection.

No reasonable fault can be found with the marine surveyors of this period,
but the scientific cartographers allowed themselves too frequently to be
influenced by Ptolemaic traditions. Thus Gastaldo (1548) presents us with a
map of Italy, which, except as to nomenclature, differs but little from that of
Ptolemy, although on the Portolano charts the peninsula had long since
assumed its correct shape. Many of the local maps, too, were excellent
specimens of cartography, but when we follow any cartographer of the period
into regions the successful delineation of which depended upon an intelligent
interpretation of itineraries, and of information collected by recent travellers,
they are generally found to fail utterly. This is illustrated by the four sketch
maps shown in fig. 28.

Fig. 28.

Columbus, trusting to Toscanelli’s misleading chart, looked upon the
countries discovered by him as belonging to eastern Asia, a view still shared
about 1507 by his brother Bartolomeo. Waldseemüller (1507) was the first to
separate America and Asia by an ocean of considerable width, but J. Ruysch
(1508) returns to the old idea, and even joins Greenland (Gruenlant) to eastern
Asia. Bologninus Zalterius on a map of 1566, and Mercator on his famous

chart of 1569, separates the two continents by a narrow strait which they call
Streto de Anian, thus anticipating the discovery of Bering Strait by more than
a hundred and fifty years. Anian, however, which they place upon the
American coast, is no other than Marco Polo’s Anica or Anin, our modern
Annam. Such an error could never have arisen had the old compilers of maps
taken the trouble to plan Marco Polo’s routes.

Globes, both celestial and terrestrial, became popular after the discovery of
America. They were included among the scientific apparatus of ships and of
educational establishments. Columbus and Magellan had such globes, those of
the latter produced by P. Reinel (1519), and Conrad Celtes tells us that he
illustrated his lectures at the university of Vienna with the help of globes
(1501). Globes were still engraved on copper, or painted by hand, but since
1507, in which year Waldseemüller published a small globe of a diameter of
110 mm., covered with printed segments or gores, this cheap and expeditious
method has come into general use. Waldseemüller constructed his gores
graphically, A. Dürer (1525) and Hen. Loriti Glareanus (1527) were the first
who dealt scientifically with the principles underlying their construction.
Globes covered with printed gores were produced by L. Boulenger (1514),
Joh. Schöner (1515), P. Apianus, Gemma Frisius (1530) and G. Mercator
(1541). Leonardo da Vinci’s rough map of the world in 8 segments (c. 1513)
seems likewise to have been intended for a globe. Of J. Schöner we know that
he produced four globes, three printed from segments (1515, 1523, 1533), and
one of larger size (diam. 822 mm.), which is drawn by hand, and is preserved
in the Germanic Museum at Nuremberg. Among engraved globes, one of the
most interesting is that which was discovered by R. M. Hunt in Paris, and is
preserved in the Lenox Library, New York. Its diameter is only 41⁄2 in. (127
mm.). The so-called “Nancy globe” is of chased silver, richly ornamented, and
formerly served the purpose of a pyx. Its diameter is 160 mm., its date about
1530. About the same date is assigned to a globe by Robert de Bailly,
engraved on copper and gilt (diam. 440 mm.). Celestial globes were

manufactured by Regiomontanus (d. 1476) at Nuremberg, by Joh. Stöffler
(1499), and by G. Hartmann (1535).

Fig. 29.

Fig. 30.—Lenox Globes (1510).

Mercator and his Successors.—Of Gerhard Kremer (1512-1594) the
earliest works are a map of Palestine (1537), a map of the world on a double
heart-shaped projection (1525), and a topographical map of Flanders based
upon his own surveys (1540), a pair of globes (1541, diam. 120 mm.), and a
large map of Europe which has been praised deservedly for its accuracy
(1554). He is best known by his marine chart (1569) and his atlas. The
projection of the former may have been suggested by a note by W. Pirkheimer
in his edition of Ptolemy (1525). Mercator constructed it graphically, the
mathematical principles underlying it being first explained by E. Wright
(1594). The “Atlas” was only published after Mercator’s death, in 1595. It

only contained nine maps, but after the plates had been sold to Jodocus (Jesse)
Hondius the number of maps was rapidly increased, although Mercator’s
name was retained. Mercator’s maps are carefully engraved on copper. Latin
letters are used throughout; the miniatures of older maps are superseded by
symbols, and in the better-known countries the maps are fairly correct, but
they fail lamentably when we follow their author into regions—the successful
delineation of which depends upon a critical combination of imperfect
information.

Even before Mercator’s death, Antwerp and Amsterdam had become great
centres of cartographic activity, and they maintained their pre-eminence until
the beginning of the 18th century. Abraham Ortelius (1527-1592), of Antwerp,
a man of culture and enterprise, but not a scientific cartographer, published the
first edition of his Theatrum orbis terrarum in 1570. It then contained 53
maps, by various authors. By 1595 the number of maps had increased to 119,
including a Parergon or supplement of 12 maps illustrating ancient history. In
1578 was published the Speculum orbis terrarum of Gerard de Jude or de
Judaeis. Lucas Janszon Waghenaer (Aurigarius) of Enkhuizen published the
first edition of his Spiegel der Zeevaart (Mariners’ Mirror) at Leiden in 1585.
It was the first collection of marine maps, lived through many editions, was
issued in several languages and became known as Charettier and Waggoner.
In the same year Adrian Gerritsz published a valuable Paskaarte of the
European Sea. Ten years afterwards, in 1595, W. Barentszoon published a
marine atlas of the Mediterranean, the major axis of which he reduced to 42
degrees. Jodocus Hondius has already been referred to as the purchaser of
Mercator’s plates. The business founded by him about 1602 was continued by
his sons and his son-in-law, Jan Janszon (Jansonius) and others. By 1653 this
firm had already produced atlases including 451 charts. Willem Janszon, the
father of Hondius’s partner, published a collection of charts (1608), to which
he gave the title of Het Licht der Zeevaart (the seaman’s light). Another
cartographic publishing firm was established at Amsterdam in 1612 by
Willem Janszon Blaeu (1571-1638), a friend of Tycho Brahe, from 1633

“mapmaker” of the states-general, and a man of scientific culture. He was
succeeded by his son Jan (d. 1673) and grandson Cornelius, and before the
end of the century turned out a Zee-Spiegel of 108 charts (1623), an Atlas
novus (Nieuwe Atlas), 1642, enlarged in the course of time until it consisted of
12 folio volumes containing hundreds of maps. J. A. Colom in 1633 published
a collection of maps under the quaint title of Vurig Colom der Zeevaert (Fiery
Column of Navigation). Among more recent Dutch map publishers are
Nicolaus Vischer (Piscator), R. Goos, H. Doncker, F. de Wit, and J. and G. van
Keulen, whose atlases were published between 1681 and 1722. These Dutch
maps and charts are generally accompanied by descriptive notes or sailing
directions printed on the back of them. A similar work is the Arcano del mare
of Sir Robert Dudley, duke of Northumberland, the numerous sheets of which
are on Mercator’s projection (1631).

Fig. 31.—Mercator’s Chart of the World (1569).

In France, in the meantime, an arc of the meridian had been measured
(1669-1670) by Jean Picard, numerous longitudes had been observed between

1672 and 1680 by the same, and by Phil. de Lahire (d. 1719), and these were
utilized in a Carte de France “as corrected from the observations of the
members of the Academy of Sciences” (1666-1699), in a map of the world
(1694) by D. Cassini, as also in Le Neptune François (1693) with
contributions by Pene, D. Cassini and others. These corrected longitudes were
not yet available for the maps produced by Nicolas Sanson of Abbeville, since
1627. The cartographical establishment founded by him in that year was
carried on after his death in 1667 by his sons, his son-in-law, P. Duval (d.
1683) and his grandson Robert du Vaugondy (d. 1766). Among the
cartographers whom he employed were M. Tavernier and Mariette, and in
many instances he mentioned the authors whose maps he copied. By 1710 the
maps published by the firm numbered 466. Nicolas de Fer, the great rival of
Sanson, and his heirs, are stated to have published as many as 600 maps after
1700.

In no other country of Europe was there at the close of the 16th century a
geographical establishment capable of competing with the Dutch towns or
with Sanson, but the number of those who produced maps, in many instances
based upon original surveys, was large. Germany is thus represented, among
others, by C. Henneberger (map of Prussia, 1576), by M. Oeder, (survey of
Saxony, 1586-1607), A. Rauh (fine hill features on a map of the environs of
Wangen and Lindau, 1617), W. Schickhardt (survey of Württemberg, 1624-
1635), and G. M. Vischer (map of Austria and Styrai, 1669-1786);
Switzerland by H. C. Gyger (Canton of Zürich, a masterpiece, 1667); Italy by
G. A. Magini (1558-1610), and V. Coronelli, appointed cosmographer of the
Venetian Republic, 1685, and founder of the Ac. Cosmogr. dei Argonauti, the
earliest geographical society, and Diogo Homem, a Portuguese settled at
Venice (1558-1574); Denmark by J. Mejer of Husum (1650); Sweden by A.
Buraeus, the “father of Swedish cartographers” (1650-1660); the British
Islands by Ch. Saxton (County Atlas of England and Wales 1575), J. Speed
(Theatrum of Great Britain, 1610), Timothy Pont and Robert Gordon of
Strathloch (map of Scotland, 1608), and A. Moll. A Novus atlas sinensis,

based upon Chinese surveys, was published in 1655 by Martin Martini, S.J., a
missionary recently returned from China. Isaac Voss, in his work De Nili
(1659), published a map of central Africa, in which he anticipated D’Anville
by rejecting all the fanciful details which found a place upon Filippo
Pigafetta’s map of that continent.

The first maps illustrating the variation of the compass were published by
Chris. Burrus (d. 1632) and Athanasius Kircher (Magnes, Rome, 1643), and
maps of the ocean and tidal currents by the latter in his Mundus subterraneus
(1665). Edmund Halley, the astronomer, compiled the first variation chart of
scientific value (1683), as also a chart of the winds (1686).

Globes manufactured for commercial purposes by Blaeu and others have
already been mentioned, but several large globes, for show rather than for use,
were produced in addition to these. Thus A. Busch, of Limburg (1656-1664),
manufactured a globe for Duke Frederick of Holstein, formerly at Gottorp, but
since 1713 at Tsarskoye Zelo. It has a diameter of 11 ft. (3.57 metres) and is
hollow, the inner surface of the shell being covered with a star map, and the
outer surface with a map of the world. Professor Erh. Weigel (1696) produced
a hollow celestial globe in copper, having a small terrestrial globe in its centre.
Its diameter is 3.25 metres. Lastly there is a pair of giant globes of artistic
design, turned out by V. Coronelli (1623), and intended as presents to Louis
XIV. Their diameter is nearly 5 metres. A pair of globes of 1592 by Emeric
Molineux (diam. 610 mm.) is now in the Temple Library, and is referred to in
Blundeville’s Exercises (1594).

The Eighteenth Century.—It was no mere accident which enabled France to
enjoy a pre-eminence in cartographic work during the greater part of the 18th
century. Not only had French men of science and scientific travellers done
excellent work as explorers in different parts of the world, but France could
also boast of two men, Guillaume Delisle and J. B. Bourguignon d’Anville,
able to utilize in the compilation of their maps the information they acquired.

Fig. 32.

Delisle (1675-1726) published 98 maps, and although as works of art they
were inferior to the maps of certain contemporaries, they were far superior to
them in scientific value. On one of his earliest maps compiled under advice of
his father Claude (1700), he gave the Mediterranean its true longitudinal
extension of 41°. It was Delisle who assumed the meridian of Ferro, which
had been imposed upon French navigators by royal order (1634), to lie exactly
20° to the west of Paris. The work of reform was carried further by B.
D’Anville (1697-1782). Altogether he published 211 maps, of which 66 are
included in his Atlas général (1737-1780); he swept away the fanciful lakes
from off the face of Africa, thus forcibly bringing home to us the poverty of
our knowledge (fig. 32), delineated the Chinese Empire in accordance with
the map based on the surveys conducted during the reign of the emperor
Kanghi, with the aid of Jesuit missionaries, and published in 1718; boldly
refused to believe in the existence of an Antarctic continent covering half the
southern hemisphere, and always brought a sound judgment to bear upon the
materials which the ever-increasing number of travellers placed at his
disposal. Among other French works of importance deserving notice are Le

Neptune oriental of Mannevillette (1745) and more especially the Carte
géometrique de la France, which is based upon surveys carried on (1744-
1783) by César François Cassini de Thury and his son Dominique de Cassini.
It is on a transversal cylindrical (rectangular) projection devised by Jacques
Cassini (d. 1746). The hills are shown in rough hachures.

England, which had entered upon a career of naval conquest and scientific
exploration, had reason to be proud of J. F. W. Desbarres, Atlantic Neptune
(1774), a North-American Pilot (1779), which first made known the naval
surveys of J. Cook and of others; and Tho. Jefferys’s West Indian and
American Atlases (1775, 1778). James Rennell (1742-1830), who was
surveyor-general of India, published the Bengal Atlas (1781), and sagaciously
arranged the vast mass of information collected by British travellers and
others in India and Africa, but it is chiefly with the name of Aaron
Arrowsmith, who came to London in 1778, and his successors, with which the
glory of the older school of cartographers is most intimately connected. His
nephew John died in 1873. Among local cartographers may be mentioned H.
Moll (d. 1732), J. Senex, whose atlas was published in 1725, and Dowet,
whose atlas was brought out at the expense of the duke of Argyll.

In Germany J. B. Homann (d. 1724) founded a geographical establishment
in 1702, which depended at first upon copies of British and French maps, but
in course of time published also original maps such as J. M. Hase’s Africa
(1727) and Tobias Meyer’s Mappa critica of Germany (1780), J. T. Güssfeld’s
map of Brandenburg (1773), John Majer’s Württemburg (1710), and J. C.
Müller’s Bavaria, both based on trigonometrical surveys. Colonel Schmettau’s
excellent survey of the country to the west of the Weser (1767-1787) was
never published, as Frederick the Great feared it might prove of use to his
military enemies. Switzerland is represented by J. J. Scheuchzer (1712), J.
Gessner (d. 1790), G. Walser (Atlas novus Helvetiae, 1769), and W. R. Meyer,
Atlas der Schweiz (1786-1802). Of the Austrian Netherlands, Count Joseph de
Ferrari published a chorographic map on the same scale as Cassini’s Carte de

la France (1777). Of Denmark a fine map was published under the auspices
of the Academy of Science of Copenhagen (1766-1825); of Spain and
Portugal an atlas in 102 sheets by Thomas Lopez (1765-1802); of Russia a
map by J. N. Delisle in 19 sheets (1730-1745); charts illustrating the variation
of the compass and of magnetic “dip” by E. Dunn (1776), J. C. Wiffe (1768);
a chart of the world by W. Dampier (1789). Map projections were dealt with
by two eminent mathematicians, J. H. Lambert (1772) and Leonh. Euler
(1777).

On the maps of Delisle and d’Anville the ground is still represented by
“molehills.” Hachures of a rude nature first made their appearance on David
Vivier’s map of the environs of Paris (1674), and on Cassini’s Carte de la
France. Contour lines (isobaths) were introduced for the first time on a chart
of the Merwede by M. S. Cruquius (1728), and on a chart of the English
Channel by Phil. Buache (1737). Dupain-Triel, acting on a suggestion of Du
Carla, compiled a contoured map of France (1791), and it only needed the
introduction of graduated tints between these contours to secure a graphic
picture of the features of the ground. It was J. G. Lehmann (1783) who based
his method of hill-shading or hachuring upon these horizontal contours. More
than 80 methods of showing the hills have found advocates since that time,
but all methods must be based upon contours to be scientifically satisfactory.

Two relief maps of Central Switzerland deserve to be mentioned, the one by
R. L. Pfyffer in wax, now in Lucerne, the other by J. R. Meyer of Aarau and
Müller of Engelberg in papier mâché, now in Zurich. Globes of the usual
commercial type were manufactured in France by Delisle (1700), Forbin
(1710-1731), R. and J. de Vaugondy (1752), Lalande (1771); in England by E.
and G. Adams (1710-1766); Germany by Homann and Seutter (1750). A
hollow celestial globe 18 ft. in diameter was set up by Dr Roger Long at
Cambridge; the terrestrial globe which Count Ch. Gravie of Vergennes
presented to Louis XVI. in 1787 had a diameter of 26 metres, or 85 ft.

Modern Cartography.—The compiler of maps of the present day enjoys
many advantages not enjoyed by men similarly occupied a hundred years ago.
Topographical surveys are gradually extending, and explorers of recent years
are better trained for their work than they were a generation ago, whilst
technical processes of recent invention—such as lithography, photography and
heliogravure—facilitate or expedite the completion of his task. This task,
however, has grown more difficult and exacting. Mere outline maps, such as
formerly satisfied the public, suffice no longer. He is called upon more
especially to give a satisfactory delineation of the ground, he must meet the
requirements of various classes of the public, and be prepared to record
cartographically all the facts of physical or political geography which are
capable of being recorded on his maps. The ingenuity of the compiler is
frequently taxed when called upon to illustrate graphically the results of
statistical information of every description.

Germany since the middle of the 19th century has become the headquarters
of scientific cartography. This is due as much to the inspiriting teachings of
Ritter and Humboldt as to the general culture and scientific training combined
with technical skill commanded by the men who more especially devote
themselves to this branch of geography, which elsewhere is too frequently
allowed to fall into the hands of mere mechanics. Men like H. Berghaus
(1797-1884), H. Kiepert (1818-1899), and A. Petermann (1822-1878) must
always occupy a foremost place in the history of cartography. Among the
geographical establishments of Germany, that founded by Justus Perthes
(1785), at Gotha, occupies the highest rank. Among its publications are A.
Stieler’s Hand-Atlas (1817-1832), K. von Spruner’s Historical Atlas (1438-
1488), H. Berghaus’ Physical Atlas (1838-1842), E. von Sydow’s Wall Maps
for Schools (1838-1840) and School Atlas (1847). The titles of these atlases
survive, though the authors of the original editions are long dead, and the
maps have been repeatedly superseded by others bringing the information up
to the date of publication. To the same firm we are indebted for Petermann’s
Mitteilungen, started in 1855 by A. Petermann, after whose death in 1902 they

were successively edited by E. Behm, A. Supan and P. Langhans, as also the
Geographisches Jahrbuch (since 1866), at first edited by E. Behm, afterwards
by Professor H. Wagner. Among other geographical institutes in Germany
which deserve mention are the Weimar Institut, founded in 1791 by F. J.
Bertuch, and directed in 1845-1852 by H. Kiepert; Paul Fleming at Glogau
(K. Sohr’s Handatlas, 1845), A. Ravenstein at Frankfort, D. Reimer at Berlin
(H. Kiepert, Handatlas, 1860); R. Andree (Hand-Atlas, 1880), and E. Debes
(Hand-Atlas, 1894) in Leipzig, and E. Hölzer in Vienna (Vincenz von Haardt’s
maps). France is represented by the publishing firms of Ch. Delagrave
(Levaseur’s maps), Hachette (Vivien de St Martin’s Atlas universel, in
progress since 1875, F. Schrader’s Atlas de géographie moderne, 1880), and
Armand Colin (Vidal de la Blache’s Atlas général, 1894). In Great Britain A.
Arrowsmith established himself in London in 1770 (General Atlas, 1817), but
the cartographical business ceased on the death of John Arrowsmith in 1873.
John Walker, to whose initiative the charts published by the admiralty are
indebted for the perspicuous, firm and yet artistic execution, which facilitate
their use by the mariner, was also the author of the maps published by the
Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge (1820-1840). Among more
recent firms are W. and A. K. Johnston (founded 1825; Royal Atlas, 1855); J.
Bartholomew & Co., now carried on by J. G. Bartholomew (Reduced Survey
maps, Atlas of the World’s Commerce, 1906); Philip & Sons (Imperial Atlas,
1890; Systematic Atlas by E. G. Ravenstein, 1894; Mercantile Marine Atlas,
1904, globes), and E. Stanford (London Atlas).

In 1890 Professor A. Penck proposed to prepare a map of the world,
including the oceans, on a scale of 1 : 1,000,000, and his scheme was
promised the support of a committee which met in London in 1909, and upon
which were represented the leading powers of the world. Maps on that scale
of a great part of Africa, Asia and America have been published by British,
French, German and United States authorities. A bathymetrical chart of the
oceans, by Professor J. Thoulet was published in 1904 at the expense of
Prince Albert of Monaco.

Reliefs from printed maps were first produced by Bauerkeller of Darmstadt
and Dondorf at Frankfort, from originals furnished by A. Ravenstein (1838-
1844). The exaggeration in altitude, on these maps and on those of a later date
and on a larger scale, was very considerable. No such exaggeration exists in
the case of reliefs of parts of the Alps, on a large scale, by P. Keil and Pelikan
(1890), X. Imfeld (1891), P. Oberlerchner (1891-1895), C. Perron (1893-
1900), F. Becker (1900), A. Heim (1904) and others. A relief globe was first
suggested in a letter of M. Maestlin to J. Kepler (1596). The first globe of this
description for the use of the blind, was made by A. Zeune in 1810. H. Erben
is the author of a rough relief on a convex surface (1842), but the finest
example of this description is a relief of Italy, by César Pomba and H.
Fritsche, on a scale of 1 : 1,000,000 and without exaggeration of heights
(1880-1884). A map of Italy in the baptistery of St Peter at Rome has
occasionally been described as a relief, though it is merely a rude outline map
of Italy, by Carlo Fontana (1698), carved into a convex surface.

Several globes of unusual dimensions were produced in the course of last
century. That which Colonel Langlois erected in the Champs Elysées (1824)
had a diameter of 39 metres. James Wyld’s hollow globe, or “Georama,”
diam. 18 metres, occupied Leicester Square until swept away as a nuisance.
The giant globe proposed by Elisée Reclus in 1895 has never been erected; he
has, however, produced maps on a concave surface, as suggested by J. D.
Hauber in 1742.

Authorities.—The history of maps is dealt with ably in Vivien de Saint Martin’s Histoire de la
géographie (Paris, 1875), and in Peschel’s Geschichte der Erdkunde (2nd ed. by Sophus Ruge, Berlin,
1877), as also by W. Wollkenhauer (Leitfaden zur Geschichte der Kartographie, Breslau, 1895), and
H. Zondervan (Allgemeine Kartenkunde, Leipzig, 1901). J. Lelewel’s Geographie du moyen âge, with
an atlas (Brussels, 1850-1857), has in part been superseded by more recent researches. There are,
however, a number of works, beautifully illustrated, which deal fully with particular periods of the
subject. Among these may be mentioned Konrad Miller’s Die ältesten Weltkarten (Stuttgart, 1895-
1897), which only deals with maps not influenced by the ideas of Ptolemy. The contents of the
following collections are more varied in their nature, viz. E. F. Jomard’s Monuments de la géographie
(Paris, 1862), Santarem’s Atlas composé de mappemondes et de portulans, &c. (Paris, 1842-1853, 78
plates). A. E. Nordenskiöld’s Facsimile Atlas (Stockholm, 1889), Gabriel Marcell, Choix de cartes et
de mappemondes XIVe et XVe siècles (Paris, 1896). C. H. Coote’s Remarkable Maps of the XVth,
XVIth and XVIIth Centuries reproduced in their Original Size (Amsterdam, 1894-1897), and
Bibliotheca lindesiana (London, 1898) with facsimiles of the Harleian and other Dieppese maps of
the 16th century. Nautical charts are dealt with in A. E. Nordenskiöld’s Periplus (Stockholm, 1869),
and Th. Fischer’s Sammlung mittelälterlicher Welt- und Seekarten (Vienna, 1886). The discovery and
mapping of America are illustrated by F. Kunstmann’s Entdeckung Amerikas (Munich, 1859), K.
Kretschmer’s Atlas zur Entdeckung Amerikas (Berlin, 1892), G. Marcel’s Reproductions de cartes et
de globes relatives à la découverte de l’Amérique du XVIe au XVIIIe siècle (Paris, 1893) and E. L.
Stevenson’s Maps Illustrating the early Discovery and Exploration of America, 1502-1530 (New
Brunswick, N.J., 1906). In addition to these collections, numerous single maps have been published in
geographical periodicals or separately. See also V. Hantzsch and L. Schmidt, Kartog. Denkmäler zur
Entdeckungsgeschichte von Amerika, Asien, Australien und Afrika aus der k. Bibliothek zu Dresden
(Leipzig, 1903), and the Crown Collection of photographs of American maps (1600-1800), selected
and edited by A. B. Hulbert (Cleveland, 1904-1909).

For reports on the progress of cartography, see Geographisches Jahrbuch (Gotha, since 1866); for
announcements of new publications, Bibliotheca geographica, published annually by the Berlin
Geographical Society, and to the geographical Journal (London).

Topographical Surveys.

The year 1784 marks the beginning of the ordnance survey, for in that year Major-General Roy measured
a base line of 27,404 ft. on Hounslow Heath. Six additional base lines were measured up to 1849, including
the Lough Foyle, in 1827-1828, and that on Salisbury Plain, in 1849. The primary
United Kingdom. triangulation was only completed in 1858, but in the meantime, in 1791, the detail survey
had begun. At first it was merely intended to produce a map sufficiently accurate on a
scale of 1 in. to a mile (1 : 63,360). Ireland having been surveyed (1824-1842) on a scale of 6 in. to a mile (1
: 10,560), it was determined in 1840, after the whole of England and Wales, with the exception of
Lancashire and Yorkshire, had been completed on one-inch scales, to adopt that scale for the whole of the
United Kingdom. Finally, in 1854, a cadastral survey of the whole of the United Kingdom, only excepting
uncultivated districts, was resolved upon, on a scale of 1 : 2500, still larger scales (1 : 500 or 1 : 1000) being
adopted for town plans. Parish boundaries are laid down with the help of local meresmen appointed by

justices at quarter sessions. The horizontal contours are based upon instrumental measurement, and as a
whole these ordnance maps were undoubtedly superior in accuracy, with rare exceptions, to similar maps
published by foreign governments. Even though the hill hachures on the older one-inch maps are not quite
satisfactory, this deficiency is in a large measure compensated for by the presence of absolutely trustworthy
contours. Originally the maps were engraved on copper, and the progress of publication was slow; but since
the introduction of modern processes, such as electrotyping (in 1840), photography (in 1855) and
zincography (in 1859), it has been rapid. A plan, the engraving of which formerly took two years, can now
be produced in two days.

The one-inch map for the whole of the United Kingdom was completed in 1890. It covers 697 sheets (or
488 of a “new series” in large sheets), and is published in three editions, viz. (a) in outline, with contours in
black, (b) with hills hachured in brown or black, and (c) printed in five colours. Carefully revised editions of
these and of the other maps are brought out at intervals of 15 years at most. Since 1898 the department has
also published maps on a smaller scale, viz. a map of England and Wales, on a scale of 2 m. to 1 in., in two
editions, both printed in colour, the one with hills stippled in brown, the other coloured on the “layer
system” as a strata-relief map; a map of the United Kingdom on a scale of 4 m. to 1 in., also in two editions,
the one in outline, showing five classes of roads and parish boundaries, the other in colours, with stippled
hills; a map on a scale of 10 m. to 1 in., also in two editions, and finally a map of the United Kingdom on a
scale of 1 : 1,000,000.

The geological surveys of Great Britain and Ireland were connected from 1832 to 1853 with the ordnance
survey, but are now carried on independently. The ordnance survey, too, no longer depends on the war office
but upon the board of agriculture and fisheries. A Bathymetrical Survey of the Freshwater Lochs of Scotland,
under the direction of Sir John Murray and L. Pullar, was completed in 1908, and the results published by
the Royal Geographical Society.

Proposals for a new map of France, to replace the famous Cassini map of 1744-1793 were made in 1802
and again by R. Bonne in 1808, but owing to the wars then devastating Europe no steps were taken until
1817, and the Carte de France de l’état major on a scale of 1 : 80,000 was only
France. completed in 1880. It is engraved on copper. The hachured hills are based upon contours,
and are of admirable commensurability. It has served as a basis for a Carte de la France,
published by the Service Vicinal on a scale of 1 : 100,000, in 596 sheets, and of a general map prepared by
the ministère des travaux publics on a scale of 1 : 200,000 in 80 sheets. On both these maps the hills are
printed in grey chalk. A third topographical map of France is being published in accordance with the
recommendation of a committee presided over by General de la Noix in 1897. The surveys for this map
were begun in 1905. The maps are based upon the cadastral plans (1 : 1000), thoroughly revised and
connected with the triangulation of France and furnished with contours at intervals of 5 m. by precise
measurement. These minutes are published on a scale of 1 : 10,000 or 1 : 20,000 for mountain districts,
while the scale of the general map is 1 : 50,000. Each sheet is bounded by parallels and meridians. The hills
are shown in brown contours at intervals of 10 m. and grey shading in chalk (Berthaut, La Carte de France,
1750-1898; Paris, 1899). A geological map of France on a scale of 1 : 80,000 is nearly completed, there are
also a map (1 : 500,000) by Carez and Vasseur, and an official Carte géologique (1 : 1,000,000; 1906).

By the middle of the 19th century topographical maps of the various German states had been completed,
and in several instances surveys of a more exact nature had been completed or begun, when in 1878 the

governments of Prussia, Saxony, Bavaria and Württemberg agreed to supersede local
Germany. maps by publishing a map of the empire (Reichskarte) in 674 sheets on a scale of 1 :
100,000. The earlier sheets of this excellent map were lithographed, but these are
gradually being superseded by maps engraved on copper. Colour-printing is employed since 1901. The hills
are hachured and in some instances contours at intervals of 50 metres are introduced. The map was
completed in 1909, but is continually undergoing renewal. The Messtischblätter, called Positionsblätter in
Bavaria, are on a scale of 1 : 25,000. The older among them leave much to be desired, but those of a later
date are satisfactory. This applies more especially to the maps of Saxony (since 1879) and Württemberg
(since 1893). The features of the ground on most of these maps are shown by contours at intervals of 10
metres. The map produced on this large scale numbers over 5000 sheets, and is used as a basis for the
geological surveys carried on in several of the states of Germany. A general map of the German Empire
(Uebersichtskarte) on a scale of 1 : 200,000, in 196 sheets, is in progress since 1893. It is printed in three
colours, and gives contours at intervals of 10 metres. In addition to these maps there are D. G. Reymann’s
well-known Specialkarte von Mittel Europa (1 : 200,000), acquired by the Prussian government in 1874 (it
will ultimately consist of 796 sheets), a government and Liebenow’s map of central Europe (1 : 300,000)
and C. Vogel’s beautiful map of Germany (1 : 500,000).

The Specialkarte of Austria-Hungary on a scale of 1 : 75,000 (765 sheets), based upon a triangulation and
cadastral surveys (1816-1867), was completed in 1889, and published in heliogravure. This map was
repeatedly revised, but as it no longer met modern requirements as to accuracy the
Austria-Hungary. director of the military geographical establishment at Vienna, Field Marshal Chr. von
Steeb, in 1896, organized what practically amounts to a re-survey of the entire monarchy,
to be completed in 75 years. At the same time the cadastral plans, reduced to a scale of 1 : 25,000, are being
published in photo-lithography. A general map of central Europe in 283 sheets published by the Austrian
government (1 : 200,000) includes nearly the whole of the Balkan Peninsula.

The famous map of Switzerland, with which is associated the name of General H. Dufour (d. 1875), is
based upon a triangulation (1809-1833) and surveys on a scale of 1 : 25,000 for the lowlands, 1 : 50,000 for
the alpine districts, and was published (1842-1865) on a scale of 1 : 100,000. The hills are
Switzerland. hachured, the light, in the case of the loftier regions, being supposed to fall obliquely. The
original surveys, carefully revised, have been published since 1870 as a Topographical
Atlas of Switzerland—the so-called Siegfried Atlas, in 552 sheets. They are printed in three colours, contours
at intervals of 10 and 20 metres being in brown, incidental features (ravines, cliffs, glaciers) in black or blue.
To mountain-climbers these contour maps are invaluable, but for ordinary purposes “strata maps,” such as J.
M. Ziegler’s hypsometric maps (1856) or so-called “relief maps,” which attempt to delineate the ground so
as to give the impression of a relief, are generally preferred.

The new survey of Belgium was completed in 1872 and there have been published 527 plane-table
sections or planchettes on a scale of 1 : 20,000 (1866-1880), a “Carte topographique de la
Belgium. Belgique,” in 72 sheets, on a scale of 1 : 40,000 (1861-1883), and a more recent map in
26 sheets on a scale of 1 : 100,000 (1903-1912). The last is printed in five colours, the
ground is shown in contours of 10 metres interval and grey stippling.

The new survey of the Netherlands, based upon General Krayenhoff’s primary triangulation (1802-1811)
was completed in 1855. The results have been published on a scale of 1 : 25,000 (776 sheets, since 1866), 1 :

50,000 (Topographic and Military Map, 62 sheets, 1850-1864, and a Waterstaatskaart,
Holland. 1864-1892), and 1 : 200,000 (Topographical Atlas, 21 sheets, 1868-1871).

In Denmark, on the proposal of the Academy of Science, a survey was carried out in 1766-1825, but the
maps issued by the Danish general staff depend upon more recent surveys. These include
Denmark. plane-table sections (Maalebordsblade), 1209 sheets on a scale of 1 : 20,000, with
contours at intervals of 5 to 10 ft., published since 1830; Atlasblade of Jutland and of De
Danske Öer, on a scale of 1 : 40,000, the former in 131 sheets, since 1870, the latter, on the same scale, in
94 sheets, since 1890, and still in progress, and a general staff map on a scale of 1 : 100,000, in 68 sheets,
since 1890. Maps of the Faroer and of Iceland have likewise been issued.

Modern surveys in Sweden date from the organization of a corps of “Landemätare,” known since 1874 as
a topographical department of the general staff. The maps issued by this authority include
Scandinavia. one of southern Sweden, 1 : 100,000, another of northern Sweden, 1 : 200,000, and a
general map on a scale of 1 : 1,000,000. In Norway a geographical survey (Opmaaling)
has been in progress since 1783, but the topographical map of the kingdom on a scale of 1 : 100,000 in 340
sheets, has not yet been completed.

Of Russia in Europe only the more densely peopled governments have been surveyed, since 1816, in the
manner of other European countries, while for most regions there are only so-called “military surveys.” The
most readily available map of the whole country is the 10-verst map (1 : 420,000), known
Russia. as General J. A. Strelbitzki’s, and published 1865-1880. A topographic map (1 : 126,000)
embracing the whole of western Russia, with Poland and the country of the Don
Cossacks, is designed to be extended over the whole empire. Certain governments—Moscow, Kief,
Volhynia, Bessarabia, the Crimea, &c.—have been published on a scale of 1 : 24,000, while Finland, as far
as 61° N., was re-surveyed in 1870-1895, and a map on a scale of 1 : 42,000 is approaching completion.

Surveys in Asiatic Russia are conducted by the topographical departments organized at Orenburg,
Tashkent, Omsk, Irkutsk and Tiflis. To the latter we are indebted for a valuable map of Caucasia, 1 :
210,000, which since the first publication (1863-1885) has undergone careful revision. The Siberian
departments have published a number of maps on a scale of 1 : 420,000. In addition to these the survey for
the Trans-Siberian railway has been published on a scale of 1 : 630,000, as also maps of the Russo-Chinese
frontier districts, 1 : 210,000 and 1 : 1,168,000. A map of Asiatic Russia, 1 : 420,000, by Bolshef, in 192
sheets, is in course of publication.

Passing to southern Europe we find that Portugal has completed a Charta chorographica (1 : 100,000)
since 1856. In Spain a plane-table survey on a scale of 1 : 20,000 has been in progress
Portugal and since 1870, but of the map of Spain in 1078 sheets on a scale of 1 : 50,000 only 150 had
Spain. been issued by the depósito de la guerra up to 1910. Meanwhile reference may be made to
B. F. Coello’s Atlas de la España (1848-1890), the maps of which are on a scale of 1 :
200,000.

In Italy Tavulette rilevata on a scale of 1 : 25,000 or 1 : 50,000, with contours, based on
Italy. surveys made 1862-1890, are being published, and a Carta del regno d’Italia, 1 :
100,000, is practically complete. There are a Carta idrologica and a Carta geologica on
the same scale, and a Carta orografica on a scale of 1 : 500,000.

Greece is still dependent upon foreigners for its maps, among which the Carte de Grèce (1 : 200,000)
from rapid surveys made by General Palet in 1828, was published in a new edition in 1880. A similar map,
mainly based upon surveys made by Austrian officers and revised by H. Kiepert (1 :
Greece. 300,000), was published by the Military Geographical Institute of Vienna in 1885. Far
superior to these maps is the Karte von Attika (1 : 100,000 and 1 : 25,000) based upon
careful surveys made by Prussian officers and published by E. Curtius and J. H. Kaupert on behalf of the
German Archaeological Institute in Athens (1878), or A. Philippson’s map of the Peloponnese (1 : 300,000;
1901).

For maps of the Balkan Peninsula we are still largely indebted to the rapid surveys carried on by Austrian
and Russian officers. The Austrian map of central Europe embraces the whole of the Balkan Peninsula on a
scale of 1 : 200,000; the Russian surveys (1877-1879) are embodied in a map of the
Balkan States. eastern part of the Balkan on a scale 1 : 126,000, and a map of Bulgaria and southern
Rumelia, on a scale 1 : 200,000, both published in 1883. A map of Turkey in Europe,
scale 1 : 210,000, was published by the Turkish general staff (1899), and another map, scale 1 : 250,000, by
the intelligence division of the British war office is in progress since 1906. Bosnia and Herzegovina are now
included with the surveys of the Austrian Empire, the kingdom of Servia has been surveyed (1880-1891) and
the results published on a scale of 1 : 75,000; in eastern Rumania surveys have been in progress since 1874
and the results have been published on a scale of 1 : 50,000; a general map of the entire kingdom, scale 1 :
200,000, was published in 1906-1907; a map of Montenegro (1 : 75,000), based on surveys by Austrian and
Russian officers, was published at Vienna in 1894.

In Asiatic Turkey several districts of historical interest have been surveyed, and surveys have likewise
been made in the interest of railways, or by boundary commissions, but there is no such thing as a general
survey carried on under the direction of government. We are thus, to a large extent, still
Asia. dependent upon compilations, such as R. Kiepert’s Asia Minor (1 : 400,000; 1904-1908),
a map of eastern Turkey in Asia, Syria and western Persia (1 : 2,000,000; 1910),
published by the Royal Geographical Society, or a Russian general map (1 : 630,000, published 1880-1885).
Among maps based upon actual surveys those of Palestine, by Lieutenant G. R. Conder and H. H.
(afterwards Lord) Kitchener (1 : 63,360, 1880), of the Sinai Peninsula by Sir C. W. Wilson and H. S. Palmer
(1 : 126,730, 1870), of Arabia Petraea by Dr A. Musil (1 : 300,000, 1907) or of the Aden territory (1905) are
among the more interesting. Of Cyprus an excellent map from surveys by Major (Lord) H. H. Kitchener was
published in 1884 (1 : 63,360).

In the case of Persia and Afghanistan we are still dependent upon compilations such as a Russian staff
map (1 : 840,000, published in 1886), Colonel Sir T. H. Holdich’s map of Persia (1 : 1,014,000, Simla, 1897-
1899), or a smaller map (1 : 2,028,000 and 1 : 4,056,000), published by the geographical division of the
general staff. The settlement of boundaries in northern Afghanistan (1883) and in Seistan (1870) has
necessitated surveys of some interest.

A trigonometrical survey of British India was begun in 1800 and the country can now boast of a survey
which in most respects is equal to those of most European states. The surveys are made on scales varying
according to the necessities of the case or the nature of the country, and they have been extended since 1862
beyond the boundaries of India proper. Revenue surveys for land settlement are published on a scale of 1 :
4000, but the usual scale for topographical maps is 1 : 63,360. An Indian Atlas, on a scale of 1 : 255,660,

includes also Ceylon and the Malay Peninsula, but although begun so long ago as 1827 many of its sheets
are unpublished. There are in addition an official map of India (1 : 1,000,000), the first edition of which was
published in 1903, as also maps of the great provinces of India, including Burma, all on a scale of 1 :
2,827,520, and a variety of physical and statistical maps. Ceylon and the Straits Settlements, with the
Federal Malay States, have their own surveyors-general. The British North Borneo Company published a
Map of British North Borneo, on a scale of 1 : 633,600 (1905).

In Siam a regular survey was organized by Mr J. McCarthy (1881-1883), a former official of the Indian
survey, which did good work in connexion with the determination of the Franco-Siamese frontier (1906).
The surveys are made on the scales of 1 : 4000, 1 : 31,680 and 1 : 63,360.

In French Indo-China surveys have been in progress since 1881. The Bureau of the Indo-Chinese general
staff, has published a map of Indo-China, including Cambodia, in 45 sheets (1 : 200,000, 1895), while to the
service géographique de l’Indo-Chine, organized in 1899, we owe a Carte de l’Indo-Chine (1 : 500,000).

For China we are still largely dependent upon careful compilations like Baron F. von Richthofen’s Atlas
von China (1 : 750,000, Berlin, 1885-1890) or Bretschneider’s Map of China (1 : 4,600,000) a new edition
of which appeared at St Petersburg in 1900. There are good survey maps of the British colony of Hong-
Kong, of Wei-hai-Wei and of the country around Kiao-chou, and the establishment of topographical offices
at Peking and Ngan-king holds out some promise of native surveys. In the meantime large scale maps
prepared by European authorities are to be welcomed, such as maps of Chih-li and Shan-tung (1 : 200,000),
from surveys by Prussian officers, 1901-1905, maps on East China (1 : 1,000,000) and of Yun-nan by
British, German and Indian officers, of the Indo-Chinese frontier (1 : 200,000, Paris 1908), and of the upper
Yangtsze-kiang by S. Chevalier (Shanghai, 1900).

Japan has a regular survey department originated by Europeans and successfully carried on by natives.
The primary triangulation was completed in 1880, a topographical map coloured geologically (1 : 200,000)
was published 1889-1897, and in addition to this there are being published an agronomical map on a scale of
1 : 100,000 (since 1887) and others. The Japanese government has likewise published a map of Korea (1 :
1,000,000; 1898).

The Philippine Islands are represented in a carefully compiled map by C. W. Hodgson (1 : 1,115,000,
New York, 1908). Of Java we possess an excellent topographical map based upon surveys made 1850-1887
(1 : 100,000). A similar map has been in progress for Sumatra since 1883, while the maps for the remaining
Dutch Indies are still based, almost exclusively, upon flying surveys. For general purposes the Atlas der
Nederlandsche Bezittingen in Oost-Indie by J. N. Stemfoort and J. J. Ten Siethoff, of which a new edition
has been published since 1900, may be consulted with confidence.

In Africa nearly all the international boundaries have been carefully surveyed and marked on the ground,
since 1880, and yield a good basis as a guide for the map compiler. A general map of Africa, by Colonel
Lannoy de Bissy, on a scale of 1 : 2,000,000 was first published in 1882-1888, but is
Africa. carefully revised from time to time. The geographical section of the British general staff
is publishing maps of all Africa on scales of 1 : 250,000 and 1 : 1,000,000. In Egypt
excellent work has been done by a survey department organized and directed by Captain H. G. Lyons up to
1909. It has published a topographical map of the Nile valley (1 : 50,000), an irrigation map (1 : 100,000), a
general map (1 : 250,000), numerous cadastral plans, &c. Work on similar lines is carried on in the Anglo-

Egyptian Sudan. Algeria has been in course of survey since 1868, Tunis since 1878, and the results have
been published on scales of 1 : 50,000 and 1 : 250,000. Of Morocco there are many maps, among which
several compiled by the French service géographique de l’armée, including a Carte du Maroc (1 : 200,000),
in progress since 1909. In the British colonies of tropical and of South Africa26 surveys for the most part are
carried on actively. Of the Gambia Colony there is a map by Major E. L. Cowie (1 : 250,000, 1904-1905);
the survey of the Gold Coast Colony is being published by Major F. G. Guggisberg since 1907 (1 : 125,000
and 1 : 200,000); southern and northern Nigeria are adequately represented on the maps of the general staff
(1 : 250,000). The states of British South Africa have each their surveyor-general, and a reconnaissance
survey has been in progress since 1903. It is based upon a careful triangulation, superintended by Sir D. Gill,
and carried in 1907 within 70 m. of Lake Tanganyika. This survey is rapidly superseding other maps, such as
the surveyor-general’s map of Cape Colony (1 : 127,000); A. Duncan’s map of the Orange River State (1 :
148,705; 1902-1904) and Jeppe’s map of the Transvaal (1 : 476,000; 1899). The results of a survey of
southern Rhodesia are given on the map of the British general staff (1 : 500,000; 1909), while of north-
eastern Rhodesia we have an excellent map compiled by C. L. Beringer in 1907 (1 : 1,000,000). Surveys in
British Central Africa were taken up in 1894; a survey of Lake Nyasa, by Lieut. E. L. Rhoades and W. B.
Phillips, was published in 1902. As regards British East Africa and Uganda, the surveys in the latter (on
scales of 1 : 10,000 and 1 : 125,000) have made considerable progress. The Victoria Nyanza was surveyed
by Captain B. Whitehouse (1898-1900), and the results have been published on a scale of 1 : 292,000. These
British possessions, together with the whole of Somaliland and southern Abyssinia, are satisfactorily
represented on the maps of the British general staff.

Maps of the French Africa Colonies have been published by the service géographique de l’Afrique
occidental and the service géographique des colonies. A map of Senegal (1 : 100,000) is in progress since
1905. The official maps of the other colonies have been compiled by A. Meunier between 1902 and 1909.
They include French West Africa, (1 : 2,000,000; 2nd ed., 1908), French Guinea (1 : 500,000; 1902) and the
Ivory Coast and Dahomey (1 : 1,500,000; 1907-1908). A map of the French Congo by J. Hansen (1 :
1,500,000), was published in 1907. In Madagascar a topographical bureau was established by General J. S.
Gallieni in 1896, and the surveys are being published since 1900 on a scale of 1 : 100,000.

As regards the German colonies we are dependent upon compilations by R. Kiepert, P. Sprigade and M.
Moisel. Good maps of the Portuguese colonies are to be found in an Atlas colonial Portugues, a second
edition of which was published by the Commissão de Cartographia in 1909. Of the Congo State we have an
official map on a scale of 1 : 1,000,000, published in 1907. Of Italian Eritrea we have excellent maps on
various scales of 1 : 100,000, 1 : 200,000 and 1 : 500,000, based upon surveys made between 1888 and
1900.

In the states of Australia cadastral surveys conducted by surveyors-general have been in progress for
many years, as also trigonometrical surveys (Western Australia excepted), and the publication of parish and
township or county maps keeps pace with the settlement of the country; but with the
Australia. exception of Victoria none of these states is in possession of a topographical map equal in
accuracy to similar maps published in Europe. In Victoria the so-called geodetic survey
was begun in 1858; the maps are published on a scale of 1 : 126,730. There exists also a general map, on a
scale of 1 : 506,930. Maps on the same scale are available of New South Wales, South Australia and
Tasmania, on a scale of 1 : 560,000 for Western Australia, on a scale of 1 : 253,460 for Queensland. There
are likewise maps on smaller scales, which undergo frequent revision. The map of British New Guinea is on

a scale of 1 : 330,200 (1898). New Zealand has a good general map on a scale of 1 : 633,700. A
trigonometrical survey was given up and only details of immediate practical use are required. The “Lands
Department” of the Fiji Islands has published a map on a scale of 1 : 380,000 (1908).

The cadastral surveys in Canada are carried on by a commission of Crown-lands in the old provinces and
by a Dominion land office, which lays out townships as in the United States, but with greater accuracy. A
surveyor-general is attached to the department of the interior, at Ottawa. He publishes the
North America. topographical maps (1 : 63,366) since 1906. They are based upon theodolite traverses 15
m. apart, and connected with the United States lake and coast surveys, the details being
filled in by plane-table surveys on a scale of 1 : 31,680. The contours, 25 ft. apart, depend upon spirit-
levelling. In the Rocky Mountains surveys photographic apparatus is successfully employed. The surveyor-
general issues also “sectional maps” (1 : 190,000 and 1 : 40,000) and so-called “Standard” topographical
maps for the thinly peopled west, on scales of 1 : 250,000 and 1 : 500,000. He is responsible likewise for
maps of Yukon and of Labrador, supplied by the geological survey, the former on a scale of 1 : 380,200, the
latter of 1 : 1,584,000. The intelligence branch of the Canadian department of military defence is publishing
since 1904 topographical maps on scales of 1 : 63,366 and 1 : 126,730, with contours. A geodetic survey
department, under Dr. W. F. King, chief astronomer of the Dominion, was established in 1909.

Maps of Newfoundland, orographical as well as geological, scale 1 : 1,584,200, have been published.

In the United States a “geological survey” was organized in 1879, under Clarence King as director, whose
successor, Major J. W. Powell, rightly conceived that it was necessary to produce good topographical maps
before a geological survey could be pursued with advantage. It is under his wise guidance that the survey
has attained its present efficiency. It is based upon a triangulation by the U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey.
The maps of the more densely peopled parts of the Union are published on a scale of 1 : 62,500, and those of
the remainder of the country on half or a quarter of that scale. The hills are shown by contours at intervals of
10 or 100 ft. The details given are considered sufficient to admit of the selection of general routes for
railways or other public works. The survey progresses at the rate of about 40,000 sq. m. annually, and in
course of time it will supersede the map of the separate states, based on older surveys. A “reconnaissance”
map of Alaska (on a scale of 1 : 250,000) was published in 1908.

In Mexico the surveys are in charge of a comision geografica-exploradora attached to the secretaria de
Fomento, but only about 140 sheets of a Carta general on a scale of 1 : 100,000 have
Central America. been published. There are also a map of the state of S. Luis Potosi (1 : 250,000), of the
environs of Puebla (1 : 50,000) and a Carta general de la republica mexicana (1 :
250,000).

A useful map of Central America has been published by the topographical section of the British general
staff on a scale of 1 : 170,300. Of great value for cartographical work is a careful survey, carried out by
American engineers (1897-1898), for a continental railway running along the west coast from Mexico to
Chile. In South America, in proportion to the area of the country, only few surveys of a thoroughly scientific
nature have been made, and it is therefore satisfactory that the service géographique of the French army
should be publishing, since 1900, a map of the entire continent on a scale of 1 : 1,000,000.

Colombia is but inadequately represented by rough maps. For Colombia we have F. L. Vergara y
Velasco’s Atlas de geografia colombiana (1906-1908); Ecuador is fairly well represented by Th. Wolf

(1892) and Hans Meier (1907); in the case of Peru we still largely depend upon Paz Soldan’s Atlas
geografica (1865-1867) and A. Raimondi’s Mapa del Peru (1 : 500,000) based upon surveys made before
1869. Sir Martin Conway’s “Map of the Andes of La Paz” (1 : 600,000; 1900) as well as Major P. H.
Fawcett’s survey of the Brazilian boundary (1906-1907) are welcome additions to our knowledge of Bolivia.
In Chile a comision topografica was appointed as long ago as 1848, but the map produced under its auspices
by Professor F. Pissis (1 : 250,000, 1870-1877), leaves much to be desired. Since that time, however,
valuable maps have been published by an Oficina de mensura de tierras, by a seccion de geografia y minas
connected with the department of public works, by the Oficina hidrografica, and more especially in
connexion with surveys necessitated by the boundary disputes with Argentina, which were settled by
arbitration in 1899 and 1902. The surveys which led to the latter were conducted by Sir Thomas Holdich.

In Venezuela a commission for producing a plano militar or military map of the country was appointed by
General Castro in 1904, but little progress seems to have been made, and meantime we are dependent upon a
revised edition of A. Codazzi’s map of 1840 which was published in 1884. In Brazil little or nothing is done
by the central government, but the progressive states of São Paulo and Mines Gerães have commissãos
geographicos e geologicos engaged in the production of topographical maps. Valuable materials have
likewise been acquired by several river surveys including those of the Amazonas by Azevedo and Pinto
(1862-1864) and W. Chandless (1862-1869) and of the Rio Madeira by Colonel G. Earl Church and Keller-
Leuzinger (1860-1875). The proposal of a committee presided over by the Marshal H. de Beaurepaire-
Rohan (1876) to prepare a map of Brazil on a scale of 1 : 200,000 has never been acted upon, and in the
meantime we are dependent upon works like the Atlas do imperio do Brazil by Mendes de Almeida (1868)
or the maps in our general atlases.

In Argentina an official geographical institute was established in 1879, but neither A. Seelstrang’s Atlas
(1886-1892) nor H. Hoskold’s Mapa topografica (1 : 2,000,000; London, 1895), which were published by it,
nor any of the numerous provincial maps are based upon scientific surveys.

It need hardly be said that hydrographic surveys have been of great service to compilers of maps.
There are few coast-lines, frequented by shipping, which have not yet been surveyed in a definite
manner. In this work the British hydrographic office may justly claim the credit of having contributed
the chief share. Great Britain has likewise taken the lead in those deep-sea explorations which reveal
to us the configuration of the sea-bottom, and enable us to construct charts of the ocean bed
corresponding to the contoured maps of dry land yielded by topographical surveys.
(E. G. R.)

Map Projections

In the construction of maps, one has to consider how a portion of spherical surface, or a configuration
traced on a sphere, can be represented on a plane. If the area to be represented bear a very small ratio to the
whole surface of the sphere, the matter is easy: thus, for instance, there is no difficulty in making a map of a
parish, for in such cases the curvature of the surface does not make itself evident. If the district is larger and
reaches the size of a county, as Yorkshire for instance, then the curvature begins to be sensible, and one
requires to consider how it is to be dealt with. The sphere cannot be opened out into a plane like the cone or
cylinder; consequently in a plane representation of configurations on a sphere it is impossible to retain the
desired proportions of lines or areas or equality of angles. But though one cannot fulfil all the requirements

of the case, we may fulfil some by sacrificing others; we may, for instance, have in the representation exact
similarity to all very small portions of the original, but at the expense of the areas, which will be quite
misrepresented. Or we may retain equality of areas if we give up the idea of similarity. It is therefore usual,
excepting in special cases, to steer a middle course, and, by making compromises, endeavour to obtain a
representation which shall not involve large errors of scale.

A globe gives a perfect representation of the surface of the earth; but, practically, the necessary limits to
its size make it impossible to represent in this manner the details of countries. A globe of the ordinary
dimensions serves scarcely any other purpose than to convey a clear conception of the earth’s surface as a
whole, exhibiting the figure, extent, position and general features of the continents and islands, with the
intervening oceans and seas; and for this purpose it is indeed absolutely essential and cannot be replaced by
any kind of map.

The construction of a map virtually resolves itself into the drawing of two sets of lines, one set to
represent meridians, the other to represent parallels. These being drawn, the filling in of the outlines of
countries presents no difficulty. The first and most natural idea that occurs to one as to the manner of
drawing the circles of latitude and longitude is to draw them according to the laws of perspective. Perhaps
the next idea which would occur would be to derive the meridians and parallels in some other simple
geometrical way.

Cylindrical Equal Area Projection.—Let us suppose a model of the earth to
be enveloped by a cylinder in such a way that the cylinder touches the equator,
and let the plane of each parallel such as PR be prolonged to intersect the
cylinder in the circle pr. Now unroll the cylinder and the projection will appear
as in fig. 2. The whole world is now represented as a rectangle, each parallel is
a straight line, and its total length is the same as that of the equator, the distance
of each parallel from the equator is sin l (where l is the latitude and the radius
of the model earth is taken as unity). The meridians are parallel straight lines Fig. 1.
spaced at equal distances.

Fig. 2.

This projection possesses an important property. From the elementary geometry of sphere and cylinder it
is clear that each strip of the projection is equal in area to the zone on the model which it represents, and
that each portion of a strip is equal in area to the corresponding portion of a zone. Thus, each small four-
sided figure (on the model) bounded by meridians and parallels is represented on the projection by a

rectangle which is of exactly the same area, and this applies to any such figure however small. It

therefore follows that any figure, of any shape on the model, is correctly represented as regards area by its
corresponding figure on the projection. Projections having this property are said to be equal-area projections
or equivalent projections; the name of the projection just described is “the cylindrical equal-area projection.”
This projection will serve to exemplify the remark made in the first paragraph that it is possible to select
certain qualities of the model which shall be represented truthfully, but only at the expense of other qualities.
For instance, it is clear that in this case all meridian lengths are too small and all lengths along the parallels,
except the equator, are too large. Thus although the areas are preserved the shapes are, especially away from
the equator, much distorted.

The property of preserving areas is, however, a valuable one when the purpose of the map is to exhibit
areas. If, for example, it is desired to give an idea of the area and distribution of the various states
comprising the British Empire, this is a fairly good projection. Mercator’s, which is commonly used in
atlases, preserves local shape at the expense of area, and is valueless for the purpose of showing areas.

Many other projections can be and have been devised, which depend for their construction on a purely
geometrical relationship between the imaginary model and the plane. Thus projections may be drawn which
are derived from cones which touch or cut the sphere, the parallels being formed by the intersection with the
cones of planes parallel to the equator, or by lines drawn radially from the centre. It is convenient to describe
all projections which are derived from the model by a simple and direct geometrical construction as
“geometrical projections.” All other projections may be known as “non-geometrical projections.”
Geometrical projections, which include perspective projections, are generally speaking of small practical
value. They have loomed much more largely on the map-maker’s horizon than their importance warrants. It
is not going too far to say that the expression “map projection” conveys to most well-informed persons the
notion of a geometrical projection; and yet by far the greater number of useful projections are non-
geometrical. The notion referred to is no doubt due to the very term “projection,” which unfortunately
appears to indicate an arrangement of the terrestrial parallels and meridians which can be arrived at by direct
geometrical construction. Especially has harm been caused by this idea when dealing with the group of
conical projections. The most useful conical projections have nothing to do with the secant cones, but are
simply projections in which the meridians are straight lines which converge to a point which is the centre of
the circular parallels. The number of really useful geometrical projections may be said to be four: the equal-
area cylindrical just described, and the following perspective projections—the central, the stereographic
and Clarke’s external.

Perspective Projections.

In perspective drawings of the sphere, the plane on which the representation is actually made may
generally be any plane perpendicular to the line joining the centre of the sphere and the point of vision. If V
be the point of vision, P any point on the spherical surface, then p, the point in which the straight line VP
intersects the plane of the representation, is the projection of P.

Orthographic Projection.—In this projection the point of vision is at an infinite distance and the rays
consequently parallel; in this case the plane of the drawing may be supposed to pass through the centre of
the sphere. Let the circle (fig. 3) represent the plane of the equator on which we propose to make an
orthographic representation of meridians and parallels. The centre of this circle is clearly the projection of
the pole, and the parallels are projected into circles having the pole for a common centre. The diameters aa′,

bb′ being at right angles, let the semicircle bab′ be divided into the required
number of equal parts; the diameters drawn through these points are the
projections of meridians. The distances of c, of d and of e from the diameter aa′
are the radii of the successive circles representing the parallels. It is clear that,
when the points of division are very close, the parallels will be very much
crowded towards the outside of the map; so much so, that this projection is not
much used.
Fig. 3.
For an orthographic projection of the globe on a meridian plane let qnrs
(fig. 4) be the meridian, ns the axis of rotation, then qr is the projection of the equator. The parallels
will be represented by straight lines passing through the points of equal division; these lines are, like
the equator, perpendicular to ns. The meridians will in this case be ellipses described on ns as a
common major axis, the distances of c, of d and of e from ns being the minor semiaxes.

Fig. 4. Fig. 5.

Let us next construct an orthographic projection of the sphere on the horizon of any place.

Set off the angle aop (fig. 5) from the radius oa, equal
to the latitude. Drop the perpendicular pP on oa, then P is
the projection of the pole. On ao produced take ob = pP,
then ob is the minor semiaxis of the ellipse representing
the equator, its major axis being qr at right angles to ao.
The points in which the meridians meet this elliptic
equator are determined by lines drawn parallel to aob
through the points of equal subdivision cdefgh. Take two
points, as d and g, which are 90° apart, and let ik be their
projections on the equator; then i is the pole of the
meridian which passes through k. This meridian is of
course an ellipse, and is described with reference to i
Fig. 6.—Orthographic Projection.
exactly as the equator was described with reference to P.
Produce io to l, and make lo equal to half the shortest
chord that can be drawn through i; then lo is the semiaxis of the elliptic meridian, and the major axis
is the diameter perpendicular to iol.

For the parallels: let it be required to describe the parallel whose co-latitude is u; take pm = pn = u,
and let m′n′ be the projections of m and n on oPa; then m′n′ is the minor axis of the ellipse
representing the parallel. Its centre is of course midway between m′ and n′, and the greater axis is

equal to mn. Thus the construction is obvious. When pm is less than pa the whole of the ellipse is to
be drawn. When pm is greater than pa the ellipse touches the circle in two points; these points divide
the ellipse into two parts, one of which, being on the other side of the meridian plane aqr, is invisible.
Fig. 6 shows the complete orthographic projection.

Stereographic Projection.—In this case the point of vision is on the
surface, and the projection is made on the plane of the great circle
whose pole is V. Let kplV (fig. 7) be a great circle through the point of
vision, and ors the trace of the plane of projection. Let c be the centre
of a small circle whose radius is cp = cl; the straight line pl represents
this small circle in orthographic projection.

We have first to show that the stereographic projection of the Fig. 7.
small circle pl is itself a circle; that is to say, a straight line through
V, moving along the circumference of pl, traces a circle on the plane
of projection ors. This line generates an oblique cone standing on a
circular base, its axis being cV (since the angle pVc = angle cVl);
this cone is divided symmetrically by the plane of the great circle
kpl, and also by the plane which passes through the axis Vc,
perpendicular to the plane kpl. Now Vr·Vp, being = Vo sec kVp·Vk
cos kVp = Vo·Vk, is equal to Vs·Vl; therefore the triangles Vrs, Vlp
are similar, and it follows that the section of the cone by the plane rs
Fig. 8.
is similar to the section by the plane pl. But the latter is a circle,
hence also the projection is a circle; and since the representation of every infinitely small circle on the
surface is itself a circle, it follows that in this projection the representation of small parts is strictly
similar. Another inference is that the angle in which two lines on the sphere intersect is represented by
the same angle in the projection. This may otherwise be proved by means of fig. 8, where Vok is the
diameter of the sphere passing through the point of vision, fgh the plane of projection, kt a great
circle, passing of course through V, and ouv the line of intersection of these two planes. A tangent
plane to the surface at t cuts the plane of projection in the line rvs perpendicular to ov; tv is a tangent
to the circle kt at t, tr and ts are any two tangents to the surface at t. Now the angle vtu (u being the
projection of t) is 90° − otV = 90° − oVt = ouV = tuv, therefore tv is equal to uv; and since tvs and uvs
are right angles, it follows that the angles vts and vus are equal. Hence the angle rts also is equal to its
projection rus; that is, any angle formed by two intersecting lines on the surface is truly represented in
the stereographic projection.

In this projection, therefore, angles are correctly represented and every small triangle is represented by a
similar triangle. Projections having this property of similar representation of small parts are called
orthomorphic, conform or conformable. The word orthomorphic, which was introduced by Germain27 and
adopted by Craig,28 is perhaps the best to use.

Since in orthomorphic projections very small figures are correctly represented, it follows that the scale is
the same in all directions round a point in its immediate neighbourhood, and orthomorphic projections may
be defined as possessing this property. There are many other orthomorphic projections, of which the best
known is Mercator’s. These are described below.

We have seen that the stereographic projection of any circle of the sphere is itself a circle. But in the case
in which the circle to be projected passes through V, the projection becomes, for a great circle, a line through
the centre of the sphere; otherwise, a line anywhere. It follows that meridians and parallels are represented in
a projection on the horizon of any place by two systems of orthogonally cutting circles, one system passing
through two fixed points, namely, the poles; and the projected meridians as they pass through the poles show
the proper differences of longitude.

To construct a stereographic projection of the sphere on the horizon of
a given place. Draw the circle vlkr (fig. 9) with the diameters kv, lr at
right angles; the latter is to represent the central meridian. Take koP equal
to the co-latitude of the given place, say u; draw the diameter PoP′, and
vP, vP′ cutting lr in pp′: these are the projections of the poles, through
which all the circles representing meridians have to pass. All their centres
then will be in a line smn which crosses pp′ at right angles through its
middle point m. Now to describe the meridian whose west longitude is ω,
draw pn making the angle opn = 90° − ω, then n is the centre of the
required circle, whose direction as it passes through p will make an angle
Fig. 9.
opg = ω with pp′. The lengths of the several lines are

op = tan 1⁄2u; op′ = cot 1⁄2u; om = cot u; mn = cosec u cot ω.

Again, for the parallels, take Pb = Pc equal to the co-latitude, say c, of the
parallel to be projected; join vb, vc cutting lr in e, d. Then ed is the
diameter of the circle which is the required projection; its centre is of
course the middle point of ed, and the lengths of the lines are

od = tan 1⁄2(u − c); oe = tan 1⁄2(u + c).

The line sn itself is the projection of a parallel, namely, that of which the Fig. 10.
co-latitude c = 180° − u, a parallel which passes through the point of
vision.

Notwithstanding the facility of construction, the stereographic projection is not much used in map-
making. It is sometimes used for maps of the hemispheres in atlases, and for star charts.

External Perspective Projection.—We now come to the general case in which the point of vision has any
position outside the sphere. Let abcd (fig. 10) be the great circle section of the sphere by a plane passing
through c, the central point of the portion of surface to be represented, and V the point of vision. Let pj
perpendicular to Vc be the plane of representation, join mV cutting pj in f, then f is the projection of any
point m in the circle abc, and ef is the representation of cm.

Let the angle com = u, Ve = k, Vo = h, ef = ρ; then, since ef: eV = mg : gV, we have ρ = k sin u/(h +
cos u), which gives the law connecting a spherical distance u with its rectilinear representation ρ. The
relative scale at any point in this system of projection is given by

σ = dρ / du, σ′ = ρ / sin u,

σ = k (1 + h cos u) / (h + cos u)2; σ′ = k / (h + cos u),

the former applying to measurements made in a direction which passes through the centre of the map,
the latter to the transverse direction. The product σσ′ gives the exaggeration of areas. With respect to
the alteration of angles we have Σ = (h + cos u) / (l + k cos u), and the greatest alteration of angle is

h−1 u
sin−1 ( h + 1 tan2 2 ).
This vanishes when h = 1, that is if the projection be stereographic; or for u = 0, that is at the centre of
the map. At a distance of 90° from the centre, the greatest alteration is 90° − 2 cot−1 √h. (See Phil.
Mag. 1862.)

Clarke’s Projection.—The constants h and k can be determined, so that the total misrepresentation,
viz.:

M = ∫0β { (σ − 1)2 + (σ′ − 1)2 } sin u du,

shall be a minimum, β being the greatest value of u, or the spherical radius of the map. On
substituting the expressions for σ and σ′ the integration is effected without difficulty. Put

λ = (1 − cos β) / (h + cos β); ν = (h − 1) λ,
H = ν − (h + 1) loge (λ + 1), H′ = λ (2 − ν + 1⁄3ν2) / (h + 1).

Then the value of M is

M = 4 sin2 1⁄2β + 2kH + k2H′.

When this is a minimum,

dM / dh = 0; dM / dk = 0
∴ kH′ + H = 0; 2 dH / dh + k dh H′ / dh = 0.

Therefore M = 4 sin2 1⁄2β − H2/H1, and h must be determined so as to make H2 : H′ a maximum. In
any particular case this maximum can only be ascertained by trial, that is to say, log H2 − log H′ must
be calculated for certain equidistant values of h, and then the particular value of h which corresponds
to the required maximum can be obtained by interpolation. Thus we find that if it be required to make
the best possible perspective representation of a hemisphere, the values of h and k are h = 1.47 and k
= 2.034; so that in this case

2.034 sin u
ρ= .
1.47 + cos u

For a map of Africa or South America, the limiting radius β we may take as 40°; then in this case

2.543 sin u
ρ= .
1.625 + cos u

For Asia, β = 54, and the distance h of the point of sight in this case is 1.61. Fig. 11 is a map of Asia
having the meridians and parallels laid down on this system.

Fig. 11.

Fig. 12 is a perspective representation of more than a hemisphere, the radius β being 108°, and the
distance h of the point of vision, 1.40.

Fig. 12.—Twilight Projection. Clarke’s Perspective Projection for a Spherical Radius of 108°.

The co-ordinates xy of any point in this perspective may be expressed in terms of latitude and
longitude of the corresponding point on the sphere in the following manner. The co-ordinates
originating at the centre take the central meridian for the axis of y and a line perpendicular to it for the
axis of x. Let the latitude of the point G, which is to occupy the centre of the map, be γ; if φ, ω be the
latitude and longitude of any point P (the longitude being reckoned from the meridian of G), u the
distance PG, and μ the azimuth of P at G, then the spherical triangle whose sides are 90° − γ, 90° − φ,
and u gives these relations—

sin u sin μ = cos φ sin ω,
sin u cos μ = cos γ sin φ − sin γ cos φ cos ω,
cos u = sin γ sin φ + cos γ cos φ cos ω.

Now x = ρ sin μ, y = ρ cos μ, that is,

x cos φ sin ω
= ,
k h + sin γ sin φ + cos γ cos φ cos ω
y cos γ sin φ − sin γ cos φ cos ω
= ,
k h + sin γ sin φ + cos γ cos φ cos ω

by which x and y can be computed for any point of the sphere. If from these equations we eliminate
ω, we get the equation to the parallel whose latitude is φ; it is an ellipse whose centre is in the central
meridian, and its greater axis perpendicular to the same. The radius of curvature of this ellipse at its
intersection with the centre meridian is k cos φ / (h sin γ + sin φ).

The elimination of φ between x and y gives the equation of the meridian whose longitude is ω,
which also is an ellipse whose centre and axes may be determined.

The following table contains the computed co-ordinates for a map of Africa, which is included
between latitudes 40° north and 40° south and 40° of longitude east and west of a central meridian.

Values of x and y.
φ
ω = 0° ω = 10° ω = 20° ω = 30° ω = 40°
x = 0.00 9.69 19.43 29.25 39.17
0°
y = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
x = 0.00 9.60 19.24 28.95 38.76
10°
y = 9.69 9.75 9.92 10.21 10.63
x = 0.00 9.32 18.67 28.07 37.53
20°
y = 19.43 19.54 19.87 20.43 21.25
x = 0.00 8.84 17.70 26.56 35.44
30°
y = 29.25 29.40 29.87 30.67 31.83
x = 0.00 8.15 16.28 24.39 32.44
40°
y = 39.17 39.36 39.94 40.93 42.34

Central or Gnomonic (Perspective) Projection.—In this
projection the eye is imagined to be at the centre of the sphere. It is
evident that, since the planes of all great circles of the sphere pass
through the centre, the representations of all great circles on this
projection will be straight lines, and this is the special property of
the central projection, that any great circle (i.e. shortest line on the
spherical surface) is represented by a straight line. The plane of
projection may be either parallel to the plane of the equator, in
which case the parallels are represented by concentric circles and the Fig. 13.
meridians by straight lines radiating from the common centre; or the
plane of projection may be parallel to the plane of some meridian, in which case the meridians are parallel
straight lines and the parallels are hyperbolas; or the plane of projection may be inclined to the axis of the
sphere at any angle λ.

In the latter case, which is the most general, if θ is the angle any meridian makes (on paper) with
the central meridian, α the longitude of any point P with reference to the central meridian, l the
latitude of P, then it is clear that the central meridian is a straight line at right angles to the equator,
which is also a straight line, also tan θ = sin λ tan α, and the distance of p, the projection of P, from the
equator along its meridian is (on paper) m sec α sin l / sin (l + x), where tan x = cot λ cos α, and m is a
constant which defines the scale.

The three varieties of the central projection are, as is the case with other perspective projections, known as
polar, meridian or horizontal, according to the inclination of the plane of projection.

Fig. 14 is an example of a meridian central projection of part of the Atlantic Ocean. The term “gnomonic”
was applied to this projection because the projection of the meridians is a similar problem to that of the

graduation of a sun-dial. It is, however, better to use the term
“central,” which explains itself. The central projection is useful
for the study of direct routes by sea and land. The United States
Hydrographic Department has published some charts on this
projection. False notions of the direction of shortest lines,
which are engendered by a study of maps on Mercator’s
projection, may be corrected by an inspection of maps drawn
on the central projection.

There is no projection which accurately possesses the
property of showing shortest paths by straight lines when
applied to the spheroid; one which very nearly does so is that
which results from the intersection of terrestrial normals with a
plane.
(From Text Book of Topographical Surveying,
We have briefly reviewed the most important projections by permission of the Controller of H. M.
Stationery Office.)
which are derived from the sphere by direct geometrical
construction, and we pass to that more important branch of the Fig. 14.—Part of the Atlantic Ocean on a
Meridian Central Projection. The shortest path
subject which deals with projections which are not subject to between any two points is shown on this
projection by a straight line.
this limitation.

Conical Projections.

Conical projections are those in which the parallels are represented by concentric circles and the
meridians by equally spaced radii. There is no necessary connexion between a conical projection and any
touching or secant cone. Projections for instance which are derived by geometrical construction from secant
cones are very poor projections, exhibiting large errors, and they will not be discussed. The name conical is
given to the group embraced by the above definition, because, as is obvious, a projection so drawn can be
bent round to form a cone. The simplest and, at the same time, one of the most useful forms of conical
projection is the following:

Conical Projection with Rectified Meridians and Two Standard Parallels.—In
some books this has been, most unfortunately, termed the “secant conical,” on
account of the fact that there are two parallels of the correct length. The use of
this term in the past has caused much confusion. Two selected parallels are
represented by concentric circular arcs of their true lengths; the meridians are
their radii. The degrees along the meridians are represented by their true lengths;
and the other parallels are circular arcs through points so determined and are
concentric with the chosen parallels.
Fig. 15. Thus in fig. 15 two parallels Gn and G′n′ are represented by their true
lengths on the sphere; all the distances along the meridian PGG′, pnn′ are the
true spherical lengths rectified.

Let γ be the co-latitude of Gn; γ′ that of Gn′; ω be the true difference of longitude of PGG′ and
pnn′; hω be the angle at O; and OP = z, where Pp is the representation of the pole. Then the true

length of parallel Gn on the sphere is ω sin γ, and this is equal to the length on the projection, i.e. ω
sin γ = hω (z + γ); similarly ω sin γ′ = hω (z + γ′).

The radius of the sphere is assumed to be unity, and z and γ are expressed in circular measure.
Hence h = sin γ/(z + γ) = sin γ′ (z + γ′); from this h and z are easily found.

In the above description it has been assumed that the two errorless parallels have been selected. But it is
usually desirable to impose some condition which itself will fix the errorless parallels. There are many
conditions, any one of which may be imposed. In fig. 15 let Cm and C′m′ represent the extreme parallels of
the map, and let the co-latitudes of these parallels be c and c′, then any one of the following conditions may
be fulfilled:—

(a) The errors of scale of the extreme parallels may be made equal and may be equated to the error of
scale of the parallel of maximum error (which is near the mean parallel).

(b) Or the errors of scale of the extreme parallels may be equated to that of the mean parallel. This is not
so good a projection as (a).

(c) Or the absolute errors of the extreme and mean parallels may be equated.

(d) Or in the last the parallel of maximum error may be considered instead of the mean parallel.

(e) Or the mean length of all the parallels may be made correct. This is equivalent to making the total area
between the extreme parallels correct, and must be combined with another condition, for example, that the
errors of scale on the extreme parallels shall be equal.

We will now discuss (a) above, viz. a conical projection with rectified meridians and two standard
parallels, the scale errors of the extreme parallels and parallel of maximum error being equated.

Since the scale errors of the extreme parallels are to be equal,

h (z + c) h (z + c′) c′ sin c − c sin c′
−1= − 1, whence z = .
sin c sin c′ sin c′ − sin c (i.)

The error of scale along any parallel (near the centre), of which the co-latitude is b is

1 − { h (z + b) / sin b }.
(ii.)

This is a maximum when

tan b − b = z, whence b is found.

Also

h (z + b) h (z + c)
1− = − 1 whence h is found.
sin b sin c (iii.)

For the errorless parallels of co-latitudes γ and γ′ we have

h = (z + γ) / sin γ = (z + γ′) / sin γ′.

If this is applied to the case of a map of South Africa between the limits 15° S. and 35° S. (see fig.
16) it will be found that the parallel of maximum error is 25° 20′; the errorless parallels, to the nearest
degree, are those of 18° and 32°. The greatest scale error in this case is about 0.7%.

In the above account the earth has been treated as a sphere. Of course its real shape is
approximately a spheroid of revolution, and the values of the axes most commonly employed are
those of Clarke or of Bessel. For the spheroid, formulae arrived at by the same principles but more
cumbrous in shape must be used. But it will usually be sufficient for the selection of the errorless
parallels to use the simple spherical formulae given above; then, having made the selection of these
parallels, the true spheroidal lengths along the meridians between them can be taken out of the
ordinary tables (such as those published by the Ordnance Survey or by the U.S. Coast and Geodetic
Survey). Thus, if a1, a2, are the lengths of 1° of the errorless parallels (taken from the tables), d the
true rectified length of the meridian arc between them (taken from the tables),

h = { (a2 − a1) / d} 180 / π,

and the radius on paper of parallel, a1 is a1d/(a2 − a1), and the radius of any other parallel = radius of
a1 ± the true meridian distance between the parallels.

This class of projection was used for the 1/1,000,000 Ordnance map of the British Isles. The three
maximum scale errors in this case work out to 0.23%, the range of the projection being from 50° N. to
61° N., and the errorless parallels are 59° 31′ and 51°44′.

Where no great refinement is required it will be sufficient to take the errorless parallels as those
distant from the extreme parallels about one-sixth of the total range in latitude. Thus suppose it is
required to plot a projection for India between latitudes 8° and 40° N. By this rough rule the errorless
parallels should be distant from the extreme parallels about 32°/6, i.e. 5° 20′; they should therefore, to
the nearest degree, be 13° and 35° N. The maximum scale errors will be about 2%.

The scale errors vary approximately as the square of the range of latitude; a rough rule is, largest
scale error = L2/50,000, where L is the range in the latitude in degrees. Thus a country with a range of
7° in latitude (nearly 500 m.) can be plotted on this projection with a maximum linear scale error
(along a parallel) of about 0.1%;29 there is no error along any meridian. It is immaterial with this
projection (or with any conical projection) what the extent in longitude is. It is clear that this class of
projection is accurate, simple and useful.

(From Text Book of Topographical Surveying, by permission of the Controller of H. M. Stationery Office.)
Fig. 16.—South Africa on a conical projection with rectified meridians and two standard parallels. Scale 800 m. to 1 in.

In the projections designated by (c) and (d) above, absolute errors of length are considered in the
place of errors of scale, i.e. between any two meridians (c) the absolute errors of length of the extreme
parallels are equated to the absolute error of length of the middle parallel. Using the same notation

h (z + c) − sin c = h (z + c′) − sin c′ = −h (z + 1⁄2c + 1⁄2c′) − sin 1⁄2 (c + c′).

L. Euler, in the Acta Acad. Imp. Petrop. (1778), first discussed this projection.

If a map of Asia between parallels 10° N. and 70° N. is constructed on this system, we have c =
20°, c′ = 80°, whence from the above equations z = 66.7° and h = .6138. The absolute errors of length
along parallels 10°, 40° and 70° between any two meridians are equal but the scale errors are
respectively 5, 6.7, and 15%.

The modification (d) of this projection was selected for the 1 : 1,000,000 map of India and
Adjacent Countries under publication by the Survey of India. An account of this is given in a
pamphlet produced by that department in 1903. The limiting parallels are 8° and 40° N., and the
parallel of greatest error is 23° 40′ 51″. The errors of scale are 1.8, 2.3, and 1.9%.

It is not as a rule desirable to select this form of the projection. If the surface of the map is
everywhere equally valuable it is clear that an arrangement by which errors of scale are larger towards
the pole than towards the equator is unsound, and it is to be noted that in the case quoted the great
bulk of the land is in the north of the map. Projection (a) would for the same region have three equal
maximum scale errors of 2%. It may be admitted that the practical difference between the two forms
is in this case insignificant, but linear scale errors should be reduced as much as possible in maps
intended for general use.

f. In the fifth form of the projection, the total area of the projection between the extreme parallels
and any two meridians is equated to the area of the portion of the sphere which it represents, and the
errors of scale of the extreme parallels are equated. Then it is easy to show that

z = (c′ sin c − c sin c′) / (sin c′ − sin c);

h = (cos c − cos c′) / (c′ − c) {z + 1⁄2 (c + c′)}.

It can also be shown that any other zone of the same range in latitude will have the same scale
errors along its limiting parallels. For instance, a series of projections may be constructed for zones,
each having a range of 10° of latitude, from the equator to the pole. Treating the earth as a sphere and
using the above formulae, the series will possess the following properties: the meridians will all be
true to scale, the area of each zone will be correct, the scale errors of the limiting parallels will all be
the same, so that the length of the upper parallel of any zone will be equal to that of the lower parallel
of the zone above it. But the curvatures of these parallels will be different, and two adjacent zones
will not fit but will be capable of exact rolling contact. Thus a very instructive flat model of the globe
may be constructed which will show by suitably arranging the points of contact of the zones the paths
of great circles on the sphere. The flat model was devised by Professor J. D. Everett, F.R.S., who also
pointed out that the projection had the property of the equality of scale errors of the limiting parallels
for zones of the same width. The projection may be termed Everett’s Projection.

Simple Conical Projection.—If in the last group of projections the two selected parallels which are to be
errorless approach each other indefinitely closely, we get a projection in which all the meridians are, as
before, of the true rectified lengths, in which one parallel is errorless, the curvature of that parallel being
clearly that which would result from the unrolling of a cone touching the sphere along the parallel
represented. And it was in fact originally by a consideration of the tangent cone that the whole group of
conical projections came into being. The quasi-geometrical way of regarding conical projections is
legitimate in this instance.

The simple conical projection is therefore arrived at in this way: imagine a
cone to touch the sphere along any selected parallel, the radius of this parallel
on paper (Pp, fig. 17) will be r cot φ, where r is the radius of the sphere and φ
is the latitude; or if the spheroidal shape is taken into account, the radius of the
parallel on paper will be ν cot φ where ν is the normal terminated by the minor
axis (the value ν can be found from ordinary geodetic tables). The meridians
are generators of the cone and every parallel such as HH′ is a circle, concentric
with the selected parallel Pp and distant from it the true rectified length of the
Fig. 17.
meridian arc between them.

This projection has no merits as compared with the group just described. The errors of scale along
the parallels increase rapidly as the selected parallel is departed from, the parallels on paper being
always too large. As an example we may take the case of a map of South Africa of the same range as
that of the example given in (a) above, viz. from 15° S. to 35° S. Let the selected parallel be 25° S.;
the radius of this parallel on paper (taking the radius of the sphere as unity) is cot 25°; the radius of
parallel 35° S. = radius of 25° − meridian distance between 25° and 35° = cot 25° − 10π/180 = 1.970.
Also h = sin of selected latitude = sin 25°, and length on paper along parallel 35° of ω° = ωh × 1.970
= ω × 1.970 × sin 25°,

but length on sphere of ω = ω cos 35°,

hence scale error = 1.970 sin 25° − 1 = 1.6%,

cos 35°

an error which is more than twice as great as that obtained by method (a).

Bonne’s Projection.—This projection, which is also called the “modified conical projection,” is derived
from the simple conical, just described, in the following way: a central meridian is chosen and drawn as a
straight line; degrees of latitude spaced at the true rectified distances are marked along this line; the parallels
are concentric circular arcs drawn through the proper points on the central meridian, the centre of the arcs
being fixed by describing one chosen parallel with a radius of ν cot φ as before; the meridians on each side
of the central meridian are drawn as follows: along each parallel distances are marked equal to the true
lengths along the parallels on sphere or spheroid, and the curve through corresponding points so fixed are
the meridians (fig. 18).

This system is that which was adopted in 1803 by the “Dépôt de la Guerre” for
the map of France, and is there known by the title of Projection de Bonne. It is that
on which the ordnance survey map of Scotland on the scale of 1 in. to a mile is
constructed, and it is frequently met with in ordinary atlases. It is ill-adapted for
countries having great extent in longitude, as the intersections of the meridians and
parallels become very oblique—as will be seen on examining the map of Asia in Fig. 18.
most atlases.

If φ0 be taken as the latitude of the centre parallel, and co-ordinates be measured from the
intersection of this parallel with the central meridian, then, if ρ be the radius of the parallel of latitude
φ, we have ρ = cot φ0 + φ0 − φ. Also, if S be a point on this parallel whose co-ordinates are x, y, so
that VS = ρ, and θ be the angle VS makes with the central meridian, then ρθ = ω cos φ; and x = ρ sin
θ, y = cot φ0 − ρ cos θ.

The projection has the property of equal areas, since each small element bounded by two infinitely close
parallels is equal in length and width to the corresponding element on the sphere or spheroid. Also all the
meridians cross the chosen parallel (but no other) at right angles, since in the immediate neighbourhood of
that parallel the projection is identical with the simple conical projection. Where an equal-area projection is
required for a country having no great extent in longitude, such as France, Scotland or Madagascar, this
projection is a good one to select.

Sinusoidal Equal-area Projection.—This projection, which is sometimes known as Sanson’s, and is also
sometimes incorrectly called Flamsteed’s, is a particular case of Bonne’s in which the selected parallel is the
equator. The equator is a straight line at right angles to the central meridian which is also a straight line.
Along the central meridian the latitudes are marked off at the true rectified distances, and from points so
found the parallels are drawn as straight lines parallel to the equator, and therefore at right angles to the
central meridian. True rectified lengths are marked along the parallels and through corresponding points the
meridians are drawn. If the earth is treated as a sphere the meridians are clearly sine curves, and for this
reason d’Avezac has given the projection the name sinusoidal. But it is equally easy to plot the spheroidal
lengths. It is a very suitable projection for an equal-area map of Africa.

Werner’s Projection.—This is another limiting case of Bonne’s equal-area projection in which the selected
parallel is the pole. The parallels on paper then become incomplete circular arcs of which the pole is the

centre. The central meridian is still a straight line which is cut
by the parallels at true distances. The projection (after Johann
Werner, 1468-1528), though interesting, is practically useless.

Polyconic Projections.

These pseudo-conical projections are valuable not so much
for their intrinsic merits as for the fact that they lend
themselves to tabulation. There are two forms, the simple or
equidistant polyconic, and the rectangular polyconic.

The Simple Polyconic.—If a cone touches the sphere or
spheroid along a parallel of latitude φ and is then unrolled, the
parallel will on paper have a radius of ν cot φ, where ν is the Fig. 19.—Sinusoidal Equal-area Projection.
normal terminated by the minor axis. If we imagine a series of
cones, each of which touches one of a selected series of parallels, the apex of each cone will lie on the
prolonged axis of the spheroid; the generators of each cone lie in meridian planes, and if each cone is
unrolled and the generators in any one plane are superposed to form a straight central meridian, we obtain a
projection in which the central meridian is a straight line and the parallels are circular arcs each of which has
a different centre which lies on the prolongation of the central meridian, the radius of any parallel being ν
cot φ.

So far the construction is the same for both forms of polyconic. In the simple polyconic the meridians are
obtained by measuring outwards from the central meridian along each parallel the true lengths of the degrees
of longitude. Through corresponding points so found the meridian curves are drawn. The resulting
projection is accurate near the central meridian, but as this is departed from the parallels increasingly
separate from each other, and the parallels and meridians (except along the equator) intersect at angles which
increasingly differ from a right angle. The real merit of the projection is that each particular parallel has for
every map the same absolute radius, and it is thus easy to construct tables which shall be of universal use.
This is especially valuable for the projection of single sheets on comparatively large scales. A sheet of a
degree square on a scale of 1 : 250,000 projected in this manner differs inappreciably from the same sheet
projected on a better system, e.g. an orthomorphic conical projection or the conical with rectified meridians
and two standard parallels; there is thus the advantage that the simple polyconic when used for single sheets
and large scales is a sufficiently close approximation to the better forms of conical projection. The simple
polyconic is used by the topographical section of the general staff, by the United States coast and geodetic
survey and by the topographical division of the U.S. geological survey. Useful tables, based on Clarke’s
spheroid of 1866, have been published by the war office and by the U.S. coast and geodetic survey.

Rectangular Polyconic.—In this the central meridian and the parallels are drawn as in the simple
polyconic, but the meridians are curves which cut the parallels at right angles.

In this case, let P (fig. 20) be the north pole, CPU the central meridian, U, U′ points in that meridian
whose co-latitudes are z and z+dz, so that UU′ = dz. Make PU = z, UC = tan z, U′C′ = tan (z + dz);
and with CC′ as centres describe the arcs UQ, U′Q′, which represent the parallels of co-latitude z and
z + dz. Let PQQ′ be part of a meridian curve cutting the parallels at right angles. Join CQ, C′Q′; these

being perpendicular to the circles will be tangents to the curve. Let UCQ = 2α,
UC′Q′ = 2(α + dα), then the small angle CQC′, or the angle between the
tangents at QQ′, will = 2dα. Now

CC′ = C′U′ − CU − UU′ = tan (z + dz) − tan z − dz = tan2 z dz.

The tangents CQ, C′Q′ will intersect at q, and in the triangle CC′q the
perpendicular from C on C′q is (omitting small quantities of the second order)
equal to either side of the equation

tan2 z dz sin 2α = −2 tan zd α.
−tan z dz = 2 dα / sin 2α, Fig. 20.

which is the differential equation of the meridian: the integral is tan α = ω cos z, where ω, a constant,
determines a particular meridian curve. The distance of Q from the central meridian, tan z sin 2α, is
equal to

2 tan z tan α 2ω sin z
= .
1 + tan2 α 1 + ω2 cos2 α

At the equator this becomes simply 2ω. Let any equatorial point
whose actual longitude is 2ω be represented by a point on the
developed equator at the distance 2ω from the central meridian, then
we have the following very simple construction (due to O’Farrell of
the ordnance survey). Let P (fig. 21) be the pole, U any point in the
central meridian, QUQ′ the represented parallel whose radius CU =
tan z. Draw SUS′ perpendicular to the meridian through U; then to
determine the point Q, whose longitude is, say, 3°, lay off US equal
to half the true length of the arc of parallel on the sphere, i.e. 1° 30′ to Fig. 21.

radius sin z, and with the centre S and radius SU describe a circular
arc, which will intersect the parallel in the required point Q. For if we suppose 2ω to be the longitude
of the required point Q, US is by construction = ω sin z, and the angle subtended by SU at C is

ω sin z
tan−1 ( tan z ) = tan−1 (ω cos z) = α,
and therefore UCQ = 2α as it should be. The advantages of this method are that with a remarkably
simple and convenient mode of construction we have a map in which the parallels and meridians
intersect at right angles.

Fig. 22 is a representation of this system of the continents of Europe and Africa, for which it is well
suited. For Asia this system would not do, as in the northern latitudes, say along the parallel of 70°, the
representation is much cramped.

With regard to the distortion in the map of Africa as thus constructed, consider a small square in latitude
40° and in 40° longitude east or west of the central meridian, the square being so placed as to be transformed
into a rectangle. The sides, originally unity, became 0.95 and 1.13, and the area 1.08, the diagonals
intersecting at 90° ± 9° 56′. In Clarke’s perspective projection a square of unit side occupying the same

position, when transformed to a rectangle, has its sides 1.02 and 1.15, its
area 1.17, and its diagonals intersect at 90° ± 7° 6′. The latter projection
is therefore the best in point of “similarity,” but the former represents
areas best. This applies, however, only to a particular part of the map;
along the equator towards 30° or 40° longitude, the polyconic is certainly
inferior, while along the meridian it is better than the perspective—
except, of course, near the centre. Upon the whole the more even
distribution of distortion gives the advantage to the perspective system.
For single sheets on large scales there is nothing to choose between this
projection and the simple polyconic. Both are sensibly perfect
representations. The rectangular polyconic is occasionally used by the
topographical section of the general staff.

Fig. 22.
Zenithal Projections.

Some point on the earth is selected as the central point of the map; great circles radiating from this point
are represented by straight lines which are inclined at their true angles at the point of intersection. Distances
along the radiating lines vary according to any law outwards from the centre. It follows (on the spherical
assumption), that circles of which the selected point is the centre are also circles on the projection. It is
obvious that all perspective projections are zenithal.

Equidistant Zenithal Projection.—In this projection, which is commonly called the “equidistant
projection,” any point on the sphere being taken as the centre of the map, great circles through this point are
represented by straight lines of the true rectified lengths, and intersect each other at the true angles.

In the general case—

if z1 is the co-latitude of the centre of the map, z the co-latitude of any other point, α the difference of
longitude of the two points, A the azimuth of the line joining them, and c the spherical length of the
line joining them, then the position of the intersection of any meridian with any parallel is given (on
the spherical assumption) by the solution of a simple spherical triangle.

Thus—

let tan θ = tan z cos α, then cos c = cos z sec θ cos (z − θ), and sin A = sin z sin α cosec c.

The most useful case is that in which the central point is the pole; the meridians are straight lines inclined
to each other at the true angular differences of longitude, and the parallels are equidistant circles with the
pole as centre. This is the best projection to use for maps exhibiting the progress of polar discovery, and is
called the polar equidistant projection. The errors are smaller than might be supposed. There are no scale
errors along the meridians, and along the parallels the scale error is (z / sin x) − 1, where z is the co-latitude
of the parallel. On a parallel 10° distant from the pole the error of scale is only 0.5%.

General Theory of Zenithal Projections.—For the sake of simplicity it will be at first assumed that
the pole is the centre of the map, and that the earth is a sphere. According to what has been said
above, the meridians are now straight lines diverging from the pole, dividing the 360° into equal
angles; and the parallels are represented by circles having the pole as centre, the radius of the parallel

whose co-latitude is z being ρ, a certain function of z. The particular function selected determines the
nature of the projection.

Let Ppq, Prs (fig. 23) be two contiguous meridians crossed by parallels
rp, sq, and Op′q′, Or′s′ the straight lines representing these meridians. If
the angle at P is dμ, this also is the value of the angle at O. Let the co-
latitude

Pp = z, Pq = z + dz; Op′ = ρ, Oq′ = ρ + dρ,

the circular arcs p′r′, q′s′ representing the parallels pr, qs. If the radius of
the sphere be unity, Fig. 23.

p′q′ = dρ; p′r′ = ρ dμ,
pq = dz; pr = sin z dμ.

Put

σ = dρ / dz; σ′ = ρ / sin z,

then p′q′ = σpq and p′r′ = σ′pr. That is to say, σ, σ′ may be regarded as the relative scales, at co-
latitude z, of the representation, σ applying to meridional measurements, σ′ to measurements
perpendicular to the meridian. A small square situated in co-latitude z, having one side in the direction
of the meridian—the length of its side being i—is represented by a rectangle whose sides are iσ and
iσ′; its area consequently is i2σσ′.

If it were possible to make a perfect representation, then we should have σ = 1, σ′ = 1 throughout. This,
however, is impossible. We may make σ = 1 throughout by taking ρ = z. This is the Equidistant Projection
just described, a very simple and effective method of representation.

Or we may make σ′= 1 throughout. This gives ρ = sin z, a perspective projection, namely, the
Orthographic.

Or we may require that areas be strictly represented in the development. This will be effected by making
σσ′ = 1, or ρ dρ = sin z dz, the integral of which is ρ = 2 sin 1⁄2z, which is the Zenithal Equal-area Projection
of Lambert, sometimes, though wrongly referred to as Lorgna’s Projection after Antonio Lorgna (b. 1736).
In this system there is misrepresentation of form, but no misrepresentation of areas.

Or we may require a projection in which all small parts are to be represented in their true forms i.e. an
orthomorphic projection. For instance, a small square on the spherical surface is to be represented as a small
square in the development. This condition will be attained by making σ = σ′, or dρ/ρ = dz/sin z, the integral
of which is, c being an arbitrary constant, ρ = c tan 1⁄2z. This, again, is a perspective projection, namely, the
Stereographic. In this, though all small parts of the surface are represented in their correct shapes, yet, the
scale varying from one part of the map to another, the whole is not a similar representation of the original.
The scale, σ = 1⁄2c sec2 1⁄2z, at any point, applies to all directions round that point.

These two last projections are, as it were, at the extremes of the scale; each, perfect in its own way,
is in other respects objectionable. We may avoid both extremes by the following considerations.

Although we cannot make σ = 1 and σ′ = 1, so as to have a perfect picture of the spherical surface, yet
considering σ − 1 and σ′ − 1 as the local errors of the representation, we may make (σ − 1)2 + (σ′ − 1)2
a minimum over the whole surface to be represented. To effect this we must multiply this expression
by the element of surface to which it applies, viz. sin zd zd μ, and then integrate from the centre to the
(circular) limits of the map. Let β be the spherical radius of the segment to be represented, then the
total misrepresentation is to be taken as

dρ ρ
∫0β { ( dz − 1 )2 + ( sin z − 1 )2 } sin z dz,
which is to be made a minimum. Putting ρ = z + y, and giving to y only a variation subject to the
condition δy = 0 when z = 0, the equations of solution—using the ordinary notation of the calculus of
variations—are

d(P)
N− = 0; Pβ = 0,
dz

Pβ being the value of 2p sin z when z = β. This gives

d2y dy dy
sin2 z
dz2
+ sin z cos z
dz − y = z − sin z ( dz ) β = 0.
This method of development is due to Sir George Airy, whose original paper—the investigation is
different in form from the above, which is due to Colonel Clarke—will be found in the Philosophical
Magazine for 1861. The solution of the differential equation leads to this result—

ρ = 2 cot 1⁄2z loge sec 1⁄2z + C tan 1⁄2z,
C = 2 cot2 1⁄2β loge sec 1⁄2β.

The limiting radius of the map is R = 2C tan 1⁄2β. In this system, called by Sir George Airy Projection
by balance of errors, the total misrepresentation is an absolute minimum. For short it may be called
Airy’s Projection.

Returning to the general case where ρ is any function of z, let us consider the local
misrepresentation of direction. Take any indefinitely small line, length = i, making an angle α with the
meridian in co-latitude z. Its projections on a meridian and parallel are i cos α, i sin α, which in the
map are represented by iσ cos α, iσ′ sin α. If then α′ be the angle in the map corresponding to α,

tan α′ = (σ′ / σ) tan α.

Put

σ′ / σ = ρ dz / sin z dρ = Σ,

and the error α′ − α of representation = ε, then

tan ε = (Σ − 1) tan α .

1 + Σ tan2 α

Put Σ = cot2 ζ, then ε is a maximum when α = ζ, and the corresponding value of ε is

ε = 1⁄2π − 2ζ.

For simplicity of explanation we have supposed this method of development so applied as to have the
pole in the centre. There is, however, no necessity for this, and any point on the surface of the sphere may be
taken as the centre. All that is necessary is to calculate by spherical trigonometry the azimuth and distance,
with reference to the assumed centre, of all the points of intersection of meridians and parallels within the
space which is to be represented in a plane. Then the azimuth is represented unaltered, and any spherical
distance z is represented by ρ. Thus we get all the points of intersection transferred to the representation, and
it remains merely to draw continuous lines through these points, which lines will be the meridians and
parallels in the representation.

Thus treating the earth as a sphere and applying the Zenithal Equal-area Projection to the case of Africa,
the central point selected being on the equator, we have, if θ be the spherical distance of any point from the
centre, φ, α the latitude and longitude (with reference to the centre), of this point, cos θ = cos φ cos α. If A is
the azimuth of this point at the centre, tan A = sin α cot φ. On paper a line from the centre is drawn at an
azimuth A, and the distance θ is represented by 2 sin 1⁄2θ. This makes a very good projection for a single-
sheet equal-area map of Africa. The exaggeration in such systems, it is important to remember, whether of
linear scale, area, or angle, is the same for a given distance from the centre, whatever be the azimuth; that is,
the exaggeration is a function of the distance from the centre only.

General Theory of Conical Projections.

Meridians are represented by straight lines drawn through a point, and a
difference of longitude ω is represented by an angle hω. The parallels of latitude
are circular arcs, all having as centre the point of divergence of the meridian
lines. It is clear that perspective and zenithal projections are particular groups of
conical projections.

Let z be the co-latitude of a parallel, and ρ, a function of z, the radius of the
circle representing this parallel. Consider the infinitely small space on the
Fig. 24.
sphere contained by two consecutive meridians, the difference of whose
longitude is dμ, and two consecutive parallels whose co-latitudes are z and z +
dz. The sides of this rectangle are pq = dz, pr = sin z dμ; in the projection p′q′r′s′ these become p′q′ =
dρ, and p′r′ = ρhdμ.

The scales of the projection as compared with the sphere are p′q′/pq = dρ/dz = the scale of meridian
measurements = σ, say, and p′r′/pr = ρhdμ/sin zdμ = ρh/sin z = scale of measurements perpendicular
to the meridian = σ′, say.

Now we may make σ = 1 throughout, then ρ = z + const. This gives either the group of conical
projections with rectified meridians, or as a particular case the equidistant zenithal.

We may make σ = σ′ throughout, which is the same as requiring that at any point the scale shall be
the same in all directions. This gives a group of orthomorphic projections.

In this case dρ/dz = ρh/sin z, or dρ/ρ = h dz/sin z.

Integrating,

ρ = k(tan 1⁄2z)h,
(i.)

where k is a constant.

Now h is at our disposal and we may give it such a value that two selected parallels are of the
correct lengths. Let z1, z2 be the co-latitudes of these parallels, then it is easy to show that

log sin z1 − log sin z2
h= .
log tan 1⁄2z1 − log tan 1⁄2z2
(ii.)

This projection, given by equations (i.) and (ii.), is Lambert’s orthomorphic projection—commonly
called Gauss’s projection; its descriptive name is the orthomorphic conical projection with two
standard parallels.

The constant k in (i.) defines the scale and may be used to render the scale errors along the selected
parallels not nil but the same; and some other parallel, e.g. the central parallel may then be made
errorless.

The value h = 1⁄3, as suggested by Sir John Herschel, is admirably suited for a map of the world.
The representation is fan-shaped, with remarkably little distortion (fig. 24).

If any parallel of co-latitude z is true to scale hk(tan 1⁄2z1)h = sin z, if this parallel is the equator, so
that z1 = 90°, kh = 1, then equation (i.) becomes ρ = (tan 1⁄2z)h/h, and the radius of the equator = 1/h.
The distance r of any parallel from the equator is 1/h − (tan 1⁄2z)h/h = (1/h){1 − (tan 1⁄2z)h}.

If, instead of taking the radius of the earth as unity we call it a, r = (a/h){1 − (tan 1⁄2z)h}. When h is
very small, the angles between the meridian lines in the representation are very small; and proceeding
to the limit, when h is zero the meridians are parallel—that is, the vertex of the cone has removed to
infinity. And at the limit when h is zero we have r = a loge cot 1⁄2z, which is the characteristic equation
of Mercator’s projection.

Fig. 25.—Elliptical equal-area Projection, showing the whole surface of the globe.

Mercator’s Projection.—From the manner in which we have arrived at this projection it is clear that it
retains the characteristic property of orthomorphic projections—namely, similarity of representation of small
parts of the surface. In Mercator’s chart the equator is represented by a straight line, which is crossed at right
angles by a system of parallel and equidistant straight lines representing the meridians. The parallels are
straight lines parallel to the equator, and the distance of the parallel of latitude φ from the equator is, as we
have seen above, r = a loge tan (45° + 1⁄2φ). In the vicinity of the equator, or indeed within 30° of latitude of
the equator, the representation is very accurate, but as we proceed northwards or southwards the
exaggeration of area becomes larger, and eventually excessive—the poles being at infinity. This distance of
the parallels may be expressed in the form r = a (sin φ + 1⁄3 sin3 φ + 1⁄5 sin5 φ + ...), showing that near the
equator r is nearly proportional to the latitude. As a consequence of the similar representation of small parts,
a curve drawn on the sphere cutting all meridians at the same angle—the loxodromic curve—is projected
into a straight line, and it is this property which renders Mercator’s chart so valuable to seamen. For
instance: join by a straight line on the chart Land’s End and Bermuda, and measure the angle of intersection
of this line with the meridian. We get thus the bearing which a ship has to retain during its course between
these ports. This is not great-circle sailing, and the ship so navigated does not take the shortest path. The
projection of a great circle (being neither a meridian nor the equator) is a curve which cannot be represented
by a simple algebraic equation.

If the true spheroidal shape of the earth is considered, the semiaxes being a and b, putting e = √(a2
− b2) / a, and using common logarithms, the distance of any parallel from the equator can be shown to
be

(a / M) {log tan (45° + 1⁄2φ) − e2 sin φ − 1⁄3 e4 sin3 φ ...}

where M, the modulus of common logarithms, = 0.434294. Of course Mercator’s projection was not
originally arrived at in the manner above described; the description has been given to show that
Mercator’s projection is a particular case of the conical orthomorphic group. The introduction of the
projection is due to the fact that for navigation it is very desirable to possess charts which shall give
correct local outlines (i.e. in modern phraseology shall be orthomorphic) and shall at the same time
show as a straight line any line which cuts the meridians at a constant angle. The latter condition
clearly necessitates parallel meridians, and the former a continuous increase of scale as the equator is

departed from, i.e. the scale at any point must be equal to the scale at the equator × sec. latitude. In
early days the calculations were made by assuming that for a small increase of latitude, say 1′, the
scale was constant, then summing up the small lengths so obtained. Nowadays (for simplicity the
earth will be taken as a sphere) we should say that a small length of meridian adφ is represented in
this projection by a sec φ dφ, and the length of the meridian in the projection between the equator and
latitude φ,

√φ0 a sec φ dφ = a loge tan (45° + ⁄ φ),
12

which is the direct way of arriving at the law of the construction of this very important projection.

Mercator’s projection, although indispensable at sea, is of little value for land maps. For
topographical sheets it is obviously unsuitable; and in cases in which it is required to show large areas
on small scales on an orthomorphic projection, that form should be chosen which gives two standard
parallels (Lambert’s conical orthomorphic). Mercator’s projection is often used in atlases for maps of
the world. It is not a good projection to select for this purpose on account of the great exaggeration of
scale near the poles. The misconceptions arising from this exaggeration of scale may, however, be
corrected by the juxtaposition of a map of the world on an equal-area projection.

It is now necessary to revert to the general consideration of conical projections.

It has been shown that the scales of the projection (fig. 23) as compared with the sphere are p′q′ /
pq = dp / dz = σ along a meridian, and p′r′ / pr′ = ρh / sin z = σ′ at right angles to a meridian.

Now if σσ′ = 1 the areas are correctly represented, then

hρ dρ = sin z dz, and integrating 1⁄2hρ2 = C − cos z;
(i.)

this gives the whole group of equal-area conical projections.

As a special case let the pole be the centre of the projected parallels, then when

z = 0, ρ = 0, and const = 1, we have p = 2 sin 1⁄2z / δh
(ii.)

Let z1 be the co-latitude of some parallel which is to be correctly represented, then 2h sin 1⁄2z1 / δh
= sin z1, and h = cos2 1⁄2z1; putting this value of h in equation (ii.) the radius of any parallel

= ρ = 2 sin 1⁄2z sec 1⁄2z1
(iii.)

This is Lambert’s conical equal-area projection with one standard parallel, the pole being the
centre of the parallels.

If we put z1=θ, then h = 1, and the meridians are inclined at their true angles, also the scale at the
pole becomes correct, and equation (iii.) becomes

ρ = 2 sin 1⁄2z;
(iv.)

this is the zenithal equal-area projection.

Reverting to the general expression for equal-area conical projections

ρ = √{2 (C − cos z) / h},
(i.)

we can dispose of C and h so that any two selected parallels shall be their true lengths; let their co-
latitudes be z1 and z2, then

2h (C − cos z1) = sin2 z1
(v.)

2h (C − cos z2) = sin2 z2
(vi.)

from which C and h are easily found, and the radii are obtained from (i.) above. This is H. C. Albers’
conical equal-area projection with two standard parallels. The pole is not the centre of the parallels.

Projection by Rectangular Spheroidal Co-ordinates.

If in the simple conical projection the selected parallel is the equator, this and the other parallels become
parallel straight lines and the meridians are straight lines spaced at equatorial distances, cutting the parallels
at right angles; the parallels are their true distances apart. This projection is the simple cylindrical. If now we
imagine the touching cylinder turned through a right-angle In such a way as to touch the sphere along any
meridian, a projection is obtained exactly similar to the last, except that in this case we represent, not
parallels and meridians, but small circles parallel to the given meridian and great circles at right angles to it.
It is clear that the projection is a special case of conical projection. The position of any point on the earth’s
surface is thus referred, on this projection, to a selected meridian as one axis, and any great circle at right
angles to it as the other. Or, in other words, any point is fixed by the length of the perpendicular from it on to
the fixed meridian and the distance of the foot of the perpendicular from some fixed point on the meridian,
these spherical or spheroidal co-ordinates being plotted as plane rectangular co-ordinates.

The perpendicular is really a plane section of the surface through the given point at right angles to
the chosen meridian, and may be briefly called a great circle. Such a great circle clearly diverges from
the parallel; the exact difference in latitude and longitude between the point and the foot of the
perpendicular can be at once obtained by ordinary geodetic formulae, putting the azimuth = 90°.
Approximately the difference of latitude in seconds is x2 tan φ cosec 1″ / 2ρν where x is the length of
the perpendicular, ρ that of the radius of curvature to the meridian, ν that of the normal terminated by
the minor axis, φ the latitude of the foot of the perpendicular. The difference of longitude in seconds
is approximately x sec ρ cosec 1″ / ν. The resulting error consists principally of an exaggeration of
scale north and south and is approximately equal to sec x (expressing x in arc); it is practically
independent of the extent in latitude.

It is on this projection that the 1/2,500 Ordnance maps and the 6-in. Ordnance maps of the United
Kingdom are plotted, a meridian being chosen for a group of counties. It is also used for the 1-in., 1⁄2 in. and
⁄ in. Ordnance maps of England, the central meridian chosen being that which passes through a point in
14

Delamere Forest in Cheshire. This projection should not as a rule be used for topographical maps, but is
suitable for cadastral plans on account of the convenience of plotting the rectangular co-ordinates of the very
numerous trigonometrical or traverse points required in the construction of such plans. As regards the errors
involved, a range of about 150 miles each side of the central meridian will give a maximum error in scale in
a north and south direction of about 0.1%.

Elliptical Equal-area Projection.

In this projection, which is also called Mollweide’s projection the parallels are parallel straight lines and
the meridians are ellipses, the central meridian being a straight line at right angles to the equator, which is
equally divided. If the whole world is represented on the spherical assumption, the equator is twice the
length of the central meridian. Each elliptical meridian has for one axis the central meridian, and for the
other the intercepted portion of the equally divided equator. It follows that the meridians 90° east and west
of the central meridian form a circle. It is easy to show that to preserve the property of equal areas the
distance of any parallel from the equator must be √2 sin δ where π sin φ = 2δ + sin 2δ, φ being the latitude of
the parallel. The length of the central meridian from pole to pole = 2 √2, where the radius of the sphere is
unity. The length of the equator = 4 √2.

The following equal-area projections may be used to exhibit the entire surface of the globe: Cylindrical
equal area, Sinusoidal equal area and Elliptical equal area.

Fig. 26.—Globular Projection.

Conventional or Arbitrary Projections.

These projections are devised for simplicity of drawing and not for any special properties. The most
useful projection of this class is the globular projection. This is a conventional representation of a

hemisphere in which the equator and central meridian are two equal straight lines at right angles, their
intersection being the centre of the circular boundary. The meridians divide the equator into equal parts and
are arcs of circles passing through points so determined and the poles. The parallels are arcs of circles which
divide the central and extreme meridians into equal parts. Thus in fig. 26 NS = EW and each is divided into
equal parts (in this case each division is 10°); the circumference NESW is also divided into 10° spaces and
circular arcs are drawn through the corresponding points. This is a simple and effective projection and one
well suited for conveying ideas of the general shape and position of the chief land masses; it is better for this
purpose than the stereographic, which is commonly employed in atlases.

(From Text Book of Topographical Surveying, by permission of the Controller of H.M. Stationery Office.)
Fig. 27.—Plane Table Graticule, dimensions in inches, for a scale of 4 in. to 1 m.

Projections for Field Sheets.

Field sheets for topographical surveys should be on conical projections with rectified meridians; these
projections for small areas and ordinary topographical scales—not less than 1/500,000—are sensibly
errorless. But to save labour it is customary to employ for this purpose either form of polyconic projection,
in which the errors for such scales are also negligible. In some surveys, to avoid the difficulty of plotting the
flat arcs required for the parallels, the arcs are replaced by polygons, each side being the length of the
portion of the arc it replaces. This method is especially suitable for scales of 1 : 125,000 and larger, but it is
also sometimes used for smaller scales.

Fig. 27 shows the method of plotting the projection for a field sheet. Such a projection is usually
called a graticule. In this case ABC is the central meridian; the true meridian lengths of 30′ spaces are
marked on this meridian, and to each of these, such as AB, the figure (in this case representing a
square half degree), such as ABED, is applied. Thus the point D is the intersection of a circle of radius
AD with a circle of radius BD, these lengths being taken from geodetic tables. The method has no
merit except that of convenience.

Summary.

The following projections have been briefly described:—

1. Cylindrical equal-area.
2. Orthographic.
3. Stereographic (which is orthomorphic).
Perspective
4. General external perspective.
5. Minimum error perspective. (Clarke’s).
6. Central.
7. Conical, with rectified meridians and two standard parallels (5 forms).
8. Simple conical.
9. Simple cylindrical (a special case of 8).
10. Modified conical equal-area (Bonne’s).
11. Sinusoidal equal-area (Sanson’s).
12. Werner’s conical equal-area
Conical 13. Simple polyconic.
14. Rectangular polyconic.
15. Conical orthomorphic with 2 standard parallels (Lambert’s, commonly called Gauss’s).
16. Cylindrical orthomorphic (Mercator’s).
17. Conical equal-area with one standard parallel.
18. Conical equal-area with two standard parallels.
19. Projection by rectangular spheroidal co-ordinates.
20. Equidistant zenithal.
21. Zenithal equal-area.
22. Zenithal projection by balance of errors (Airy’s).
Zenithal
23. Elliptical equal-area (Mollweide’s).
24. Globular (conventional).
25. Field sheet graticule.

Of the above 25 projections, 23 are conical or quasi-conical, if zenithal and perspective projections
be included. The projections may, if it is preferred, be grouped according to their properties. Thus in
the above list 8 are equal-area, 3 are orthomorphic, 1 balances errors, 1 represents all great circles by
straight lines, and in 5 one system of great circles is represented correctly.

Among projections which have not been described may be mentioned the circular orthomorphic
(Lagrange’s) and the rectilinear equal-area (Collignon’s) and a considerable number of conventional
projections, which latter are for the most part of little value.

The choice of a projection depends on the function which the map is intended to fulfil. If the map is
intended for statistical purposes to show areas, density of population, incidence of rainfall, of disease,
distribution of wealth, &c., an equal-area projection should be chosen. In such a case an area scale
should be given. At sea, Mercator’s is practically the only projection used except when it is desired to

determine graphically great circle courses in great oceans, when the central projection must be
employed. For conveying good general ideas of the shape and distribution of the surface features of
continents or of a hemisphere Clarke’s perspective projection is the best. For exhibiting the progress
of polar exploration the polar equidistant projection should be selected. For special maps for general
use on scales of 1/1,000,000 and smaller, and for a series of which the sheets are to fit together, the
conical, with rectified meridians and two standard parallels, is a good projection. For topographical
maps, in which each sheet is plotted independently and the scale is not smaller than 1/500,000, either
form of polyconic is very convenient.

The following are the projections adopted for some of the principal official maps of the British
Empire:—

Conical, with Rectified Meridians and Two Standard Parallels.—The 1 : 1,000,000 Ordnance map
of the United Kingdom, special maps of the topographical section, General Staff, e.g. the 64-mile map
of Afghanistan and Persia. The 1 : 1,000,000 Survey of India series of India and adjacent countries.

Modified Conical, Equal-area (Bonne’s).—The 1 in., 1⁄2 in., 1⁄4 in. and 1⁄10 in. Ordnance maps of
Scotland and Ireland. The 1 : 800,000 map of the Cape Colony, published by the Surveyor-General.

Simple Polyconic and Rectangular Polyconic maps on scales of 1 : 1,000,000, 1 : 500,000, 1 :
250,000 and 1 : 125,000 of the topographical section of the General Staff, including all maps on these
scales of British Africa. A rectilinear approximation to the simple polyconic is also used for the
topographical sheets of the Survey of India. The simple polyconic is used for the 1 in. maps of the
Militia Department of Canada.

Zenithal Projection by Balance of Errors (Airy’s).—The 10-mile to 1 in. Ordnance map of England.

Projection by Rectangular Spheroidal Co-ordinates.—The 1 : 2500 and the 6 in. Ordnance sheets
of the United Kingdom, and the 1 in., 1⁄2 in. and 1⁄4 in. Ordnance maps of England. The cadastral plans
of the Survey of India, and cadastral plans throughout the empire.

Authorities.—See Traité des projections des cartes géographiques, by A. Germain (Paris, 1865)
and A Treatise on Projections, by T. Craig, United States Coast and Geodetic Survey (Washington,
1882). Both Germain and Craig (following Germain) make use of the term projections by
development, a term which is apt to convey the impression that the spherical surface is developable.
As this is not the case, and since such projections are conical, it is best to avoid the use of the term.
For the history of the subject see d’Avezac, “Coup d’œil historique sur la projection des cartes
géographiques,” Société de géographie de Paris (1863).

J. H. Lambert (Beiträge zum Gebrauch der Mathematik, u.s.w. Berlin, 1772) devised the following
projections of the above list: 1, 15, 17, and 21; his transverse cylindrical orthomorphic and the
transverse cylindrical equal-area have not been described, as they are seldom used. Among other
contributors we mention Mercator, Euler, Gauss, C. B. Mollweide (1774-1825), Lagrange, Cassini, R.
Bonne (1727-1795), Airy and Colonel A. R. Clarke.

( ; )

1 The ancient Greeks called a map Pinax, The Romans Tabula geographica. Mappa mundi was the medieval Latin for a map of the world
which the ancients called Tabula totius orbis descriptionem continens.

2 Close, “The Ideal Topographical Map,” Geog. Journal, vol. xxv. (1905).

3 K. Peucker, Schattenplastik und Farbenplastik (Vienna, 1898); Geograph. Zeitschrift (1902 and 1908).

4 Professor Henrici, Report on Planimeters (64th meeting of the British Association, Oxford, 1894); J. Tennant, “The Planimeter”
(Engineering, xlv. 1903).

5 H. Wagner’s Lehrbuch (Hanover, 1908, pp. 241-252) refers to numerous authorities who deal fully with the whole question of
measurement.

6 Kienzl of Leoben in 1891 had invented a similar apparatus which he called a Relief Pantograph (Zeitschrift, Vienna Geog. Soc. 1891).

7 M. Fiorini, Erd- und Himmelsgloben, frei bearbeitet von S. Günther (Leipzig, 1895).

8 Jahrb. des polytechn. Instituts in Wien, vol. xv.

9 Compare the maps of Europe, Asia, &c., in this work.

10 The great majority of the maps in this work are made by this process.

11 Lepsius, Urkundenbuch, Pl. XXII.

12 These Colchians certainly were not Egyptians. The maps referred to may have been Assyrian.

13 We are indebted to Strabo for nearly all we know about Greek cartographers anterior to Ptolemy, for none of their maps has been
preserved.

14 The gnomon was known to the Chinese in the 5th century b.c., and reached the Greeks (Anaximander) through Babylon. Pytheas, as far
as known, was the first to utilize it for the determination of a latitude.

15 If, with W. Dörpfeld, we assume an Attic stadium of 200 steps (500 ft.) to be equal to 164 metres, a degree of 700 stad. would be equal
to 114,800 metres, its actual length according to modern measurement being 110,808 metres.

16 Climata based on the length of the longest day were introduced by Hippocrates (c. 400 b.c.). Zones similar to those already drawn out
for the celestial sphere were first introduced by the Pythagoreans. Parmenides of Elea (544-430 b.c.) distinguishes five of these zones, viz. a
torrid zone, between the tropics of summer and winter, which was uninhabitable on account of heat; two frigid zones, uninhabitable on account
of cold, and two intermediate temperate zones.

17 Celestial globes were made much earlier than terrestrial ones. In the museum of Naples there is a celestial globe, 2 metres in diameter,
supported upon the shoulders of an Atlas, which E. Heis, judging by the constellations engraved upon it (Atlas coelestis novus, Bonn, 1872)
judges to date from the 4th century b.c. It may even be the work of Eudoxus (d. 386 b.c.) the famous astronomer. Aratus of Soli in Cilicia, in
his poetical Prognostics of Stars and the World, refers to a globe in his possession. Archimedes, the famous mathematician, had a celestial
globe of glass, in the centre of which was a small terrestrial globe. Hero of Alexandria (284-221 b.c.), the ingenious inventor of “Hero’s
Fountain,” is believed to have possessed a similar apparatus. The celestial globe of Hipparchus still existed in the Alexandrian library in the
time of Ptolemy, who himself refers to globes in his Almagest, as also in the Geography. Leontius, who wrote a book on the manufacture of
globes (first published at Basel in 1539), is identified by Fiorini with a bishop of Neapolis (Cyprus) of the time of Constantine III. (642-668).

18 The oldest MS. of Ptolemy’s Geography is found in the Vatopedi monastery of Mt Athos. It dates from the 12th or 13th century and was
published by Victor Langlois in 1867. For the latest edition we are indebted to the late Carl Müller (Paris, 1883-1906) to whom we are likewise
indebted for an edition of the Geographi graeci minores (1855-1861).

19 Facsimiles of it have been published by Desjardins(1869-1871), by K. Miller (1886), who ascribes it to Castorius, a.d. 366, and by
others.

20 R. Gough, British Topography (London 1768). His “Histories” are published in Rerum brit. scriptores XL. and LVII. 1866-1869.

21 M. Bittner, Die topogr. Capital des ind. Seespiegels (Vienna, 1897).

22 E. G. Ravenstein, Martin Behaim, his Life and his Globe (London, 1908). On the original only equator, ecliptics, tropics, polar circles
and one meridian 80° to the west of Lisbon are laid down.

23 See fig. 23, Catalan Map of the World (1375).

24 J. G. Kohl published facsimiles of the American section of the maps (Weimar, 1860).

25 Facsimiles of the maps of 1507 and 1517 were published by J. Fischer and F. M. von Wieser (Innsbruck, 1903).

26 See “The Survey in British Africa”: the Annual Report of the Colonial Survey Commission.

27 A. Germain, Traité des Projections (Paris, 1865).

28 T. Craig, A Treatise on Projections (U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey, Washington, 1882).

29 This error is much less than that which may be expected from contraction and expansion of the paper upon which the projection is drawn
or printed.

MAPLE, SIR JOHN BLUNDELL, Bart. (1845-1903), English business magnate, was born on
the 1st of March 1845. His father, John Maple (d. 1900), had a small furniture shop in Tottenham Court Road,
London, and his business began to develop about the time that his son entered it. The practical management soon
devolved on the younger Maple, under whom it attained colossal dimensions. The firm became a limited liability
company, with a capital of two millions, in 1890, with Mr Maple as chairman. He entered parliament as
Conservative member for Dulwich in 1887, was knighted in 1892, and was made a baronet in 1897. He was the
owner of a large stud of race-horses, and from 1885 onwards won many important races, appearing at first under
the name of “Mr Childwick.” His public benefactions included a hospital and a recreation ground to the city of St
Albans, near which his residence, Childwickbury, was situated, and the rebuilding, at a cost of more than
£150,000, of University College Hospital, London. He died on the 24th of November 1903. His only surviving
daughter married in 1896 Baron von Eckhardstein, of the German Embassy.

MAPLE, in botany. The maple (O.E. mapel-tréow, mapulder) and sycamore trees are species of Acer, of the
order Acerineae. The genus includes about sixty species, natives of Europe, North America and Asia, especially
the Himalayas, China and Japan. Maples are for the most part trees with opposite, long-stalked, palmately lobed
leaves. The flowers are in fascicles, appearing before the leaves as in the Norway maple, or in racemes or panicles
appearing with, or later than, the leaves as in sycamore. Some of the flowers are often imperfect, the stamens or
pistil being more or less aborted. The fruit is a two-winged “samara.” The genus was represented in the Tertiary
flora of Europe, when it extended into the polar regions; nineteen species have been recorded from the Miocene
strata of Oeningen in Switzerland. The common maple, A. campestre, is the only species indigenous to Great
Britain. This and the sycamore were described by Gerard in 1597 (Herball, p. 1299), the latter being “a stranger to
England.” Many species have been introduced, especially from Japan, for ornamental purposes. The following are
more especially worthy of notice.

Acer campestre, the common maple, is common in hedgerows, but less often seen as a tree, when it is
seldom more than 20 ft. high, though in sheltered situations 30 ft. or more is attained. The leaves are
generally less than 2 in. across, and the five main lobes are blunter than in the sycamore. The clusters of
green flowers terminate the young shoots and are erect; the two wings of the fruit spread almost
horizontally, and are smaller than in the sycamore. It occurs in northern Europe, the Caucasus, and northern

Asia. The wood is excellent fuel, and makes the best charcoal. It is compact, of a fine grain, sometimes
beautifully veined, and takes a high polish. Hence it has been celebrated from antiquity for tables, &c. The
wood of the roots is frequently knotted, and valuable for small objects of cabinet work. The young shoots,
being flexible and tough, are employed in France as whips.

A. pseudo-platanus, the sycamore or great maple, is a handsome tree of quick growth, with a smooth
bark. The leaves are large, with finely acute and serrated lobes, affording abundant shade. The flowers are
borne in long pendulous racemes, and the two wings of the fruit are ascending. It lives from 140 to 200
years. It is found wild chiefly in wooded mountainous situations in central Europe. The wood when young
is white, but old heartwood is yellow or brownish. Like the common maple it is hard and takes a high
polish. It is much prized by wheelwrights, cabinet-makers, sculptors, &c., on the Continent; while knotted
roots are used for inlaying. Sugar has been obtained from the sap of this as from other species, the most
being one ounce from a quart of sap. The latter has also been made into wine in the Highlands of Scotland.
It withstands the sea and mountain breezes better than most other timber trees, and is often planted near
farm-houses and cottages in exposed localities for the sake of its dense foliage. Its wood is valued in turnery
for cups, bowls and pattern blocks. It produces abundance of seeds, and is easily raised, but it requires good
and tolerably dry soil; it will not thrive on stiff clays nor on dry sands or chalks. There are many varieties,
the variegated and cut-leaved being the most noticeable. The lobed shape of its leaf and its dense foliage
caused it to be confused with the true sycamore—Ficus sycamorus—of scripture.

A. platanoides, the Norway maple, is met with from Norway to Italy, Greece, and central and south
Russia. It was introduced into Britain in 1683. It is a lofty tree (from 40 to 70 ft.), resembling the sycamore,
but with yellow flowers, appearing before the leaves, and more spreading wings to the fruit. There are
several varieties. The wood is used for the same purposes as that of the sycamore. Sugar has been made
from the sap in Norway and Sweden.

Many varieties of A. palmatum, generally known as polymorphum, with variously laciniated and more or
less coloured foliage, have been introduced from Japan as ornamental shrubs. The branches and corolla are
purple, the fruit woolly. The foliage of the typical form is bright green with very pointed lobes. It occurs in
the central mountains of Nippon and near Nagasaki. Beautiful varieties have been introduced under the
varietal names, ampelopsifolium, atropurpureum, dissectum, &c. They are remarkable for the coppery
purple tint that pervades the leaves and young growths of some of the varieties. Other Japanese species are
A. japonicum, the varieties of which are among the most handsome of small deciduous shrubs; A. rufinerve,
with the habit of the sycamore; A. distylum, bearing leaves without lobes; A. diabolicum, with large plane-
like leaves; and A. carpinifolium, with foliage resembling that of the hornbeam.

A. saccharinum, a North American species, the sugar, rock, or bird’s-eye maple, was introduced in 1735.
It sometimes attains to 70 or even over 100 ft., more commonly 50 to 60 ft. It is remarkable for the
whiteness of the bark. The wood is white, but acquires a rosy tinge after exposure to light. The grain is fine
and close, and when polished has a silky lustre. The timber is used instead of oak where the latter is scarce,
and is employed for axle-trees and spokes, as well as for Windsor chairs, &c. It exhibits two accidental
forms in the arrangement of the fibres, an undulated one like those of the curled maple (A. rubrum), and one
of spots, which gives the name bird’s-eye to the wood of this species. Like the curled maple, it is used for
inlaying mahogany. It is much prized for bedsteads, writing-desks, shoe-lasts, &c. The wood forms
excellent fuel and charcoal, while the ashes are rich in alkaline principles, furnishing a large proportion of
the potash exported from Boston and New York. Sugar is principally extracted from this species, the sap
being boiled and the syrup when reduced to a proper consistence runs into moulds to form cakes. Trees
growing in low and moist situations afford the most sap but least sugar. A cold north-west wind, with frosty

nights and sunny days in alternation, tends to incite the flow, which is more abundant during the day than
the night. A thawing night is said to promote the flow, and it ceases during a south-west wind and at the
approach of a storm; and so sensitive are the trees to aspect and climatic variations that the flow of sap on
the south and east side has been noticed to be earlier than on the north and west side of the same tree. The
average quantity of sap per tree is from 12 to 24 gallons in a season.

A. rubrum, the red-flowering or scarlet maple, is a middle-sized tree, and was introduced in 1656. The
bright scarlet or dull red flowers appear before the leaves in March and April. The wood, like that of other
species, is applicable to many purposes—as for the seats of Windsor chairs, turnery, &c. The grain in very
old trees is sometimes undulated, which suggested the name of curled maple, and gives beautiful effects of
light and shade on polished surfaces. The most constant use of curled maple is for the stocks of fowling-
pieces and rifles, as it affords toughness and strength combined with lightness and elegance. The inner bark
is dusky red. On boiling, it yields a purple colour which with sulphate of iron affords a black dye. The wood
is inferior to that of the preceding species in strength and as fuel. Sugar was made from the sap by the
French Canadians, but the production is only half as great as that from the sugar maple. In Britain it is
cultivated as an ornamental tree, as being conspicuous for its flowers in spring, and for its red fruit and
foliage in autumn.

A. macrophyllum, a north-western American species, is a valuable timber tree.

For a good account of the North American species see C. S. Sargent’s Silva of North America, vol. ii. See
also under Sugar.

MAPU, ABRAHAM (1808-1867), Hebrew novelist. His works are chiefly historical romances in
Hebrew. His most famous books were The Love of Zion and the Transgression of Samaria. Besides their intrinsic
merits, these novels stand high among the works which produced the romantic movement in modern Hebrew
literature. Mapu’s plots were somewhat sensational, incident being more prominent than characterization. But
underlying all was a criticism of contemporary life. His novels made a deep impression and became instantly
popular. Mapu’s Hebrew style is simple and classical. An English translation of the Love of Zion bears the title
Amnon, Prince and Peasant, by F. Jaffe (1887). Mapu’s stories have been often translated into other languages.

See N. Slouschz, The Renascence of Hebrew Literature (1909), ch. v.
(I. A.)

MAQQARĪ, or Maḳḳarī [Abū-l-‘Abbās Ahmad ibn Maḥommed ul-Maqqarī] (c. 1591-1632), Arabian
historian, was born at Tlemcen in Algeria and studied at Fez and Marrakesh, where he remained engaged in literary

work until he made the pilgrimage to Mecca in 1618. In the following year he settled in Cairo. In 1620 he visited
Jerusalem and Damascus, and during the next six years made the pilgrimage five times. In 1628 he was again in
Damascus, where he gave a course of lectures on Bukhārī’s collection of Traditions, spoke much of the glories of
Moslem Spain, and received the impulse to write his work on this subject later. In the same year he returned to
Cairo, where he spent a year in writing his history. He was just making preparations to settle definitely in
Damascus when he died in 1632.

His great work, The Breath of Perfume from the Branch of Green Andalusia and Memorials of its Vizier
Lisān ud-Dīn ibn ul-Khatīīb, consists of two parts. The first is a compilation from many authors on the
description and history of Moslem Spain; it was published by Wright, Krehl, Dozy and Dugat as Analectes
sur l’histoire et la littérature des Arabes d’Espagne (Leiden, 1855-1861), and in an abridged English
translation by P. de Gayangos (London, 1840-1843). The whole work has been published at Būlāq (1863)
and Cairo (1885).

For other works of Maqqarī see C. Brockelmann’s Gesch. der arabischen Litteratur (Berlin, 1902), ii.
297.
(G. W. T.)

MAQRĪZĪ, or Makrizi [Taqī ud-Dīn Aḥmad ibn ‘Alī] (1364-1442), Arabian historian, known as al-Maqrīzī
because of his ancestral connexion with Maqrīz, a suburb of Baalbek, was born at Cairo and spent most of his life
in Egypt, where he was trained in the Hanifite school of law, though later he became a Shāfi’ite with an inclination
to Zāhirite views. In 1385 he made the pilgrimage. For some time he was secretary in a government office, and in
1399 became inspector of markets for Cairo and northern Egypt. This post he soon gave up to become preacher at
the mosque of ‘Amr, president of the mosque ul-Hākim, and a lecturer on tradition. In 1408 he went to Damascus
to become inspector of the Qalānisīyya and lecturer. Later he retired into private life at Cairo. In 1430 he made the
pilgrimage with his family and travelled for some five years. His learning was great, his observation accurate and
his judgment good, but his books are largely compilations, and he does not always acknowledge the sources to
which he is indebted. Most of his works are concerned with Egypt. The most important is the Mawā‘iz wal-I’tibār
fī dhikr ul-Ḥitaṭ wal-Āihār (2 vols., Bulāq, 1854), translated into French by U. Bouriant as Description
topographique et historique de l’Égypte (Paris, 1895-1900; cf. A. R. Guest, “A List of Writers, Books and other
Authorities mentioned by El Maqrīzī in his Khiṭat,” in Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 1902, pp. 103-125). Of
his History of the Fatimites an extract was published by J. G. L. Kosegarten in his Chrestomathia (Leipzig, 1828),
pp. 115-123; the History of the Ayyūbit and Mameluke Rulers has been translated into French by E. Quatremère (2
vols., Paris, 1837-1845). Maqrīzī began a large work called the Muqaffā, a cyclopaedia of Egyptian biography in
alphabetic order. It was intended to be in 80 volumes, but only 16 were written. Three autograph volumes exist in
MS. in Leiden, and one in Paris.

Among smaller works published are the Mahommedan Coinage (ed. O. G. Tychsen, Rostock, 1797;
French translation by S. de Sacy, Paris, 1797); Arab Weights and Measures (ed. Tychsen, Rostock, 1800);
the Arabian Tribes that migrated to Egypt (ed. F. Wüstenfeld, Göttingen, 1847); the Account of
Hadhramaut (ed. P. B. Noskowyj, Bonn, 1866); the Strife between the Banī Umayya and the Banī Hāshim
(ed G. Vos, Leiden, 1888), and the Moslems in Abyssinia (ed. F. T. Rink, Leiden, 1790). For Maqrīzī’s life

see the quotations from contemporary biographies in S. de Sacy’s Chrestomathie arabe (2nd ed., Paris,
1826), ii. 112 seq., and for other works still in MS. C. Brockelmann, Gesch. der arabischen Litteratur
(Berlin, 1902), ii. 38-41. (G. W. T.)

MAR, EARLDOM OF. Mar, one of the ancient divisions or provinces of Scotland, comprised the
larger portion of Aberdeenshire, extending from north of the Don southward to the Mounth. Like other such
districts, it was in Celtic times under the rule of a mormaer. In the 12th century his place was taken by an earl, but
no definite succession of earls appears till the 13th century, nor is any connexion established between them and the
mormaers. From the middle of the 13th century the earls were recognized as among “the seven earls of Scotland”
and held a great position. Earl Gratney (fl. c. 1300) married a sister of (King) Robert Bruce, who brought him the
lordship of Garioch and castle of Kildrummy, which she held against the earl of Athole, an ally of the English
(1335). Their son Donald was made regent in July 1332, but was disastrously defeated and slain at Dupplin next
month. His daughter and eventual heir, Margaret, brought the earldom to her husband, William, earl of Douglas,
and on the accession of her daughter Isabél a troublous time followed.

While she was living as a widow at her castle of Kildrummy, it was stormed by Alexander Stewart, a bastard,
who forced her to execute a charter (August 12, 1404) settling the reversion to the earldom on himself and his
heirs. This act she revoked by a charter of the 19th of September 1404, which cannot now be found; but on
marrying him, on the 9th of December 1404, she granted him the earldom for life, the king confirming this on the
21st of June 1405. After her death in 1408 the earl played a great part, commanding the royal forces at the battle of
Harlaw, when the Lord of the Isles was defeated in 1411, and afterwards acting as warden of the Marches. In 1426
he resigned the earldom to the Crown, the king granting it by a fresh creation to him and certain heirs, with
reversion to the Crown. On the earl’s death in 1435 the earldom was claimed by Robert, Lord Erskine, as heir of
Gratney, earl of Mar, through a daughter; but the Crown claimed as reversionary under the creation of 1426. A long
struggle followed, till in 1457 James II. obtained from a justiciary court at Aberdeen a recognition of the Crown’s
right to the earldom and its lands, and shortly after bestowed them on his son John as earl of Mar and Garioch. He
died unmarried in 1479, and in 1483 his elder brother Alexander duke of Albany received the earldom, but was
soon forfeited. James III. created his son John earl of Mar and Garioch in 1486, and after his death unmarried in
1503, James IV. alienated to Lord Elphinstone (1507-1510) many of the Mar lands, including Kildrummy. The title
was not revived till 1562, when James Stewart, earl of Murray, held it for a few months.

In 1565 John, Lord Erskine, succeeded in getting returned heir to the earldom, and shortly after (June 23, 1565)
Queen Margaret restored the charter to him and his heirs “all and hail the said earldom of Mar.” As earl he took
part against the queen in 1567, and in 1571 was made regent of Scotland, which post he retained till his death
(1572). His son, earl John (c. 1558-1634), played a great part in the history of the family. His great achievement
was the recovery of the Mar estates, alienated by the Crown during the long period that his family had been out of
possession, including Kildrummy, the “head” of the earldom. It was in his time that the precedence of the earldom
(see below) was settled. John, the next earl (c. 1585-1654) was a Royalist, as was his son John (d. 1668), much to
the injury of the family fortune, which was further impaired by the attachment of the family, after the Revolution,
to the Stuarts. His son Charles (1650-1689) was arrested by the government just before his death (1689), and the

next earl, John (1675-1732), a prominent Jacobite (see below), was attainted, the earldom remaining under
forfeiture for 108 years; by the Old Pretender he was created duke of Mar.

Alloa and other Erskine estates of the attainted earl were repurchased for the family, and descended to John
Francis Erskine (1741-1825), his heir-male, who was also his heir of line through his daughter. To him, in his
eighty-third year, as grandson and lineal representative of the attainted earl, the earldom was restored by act of
parliament in 1824. His grandson, who succeeded him in 1828, inherited the earldom of Kellie (1619) and other
Erskine dignities by decision of 1835. At his death in 1866, his earldom of Mar was the subject of rival claims, and
the right to the succession was not determined till 1875. His estates passed to his cousin and heir-male, who
succeeded to his earldom of Kellie and claimed “the honour and dignity of earl of Mar.” But the latter was also
claimed by a Mr Goodeve, whose father had married the late earl’s eldest sister, and who assumed the title. It was
not suggested that the late earl had more than one earldom of Mar, but Lord Kellie claimed it as descendible to
heirs-male under a creation by Queen Mary, and Mr Goodeve as descendible to heirs of line under an earlier
creation. The House of Lords decided (Feb. 25, 1875) that Lord Kellie was entitled to the earldom as having been
created by Queen Mary in 1565, with a limitation which must be presumed to be to heirs-male of the body. This
decision gave great dissatisfaction, but was described as “final, right or wrong, and not to be questioned” by Lord
Selborne and the lord chancellor in 1877, and Lord Kellie was thenceforth recognized as holding the earldom on
the Union Roll, the only one known, though Mr Goodeve continued to assume the title. The Lords’ decision could
not be reversed, but in 1885, after much agitation, a means was found of evading it in practice by the “Earldom of
Mar Restitution Act.” By “an equivocation on the facts of the case,” it was recited that “doubts may exist whether
the said ancient honour, dignity, and title of peerage of earl of Mar ... was or was not ... by any lawful means
surrendered or merged in the Crown” before 1565, and that the House of Lords had decided that Queen Mary’s
known charter of 1565 applied only to lands and “did not operate or extend to restore” the peerage dignity, and
enacted that “John Francis Erskine Goodeve Erskine” (which last name the claimant had added) should be
“restored to” the ancient earldom. His previous assumption of the title was thus rejected as invalid, but from the
passing of the act two earldoms of Mar were in existence, that of Lord Kellie being confirmed and allowed the
precedence of 1565, while the restored earldom was allowed that of the dignity on the Union Roll, the only one
known till then. This precedence had been assigned to it by the Decreet of Ranking (1606), and assigns to it an
origin in 1404 (or, as some say, 1395). It is frequently, but absurdly, stated to have been “created before 1014,” and
wrongly spoken of as the Premier Scottish Earldom (see Earl). A barony of Garioch is also wrongly said to be
annexed to it, but the title is used by the earl’s eldest son in default of any other.

Bibliography.—Minutes of Evidence, 1875 and 1885; Riddell’s Peerage and Consistorial Law; Skene,
Celtic Scotland; Lord Crawford’s Earldom of Mar in Sunshine and Shade; articles by G. Burnett (Lyon), Sir
H. Barkly, Cornelius Hallen, W. A. Lindsay and J. H. Round in Genealogist (N.S.), vols. 3, 4, 9; Lord
Redesdale’s The Earldom of Mar, a Letter to the Lord Clerk Register (reply to Lord Crawford) (1883); J. H.
Round’s “Are there two Earls of Mar?” in Foster’s Collectanea genealogica, and “The later Earldom of
Mar” in Walford’s Antiquarian Magazine, vol. ii.; also his Studies in Peerage and Family History.
(J. H. R.)

MAR, JOHN ERSKINE, 1st or 6th Earl of (d. 1572), regent of Scotland, was a son of John, 5th
Lord Erskine (d. 1552), who was guardian of King James V., and afterwards of Mary Queen of Scots. The younger
John, who succeeded his father as 6th Lord Erskine in 1552, joined the religious reformers, but he was never very
ardent in the cause, although he subscribed the letter asking Knox to return to Scotland in 1557. The custody of
Edinburgh Castle was in his hands, and during the struggle between the regent, Mary of Lorraine, and the lords of
the Congregation he appears to have acted consistently in the interests of peace. When Mary Stuart returned to
Scotland in 1561 Lord Erskine was a member of her council, he favoured her marriage with Lord Darnley, and his
wife, Annabella Murray, called by Knox a “verray Jesabell,” was a frequent companion of the queen. In 1565
Erskine was granted the earldom of Mar (see above). As guardian of James, afterwards King James VI., he
prevented the young prince from falling into the hands of Bothwell, and when the Scottish nobles rose against
Mary and Both well, Mar was one of their leaders; he took part in the government of Scotland during Mary’s
imprisonment at Lochleven, and also after her subsequent abdication. In September 1571 he was chosen regent of
Scotland, but he was overshadowed and perhaps slighted by the earl of Morton, and he died at Stirling on the 29th
of October 1572.

MAR, JOHN ERSKINE, 2nd or 7th Earl of (c. 1558-1634), Scottish politician, was the only son of
the preceding. Together with King James VI. he was educated by George Buchanan. After attaining his majority he
was nominally the guardian of the young king, who was about seven years his junior, and who lived with him at
Stirling; but he was in reality a puppet in the hands of the regent, the earl of Morton; and he lost power and
position when Morton was imprisoned. He was concerned in the seizure of James VI. in 1582 (a plot known as the
raid of Ruthven); but when James escaped from his new custodians the earl fled into the west of Scotland. Then
leaving his hiding-place Mar seized Stirling Castle, whereupon James marched against him, and he took refuge in
England. Queen Elizabeth interceded for him, but in vain, and after some futile communications between the
governments of England and Scotland Mar and his friends gathered an army, entered the presence of the king at
Stirling, and were soon in supreme authority (1585). Mar was restored to his lands and titles. Henceforward he
stood high in the royal favour; he became governor of Edinburgh Castle and was made tutor to James’s son, Prince
Henry, and for his second wife he married Mary, daughter of Esmé Stewart, duke of Lennox. In 1601 the earl was
sent as envoy to London; here Elizabeth assured him that James should be her successor, and his mission was
conducted with tact and prudence. Having joined the English privy council Mar was created Lord Cardross in
1610; he was a member of the Court of High Commission and was lord high treasurer of Scotland from 1615 to
1630. He died at Stirling on the 14th of December 1634. John (c. 1585-1654), his only son by his first wife,
succeeded to his earldom; by his second wife he had five sons, among them being James (d. 1640), earl of Buchan;
Henry (d. 1628), whose son David (d. 1671) succeeded to the barony of Cardross; and Charles, the ancestor of the
earls of Rosslyn.

MAR, JOHN ERSKINE, 6th or 11th Earl of (1675-1732), Scottish Jacobite, was the eldest son of
Charles, the 5th earl (1650-1689), from whom he inherited estates which were heavily loaded with debt. He was
associated with the party favourable to the English government; he was one of the commissioners for the Union,
and was made a Scottish secretary of state, becoming after the Union of 1707 a representative peer for Scotland,
keeper of the signet and a privy councillor. In 1713 Mar was made an English secretary of state by the Tories, but
he seems to have been equally ready to side with the Whigs, and in 1714 he assured the new king, George I., of his
loyalty. However, like the other Tories, he was deprived of his office, and in August 1715 he went in disguise to
Scotland and placed himself at the head of the adherents of James Edward, the Old Pretender. Meeting many
Highland chieftains at Aboyne he avowed an earnest desire for the independence of Scotland, and at Braemar on
the 6th of September 1715 he proclaimed James VIII. king of Scotland, England, France and Ireland. Gradually the
forces under his command were augmented, but as a general he was a complete failure. Precious time was wasted
at Perth, a feigned attack on Stirling was resultless, and he could give little assistance to the English Jacobites. At
Sheriffmuir, where a battle was fought in November 1715, Mar’s forces largely outnumbered those of his
opponent, Archibald Campbell, afterwards 3rd duke of Argyll; but no bravery could atone for the signal
incompetence displayed by the earl, and the fight was virtually a decisive defeat for the Jacobites. Mar then met
James Edward at Fetteresso; the cause however was lost, and the prince and the earl fled to France. Mar sought to
interest foreign powers in the cause of the Stuarts; but in the course of time he became thoroughly distrusted by the
Jacobites. In 1721 he accepted a pension of £3500 a year from George I., and in the following year his name was
freely mentioned in connexion with the trial of Bishop Atterbury, whom it was asserted that Mar had betrayed.
This charge may perhaps be summarized as not proven. At the best his conduct was highly imprudent, and in 1724
he left the Pretender’s service. His later years were spent in Paris and at Aix-la-Chapelle, where he died in May
1732.

Mar, who was known as “bobbing John,” married for his second wife, Frances (d. 1761), daughter of the 1st
duke of Kingston, and was thus a brother-in-law of Lady Mary Wortley Montagu. He had been attainted in 1716,
and his only son, Thomas, Lord Erskine, died childless in March 1766.

Mar’s brother, James Erskine (1679-1754), was educated as a lawyer and became lord justice clerk of the Court
of Session and Lord Grange in 1710. He took no part in the rising of 1715, although there is little doubt that at
times he was in communication with the Jacobites; but was rather known for his piety and for his sympathy with
the Presbyterians. He is more famous, however, owing to the story of his wife’s disappearance. This lady, Rachel
Chicely, was a woman of disordered intellect; probably with reason she suspected her husband of infidelity, and
after some years of unhappiness Grange arranged a plan for her seizure. In January 1732 she was conveyed with
great secrecy from Edinburgh to the island of Hesker, thence to St Kilda, where she remained for about ten years,
thence she was taken to Assynt in Sutherland, and finally to Skye. To complete the idea that she was dead her
funeral was publicly celebrated, but she survived until May 1745. Meanwhile in 1734 Grange had resigned his
judgeship and had become an English member of parliament; here he was a bitter opponent of Sir Robert Walpole.
He died in London on the 20th of January 1754.

See the Journal of the Earl of Mar (1716); R. Patten, History of the late Rebellion (1717); and A. Lang,
History of Scotland, vol. iv. (1907).

MARA, GERTRUD ELISABETH (1749-1833), German singer, was born at Cassel, the daughter
of a poor musician named Schmeling. From him she learnt the violin, and while still a child her playing at the fair
at Frankfort was so remarkable that money was collected to provide for her. She was helped by influential friends,
and studied under Hillel at Leipzig for five years, proving to be endowed with a wonderful soprano voice. She
began to sing in public in 1771, and was soon recognized as the greatest singer that Germany had produced. She
was permanently engaged for the Prussian Court, but her marriage to a debauched violinist named Mara created
difficulties, and in 1780 she was released. After singing at Vienna, Munich and elsewhere, she appeared in Paris in
1782, where her rivalry with the singer Todi developed into a regular faction. In 1784 she went to London, and
continued to appear there with great success, with visits at intervals to Italy and to Paris till 1802, when for some
years she retired to Russia. She visited England again in 1819, but then abandoned the stage. She went to Livonia,
and died on the 20th of January 1833 at Revel.

MARABOUT (the French form of the Arab. murābit, “one who pickets his horse on a hostile frontier”; cf.
Portug. marabute; Span. morabito), in Mahommedan religion a hermit or devotee. The word is derived from ribāṭ,
a fortified frontier station. To such stations pious men betook them to win religious merit in war against the infidel;
their leisure was spent in devotion, and the habits of the convent superseded those of the camp (see M’G. De Slane
in Jour. As., 1842, i. 168; Dozy, Suppl. i. 502). Thus ribāṭ came to mean a religious house or hospice (zāwiya). The
great sphere of the marabouts is North Africa. There it was that the community formed by Yahya b. Ibrāhīm and
the doctor Abdullah developed into the conquering empire of the Murābiṭs, or, as Christian writers call them, the
Almoravides (q.v.), and there still, among the Berbers, the marabouts enjoy extraordinary influence, being
esteemed as living saints and mediators. They are liberally supported by alms, direct all popular assemblies, and
have a decisive voice in intertribal quarrels and all matters of consequence. On their death their sanctity is
transferred to their tombs (also called marabouts), where chapels are erected and gifts and prayers offered. The
marabouts took a prominent part in the resistance offered to the French by the Algerian Moslems; and they have
been similarly active in politico-religious movements in Tunisia and Tripoli.

See L. Rinn, Marabouts et Khouan (Algiers, 1884); and the article Dervish.

MARACAIBO, a large lake of western Venezuela, extending southward from the Gulf of Venezuela, into
which it opens through a long neck, or strait, obstructed at its mouth by islands and bars, and having a large
drainage basin bounded on the W. by the Eastern Cordillera, on the S.E. by the Cordillera de Merida, and on the E.
by a low range of mountains extending N. by W. from Trujillo to the coast. The lake is roughly quadrangular in
shape, and extends from the 9th to the 11th parallel of S. lat. and from the 71st to the 72nd meridian. It opens into
the Gulf through 13 channels, the depth on the bar in the main channel ranging from 7 ft. at low water to 12 ft. at
high water. Inside the bar the depth is about 30 ft., and the lake is navigable for vessels of large size. It receives the
waters of many rivers, principally on its west and south sides, the largest of which are the Catatumbo and Zulia,
Escalante, Chanudo, Ceniza, Sant’Ana, Negro, Apan and Palmar. The first three have navigable channels for river
steamers. There are a number of small lakes near Lake Maracaibo’s southern and western margins, the largest of
which is the Laguna de Zulia. The heavy rainfall on the eastern slopes of the Eastern Cordillera, which is said to
exceed 86 in. per annum, is responsible for the great volume of water discharged into the lake. The average annual
precipitation over the whole basin is said to be 70 in. In the upper half of the lake the water is sweet, but below
that, where the tidal influence is stronger, it becomes brackish. The only port of consequence on the lake is
Maracaibo, but there are small ports at its upper end which are in direct communication with the inland cities of
Trujillo, Merida and San Cristobal. The Catatumbo River, which enters from the west near the north end of the
lake, and its principal tributary, the Zulia, are navigable as far as Villamizar, in Colombia, and afford an excellent
transportation route for the coffee and other products of Santander.

MARACAIBO (sometimes Maracaybo), a city and seaport of Venezuela and capital of the state of Zulia
(formerly Maracaibo), on the west shore of the broad channel or neck which connects Lake Maracaibo with the
Gulf of Venezuela, or Maracaibo, about 25 m. from the mouth of the channel opening into the latter. Pop. (1889),
34,284; (1905), 49,817; there is a considerable German element in the vicinity. The best residential suburb,
Haticos, extends along the lake shore toward the south. The city is provided with tramways, telephone service and
electric lighting, but the water supply and drainage are inferior. The most important buildings are the executive’s
residence, the legislative chambers, the municipal hall, the Baralt theatre, the prison, the market, a hospital and six
churches. The city also has a school of arts, a public library, and a public garden. In colonial times Maracaibo had
a famous Jesuits’ college (now gone) and was one of the educational centres of Spanish America; the city now has
a national college and a nautical school. The industries include shipbuilding, and the manufacture of saddlery and
other leather products, bricks and tile, rum, beer, chocolate and coco-nut oil. Maracaibo is chiefly known, however,
as one of the principal commercial centres and shipping ports on the northern coast of South America. The bar at
the entrance to Maracaibo channel does not admit vessels drawing more than 12 ft., but there is a depth of 30 ft.

inside and near the city. Steam communication is maintained on the Catatumbo and Zulia rivers to Villamizar, and
on the Escalante to Santa Cruz. The principal exports from Maracaibo are coffee, hides and skins, cabinet and dye-
woods, cocoa, and mangrove bark, to which may be added dividivi, sugar, copaiba, gamela and hemp straw for
paper-making, and fruits. In 1906, 26% of the coffee exports was of Colombian origin.

Maracaibo was founded in 1571 by Alonso Pacheco, who gave it the name Nueva Zamora. Up to 1668 the
entrepôt for the inland settlements was a station named Gibraltar at the head of the lake, but the destruction of that
station by pirates in that year transferred this valuable trade to Maracaibo. The city did not figure actively in the
War of Independence until 1821 (Jan. 28), when the province declared its independence and sought an alliance
with Colombia. This brought to an end the armistice between Bolívar and Morillo, and thenceforward the city
experienced all the changing fortunes of war until its final capture by the revolutionists in 1823.

MARĀGHA, a town of Persia in the province of Azerbaijan, on the Safi River, in 37° 23′ N., 46° 16′ E.,
80 m. from Tabriz. Pop. about 16,000. It is pleasantly situated in a narrow valley running nearly north and south at
the eastern extremity of a well-cultivated plain opening towards Lake Urmia, which lies 18 m. to the west. The
town is encompassed by a high wall ruined in many places, and has four gates. Two stone bridges in good
condition, said to have been constructed during the reign of Hulaku Khan (1256-1265), and since then several
times repaired, lead over the Safi River on the western side of the town. The place is surrounded by extensive
vineyards and orchards, all well watered by canals led from the river, and producing great quantities of fruit for
exportation to Russia. On a hill west of the town are the remains of a famous observatory (rasad) constructed
under the direction of the great astronomer Nasr-ud-din of Tus. The hills west of the town consist of horizontal
strata of sandstone covered with irregular pieces of basalt and the top of the hill on which the observatory stood
was made level by taking away the basalt. The building, which no doubt served as a citadel as well, enclosed a
space of 380 yds. by 150, and the foundations of the walls were 41⁄2 to 5 ft. in thickness. The marble, which is
known throughout Persia as Marāgha marble, is a travertine obtained at the village of Dashkesen (Turkish for
“stone-breakers”) about 30 m. north-west from Maragha. It is deposited from water, which bubbles up from a
number of springs in the form of horizontal layers, which at first are thin crusts and can easily be broken, but
gradually solidify and harden into blocks with a thickness of 7 to 8 in. It is a singularly beautiful substance, being
of pink, greenish, or milk-white colour, streaked with reddish, copper-coloured veins. An analysis of the marble
gave the following result: calcium carbonate, 90.93; magnesium, .75; iron, 1.37; manganese, 4.34; calcium
sulphate, 2.30; calcium phosphate, .24 (R. T. Günther, Geog. Journ. xiv. 517).

MARANHÃO, or Maranham (Span. Marañon, the name given to the upper Amazon), a northern state of
Brazil, bounded N. by the Atlantic, E. and S.E. by Piauhy, S.W. and W. by Goyaz and Pará. Area, 177,569 sq. m.;
pop. (1890), 430,854; (1900), 499,308. The coastal zone and the north-west corner of the state belong to the
Amazon valley region, being a heavily forested plain traversed by numerous rivers. The eastern and southern parts,
however, belong to the lower terraces of the great Brazilian plateau, broken by eroded river-courses between which
are high open plains. There are no true mountain ranges in Maranhão, those indicated on the maps being only
plateau escarpments marking either its northern margin or the outlines of river valleys. The climate is hot, and the
year is divided into a wet and dry season, extreme humidity being characteristic of the former. The heat, however,
is greatly modified on the coast by the south-east trade winds, and the climate is generally considered healthy,
though beri-beri and eruptive diseases are common on the coast. The coast itself is broken and dangerous, there
being many small indentations, which are usually masked by islands or shoals. The largest of these are the Bay of
Tury-assú, facing which is the island of São João, and several others of small size, and the contiguous bays of São
Marcos and São José, between which is the large island of Maranhão. The rivers of the state all flow northward to
the Atlantic and a majority of them have navigable channels. The Parnahyba forms the eastern boundary of
Maranhão, but it has one large tributary, the Balsas, entirely within the state. A part of the western boundary is
formed by the Tocantins, and another part by the Gurupy, which separates the state from Pará. The principal rivers
of the state are the Maracassumé and Tury-assú, the Mearim and its larger tributaries (the Pindaré, Grajahú, Flôres
and Corda) which discharge into the Bay of São Marcos, and the Itapicurú and Monim which discharge into the
Bay of São José. Like the Amazon, the Mearim has a pororoca or bore in its lower channel, which greatly
interferes with navigation. There are a number of small lakes in the state, some of which are, apparently, merely
reservoirs for the annual floods of the rainy season.

The principal industries of Maranhão are agricultural, the river valleys and coastal zone being highly fertile and
being devoted to the cultivation of sugar-cane, cotton, rice, coffee, tobacco, mandioca and a great variety of fruits.
The southern highlands, however, are devoted to stock-raising, which was once an important industry.
Troublesome insects, vampire bats, and the failure to introduce new blood into the degenerated herds, are
responsible for its decline. Agriculture has also greatly declined, the state producing for export only a
comparatively small quantity of cotton, rice, sugar and aguardiente. Besides São Luiz, the capital of the state, the
principal towns, with the population of their municipal districts in 1890, are: Caxias (19,443), Alcantara (4730),
Carolina (7266), Grajahú (11,704), Tury-assú (8983) and Viana (9965).

The coast of Maranhão was first discovered by Pinzon in 1500, but it was included in the Portuguese grant of
captaincies in 1534. The first European settlement, however, was made by a French trading expedition under
Jacques Riffault, of Dieppe, in 1594, who lost two of his three vessels in the vicinity of the island of Maranhão,
and left a part of his men on that island when he returned home. Subsequently Daniel de la Rivardière was sent to
report on the place, and was then commissioned by the French crown to found a colony on the island; this was
done in 1612. The French were expelled by the Portuguese in 1615, and the Dutch held the island from 1641 to
1644. In 1621 Ceará, Maranhão and Pará were united and called the “Estado do Maranhão,” which was made
independent of the southern captaincies. Ceará was subsequently detached, but the “state” of Maranhão remained
independent until 1774, when it again became subject to the colonial administration of Brazil. Maranhão did not
join in the declaration of independence of 1822, but in the following year the Portuguese were driven out by
Admiral Lord Cochrane and the province became a part of the new empire of Brazil.

MARANO (accursed or banned), a term applied to Jewish Christians in Spain. Converted to Roman
Catholicism under compulsion, these “New Christians” often continued to observe Jewish rites in their homes, as
the Inquisition records attest. It was in fact largely due to the Maranos that the Spanish Inquisition was founded.
The Maranos made rapid strides in prosperity, and “accumulated honours, wealth and popular hatred” (Lea,
History of the Spanish Inquisition, i. 125). This was one of the causes that led to the expulsion of the Jews from
Spain in 1492. Maranos emigrated to various countries, but many remained in the Peninsula. Subsequently
distinguished individuals left home for more tolerant lands. The Jewish community in London was refounded by
Maranos in the first half of the 17th century. Hamburg commerce, too, owed much to the enterprise of Portuguese
Maranos. In Amsterdam many Maranos found asylum; Spinoza was descended from such a family. There are still
remnants of Marano families in Portugal.

See Lea, loc. cit. and elsewhere; see index s.v. “New Christian”; Graetz, History of the Jews, Eng. trans.
see index s.v. “Marranos”; M. Kayserling, in Jewish Encyclopedia, viii. 318 seq.; and for the present day
Jewish Quarterly Review, xv. 251 seq.
(I. A.)

MARASH (anc. Germanicia-Marasion), the chief town of a sanjak of the same name in the Aleppo vilayet,
altitude 2600 ft. situated E. of the Jihan river, at the foot of Mt Taurus. The sanjak lies almost wholly in Mt Taurus,
and includes the Armenian town of Zeitun. Marash is prosperous, and has a large trade in Kurd carpets and
embroideries. The climate is good, except in summer. Of the population (50,000) about half are Turkish-speaking
Armenians. There are a college, church and schools belonging to the American mission, a native Protestant church
and a Jesuit establishment. The site, which lies near the mouths of the three main passes over the eastern Taurus—
viz. those descending from Geuksun (Cocysus), Albistan-Yarpuz (Arabissus), and Malatia (Melitene)—is shown to
have had early importance, not only by the occurrence of Marasi in Assyrian inscriptions, but by the discovery of
several “Hittite” monuments on the spot. These, said to have been unearthed, for the most part, near the Kirk Geuz
spring above the modern town, are now in Constantinople and America, and include an inscribed lion, once built
into the wall of the citadel known in the middle ages as al-Marwani, and several stelae. No more is known of the
place until it appears as Germanicia-Caesarea, striking imperial coins with the head of L. Verus (middle of 2nd
cent. a.d.). The identification of Marash with Germanicia has been disputed, but successfully defended by Sir W.
M. Ramsay; and it is borne out by the Armenian name Kermanig, which has been given to the place since at least
the 12th century. Before the Roman period Marash doubtless shared the fortunes of the Seleucid kingdom of
Commagene. Germanicia-Marasion played a great part in Byzantine border warfare: Heraclius was there in a.d.
640; but before 700 it had passed into Saracen hands and been rebuilt by the caliph Moawiya. During the 8th and
9th centuries, when the direct pass from Cocysus came into military use, Marasion (the older name had returned

into general use) was often the Byzantine objective and was more than once retaken; but after 770, when Mansur
incorporated it in “Palestine” it remained definitely in Moslem power and was refortified by Harun-al-Rashid. It
was seized by the crusaders after their march across Mt Taurus, a.d. 1097, became an important town of Lesser
Armenia and was taken by the Seljuks in 1147. In the 16th century it was added to the Osmanli Empire by Selim I.
Marash passed with the rest of Syria into Egyptian hands in 1832, and in 1839 received fugitives from the defeat of
Nizib, among whom was Moltke. Ibrahim Pasha was encamped near it when directed by his father, at the bidding
of the powers, to stay his further advance. Since its reversion to Ottoman power (1840) the history of Marash has
been varied only by Armenian troubles, largely connected with the fortunes of Zeitun, for the reduction of which
place it has more than once been used as a base. There was less disturbance there in 1895-1896 than in other north
Syrian towns.
(D. G. H.)

MARAT, JEAN PAUL (1743-1793), French revolutionary leader, eldest child of Jean Paul Marat, a
native of Cagliari in Sardinia, and Louise Cabrol of Geneva, was born at Boudry, in the principality of Neuchâtel,
on the 24th of May 1743. His father was a designer, who had abandoned his country and his religion, and married
a Swiss Protestant. On his mother’s death in 1759 Marat set out on his travels, and spent two years at Bordeaux in
the study of medicine, whence he moved to Paris, where he made use of his knowledge of his two favourite
sciences, optics and electricity, to subdue an obstinate disease of the eyes. After some years in Paris he went to
Holland, and then on to London, where he practised his profession. In 1773 he made his first appearance as an
author with a Philosophical Essay on Man. The book shows a wonderful knowledge of English, French, German,
Italian and Spanish philosophers, and directly attacks Helvetius, who had in his De l’esprit declared a knowledge
of science unnecessary for a philosopher. Marat declares that physiology alone can solve the problems of the
connexion between soul and body, and proposes the existence of a nervous fluid as the true solution. In 1774 he
published The Chains of Slavery, which was intended to influence constituencies to return popular members, and
reject the king’s friends. Its author declared later that it procured him an honorary membership of the patriotic
societies of Carlisle, Berwick and Newcastle. He remained devoted to his profession, and in 1775 published in
London a little Essay on Gleets, and in Amsterdam a French translation of the first two volumes of his Essay on
Man. In this year he visited Edinburgh, and on the recommendation of certain Edinburgh physicians was made an
M. D. of St Andrews. On his return to London he published an Enquiry into the Nature, Cause, and Cure of a
Singular Disease of the Eyes, with a dedication to the Royal Society. In the same year there appeared the third
volume of the French edition of the Essay on Man, which reached Ferney, and exasperated Voltaire, by its
onslaught on Helvetius, into a sharp attack which only made the young author more conspicuous. His fame as a
clever doctor was now great, and on the 24th of June 1777, the comte d’Artois, afterwards Charles X. of France,
made him by brevet physician to his guards with 2000 livres a year and allowances.

Marat was soon in great request as a court doctor among the aristocracy; and even Brissot, in his Mémoires,
admits his influence in the scientific world of Paris. The next years were much occupied with scientific work,
especially the study of heat, light and electricity, on which he presented memoirs to the Académie des Sciences,
but the academicians were horrified at his temerity in differing from Newton, and, though acknowledging his
industry, would not receive him among them. His experiments greatly interested Benjamin Franklin, who used to
visit him and Goethe always regarded his rejection by the academy as a glaring instance of scientific despotism. In

1780 he had published at Neuchâtel a Plan de législation criminelle, founded on the principles of Beccaria. In
April 1786 he resigned his court appointment. The results of his leisure were in 1787 a new translation of
Newton’s Optics, and in 1788 his Mémoires académiques, ou nouvelles découvertes sur la lumière.

His scientific life was now over, his political life was to begin; in the notoriety of that political life his great
scientific and philosophical knowledge was to be forgotten, the high position he had given up denied, and he
himself scoffed at as an ignorant charlatan, who had sold quack medicines about the streets of Paris, and been glad
to earn a few sous in the stables of the comte d’Artois. In 1788 the notables had met, and advised the assembling
of the states-general. The elections were the cause of a flood of pamphlets, of which one, Offrande à la patrie, was
by Marat, and, though now forgotten, dwelt on much the same points as the famous brochure of the Abbé Siéyès:
Qu’est-ce que le tiers état? When the states-general met, Marat’s interest was as great as ever, and in June 1789 he
published a supplement to his Offrande, followed in July by La constitution, in which he embodies his idea of a
constitution for France, and in September by his Tableau des vices de la constitution d’Angleterre, which he
presented to the Assembly. The latter alone deserves remark. The Assembly was at this time full of anglomaniacs,
who desired to establish in France a constitution similar to that of England. Marat had seen that England was at
this time being ruled by an oligarchy using the forms of liberty, which, while pretending to represent the country,
was really being gradually mastered by the royal power. His heart was now all in politics; and he decided to start a
paper. At first appeared a single number of the Moniteur patriote, followed on the 12th of September by the first
number of the Publiciste parisien, which on the 16th of September took the title of L’Ami du peuple and which he
edited, with some interruptions, until the 21st of September 1792.

The life of Marat now becomes part of the history of the French Revolution. From the beginning to the end he
stood alone. He was never attached to any party; the tone of his mind was to suspect whoever was in power. About
his paper, the incarnation of himself, the first thing to be said is that the man always meant what he said; no
poverty, no misery or persecution, could keep him quiet; he was perpetually crying, “Nous sommes trahis.”
Whoever suspected any one had only to denounce him to the Ami du peuple, and the denounced was never let
alone till he was proved innocent or guilty. Marat began by attacking the most powerful bodies in Paris—the
Constituent Assembly, the ministers, the corps municipal, and the court of the Châtelet. Denounced and arrested,
he was imprisoned from the 8th of October to the 5th of November 1789. A second time, owing to his violent
campaign against Lafayette, he narrowly escaped arrest and had to flee to London (Jan. 1790). There he wrote his
Dénonciation contre Necker, and in May dared to return to Paris and continue the Ami du peuple. He was
embittered by persecution, and continued his vehement attacks against all in power, and at last, after the day of the
Champs du Mars (July 17, 1790), against the king himself. All this time he was in hiding in cellars and sewers,
where he was attacked by a horrible skin disease, tended only by the woman Simonne Evrard, who remained true
to him. The end of the Constituent Assembly he heard of with joy and with bright hopes for the future, soon dashed
by the behaviour of the Legislative Assembly. When almost despairing, in December 1791, he fled once more to
London, where he wrote his Ecole du citoyen. In April 1792, summoned again by the Cordeliers’ Club, he returned
to Paris, and published No. 627 of the Ami. The war was now the question, and Marat saw clearly that it was to
serve the purposes of the Royalists and the Girondins, who thought of themselves alone. Again denounced, Marat
had to remain in hiding until the 10th of August. The early days of the war being unsuccessful, the proclamation of
the duke of Brunswick excited all hearts; who could go to save France on the frontiers and leave Paris in the hands
of his enemies? Marat, like Danton, foresaw the massacres of September. After the events of the 10th of August he
took his seat at the commune, and demanded a tribunal to try the Royalists in prison. No tribunal was formed, and
the massacres in the prisons were the inevitable result. In the elections to the Convention, Marat was elected
seventh out of the twenty-four deputies for Paris, and for the first time took his seat in an assembly of the nation.
At the declaration of the republic, he closed his Ami du peuple, and commenced, on the 25th, a new paper, the
Journal de la république française, which was to contain his sentiments as its predecessor had done, and to be

always on the watch. In the Assembly Marat had no party; he would always suspect and oppose the powerful,
refuse power for himself. After the battle of Valmy, Dumouriez was the greatest man in France; he could almost
have restored the monarchy; yet Marat did not fear to denounce him in placards as a traitor.

His unpopularity in the Assembly was extreme, yet he insisted on speaking on the question of the king’s trial,
declared it unfair to accuse Louis for anything anterior to his acceptance of the constitution, and though implacable
towards the king, as the one man who must die for the people’s good, he would not allow Malesherbes, the king’s
counsel, to be attacked in his paper, and speaks of him as a “sage et respectable vieillard.” The king dead, the
months from January to May 1793 were spent in an unrelenting struggle between Marat and the Girondins. Marat
despised the ruling party because they had suffered nothing for the republic, because they talked too much of their
feelings and their antique virtue, because they had for their own virtues plunged the country into war; while the
Girondins hated Marat as representative of that rough red republicanism which would not yield itself to a Roman
republic, with themselves for tribunes, orators and generals. The Girondins conquered at first in the Convention,
and ordered that Marat should be tried before the Revolutionary Tribunal. But their victory ruined them, for on the
24th of April Marat was acquitted, and returned to the Convention with the people at his back. The fall of the
Girondins on the 31st of May was a triumph for Marat. But it was his last. The skin disease he had contracted in
the subterranean haunts was rapidly closing his life; he could only ease his pain by sitting in a warm bath, where
he wrote his journal, and accused the Girondins, who were trying to raise France against Paris. Sitting thus on the
13th of July he heard in the evening a young woman begging to be admitted to see him, saying that she brought
news from Caen, where the escaped Girondins were trying to rouse Normandy. He ordered her to be admitted,
asked her the names of the deputies then at Caen, and, after writing their names, said, “They shall be soon
guillotined,” when the young girl, whose name was Charlotte Corday (q.v.), stabbed him to the heart.

His death caused a great commotion at Paris. The Convention attended his funeral, and placed his bust in the
hall where it held its sessions. Louis David painted “Marat Assassinated,” and a veritable cult was rendered to the
Friend of the People, whose ashes were transferred to the Panthéon with great pomp on the 21st of September
1794—to be cast out again in virtue of the decree of the 8th of February 1795.

Marat’s name was long an object of execration on account of his insistence on the death penalty. He stands in
history as a bloodthirsty monster, yet in judging him one must remember the persecutions he endured and the
terrible disease from which he suffered.

Besides the works mentioned above, Marat wrote: Recherches physiques sur l’électricité, &c. (1782);
Recherches sur l’électricité médicale (1783); Notions élémentaires d’optique (1764); Lettres de
l’observateur Bon Sens à M. de M. ... sur la fatale catastrophe des infortunés Pilatre de Rozier et Romain,
les aéronautes et l’aérostation (1785); Observations de M. l’amateur Avec à M. l’abbé Sans ... &c., (1785);
Éloge de Montesquieu (1785), published 1883 by M. de Bresetz; Les Charlatans modernes, ou lettres sur le
charlatanisme académique (1791); Les Aventures du comte Potowski (published in 1847 by Paul Lacroix,
the “bibliophile Jacob”); Lettres polonaises (unpublished). Marat’s works were published by A. Vermorel,
Œuvres de J. P. Marat, l’ami du peuple, recueillies et annotées (1869). Two of his tracts, (1) On Gleets, (2)
A Disease of the Eyes, were reprinted, ed. J. B. Bailey, in 1891.

See A. Vermorel, Jean Paul Marat (1880); François Chévremont, Marat: esprit politique, accomp. de sa
vie (2 vols., 1880); Auguste Cabanès, Marat inconnu (1891); A. Bougeait, Marat, l’ami du peuple (2 vols.,
1865); M. Tourneux, Bibliographie de l’histoire de Paris pendant la révolution française (vol. ii., 1894; vol.
iv., 1906), and E. B. Bax, J. P. Marat (1900). The Correspondance de Marat has been edited with notes by
C. Villay (1908).
(R. A.*)

MARATHI (properly Marāthī),1 the name of an important Indo-Aryan language spoken in western and
central India. In 1901 the number of speakers was 18,237,899, or about the same as the population of Spain.
Marathi occupies an irregular triangular area of approximately 100,000 sq.m., having its apex about the district of
Balaghat in the Central Provinces, and for its base the western coast of the peninsula from Daman on the Gulf of
Cambay in the north to Karwar on the open Arabian Sea in the south. It covers parts of two provinces of British
India—Bombay and the Central Provinces (including Berar)—with numerous settlers in Central India and Madras,
and is also the principal language of Portuguese India and of the north-western portion of His Highness the
Nizam’s dominions. The standard form of speech is that of Poona in Bombay, and, in its various dialects it covers
the larger part of that province, in which it is the vernacular of more than eight and a half millions of people.

As explained in the article Indo-Aryan Languages, there were in ancient times two main groups of these forms
of speech—one, the language of the Midland, spoken in the country near the Gangetic Doab, and the other, the
languages of the so-called “Outer Band,” containing the Midland on three sides, west, east and south. The country
to the south of the Midland, in which members of this Outer group of languages were formerly spoken, included
the modern Rajputana and Gujarat, and extended to the basin of the river Nerbudda, being bounded on the south by
the Vindhya hills. In the course of time the population of the Midland expanded, and gradually occupied this tract,
reaching the sea in Gujarat. The language of the Outer Band was thus forced farther afield. Its speakers crossed the
Vindhyas and settled in the central plateau of the Deccan and on the Konkan coast. Here they came into contact
with speakers of the Dravidian languages of southern India. As happened elsewhere in India, they retained their
own Aryan tongue, and gradually through the influence of their superior civilization imposed it upon the
aborigines, so that all the inhabitants of this tract became the ancestors of the speakers of modern Marathi.

In Rajputana and Gujarat the language (see Gujarat) is to a certain extent mixed. Near the original Midland
there are few traces of the Outer language, but as we go farther and farther away from that centre we find, as might
be expected, the influence of the Midland language becoming weaker and weaker, and traces of the Outer language
becoming more and more evident, until in Gujarati we recognize several important survivals of the old language
once spoken by the earlier Aryan inhabitants.

Dialects.—Besides the standard form of speech, there is only one real dialect of Marathi, viz. Konkani
(Kōnkaṇī), spoken in the country near Goa. There are also several local varieties, and we may conveniently
distinguish between the Marathi of the Deccan, that of the Central Provinces (including Berar), and that of the
northern and central Konkan. In the southern part of the district of Ratnagiri this latter Konkani variety of Marathi
gradually merges into the true Konkani dialect through a number of intermediate forms of speech. There are also
several broken jargones, based upon Marathi, employed by aboriginal tribes surviving in the hill country.

Relations with other Indo-Aryan Languages.—Marathi has to its north, in order from west to east, Gujarati,
Rajasthani, Western Hindi and Eastern Hindi. To its east and south it has the Dravidian languages, Gondi, Telugu
and Kanarese. Elsewhere in India Aryan languages gradually fade away into each other, so that it is impossible to
fix any definite boundary line between them. But this is not the case with Marathi. It does not merge into any of
the cognate neighbouring forms of speech, but possesses a distinct linguistic frontier. A native writer2 says: “The
Gujarati language agrees very closely with the languages of the countries lying to the north of it, because the

Gujarati people came from the north. If a native of Delhi, Ajmere, Marwar, Mewar, Jaipur, &c., comes into
Gujarat, the Gujarati people find no difficulty in understanding his language. But it is very wonderful that when
people from countries bordering Gujarat on the south, as the Konkan, Maharashtra, &c. (i.e. people speaking
Marathi) come to Gujarat, the Gujarati people do not in the least comprehend what they say.” This isolated
character of Marathi is partly due to the barrier of the Vindhya range which lies to its north, and partly to the fact
that none of the northern languages belongs now to the Outer Band, but are in more or less close relationship to the
language of the Midland. There was no common ground either physical or linguistic, upon which the colliding
forms of speech could meet on equal terms. Eastern Hindi is more closely related to Marathi than the others, and in
its case, in its bordering dialects, we do find a few traces of the influence of Marathi—traces which are part of the
essence of the language, and not mere borrowed waifs floating on the top of a sea of alien speech and not absorbed
by it.

Written Character.—Marathi books are generally printed in the well-known Nagari character (see Sanskrit),
and this is also used to a great extent in private transactions and correspondence. In the Maratha country it is
known as the Bālbōdh (“teachable to children,” i.e. “easy”) character. A cursive form of Nagari called Mōḍī, or
“twisted,” is also employed as a handwriting. It is said to have been invented in the 17th century by Balaji Avaji,
the secretary of the celebrated Sivaji. Its chief merit is that each word can be written as a whole without lifting the
pen from the paper, a feat which is impossible in the case of Nagari.3

Origin of the Language.—The word “Marāṭhī” signifies (the language) of the Maratha country. It is the modern
form of the Sanskrit Māhārāṣṭrī, just as “Marāṭhā” represents the old Māhā-rāṣṭra, or Great Kingdom. Māhārāṣṭrī
was the name given by Sanskrit writers to the particular form of Prakrit spoken in Māhārāṣṭra, the great Aryan
kingdom extending southwards from the Vindhya range to the Kistna, broadly corresponding to the southern part
of the Bombay Presidency and to the state of Hyderabad. As pointed out in the article Prakrit this Māhārāṣṭrī early
obtained literary pre-eminence in India, and became the form of Prakrit employed as the language not only of lyric
poetry but also of the formal epic (kāvya). Dramatic works were composed in it, and it was the vehicle of the non-
canonical scriptures of the Jaina religion. The oldest work in the language of which we have any knowledge is the
Sattasaī, or Seven Centuries of verses, compiled at Pratiṣṭhāna, on the Gōdāvarī, the capital of King Hāla, at some
time between the 3rd and 7th centuries a.d. Pratiṣṭhāna is the modern Paithan in the Aurangabad district of
Hyderabad, and that city was for long famous as a centre of literary composition. In later times the political centre
of gravity was changed to Poona, the language of which district is now accepted as the standard of the best
Marathi.

General Character of the Language.—In the following account of the main features of Marathi, the reader is
presumed to be familiar with the leading facts stated in the articles Indo-Aryan Languages and Prakrit. In the
Prakrit stage of the Indo-Aryan languages we can divide the Prakrits into two well-defined groups, an Inner,
Śaurasēnī and its connected dialects on the one hand, and an Outer, Māhārāṣṭrī, Ardhamāgadhī, and Māgadhī with
their connected dialects on the other. These two groups differed in their phonetic laws, in their systems of
declension and conjugation, in vocabulary, and in general character.4 In regard to the last point reference may be
made to the frequent use of meaningless suffixes, such as -alla, -illa, -ulla, &c., which can be added, almost ad
libitum to any noun, adjective or particle in Māhārāṣṭrī and Ardhamāgadhī, but which are hardly ever met in
Śaurasēnī. These give rise to numerous secondary forms of words, used, it might be said, in a spirit of playfulness,
which give a distinct flavour to the whole language. Similarly the late Mr Beames (Comparative Grammar, i. 103)
well describes Marathi as possessing “a very decided individuality, a type quite its own, arising from its
comparative isolation for so many centuries.” Elsewhere (p. 38) he uses language which would easily well apply to
Māhārāṣṭrī Prakrit when he says, “Marathi is one of those languages which we may call playful—it delights in all

sorts of jingling formations, and has struck out a larger quantity of secondary and tertiary words, diminutives, and
the like, than any of the cognate tongues,” and again (p. 52):—

“In Marathi we see the results of the Pandit’s file applied to a form of speech originally possessed of
much natural wildness and licence. The hedgerows have been pruned and the wild briars and roses trained
into order. It is a copious and beautiful language, second only to Hindi. It has three genders, and the same
elaborate preparation of the base as Sindhi, and, owing to the great corruption which has taken place in its
terminations, the difficulty of determining the gender of nouns is as great in Marathi as in German. In fact,
if we were to institute a parallel in this respect, we might appropriately describe Hindi as the English,
Marathi as the German of the Indian group—Hindi having cast aside whatever could possibly be dispensed
with, Marathi having retained whatever has been spared by the action of time. To an Englishman Hindi
commends itself by its absence of form, and the positional structure of its sentences resulting therefrom; to
our High-German cousins the Marathi, with its fuller array of genders, terminations, and inflexions, would
probably seem the completer and finer language.”

In the article Prakrit it is explained that the literary Prakrits were not the direct parents of the modern Indo-
Aryan vernaculars. Each Prakrit had first to pass through an intermediate stage—that of the Apabhramśa—before
it took the form current at the present day. While we know a good deal about Māhārāṣṭrī and very little about
Śaurasēnī Prakrit, the case is reversed in regard to their respective Apabhramśas. The Śaurasēnā Apabhramśa is the
only one concerning which we have definite information. Although it would be quite possible to reason from
analogy, and thus to obtain what would be the corresponding forms of Māhārāṣṭra Apabhramśa, we should often be
travelling upon insecure ground, and it is therefore advisable to compare Marathi, not with the Apabhramśa from
which it is immediately derived, but with its grandmother, Māhārāṣṭrī Prakrit. We shall adopt this course, so far as
possible, in the following pages.

Vocabulary.—In the article Indo-Aryan Languages it is explained that, allowing for phonetic
development, the vocabulary of Śaurasēnī Prakrit was the same as that of Sanskrit, but that the farther we
go from the Midland, the more examples we meet of a new class of words, the so-called dēśyas,
descendants of the old Primary Prakrits spoken outside the Midland, and strange to Sanskrit. Māhārāṣṭrī
Prakrit, the most independent of the Outer languages, was distinguished by the large proportion of these
dēśyas found in its vocabulary, and the same is consequently the case in Marathi. The Brahmins of the
Maratha country have always had a great reputation for learning, and their efforts to create a literary
language out of their vernacular took, as in other parts of India, the direction of borrowing tatsamas from
Sanskrit, to lend what they considered to be dignity to their sentences. But the richness of the language in
dēśya words has often rendered such borrowing unnecessary, and has saved Marathi, although the
proportion of tatsamas to tadbhavas5 in the language is more than sufficiently high, from the fate of the
Pandit-ridden literary Bengali, in which 80 to 90% of the vocabulary is pure Sanskrit. There is indeed a
tradition of stylistic chastity in the Maratha country from the earliest times, and even Sanskrit writers
contrasted the simple elegance of the Deccan (or Vaidarbhī) style with the flowery complexity of eastern
India.

The proportion of Persian and, through Persian, of Arabic words in the Marathi vocabulary is
comparatively low, when compared with, say, Hindostani. The reason is, firstly, the predominance in the
literary world of these learned Brahmins, and, secondly, the fact that the Maratha country was not
conquered by the Mussulmans till a fairly late period, nor was it so thoroughly occupied by them as were
Sind, the Punjab, and the Gangetic valley.

Phonetics.6—In the standard dialect the vowels are the same as in Sanskrit, but ṛ and ḷ only appear in
words borrowed directly from that language (tatsamas). Final short vowels (a, i and u) have all disappeared
in prose pronunciation, except in a few local dialects, and final i and u are not even written. On the other
hand, in the Nagari character, the non-pronunciation of a final a is not indicated. After an accented syllable
a medial a is pronounced very lightly, even when the accent is not the main accent of the word. Thus, if we
indicate the main accent by ’, and subsidiary accents (equivalent to the Hebrew methegh) by `, then the
word kárawat, a saw, is pronounced kárawat; and kàḷakáḷaṇễ, to be agitated, is pronounced kàḷakáḷaṇễ. In
Konkani the vowel a assumes the sound of o in “hot,” a sound which is also heard in the language of
Bengal. In dialectic speech ē is often interchangeable with short or long a, so that the standard sāṅgitalễ, it
was said, may appear as sāṅgitalā or sāṅgitalẫ. The vowels ē and ō are apparently always long in the
standard dialect, thus following Sanskrit; but in Konkani there is a short and a long form of each vowel.
Very probably, although the distinction is not observed in writing, and has not been noticed by native
scholars, these vowels are also pronounced short in the standard dialect under the circumstances to be now
described. When a long ā, ī or ū precedes an accented syllable it is usually shortened. In the case of ā the
shortening is not indicated by the spelling, but the written long ā is pronounced short like the ă in the Italian
ballo. Thus, the dative of pīk, a ripe crop, is pikā̇s, and that of hāt, a hand, is hātā̇s, pronounced hătā̇s.
Almost the only compound consonants which survived in the Prakrit stage were double letters, and in M.
these are usually simplified, the preceding vowel being lengthened in compensation. Thus, the Prakrit
kannō becomes kān, an ear; Pr. bhikkhā becomes bhīk, alms; and Pr. puttō becomes pūt, a son. In the Piśāca
(see Indo-Aryan Languages) and other languages of north-western India it is not usual to lengthen the
vowel in compensation, and the same tendency is observable in Konkani, which, it may be remarked,
appears to contain many relics of the old Prakrit (Saurāṣṭrī) spoken in the Gujarat country before the
invasion from the Midland. Thus, in Konkani, we have put as well as pūt, while the word corresponding to
the Pr. ekkō, one, is ek as well as the standard ēk.

On the whole, the consonantal system is much the same as in other Indian languages. Nasalization of
long vowels is very common, especially in Konkani. In this article it is indicated by the sign ~ placed over
the affected vowel. The palatals are pronounced as in Skr. in words borrowed from that language or from
Hindostani, and also in Marathi tadbhavas before i, ī, ē or y. Thus, caṇḍ (tatsama), fierce; jamā
(Hindostani), collected; cikhal (M. tadbhava), mud. In other cases they are pronounced ts, tsh, dz, dzh
respectively. Thus tsākar (for cākar), a servant; dzāṇễ (for jāṇễ), to go. There are two s-sounds in the
standard dialect which are very similarly distinguished. Ś, pronounced like an English sh, is used before i, ī,
ē or y; and s, as in English “sin,” elsewhere. Thus, śimphī, a caste-name; śīl, a stone; śēt, a field; śyām, dark
blue; but sāp, a snake; sumār (Persian shumār), an estimate; strī, a woman. In the dialects s is practically
the only sibilant used, and that is changed by the vulgar speakers of Konkani to h (again as in north-western
India). Aspirated letters show a tendency to lose their aspiration, especially in Konkani. Thus, bhīk (for
bhīkh), alms, quoted above; hāt (Pr. hatthō), a hand. In Konkani we have words such as boiṇ, a sister,
against standard bhain; gēr, standard gharī̇, in a house; āmī, standard āmhī, we. Here again we have
agreement with north-western India. Generally speaking Marathi closely follows Māhārāṣṭrā when that
differs from the Prakrits of other parts of India. Thus we have Skr. vrajati, Māhārāṣṭrī vaccai (instead of
vajjai), he goes; Konkani votsū, to go; Saurasēnī genhiduim, Māhārāṣṭrī ghettuṁ, to take; Marathi ghētalễ,
taken. There is similarly both in Marathi and Māhārāṣṭrī a laxness in distinguishing between cerebral and
dental letters (which again reminds us of north-western India). Thus, Skr. daśati, Māhārāṣṭrī ḍasai, he bites;
M. ḍāsaṇễ to bite; Skr. dahati, Māhārāṣṭrī ḍahai, he burns; M. ḍādzaṇễ, to be hot; Skr. gardabhas; Śaurasēnī
gaddahō; Hindostani gadhā; but Māhārāṣṭrī gaḍḍahō; M. gāḍhav, an ass; and so many others. In Māhārāṣṭrī
every n becomes ṇ, but in Jaina MSS. when the n was initial or doubled it remained unchanged. A similar

rule is followed regarding l and the cerebral ḷ common in Vedic Sanskrit, in MSS. coming from southern
India, and, according to the grammarians, also in the Piśāca dialects of the north-west. In M. a Pr. double nn
or ll is simplified, according to the usual rule, to n or l respectively, with lengthening of the preceding vowel
in compensation. Both ṇ and ḷ are of frequent occurrence in M., but only as medial letters, and then only
when they represent ṇ or ḷ in the Pr. stage. When the letter is initial or represents a double nn or ll of Pr. it is
always n or l respectively, thus offering a striking testimony to the accuracy of the Jaina and southern MSS.
Thus, ordinary Māhārāṣṭrī ṇa, but Jaina Māhārāṣṭrī na, M. na, not; Māhārāṣṭrī (both kinds) ghaṇō, M. ghaṇ,
dense; Māhārāṣṭrī soṇṇaaṁ, Jaina sonnaaṁ, M. sōnē̇, gold; Māhārāṣṭrī kālō, time, southern MSS. of the
same kālō, M. kāḷ, time; Māhārāṣṭrī callai, M. tsālē, he goes or used to go. In some of the local dialects,
following the Vedic practice, we find ḷ where d is employed elsewhere, as in (Berar) ghōḷā for ghōḍā, a
horse; and there are instances of this change occurring even in Māhārāṣṭrī; e.g. Skr. taḍagaṁ, Māhārāṣṭrī
taḷāam, M. taḷễ, a pond.

The Skr. compound consonant jñ is pronounced dny in the standard dialect, but gy in the Konkan. Thus,
Skr. jñānaṁ becomes dnyān or gyān according to locality.

Declension.—Marathi and Gujarati are the only Indo-Aryan languages which have retained the three
genders, masculine, feminine and neuter, of Sanskrit and Prakrit. In rural dialects of Western Hindi and of
Rajasthani sporadic instances of the neuter gender have survived, but elsewhere the only example occurs in
the interrogative pronoun. In Marathi the neuter denotes not only inanimate things but also animate beings
when both sexes are included, or when the sex is left undecided. Thus, ghōḍễ, neut., a horse, without regard
to sex. In the Konkan the neuter gender is further employed to denote females below the age of puberty, as
in cēḍū, a girl. Numerous masculine and feminine words, however, denote inanimate objects. The rules for
distinguishing the gender of such nouns are as complicated as in German, and must be learned from the
grammars. For the most part, but not always, words follow the genders of their Skr. originals, and the
abrasion of terminations in the modern language renders it impossible to lay down any complete set of rules
on the subject. We may, however, say that strong bases (see below) in ā—and these do not include tatsamas
—are masculine, and that the corresponding feminine and neuter words end in ī and ễ respectively. Thus,
mulagā, a son; mulagī, a daughter; mulagễ, a child of so and so. As a further guide we may say that sex is
usually distinguished by the use of the masculine and feminine genders, and that large and powerful
inanimate objects are generally masculine, while small, delicate things are generally feminine. In the case of
some animals (as in our “horse” and “mare”) sex is distinguished by the use of different words; e.g. bōkaḍ,
he-goat, and śēḷī, a nanny-goat.

The nominative form of a tadbhava word is derived from the nominative form in Sanskrit and Prakrit, but
tatsama words are generally borrowed in the form of the Sanskrit crude base. Thus, Skr. crude base mālin,
nom. sing, mālī; Pr. nom. māliō (māḷiō); M. māḷī (tadbhava), a gardener; Skr. base mati-; nom. matis; M.
mati (tatsama). Some tatsamas are, however, borrowed in the nominative form, as in Skr. dhanin, nom.
dhanī; M. dhanī, a rich man. In Prakrit the nominative singular of many masculine tatsamas ended in ō. In
the Apabhraṁśa stage this ō was weakened to u, and in modern Marathi, under the general rule, this final
short u was dropped, the noun thus reverting as stated above to the form of the Sanskrit crude base. But in
old Marathi, the short u was still retained. Thus, the Sanskrit īśvaras, lord, became, as a Prakrit tatsama,
īśvarō, which in Apabhraṁśa took the form īśvaru. The old Marathi form was also īśvaru, but in modern
Marathi we have īśvar. Tadbhavas derived from Sanskrit bases in a are treated very similarly, the
termination being dropped in the modern language. Thus, Skr. nom. masc. karṇas, Pr. kannō, M. kān; Skr.
nom. sing. fem. khaṭvā, Pr. khaṭṭā, M. khāṭ, a bed; Skr. nom. sing. neut. gṛhaṁ, Pr. gharaṁ, M. ghar, a
house. Sometimes the Skr. nom. sing. fem. of these nouns ends in ī, but this makes no difference, as in Skr.

and Pr. cullī, M. cūl, a fireplace. There is one important set of exceptions to this rule. In the article Prakrit
attention is drawn to the frequent use of pleonastic suffixes, especially of -(a)ka- (masc. and neut.), -
(i)kā(fem.). This could in Sanskrit be added to any noun, whatever the termination of the base might be. In
Prakrit the k of this suffix, being medial, was elided, so that we get forms like Skr. nom. sing. masc. ghōṭa-
kas, Pr. ghōḍa-ō, M. ghōḍā, a horse; Skr. nom. sing. fem. ghōṭi-kā, Pr. ghōḍi-ā, M. ghōḍī, a mare; Skr.
ghōṭa-kaṁ, Pr. ghōḍa-(y)am, M. ghōḍe, a horse (without distinction of sex). Such modern forms made with
this pleonastic suffix, and ending in ā, ī or ễ are called “strong forms,” while all those made without it are
called “weak forms.” As a rule the fact that a noun is in a weak or a strong form does not affect its meaning,
but sometimes the use of a masculine strong form indicates clumsiness or hugeness. Thus bhākar (weak
form) means “bread,” while bhākarā (strong form) means “a huge loaf of bread.” The other pleonastic
suffixes mentioned under Prakrit are also employed in Marathi, but usually with specific senses. Thus the
suffix -illa- generally forms adjectives, while -ḍa-ka- (in M. -ḍā, fem. -ḍī, neut. -ḍễ) implies contempt.

The synthetic declension of Sanskrit and Prakrit has been preserved in Marathi more completely than in
any other Indo-Aryan language. While Māhārāṣṭrī Prakrit, like all others, passed through the Apabhraṁśa
stage in the course of its development, the conservative character of the language retained even in that stage
some of the old pure Māhārāṣṭrī forms. In the article Prakrit we have seen how there gradually arose a
laxity in distinguishing the cases. In Māhārāṣṭrī the Sanskrit dative fell into almost entire disuse, the
genitive being used in its place, while in Apabhraṁśa the case terminations become worn down to -hu, -ho,
-hi, -hī and -hā, of which -hi and -hī were employed for several cases, both singular and plural. There was
also a marked tendency for these terminations to become confused, so that in the earliest stages of most of
the modern Indo-Aryan vernaculars we find -hi freely employed for any oblique case of the singular, and -hī
for any oblique case of the plural. Another feature of Prakrit was the simplification of the complicated
declensional system of Sanskrit by assimilating it in all cases to the declension of a-bases, corresponding to
the first and second declensions in Latin.

In the formation of the plural the Prakrit declensions are very closely followed by Marathi. We shall
confine our remarks to a-bases, which may be either weak or strong forms, and of which the feminine ends
sometimes in ā, and sometimes in ī. In Prakrit the nom. plur. of these nouns ends masc. ā, fem. āō, īō, neut.
āiṁ. We thus get the following:—

Masculine. Feminine. Neu
Nom. Sing. Nom. Plur. Nom. Sing. Nom. Plur. Nom. Sing. Nom. Plur. Nom. Sing.
Weak form.
Prakrit kannō, kannā khaṭṭā, khaṭṭāō cullī, cullīō gharaṁ,
an ear. a bed. a fireplace. a house.
Marathi kān kān khāṭ khāṭā cūl cūlī ghar
Strong form.
Prakrit ghōḍaō, ghōḍayā ghōḍiā, ghōḍiāō — — *ghōḍayaṁ,
a horse. a mare. a horse.
Marathi ghōḍā ghōḍē ghōḍī ghōḍyā — — ghōḍễ

Several of the old synthetic cases have survived in Marathi, especially in the antique form of the
language preserved in poetry. Most of them have fallen into disuse in the modern prose language. We may
note the following, some of which have preserved the Māhārāṣṭrī forms, while others are directly derived

from the Apabhraṁśa stage of the language. We content ourselves with giving some of the synthetic cases
of one noun, a weak neuter a-base, ghar, a house.

Māhārāṣṭrī Prakrit. Apabhraṁśa. Marathi.
Sing.
Nominative gharaṁ gharu ghar
Dative gharassa (genitive) gharaho (genitive) gharās (dative)
Locative gharē gharahi (-hī) gharī̃, gharā
General oblique gharassa (genitive) gharaho (genitive) gharās, gharā
Plur.
Nominative gharāiṁ gharaī̃ gharễ
Locative gharēsu gharahi (-hī) gharī̃
General oblique gharāṇa (genitive) gharahā (genitive) gharẫ

As already stated, in Prakrit the genitive is employed instead of the dative, and thus forms the basis of the
Marathi dative singular. The genitive plural is not used as a dative plural in Marathi, but it is the basis of the
plural general oblique case. The Marathi singular general oblique case is really the same as the Marathi
dative singular, but in the standard form of speech when so used the final s is dropped, gharās, as a general
oblique case, being only found in dialects. This general oblique case is the result of the confusion of the
various oblique cases originally distinguished in Sanskrit and in literary Prakrit. In Apabhraṁśa the genitive
began to usurp the function of all the other cases. It is obvious that if it were regularly employed in so
indeterminate a sense, it would give rise to great confusion. Hence when it was intended to show clearly
what particular case was meant, it became usual to add, to this indeterminate genitive, defining particles
corresponding to the English “of,” “to,” “from,” “by,” &c., which, as in all Indo-Aryan languages they
follow the main word, are called “postpositions.” Before dealing with these, it will be convenient to give the
modern Marathi synthetic declension of the commoner forms of nouns. The only synthetic case which is
now employed in prose is the dative, and this can always be formed from the general oblique case by
adding an s to the end of the word. It is therefore not given in the following table.

Masculine. Feminine. Neuter.
Meaning. Ear. Horse. Gardener. Bed. Fireplace. Mare. House. Horse. Pearl.
Sing.
Nom. kān ghōḍā māḷī khāṭ cūl ghōḍī ghar ghōḍễ motī
Gen. obl. kānā ghōḍyā māḷyā khāṭē cūlī ghōḍī gharā ghōḍyā mōtyā
Plur.
Nom. kān ghōḍễ māḷī khāṭā cūlī ghōḍyā gharễ ghōḍī̃ mōtyễ
Gen. obl. kānẫ ghōḍyẫ māḷyẫ khāṭẫ cūlī ghōḍyẫ gharẫ ghōḍyẫ mōtyẫ

The usual postpositions are:—

Instrumental: nễ, plural nī̃, by. Dative: lā, plural also nā, to or for. Ablative: hūn, ūn, from. Genitive: tsā,
of. Locative: ~t, in. We thus get the following complete modern declension of ghar, a house (neut.):—

Sing. Plur.

Nom. ghar gharễ
Acc. ghar gharễ
Instr. gharānễ gharẫnī̃
Dat. gharās, gharālā gharẫs, gharẫlā, gharẫnā
Abl. gharāhūn, gharūn gharẫhūn
Gen. gharātsā gharẫtsa
Loc. gharẫt gharẫt

The accusative is usually the same as the nominative, but when definiteness is required the dative is
employed instead. The termination nễ, with its plural nī̃, is, as explained in the article Gujarati, really the
oblique form, by origin a locative, of the nā or nō, employed in Gujarati to form the genitive. The suffix nā
of the dative plural is derived from the same word. Here it is probably a corruption of the Apabhraṁśa nāu
or naho. The postposition lā is probably a corruption of the Sanskrit lābhē, Apabhraṁśa lahi, for the benefit
(of). As regards the ablative, we have in old Marathi poetry a form corresponding to gharāhu-niyẫ, which
explains the derivation. Gharāhu is a by-form of the Prakrit synthetic ablative gharāu, to which niyā,
another oblique form of nā, is added to define the meaning. The locative termination ~t is a contraction of
the Pr. antō, Skr. antar, within.

The genitive gharātsā is really an adjective meaning “belonging to the house,” and agrees in gender,
number and case with the noun which is possessed. Thus:

māḷyātsā ghōḍā, the gardener’s horse. māḷyācē ghōḍē, the gardener’s horses.

māḷyācī ghōḍī, the gardener’s mare. māḷyācyā ghōḍyā, the gardener’s mares.

māḷyācễ ghōḍễ, the gardener’s horse (neut.). māḷyācī̃ ghōḍī, the gardener’s horses (neut.).

The suffix tsā, cī, cễ, is derived from the Sanskrit suffix tyakas, Pr. caō, which is used in much the same
sense. In Sanskrit it may be added either to the locative or to the unmodified base of the word to which it is
attached, thus, ghōṭakē-tyakas or ghōṭaka-tyakas. Similarly in Marathi, while it is usually added to the
general oblique base, it may also be added to the unmodified noun, in which case it has a more distinctly
adjectival force. The use of tsā has been influenced by the fact that the Sanskrit word kṛtyas, Pr. kiccaō, also
takes the same form in Marathi. As explained in the article Hindostani, synonyms of this word are used in
other Indo-Aryan languages to form suffixes of the genitive.7

Strong adjectives, including genitives, can be declined like substantives, and agree with the qualified
noun in gender, number and case. When the substantive is in an oblique case, the adjective is put into the
general oblique form without any defining postposition, which is added to the substantive alone. Weak
adjectives are not inflected in modern prose, but are inflected in poetry. As in other Indo-Aryan languages,
comparison is effected by putting the noun with which comparison is made in the ablative case.

The pronouns closely follow the Prakrit originals. The origin of all these is discussed in the article
Hindostani, and the account need not be repeated here. As usual in these languages, there is no pronoun of
the third person, its place being supplied by the demonstratives. The following are the principal pronominal
forms:—

mī̃, I, instr. mī̃, myā, dat. malā, obl. madz; āmhī, we, instr. āmhī̃, obl. āmhẫ; mādzhā, my, of me; āmtsā,
our, of us.

tū̃, thou, instr. tū̃, twā, dat. tulā, obl. tudz; tumhī, you, instr. tumhī̃, obl. tumhẫ; tudzhā, thy, of thee;
tumtsā, your, of you.

āpan, self, obl. āpaṇa, gen. āpalā. This is also employed as an honorific pronoun of the second person,
and, in addition, to mean “we including you.”

hā, this, fem., hī, neut. hễ; tō, he, that, fem. tī, neut. tễ; dzō, who, fem., jī, neut. jễ.

kōṇ, who? kāy, what? obl. kāśa; kōṇī, any one; kẫhī, anything.

In all these the plural is employed honorifically instead of the singular.

Conjugation.—In Prakrit (q.v.) the complicated system of Sanskrit conjugation had already disappeared,
and all verbs fell into two classes, the first, or a-, conjugation, and the second, or ē-, conjugation, in which
the ē represents the aya of the Sanskrit tenth conjugation and of causal and denominative verbs. Marathi
follows Prakrit in this respect and has two conjugations. The first, corresponding to the Prakrit a-class, as a
rule consists of intransitive verbs, and the second, corresponding to the e- or causal class, of transitive
verbs, but there are numerous exceptions. Verbs whose roots end in vowels or in h belong partly to one and
partly to the other conjugation. These conjugations differ only in the present and past participles and in the
tenses formed from them. Here, in the first conjugation an a, and in the second conjugation an i, is inserted
between the base and the termination.

The only original Prakrit tenses which have survived in Marathi are the present and the imperative. The
present has lost its original meaning and is now a habitual past. It is also the base of the Marathi future.
These three tenses, the habitual past, the imperative and the future, are conjugated as follows. They should
be compared with the corresponding forms in the article Prakrit. The verb selected is the root uṭh, rise, of
the first conjugation.

Habitual past
Imperative. Future.
(old present),
Person. Let me rise. I shall rise.
I used to rise.
Sing. Plural. Sing. Plural. Sing. Plural.
1 uṭhễ uṭhū̃ uṭhū̃ uṭhū̃ uṭhēn uṭhū̃
2 uṭhēs uṭhẫ uṭh uṭhā uṭhaśīl uṭhāl
3 uṭhē uṭhat uṭhō uṭhōt uṭhēl uṭhatīl

As in Rajasthani, Bihari and the Indo-Aryan language of Nepal (see Pahari), the future is formed by
adding l, or in the first person singular n, to the old present. In the second person singular the l has been
added to a form derived from the Pr. uṭṭhasi, which is also the origin of the old present uṭhēs. Some
scholars, however, see in uṭhaśī a derivation of the Prakrit future uṭṭhihisi, thou shalt arise, and a confusion
of the Prakrit present and future is quite possible.

The remaining tenses are modern forms derived from the participles. The verbal nouns, participles and
infinitives are as follows:—

Prakrit Marathi Marathi
(First First Second
Conjugation). Conjugation. Conjugation.

Verbal Noun uṭṭhaṇīaṁ uṭhaṇễ, the act of rising. māraṇễ, the act of killing.
Infinitive uṭṭhiuṁ uṭhū̃, to rise. mārū̃, to kill.
Present Participle uṭṭhantō, uṭṭhantaō uṭhat, uṭhatā, rising. mārīt, māritā, killing.
Past Participle uṭṭhiallaō uṭhalā, risen. mārilā, killed.
Future Participle Active uṭṭhaṇaaḍō uṭhaṇār, about to rise. māraṇār, about to kill.
Future Participle Passive uṭṭhiavvaō uṭhāwā, about to be risen. mārāwā, about to be killed.
Conjunctive Participle uṭṭhiu uṭhūn, having risen. mārūn, having killed.

The only form that requires notice is that of the conjunctive participle. It is derived from the
Apabhrarṁśa form uṭṭhiu, to which the dative suffix n (old Marathi ni, niyẫ) has been added.

Various tenses are formed by adding personal suffixes to the present, past or future passive participle.
When the subject of the verb is in the nominative the tense so formed agrees with it in gender, number and
person. We may note four such tenses: a present, uṭhatō̃, I rise; a past, uṭhalō̃, I rose; past conditional, uṭhatō̃,
had I risen; and a subjunctive, uṭhāwā, I should rise. In the present, the terminations are relics of the verb
substantive, and in the other tenses of the personal pronouns. In these latter, as there is no pronoun of the
third person, the third persons have no termination, but are simply the unmodified participle. We thus get
the present and the past conjugated as follows, with a masculine subject:—

Present, I rise. Past, I rose.
Singular. Plural. Singular. Plural.
1 uṭhatō̃ uṭhatō uṭhalō̃ uṭhalō̃
2 uṭhatōs uṭhatẫ uṭhalās uṭhalẫ
3 uṭhatō uṭhatāt uṭhalā uṭhalē

The feminine and neuter forms differ from the above: thus, uṭhatēs, thou (fem.) risest; uṭhalīs, thou (fem.)
didst rise; and so on for the other persons and for the neuter.

It will be observed that, in the case of transitive verbs, while the present participle is active, the past and
future passive participles are passive in meaning. The same is the case with the future passive participle of
the intransitive verb. In tenses, therefore, formed from these participles the sentence must be construed
passively. The subject must be put into the instrumental case, and the participle inflected to agree with the
object. If the object is not expressed, or, as is sometimes the case, is expressed in the guise of a kind of ethic
dative, the participle is construed impersonally, and is employed in the neuter form. Thus (present tense)
mulagā (nom. masc.) pōthī vācitō, the boy reads a book, but (past tense) mulagyānễ (instrumental pōthī
(nom. fem.) vācilī (fem.) the boy read a book, literally, by-the-boy a-book was-read; or mulagyānễ pōthīlā
(dative) vācilễ (neuter), the boy read the book, literally, by-the-boy, with-reference-to-the-book, it-
(impersonal)-was-read. Similarly in the subjunctive formed from the future passive participle, mulagyānễ
pōthī vācāwī, the boy should read a book (by-the-boy a-book is-to-be-read) or mulagyānễ pōthīlā vācāwễ,
the boy should read the book [by-the-boy with-reference-to-the-book, it (impersonal)-is-to-be-read]. As an
example of the subjunctive of an intransitive verb, we have twā uṭhāwễ, by-thee it-is-to-be-risen, thou
shouldst rise. As in intransitive verbs the passive sense is not so strong, in their case the tense may also be
used actively, as in tū̃ uṭhāwās, thou shouldst rise, lit., thou (art) to-be-risen. It will be noted that when a
participle is used passively it takes no personal suffix.

We have seen that the present tense is formed by compounding the present participle with the verb
substantive. Further tenses are similarly made by suffixing, without compounding, various tenses of the
verb substantive to the various participles. Thus mī uṭhat āhễ, I am rising; mī uṭhat hōtō̃, I was rising; myā
uṭhāvễ hōtễ (impersonal construction), I should have risen. In the case of tenses formed from the past
participle, the auxiliary is appended, not to the participle, but to the past tense, as in mī̃ uṭhalō̃ āhē, I have
risen; myā mārilā āhē (personal passive construction) or myā mārilễ āhē (impersonal passive construction),
I have killed. Similarly mī uṭhalō̃ hōtō̃ (active construction), I had risen. The usual forms of the present and
past of the verb substantive are:—

Present, I am. Past, I was (masc).
Singular. Plural. Singular. Plural.
1 āhễ āhễ hōtō̃ hōtō̃
2 āhēs āhẫ hōtās hōtẫ
3 āhē āhēt hōtā hōtē

The past changes for gender, but the present is immutable in this respect. Ahễ is usually considered to be
a descendant of the Sanskrit asmi, I am,8 while hōtō̃ is derived from the Pr. hoṁtaō, the present participle of
what corresponds to the Skr. root bhū, become.

A potential passive and a causal are formed by adding av to the root of a simple verb. The former follows
the first, or intransitive, and the latter the second or transitive conjugation. The potential passive of a neuter
verb is necessarily construed impersonally. The causal verb denotes indirect agency; thus, karanễ, to do,
karavanễ, to cause a person to do; tyācyā-kaḍūn myā tễ karavilễ, I caused him to do that, literally, by-
means-of-him by-me that was-caused-to-be-done. The potential, being passive, has the subject in the dative
(cf. Latin mihi est ludendum) or in the instrumental of the genitive, as in malā (dative), or mājhyānễ (instr.
of mādzhā, of me), uthavatē̃, I can rise, literally, for-me, or by-my-(action), rising-can-be-done. So, Rāmālā,
or Rāmācyānễ, pōthī vācavalī, Rām could read a book (by R. a book could be read).

Several verbs are irregular. These must be learnt from the grammars. Here we may mention hōṇễ, to
become, past participle dzhālā; yēṇễ, to come, past participle ālā; and dzāṇễ, to go, past participle gēlā.
There are also numerous compound verbs. One of these, making a passive, is formed by conjugating the
verb dzāṇễ, to go, with the past participle of the principal verb. Thus, mārilā dzātō, he is being killed,
literally, he goes killed.

Literature.—As elsewhere in India, the modern vernacular literature of the Maratha country arose under
the influence of the religious reformation inaugurated by Rāmānuja early in the 12th century. He and his
followers taught devotion to a personal deity instead of the pantheism hitherto prevalent. The earliest writer
of whom we have any record is Nāmdēv (13th century), whose hymns in honour of Vithoba, a personal
form of Vishnu, have travelled far beyond the home of their writer, and are even found in the Sikh Àdi
Granth. Dnyānōbā, a younger contemporary, wrote a paraphrase of the Sanskrit Bhagavad Gītā, which is
still much admired. Passing over several intermediate writers we come to the period of the warrior Sivaji,
the opponent of Aurangzeb. He was a disciple of Rāmdās (1608-1681), who exercised great influence over
him, and whose Dāsbōdh, a work on religious duty, is a classic. Contemporary with Rāmdās and Sivaji was
Tukārām (1608-1649), a Śūdra by caste, and yet the greatest writer in the language. He began life as a petty
shopkeeper, and being unsuccessful both in his business and in his family relations, he abandoned the world
and became a wandering ascetic. His Abhangs or “unbroken” hymns, probably so called from their

indefinite length and loose, flowing metre, are famous in the country of his birth. They are fervent, but
though abounding in excellent morality, do not rise to any great height as poetry. Other Marathi poets who
may be mentioned are Śrīdhar (1678-1728), the most copious of all, who translated the Bhāgavata Purāna,
and the learned Mayūra or Mōrōpant (1729-1794), whose works smell too much of the lamp to satisfy
European standards of criticism. Mahīpati (1715-1790) was an imitator of Tukārām, but his chief
importance rests on the fact that he collected the popular traditions about national saints, and was thus the
author of the Acta sanctorum of the Marathas. Lāvaṇīs, or erotic lyrics, by various writers, are popular, but
are often more passionate than decent. Another branch of Marathi literature is composed of Pāwāḍās or
war-ballads, mostly by nameless poets, which are sung everywhere throughout the country. There is a small
prose literature, consisting of narratives of historical events (the so-called Bakhars), moral maxims and
popular tales.

In the 19th century the facilities of the printing press are responsible for a great mass of published matter.
Most of the best works have been written in English by learned natives, upon whom the methods of
European scholarship have exercised more influence than elsewhere in India, and have given rise to a happy
combination of western science with Oriental lore. No vernacular authors of outstanding merit have
appeared during the last century.

Konkani once had a literature of its own, which is said to have been destroyed by the Inquisition at Goa.
Temples and manuscripts were burnt wholesale. Under Roman Catholic auspices a new literature arose, the
earliest writer being an Englishman, Thomas Stephens (Thomaz Estevão), who came to Goa in 1579, wrote
the first Konkani grammar, and died there in 1619. Amongst other works, he was the author of a Konkani
paraphrase of the New Testament in metrical form, which has been several times reprinted and is still a
favourite work with the native Christians. Since his time there has grown up a considerable body of
Christian literature from the pens of Portuguese missionaries and native converts.

Authorities.—Marathi is fortunate in possessing the best dictionary of any modern Indian language, J. T.
Molesworth’s (2nd ed., Bombay, 1857). Navalkar’s (3rd ed., Bombay, 1894) is the best grammar. The
earliest students of Marathi were the Portuguese, who were familiar only with the language as spoken on
the coast, i.e. with the standard dialect of the northern Konkan and with Konkani. They have since devoted
themselves to these two forms of speech. For the former, reference may be made to the Grammatica da
lingua Concani no dialecto do norte, by J. F. da Cunha Rivara (Goa, 1858). For Konkani proper, see A. F.
X. Maffei’s Grammar (Mangalore, 1882) and Dictionaries (ibid., 1883). These are in English. Monsenhor
S. R. Dalgado is the author of a Konkan-Portuguese Dictionary (Bombay, 1893).

For further information regarding Marathi in general, see the list of authorities under Indo-Aryan
Languages. For accounts of Marathi literature, see the preface to Molesworth’s Dictionary; also J. Murray
Mitchell’s “The Chief Marathi Poets” in Transactions of the Congress of Orientalists, London, 1892, i. 282
sqq., and ch. viii. of M. G. Ranade’s Rise of the Maratha Power (Bombay, 1900). For Konkani literature,
see J. Gerson da Cunha’s “Materials for the History of Oriental Studies among the Portuguese,” in the
Proceedings of the Fourth International Congress of Orientalists, ii. 179 sqq. (Florence, 1881). A full
account of Marathi, given in great detail, will be found in vol. vii. of the Linguistic Survey of India
(Calcutta, 1905). (G. A. Gr.)

1 The name is sometimes spelt Mahrāthī, with an h before the r, but, according to a phonetic law of the Aryan languages of western India,
this is incorrect. The original h in “Māhārāṣṭrī,” from which the word is derived, is liable to elision on coming between two vowels.

2 Shastri Vrajlal Kalidas, quoted by Beames in Comparative Grammar, i. 102.

3 See B. A. Gupte in Indian Antiquary (1905), xxxiv. 27.

4 For details see Dr Sten Konow’s article on Māhārāṣṭrī and Marāṭhī in Indian Antiquary (1903), xxxii. 180 seq.

5 For the explanation of these terms see Indo-Aryan Languages.

6 Abbreviations: Skr. = Sanskrit. Pr. = Māhārāṣṭrī Prakrit. M. = Marathi.

7 Fuller information regarding all the above postpositions will be found in G. A. Grierson’s article “On Certain Suffixes in the Modern
Indo-Aryan Vernaculars,” on pp. 473 seq. of the Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung for 1903.

8 See, however, Hoernle, Comparative Grammar, p. 364.

MARATHON,, a plain on the N.E. coast of Attica, divided from
the plain of Athens by the range of Pentelicus; it contained four villages—
Marathon, Probalinthos, Tricorythos and Oenoe—which originally formed
an independent tetrapolis and in historical times still upheld peculiar rites
and legendary associations, chiefly connected with Heracles and Theseus.
In the 6th century b.c. it served as a base for Peisistratus (q.v.), who owned
much property in that district, for securing the rest of Attica. The plain
derives its fame mainly from the battle in which the Athenians and
Plataeans defeated the Persians (490 b.c.). The Persian force had been sent
by King Darius to punish the Athenians for previous interferences in Asia
and to restore their tyrant Hippias. It was probably by advice of the latter
that the generals Datis and Artaphernes landed their troops, numbering
perhaps 50,000, at Marathon. The Athenians, on the recommendation of
their strategus Miltiades, resolved to meet this force in the open field, and
sent out their full levy of 9000 heavy infantry under the polemarch
Callimachus. They were joined on the way by 1000 Plataeans, but were
disappointed of the assistance which they expected from Sparta. From their
station at the head of the Vrana valley, which slopes down to Marathon
plain, the Athenians for some days observed the Persian army, which gave
no sign of proceeding to attack. After some waiting, Miltiades, who seems
throughout to have played a more prominent part than his superior
Callimachus, drew up the Athenian army for battle and charged down upon
the enemy, whose line was formed on the level about a mile distant. The

Athenian wings, whose formation had been made specially deep, broke the
opposing divisions by their impact; the centre was at first overborne by the
superior weight of the native Persians, but ultimately was relieved by the
victorious wings, which closed in upon the Persian centre. The Persians
were thereupon driven back into the sea all along the line, and, although the
majority regained their ships, no less than 6400 were left dead, as against
192 Athenians. The Persian fleet, of which perhaps a detachment had been
sent on before the battle, now sailed round Cape Sunium in order to effect a
landing at Phalerum, close by Athens, and with the help of traitors within
the walls to take the city by surprise. But Miltiades, who had suspected
some plot all along, and had lately been warned by a signal on Mt
Pentelicus which he interpreted as a message to the Persians, marched back
the victorious army in time to defend Athens. The enemy, upon noticing his
presence, did not venture a second disembarcation and retired straightway
out of Greek waters. The details of the battle, and the Persian plan of
campaign, are not made clear by our ancient sources, but reconstructions
have been attempted by numerous modern authorities.
(M. O. B. C.)

The tumulus or “Soros” was excavated by M. Stais in 1891 and 1892. A
slight previous excavation had brought to light some prehistoric
implements, and it was supposed that the mound had no connexion with the
battle; but it has now been discovered that the presence of those prehistoric
objects was accidental. Underlying the mound was found a stratum about
85 ft. long by 20 broad, consisting of a layer of sand, above which lay the
ashes and bones of many corpses; together with these were the remains of
many lecythi and other vases, some of them contemporary with the Persian
wars, some of them of much earlier style, and probably taken in the
emergency from neighbouring cemeteries. It is conjectured with some
probability that a large vase containing ashes may have been used as the
burial urn of one of the Athenian generals who fell. There was also, in the

middle of the stratum, a trench for funeral offerings about 30 ft. by 3; it
contained bones of beasts, with ashes and fragments of vases. There can
therefore be no doubt that the tumulus was piled up to commemorate the
Athenians who fell in the battle, and that it marks the place where the
carnage was thickest. A selection from the contents of the tumulus has been
placed in the National Museum at Athens.
(E. Gr.)

See Herodotus vi. 102-117; W. M. Leake, The Topography of Athens
(London, 1841), ii. 203-227; R. W. Macan, Herodotus, iv.-vi. (London,
1895), ii. 149-248; G. B. Grundy, The Great Persian War (London,
1901), pp. 145-194; J. A. Munro in Journal of Hellenic Studies, 1899,
pp. 186-197. For the tumulus, Ἀρχαιολογικὸν Δελτίον 1891, pp. 67
sqq. See also Miltiades.

MARAZION, a small seaport in the St Ives parliamentary division
of Cornwall, England, on the shore of Mount’s Bay, 2 m. E. of Penzance,
served by the Great Western railway. Pop. (1901), 1251. A causeway of
boulders and pebbles, thrown up by the sea and passable at low tide, unites
Marazion with the insular St Michael’s Mount (q.v.). The church of St
Hilary, destroyed by fire in 1853, had a very fine spire, which has been
faithfully reproduced in the restored building. Unusual archaeological
interest attaches to the churchyard. Its inscribed stones date from the 4th
century, one being in honour of Constantine the Great. Another has Cornish

lettering, which can no longer be deciphered; and there are British and
Roman crosses. Market gardening and fishing are the main industries.

The charter attributed to Robert count of Mortain, granting lands and
liberties to St Michael’s Mount, opposite Marazion, included a market on
Thursdays. This appears to have been held from the first on the mainland.
From it is probably derived the Marghasbigan (Parvum Forum) of the
earlier and the Marghasyewe or Marketjew (Forum Jovis) of the later
charters. It may be added that a Jewish origin has been ascribed to the place
from the name Marketjew. It is certain that Richard king of the Romans
provided that the three fairs, on the two feasts of St Michael and at Mid-
Lent, and the three markets which had hitherto been held by the priors of St
Michael’s Mount on land not their own at Marghasbighan, should in future
be held on their own land at Marchadyou. He transferred in fact the fairs
and markets from the demesne lands of the Bloyous in Marazion to those of
the prior. To remedy the loss incurred by this measure Ralph Bloyou in
1331 procured for himself and his heirs a market on Mondays and a fair on
the vigil, feast and morrow of St Andrew at Marghasyon. In Leland’s time
the market was held at Marhasdeythyow (Forum Jovis), and both Norden
(1582) and Carew (1602) tell us that Marcajewe signifies the Thursday’s
market, which, whether etymologically sound or not, shows that the prior’s
market had prevailed over its rival. In 1595 Queen Elizabeth granted to
Marazion a charter of incorporation. This ratified the grant of St Andrew’s
fair, provided for another on the Feast of St Barnabas and established a
market on Saturdays. The corporation was to consist of a mayor, 8 aldermen
and 12 capital burgesses. This corporation continued to administer the
affairs of the borough until it was dissolved under the Municipal
Corporations Act in 1835, when the property belonging to it was vested in
charity commissioners. The chairman of the commissioners retains
possession of the regalia. Of the fairs only the Michaelmas fair has survived
and all the markets have gone. It is frequently stated that Marazion had

formerly the right of returning two members to parliament, but that owing
to its inability to pay the members’ expenses the right was lost. Under the
Commonwealth an attempt was made to secure or recover the right, and two
members are said to have been returned, but they were not allowed to take
their seats. Remains of an ancient bronze furnace, discovered near the town,
tend to prove that tin-smelting was practised here at an early period.
Marazion was once a flourishing town, and owed its prosperity to the
throng of pilgrims who came to visit St Michael’s Mount. During the first
half of the 16th century it was twice plundered; first by the French, and later
by the Cornish rebels. The rise and progress of the neighbouring borough of
Penzance in the 17th century was the undoing of Marazion.

MARBLE (from Lat. marmar, Gr. μάρμαρος, shining stone), a term
applied to any limestone or dolomite which is sufficiently close in texture to
admit of being polished. Many other ornamental stones—such as
serpentine, alabaster and even granite—are sometimes loosely designated
marble, but by accurate writers the term is invariably restricted to those
crystalline and compact varieties of carbonate of lime (occasionally with
carbonate of magnesia) which, when polished, are applicable to purposes of
decoration. The crystalline structure is typically shown in statuary marble.
A fractured surface of this stone displays a multitude of sparkling facets,
which are the rhombohedral cleavage-planes of the component grains. The
beautiful lustre of polished statuary marble is due to the light penetrating
for a short distance into the rock and then suffering reflection at the surfaces

of the deeper-lying crystals. The durability of marble in a dry atmosphere or
when protected from rain renders it a valuable building stone (q.v.); on the
other hand, when exposed to the weather or the acid atmosphere of large
cities, its surface readily crumbles.

Statuary and Economic Marbles.—Among statuary marbles the first
place may be assigned to the famous Pentelic marble, the material in which
Pheidias, Praxiteles, and other Greek sculptors executed their principal
works. The characteristics of this stone are well seen in the Elgin marbles,
which were removed from the Parthenon at Athens, and are now at the
British Museum. The marble was derived from the quarries of Mount
Pentelicus in Attica. Several large buildings have recently been constructed
with this marble in London. The neighbouring mountain of Hymettus
likewise yielded marbles, but these were neither so pure in colour nor so
fine in texture as those of Pentelicus. Parian marble, another stone much
used by Greek sculptors and architects, was quarried in the isle of Paros,
chiefly at Mount Marpessa. It is called by ancient writers lychnites (from
the Gr. λύχνος, a lamp) in allusion to the fact that the quarries were worked
by the light of lamps. The Venus de’ Medici is a notable example of work in
this material. Carrara marble is better known than any of the Greek marbles,
inasmuch as it constitutes the stone invariably employed by the best
sculptors of the present day. This marble occurs abundantly in the Apuan
Alps, an offshoot of the Apennines, and is largely worked in the
neighbourhood of Carrara, Massa and Serravezza. Stone from this district
was employed in Rome for architectural purposes in the time of Augustus,
but the finer varieties, adapted to the needs of the sculptor, were not
discovered until some time later. It is in Carrara marble that the finest works
of Michelangelo and of Canova are executed. The purest varieties of this
stone are of snow-white colour and of fine saccharoidal texture. Silica is
disseminated through some of the marble, becoming a source of annoyance
to the workman; while occasionally it separates as beautifully pellucid

crystals of quartz known as “Carrara diamonds.” The geological age of the
marbles of the Apuan Alps has been a subject of much dispute, some
geologists regarding them as metamorphosed Triassic, Liassic or Rhaetic
rocks. Much of the common marble is of a bluish colour, and therefore unfit
for statuary purposes; when streaked with blue and grey veins the stone is
known as bardiglio. Curiously enough, the common white marble of
Tuscany comes to England as Sicilian marble—a name probably due to its
having been formerly re-shipped from some port in Sicily.

Although crystalline marbles fit for statuary work are not found to any
extent in Great Britain, the limestones of the Palaeozoic formations yield a
great variety of marbles well suited for architectural purposes. The
Devonian rocks of south Devon are rich in handsome marbles, presenting
great diversity of tint and pattern. Plymouth, Torquay, Ipplepen,
Babbacombe and Chudleigh may be named as the principal localities. Many
of these limestones owe their beauty to the fossil corals which they contain,
and are hence known as “madrepore marbles.”

Of far greater importance than the marbles of the Devonian system are
those of Carboniferous age. It is from the Carboniferous or Mountain
Limestone that British marbles are mainly derived. Marbles of this age are
worked in Derbyshire and Yorkshire, in the neighbourhood of Bristol, in
North Wales, in the Isle of Man, and in various parts of Ireland. One of the
most beautiful of these stones is the “encrinital marble,” a material which
owes its peculiarities to the presence of numerous encrinites, or stone-lilies.
These fossils, when cut in various directions, give a characteristic pattern to
the stone. The joints of the stems and arms are known from their shape as
“wheel-stones,” and the rock itself has been called “entrochal marble.” The
most beautiful varieties are those in which the calcareous fossils appear as
white markings on a ground of grey limestone. In Belgium a black marble
with small sections of crinoid stems is known as petit granit, while in

Derbyshire a similar rock, crowded with fragments of minute encrinites, is
termed “bird’s-eye marble.”

Perhaps the most generally useful marbles yielded by the Carboniferous
system are the black varieties, which are largely employed for chimney-
pieces, vases, and other ornamental objects. The colour of most black
limestone is due to the presence of bituminous matter. Such limestone
commonly emits a fetid odour when struck; and the colour, being of organic
origin, is discharged on calcination. Black marbles, more or less dense in
colour, are quarried in various parts of Ireland, especially at Kilkenny and
near Galway, but the finest kind is obtained from near Ashford in
Derbyshire. From Ashford is also derived a very beautiful stone known as
“rosewood marble.” This is a dense brown laminated limestone, displaying
when polished a handsome pattern somewhat resembling the grain of
rosewood; it occurs in very limited quantity, and is used chiefly for inlaid
work. The black marble of Frosterley, Yorkshire, is another Carboniferous
example which owes its “figure” or pattern to the presence of large corals.

With the rosewood marble may be compared the well-known “landscape
marble” or Cotham stone, an argillaceous limestone with peculiar dendritic
markings, due probably to the infiltration of water containing oxide of
manganese. This limestone occurs in irregular masses near the base of the
White Lias, or uppermost division of the Rhaetic series. It is found
principally in the neighbourhood of Bristol. The arborescent forms depicted
in bluish-grey upon this landscape marble form a marked contrast to the
angular markings of warm brown colour which are seen on slabs of “ruin
marble” from Florence—a stone occasionally known also as landscape
stone, or pietra paesina.

British limestones of Secondary and Tertiary age are not generally
compact enough to be used as marbles, but some of the shelly beds are
employed to a limited extent for decorative purposes. “Ammonite marble”

is a dark brown limestone from the Lower Lias of Somersetshire, crowded
with ammonites, principally A. planicostata. Under the name of Forest
marble, geologists recognize a local division of the Lower Oolitic series, so
named by W. Smith from Wychwood Forest in Oxfordshire, where shelly
limestones occur; and these, though of little economic value, are capable of
being used as rough marbles. But the most important marbles of the
Secondary series are the shelly limestones of the Purbeck formation.
Purbeck marble was a favourite material with medieval architects, who used
it freely for slender clustered columns and for sepulchral monuments. It
consists of a mass of the shells of a fresh-water snail, Paludina carinifera,
embedded in a blue, grey or greenish limestone, and is found in the Upper
Purbeck beds of Swanage in Dorsetshire. Excellent examples of its use may
be seen in Westminster Abbey and in the Temple Church, as well as in the
cathedrals of Salisbury, Winchester, Worcester and Lincoln. Sussex marble
is a very similar stone, occurring in thin beds in the Weald clay, and
consisting largely of the shells of Paludina, principally P. sussexiensis and
P. fluviorum. The altar stones and the episcopal chair in Canterbury
Cathedral are of this material.

Certain calcareous metamorphic rocks frequently form stones which are
sufficiently beautiful to be used for ornamental purposes, and are generally
classed as marbles. Such serpentinous limestones are included by
petrologists under the term “ophicalcite.” The famous verde antico is a rock
of this character. Mona marble is an ophicalcite from the metamorphic
series of the Isle of Anglesey, while the “Irish green” of architects is a
similar rock from Connemara in western Galway. It is notable that some of
the “white marble” of Connemara has been found by W. King and T. H.
Rowney to consist almost wholly of malacolite, a silicate of calcium and
magnesium.

A beautiful marble has been worked to a limited extent in the island of
Tiree, one of the Hebrides, but the quarry appears to be now exhausted.
This Tiree marble is a limestone having a delicate carnelian colour diffused
through it in irregular patches, and containing rounded crystals of sahlite, a
green augitic mineral resembling malacolite in composition.

Many marbles which are prized for the variegated patterns they display
owe these patterns to their formation in concentric zones—such marbles
being in fact stalagmitic deposits of carbonate of lime, sometimes
consisting of aragonite. One of the most beautiful stalagmitic rocks is the
so-called onyx marble of Algeria. This stone was largely used in the
buildings of Carthage and Rome, but the quarries which yielded it were not
known to modern sculptors until 1849, when it was rediscovered near
Oued-Abdallah. The stone is a beautifully translucent material, delicately
clouded with yellow and brown, and is greatly prized by French workmen.
Large deposits of a very fine onyx-like marble, similar to the Algerian
stone, have been worked at Técali, about 35 miles from the city of Mexico.
Among other stalagmitic marbles, mention may be made of the well-known
Gibraltar stone, which is often worked into models of cannon and other
ornamental objects. This stalagmite is much deeper in colour and less
translucent than the onyx marbles of Algeria and Mexico. A richly tinted
stalagmitic stone worked in California is known as Californian marble. It is
worth noting that the “alabaster” of the ancients was stalagmitic carbonate
of lime, and that this stone is therefore called by mineralogists “Oriental
alabaster” in order to distinguish it from our modern “alabaster,” which is a
sulphate, and not a carbonate, of lime. Gypsum capable of taking a polish is
found at Fauld in Staffordshire and in Italy and Spain.

The brown and yellow colours which stalagmitic marbles usually present
are due to the presence of oxide of iron. This colouring matter gives special
characters to certain stones, such as the giallo antico, or antique yellow

marble of the Italian antiquaries. Siena marble is a reddish mottled stone
obtained from the neighbourhood of Siena in Tuscany; and a somewhat
similar stone is found in King’s County, Ireland. True red marble is by no
means common, but it does occur, of bright and uniform colour, though in
very small quantity, in the Carboniferous limestone of Derbyshire and
north-east Staffordshire. The red marble called rosso antico is often
confounded with the porfiro rosso antico, which is really a mica-hornblende
porphyrite owing its red colour to the mineral withamite.

Fire marble is the name given to a brown shelly limestone containing
ammonites and other fossil shells, which present a brilliant display of
iridescent colours, like those of precious opal. It occurs in rocks of Liassic
age at the lead-mines of Bleiberg in Carinthia, and is worked into snuff-
boxes and other small objects. By mineralogists it is often termed
lumachella, an Italian name which may, however, be appropriately applied
to any marble which contains small shells.

The quarries of France, Belgium, Italy and Spain, not to mention less
important localities, yield a great diversity of marbles, and almost each
stone bears a distinctive name, often of trivial meaning; but in this article it
is impossible to enumerate the local names used by marble-workers in
different countries to distinguish the various stones which pass under their
hands.

America possesses some valuable deposits of marble, which in the
eastern States have been extensively worked. The crystalline limestones of
western New England furnish an abundance of white and grey marble,
while a beautiful material fit for statuary work has been quarried near
Rutland in Vermont. A grey bird’s-eye marble is obtained from central New
York, and the greyish clouded limestones of Thomaston in Maine have been
extensively quarried. Of the variegated and coloured marbles, perhaps the
most beautiful are those from the northern part of Vermont, in the

neighbourhood of Lake Champlain. A fine brecciated marble is found on
the Maryland side of the Potomac, below Point of Rocks. Among the
principal localities for black marble may be mentioned Shoreham in
Vermont and Glen Falls in New York. In 1908 the American States
producing marble were, in order of value, Vermont, Georgia, Tennessee,
New York, Massachusetts, Alabama, Pennsylvania, Maryland, California,
Colorado, Alaska, N. Carolina, Kentucky, New Mexico, Utah, Missouri and
Idaho. In Canada the crystalline limestones of the pre-Cambrian series yield
beautiful marbles.

In India we find important quarries at Makrana in Rajputana,—a locality
which is said to have yielded the marble for the famous Taj Mahal at Agra.
In the valley of the Nerbudda, near Jabalpur, there is a large development of
marble. The white marble which is used for the delicately pierced screens
called jalee work is obtained from near Raialo, in Ulwar.
(F. W. R.*)

Petrography.—Marbles are uniformly crystalline, and hence have no
bedding or schistosity which would tend to make them fissile, but are
entirely massive and free from grain. The microstructure of pure
marble is comparatively simple. In thin sections they are seen to be
built up of somewhat rounded grains of calcite, fitting closely together
in a mosaic; very rarely do any grains show traces of crystalline form.
They are colourless and transparent, and are usually traversed by a
lattice-work of sharply defined cleavage cracks, which correspond to
the rhombohedral faces. In polarized light the colours are pinkish or
greenish white, or in very thin sections iridescent because the mineral
has a very strong double refraction. They may also be crossed by bars
or stripes, each of which indicates a twin plate, for the crystals are
usually polysynthetic. This twinning may be produced by pressure
acting either during the crystallization of the rock or at a later period.

The purest marbles generally contain some accessory minerals, and
in many of these rocks they form a considerable proportion of the
whole mass. The commonest are quartz in small rounded grains, scales
of colourless or pale yellow mica (muscovite and phlogopite), dark
shining flakes of graphite and small crystals of pyrites or iron oxides.
Even fine Carrara marble leaves a residue of this sort when dissolved
in acid. Many marbles contain other minerals which are usually
silicates of lime or magnesia. The list of these accessories is a very
large one. Augite is very frequent and may be white (malacolite) or
pale green (coccolite, sahlite, diopside); hornblende occurs as white
bladed tremolite or pale green actinolite; feldspars may be present also,
such as orthoclase, or more frequently some plagioclase such as albite,
labradorite and anorthite; scapolite (or wernerite); various kinds of
garnet; vesuvianite, spinel, forsterite, periclase, brucite, talc, zoisite and
epidote, chondrodite, biotite, datolite, sphene and apatite may be
mentioned as typical accessory minerals. The presence of metalliferous
minerals such as galena, grey or red silver ores, zinc blende,
antimonite, chalcopyrite, molybdenite, cassiterite, usually indicates
impregnation by ore-bearing solutions, especially if these substances
occur in workable quantities. The rubies of Burma are found in
crystalline limestones and are constantly accompanied by precious
spinel (or balas-ruby).

These minerals represent impurities in the original limestone which
crystallized at the time that the marble became crystalline. The silicates
derive their silica mainly from sand or infiltrated siliceous deposits; the
alumina represents an admixture of clay; the iron came from limonite
or hematite in the original state of the rock. Where the silicates bulk
largely because the original limestone was highly impure, all the
carbonic acid may be driven out and replaced by silica during the
process of recrystallization. The rock is then a calc-silicate rock, hard,

tough, flinty and no longer readily soluble in acids. They are
sometimes fine-grained hornstones (known as calc-silicate hornfelses).
Where white minerals predominate (wollastonite, tremolite, feldspar)
these rocks may have a close resemblance to marbles, but often they
are green from the abundance of green augites and amphiboles, or
brown (when garnet and vesuvianite are present in quantity) or yellow
(with epidote, chondrodite or sphene). Decomposition induces further
changes in colour owing to the formation of green or yellow
serpentine, pale green talc, red hematite, and brown limonite. Most of
the coloured or variegated crystalline marbles have originated in this
manner. Often bands of calc-silicate rock alternate with bands of
marble, and they may be folded or bent; in other cases, nodules and
patches of silicates occur in a matrix of pure marble. Earth movements
may shatter the rocks, producing fissures afterwards filled with veins of
calcite; in this way the beautiful brecciated or veined marbles are
produced. Sometimes the broken fragments are rolled and rounded by
the flow of the marble under pressure and pseudo-conglomerates or
“crush conglomerates” result. In other cases the banding of the marble
indicates the original bedding of the calcareous sediments. Crystalline
limestones which contain much mica may be called cipollins; in them
quartz, garnet and hornblende often also occur. The ophicalcites are
marbles containing much serpentine, which has been formed by the
decomposition of forsterite, olivine or augite. The much-discussed
Eozoon, at one time supposed to be the earliest known fossil and found
in Archaean limestones in Canada, is now known to be inorganic and to
belong to the ophicalcites.

Many marbles, probably all of them, are metamorphosed limestones.
The passage of limestones rich in fossils into true marbles as they
approach great crystalline intrusions of granite is a phenomenon seen
in many parts of the world; occasionally the recrystallization of the

rock has not completely obliterated the organic structures (e.g. at
Carrara and at Bergen in Norway). The agencies which have induced
the metamorphism are heat and pressure, the heat arising from the
granite and the pressure from overlying masses of rock, for these
changes took place before the granite cooled and while it was still
deeply buried beneath the surface. In 1806 Sir James Hall described a
series of experiments proving this. He enclosed chalk in a gun-barrel
securely plugged and heated it to a high temperature in a furnace.
Carbonic acid was given off by the chalk and produced a great pressure
in the interior of the tube. After slow cooling the mass was found to
have become converted into granular crystalline marble. As rocks
which have undergone changes of this kind are commonest in the
oldest and deepest layers of the earth’s crust, most marbles are
Palaeozoic or pre-Cambrian. They occur very often with mica schists,
phyllites, &c., which were beds of clay alternating with the original
limestone. Formerly it was supposed that some of these marbles were
crystalline sediments or even igneous rocks, but the tendency of
modern geology is to assume that they were ordinary limestones, many
of which may have been fossiliferous. In regions where the
sedimentary rocks have been converted into schists, gneisses and
granulites, the limestones are represented by calc schists, cipollins and
marbles. Often no granite or other intrusive rock is present which may
be regarded as the cause of the metamorphism. The marbles are often
banded or schistose, and under the microscope show crushing and
deformation of the component crystals, such as would have been
produced by the earth pressures which accompany rock-folding. These
crush structures have been obtained experimentally in marbles
subjected to great pressures in steel cylinders. In the recrystallization of
these limestones the direct heating action of igneous intrusions may
have played no part, but the rise of temperature and increase of

pressure due to the folding of great rock masses have probably been the
operating causes. This type of metamorphism has been distinguished
by the name marmarosis (Sir A. Geikie, Text Book of Geology, 1882).

For descriptions of ancient marbles see F. Corsi, Delle pietre antiche
(Rome, 1845); M. W. Porter, What Rome was built with (Oxford,
1907), and for marbles in general consult E. Hull, Building and
Ornamental Stones (1872); G. P. Merrill, Stones for Building and
Decoration (3rd ed., 1905, New York). (J. S. F.)

MARBLEHEAD, a township of Essex county, Massachusetts,
U.S.A., occupying a rocky promontory on Massachusetts Bay, about 16 m.
N. of Boston. Pop. (1890), 8202; (1900), 7582; (1905), 7209; (1910), 7338.
Area, about 4 sq. m. Marblehead is served by the Boston & Maine railroad,
and by electric railways connecting with Salem, Lynn and Boston. It is a
quaint old town, with a number of houses dating back to the 17th and 18th
centuries. Among the older buildings are the Lee mansion (1768), St
Michael’s church (P. E., 1714), and the old town-hall (1727), sometimes
called Marblehead’s “Cradle of Liberty.” Abbot Hall (1877), the municipal
building, also contains the public library and several noteworthy paintings,
including “The Spirit of ’76” or “Yankee Doodle” by Archibald M. Willard.
The post office and custom-house was completed in 1904. There are several
parks (Crocker, Fort Sewall, Seaside, and Fountain), and an old burying-
ground, in which many of the early settlers and a number of soldiers of the
War of Independence (including General John Glover) are buried; and a

granite monument near the railway station commemorates the taking of the
British supply and powder ship “Hope” off Marblehead in 1776 by Captain
James Mugford, who was killed during the fight. The commodious harbour,
nearly landlocked, is formed by a rocky peninsula known as Marblehead
Neck. On this are the club-houses of the Eastern and Corinthian Yacht
clubs; and Marblehead is a popular yachting centre. The manufacture of
children’s shoes is the principal industry. Shipbuilding, once important, has
been superseded by yacht and launch construction.

Marblehead, originally a part of Salem, known as Marble Harbor, was
settled about 1629 by English emigrants (probably mostly from
Lincolnshire and Devonshire); later (after about 1700) many emigrants
from the Channel Islands settled here, and to them the dialectical
peculiarities of Marblehead have often (perhaps mistakenly) been
attributed. Marblehead was separately incorporated as a town in 1649. In
the colonial period Marblehead was an important commercial port, and at
one time was one of the most populous places in Massachusetts. After the
passage of the Boston Port Bill (1774) it was made the port of entry instead
of Boston, but its merchants refused to take advantage of this opportunity
and patriotically invited the Boston merchants to use their wharves and
warehouses. During the War of Independence many “state cruisers”
(chartered at the Continental expense) set out from this port, the most
famous being the “Lee,” commanded by John Manley1 (1733-93); in
November 1775 this cruiser captured the “Nancy” with military stores
valued at £20,541, which were taken to the American army at Cambridge.
The “Lee” was manned by fifty men of the “amphibious regiment,” which
under General John Glover (1732-1797) rendered invaluable services to
Washington in conveying his troops across the East River after the battle of
Long Island, and later in ferrying them across the Delaware before the
battle of Trenton. Marblehead furnished more than 1000 men to the
Continental army. During the war of 1812 the sea fight between the

“Chesapeake” and the “Shannon” took place (June 1, 1813) off the adjacent
coast. Marblehead was the scene of Benjamin (nicknamed “Flood”) Ireson’s
ride, immortalized by J. G. Whittier.

See Samuel Roads, jun., The History and Traditions of Marblehead
(Boston, 1880; 3rd ed., Marblehead, 1897).

1 See Robert E. Peabody, “Naval Career of Captain John Manley of Marblehead”, in
Essex Institute Historical Collections (Salem, Mass.) for January 1909.

MARBLES, a children’s game of great antiquity, wide distribution,
and uncertain origin, played with small spheres of stone, glass, baked clay
or other material, from one-third of an inch to two inches in diameter. The
game was once popular with all classes. Tradition, both at Oxford and
Cambridge, attests that the game was formerly prohibited among
undergraduates on the steps of the Bodleian or the Senate House. There is a
similar tradition at Westminster School that the boys were forbidden to play
marbles in Westminster Hall on account of the complaints made by
members of parliament and lawyers. An anonymous poem of the 17th
century speaks of a boy about to leave Eton as
“A dunce at syntax, but a dab at taw.”

Rogers, in The Pleasures of Memory, recalls how

“On yon grey stone that fronts the chancel-door,

Worn smooth by busy feet, now seen no more,
Each eve we shot the marble through the ring.”

Defoe (1720) writes of the seer Duncan Campbell: “Marbles, which he used
to call children’s playing at bowls, yielded him mighty diversion; and he
was so dexterous an artist at shooting that little alabaster globe from
between the end of his forefinger and the knuckle of his thumb, that he
seldom missed hitting plumb, as the boys call it, the marble he aimed at,
though at the distance of two or three yards.” The locus classicus on
marbles in the 19th century is in the trial in Pickwick, where Serjeant
Buzfuz pathetically says of Master Bardell that “his ‘alley tors’ and his
‘commoneys’ are alike neglected; he forgets the long familiar cry of
‘knuckle down,’ and at tip-cheese, or odd and even, his hand is out.” Many
similar passages might be adduced to prove the former popularity of
marbles with the young of all classes. In some rural parts of Sussex Good
Friday was known as “marble-day” till late in the 19th century, since on that
day both old and young, including many who would never have thought of
playing marbles at other times, took part in the game. There was some
traditional reason for regarding marbles as a Lenten sport—perhaps, as the
Rev. W. D. Parish suggests, “to keep people from more boisterous and
mischievous enjoyments.”

The origin of the game is concealed in the mists of antiquity. Marbles
used by Egyptian and Roman children before the Christian era are to be
seen in the British Museum. Probably some of the small stone spheres
found among neolithic remains, which Evans (Ancient Stone Implements,
2nd ed., p. 420) admits to be too small for projectiles, are prehistoric
marbles. It is commonly assumed that the game which the youthful
Augustus, like other Roman children, played with nuts was a form of
marbles, and that the Latin phrase of relinquere nuces, in the sense of
putting away childish things, referred to this game. Strutt believed that nuts

of the roundest sort were the original “marbles.” The earliest unmistakable
reference to marbles in literature seems to be in a French poem of the 12th
century, quoted by Littré s.v. Bille.

The marbles with which various games are nowadays played are small
spheres of stone, glass or baked clay. In the 18th century they were mostly
made from chips of marble (whence the name) or other stone, which were
ground into a roughly spherical shape by attrition in a special iron mill.
Nuremberg was then the centre of the trade in marbles, though some were
made in Derbyshire, and indeed wherever there was a stonemason’s yard to
afford raw material. The “alley taw,” as its name indicates, was made of
alabaster. In the first decade of the 20th century English marbles were all
imported from central Germany, and the alleys, or most valuable marbles,
used for shooting, were mostly made of coloured glass, sold retail from ten
a penny to a penny each. Coloured stone marbles and so-called china
marbles—really of baked clay—were sold at prices varying from forty to a
hundred a penny, though even the cheapest of these were painted by hand
with concentric rings. The well-made and highly valued alleys of earlier
times were no longer procurable, owing to the decline in popularity of the
sport. In the United States, however, much more expensive and accurately
rounded marbles were still manufactured, the latest being of hollow steel.

There has never been any recognized authority on the game of
marbles, and it is probable that, in the past as in the present, every
parish and school and set of boys made its own rules. There are,
however, three or four distinct games which are traditional, and may be
found, with trifling variations, wherever the game is played. Strutt,
writing at the end of the 18th century, describes these as follows: (1)
“Taw, wherein a number of boys put each of them one or two marbles
in a ring and shoot at them alternately with other marbles, and he who
obtains the most of them by beating them out of the ring is the

conqueror.” The marbles placed in the ring—whence the game is often
known as “ring-taw”—are usually of the cheaper kind known as
“commoneys,” “stoneys” or “potteys,” and the marble with which the
player shoots is a more valuable one, known as an “alley,” or “alley
taw,” sometimes spelt “tor,” as by Dickens. Usually it is necessary that
the alley should emerge from the ring as well as drive out another
marble; under other rules the ring is smaller, not more than a foot in
diameter, and the player must be skilful enough to leave his alley inside
it, whilst driving the object marble outside. (2) “Nine holes: which
consists in bowling of marbles at a wooden bridge with nine arches.”
Each arch bears a number, and the owner of the bridge pays that
number of marbles to the player who shoots through it, making his
profit from the missing marbles, which he confiscates; or the game
may simply be played so many up—usually 100. (3) “There is also
another game of marbles where four, five or six holes, and sometimes
more, are made in the ground at a distance from each other; and the
business of every one of the players is to bowl a marble by a regular
succession into all the holes, which he who completes in the fewest
bowls obtains the victory.” This primitive form of golf is played by
Zulu adults with great enthusiasm, and is still popular among the car-
drivers of Belfast. (4) “Boss out, or boss and span, also called hit and
span, wherein one bowls a marble to any distance that he pleases,
which serves as a mark for his antagonist to bowl at, whose business it
is to hit the marble first bowled, or lay his own near enough to it for
him to span the space between them and touch both marbles; in either
case he wins, if not, his marble remains where it lay and becomes a
mark for the first player, and so alternately until the game be won.” In
rural parts of England this was known as a “going-to-school game,”
because it helped the players along the road.

Mr F. W. Hackwood states that, in the middle of the 19th century,
taverns in the Black Country had regular marble alleys, consisting of a
cement bed 20 ft. long by 12 ft. wide and 18 in. from the ground, with
a raised wooden rim to prevent the marbles from running off. Players
knelt down to shoot, and had to “knuckle down” fairly—i.e. to place
the knuckle of the shooting hand on the ground, so that the flip of the
thumb was not aided by a jerk of the wrist. The game was usually ring-
taw. But marbles is now obsolete in England as a game for adults (Old
English Sports, London, 1907).

A writer in Notes and Queries (IX. ii. 314) thus describes the
marbles used by English boys in the middle of the 19th century: “In
ring-taw the player put only commoneys in the ring, and shot with the
taws, which included stoneys, alleys and blood-alleys. Commoneys
were unglazed; potteys glazed in the kiln. Stoneys were made from
common pebbles such as were used for road-mending; alleys and
blood-alleys out of marble. The blood-alleys were highly prized, and
were called by this name because of the spots or streaks of red in them.
In Derbyshire, where large numbers were made, they had relative
values. The stoney was worth three commoneys or two potteys. An
alley was worth six commoneys or four potteys. Blood-alleys were
worth more, according to the depth and arrangement of colour—from
twelve to fifty commoneys and stoneys in proportion.” “A taw with a
history was prized above rubies,” another correspondent observes (IX.
ii. 76). “All the best-made marbles were taws, and no commoneys or
potteys were used for shooting with, either in ring-taw or the various
hole-games.” In Belfast, 1854-1858, the marble season extended from
Easter to June, when the ground was usually dry and hard. The marbles
were stoneys, of composition painted; crockeries, of slightly glazed
stone-ware, dark brown and yellow; clayeys, of red brick clay baked in
the fire; marbles, of white marble; china alleys, with white glaze and

painted rings; and glass marbles. The two chief games were ring-taw
and hole and taw; in the latter three holes were made in a line, 6 ft. to
12 ft. apart, and the player had to go three times up and down
according to somewhat elaborate rules (Notes and Queries, IX. iii. 65).
The stoneys and crockeries were sold at twenty a penny; the clayeys
were cheaper and were not used as stakes; the marbles proper and
china alleys, used as taws for shooting, cost a halfpenny and a farthing
respectively. In other parts of the country the phraseology of marbles
affords some interesting problems for the philologist. We hear of
“alleys, barios, poppos and stoneys”; of “marididdles,” home-made
marbles of rolled and baked clay; in Scotland of “bools, whinnies,
glassies, jauries”; of “Dutch alleys,” and so forth. “Dubs, trebs and
fobs,” stand for twos, threes and fours. To be “mucked” is to lose all
one’s “mivvies” or marbles. When the taw stayed in the ring it was a
“chuck.” “Phobbo slips” was a phrase used to forbid the correction of
an error.

The fullest account of the various games of marbles played by
English children is to be found in Mrs Gomme’s Traditional Games of
England, Scotland and Ireland (London, 1898), under the headings
Boss-out, Bridgeboard, Bun-hole, Cob, Ho-go, Holy Bang, Hundreds,
Lag, Long-Tawl, Marbles, Nine-Holes, Ring-taw, Three-Holes. Other
games are known as Plum-pudding, or Picking the Plums, in which one
shoots at marbles in a row; Pyramids, in which the marbles are
arranged in a pyramid; Bounce About, Bounce Eye, Conqueror, Die
Shot, Fortifications, Handers, Increase Pound, Knock Out, Rising Taw,
Spanners, Tip-shears; Strutt’s Sports and Pastimes, ed. J. C. Cox
(London, 1902). Much information will also be found in Notes and
Queries, passim—especially the 9th series. For marbles in France see
Larousse, s.v. Billes. See also Solitaire. (W. E. G. F.)

MARBOT, JEAN BAPTISTE ANTOINE
MARCELIN, Baron de (1782-1854), French soldier, son of General
Jean Antoine de Marbot (1754-1800), who died in the defence of Genoa
under Masséna, was born at La Rivière (Corrèze), on the 18th of August
1782. He joined the republican army as a volunteer in 1799, rose rapidly to
commissioned rank, and was aide-de-camp to Marshal Augereau,
commanding the VII. corps, in the war against Prussia and Russia in 1806-
7. After this he served with great distinction in the Peninsular War under
Lannes and Masséna, and showed himself to be a dashing leader of light
cavalry in the Russian War of 1812 and the German campaign of the
following year. After a slow recovery from the wounds he had received at
Leipzig and Hanau, he was promoted general of brigade by Napoleon
during the Hundred Days, and took part in, and was wounded at, the battle
of Waterloo. He was exiled at the second restoration and only returned to
France in 1819, after which, however, his intimacy with the duke of Orleans
secured him important military positions. After the July restoration he was
made maréchal-de-camp, and in this rank he was present at the siege of
Antwerp in 1832. He was promoted lieutenant-general in 1836. From 1835
to 1840 he served in various Algerian expeditions, and in 1845 he was made
a member of the Chamber of Peers. Three years later, at the fall of Louis
Philippe, he retired into private life. He died at Paris on the 16th of
November 1854. Marbot wrote two pamphlets, Remarques critiques sur
l’ouvrage de M. le général Roguet, intitulé Considérations sur l’art de la

guerre (1820), and La Nécessité d’augmenter les forces militaires de la
France (1825), but his fame rests chiefly, if not indeed wholly, on the
fascinating Memoirs of his Life and Campaigns which were published in
Paris in 1891 (Eng. trans., 1902). To ordinary readers and to students of
history alike these give a picture of the Napoleonic age of warfare which for
vividness and romantic interest has never been surpassed.

His elder brother, Antoine Adolphe Marcelin de Marbot (1781-1844),
was born at La Rivière, on the 22nd of March 1781, entered the army at an
early age, obtained commissioned rank in the revolutionary wars and
became aide-de-camp to Bernadotte. In 1802 he was arrested on the ground
of being concerned in a plot of the Republicans against the Consulate, but
he was released, though Napoleon continued to regard him as an opponent
of the established régime. After a term of duty with the army in Santo
Domingo he participated in the campaigns of 1806-7, and from 1808 to
1811 he was employed in the Peninsular War. In the Russian War of 1812
he was wounded and made prisoner. At the end of two years of captivity he
returned to France at the general peace, was aide-de-camp to Marshal
Davout during the Hundred Days, and thereafter passed into retirement,
from which he did not emerge till 1830. He attained the rank of maréchal-
de-camp under Louis Philippe, and died at Bra, near Tulle, on the 2nd of
June 1844.

MARBURG, a town of Austria, in Styria, 41 m. S. of Graz by rail.
Pop. (1900), 24,501. It is very picturesquely situated on the left bank of the
river Drave, on a plain called the Pettauer-Feld, at the base of the well-
wooded Bachergebirge. To the north of the town the train passes through
the Leitersberg tunnel (725 yds. long), opened in 1846, while the Drave,
which has here a width of 200 yds., is spanned by a magnificent iron bridge,
built in 1845. The principal buildings are the cathedral, dating from the 16th
century, the tower of which, erected in 1623, is 136 ft. high, and the old
castle. Its situation in the midst of a fertile vine and fruit-growing district,
connected by the navigable Drave with Hungary, and by railway with
Vienna, Trieste, Tirol and Carinthia, makes it the centre of a considerable
traffic in wine and grain. Its industrial products are leather, boots and shoes,
iron and tin wares, liqueurs and sparkling wine, and it also contains the
extensive workshops of the South Austrian railway. Marburg is the seat of
the bishop of Lavant, and is the native town of the famous Austrian admiral,
Baron Wilhelm of Tegetthoff (1827-1871). Near Marburg is the village of
Mariarast, the church of which is a popular place of pilgrimage.

MARBURG, an ancient university town of Germany, in the
Prussian province of Hesse-Nassau, situated on the slope of a hill on the
right bank of the Lahn, 60 m. by rail N. of Frankfort-on-Main, on the main
line to Cassel. Pop. (1905), 20,137. On the opposite bank of the river, here
spanned by two bridges, lie the suburb of Weidenhausen and the railway
station of the Prussian state railway. The hill on which the town lies is

crowned by the extensive old Schloss, a fine Gothic building, the most
noteworthy parts of which are the Rittersaal, dating from 1277-1312, and
the beautiful little chapel. This Schloss was formerly the residence of the
landgraves of Hesse, served afterwards as a prison, and is now the
repository of the historically interesting and valuable archives of Hesse. The
chief architectural ornament of Marburg is, however, the Elisabethenkirche,
a veritable gem of the purest Early Gothic style, erected by the grand master
of the Teutonic Order in 1235-1283, to contain the tomb of St Elizabeth of
Hungary. The remains of the saint were deposited in a rich silver-gilt
sarcophagus, which may still be seen, and were afterwards visited by
myriads of pilgrims, until the Protestant zeal of Landgrave Philip the
Generous caused him to remove the body to some unknown spot in the
church. The church also contains the tombs of numerous Hessian
landgraves and knights of the Teutonic Order. The Lutheran church is
another good Gothic edifice, dating mainly from the 15th century. The
town-hall, built in 1512, and several fine houses in the Renaissance style,
also deserve mention. The university of Marburg, founded by Philip the
Magnanimous in 1527, was the first university established without papal
privileges, and speedily acquired a great reputation throughout Protestant
Europe. It has a library of 140,000 volumes, is admirably equipped with
medical and other institutes, which form some of the finest modern
buildings in the town, and was attended, in 1905, by 1576 students.
Marburg also possesses a gymnasium, a “Realschule,” an agricultural
school, a society of naturalists, a hospital, and an extensive lunatic asylum.
It is the seat of a district court, and of superintendents of the Lutheran and
Reformed Churches. Marburg pottery is renowned; and leather, iron wares
and surgical instruments are also manufactured there. The environs are very
picturesque.

Marburg is first historically mentioned in a document of the beginning of
the 13th century, and received its municipal charter from the landgrave

Louis of Thuringia in 1227. On his death it became the residence of his
wife, Elizabeth of Hungary, who built a hospital there, and died in 1231, at
the age of twenty-four, worn out with works of religion and charity. She
was canonized in 1235 at the instance of the Teutonic Knights, who had
settled in Marburg in 1233 and were zealous in promoting her cult. By 1247
Marburg had already become the second town of Hesse, and in the 15th and
16th centuries it alternated with Cassel as the seat of the landgraves. In
1529 the famous conference between Luther and Zwingli on the subject of
Transubstantiation took place there in the Rittersaal of the Schloss (see
Marburg, Colloquy of). During the Thirty Years’ and Seven Years’ Wars
Marburg suffered considerably from sieges and famine. In 1806, and again
in 1810, it was the centre of an abortive rising against the French, in
consequence of which the fortifications of the castle were destroyed.

See Kolbe, Marburg im Mittelalter (Marb., 1879); Bücking,
Mittheilungen aus Marburgs Vorzeit (Marb., 1886); Schoof, Marburg
die Perle des Hessenlandes (2nd ed., 1903).

MARBURG, COLLOQUY OF (Marburger
Religionsgespräch), the name given to a conference of divines held in 1529
in the interests of the unity of Protestant Germany. The circumstances in
which it was held, the influence of the men who conducted its deliberations,
and the result of its proceedings, combine to render it of no small
importance for the history of the Reformation in Germany.

After the Imperial Diet of Spires in 1526 had decreed that all states of the
empire should observe the Edict of Worms (1521), banning Luther and his
adherents, in such a manner that they should not be afraid to answer it
before God and the emperor, the reform movement had received such an
access of strength that the Catholic party felt itself menaced in earnest, and
in 1529 again passed a resolution at Spires, deigned not merely to preclude
any further expansion of the Reformation, but even to prevent it from
maintaining the ground already won. This decision was at once challenged,
on the 19th of April, by the protest of the Evangelical states (whence the
name Protestants); and the effect of this disclaimer was not small. Still, it
was devoid of political significance, unless backed by the united force of all
the princes and states subscribing to the Evangelical teaching; and this unity
was wanting. The feud which raged round the doctrine of the Lord’s Supper
had already broken out before the first diet of Spires, and had aroused great
and immediate excitement. At a very early period, however, efforts were
made to allay the dissension. Strassburg pronounced for conciliation: but
the most powerful and zealous champion of peace was to be found in the
landgrave Philip of Hesse, who recognized the absolute necessity—from a
political standpoint—of the union of all German Protestants. It is probable
that he had invited Luther to a religious conference as early as the year
1527; but on that occasion he met with a refusal. True, the impression
conveyed by the attitude of the Catholic party at the second Diet of Spires
had served to awaken the feeling for solidarity among the Evangelicals
there assembled; and on the 22nd of April they had even secured the basis
for a provisional alliance in the shape of a formula drawn up by Bucer and
dealing with the Lord’s Supper. But it was obvious that a permanent
coalition could not be expected unless some definite understanding on the
debated point could be attained; and on the very same day the landgrave
despatched to Zwingli an invitation to a colloquy, and received his prompt
acquiescence. Melanchthon, who in the tension which prevailed at the

synod had shown himself inclined to negotiation, became suspicious on his
return, and endeavoured to influence the elector of Saxony and Luther in
accordance with his views. The landgrave, however, was so far successful
that the beginning of October (1529) saw the colloquy opened in the castle
at Marburg. With Zwingli, who had arrived on the 27th of September, he
had several interviews of considerable political importance before the
Wittenberg divines made their appearance. These interviews settled the
preliminaries of an alliance; but they rested on the assumption that the
theological feud between Wittenberg and Zürich could be removed, or its
violence at least abated.

The proceedings opened on the 1st of October with conferences between
Luther and Oecolampadius, and Melanchthon and Zwingli: then on the two
following days the discussion proper—confined almost entirely to Luther
and Zwingli—was held before the landgrave and his guest Duke Ulrich of
Württemberg, in the presence of more than fifty persons. As regards the
main point of contention, i.e. the doctrine of the Lord’s Supper, no
agreement was found practicable; and the private conversations on the 4th
of October, which formed the sequel of the debate, carried matters no
farther. “You have another spirit,” said Luther. Since the landgrave,
however, was reluctant to see the colloquy brought to an absolutely fruitless
close, he requested Luther to draw up a list of the most important points of
doctrine on which it might yet be possible to arrive at some degree of
unanimity. This was done on the 4th of October; and a few alterations were
introduced to meet the wishes of the Swiss deputies. The Articles of
Marburg, which thus came into being, contain the doctrine of the Trinity, of
the personality of Christ, of faith and justification, of the Scriptures, of
baptism, of good works, of confession, of government, of tradition, and of
infant baptism. The fifteenth article, treating of the Lord’s Supper, defines
the ground common to both parties even in this debateable region,
recognizing the necessity of participation in both kinds, and rejecting the

sacrifice of the Mass. It then proceeds to fix the point of difference in the
fact that no agreement had been reached on the question “whether the true
body and blood of Christ are corporeally present in the bread and wine”
(“Nit vergleicht haben wir uns, ob der war leib und plut Christi leiblich im
brot und wein sey”). Nevertheless, the adherents of each doctrine are
recommended to display Christian charity to those of the other. These
articles were signed by the ten official members of the colloquy: Luther,
Jonas, Melanchthon, Osiander, Agricola, Brenz, Oecolampadius, Bucer,
Hedio and Zwingli. The personal contact between Luther and Zwingli led to
no mental rapprochement between the two; but in the following year the
Articles of Marburg did good service as one of the preliminaries to the
Augsburg Confession, and remain a valuable document for the fundamental
principles common to the Lutheran and Reformed Churches.

See T. Kolde, s.v. “Marburger Religionsgespräch,” in
Realencyklopädie f. protestant. Theologie, 3rd ed. xii. 248 seq.
(C. M.)

MARCA, PIERRE DE (1594-1662), French prelate and
historian, was born at Gan, near Pau, on the 24th of January 1594. His
family was known among judicial circles in the 16th century, and
maintained the Roman Catholic faith after the official introduction of the
Reformed religion into Navarre. After having studied law at the university
of Toulouse he practised successfully at Pau. But he was ambitious, and
turned to a larger sphere. He ardently called for the armed intervention of

King Louis XIII. in Béarn, and on this occasion published his first writing,
Discours d’un Béarnais, très fidèle sujet du roi, sur l’édit du rétablissement
de l’exercice de la religion catholique dans tout le Béarn (1618). After the
easy campaign of 1620, the possessions which had been taken by the
Protestants were given back to the Roman Catholic church; this task was
performed, under his supervision, with judgment and moderation. During
the siege of La Rochelle he performed a mission which brought him in
touch with Richelieu, who shortly afterwards nominated him intendant de
justice in Béarn (1631), and in 1639 summoned him to Paris with the title of
counsellor of state. The following year, the question of the intervention of
kings in the election of bishops having been raised in a pamphlet by Charles
Hersent (Optalus Gallus de cavendo schismate, 1640), Marca defended
what were then called the liberties of the Gallican Church, in his celebrated
treatise De concordia sacerdotii et imperii, seu de libertalibus ecclesiae
gallicanae (1641). He was soon rewarded for this service. Although he had
not yet taken even the minor holy orders, he was nominated bishop of
Couserans by the king on the 28th of December 1641, but the pope refused
to give his sanction. It was only after Marca had formally denied those
propositions contained in De concordia which were displeasing to Rome
that he was proclaimed in the consistory (Jan. 13, 1648). During this time,
and until 1651, he was governor of the province of Catalonia, then occupied
by the French. After the Treaty of the Pyrenees, he was sent to direct the
conference which had been formed to fix the limits of Roussillon, which
had just been ceded to France (1660). Marca now interested himself in the
fortunes of Mazarin, and remained faithful to him even during the Fronde.
As a recompense, he was nominated archbishop of Toulouse (May 28,
1652), but had to wait for the bulls of investiture till the 23rd of March
1654. It was difficult for him to please both pope and king. In the struggle
against the Jansenists he used all the influence he had with the clergy to
secure the passage of the apostolic constitution of the 31st of March 1653

(Relation de ce qui s’est fait depuis 1653 dans les assemblées des évêques
au sujet des cinq propositions, 1657); but in the rebellion raised by Retz,
archbishop of Paris, against the king, he took the part of the king against the
pope. Michel Le Tellier having ordered him to refute a thesis of the college
of Clermont on the infallibility of the pope, Marca wrote a treatise which
was most Gallican in its ideas, but refused to publish it for fear of drawing
down “the indignation of Rome.” These tactics were successful, and when
Retz, weary of a struggle without definite results, resigned the
archbishopric, Marca became his successor (Feb. 26, 1662). He did not
derive much profit from this new favour, as he died on the 29th of June
following, without his nomination having been sanctioned by the pope.

Marca, clever and covetous, was also an historian of note. When very
young he showed his interest in the past history of his native land, and in
1617, at the age of twenty-three, he had set to work looking through
archives, copying charters, and corresponding with the principal men of
learning of his time, the brothers Dupuy, André Duchesne and Jean Besly,
whom he visited in Poitou. His Histoire de Béarn was published at Paris in
1640. It was not so well received as his De concordia, but is more
appreciated by posterity. If Marca’s criticism is too often undecided, both in
the ancient epochs, where he supports the text by a certain amount of
guesswork and in certain points where he touches on religion, yet he always
gives the text correctly. A number of chapters end with an interesting
collection of charters. It is to be regretted that this incomplete work does
not go beyond 1300. During his long stay in Catalonia he made preparations
for a geographical and historical description of this province, which was
bound to France by so many political and literary associations. Baluze, who
became his secretary in 1656, helped him with the work and finished it,
adding clever appendices and publishing the whole in 1688 under the title
Marca hispanica.

Marca married Marguerite de Forgues on the 4th of June 1618, and had
one son and three daughters. His son, Galactoire, who was president of the
parlement of Navarre, died on the 10th of February 1689.

Marca’s biography was written in Latin by two of his intimate
friends, Étienne Baluze, his secretary (Epistola ad Samuelem
Sorbierium, de vita, gestis et scriptis Petri de Marca, Paris, 1663), and
his cousin, Paul de Faget (at the beginning of a collection of Marca’s
theological pamphlets, first published by Paul de Faget in 1668). This
contained four treatises on the Eucharist, the sacrifice of the Mass, the
erection of the patriarchate of Constantinople (in Latin), and the
sacrament of the Eucharist (in French). It was supposed to contain
heretical propositions and caused a good deal of scandal, inciting
Baluze against Faget, both of whom abused the other, to defend the
memory of the prelate.

See Bayle’s article in the Dictionnaire historique et critique (s.v.
“Marca”), and the Vie de Marca in the Histoire de Béarn (vol. i., 1894)
of V. Dubarat.

MARCANTONIO [Marcantonio Raimondi], the chief Italian
master of the art of engraving in the age of the Renaissance, and the first
who practised it in order to reproduce, not designs of his own invention, as
earlier craftsmen had commonly done, but those of other artists almost
exclusively. The date of his birth is uncertain, nor is there any good

authority for assigning it, as is commonly done, approximately to the year
1488. He was probably born some years at least earlier than this, inasmuch
as he is mentioned by a contemporary writer, Achillini, as being an artist of
repute in 1504. His earliest dated plate, illustrating the story of Pyramus and
Thisbe, belongs to the following year, 1505. Marcantonio received his
training in the workshop of the famous goldsmith and painter of Bologna,
Francesco Raibolini, usually called Francia. “Having more aptitude in
design,” says Vasari, “than his master, and managing the graver with facility
and grace, he made waist-buckles and many other things in niello, such
being then greatly in fashion, and made them most beautifully, as being in
truth most excellent in that craft.” The real fame, however, of Marcantonio
was destined to be founded on his attainments, not in the goldsmith’s art
generally, but in that particular development of it which consists of
engraving designs on metal plates for the purpose of reproduction by the
printing press. This art was not new in Italy in the days of Marcantonio’s
apprenticeship. It had been practised, in a more or less elementary form, for
not less than forty or fifty years in the workshops alike of Venetia, the
Emilia, Tuscany and Lombardy. But the technical aim of the Italian
engravers had not hitherto been directed, like that of Schongauer or Dürer
north of the Alps, towards securing such freedom and precision in the use of
the burin as should impart to the impressions taken from their engraved
plates both a striking decorative effect and a power of suggesting to the eye
a complex variety of natural objects and surfaces in light and shade. The
Italian masters had been satisfied with much more rudimentary effects. The
Florentine primitives had been content either with very simple cloudy
patches of cross-hatching in fine straight lines, or with broad open shadings
in the manner of a bold pen-drawing. Mantegna and Pollaiuolo, the two
chief original masters who practised the art, had used the latter method with
great power but at the same time great simplicity.

By the beginning of the 16th century a desire for a more complicated
kind of effects was already arising among the followers of the art in Italy.
Both backgrounds and passages of foreground detail were often imitated,
inartificially enough, from the works of the northern masters. Marcantonio
himself was among the foremost in this movement. About eighty
engravings can be referred to the first five or six years of his career (1505-
1511). Their subjects are very various, including many of pagan mythology,
and some of obscure allegory, along with those of Christian devotion. The
types of figures and drapery, and the general character of the compositions,
bespeak for the most part the inspiration, and sometimes the direct
authorship, of Francia. But the influence of German example is very
perceptible also, particularly in the landscape backgrounds, and in the
endeavour to express form by means of light and shadow with greater
freedom than had been hitherto the practice of the southern schools. In a
few subjects also the figures themselves correspond to a coarse Teutonic,
instead of to the refined Italian, ideal. But so far we find Marcantonio only
indirectly leaning on the north for the sake of self-improvement. It must
have been for the sake of commercial profit that he by-and-by produced a
series of direct counterfeits on copper from Albert Dürer’s woodcuts. These
facsimiles are sixty-nine in number, including seventeen of Dürer’s “Life of
the Virgin,” thirty-seven of his “Little Passion,” on wood, and a number of
single pieces. According to Vasari, Dürer’s indignation over those
counterfeits was the cause of his journey to Venice, where he is said to have
lodged a complaint against Marcantonio, and induced the Senate to prohibit
the counterfeiting of his monogram, at any rate, upon any future imitations
of the kind. Vasari’s account must certainly be mistaken, inasmuch as
Dürer’s journey to Venice took place in 1506, and neither of the two series
of woodcuts imitated by Marcantonio was published until 1511. The greater
part of the designs for the “Life of the Virgin” had, it is true, been made and
engraved seven years earlier than the date of their publication; and it is to

be remarked that, whereas Marcantonio’s copies of the “Little Passion”
leave out the monogram of Dürer, it is inserted in his copies of the “Life of
the Virgin”; whence it would, after all, seem possible that he had seen and
counterfeited a set of impressions of this series at the time when they were
originally executed, and before their publication. But the real nature of the
transaction, if transaction there was, which took place between Dürer and
Marcantonio we cannot now hope to recover. Enough that the Bolognese
engraver evidently profited, both in money and in education of the hand, by
his work in imitating in a finer material the energetic characters of these
northern woodcuts. He was soon to come under a totally different influence,
and to turn the experience he had gained to account in interpreting the work
of a master of a quite other stamp. Up till the year 1510 Marcantonio had
lived entirely at Bologna, with the exception, it would appear, of a visit or
visits to Venice. (A few of his early engravings are from drawings of the
school of Giorgione.) Very soon afterwards he was attracted, for good and
all, into the circle which surrounded Raphael at Rome. Where or when he
had first made Raphael’s acquaintance is uncertain. His passage to Rome by
way of Florence has been supposed to be marked by an engraving, dated
1510, and known as “The Climbers,” Les Grimpeurs (Bartsch, 487), in
which he has reproduced a portion of the design of Michelangelo’s cartoon
of the Soldiers surprised bathing, and has added behind the figures a
landscape imitated from the then young Dutch engraver Lucas of Leiden.
Contemporary or somewhat earlier than this is a large engraving done by
him from a design by Baldassare Peruzzi, a Sienese artist drawn about the
same time into the Raphael circle. The piece in which he is recorded to have
first tried his hand after Raphael himself is the Lucretia (Bartsch 192). From
that time until he disappears in the catastrophe of 1527, Marcantonio was
almost exclusively engaged in reproducing by means of engraving the
designs of Raphael or of his immediate pupils. Raphael, the story goes, was
so delighted with the print of the Lucretia that he personally trained and

helped Marcantonio afterwards. A printing establishment was set up under
the charge of Raphael’s colour-grinder, Il Baviera, and the profits, in the
early stage of the business, were shared between the engraver and the
printer. The sale soon became very great; pupils gathered round about
Marcantonio, of whom the two most distinguished were Marco Dente,
known as Marco da Ravenna, and Agostino de’ Musi, known as Agostino
Veneziano; and he and they, during the last ten years of Raphael’s life, and
for several years following his death, gave forth a great profusion of
engravings after the master’s work—not copying, in most instances, his
finished paintings, but working up, with the addition of simple backgrounds
and accessories, his first sketches and trials, which often give the
composition in a different form from the finished work, and are all the more
interesting on that account.

The best of these engravings produced in the workshop of Marcantonio
—those, namely, done by his own hand, and especially those done during
the first few years after he had attached himself to Raphael—count among
the most prized and coveted examples of the art. In them he enters into the
genius of his master, and loses little of the chastened science and rhythmical
purity of Raphael’s contours, or of the inspired and winning sentiment of
his faces; while in the parts where he is left to himself—the rounding and
shading, the background and landscape—he manages his burin with all the
skill and freedom which he had gained by the imitation of northern models,
but puts away the northern emphasis and redundance of detail. His work,
however, does not long remain at the height marked by pieces like the
Lucretia, the Dido, the Judgment of Paris, the Poetry, the Philosophy, or the
first Massacre of the Innocents. Marcantonio’s engravings after the works
of Raphael’s later years are cold, ostentatious, and soulless by comparison.
Still more so, as is natural, were those which he and his pupils produced
after the designs of the degenerate scholars of Raphael and Michelangelo,
of a Giulio Romano, a Polidoro, or a Bandinelli. Marcantonio’s association

with Giulio Romano was the cause of his first great disaster in life. He
engraved a series of obscene designs by that painter in illustration of the
Sonnetti lussuriosi of Pietro Aretino, and thereby incurred the anger of pope
Clement VII., at whose order he was thrown into prison. Marcantonio’s ruin
was completed by the calamities attendant on the sack of Rome in 1527. He
had to pay a heavy ransom in order to escape from the hands of the
Spaniards, and fled from Rome, in the words of Vasari, “all but a beggar.” It
is said that he took refuge in his native city, Bologna; but he never again
emerges from obscurity, and all we know with certainty is that in 1534 he
was dead.
(S. C.)

MARCASITE, a mineral with the same chemical composition as
pyrites, being iron disulphide FeS2, but crystallizing in the orthorhombic
instead of in the cubic system. The name is of Arabic origin and was long
applied to crystallized pyrites (q.v.); it was restricted to the present species
by W. Haidinger in 1845. The mineral was known to G. Agricola in 1546
under the names Wasserkies or Weisserkies and Leberkies, and it has been
variously known as white pyrites, hepatic pyrites, lamellar pyrites, radiated
pyrites (German Strahlkies) and prismatic pyrites. The orthorhombic form
of the crystals, as distinct from the cubic form of pyrites, was recognized by
Romé de l’Isle in 1772, though later R. J. Haüy considered the crystals to be
only distorted cubic forms.

The crystals are isomorphous with mispickel
(q.v.), but only rarely are they distinctly developed
and simple (fig.). Usually they are twinned on a
prism plane, M, producing pentagonal stellate
groups of five crystals; twinning on the plain g, in
which the crystals intercross at angles of nearly 60°,
is less common. This frequent twinning gives rise to characteristic forms,
with many re-entrant angles, to which the names “spear pyrites” and
“cockscomb pyrites” are applied. The commonest state of aggregation is
that of radially arranged fibres, the external surface of the mass being
globular, nodular or stalactitic in form.

Apart from crystalline form, the external characters of marcasite are very
similar to those of pyrites, and when distinct crystals are not available the
two species cannot always be easily distinguished. The colour is usually
pale bronze-yellow, often rather lighter than that of pyrites; on freshly
fractured surfaces of pure marcasite the colour is tin-white, but this rapidly
tarnishes on exposure to air. The lustre is metallic and brilliant. The streak
is greyish or brownish-black. The hardness (6-61⁄2) is the same as that of
pyrites, and the specific gravity (4.8-4.9) as a rule rather less. Arsenical
varieties of marcasite, containing up to 5% of arsenic, are known as
lonchidite and kyrosite.

Marcasite readily oxidizes on exposure to moist air, with the
production of sulphuric acid and a white fibrous efflorescence of
ferrous sulphate, and in course of time specimens in collections often
became completely disintegrated. In nature it is frequently altered to
limonite with the separation of native sulphur. Marcasite is thus the less
stable of the two modifications of iron disulphide. Many experiments
have been made with a view to determining the difference in chemical
constitution of marcasite and pyrites, but with no very definite results.

It is a noteworthy fact that whilst pyrites has been prepared artificially,
marcasite has not.

Marcasite occurs under the same conditions as pyrites, but is much
less common. Whilst pyrites is found abundantly in the older
crystalline rocks and slates, marcasite is more abundant in clays, and
has often been formed as a concretion around organic remains. It is
abundant, for example, in the plastic clay of the Brown Coal formation
at Littmitz, near Carlsbad, in Bohemia, at which place it has been
extensively mined for the manufacture of sulphur and ferrous sulphate.
In the Chalk of the south-east of England nodules of marcasite with a
fibrous radiated structure are abundant, and in the Chalk Marl between
Dover and Folkestone fine twinned groups of “spear pyrites” are
common. The mineral is also met with in metalliferous veins, though
much less frequently than pyrites; for example the “cockscomb pyrites”
of the lead mines of Derbyshire and Cumberland. (L. J. S.)

MARCEAU-DESGRAVIERS, FRANÇOIS
SÉVERIN (1769-1796), French general, was born at Chartres on the
1st of March 1769. His father was a law officer, and he was educated for a
legal career, but at the age of sixteen he enlisted in the regiment of Savoy-
Carignan. Whilst on furlough in Paris Marceau joined in the attack on the
Bastille (July 14, 1789); after that event he took his discharge from the
regular army and returned to Chartres, but the embarrassments of his family

soon compelled him to seek fresh military employment. He became drill
instructor, and afterwards captain in the departmental (Eure-et-Loire)
regiment of the National Guard. Early in March 1792 he was elected
lieutenant-colonel of one of the battalions of the Eure-et-Loire; he took part
in the defence of Verdun in 1792, and it fell to his lot to bear the proposals
of capitulation to the Prussian camp. The spiritless conduct of the defenders
excited the wrath of the revolutionary authorities, and Marceau was
fortunate in escaping arrest and finding re-employment as a captain in the
regular service. Early in 1793 he became with other officers “suspect,” and
was for some time imprisoned. On his release he hurried to take part in the
defence of Saumur against the Vendéan royalists, and distinguished himself
at the combat of Saumur (June 10, 1793) by gallantly rescuing the
representative Bourbotte from the hands of the insurgents. The Convention
voted him the thanks of the country, and thenceforward his rise was rapid.
His conduct at Chantonnay (Sept. 5) won him the provisional rank of
general of brigade. On the 17th of October he bore a great part in the
victory of Cholet, and on the field of this battle began his friendship with
Kléber. For the victory of Cholet Kléber was made general of division and
Marceau confirmed as general of brigade. Their advice was of the greatest
value to the generals in command, and the military talents of each were the
complement of the other’s. Marceau, who became general of division (Nov.
10), succeeded to the chief command ad interim, and with his friend won
important victories near Le Mans (Dec 12-13) and Savenay (Dec. 23). After
the battle of Le Mans, Marceau rescued and protected a young Royalist
lady, Angélique des Mesliers. It is often supposed that he was in love with
his prisoner; but the help even of the commander-in-chief did not avail to
save her from the guillotine (Jan. 22, 1794). Marceau had already retired
from the war, exhausted by the fatigues of the campaign, and he and Kléber
were saved from arrest and execution only by the intervention of Bourbotte.
Marceau became affianced about this time to Agathe Leprêtre de

Châteaugiron, but his constant military employment, his broken health, and
the opposition of the comte de Châteaugiron on the one hand and of
Marceau’s devoted half-sister “Emira,” wife of the Republican politician
Sergent, on the other, prevented the realization of his hopes. After spending
the winter of 1793-1794 in Paris he took a command in the army under
Jourdan, in which Kléber also served. He took part in the various battles
about Charleroi, and at the final victory of Fleurus (June 26, 1794) he had a
horse shot under him. He distinguished himself again at Jülich and at
Aldenhoven, and stormed the fines of Coblenz on the 23rd of October. With
the Army of the Sambre and Meuse he took his share in the campaign of
1795 on the Rhine and the Lahn, distinguishing himself particularly with
Kléber in the fighting about Neuwied on the 18th and 19th of October, and
at Sulzbach on the 17th of December. In the campaign of 1796 the famous
invasion of Germany by the armies of Jourdan and Moreau ended in
disaster, and Marceau’s men covered Jourdan’s retreat over the Rhine. He
fought the desperate actions on the Lahn (Sept. 16 and 18), and at
Altenkirchen on the 19th received a mortal wound, of which he died on the
21st, at the early age of twenty-seven. The Austrians vied with his own
countrymen in doing honour to the dead general. His body was burned, and
his ashes, which at the time were placed under a pyramid designed by
Kléber, were transferred in 1889 to the Pantheon at Paris.

See Maze, Le Général Marceau (1889); Parfait, Le Général
Marceau (1892); and T. C. Johnson, Marceau (London, 1896).

MARCEL, ÉTIENNE (d. 1358), provost of the merchants of
Paris under King John II., belonged by birth to the wealthy Parisian
bourgeoisie, being the son of a clothier named Simon Marcel and of
Isabelle Barbou. He is mentioned as provost of the Grande-Confrérie of
Notre Dame in 1350, and in 1354 he succeeded Jean de Pacy as provost of
the Parisian merchants. His political career began in 1356, when John was
made prisoner after the battle of Poitiers. In conjunction with Robert le
Coq, bishop of Laon, he played a leading part in the states-general called
together by the dauphin Charles on the 17th of October. A committee of
eighty members, constituted on their initiative, pressed their demands with
such insistence that the dauphin prorogued the states-general; but financial
straits obliged him to summon them once more on the 3rd of February
1357, and the promulgation of a great edict of reform was the consequence.
John the Good forbade its being put into effect, whereupon a conflict began
between Marcel and the dauphin, Marcel endeavouring to set up Charles the
Bad, king of Navarre, in opposition to him. The states-general assembled
again on the 13th of January 1358, and on the 22nd of February the
populace of Paris, led by Marcel, invaded the palace and murdered the
marshals of Champagne and Normandy before the prince’s eyes.
Thenceforward Marcel was in open hostility to the throne. After vainly
hoping that the insurrection of the Jacquerie might turn to his advantage, he
next supported the king of Navarre, whose armed bands infested the
neighbourhood of Paris. On the night of the 31st of July Marcel was about
to open the gates of the capital to them, but Jean Maillart prevented the
execution of this design, and killed him before the Porte Saint-Antoine.
During the following days his adherents were likewise put to death, and the
dauphin was enabled to re-enter Paris. Étienne Marcel married first Jeanne
de Dammartin, and secondly Marguerite des Essars, who survived him.

See F. T. Perrens, Étienne Marcel et le gouvernement de la
bourgeoisie au xive siècle (Paris, 1860); P. Frémaux, La Famille

d’Étienne Marcel, in the Mémoires of the Société de l’histoire de Paris
et de l’Île de France (1903), vol. xxx.; and Hon. R. D. Denman,
Étienne Marcel (1898). (J. V.*)

MARCELLINUS, ST, according to the Liberian catalogue,
became bishop of Rome on the 30th of June, 296; his predecessor was
Caius or Gaius. He is not mentioned in the Martyrologium hieronymianum,
or in the Depositio episcoporum, or in the Depositio martyrum. The Liber
pontificalis, basing itself on the Acts of St Marcellinus, the text of which is
lost, relates that during Diocletian’s persecution Marcellinus was called
upon to sacrifice, and offered incense to idols, but that, repenting shortly
afterwards, he confessed the faith of Christ and suffered martyrdom with
several companions. Other documents speak of his defection, and it is
probably this lapse that explains the silence of the ancient liturgical
calendars. In the beginning of the 5th century Petilianus, the Donatist
bishop of Constantine, affirmed that Marcellinus and his priests had given
up the holy books to the pagans during the persecution and offered incense
to false gods. St Augustine contents himself with denying the affair (Contra
litt. Petiliani, ii. 202; De unico baptismo, 27). The records of the pseudo-
council of Sinuessa, which were fabricated at the beginning of the 6th
century, state that Marcellinus after his fall presented himself before a
council, which refused to try him on the ground that prima sedes a nemine
iudicatur. According to the Liber pontificalis, Marcellinus was buried, on
the 26th of April 304, in the cemetery of Priscilla, on the Via Salaria, 25

days after his martyrdom; the Liberian catalogue gives as the date the 25th
of October. The fact of the martyrdom, too, is not established with certainty.
After a considerable interregnum he was succeeded by Marcellus, with
whom he has sometimes been confounded.

See L. Duchesne, Liber pontificalis, I. lxxiii.-lxxiv. 162-163, and II.
563.
(H. De.)

MARCELLO, BENEDETTO (1686-1739), Italian musical
composer, was born in 1686, either on the 31st of July or on the 1st of
August. He was of noble family (in his compositions he is frequently
described as “Patrizio Veneto”), and although a pupil of Lotti and
Gasparini, was intended by his father to devote himself to the law. In 1711
he was a member of the Council of Forty, and in 1730 went to Pola as
Provveditore. His health having been impaired by the climate of Istria, he
retired after eight years to Brescia in the capacity of Camerlengo, and died
there on the 24th of July 1739.

Marcello is best remembered by his Estro poetico-armonico (Venice,
1724-1727), a musical setting for voices and strings of the first fifty Psalms,
as paraphrased in Italian by G. Giustiniani. They were much admired by
Charles Avison, who with John Garth brought out an edition with English
words (London, 1757). Some extracts are to be found in Hawkins’s History
of Music. His other works are chiefly cantatas, either for one voice or
several; the library of the Brussels conservatoire possesses some interesting

volumes of chamber-cantatas composed for his mistress. Although he
produced an opera, La Fede riconosciuta, at Vicenza in 1702, he had little
sympathy with this form of composition, and vented his opinions on the
state of musical drama at the time in the satirical pamphlet Il Teatro alla
moda, published anonymously in Venice in 1720. This little work, which
was frequently reprinted, is not only extremely amusing, but is also most
valuable as a contribution to the history of opera.

A catalogue of his works is given in Monatshefte für
Musikgeschichte, vol. xxiii. (1891).

MARCELLUS, the name of two popes.
Marcellus I. succeeded Marcellinus, after a considerable interval, most
probably in May 308, under Maxentius. He was banished from Rome in
309 on account of the tumult caused by the severity of the penances he had
imposed on Christians who had lapsed under the recent persecution. He
died the same year, being succeeded by Eusebius. He is commemorated on
the 16th of January.

Marcellus II. (Marcello Cervini), the successor of Julius III., was born
on the 6th of May 1501, and was elected pope on the 9th of April 1555. He
had long been identified with the rigorist party in the church, and as
president of the Council of Trent had incurred the anger of the emperor by
his jealous defence of papal prerogative. His motives were lofty, his life

blameless, his plans for reform nobly conceived. But death removed him
(April 30, 1555) before he could do more than give an earnest of his
intentions. He was followed by Paul IV.

Contemporary lives are to be found in Panvinio, continuator of
Platina, De vitis pontiff, rom.; and Ciaconius, Vitae et res gestae
summorum pontiff. rom. (Rome, 1601-1602). P. Polidoro, De gestis,
vita et moribus Marcelli II. (Rome, 1744), makes use of an unpublished
biography of the pope by his brother, Alessandro Cervini. See also
Brilli, Intorno alla vita e alle azioni di Marcello II. (Montepulciano,
1846); Ranke, Popes (Eng. trans., Austin), i. 284 seq.; A. von Reumont,
Gesch. der Stadt Rom, iii. 2, 512, seq.
(T. F. C.)

MARCELLUS, a Roman plebeian family belonging to the
Claudian gens. Its most distinguished members were the following:—

1. Marcus Claudius Marcellus (c. 268-208 b.c.), one of the Roman
generals during the Second Punic War and conqueror of Syracuse. He first
served against Hamilcar in Sicily. In his first consulship (222) he was
engaged, with Cn. Cornelius Scipio as colleague, in war against the
Insubrian Gauls, and won the spolia opima for the third and last time in
Roman history by slaying their chief Viridomarus or Virdumarus (Polybius
ii. 34; Propertius v. 10, 39). In 216, after the defeat at Cannae, he took
command of the remnant of the army at Canusium, and although he was
unable to prevent Capua going over to Hannibal, he saved Nola and

southern Campania. In 214 he was in Sicily as consul at the time of the
revolt of Syracuse; he stormed Leontini and besieged Syracuse, but the skill
of Archimedes repelled his attacks. After a two years’ siege he gradually
forced his way into the city and took it in the face of strong Punic
reinforcements. He spared the lives of the inhabitants, but carried off their
art treasures to Rome, the first instance of a practice afterwards common.
Consul again in 210, he took Salapia in Apulia, which had revolted to
Hannibal, by help of the Roman party there, and put to death the Numidian
garrison. Proconsul in 209, he attacked Hannibal near Venusia, and after a
desperate battle retired to that town; he was accused of bad generalship, and
had to leave the army to defend himself in Rome. In his last consulship
(208), he and his colleague, while reconnoitring near Venusia, were
unexpectedly attacked, and Marcellus was killed. His successes have been
exaggerated by Livy, but the name often given to him, the “sword of
Rome,” was well deserved.

Livy xxiii. 14-17, 41-46; xxiv. 27-32, 35-39; xxv. 5-7, 23-31; xxvi.
26, 29-32; xxvii. 1-5, 21-28; Polybius viii. 5-9, x. 32; Appian, Hannib.
50; Florus ii. 6.

2. M. Claudius Marcellus, an inveterate opponent of Julius Caesar.
During his consulship (51 b.c.) he proposed to remove Caesar from his
army in March 49, but this decision was delayed by Pompey’s irresolution
and the skilful opposition of the tribune C. Curio (see Caesar, Julius). In
January 49 he tried to put off declaring war against Caesar till an army
could be got ready, but his advice was not taken. When Pompey left Italy,
Marcus and his brother Gaius followed, while his cousin withdrew to
Liternum. After Pharsalus M. Marcellus retired to Mytilene, where he
practised rhetoric and studied philosophy. In 46 his cousin and the senate
successfully appealed to Caesar to pardon him, and Marcellus reluctantly
consented to return. On this occasion Cicero’s1 speech Pro Marcello was

delivered. Marcellus left for Italy, but was murdered in May by one of his
own attendants, P. Magius Chilo, in the Peiraeus. Marcellus was a thorough
aristocrat. He was an eloquent speaker (Cicero, Brutus, 71), and a man of
firm character, although not free from avarice.

See Cicero, Ad fam. iv. 4, 7, 10, and Ad Att. v. 11 (ed. Tyrrell and
Purser); Caesar, B. C. i. 2; Suetonius, Caesar, 29; G. Boissier, Cicero
and his Friends (Eng. trans., 1897).

3. M. Claudius Marcellus (c. 43-23 b.c.), son of C. Marcellus and
Octavia, sister of Augustus. In 25 he was adopted by the emperor and
married to his daughter Julia. This seemed to mark him out as the heir to the
throne, but Augustus, when attacked by a serious illness, gave his signet to
M. Vipsanius Agrippa. In 23 Marcellus, then curule aedile, died at Baiae.
Livia was suspected of having poisoned him to get the empire for her son
Tiberius. Great hopes had been built on the youth, and he was celebrated by
many writers, especially by Virgil in a famous passage (Aeneid, vi. 860). He
was buried in the Campus Martius, and Augustus himself pronounced the
funeral oration. The Theatrum Marcelli (remains of which can still be seen)
was afterwards dedicated in his honour.

Horace, Odes, i. 12; Propertius iii. 18; Dio Cassius liii. 28, 30;
Tacitus, Annals, ii. 41; Suetonius, Augustus, 63; Vell. Pat. ii. 93.

1 The authorship of this speech has been disputed.

MARCESCENT (Lat. marcescens, withering), a botanical term
for withering without falling off.

MARCH, EARLS OF, title derived from the “marches” or
boundaries (1) between England and Wales, and (2) England and Scotland,
and held severally by great feudal families possessed of lands in those
border districts. The earls of March on the Welsh borders were descended
from Roger de Mortemer (so called from his castle of Mortemer in
Normandy), who was connected by marriage with the dukes of Normandy.
His son Ralph (d. c. 1104) figures in Domesday as the holder of vast estates
in Shropshire, Herefordshire and other parts of England, especially in the
west; and his grandson Hugh de Mortimer, founder of the priory of
Wigmore in Herefordshire, was one of the most powerful of the barons
reduced to submission by Henry II., who compelled him to surrender his
castles of Cleobury and Wigmore. The Mortimers, however, continued to
exercise almost undisputed sway, as lords of Wigmore, over the western
counties and the Welsh marches.

I. Welsh Marches.—Roger de Mortimer (c. 1286-1330), 8th baron of
Wigmore and 1st earl of March, being an infant at the death of his father,
Edmund, was placed by Edward I. under the guardianship of Piers
Gaveston, and was knighted by Edward in 1306; Mortimer’s mother being a
relative of Edward’s consort, Eleanor of Castile. Through his marriage with
Joan de Joinville, or Genevill, Roger not only acquired increased

possessions on the Welsh marches, including the important castle of
Ludlow, which became the chief stronghold of the Mortimers, but also
extensive estates and influence in Ireland, whither he went in 1308 to
enforce his authority. This brought him into conflict with the De Lacys, who
turned for support to Edward Bruce, brother of Robert Bruce, king of
Scotland. Mortimer was appointed lord-lieutenant of Ireland by Edward II.
in 1316, and at the head of a large army drove Bruce to Carrickfergus, and
the De Lacys into Connaught, wreaking vengeance on their adherents
whenever they were to be found. He was then occupied for some years with
baronial disputes on the Welsh border until about 1318, when he began to
interest himself in the growing opposition to Edward II. and his favourites,
the Despensers; and he supported Humphrey de Bohun, earl of Hereford, in
refusing to obey the king’s summons to appear before him in 1321. Forced
to surrender to the king at Shrewsbury in January 1322, Mortimer was
consigned to the Tower of London, whence he escaped to France in August
1324. In the following year Isabella, wife of Edward II., anxious to escape
from her husband, obtained his consent to her going to France to use her
influence with her brother, Charles IV., in favour of peace. At the French
court the queen found Roger Mortimer; she became his mistress soon
afterwards, and at his instigation refused to return to England so long as the
Despensers retained power as the king’s favourites. The scandal of
Isabella’s relations with Mortimer compelled them both to withdraw from
the French court to Flanders, where they obtained assistance for an invasion
of England. Landing in England in September 1326, they were joined by
Henry, earl of Lancaster; London rose in support of the queen; and Edward
took flight to the west, whither he was pursued by Mortimer and Isabella.
After wandering helplessly for some weeks in Wales, the king was taken on
the 16th of November, and was compelled to abdicate in favour of his son.
But though the latter was crowned as Edward III. in January 1327, the
country was ruled by Mortimer and Isabella, who procured the murder of

Edward II. in the following September. Rich estates and offices of profit
and power were now heaped on Mortimer, and in September 1328 he was
created earl of March. Greedy and grasping, he was no more competent
than the Despensers to conduct the government of the country. The jealousy
and anger of Lancaster having been excited by March’s arrogance,
Lancaster prevailed upon the young king, Edward III., to throw off the yoke
of his mother’s paramour. At a parliament held at Nottingham in October
1330 a plot was successfully carried out by which March was arrested in the
castle, and, in spite of Isabella’s entreaty to her son to “have pity on the
gentle Mortimer,” was conveyed to the Tower. Accused of assuming royal
power and of various other high misdemeanours, he was condemned
without trial and hanged at Tyburn on the 29th of November 1330, his vast
estates being forfeited to the crown. March’s wife, by whom he had four
sons and eleven daughters, survived till 1356. The daughters all married
into powerful families, chiefly of Marcher houses. His eldest son, Edmund,
was father of Roger Mortimer (c. 1328-1360), who was knighted by
Edward III. in 1346, and restored to his grandfather’s title as 2nd earl of
March.

Edmund de Mortimer (1351-1381), 3rd earl of March, was son of Roger,
2nd earl of March, by his wife Philippa, daughter of William Montacute, 1st
earl of Salisbury. Being an infant at the death of his father, Edmund, as a
ward of the crown, was placed by Edward III. under the care of William of
Wykeham and Richard Fitzalan, earl of Arundel. The position of the young
earl, powerful on account of his possessions and hereditary influence in the
Welsh marches, was rendered still more important by his marriage in 1368
to Philippa, only daughter of Lionel, duke of Clarence, third son of Edward
III. Lionel’s wife was Elizabeth, daughter and heiress of William de Burgh,
6th Lord of Connaught and 3rd earl of Ulster, and Lionel had himself been
created earl of Ulster before his marriage. The earl of March, therefore, not
only became the representative of one of the chief Anglo-Norman lordships

in Ireland in right of his wife Philippa, but the latter, on the death of her
father shortly after her marriage, stood next in succession to the crown after
the Black Prince and his sickly son Richard, afterwards king Richard II.
This marriage had, therefore, far-reaching consequences in the history of
England, giving rise to the claim of the house of York to the crown of
England, contested in the War of the Roses; Edward IV. being descended
from the third son of Edward III. as great-great-grandson of Philippa,
countess of March, and in the male line from Edmund, duke of York, fifth
son of Edward III.

Mortimer, now styled earl of March and Ulster, became marshal of
England in 1369, and was employed in various diplomatic missions during
the next following years. He was a member of the committee appointed by
the Peers to confer with the Commons in 1373—the first instance of such a
joint conference since the institution of representative parliaments—on the
question of granting supplies for John of Gaunt’s war in France; and in the
opposition to Edward III. and the court party, which grew in strength
towards the end of the reign, March took the popular side, being prominent
in the Good Parliament of 1376 among the lords who, encouraged by the
Prince of Wales, concerted an attack upon the court party led by John of
Gaunt. The Speaker of the Commons in this parliament was March’s
steward, Peter de la Mare; he firmly withstood John of Gaunt in stating the
grievances of the Commons, in supporting the impeachment of several high
court officials, and in procuring the banishment of the king’s mistress, Alice
Perrers. March was a member of the administrative council appointed by
the same parliament after the death of the Black Prince to attend the king
and advise him in all public affairs. On the accession of Richard II., a
minor, in 1377, the earl became a member of the standing council of
government; though as father of the heir-presumptive to the crown he
wisely abstained from claiming any actually administrative office. The most
powerful person in the realm was, however, John of Gaunt, duke of

Lancaster, whose jealousy of March led to the acceptance by the latter of
the lieutenancy of Ireland in 1379. March succeeded in asserting his
authority in eastern Ulster, but failed to subdue the O’Neills farther west.
Proceeding to Munster to put down the turbulency of the chieftains of the
south, March died at Cork on the 27th of December 1381. He was buried in
Wigmore Abbey, of which he had been a benefactor, and where his wife
Philippa who died about the same time was also interred. The earl had two
sons and two daughters, the elder of whom, Elizabeth, married Henry Percy
(Hotspur), son of the earl of Northumberland. His eldest son Roger
succeeded him as 4th earl of March and Ulster. His second son Edmund
(1376-1409) played an important part in conjunction with his brother-in-law
Hotspur against Owen Glendower; but afterwards joined the latter, whose
daughter he married about 1402.

Roger de Mortimer, 4th earl of March and Ulster (1374-1398), son of
the 3rd earl, succeeded to the titles and estates of his family when a child of
seven, and a month afterwards he was appointed lord-lieutenant of Ireland,
his uncle Sir Thomas Mortimer acting as his deputy. Being a ward of the
Crown, his guardian was the earl of Kent, half-brother to Richard II.; and in
1388 he married Kent’s daughter, Eleanor. The importance which he owed
to his hereditary influence and possessions, and especially to his descent
from Edward III., was immensely increased when Richard II. publicly
acknowledged him as heir-presumptive to the crown in 1385. In 1394 he
accompanied Richard to Ireland, but notwithstanding a commission from
the king as lieutenant of the districts over which he exercised nominal
authority by hereditary right, he made little headway against the native Irish
chieftains. March enjoyed great popularity in England though he took no
active part in opposing the despotic measures of the king; in Ireland he
illegally assumed the native Irish costume. In August 1398 he was killed in
fight with an Irish clan, and was buried in Wigmore Abbey. March’s
daughter Anne married Richard earl of Cambridge, son of Edmund duke of

York, fifth son of Edward III.; their son Richard, duke of York, was father
of King Edward IV., who thus derived his title to the crown and acquired
the estates of the house of Mortimer.

Edmund de Mortimer (1391-1425), 5th earl of March and Ulster, son of
the 4th earl, succeeded to his father’s claim to the crown as well as to his
title and estates on the death of the latter in Ireland in 1398. In the following
year Richard II. was deposed and the crown seized by Henry of Lancaster.
The young earl of March and his brother Roger were then kept in custody
by Henry IV., who, however, treated them honourably, until March 1405,
when they were carried off from Windsor Castle by the opponents of the
Lancastrian dynasty, of whom their uncle Sir Edmund Mortimer (see above)
and his brother-in-law Henry Percy (Hotspur) were leaders in league with
Owen Glendower. The boys were recaptured, and in 1409 were committed
to the care of the prince of Wales. On the accession of the latter as Henry V.,
in 1413, the earl of March was set at liberty and restored to his estates, his
brother Roger having died some years previously; and he continued to
enjoy the favour of the king in spite of a conspiracy in 1415 to place him on
the throne, in which his brother-in-law, the earl of Cambridge, played the
leading part. March accompanied Henry V. throughout his wars in France,
and on the king’s death in 1422 became a member of the council of regency.
He died in Ireland in 1425, and as he left no issue the earldom of March in
the house of Mortimer became extinct, the estates passing to the last earl’s
nephew Richard, who in 1435 was officially styled duke of York, earl of
March and Ulster, and baron of Wigmore. Richard’s son Edward having
ascended the throne in 1461 as Edward IV., the earldom of March became
merged in the crown.

See Thomas Rymer, Foedera, &c. (London, 1704-1732); T. F. Tout,
The Political History of England, vol. iii., ed. by William Hunt and R.
L. Poole (London, 1905); Sir William Dugdale, Monasticon

anglicanum (3 vols., London, 1655-1673); William Stubbs,
Constitutional History of England, vol. ii.

II. Scottish Marches.—The Scottish earls of March were descended from
Crinan, whose son Maldred married Algitha, daughter of Ughtred, earl of
Northumberland, by Elgiva, daughter of the Saxon king Æthelred.
Maldred’s son Cospatrick, or Gospatrick, was made earl of Northumberland
by William the Conqueror; but being soon afterwards deprived of this
position he fled to Scotland, where Malcolm Canmore, king of Scotland,
welcomed him and granted him Dunbar and the adjoining lands. Two
generations of Cospatricks followed in lineal succession, bearing the title of
earl, but without territorial designation. Cospatrick II. witnessed the charter
of Alexander I. founding the abbey of Scone in 1115. The 3rd earl, also
named Cospatrick, a liberal benefactor of Melrose Abbey, died in 1166,
leaving two sons, the younger of whom was the ancestor of the earls of
Home. The elder son, Waltheof, was the first of the family to be styled
“Comes de Dunbar,” about the year 1174. His importance is proved by the
fact that he was one of the hostages for the performance of the Treaty of
Falaise for the liberation of William the Lion in 1175. Waltheof’s son
Patrick Dunbar (the name Dunbar, derived from the family estates, now
becoming an hereditary surname), styled 5th earl of Dunbar, although his
father had been the first to adopt the territorial designation, was keeper of
Berwick Castle, and married Ada, natural daughter of William the Lion. His
grandson Patrick, 7th earl, headed the party that liberated King Alexander
III. in 1255 from the Comyns, and in the same year was nominated guardian
of the king and queen by the Treaty of Roxburgh. He signed the Treaty of
Perth (July 6, 1266) by which Magnus VI. of Norway ceded the Isle of Man
and the Hebrides to Scotland. His wife was Christian, daughter of Robert
Bruce, the competitor for the crown of Scotland.

Patrick Dunbar, 8th earl of Dunbar and 1st earl of March, claimed the
crown of Scotland in 1291 as descendant of Ada, daughter of William the
Lion. He was one of the “seven earls of Scotland,” a distinct body separate
from the other estates of the realm, who claimed the right to elect a king in
cases of disputed succession, and whose authority was, perhaps, to be
traced to the seven provinces of the Pictish kingdom. He was the first of the
earls of Dunbar to appear in the records as “comes de Marchia,” or earl of
March. Like most of his family in later times, he was favourable to the
English interest in Scottish affairs, and he did homage to Edward I. of
England. His wife Marjory, daughter of Alexander Comyn, earl of Buchan,
took the other side and held the castle of Dunbar for Baliol, but was forced
to surrender it to Edward in 1296. In 1298 he was appointed the English
king’s lieutenant in Scotland.

Patrick Dunbar (1285-1369), 9th earl of Dunbar and 2nd earl of March,
son of the preceding, gave refuge to Edward II. of England after
Bannockburn, and contrived his escape by sea to England. Later, he made
peace with Robert Bruce, and by him was appointed governor of Berwick
Castle, which he held against Edward III. until the defeat of the Scots at
Halidon Hill (July 19, 1333) made it no longer tenable. His countess,
known in Scottish history and romance as “Black Agnes,” daughter of
Thomas Randolph, earl of Moray (Murray), and grandniece of Robert
Bruce, is famous for her defence of Dunbar Castle against the English under
the earl of Salisbury in 1338, Salisbury being forced to abandon the attempt
after a fierce siege lasting nineteen weeks. This lady succeeded to the
estates and titles of her brother, John Randolph, 3rd earl of Moray. The
earldom of Moray passed after her death to her second son, John Dunbar,
who married Marjory, daughter of King Robert II. Black Agnes also bore to
the earl of March two daughters, the elder of whom, Agnes, after being the
mistress of King David II., married Sir James Douglas, lord of Dalkeith,
from whom were descended the first three earls of Morton; the younger,

Elizabeth, married John Maitland of Lethington, ancestor of the duke of
Lauderdale, whose second title was marquess of March.

George Dunbar (d. 1420), 10th earl of Dunbar and 3rd earl of March,
great-nephew of the 8th earl and warden of the marches, accompanied
Douglas in his foray into England in 1388, and commanded the Scots after
Otterburn. He afterwards quarrelled with the Douglases, because his
daughter was passed over in favour of a daughter of Archibald, “the Grim
Earl of Douglas,” as wife for David, duke of Rothesay, son of Robert III.
When Douglas seized March’s lands the latter fled to England, where he
was welcomed by Henry IV., to whom he was related. He fought on the
English side at Homildon Hill; and, having revealed to Henry the defection
of the Percies, who were in league with Douglas and Owen Glendower, he
fought against those allies at the battle of Shrewsbury (July 23, 1403).
Becoming reconciled with Douglas, he returned to Scotland in 1409, and
was restored to his earldom by the regent Albany. He died in 1420.

George Dunbar, 11th earl of Dunbar and 4th earl of March, was one of
the negotiators for the release of James I. of Scotland in 1423 from his
captivity in England, and was knighted at that king’s coronation. In 1434,
however, on the ground that the regent had had no power to reverse his
father’s forfeiture for treason, March was imprisoned and his castle of
Dunbar seized by the king; and the parliament at Perth declared his lands
and titles forfeited to the crown. The earl, being released, retired to England
with his son Patrick, whose daughter and heiress Margaret was ancestress of
Patrick, 5th earl of Dumfries, now represented by the marquess of Bute.

The earldom of March in the house of Dunbar having thus been forfeited
to the crown, James II. in 1455 conferred the title, together with that of
warden of the marches, on his second son Alexander, duke of Albany; but
this prince entered into treasonable correspondence with Edward IV. of
England, and in 1487 the earldom of March and the barony and castle of

Dunbar were again declared forfeited and annexed to the crown of
Scotland.

The title of earl of March was next held by the house of Lennox. In 1576
the earldom of Lennox became extinct on the death without male issue of
Charles (father of Lady Arabella Stuart), 5th earl of Lennox; and it was then
revived in favour of Robert Stuart, a grand-uncle of King James VI., second
son of John, 3rd earl of Lennox. But in 1579 Esmé Stuart, a member of a
collateral branch which in 1508 had inherited the lordship of Aubigny in
France, came to Scotland and obtained much favour with James VI. The
earldom of Lennox (soon afterwards raised to a dukedom) was taken from
Robert and conferred upon Esmé; and Robert was compensated by being
created earl of March and baron of Dunbar (1582). Robert died without
legitimate issue in 1586, when the earldom of March again reverted to the
crown. In 1619 Esmé, 3rd duke of Lennox, was created earl of March; and
his son James was created duke of Richmond in 1641. On the death without
issue of Charles, 6th duke of Lennox and 3rd duke of Richmond, in 1672,
his titles devolved upon King Charles II. as nearest collateral heir-male. In
1675 Charles conferred the titles of duke of Richmond and Lennox and earl
of March on Charles Lennox, his natural son by Louise de Keroualle,
duchess of Portsmouth, from whom the earldom of March has descended to
its present holder the duke of Richmond and Gordon. (See Richmond, Earls
and Dukes of; and Lennox.)

The title of earl of March in the peerage of Scotland, by another creation,
was conferred in 1697 on William Douglas, second son of William, 1st
duke of Queensberry. His grandson William, 3rd earl of March, became 4th
duke of Queensberry on the death without surviving male issue of his
cousin Charles, 3rd duke of Queensberry, in 1778. Dying unmarried in
1810, the several titles of the duke passed to different branches of the house
of Douglas. The earldom of March is stated by Sir Bernard Burke and other

authorities to have devolved upon Francis, 8th earl of Wemyss, great-great-
grandson of David, 3rd earl of Wemyss, whose wife was Anne, daughter of
the 1st duke of Queensberry and sister of the 1st earl of March; and the title
is now assumed by the earl of Wemyss. On the other hand, Francis, 8th earl
of Wemyss, not having been an heir of the body of the 1st earl of March, Sir
Robert Douglas says in The Peerage of Scotland that on the death of the 4th
duke of Queensberry in 1810 “the earldom of March, it is supposed,
became extinct.”

See Andrew Lang, History of Scotland (4 vols., London, 1900-
1907); Sir Bernard Burke, A Genealogical History of Dormant and
Extinct Peerages (London, 1866); Sir Robert Douglas, The Peerage of
Scotland (2 vols., Edinburgh 1813); Lady Elizabeth Cust, Some
Account of the Stuarts of Aubigny in France (London, 1891).
(R. J. M.)

MARCH, AUZIAS (c. 1395-1458), Catalan poet, was born at
Valencia towards the end of the 14th century. Little is known of his career
except that he was twice married—first to Na Ysabel Martorell, and second
to Na Johanna Scorna—that he died on the 4th of November 1458, and that
he left several natural children. Inheriting an easy fortune from his father,
the treasurer to the duke of Gandia, and enjoying the powerful patronage of
Prince Carlos de Viana of Aragon, March was enabled to devote himself to
poetical composition. He is an undisguised follower of Petrarch, carrying
the imitation to such a point that he addresses his Cants d’amor to a lady

whom he professes to have seen first in church on Good Friday; so far as
the difference of language allows, he reproduces the rhythmical cadences of
his model, and in the Cants de mort touches a note of brooding sentiment
peculiar to himself. Though his poems are disfigured by obscurity and a
monotonous morbidity, he was fully entitled to the supremacy which he
enjoyed among his contemporaries, and the success of his innovation no
doubt encouraged Boscán to introduce the Italian metres into Castilian.

His verses were first printed in Catalan in 1543, but they had already
become known through the Castilian translation published by Baltasar
de Romani in 1539.

MARCH, FRANCIS ANDREW (1825- ), American
philologist and educationalist, was born on the 25th of October 1825 in
Millbury, Massachusetts. He graduated in 1845 at Amherst, where his
attention was turned to the study of Anglo-Saxon by Noah Webster. He was
a teacher at Swanzey, New Hampshire, and at the Leicester Academy,
Massachusetts, in 1845-1847, and attempted the philological method of
teaching English “like Latin and Greek,” later described in his Method of
Philological Study of the English Language (1865); at Amherst in 1847-
1849; at Fredericksburg, Virginia, in 1852-1855; and in 1855 became a tutor
at Lafayette College, where he became adjunct professor of belles-lettres
and English literature in 1856, and professor of English language and
comparative philology—the first chair of the kind established—in 1857. He

lectured on constitutional and public law and Roman law in 1875-1877, and
also taught subjects as diverse as botany and political economy. In 1907 he
became professor emeritus. At Lafayette he introduced the first carefully
scientific study of English in any American college, and in 1870 published
A Comparative Grammar of the Anglo-Saxon Language, in which its Forms
are Illustrated by Those of the Sanskrit, Greek, Latin, Gothic, Old Saxon,
Old Friesic, Old Norse and Old High German, and An Anglo-Saxon
Reader; he was editor of the “Douglass Series of Christian Greek and Latin
Classics,” to which he contributed Latin Hymns (1874); he was chairman of
the Commission of the State of Pennsylvania on Amended Orthography;
and was consulting editor of the Standard Dictionary, and in 1879-1882
was director of the American readers for the Philological Society’s (New
Oxford) Dictionary. He was president of the American Philological
Association in 1873-1874 and in 1895-1896, of the Spelling Reform
Association after 1876, and of the Modern Language Association in 1891-
1893. Among American linguistic scholars March ranks with Whitney,
Child and Gildersleeve; and his studies in English, though practically
pioneer work in America, are of undoubted value. His article “On Recent
Discussions of Grimm’s Law” in the Transactions and Proceedings of the
American Philological Association for 1873 in large part anticipated
Verner’s law. With his son, Francis Andrew March, jun. (b. 1863), adjunct-
professor of modern languages in 1884-1891 and subsequently professor of
English literature at Lafayette, he edited A Thesaurus Dictionary of the
English Language (1903).

See Addresses in Honor of Professor Francis A. March, LL.D.,
L.H.D., delivered at Easton, Pennsylvania, on the 24th of October
1895.

MARCH, a market town in the Wisbech parliamentary division of
Cambridgeshire, England, 30 m. N. by W. of Cambridge. Pop. of urban
district (1901), 7565. It lies in the midst of the flat fen country, on the old
course of the river Nene. It is an important junction on the Great Eastern
railway and the starting-point of a line worked by that company jointly with
the Great Northern to Lincoln and Doncaster. The church of St Wendreda,
in Early English and later styles, is remarkable for a magnificent
Perpendicular timber roof, beautifully carved. There are agricultural
implement and engineering works, and corn mills.

MARCH, the third month of the modern calendar, containing thirty-
one days. It was the Romans’ first month until the adoption of the Julian
calendar, 46 b.c., and it continued to be the beginning of the legal year in
England until the 18th century. In France it was reckoned the first month of
the year until 1564, when, by an edict of Charles IX., January was decreed
to be thenceforth the first month. Scotland followed the example of France
in 1599; but in England the change did not take place before 1752. The

Romans called the month Martius, a name supposed to have been conferred
on it by Romulus in honour of his putative father, Mars, the god of war; but
Ovid declares the month to have existed before the time of Romulus,
though in a different position in the calendar. The Anglo-Saxons called
March Hlyd-monath, “loud or stormy month,” or Lencten-monath,
“lengthening month,” in allusion to the fact that the days then rapidly
become longer. There is an old saying, common to both England and
Scotland—which has its equivalent among the Basques and many European
peoples—representing March as borrowing three days from April; the last
three days of March being called the “borrowing” or the “borrowed days.”
As late as the end of the 18th century the first three days of March were
known in Devonshire as “Blind Days,” and were deemed so unlucky that no
farmer would sow seed then.

The chief festival days of March are the 1st, St David; the 12th, St
Gregory; the 17th, St Patrick; and the 25th, Lady Day, one of the quarter
days in England.

MARCH (1) (from Fr. marcher, to walk; the earliest sense in French
appears to be “to trample,” and the origin has usually been found in the Lat.
marcus, hammer; Low Lat. marcare, to hammer; hence to beat the road
with the regular tread of a soldier: cf. “beat,” of a policeman’s round), the
movement of military troops with regular rhythmical steps, often with the
time marked by the beat of drum, the sound of pipes or bugles or the music

of a military band; hence the advance or movement of a body of troops
from one point to another, and the distance covered in so doing. The word is
also naturally applied to the music composed for marching to, and to the
steady regular advance or progress of non-military bodies or persons, or of
events, &c. In the military sense, “marching” is walking in formed bodies
of troops, either during drill evolutions on parade or on the “line of march”
from one place to another. In both senses the word is used with mounted
troops as well as with dismounted men. Formerly all evolutions were
carried out at the so-called “parade-march” pace of about 75-80 paces to the
minute, and in one or two armies of the 18th century the parade step
cadence was as slow as 60. These cadences are now, however, reserved in
all armies for ceremonial occasions, and the usual manœuvre and marching
pace (“quick march”) is about 120, the “double” march pace (pas
gymnastique) about 180. The “quick” march, translated into miles and
hours, is about 31⁄2 or 35⁄8 miles an hour in all armies, though a few special
bodies of light troops such as the Italian Bersaglieri are trained to move at a
much faster rate for hours together, either by alternate “quick” and “double”
marching or by an unvarying “jog-trot.” The paces recognized for cavalry
are the walk, the trot, the canter and the gallop; the usual practice on the
line of march being to alternate the walk and the trot, which combination
gives a speed of about 5 miles an hour for many hours together. A “day’s
march,” or more simply a “march,” is usually reckoned to be 15-16 miles
for a large body of troops, a “forced” march being one of 20 miles or over,
or one in which, from whatever cause, the troops are on foot for more than
about seven hours. For large bodies of troops the rate of movement on the
line of march rarely exceeds 3 miles an hour. The immense assistance
afforded by music to marching troops has been recognized from the earliest
times of organized armies, and a great deal of special march-music has been
written for military bands, formerly often in 3⁄4 or 6⁄8 time (one bar
representing one pace with the foot), but now almost invariably in common

or 2⁄4 time, which is more suitable for the “quick march.” The music itself is
usually a combination of simple, lively melody and well-marked accents for
the drums, with little attempt at contrapuntal writing. The fife or piccolo,
the natural bugle (in Italy and elsewhere the chromatic key-bugle is used),
and the drum are the principal instruments, the “band,” as distinct from the
“drums” and “bugles,” having in addition to drum and fifes clarinets
(saxophones in France and Belgium) and saxhorns of all types. In Scottish
regiments, and in a few isolated cases elsewhere, bagpipes provide the
marching music. The importance of music on the march is attested further
by the almost universal practice of singing or whistling marching songs,
and even playing them on concertinas, &c., in the absence of the band and
drums.

2. From marche, the French form of a common Teutonic word
represented in English by “mark” (q.v.), a boundary or frontier region
between two countries or districts. The word appears to have been first used
in this sense in the 8th century, and the earliest “mark” or “march” districts
were tracts of land on the borders of the Carolingian Empire. Wherever
Charlemagne pushed forward the frontiers of the Frankish realm he
provided for the security of his lands, new and old alike, by establishing
mark districts on the borders. The defence and oversight of these were
entrusted to special officers, afterwards called margraves, or counts of the
mark, who usually enjoyed more extensive powers than fell to the lot of an
ordinary count. It is at this time that we hear first of the Spanish mark
(marca hispanica) and the Bavarian mark (marca bajoariae). These mark
districts were practically obliterated during the reigns of the feeble
sovereigns who succeeded Charlemagne, but the system was revived with
the accession of Henry the Fowler to the German throne early in the 10th
century and with a renewal of the work of conquering and colonizing the
regions east of the Elbe, and in eastern Germany generally. Under Henry
and his son, Otto the Great, marks were again set upon the borders of

Germany, and this time the organization was more lasting. The mark
districts increased in size and strength, especially those which fell under the
dominion of an able and energetic ruler, and some of them became powerful
states, retaining the name mark long after the original significance of the
word had been forgotten. It is interesting to note that the two most
important of the modern German states, Austria and Prussia, both had their
origin in mark districts, the mark of Brandenburg, the nucleus of the
kingdom of Prussia, being at first a border district to the east of the duchy
of Saxony, and the east mark, or mark of Austria, being a border district of
the duchy of Bavaria. In Italy march districts made their appearance about
the same time as in other parts of the Frankish Empire. The best known of
these is the march of Ancona, which with other marches and adjoining
districts, was known later as the Marches, a province lying about the centre
of Italy between the Apennines and the Adriatic Sea. After forming part of
the states of the Church the Marches were united with the kingdom of Italy
in 1860 (see Marches, The).

In England in the same connexion the plural word “marches” was the
form commonly adopted, and soon after the Norman Conquest the disturbed
districts on the borders of Wales began to be known as the Welsh marches.
Lands therein were granted to powerful nobles on condition that they
undertook the defence of the neighbouring counties of England. These lords
of the marches, or lords marcher, as they were often called, had special
privileges, but they were generally so fully occupied in fighting against
each other and in seeking to increase their own wealth and power that the
original object of their appointment was entirely forgotten. The condition of
the marches grew worse and worse, and during disturbed reigns, like those
of Henry III. and Edward II., lawlessness was rampant and rebellion was
centred therein. A more satisfactory condition of affairs, however, prevailed
after the conclusion of the Wars of the Roses; and the establishment by
Henry VIII. in 1542 of a council of Wales and the marches was followed by

a notable diminution of disorder in this region. About the time of Elizabeth
the Welsh marches ceased to have any but an historical importance. In 1328
Roger Mortimer, a member of one of the most powerful of the marcher
families, was created earl of March (comes de marchia Waliae), and in the
reign of Edward III. (1354) the marches were declared to be no part of the
principality, but directly subject to the English crown. It is difficult to define
the boundaries of the Welsh marches, as their extent varied considerably
from time to time, but under Edward I. and again under the Lancastrian
kings the marcher lordships included more than half of the area of Wales;
they embraced practically the whole of the principality except the counties
of Anglesea, Carnarvon and Merioneth in the north and Carmarthen and
Cardigan in the south, together with parts of the English border counties,
Monmouth, Hereford and Shropshire.

The debateable ground between England and Scotland was also known as
the marches, although its condition began to attract the attention of the
southern kingdom somewhat later than was the case with Wales.
Arrangements were made for garrisoning them and at one time they were
divided into three sections: the east, the west, and the middle marches, the
oversight of each being entrusted to a warden. Roughly speaking, they
embraced the modern counties of Northumberland and Cumberland,
together with a tract on the Scottish side of the border. The need for
protecting them ceased soon after the accession of James VI. of Scotland to
the English throne, and they have now only an historical and legendary
significance. About 1200 Patrick de Dunbar, earl of Dunbar, called himself
earl of March, taking the name from the merse, or march, a tract of land in
Berwickshire.

In France under the ancien régime there was a county of La Marche, and
in north-east Germany there was the county of La Marck, now part of the
kingdom of Prussia.

MARCHE, or La Marche, one of the former provinces of France. It
owes its name to its position, it having been in the 10th century a march or
border district between the duchy of Aquitaine and the domains of the
Frankish kings in central France. Sometimes it was called the Marche
Limousine, and originally it was a small district cut partly from Limousin
and partly from Poitou. Its area was increased during the 13th century, after
which, however, it remained unaltered until the time of the Revolution. It
was bounded on the N. by Berry; on the E. by Bourbonnais and Auvergne;
on the S. by Limousin; and on the W. by Poitou. It embraced the greater
part of the modern department of Creuse, a considerable part of Haute
Vienne, and a fragment of Indre. Its area was about 1900 sq. m.; its capital
was Charroux and later Guéret, and among its other principal towns were
Dorat, Bellac and Confolens.

Marche first appears as a separate fief about the middle of the 10th
century when William III., duke of Aquitaine, gave it to one of his vassals
named Boso, who took the title of count. In the 12th century it passed to the
counts of Limousin, and this house retained it until the death of the
childless Count Hugh in 1303, when it was seized by the French king,
Philip IV. In 1316 it was made a duchy for Prince Charles, afterwards King
Charles IV., and a few years later (1327) it passed into the hands of the
family of Bourbon. The family of Armagnac held it from 1435 to 1477,
when it reverted to the Bourbons, and in 1527 it was seized by Francis I.
and became part of the domains of the French crown. It was divided into

Haute Marche and Basse Marche, the estates of the former being in
existence until the 17th century. From 1470 until the Revolution the
province was under the jurisdiction of the parlement of Paris.

See A. Thomas, Les États provinciaux de la France centrale (1879).

MARCHE, a town of Belgium in the province of Luxemburg, 33 m.
S.W. of Liége and about 28 m. S.E. of Namur. Pop. (1904), 3540. It dates
from the 7th century, when it was the chief town of the pagus falmiensis, as
it still is of the same district now called Famène. Formerly it was fortified,
and a treaty was signed there in 1577 between Philip II. and the United
Provinces. In 1792 Lafayette was taken prisoner by the Austrians in a
skirmish near it.

MARCHENA, a town of southern Spain, in the province of
Seville, on the Cordova-Utrera and Marchena-La Roda railways. Pop.
(1900), 12,468. Marchena occupies a sandy valley near the river Corbones,
a left-hand territory of the Guadalquivir. Formerly it was surrounded with

walls and towers, a large portion of which still remains. Among the
principal buildings is the palace of the dukes of Arcos, within the enclosure
of which is an ancient Moorish building, now the church of Santa Maria de
la Mota. At the eastern end of the town is a sulphur spring. There is some
trade in wheat, barley, olives, oil and wine. Marchena (perhaps the Castra
Gemina of Pliny) was taken from the Moors by St Ferdinand in 1240.

MARCHENA RUIZ DE CASTRO, JOSÉ (1768-
1821?), Spanish author, was born at Utrera on the 18th of November 1768
and studied with distinction at the university of Seville. He took minor
orders and was for some time professor at the seminary of Vergara, but he
became a convert to the doctrines of the French philosophes, scandalizing
his acquaintances by his professions of materialism and his denunciations
of celibacy. His writings being brought before the Inquisition in 1792,
Marchena escaped to Paris, where he is said to have collaborated with
Marat in L’Ami du peuple; at a later date he organized a revolutionary
movement at Bayonne, returned to Paris, avowed his sympathies with the
Girondists, and refused the advances of Robespierre. He acted as editor of
L’Ami des lois and other French journals till 1799, when he was expelled
from France; he succeeded, however, in obtaining employment under
Moreau, upon whose fall in 1804 he declared himself a Bonapartist. In 1808
he accompanied Murat to Spain as private secretary; in this same year he
was imprisoned by the Inquisition, but was released by Joseph Bonaparte,
who appointed him editor of the official Gaceta. In 1813 Marchena retired

to Valencia, and thence to France, where he supported himself by
translating into Spanish the works of Montesquieu, Rousseau, Voltaire and
Volney. The Liberal triumph of 1820 opened Spain to him once more, but
he was coldly received by the revolutionary party. He died at Madrid
shortly before the 26th of February 1821. The interest of his voluminous
writings is almost wholly ephemeral, but they are excellent specimens of
trenchant journalism. His Fragmentum Petronii (Basel, 1802), which
purports to reconstruct missing passages in the current text of Petronius, is a
testimony to Marchena’s fine scholarship; but, by the irony of fate,
Marchena is best known by his ode to Christ Crucified, which breathes a
spirit of profound and tender piety.

MARCHES, THE (It. Le Marche), a territorial division of Italy,
embracing the provinces of Pesaro and Urbino, Ancona, Macerata, and
Ascoli Piceno, with an area of 3763 sq. m., and a population of 1,088,763 in
1901. It is bounded by the Emilia on the N., the Adriatic on the E., the
Abruzzi on the S., and Umbria and Tuscany on the W. The four provinces
follow one another in the order given from north to south and have a certain
amount of coast-line. The chief rivers, all of which run into the Adriatic
eastwards and north-eastwards, are the Metauro (anc. Metaurus, q.v.) and
the Tronto (anc. Truentus), the latter forming the southern boundary of the
compartimento for some distance. Except for the river valleys and the often
very narrow coast strip, the general level is more than 500 ft. above the sea.
The lower hills are very largely composed of loose, clayey, unstable earth,

while the Apennines are of limestone. The province of Pesaro and Urbino
falls within the boundaries of the ancient Umbria (q.v.), while the territory
of the other three belonged to Picenum (q.v.). The railway from Bologna to
Brindisi runs along the coast-line of the entire territory. At Ancona it is
joined by the main line from Foligno and Rome; at Porto Civitanova is a
branch to Macerata, San Severino and Fabriano (a station on the line from
Ancona to Rome and the junction for Urbino); at Porto S. Giorgio is a
branch to Fermo and, at Porto d’Ascoli, a branch to Ascoli Piceno. But,
with the exception of the railway along the coast, there is no
communication north and south, owing to the mountainous nature of the
country, except by somewhat devious roads.

Owing largely to the mezzadria or métayer system, under which products
are equally divided between the owners and the cultivators of the land, the
soil is fairly highly cultivated, though naturally poor in quality. The silk
industries, making of straw-plait and straw hats, rearing of silkworms and
cocoons, with some sugar-refining, tobacco, terra-cotta manufacture,
brickworks and ironworks, furnish the chief occupations of the people next
after agriculture and pastoral pursuits. Another important branch of activity
is the paper industry, especially at Fabriano. Chiaravalle possesses one of
the largest tobacco factories of the Italian régie. Limestone quarries and
sulphur mines supply building stone and sulphur to the regions of central
Italy; chalk and petroleum are also found. As regards maritime trade the
province possesses facilities in the port of Ancona (the only really good
harbour, where are also important shipbuilding works), the canal ports of
Senegallia (Sinigaglia), Pesaro, Fano and other smaller harbours chiefly
used by fishing boats. Fishing is carried on by the entire coast population,
which furnishes a large contingent of sailors to the Italian navy.

For the early history of the territory of the Marches see Picenum. From
the Carolingian period onwards the name Marca begins to appear—first the

Marca Fermana for the mountainous part of Picenum, the Marca
Camerinese for the district farther north, including a part of Umbria, and the
Marca Anconitana for the former Pentapolis. In 1080 the Marca Anconitana
was given in investiture to Robert Guiscard by Gregory VII., to whom the
countess Matilda ceded the Marches of Camerino and of Fermo. In 1105 we
find the emperor Henry IV. investing Werner with the whole territory of the
three marches under the name of March of Ancona. It was afterwards once
more recovered by the Church and governed by papal legates. It became
part of the kingdom of Italy in 1860.

The pictorial art of the Marches from the 13th century onwards has
become the object of considerable interest since the important exhibition
held at Macerata in 1905, when many interesting works, scattered all over
the district in small towns and villages, were brought together. The result
was something of a revelation, for, though the influence of Umbria was
always considerable, there were many independent elements (see F. M.
Perkins in Rassegna d’ Arte, 1906, 49 sqq.).
(T. As.)

MARCHMONT, EARLS OF. The 1st earl of Marchmont
was Sir Patrick Hume or Home (1641-1724), son of Sir Patrick Hume, bart.
(d. 1648), of Polwarth, Berwickshire, and a descendant of another Sir
Patrick Hume, a supporter of the Reformation in Scotland. A member of the
same family was Alexander Hume (c. 1560-1609), the Scottish poet, whose
Hymns and Sacred Songs were published in 1599 (new ed. 1832). Polwarth,

as Patrick Hume was usually called, became a member of the Scottish
parliament in 1665. Here he was active in opposing the harsh policy of the
earl of Lauderdale towards the Covenanters, and for his contumacy he was
imprisoned. After his release he went to London, where he associated
himself with the duke of Monmouth. Suspected of complicity in the Rye
House plot, he remained for a time in hiding and then crossed over to the
Netherlands, where he took part in the deliberations of Monmouth, the earl
of Argyll and other exiles about the projected invasion of Great Britain.
Although he appeared to distrust Argyll, Polwarth sailed to Scotland with
him in 1685, and after the failure of the rising he escaped to Utrecht, where
he lived in great poverty until 1688. He accompanied William of Orange to
England, and in 1689 he was again a member of the Scottish parliament. In
1690 he was made a peer as Lord Polwarth; in 1696 he became lord high
chancellor of Scotland, and in 1697 was created earl of Marchmont. When
Anne became queen in 1702 he was deprived of the chancellorship. He died
on the 2nd of August 1724. His son Alexander, the 2nd earl (1676-1740),
took the name of Campbell instead of Hume after his marriage in 1697 with
Margaret, daughter and heiress of Sir George Campbell of Cessnock,
Ayrshire. He was a lord of session from 1704 to 1714; ambassador to
Denmark from 1715 to 1721, and lord clerk register from 1716 to 1733. His
son Hugh Hume, 3rd earl (1708-1794), who entered parliament in 1734 at
the same time as his twin brother Alexander (d. 1756), afterwards lord clerk
register of Scotland, was keeper of the great seal of Scotland, one of
Bolingbroke’s most intimate friends and one of Pope’s executors. His two
sons having predeceased their father, the earldom became dormant,
Marchmont House, Berwickshire, and the estates passing to Sir Hugh
Purves, bart., a descendant of the 2nd earl, who took the name of Hume-
Campbell. The 3rd earl had, however, three daughters, one of whom, Diana
(d. 1827), married Walter Scott of Harden, Berwickshire; and in 1835 her
son Hugh Hepburne-Scott (1758-1841) successfully claimed the Scottish

barony of Polwarth. In 1867 his grandson, Walter Hugh (b. 1838), became
6th Lord Polwarth.

See The Marchmont Papers, ed. Sir G. H. Rose (1831).

MARCHPANE, or Marzipan, a sweetmeat made of sweet almonds
and sugar pounded and worked into a paste, and moulded into various
shapes, or used in the icing of cakes, &c. The best marchpane comes from
Germany, that from Königsberg being celebrated. The origin of the word
has been much discussed. It is common in various forms in most European
languages, Romanic or Teutonic; Italian has marzapane, French massepain,
and German marzipan, which has in English to some extent superseded the
true English form “marchpane.” Italian seems to have been the source from
which the word passed into other languages. In Johann Burchard’s Diarium
curiae romanae (1483-1492) the Latin form appears as martiapanis (Du
Cange, Glossarium s.v.), and Minshseu explains the word as Martius Panis,
bread of Mars, from the “towers, castles and such like” that appeared on
elaborate works of the confectioner’s art made of this sweatmeat. Another
derivation is that from Gr. μάζα, barley cake, and Lat. panis. A connexion
has been sought with the name of a Venetian coin, matapanus (Du Cange,
s.v.), on which was a figure of Christ enthroned, struck by Enrico Dandolo,
doge of Venice (1192-1205). From the coin the word was applied to a small
box, and hence apparently to the sweetmeat contained in it.

MARCIAN (c. 390-457), emperor of the East (450-457), was born
in Thrace or Illyria, and spent his early life as an obscure soldier. He
subsequently served for nineteen years under Ardaburius and Aspar, and
took part in the wars against the Persians and Vandals. Through the
influence of these generals he became a captain of the guards, and was later
raised to the rank of tribune and senator. On the death of Theodosius II. he
was chosen as consort by the latter’s sister and successor, Pulcheria, and
called upon to govern an empire greatly humbled and impoverished by the
ravages of the Huns. Marcian repudiated the payment of tribute to Attila; he
reformed the finances, checked extravagance, and repeopled the devastated
districts. He repelled attacks upon Syria and Egypt (452), and quelled
disturbances on the Armenian frontier (456). The other notable event of his
reign is the Council of Chalcedon (451), in which Marcian endeavoured to
mediate between the rival schools of theology.

See Gibbon, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (ed. Bury,
London, 1896), iii. 384, iv. 444-445; J. Bury, The Later Roman Empire
(London, 1889), i. 135-136.

MARCIANUS (c. a.d. 400), Greek geographer, was born at
Heraclea in Pontus. Two of his works have been preserved in a more or less
mutilated condition. In the first, the Periplus of the Outer Sea, in two books,
in which he proposed to give a complete description of the coasts of the
eastern and western oceans, his chief authority is Ptolemy; the distances
from one point to another are given in stades, with the object of rendering
the work easier for the ordinary student. In this he follows Protagoras, who,
according to Photius (cod. 188), wrote a sketch of geography in six books.
The work contains nothing that cannot be learned from Ptolemy, whom he
follows in calling the promontory of the Novantae (Mull of Galloway) the
most northern point of Britain. Improving on Ptolemy, he makes the island
of Taprobane (Ceylon) twenty times as large as it is in reality. The second,
the Periplus of the Inner Sea (the Mediterranean), is a meagre epitome of a
similar work by Menippus of Pergamum, who lived during the times of
Augustus and Tiberius. It contains a description of the southern coast of the
Euxine from the Thracian Bosporus to the river Iris in Pontus. A few
fragments remain of an epitome by Marcianus of the eleven books of the
Geographumena of Artemidorus of Ephesus.

See J. Hudson, Geographiae veteris scriptores graeci minores, vol. i.
(1698), with Dodwell’s dissertation; C. W. Müller, Geographici graeci
minores, vol. i. pp. cxxix., 515-573; E. Miller, Périple de Marcien
d’Héraclée (1839); S. F. G. Hoffmann, Marciani Periplus (1841); E. H.

Bunbury, Hist. of Ancient Geography (1879), ii. 660; A. Forbiger,
Handbuch der alten Geographie, vol. i. (1842).

MARCION and THE MARCIONITE CHURCHES.
In the period between 130 and 180 a.d. the varied and complicated
Christian fellowships in the Roman Empire crystallized into close and
mutually exclusive societies—churches with fixed constitutions and creeds,
schools with distinctive esoteric doctrines, associations for worship with
peculiar mysteries, and ascetic sects with special rules of conduct. Of
ecclesiastical organizations the most important, next to Catholicism, was
the Marcionite community. Like the Catholic Church, this body professed
to comprehend everything belonging to Christianity. It admitted all
believers without distinction of age, sex, rank or culture. It was no mere
school for the learned, disclosed no mysteries for the privileged, but sought
to lay the foundation of the Christian community on the pure gospel, the
authentic institutes of Christ. The pure gospel, however, Marcion found to
be everywhere more or less corrupted and mutilated in the Christian circles
of his time. His undertaking thus resolved itself into a reformation of
Christendom. This reformation was to deliver Christendom from false
Jewish doctrines by restoring the Pauline conception of the gospel,—Paul
being, according to Marcion, the only apostle who had rightly understood
the new message of salvation as delivered by Christ. In Marcion’s own
view, therefore, the founding of his church—to which he was first driven by
opposition—amounts to a reformation of Christendom through a return to

the gospel of Christ and to Paul; nothing was to be accepted beyond that.
This of itself shows that it is a mistake to reckon Marcion among the
Gnostics. A dualist he certainly was, but he was not a Gnostic. For he
ascribed salvation, not to “knowledge” but to “faith”; he appealed openly to
the whole Christian world; and he nowhere consciously added foreign
elements to the revelation given through Christ. It is true that in many
features his Christian system—if we may use the expression—resembles
the so-called Gnostic systems; but the first duty of the historian is to point
out what Marcion plainly aimed at; only in the second place have we to
inquire how far the result corresponded with those purposes.

The doctrines of Marcion and the history of his churches from the
2nd to the 7th century are known to us from the controversial works of
the Catholic fathers. From Justin onwards, almost every eminent
Church teacher takes some notice of Marcion, while very many write
extensive treatises against him. The most important of those which
have come down to us are the controversial pieces of Irenaeus (in his
great work against heretics), Tertullian (Adv. Marc. i.-v.), Hippolytus,
Pseudo-Origen Adamantius, Epiphanius, and the Armenian Esnik.1
From these works the contents of the Marcionite Gospel, and also the
text of Paul’s epistles in Marcion’s recension, can be settled with
tolerable accuracy. His opponents, moreover, have preserved some
expressions of his, with extracts from his principal work; so that our
knowledge of Marcion’s views is in part derived from the best sources.

Marcion was a wealthy shipowner, belonging to Sinope in Pontus. He
appears to have been a convert from Paganism to Christianity, although it
was asserted in later times that his father had been a bishop. That report is
probably as untrustworthy as another, that he was excommunicated from the
Church for seducing a virgin. What we know for certain is that after the
death of Hyginus, bishop of Rome (or c. 139 a.d.), he arrived, in the course

of his travels, at Rome, and made a handsome donation of money to the
local church. Even then, however, the leading features of his peculiar
system must have been already thought out. At Rome he tried to gain
acceptance for them in the college of presbyters and in the church; indeed
he had previously made similar attempts in Asia Minor. But he now
encountered such determined opposition from the majority of the
congregation that he found it necessary to withdraw from the great church
and establish in Rome a community of his own. This was about the year
144. The new society increased in the two following decades; and very soon
numerous sister-churches were flourishing in the east and west of the
empire. Marcion took up his residence permanently in Rome, but still
undertook journeys for the propagation of his opinions. In Rome he became
acquainted with the Syrian Gnostic Cerdo, whose speculations influenced
the development of the Marcionite theology. Still Marcion seems never to
have abandoned his design of gaining over the whole Church to his gospel.
The proof of this is found, partly in the fact that he tried to establish
relations with Polycarp of Smyrna, from whom he got a sharp rebuff, partly
in a legend to the effect that towards the end of his life he sought
readmission to the Church. Such, presumably, was the construction put in
after times on his earnest endeavour to unite Christians on the footing of the
“pure gospel.” When he died is not known, but his death can scarcely have
been much later than the year 165.

The distinctive teaching of Marcion originated in a comparison of the
Old Testament with the gospel of Christ and the theology of the apostle
Paul. Its motive was not cosmological or metaphysical, but religious and
historical. In the gospel he found a God revealed who is goodness and love,
and who desires faith and love from men. This God he could not discover in
the Old Testament; on the contrary, he saw there the revelation of a just,
stern, jealous, wrathful and variable God, who requires from his servants
blind obedience, fear and outward righteousness. Overpowered by the

majesty and novelty of the Christian message of salvation, too
conscientious to rest satisfied with the ordinary attempts at the solution of
difficulties, while prevented by the limitations of his time from reaching an
historical insight into the relation of Christianity to the Old Testament and
to Judaism, he believed that he expressed Paul’s view by the hypothesis of
two Gods: the just God of the law (the God of the Jews, who is also the
Creator of the world), and the good God, the Father of Jesus Christ.
Paradoxes in the history of religion and revelation which Paul draws out,
and which Marcion’s contemporaries passed by as utterly
incomprehensible, are here made the foundation of an ethico-dualistic
conception of history and of religion. It may be said that in the 2nd century
only one Christian—Marcion—took the trouble to understand Paul; but it
must be added that he misunderstood him. The profound reflections of the
apostle on the radical antithesis of law and gospel, works and faith, were
not appreciated in the 2nd century. Marcion alone perceived their decisive
religious importance, and with them confronted the legalizing, and in this
sense judaizing, tendencies of his Christian contemporaries. But the Pauline
ideas lost their truth under his treatment; for, when it is denied that the God
of redemption is at the same time the almighty Lord of heaven and earth,
the gospel is turned upside down.

The assumption of two Gods necessarily led to cosmological
speculations. Under the influence of Cerdo, Marcion carried out his ethical
dualism in the sphere of cosmology; but the fact that his system is not free
from contradictions is the best proof that all along religious knowledge, and
not philosophical, had the chief values in his eyes. The main outlines of his
teaching are as follows. Man is, in spirit, soul and body, a creature of the
just and wrathful god. This god created man from ὔλη (matter),2 and
imposed on him a strict law. Since no one could keep this law, the whole
human race fell under the curse, temporal and eternal, of the Demiurge.
Then a higher God, hitherto unknown, and concealed even from the

Demiurge, took pity on the wretched, condemned race of men. He sent his
Son (whom Marcion probably regarded as a manifestation of the supreme
God Himself)3 down to this earth in order to redeem men. Clothed in a
visionary body, in the likeness of a man of thirty years old, the Son made
his appearance in the fifteenth year of Tiberius, and preached in the
synagogue at Capernaum. But none of the Jewish people understood him.
Even the disciples whom he chose did not recognize his true nature, but
mistook him for the Messiah promised by the Demiurge through the
prophets, who as warrior and king was to come and set up the Jewish
empire. The Demiurge himself did not suspect who the stranger was;
nevertheless he became angry with him, and, although Jesus had punctually
fulfilled his law, caused him to be nailed to the cross. By that act, however,
he pronounced his own doom. For the risen Christ appeared before him in
his glory, and charged him with having acted contrary to his own law. To
make amends for this crime, the Demiurge had now to deliver up to the
good God the souls of those who were to be redeemed; they are, as it were,
purchased from him by the death of Christ. Christ then proceeded to the
underworld to deliver the spirits of the departed. It was not the Old
Testament saints, however, but only sinners and malefactors like Cain, Esau
and Saul, who obeyed his summons. The prophets and patriarchs, having
been often deceived by the Demiurge, suspected a trick and would not avail
themselves of the promised salvation, remaining content with the bliss of
being in Abraham’s bosom. Then, to gain the living, Christ raised up Paul as
his apostle. He alone understood the gospel, and recognized the difference
between the just God and the good. Accordingly, he opposed the original
apostles with their Judaistic doctrines, and founded small congregations of
true Christians. But the preaching of the false Jewish Christians gained the
upper hand; nay, they even falsified the evangelical oracles and the letters
of Paul. Marcion himself was the next raised up by the good God, to
proclaim once more the true gospel. This he did by setting aside the

spurious gospels, purging the real gospel (the Gospel of Luke) from
supposed judaizing interpolations, and restoring the true text of the Pauline
epistles.4 He likewise composed a book, called the Antitheses,5 in which he
proved the disparity of the two Gods, from a comparison of the Old
Testament with the evangelical writings.

On the basis of these writings Marcion proclaimed the true Christianity,
and founded churches. He taught that all who put their trust in the good
God, and his crucified Son, renounce their allegiance to the Demiurge, and
approve themselves by good works of love, shall be saved. But he taught
further—and here we trace the influence of the current gnosticism on
Marcion—that only the spirit of man is saved by the good God; the body,
because material, perishes. Accordingly his ethics also were thoroughly
dualistic. By the “works of the Demiurge,” which the Christian is to flee, he
meant the whole “service of the perishable.” The Christian must shun
everything sensual, and especially marriage, and free himself from the body
by strict asceticism. The original ethical contrast of “good” and “just” is
thus transformed into the cosmological contrast of “spirit” and “matter.”
The good God appears as the god of spirit, the Old Testament God as the
god of matter. That is Gnosticism; but it is at the same time illogical. For,
since, according to Marcion, the spirit of man is derived, not from the good,
but from the just God, it is impossible to see why the spiritual should yet be
more closely related to the good God than the material. There is yet another
direction in which the system ends with a contradiction. According to
Marcion, the good God never judges, but everywhere manifests His
goodness—is, therefore, not to be feared, but simply to be loved, as a father.
But here the question occurs, What becomes of the men who do not believe
the gospel? Marcion answers, The good God does not judge them, but
merely removes them from His presence. Then they fall under the power of
the Demiurge, who—rewards them for their fidelity? No, says Marcion, but
on the contrary—punishes them in his hell! The contradiction here is

palpable; and at the same time the antithesis of “just” and “good” ultimately
vanishes. For the Demiurge now appears as an inferior being, who in reality
executes the purposes of the good God. It is plain that dualism here
terminates in the idea of the sole supremacy of the good God.

It is not surprising, therefore, that even in the 2nd century the disciples of
Marcion diverged in several directions. Rigorous asceticism, the rejection
of the Old Testament, and the recognition of the “new God” remained
common to all Marcionites, who, moreover, like the Catholics, lived
together in close communities ruled by bishops and presbyters (although
their constitution was originally very loose, and sought to avoid every
appearance of “legality”). Some, however, accepted three first principles
(the evil, the just, the good); others held by two, but regarded the Demiurge
as the god of evil, i.e. the devil; while a third party, like Apelles, the most
distinguished of Marcion’s pupils, saw in the Demiurge only an apostate
angel of the good God—thus returning to monotheism. The golden age of
the Marcionite churches falls between the years 150 and 250. During that
time they were really dangerous to the great Church; for in fact they
maintained certain genuine Christian ideas, which the Catholic Church had
forgotten. The earliest inscription (a.d. 318) on a Christian place of worship
is Marcionite, and was found on a stone which had stood over the doorway
of a house in a Syrian village. From the beginning of the 4th century they
began to die out in the West, or rather they fell a prey to Manichaeism. In
the East also many Marcionites went over to the Manichaeans; but there
they survived much longer. They can be traced down to the 7th century, and
then they seem to vanish. But it was unquestionably from Marcionite
impulses that the new sects of the Paulicians and Bogomils arose; and in so
far as the western Cathari, and the antinomian and anticlerical sects of the
13th century are connected with these, they also may be included in the
history of Marcionitism.

See A. Harnack, History of Dogma, i. 266, 286; F. Loofs,
Dogmengeschichte pp. 111-114; G. Krüger, Early Christian Literature,
and art. in Hauck-Herzog’s Realencyklopädie für prot. Theol. und
Kirche, xii.; F. J. Foakes Jackson’s Christian Difficulties of the Second
and Twentieth Centuries, is a study of Marcion and his relation to
modern thought.
(A. Ha.)

1 Esnik’s presentation of the Marcionite system is a late production, and contains many
speculations that cannot be charged upon Marcion himself.

2 On the relation of matter to the Creator, Marcion himself seems not to have
speculated, though his followers may have done so.

3 Marcion’s teaching at this point forestalls the patripassian christology of Noetus and
Praxeas (see Neander, Church Hist. ii. 143).—[Ed.]

4 Marcion was the earliest critical student of the New Testament canon and text. It is
noteworthy that he refused to admit the genuineness of the Pastoral Epistles and said that
the letter to the Ephesians was really addressed to the Laodiceans (Tertullian, Adv. Marc. v.
11, 21).—(Ed.)

5 Some have seen a reference to this work in 1 Tim. vi. 20.—(Ed.)

MARCOMANNI (i.e. men of the mark, or border), the name of a
Suevic tribe. With kindred peoples they were often in conflict with the
Roman Empire, and gave their name to the Marcomannic War, a struggle
waged by the emperor Marcus Aurelius against them and the Quadi. The

Marcomanni disappeared from history during the 4th century, being
probably merged in the Baiouarii, the later Bavarians.

See Suebi; also F. M. Wittmann, Die älteste Geschichte der
Markomannen (Munich, 1855), and E. Devrient, “Hermunduren und
Markomannen” in Neues Jahrb. f. das klassische Altertum (1901), 51.

MARCOS DE NIZA (c. 1495-1558), a Franciscan friar born in
Nice about 1495. He went to America in 1531, and after serving his order
zealously in Peru, Guatemala and Mexico, was chosen to explore the
country north of Sonora, whose wealth was pictured in the hearsay stories
of Alvar Nuñez Cabeza de Vaca. Preceded by Estevanico, the negro
companion of Cabeza de Vaca in his wanderings and the “Black Mexican”
of Zuñi traditions, Fray Marcos left Culiacan in March 1539, crossed south-
eastern Arizona, penetrated to Zuñi or the “Seven Cities of Cibola,” and in
September returned to Culiacan. He saw Zuñi only from a distance, and his
description of it as equal in size to the city of Mexico was probably exact;
but he embodied much mere hearsay in his report, the Descubrimiento de
las siete ciudades, which led F. V. de Coronado to make his famous
expedition next year to Zuñi, of which Fray Marcos was the guide; and the
realities proved a great disappointment. Fray Marcos was made Provincial
of his order for Mexico before the second trip to Zuñi, and returned in 1541
to the capital, where he died on the 25th of March 1558.

The Descubrimiento is one of the world’s famous narratives of
travel. It may be found in J. F. Pacheco’s Documentos (vol. iii.) and
Hakluyt’s Voyages (vol. iii.); also in G. Ramusio, Navigazione (vol. iii.)
and H. Ternaux-Compans, Voyages (vol. iii.). See A. F. A. Bandelier,
The Gilded Man (El Dorado), (New York, 1893); H. H. Bancroft,
Arizona and New Mexico (San Francisco, 1888), and, for critical
opinions, G. P. Winship, “The Coronado Expedition,” in U.S. Bureau of
Ethnology, Fourteenth Annual Report (for 1892-1893), (Washington,
1896).

MARCOU, JULES (1824-1898), Swiss-American geologist, was
born at Salins, in the department of Jura, in France, on the 20th of April
1824. He was educated at Besançon and at the college of St Louis, Paris. He
worked in early years with J. Thurmann (1804-1855) on the geology of the
Jura mountains. In 1847 he went to North America as travelling geologist
for the Jardin des Plantes, and in the following year in Boston he joined
Agassiz, whom he had met in Switzerland, and accompanied him to the
Lake Superior region. Marcou spent two years in studying the geology of
various parts of the United States and Canada, and returned to Europe for a
short time in 1850. In 1853 he published a Geological Map of the United
States, and the British Provinces of North America. In 1855 he became
professor of geology and palaeontology at the polytechnic school of Zurich,
but relinquished this office in 1859, and in 1861 again returned to the
United States, when he assisted Agassiz in founding the Museum of

Comparative Zoology. In 1861 he published his Geological Map of the
World (2nd ed. 1875). Of his published papers the more noteworthy are
those on the Jura-Cretaceous formations of the Jura, on the “Dyas”
(Permian) of Nebraska, and on the Taconic rocks of Vermont and Canada.
His other works include Lettres sur les roches du Jura et leur distribution
géographique dans les deux hémisphères (1857-1860) and Geology of
North America (1858). Marcou died at Cambridge, Mass., on the 17th of
April 1898.

MARCUS AURELIUS ANTONINUS (121-180), Roman
emperor and Stoic philosopher, was born in Rome a.d. 121, the date of his
birth being variously stated as the 6th, 21st and 26th of April. His original
name was Marcus Annius Verus.1 His mother Domitia Calvilla (or Lucilla)
was a lady of consular rank, and the family of his father Annius Verus
(prefect of the city and thrice consul), originally Spanish, had received
patrician rank from Vespasian. Marcus was three months old when his
father died, and was thereupon adopted by his grandfather. The moral
training which he received from his grandfather and his mother must have
been all but perfect. The noble qualities of the child attracted the attention
of Hadrian, who, playing upon the name “Verus,” said that it should be
changed to “Verissimus” (BHPICCIMOC on medals). Hadrian adopted, as
his successor, Titus Antoninus Pius (uncle of Marcus), on condition that he
in turn adopted both Marcus (then seventeen) and Lucius Ceionius
Commodus, the son of Aelius Caesar, who had originally been intended by

Hadrian as his successor, but had died before him. Marcus had been, at the
age of fifteen, betrothed to Fabia, the sister of Commodus; the engagement
was broken off by Antoninus Pius, and he was betrothed to Faustina, the
daughter of the latter. In 139 the title of Caesar was conferred upon him and
he dropped the name of Verus. The full name he then bore was Marcus
Aelius Aurelius Antoninus, Aelius coming from Hadrian’s family, and
Aurelius being the original name of Antoninus Pius. In 140 he was made
consul.

The education of Aurelius in his youth was minute (see Medit. i. 1-16). A
better guardian than Antoninus Pius could not be conceived. Marcus
himself says, “To the gods I am indebted for having good grandfathers,
good parents, a good sister, good teachers, good associates, good kinsmen
and friends, nearly everything good.” He was educated, not at school, but
by tutors, Herodes Atticus and M. Cornelius Fronto (q.v.) in the usual
curriculum of rhetoric and poetry; but at the age of eleven he became
acquainted with Diognetus the painter and Stoic philosopher (Hist. script.
aug. i. 305, notes), was fascinated by the philosophy he taught, assumed the
dress of his sect, and ultimately abandoned rhetoric and poetry for
philosophy and law, having among his teachers of the one Sextus of
Chaeronea, grandson of Plutarch, and later Q. Junius Rusticus, and of the
other L. Volusius Maecianus (or Metianus), a distinguished jurist. He went
thoroughly into the practice as well as the theory of Stoicism, and lived so
abstemious and laborious a life that he injured his health. From his Stoic
teachers he learned to work hard, to deny himself, to avoid listening to
slander, to endure misfortunes, never to deviate from his purpose, to be
grave without affectation, delicate in correcting others, “not frequently to
say to any one, nor to write in a letter, that I have no leisure,” nor to excuse
the neglect of duties by alleging urgent occupations. Through all his Stoical
training Aurelius preserved the natural sweetness of his nature.

During the reign of Antoninus Pius (138 to 161), the concord between
him and Aurelius was complete; Capitolinus (c. 7) says “nec praeter duas
noctes per tot annos mansit diversis vicibus.” The two were associated in
the administration and in the simple country occupations of the seaside villa
of Lorium, the birthplace of Pius, to which he loved to retire. It has been
assumed on the strength of a passage in Capitolinus that Aurelius married
Faustina in 146, but the passage is not clear, and other evidence points
strongly to 140; at all events it seems certain that a daughter was born to
him in 140. Antoninus Pius died in 161, having recommended as his
successor Aurelius, then forty years of age, without mentioning Commodus,
his other adopted son, commonly called Lucius Verus. It is believed that the
senate urged Aurelius to take the sole administration. But he showed the
magnanimity of his nature by at once admitting Verus as his partner, giving
him the tribunician and proconsular powers, and the titles Caesar and
Augustus. This was the first time that Rome had two emperors as
colleagues. Verus, a weak, self-indulgent man, had a high respect for his
adoptive brother, and deferred uniformly to his judgment. In the first year of
his reign Faustina gave birth to twins, one of whom became the emperor
Commodus.

The early part of the reign of Aurelius was clouded by national
misfortunes. An inundation of the Tiber swept away a large part of Rome,
destroying fields, drowning cattle, and causing a famine (162); then came
earthquakes, fires and plagues of insects; the soldiers in Britain tried to
induce their general Statius Priscus to proclaim himself emperor; finally, the
Parthians under Vologaeses III. resumed hostilities, annihilated the Roman
forces under Severianus at Elegia in Cappadocia, and devastated Syria.
Verus, originally a man of considerable courage and ability, was sent to
oppose the Parthians, but gave himself up to sensual excesses, and the
Roman cause in Armenia would have been lost, and the empire itself,
perhaps, imperilled, had not Verus had under him able generals,2 the chief

of whom was Avidius Cassius (see Cassius, Avidius). By them the Parthian
War was brought to a conclusion in 165, but Verus and his army brought
back with them a terrible pestilence, which spread through the whole
empire. The people seem to have thought that the last days of the empire
had come. The Parthians had at the best been beaten, not subdued; the
Britons threatened revolt; there were signs that various tribes beyond the
Alps intended to break into Italy. Indeed, the bulk of the reign of Aurelius
was spent in efforts to ward off the attacks of the barbarians. He went
himself to the wars with Verus in 167, first to Aquileia and then on into
Pannonia and Noricum, wintering at Sirmium in Pannonia. Ultimately the
Marcomanni, the fiercest of the tribes that inhabited the country between
Illyria and the sources of the Danube, sued for peace in 168. In January or
February 160 Verus died at Altinum, apparently of apoplexy, though some
ventured to say that he was poisoned by Aurelius.

Aurelius was thenceforth indisputed master of the empire, during one of
the most troubled periods of its history. His reign is well described by F. W.
Farrar (Seekers after God): “He regarded himself as being, in fact, the
servant of all. The registry of the citizens, the suppression of litigation, the
elevation of public morals, the care of minors, the retrenchment of public
expenses, the limitation of gladiatorial games and shows, the care of roads,
the restoration of senatorial privileges, the appointment of none but worthy
magistrates, even the regulation of street traffic, these and numberless other
duties so completely absorbed his attention that, in spite of indifferent
health, they often kept him at severe labour from early morning till long
after midnight. His position, indeed, often necessitated his presence at
games and shows, but on these occasions he occupied himself either in
reading, in being read to, or in writing notes. He was one of those who held
that nothing should be done hastily, and that few crimes were worse than
the waste of time.” The comprehensiveness of his legal and judicial reforms
is very striking. Slaves, heirs, women and children, were benefited, and he

made serious attempts to deal with the steady fall in the birth-rate of
legitimate children.

In the autumn of 169 two of the German tribes, the Quadi and the
Marcomanni, with their allies the Vandals, Iazyges and Sarmatians, renewed
hostilities and, for three years, Aurelius resided almost constantly at
Carnuntum. In the end the Marcomanni were driven out of Pannonia, and
were almost destroyed in their retreat across the Danube. In 174 Aurelius
gained over the Quadi a decisive victory, which is commemorated by one of
the sculptures on the column of Antonine. The story is that the Romans,
entangled in a defile, were suffering from thirst. A sudden storm gave
abundance of rain, while hail and thunder confounded their enemies, and
enabled the Romans to gain an easy and complete victory. This triumph was
universally considered at the time, and for long afterwards, to have been a
miracle, and bore the title of “The Miracle of the Thundering Legion.” The
pagan writers (e.g. Dio Cassius, lxx. 8-10) ascribed the victory to the magic
arts of an Egyptian named Arnuphis who prevailed on Mercury and other
gods to give relief, while the Christians attributed it to the prayers of their
brethren in a legion to which, they affirmed, the emperor then gave the
name of “The Thundering.” Dacier, however, and others who adhere to the
Christian view of the miracle, admit that the appellation of “Thundering” or
“Lightning” (κεραυνοβόλος, or κεραυνοφόρος) was given to the legion
because there was a figure of lightning on their shields. It has also been
virtually proved that it had the title even in the reign of Augustus.

Aurelius next marched to Germany. There news reached him that Avidius
Cassius, the commander of the Roman troops in Asia, had revolted and
proclaimed himself emperor (175). But after three months Cassius was
assassinated, and his head was brought to Aurelius, who with characteristic
magnanimity, persuaded the senate to pardon all the family of Cassius. It is
a proof of the wisdom of Aurelius’s clemency that he had little or no trouble

in pacifying the provinces which had been the scene of rebellion. He treated
them all with forbearance, and it is said that when the correspondence of
Cassius was brought him he burnt it without reading it. During his journey
of pacification, Faustina, who had borne him eleven children, died. Dio
Cassius and Capitolinus charge Faustina with the most shameless infidelity
to her husband, who is even blamed for not paying heed to her crimes. But
none of these stories rests on trustworthy evidence; on the other hand, there
can be no doubt that Aurelius trusted her while she lived, and mourned her
loss.

After the death of Faustina and the pacification of Syria, Aurelius
proceeded, on his return to Italy, through Athens, and was initiated in the
Eleusinian mysteries, the reason assigned for his doing so being that it was
his custom to conform to the established rites of the countries he visited. He
gave large sums of money for the endowment of chairs in philosophy and
rhetoric, with a view to making the schools the resort of students from all
parts of the empire. Along with his son Commodus he entered Rome in 176,
and obtained a triumph for victories in Germany. In 177 occurred that
persecution of Christians, the share of Aurelius in which has been the
subject of so much controversy. Meanwhile the German War continued, and
the two Quintilii, who had been left in command, begged Aurelius once
more to take the field. In this campaign Aurelius, after a series of successes,
was attacked, according to some authorities, by an infectious disease, of
which he died after a seven days’ illness, either in his camp at Sirmium
(Mitrovitz), on the Save, in Lower Pannonia, or at Vindobona (Vienna), on
the 17th of March 180, in the fifty-ninth year of his age. Other accounts are:
(1) that he was poisoned in the interests of Commodus (Dio. Cass. lxxi. 33,
4), (2) that he died of a chronic stomachic disease; the latter is perhaps the
most likely. His ashes (according to some authorities, his body) were taken
to Rome. By common consent he was deified and all those who could
afford the cost obtained his statue or bust; for a long time his statues held a

place among the penates of the Romans. Commodus, who was with his
father when he died, erected to his memory the Antonine column (now in
the Piazza Colonna at Rome), round the shaft of which are sculptures in
relief commemorating the miracle of the Thundering Legion and the various
victories of Aurelius over the Quadi and the Marcomanni. A bronze
equestrian statue was set up in the Forum, now on the Capitol.

Aurelius throughout his reign was hostile to Christianity. The Christians
suffered from systematic persecution, and many historians, with a strange
lack of historical insight, have poured denunciation upon him for an attitude
which was the natural outcome of his convictions. During his reign the
atmosphere of Roman society was heavily charged with the popular Greek
philosophy to which, ethics apart, Christianity was diametrically opposed.
Under Antoninus the “pursuit” of Christians was unknown; under Trajan
and Hadrian it was forbidden (cf. Keim, Aus dem Urchrist, p. 99). But
Aurelius was an eager patriot and a man of logical mind. From his earliest
youth he had learned to identify the ritual of the Roman religion with the
very essence of the imperial idea. He became a Salian priest at the age of
eight, and soon knew by heart all the forms and liturgical order of the
official worship, and even the sacred music. In the earliest statue we have
he is a youth offering incense; he is a priest at the sacrificial altar in the
latest triumphal reliefs. Naturally he felt that the prevalence of Christianity
was incompatible with his ideal of Roman prosperity, and therefore that the
policy of the Flavian emperors was the only logical solution of an important
problem. Neumann argued that the recrudescence of active persecution was
initiated by a deliberate ad hoc rescript issued probably in a.d. 176. Sir W.
M. Ramsay, however, doubts this (The Church in the Roman Empire,
London, 1893), and argues that it was due to a long series of instructions to
provincial governors (mandata, not decreta) who interpreted their duty
largely in conformity with the attitude of the reigning emperor. In other
words the governors were ordered merely to punish sacrilege, and, under