xviii. 486), one of the nymphs of Dodona, the nurses of Dionysus; in

Euripides (frag. 177), the mother of Dionysus; in Hyginus (fab. 9. 82), the daughter of Atlas, wife of Tantalus and mother of Pelops and Niobe. Others make her a Titanid, the daughter of Uranus and Gaea (Apollodorus i. 1). Speaking generally, Dione may be regarded as the female embodiment of the attributes of Zeus, to whose name her own is related as Juno (= Jovino) to Jupiter.

DIONYSIA, festivals in honour of the god Dionysus generally, but in particular the festivals celebrated in Attica and by the branches of the Attic-Ionic race in the islands and in Asia Minor. In Attica there were two festivals annually. (1) The lesser Dionysia, or [Greek: ta kat agrous], was held in the country places for four days (about the 19th to the 22nd of December) at the first tasting of the new wine. It was accompanied by songs, dance, phallic processions and the impromptu performances of itinerant players, who with others from the city thronged to take part in the excitement of the rustic sports. A favourite amusement was the Ascoliasmus, or dancing on one leg upon a leathern bag ([Greek: askos]), which had been smeared with oil. (2) The _greater_ Dionysia, or [Greek: ta en astei], was held in the city of Athens for six days (about the 28th of March to the 2nd of April). This was a festival of joy at the departure of winter and the promise of summer, Dionysus being regarded as having delivered the people from the wants and troubles of winter. The religious act of the festival was the conveying of the ancient image of the god, which had been brought from Eleutherae to Athens, from the ancient sanctuary of the Lenaeum to a small temple near the Acropolis and back again, with a chorus of boys and a procession carrying masks and singing the dithyrambus. The festival culminated in the production of tragedies, comedies and satyric dramas in the great theatre of Dionysus. Other festivals in honour of Dionysus were the Anthesteria (q.v.); the Lenaea (about the 28th to the 31st of January), or festival of vats, at which, after a great public banquet, the citizens went through the city in procession to attend the dramatic representations; the Oschophoria (October-November), a vintage festival, so called from the branches of vine with grapes carried by twenty youths from the ephebi, two from each tribe, in a race from the temple of Dionysus in Athens to the temple of Athena Sciras in Phalerum.

See A. Mommsen, _Feste der Stadt Athen_ (1898); L. Preller, _Griechische Mythologie_; L. C. Purser in Smith's _Dictionary of Antiquities_ (3rd ed., 1890); article DIONYSOS in W. H. Roscher's _Lexikon der Mythologie_; and the exhaustive account with bibliography by J. Girard in Daremberg and Saglio's _Dictionnaire des antiquités_.

DIONYSIUS, pope from 259 to 268. To Dionysius, who was elected pope in 259 after the persecution of Valerian, fell the task of reorganizing the Roman church, which had fallen into great disorder. At the protest of some of the faithful at Alexandria, he demanded from the bishop of Alexandria, also called Dionysius, explanations touching his doctrine. He died on the 26th of December 268.

DIONYSIUS (c. 432-367 B.C.), tyrant of Syracuse, began life as a clerk in a public office, but by courage and diplomacy succeeded in making himself supreme (see SYRACUSE). He carried on war with Carthage with varying success; his attempts to drive the Carthaginians entirely out of the island failed, and at his death they were masters of at least a third of it. He also carried on an expedition against Rhegium and its allied cities in Magna Graecia. In one campaign, in which he was joined by the Lucanians, he devastated the territories of Thurii, Croton and Locri. After a protracted siege he took Rhegium (386), and sold the inhabitants as slaves. He joined the Illyrians in an attempt to plunder the temple of Delphi, pillaged the temple of Caere on the Etruscan coast, and founded several military colonies on the Adriatic. In the Peloponnesian War he espoused the side of the Spartans, and assisted them with mercenaries. He also posed as an author and patron of literature; his poems, severely criticized by Philoxenus, were hissed at the Olympic games; but having gained a prize for a tragedy on the _Ransom of Hector_ at the Lenaea at Athens, he was so elated that he engaged in a debauch which proved fatal. According to others, he was poisoned by his physicians at the instigation of his son. His life was written by Philistus, but the work is not extant. Dionysius was regarded by the ancients as a type of the worst kind of despot--cruel, suspicious and vindictive. Like Peisistratus, he was fond of having distinguished literary men about him, such as the historian Philistus, the poet Philoxenus, and the philosopher Plato, but treated them in a most arbitrary manner.

See Diod. Sic. xiii., xiv., xv.; J. Bass, _Dionysius I. von Syrakus_ (Vienna, 1881), with full references to authorities in footnotes; articles SICILY and SYRACUSE.

His son DIONYSIUS, known as "the Younger," succeeded in 367 B.C. He was driven from the kingdom by Dion (356) and fled to Locri; but during the commotions which followed Dion's assassination, he managed to make himself master of Syracuse. On the arrival of Timoleon he was compelled to surrender and retire to Corinth (343), where he spent the rest of his days in poverty (Diodorus Siculus xvi.; Plutarch, _Timoleon_).

See SYRACUSE and TIMOLEON; and, on both the Dionysii, articles by B. Niese in Pauly-Wissowa's _Realencyclopädie_, v. pt. 1 (1905).

DIONYSIUS AREOPAGITICUS (or "the Areopagite"), named in Acts xvii. 34 as one of those Athenians who believed when they had heard Paul preach on Mars Hill. Beyond this mention our only knowledge of him is the statement of Dionysius, bishop of Corinth (fl. A.D. 171), recorded by Eusebius (_Church Hist._ iii. 4; iv. 23), that this same Dionysius the Areopagite was the first "bishop" of Athens. Some hundreds of years after the Areopagite's death, his name was attached by the Pseudo-Areopagite to certain theological writings composed by the latter. These were destined to exert enormous influence upon medieval thought, and their fame led to the extension of the personal legend of the real Dionysius. Hilduin, abbot of St Denys (814-840), identified him with St Denys, martyr and patron-saint of France. In Hilduin's _Areopagitica_, the Life and Passion of the most holy Dionysius (Migne, _ Patrol. Lat._ tome 106), the Areopagite is sent to France by Clement of Rome, and suffers martyrdom upon the hill where the monastery called St Denys was to rise in his honour. There is no earlier trace of this identification, and Gregory of Tours (d. 594) says (_Hist. Francorum_, i. 18) that St Denys came to France in the reign of Decius (A.D. 250), which falls about midway between the presumptive death of the real Areopagite and the probable date of the writings to which he owed his adventitious fame.

Traces of the influence of these writings appear in the works of Eastern theologians in the early part of the 6th century. They also were cited at the council held in Constantinople in 533, which is the first certain dated reference to them. In the West, Gregory the Great (d. 604) refers to them in his thirty-fourth sermon on the gospels (Migne, _Pat. Lat._ tome 76, col. 1254). They did not, however, become generally known in the Western church till after the year 827, when the Byzantine emperor Michael the Stammerer sent a copy to Louis the Pious. It was given over to the care of the above-mentioned abbot Hilduin. In the next generation the scholar and philosopher Joannes Scotus Erigena (q.v.) translated the Dionysian writings into Latin. This appears to have been the only Latin translation until the 12th century when another was made, followed by several others.

Thus, the author, date and place of composition of these writings are unknown. External evidence precludes a date later than the year 500, and the internal evidence from the writings themselves precludes any date prior to 4th-century phases of Neo-platonism. The extant writings of the Pseudo-Areopagite are: (a) [Greek: Peri tês ouranias hierarchias], _Concerning the Celestial Hierarchy_, in fifteen chapters. (b) [Greek: Peri tês ekklêsiastikês hierarchias], _Concerning the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy_, in seven chapters. (c) [Greek: Peri theiôn onomatôn], _Concerning Divine Names_, in thirteen chapters. (d) [Greek: Peri mystikês theologias], _Concerning Mystic Theology_, in five chapters. (e) Ten letters addressed to various worthies of the apostolic period.

Although these writings seem complete, they contain references to others of the same author. But of the latter nothing is known, and they may never have existed.

The writings of the Pseudo-Areopagite are of great interest, first as a striking presentation of the heterogeneous elements that might unite in the mind of a gifted man in the 5th century, and secondly, because of their enormous influence upon subsequent Christian theology and art. Their ingredients--Christian, Greek, Oriental and Jewish--are not crudely mingled, but are united into an organic system. Perhaps theological philosophic fantasy has never constructed anything more remarkable. The system of Dionysius was a proper product of its time,--lofty, apparently complete, comparable to the _Enneads_ of Plotinus which formed part of its materials. But its materials abounded everywhere, and offered themselves temptingly to the hand strong enough to build with them. There was what had entered into Neo-platonism, both in its dialectic form as established by Plotinus, and in its magic-mystic modes devised by Iamblichus (d. c. 333). There was Jewish angel lore and Eastern mood and fancy; and there was Christianity so variously understood and heterogeneously constituted among Syro-Judaic Hellenic communities. Such Christianity held materials for formula and creed; also principles of liturgic and sacramental doctrine and priestly function; also a mass of popular beliefs as to intermediate superhuman beings who seemed nearer to men than any member of the Trinity.

Out of this vast spiritual conglomerate, Pseudo-Dionysius formed his system. It was not juristic,--not Roman, Pauline or Augustinian. Rather he borrowed his constructive principles from Hellenism in its last great creation, Neo-platonism. That had been able to gather and arrange within itself the various elements of latter-day paganism. The Neo-platonic categories might be altered in name and import, and yet the scheme remain a scheme; since the general principle of the transmission of life from the ultimate Source downward through orders of mediating beings unto men, might readily be adapted to the Christian God and his ministering angels. Pseudo-Dionysius had lofty thoughts of the sublime transcendence of the ultimate divine Source. That source was not remote or inert; but a veritable Source from which life streamed to all lower orders of existence,--in part directly, and in part indirectly as power and guidance through the higher orders to the lower. Life, creation, every good gift, is from God directly; but his flaming ministers also intervene to guide and aid the life of man; and the life which through love floods forth from God has its counterflow whereby it draws its own creations to itself. God is at once absolutely transcendent and universally immanent. To live is to be united with God; evil is the nonexistent, that is, severance from God. Whatever is, is part of the forth-flowing divine life which ever purifies, enlightens and perfects, and so draws all back to the Source.

The transcendent Source, as well as the universal immanence, is the Triune God. Between that and men are ranged the three triads of the Celestial Hierarchy: Seraphim, Cherubim and Thrones; Dominations, Virtues, Powers; Principalities, Archangels, Angels. Collectively their general office is to raise mankind to God through purification, illumination and perfection; and to all may be applied the term angel. The highest triad, which is nearest God, contemplates the divine effulgence, and reflects it onward to the second; the third, and more specifically angelic triad, immediately ministers to men. The sources of these names are evident: seraphim and cherubim are from the Old Testament; later Jewish writings gave names to archangels and angels, who also fill important functions in the New Testament. The other names are from Paul (Eph. i. 21; Col. i. 16).

Such is the system of Pseudo-Dionysius, as presented mainly in _The Celestial Hierarchy_. That work is followed by _The Ecclesiastical Hierarchy_, its counterpart on earth. What the primal triune Godhead is to the former, Jesus is to the latter. The Ecclesiastical Hierarchy likewise is composed of Triads. The first includes the symbolic sacraments: Baptism, Communion, Consecration of the Holy Chrism. Baptism signifies purification; Communion signifies enlightening; the Holy Chrism signifies perfecting. The second triad is made up of the three orders of Bishops, Presbyters and Deacons, or rather, as the Areopagite names them: Hierarchs, Light-bearers, Servitors. The third triad consists of monks, who are in a state of perfection, the initiated laity, who are in a state of illumination, and the catechumens, in a state of purification. All worship, in this treatise, is a celebration of mysteries, and the pagan mysteries are continually suggested by the terms employed.

The work _Concerning the Divine Names_ is a noble discussion of the qualities which may be predicated of God, according to the warrant of the terms applied to him in Scripture. The work _Concerning Mystic Theology_ explains the function of symbols, and shows that he who would know God truly must rise above them and above the conceptions of God drawn from sensible things.

The works of Pseudo-Dionysius began to influence theological thought in the West from the time of their translation into Latin by Erigena. Their use may be followed through the writings of scholastic philosophers, e.g. Peter Lombard, Albertus Magnus, Thomas Aquinas and many others. In poetry we find their influence in Dante, Spenser, Milton. The fifteenth chapter of _The Celestial Hierarchy_ constituted the canon of symbolical angelic lore for the literature and art of the middle ages. Therein the author explains in what respect theology ascribes to angels the qualities of fire, why the thrones are said to be _fiery_ ([Greek: pyrinous]); why the seraphim are _burning_ ([Greek: emprêstas]) as their name indicates. The fiery form signifies, with Celestial Intelligences, likeness to God. Dionysius explains the significance of the parts of the human body when given to celestial beings: feet are ascribed to angels to denote their unceasing movement on the divine business, and their feet are winged to denote their celerity. He likewise explains the symbolism of wands and axes, of brass and precious stones, when joined to celestial beings; and what wheels and a chariot denote when furnished to them,--and much more besides.

BIBLIOGRAPHY.--There is an enormous literature on Pseudo-Dionysius. The reader may be first referred to the articles in Smith's _Dictionary of Christian Biography_ and Hauck's _Realencyklopadie fur protestantische Theologie_ (Leipzig, 1898). The bibliography in the latter is very full. Some other references, especially upon the later influence of these works, are given in H. O. Taylor's _Classical Heritage of the Middle Ages_ (Macmillan, 1903). The works themselves are in Migne's _Patrologia Graeca_, tomes 3 and 4, with a Latin version. Erigena's version is in Migne, _Patrol. Lat._ t. 122. _Vita Dionysii_ by Hilduin is in Migne, _Pat. Lat._ 106. There is an English version by Parker (London, 1894 and 1897). (H. O. T.)

DIONYSIUS EXIGUUS, one of the most learned men of the 6th century, and especially distinguished as a chronologist, was, according to the statement of his friend Cassiodorus, a Scythian by birth, "_Scytha natione_." This may mean only that he was a native of the region bordering on the Black Sea, and does not necessarily imply that he was not of Greek origin. Such origin is indicated by his name and by his thorough familiarity with the Greek language. His surname "Exiguus" is usually translated "the Little," but he probably assumed it out of humility. He was living at Rome in the first half of the 6th century, and is usually spoken of as abbot of a Roman monastery. Cassiodorus, however, calls him simply "monk," while Bede calls him "abbot." But as it was not unusual to apply the latter term to distinguished monks who were not heads of their houses, it is uncertain whether Dionysius was abbot in fact or only by courtesy. He was in high repute as a learned theologian, was profoundly versed in the Holy Scriptures and in canon law, and was also an accomplished mathematician and astronomer. We owe to him a collection of 401 ecclesiastical canons, including the apostolical canons and the decrees of the councils of Nicaea, Constantinople, Chalcedon and Sardis, and also a collection of the decretals of the popes from Siricius (385) to Anastasius II. (498). These collections, which had great authority in the West (see CANON LAW), were published by Justel in 1628. Dionysius did good service to his contemporaries by his translations of many Greek works into Latin; and by these translations some works, the originals of which have perished, have been handed down to us. His name, however, is now perhaps chiefly remembered for his chronological labours. It was Dionysius who introduced the method of reckoning the Christian era which we now use (see CHRONOLOGY). His friend Cassiodorus depicts in glowing terms the character of Dionysius as a saintly ascetic, and praises his wisdom and simplicity, his accomplishments and his lowly-mindedness, his power of eloquent speech and his capacity of silence. He died at Rome, some time before A.D. 550.

His works have been published in Migne, _Patrologia Latina_, tome 67; see especially A. Tardif, _Histoire des sources du droit canonique_ (Paris, 1887), and D. Pitra, _Analecta novissima, Spicilegii Solesmensis continuatio_, vol. i. p. 36 (Paris, 1885).

DIONYSIUS HALICARNASSENSIS ("of Halicarnassus"), Greek historian and teacher of rhetoric, flourished during the reign of Augustus. He went to Rome after the termination of the civil wars, and spent twenty-two years in studying the Latin language and literature and preparing materials for his history. During this period he gave lessons in rhetoric, and enjoyed the society of many distinguished men. The date of his death is unknown. His great work, entitled [Greek: Rômaikê archaiologia] (Roman Antiquities), embraced the history of Rome from the mythical period to the beginning of the first Punic War. It was divided into twenty books,--of which the first nine remain entire, the tenth and eleventh are nearly complete, and the remaining books exist in fragments in the excerpts of Constantine Porphyrogenitus and an epitome discovered by Angelo Mai in a Milan MS. The first three books of Appian, and Plutarch's _Life of Camillus_ also embody much of Dionysius. His chief object was to reconcile the Greeks to the rule of Rome, by dilating upon the good qualities of their conquerors. According to him, history is philosophy teaching by examples, and this idea he has carried out from the point of view of the Greek rhetorician. But he has carefully consulted the best authorities, and his work and that of Livy are the only connected and detailed extant accounts of early Roman history.

Dionysius was also the author of several rhetorical treatises, in which he shows that he has thoroughly studied the best Attic models:--_The Art of Rhetoric_ (which is rather a collection of essays on the theory of rhetoric), incomplete, and certainly not all his work; _The Arrangement of Words_ ([Greek: Peri syntheseôs onomatôn]), treating of the combination of words according to the different styles of oratory; _On Imitation_ ([Greek: Peri mimêseôs]), on the best models in the different kinds of literature and the way in which they are to be imitated--a fragmentary work; _Commentaries on the Attic Orators_ ([Greek: Peri tôn archaiôn rhêtorôn hypomnêmatismoi]), which, however, only deal with Lysias, Isaeus, Isocrates and (by way of supplement) Dinarchus; _On the admirable Style of Demosthenes_ ([Greek: Peri tês lektikês Dêmosthenous deinotêtos]); and _On the Character of Thucydides_ ([Greek: Peri tou Thoukydidou charakteros]), a detailed but on the whole an unfair estimate. These two treatises are supplemented by letters to Cn. Pompeius and Ammaeus (two).

Complete edition by J. J. Reiske (1774-1777); of the _Archaeologia_ by A. Kiessling and V. Prou (1886) and C. Jacoby (1885-1891); Opuscula by Usener and Radermacher (1899); Eng. translation by E. Spelman (1758). A full bibliography of the rhetorical works is given in W. Rhys Roberts's edition of the Three Literary Letters (1901); the same author published an edition of the _De compositione verborum_ (1910, with trans.); see also M. Egger, _Denys d'Halicarnasse_ (1902), a very useful treatise. On the sources of Dionysius see O. Bocksch, "De fontibus Dion. Halicarnassensis" in _Leipziger Studien_, xvii. (1895). Cf. also J. E. Sandys, _Hist. of Class. Schol._ i. (1906).

DIONYSIUS PERIEGETES, author of a [Greek: Periêgêsis tês oikoumenês], a description of the habitable world in Greek hexameter verse, written in a terse and elegant style. Nothing certain is known of the date or nationality of the writer, but there is some reason for believing that he was an Alexandrian, who wrote in the time of Hadrian (some put him as late as the end of the 3rd century). The work enjoyed a high degree of popularity in ancient times as a school-book; it was translated into Latin by Rufus Festus Avienus, and by the grammarian Priscian. The commentary of Eustathius is valuable.

The best editions are by G. Bernhardy (1828) and C. Müller (1861) in their _Geographici Graeci minores_; see also E. H. Bunbury, _Ancient Geography_ (ii. p. 480), who regards the author as flourishing from the reign of Nero to that of Trajan, and U. Bernays, _Studien zu Dion. Perieg._ (1905). There are two old English translations: T. Twine (1572, black letter), J. Free (1789, blank verse).

DIONYSIUS TELMAHARENSIS ("of Tell-Ma[h.]r[=e]"), patriarch or supreme head of the Syrian Jacobite Church during the years 818-848, was born at Tell-Ma[h.]r[=e] near Ra[k.][k.]a (ar-Ra[k.][k.]ah) on the Bal[=i]kh. He was the author of an important historical work, which has seemingly perished except for some passages quoted by Barhebraeus and an extract found by Assemani in Cod. _Vat._ 144 and published by him in the _Bibliotheca orientalis_ (ii. 72-77). He spent his earlier years as a monk at the convent of [K.]en-neshr[=e] on the upper Euphrates; and when this monastery was destroyed by fire in 815, he migrated northwards to that of Kais[=u]m in the district of Samos[=a]ta. At the death of the Jacobite patriarch Cyriacus in 817, the church was agitated by a dispute about the use of the phrase "heavenly bread" in connexion with the Eucharist. An anti-patriarch had been appointed in the person of Abraham of [K.]artam[=i]n, who insisted on the use of the phrase in opposition to the recognized authorities of the church. The council of bishops who met at Ra[k.][k.]a in the summer of 818 to choose a successor to Cyriacus had great difficulty in finding a worthy occupant of the patriarchal chair, but finally agreed on the election of Dionysius, hitherto known only as an honest monk who devoted himself to historical studies. Sorely against his will he was brought to Ra[k.][k.]a, ordained deacon and priest on two successive days, and raised to the supreme ecclesiastical dignity on the 1st of August. From this time he showed the utmost zeal in fulfilling the duties of his office, and undertook many journeys both within and without his province. The ecclesiastical schism continued unhealed during the thirty years of his patriarchate. The details of this contest, of his relations with the caliph Ma'm[=u]n, and of his many travels--including a journey to Egypt, on which he viewed with admiration the great Egyptian monuments,--are to be found in the _Ecclesiastical Chronicle_ of Barhebraeus.[1] He died in 848, his last days having been especially embittered by Mahommedan oppression. We learn from Michael the Syrian that his _Annals_ consisted of two parts each divided into eight chapters, and covered a period of 260 years, viz. from the accession of the emperor Maurice (582-583) to the death of Theophilus (842-843).

In addition to the lost _Annals_, Dionysius was from the time of Assemani until 1896 credited with the authorship of another important historical work--a _Chronicle_, which in four parts narrates the history of the world from the creation to the year A.D. 774-775 and is preserved entire in _Cod. Vat._ 162. The first part (edited by Tullberg, Upsala, 1850) reaches to the epoch of Constantine the Great, and is in the main an epitome of the Eusebian Chronicle.[2] The second part reaches to Theodosius II. and follows closely the _Ecclesiastical History_ of Socrates; while the third, extending to Justin II., reproduces the second part of the _History_ of John of Asia or Ephesus, and also contains the well-known chronicle attributed to Joshua the Stylite. The fourth part[3] is not like the others a compilation, but the original work of the author, and reaches to the year 774-775--apparently the date when he was writing. On the publication of this fourth part by M. Chabot, it was discovered and clearly proved by Nöldeke (_Vienna Oriental Journal_, x. 160-170), and Nau (_Bulletin critique_, xvii. 321-327), who independently reached the same conclusion, that Assemani's opinion was a mistake, and that the chronicle in question was the work not of Dionysius of Tell-Ma[h.]r[=e] but of an earlier writer, a monk of the convent of Zu[k.]n[=i]n near [=A]mid (Diarbekr) on the upper Tigris. Though the author was a man of limited intelligence and destitute of historical skill, yet the last part of his work at least has considerable value as a contemporary account of events during the middle period of the 8th century. (N. M.)

FOOTNOTES:

[1] Ed. Abbeloos and Lamy, i. 343-386; cf. Wright, _Syriac Literature_, 196-200, and Chabot's introduction to his translation of the fourth part of the _Chronicle_ of (pseudo) Dionysius.

[2] See the studies by Siegfried and Gelzer, _Eusebii canonum epitome ex Dionysii Telmaharensis chronico petita_ (Leipzig, 1884), and von Gutschmid, _Untersuchungen über die syrische Epitome der Eusebischen Canones_ (Stuttgart, 1886).

[3] Text and translation by J.-B. Chabot (Paris, 1895).

DIONYSIUS THRAX (so called because his father was a Thracian), the author of the first Greek grammar, flourished about 100 B.C. He was a native of Alexandria, where he attended the lectures of Aristarchus, and afterwards taught rhetoric in Rhodes and Rome. His [Greek: Technê grammatikê], which we possess (though probably not in its original form), begins with the definition of grammar and its functions. Dealing next with accent, punctuation marks, sounds and syllables, it goes on to the different parts of speech (eight in number) and their inflections. No rules of syntax are given, and nothing is said about style. The authorship of Dionysius was doubted by many of the early middle-age commentators and grammarians, and in modern times its origin has been attributed to the oecumenical college founded by Constantine the Great, which continued in existence till 730. But there seems no reason for doubt; the great grammarians of imperial times (Apollonius Dyscolus and Herodian) were acquainted with the work in its present form, although, as was natural considering its popularity, additions and alterations may have been made later. The [Greek: Technê] was first edited by J. A. Fabricius from a Hamburg MS. and published in his _Bibliotheca Graeca_, vi. (ed. Harles). An Armenian translation, belonging to the 4th or 5th century, containing five additional chapters, was published with the Greek text and a French version, by M. Cirbied (1830). Dionysius also contributed much to the criticism and elucidation of Homer, and was the author of various other works--amongst them an account of Rhodes, and a collection of [Greek: Meletai] (literary studies), to which the considerable fragment in the _Stromata_ (v. 8) of Clement of Alexandria probably belongs.

Editions, with scholia, by I. Bekker in _Anecdota Graeca_, ii. and G. Uhlig (1884), reviewed exhaustively by P. Egenolff in Bursian's _Jahresbericht_, vol. xlvi. (1888); Scholia, ed. A. Hilgard (1901); see also W. Hörschelmann, _De Dionysii Thracis interpretibus veteribus_ (1874); J. E. Sandys, _Hist. of Classical Scholarship_, i. (1906).

DIONYSUS (probably = "son of Zeus," from [Greek: Dios] and [Greek: nysos], a Thracian word for "son"), in Greek mythology, originally a nature god of fruitfulness and vegetation, especially of the vine; hence, distinctively, the god of wine. The names Bacchus ([Greek: Bakchos], in use among the Greeks from the 5th century), Sabazius, and Bassareus, are also Thracian names of the god. The two first (like Iacchus, Bromius and Euios) have been connected with the loud "shout" ([Greek: sabazein = bazein = eúazein]) of his worshippers, Bassareus with [Greek: bassárai], the fox-skin garments of the Thracian Bacchanals. It has been suggested (J. E. Harrison _Prolegomena to Greek Religion_) that Sabazius and Bromius = "beer-god," "god of a cereal intoxicant" (cf. Illyrian _sabaia_ and modern Greek [Greek: brômi], "oats"), while W. Ridgeway (_Classical Review_, January 1896), comparing Apollo Smintheus, interprets Bassareus as "he who keeps away the foxes from the vineyards" (for various interpretations of these and other cult-titles, see O. Gruppe, _Griechische Mythologie_, ii. pp. 1408, 1532, especially the notes).

In Homer, notwithstanding the frequent mention of the use of wine, Dionysus is never mentioned as its inventor or introducer, nor does he appear in Olympus; Hesiod is the first who calls wine the gift of Dionysus. On the other hand, he is spoken of in the _Iliad_ (vi. 130 foll., a passage belonging to the latest period of epic), as "raging," an epithet that indicates that in those comparatively early times the orgiastic character of his worship was recognized. In fact, Dionysus may be regarded under two distinct aspects: that of a popular national Greek god of wine and cheerfulness, and that of a foreign deity, worshipped with ecstatic and mysterious rites introduced from Thrace. According to the usual tradition, he was born at Thebes--originally the local centre of his worship in Greece--and was the son of Zeus, the fertilizing rain god, and Semele, the daughter of Cadmus, a personification of earth. Before the child was mature, Zeus appeared to Semele at her request in his majesty as god of lightning, by which she was killed, but the infant was saved from the flames by Zeus (or Hermes). The epithet [Greek: perikionios], originally referring to an ivy-crowned, pillar-shaped fetish of the god, afterwards gave rise to the legend of a miraculous growth of ivy "round the pillars" of the royal palace, whereby the infant Dionysus was preserved from the flames. Zeus took him up, enclosed him within his own thigh till he came to maturity, and then brought him to the light, so that he was twice born; it was to celebrate this double birth that the _dithyrambus_ (also used as an epithet of the god) was sung (see _Etym. Mag._ s.v.). It has been suggested that this is an allusion to the _couvade_ of certain barbarous tribes, amongst whom it is customary, when a child is born, for the husband to take to his bed and receive medical treatment, as if he shared the pains of maternity (see COUVADE, and references there). Dionysus was then conveyed by Hermes to be brought up by the nymphs of Nysa, a purely imaginary spot, afterwards localized in different parts of the world, which claimed the honour of having been the birthplace of the god. As soon as Dionysus was grown up, he started on a journey through the world, to teach the cultivation of the vine and spread his worship among men. While so engaged he met with opposition, even in his own country, as in the case of Pentheus, king of Thebes, who opposed the orgiastic rites introduced by Dionysus among the women of Thebes, and, having been discovered watching one of these ceremonies, was mistaken for some animal of the chase, and slain by his own mother (see A. G. Bather, _Journ. Hell. Studies_, xiv. 1894). A similar instance is that of Lycurgus, a Thracian king, from whose attack Dionysus saved himself by leaping into the sea, where he was kindly received by Thetis. Lycurgus was blinded by Zeus and soon died, or became frantic and hewed down his own son, mistaking him for a vine. At Orchomenus, the three daughters of Minyas refused to join the other women in their nocturnal orgies, and for this were transformed into birds (see AGRIONIA). These and similar stories point to the vigorous resistance offered to the introduction of the mystic rites of Dionysus, in places where an established religion already existed. On the other hand, when the god was received hospitably he repaid the kindness by the gift of the vine, as in the case of Icarius of Attica (see ERIGONE).

The worship of Dionysus was actively conducted in Asia Minor, particularly in Phrygia and Lydia. Here, as Sabazius, he was associated with the Phrygian goddess Cybele, and was followed in his expeditions by a _thiasos_ (retinue) of centaurs, and satyrs, with Pan and Silenus. In Lydia his triumphant return from India was celebrated by an annual festival on Mount Tmolus; in Lydia he assumed the long beard and long robe which were afterwards given him in his character of the "Indian Bacchus," the conqueror of the East, who, after the campaigns of Alexander, was reported to have advanced as far as the Ganges. The other incidents in which he appears in a purely triumphal character are his transforming into dolphins the Tyrrhene pirates who attacked him, as told in the Homeric hymn to Dionysus and represented on the monument of Lysicrates at Athens, and his part in the war of the gods against the giants. The former story has been connected with the sailors' custom of hanging vine leaves, ivy and bunches of grapes round the masts of vessels in honour of vintage festivals. The adventure with the pirates occurred on his voyage to Naxos, where he found Ariadne abandoned by Theseus. At Naxos Ariadne (probably a Cretan goddess akin to Aphrodite) was associated with Dionysus as his wife, by whom he was the father of Oenopion (wine-drinker), Staphylus (grape), and Euanthes (blooming), and their marriage was annually celebrated by a festival. Having compelled all the world to recognize his divinity, he descended to the underworld to bring up his mother, who was afterwards worshipped with him under the name of Thyone ("the raging"), he himself being called after her Thyoneus.

Another phase in the myth of Dionysus originated in observing the decay of vegetation in winter, to suit which he was supposed to be slain and to join the deities of the lower world. This phase of his character was developed by the Orphic poets, he having here the name of Zagreus ("torn in pieces"), and being no longer the Theban god, but a son of Zeus and Persephone. The child was brought up secretly, watched over by Curetes; but the jealous Hera discovered where he was, and sent Titans to the spot, who, finding him at play, tore him to pieces, and cooked and ate his limbs, while Hera gave his heart to Zeus. The tearing in pieces is referred by some to the torture experienced by the grape (_Naturschmerz_) when crushed for making into wine (cf. Burns's _John Barleycorn_); but it is better to refer it to the tearing of the flesh of the victim at sacrifices at which the deity or the sacred animal was slain, and sacramentally eaten raw (cf. the title [Greek: ômêstês] given to Dionysus in certain places, probably pointing to human sacrifice.) To connect this with the myth of the Theban birth of Dionysus, it is said that Zeus gave the child's heart to Semele, or himself swallowed it and gave birth to the new Dionysus (called Iacchus from his worshippers' cry of rejoicing), who was cradled and swung in a winnowing fan ([Greek: liknos]; see J. E. Harrison, _Journ. Hellenic Studies_, xxiii.), the swinging being supposed to act as a charm in awakening vegetation from its winter sleep. The conception of Zagreus, or the winter Dionysus, appears to have originated in Crete, but it was accepted also in Delphi, where his grave was shown, and sacrifice was secretly offered at it annually on the shortest day. The story is in many respects similar to that of Osiris. According to others, Zagreus was originally a god of the chase, who became a hunter of men and a god of the underworld, more akin to Hades than to Dionysus (see also TITANS).

Dionysus further possessed the prophetic gift, and his oracle at Delphi was as important as that of Apollo. Like Hermes, Dionysus was a god of the productiveness of nature, and hence Priapus was one of his regular companions, while not only in the mysteries but in the rural festivals his symbol, the phallus, was carried about ostentatiously. His symbols from the animal kingdom were the bull (perhaps a totemistic attribute and identified with him), the panther, the lion, the tiger, the ass, the goat, and sometimes also the dolphin and the snake. His personal attributes are an ivy wreath, the thyrsus (a staff with pine cone at the end), the laurel, the pine, a drinking cup, and sometimes the horn of a bull on his forehead. Artistically he was represented mostly either as a youth of soft, nearly feminine form, or as a bearded and draped man, but frequently also as an infant, with reference to his birth or to his bringing up in "Nysa." His earliest images were of wood with the branches still attached in parts, whence he was called Dionysus Dendrites, an allusion to his protection of trees generally (according to Pherecydes in C. W. Müller, _Frag. Hist. Graec._ iv. p. 637, the word [Greek: nysa] signified "tree"). It is suggested that the cult of Dionysus absorbed that of an old tree-spirit. He was figured also, like Hermes, in the form of a pillar or term surmounted by his head. For the connexion of Dionysus with Greek tragedy see DRAMA.

See Farnell, _Cults of the Greek States_, v. (1910); also O. Rapp, _Beziehungen des Dionysuskultus zu Thrakien_ (1882); O. Ribbeck, _Anfange und Entwickelung des Dionysuskultes in Attica_ (1869); A. Lang, _Myth, Ritual and Religion_, ii. p. 241; L. Dyer, _The Gods in Greece_ (1891); J. E. Harrison, _Prolegomena to the Study of Greek Religion_ (1903); J. G. Frazer, _The Golden Bough_, ii (1900), pp. 160, 291, who regards the bull and goat form of Dionysus as expressions of his proper character as a deity of vegetation; F. A. Voigt in Roscher's _Lexikon der Mythologie_; L. Preller, _Griechische Mythologie_ (4th ed. by C. Robert); F. Lenormant (s.v. "Bacchus") in Daremberg and Saglio's _Dictionnaire des antiquités_; O. Kern in Pauly-Wissowa's _Realencyclopadie_ (with list of cult titles); W. Pater, _Greek Studies_ (1895); E. Rohde, _Psyche_, ii., who finds the origin of the Hellenic belief in the immortality of the soul in the "enthusiastic" rites of the Thracian Dionysus, which lifted persons out of themselves, and exalted them to a fancied equality with the gods; O. Gruppe, _Griechische Mythologie und Religionsgeschichte_, ii. (1907), who considers Boeotia, not Thrace, to have been the original home of Dionysus; P. Foucart, "Le Culte de Dionysos en Attique" in _Mémoires de l'Institut national de France_, xxxvii. (1906), who finds the prototype of Dionysus in Egypt. _The Great Dionysiak Myth_ (1877-1878) by R. Brown contains a wealth of material, but is weak in scholarship. For a striking survival of Dionysiac rites in Thrace (Bizye), see Dawkins, in _J.H.S._ (1906), p. 191.

DIOPHANTUS, of Alexandria, Greek algebraist, probably flourished about the middle of the 3rd century. Not that this date rests on positive evidence. But it seems a fair inference from a passage of Michael Psellus (_Diophantus_, ed. P. Tannery, ii. p. 38) that he was not later than Anatolius, bishop of Laodicea from A.D. 270, while he is not quoted by Nicomachus (fl. c. A.D. 100), nor by Theon of Smyrna (c. A.D. 130), nor does Greek arithmetic as represented by these authors and by Iamblichus (end of 3rd century) show any trace of his influence, facts which can only be accounted for by his being later than those arithmeticians at least who would have been capable of understanding him fully. On the other hand he is quoted by Theon of Alexandria (who observed an eclipse at Alexandria in A.D. 365); and his work was the subject of a commentary by Theon's daughter Hypatia (d. 415). The _Arithmetica_, the greatest treatise on which the fame of Diophantus rests, purports to be in thirteen Books, but none of the Greek MSS. which have survived contain more than six (though one has the same text in seven Books). They contain, however, a fragment of a separate tract on _Polygonal Numbers_. The missing books were apparently lost early, for there is no reason to suppose that the Arabs who translated or commented on Diophantus ever had access to more of the work than we now have. The difference in form and content suggests that the _Polygonal Numbers_ was not part of the larger work. On the other hand the _Porisms_, to which Diophantus makes three references ("we have it in the Porisms that ..."), were probably not a separate book but were embodied in the _Arithmetica_ itself, whether placed all together or, as Tannery thinks, spread over the work in appropriate places. The "Porisms" quoted are interesting propositions in the theory of numbers, one of which was clearly that _the difference between two cubes can be resolved into the sum of two cubes_. Tannery thinks that the solution of a complete quadratic promised by Diophantus himself (I. def. 11), and really assumed later, was one of the Porisms.

Among the great variety of problems solved are problems leading to determinate equations of the first degree in one, two, three or four variables, to determinate quadratic equations, and to indeterminate equations of the first degree in one or more variables, which are, however, transformed into determinate equations by arbitrarily assuming a value for one of the required numbers, Diophantus being always satisfied with a rational, even if fractional, result and not requiring a solution in integers. But the bulk of the work consists of problems leading to indeterminate equations of the second degree, and these universally take the form that one or two (and never more) linear or quadratic functions of one variable x are to be made rational square numbers by finding a suitable value for x. A few problems lead to indeterminate equations of the third and fourth degrees, an easy indeterminate equation of the sixth degree being also found. The general type of problem is to find two, three or four numbers such that different expressions involving them in the first and second, and sometimes the third, degree are squares, cubes, partly squares and partly cubes, &c. E.g. _To find three numbers such that the product of any two added to the sum of those two gives a square_ (III. 15, ed. Tannery); _To find four numbers such that, if we take the square of their sum ± any one of them singly, all the resulting numbers are squares_ (III. 22); _To find two numbers such that their product ± their sum gives a cube_ (IV. 29); _To find three squares such that their continued product added to any one of them gives a square_ (V. 21). Book VI. contains problems of finding rational _right-angled triangles_ such that different functions of their parts (the sides and the area) are squares. A word is necessary on Diophantus' notation. He has only one symbol (written somewhat like a final sigma) for an unknown quantity, which he calls [Greek: arithmos] (defined as "an undefined number of units"); the symbol may be a contraction of the initial letters [alpha][rho], as [Delta]^[Upsilon], [Kappa]^[Upsilon], [Delta]^[Upsilon][Delta], &c., are for the powers of the unknown ([Greek: dynamis], square; [Greek: kubos], cube; [Greek: dynamodynamis], fourth power, &c.). The only other algebraical symbol is [graphic: /|\] for minus; plus being expressed by merely writing terms one after another. With one symbol for an unknown, it will easily be understood what scope there is for adroit assumptions, for the required numbers, of expressions in the one unknown which are at once seen to satisfy some of the conditions, leaving only one or two to be satisfied by the particular value of x to be determined. Often assumptions are made which lead to equations in x which cannot be solved "rationally," i.e. would give negative, surd or imaginary values; Diophantus then traces how each element of the equation has arisen, and formulates the auxiliary problem of determining how the assumptions must be corrected so as to lead to an equation (in place of the "impossible" one) which can be solved rationally. Sometimes his x has to do duty twice, for different unknowns, in one problem. In general his object is to reduce the final equation to a simple one by making such an assumption for the side of the square or cube to which the expression in x is to be equal as will make the necessary number of coefficients vanish. The book is valuable also for the propositions in the theory of numbers, other than the "porisms," stated or assumed in it. Thus Diophantus knew that _no number of the form 8n + 7 can be the sum of three squares_. He also says that, if 2n + 1 is to be the sum of two squares, "n must not be odd" (i.e. _no number of the form 4n + 3, or 4n - 1, can be the sum of two squares_), and goes on to add, practically, the condition stated by Fermat, "and the double of it [n] increased by one, when divided by the greatest square which measures it, must not be divisible by a prime number of the form 4n - 1," except for the omission of the words "when divided ... measures it."

# AUTHORITIES.--The first to publish anything on Diophantus in Europe was Rafael Bombelli, who embodied in his Algebra (1572) all the problems of Books I.-IV. and some of Book V. interspersing them with his own problems. Next Xylander (Wilhelm Holzmann) published a Latin translation (Basel, 1575), an altogether meritorious work, especially having regard to the difficulties he had with the text of his MS. The Greek text was first edited by C. G. Bachet (_Diophanti Alexandrini arithmeticorum libri sex, et de numeris multangulis liber unus, nunc primum graece et latine editi atque absolutissimis commentariis illustrati_ ... Lutetiae Parisiorum ... MDCXXI.). A reprint of 1670 is only valuable because it contains P. de Fermat's notes; as far as the Greek text is concerned it is much inferior to the other. There are two German translations, one by Otto Schulz (1822) and the other by G. Wertheim (Leipzig, 1890), and an English edition in modern notation (T. L. Heath, _Diophantos of Alexandria: A Study in the History of Greek Algebra_ (Cambridge, 1885)). The Greek text has now been definitively edited (with Latin translation, Scholia, &c.) by P. Tannery (Teubner, vol. i., 1893; vol. ii., 1895). General accounts of Diophantus' work are to be found in H. Hankel and M. Cantor's histories of mathematics, and more elaborate analyses are those of Nesselmann (_Die Algebra der Griechen_, Berlin, 1842) and G. Loria (_Le Scienze esatte nell' antica Grecia_, libro v., Modena, 1902, pp. 95-158). (T. L. H.)

DIOPSIDE, an important member of the pyroxene group of rock-forming minerals. It is a calcium-magnesium metasilicate, CaMg(SiO3)2, and crystallizes in the monoclinic system. Usually some iron is present replacing magnesium, and when this predominates there is a passage to hedenbergite, CaFe(SiO3)2, a closely allied variety of monoclinic pyroxene. These are distinguished from augite by containing little or no aluminium. Diopside is colourless, white, pale green to dark green or nearly black in colour, the depth of the colour depending on the amount of iron present. The specific gravity and optical constants also vary with the chemical composition; the sp. gr. of diopside is 3.2, increasing to 3.6 in hedenbergite, and the angle of optical extinction in the plane of symmetry varies between 38° and 47° in the two extremes of the series. Crystals are usually prismatic in habit with a rectangular cross-section as shown in the figure: the angle between the prism faces m, parallel to which there are perfect cleavages, is 92° 50´.

Several varieties, depending on differences in structure and chemical composition, have been distinguished, viz. coccolite (from [Greek: kokkos], a grain), a granular variety; salite or sahlite, from Sala in Sweden; malacolite; diallage; violane, a lamellar variety of a dark violet-blue colour; chrome-diopside, a bright green variety containing a small amount of chromium; and many others. Belonging to the same series with diopside and hedenbergite is a manganese pyroxene, known as schefierite, which has the composition (Ca, Mg) (Fe, Mn) (Si03)2.

Diopside is the characteristic pyroxene of metamorphic rocks, occurring especially in crystalline limestones, and often in association with garnet and epidote. It is also an essential constituent of some pyroxene-granites, diorites and a few other igneous rocks, but the characteristic pyroxene of this class of rocks is augite. Fine transparent crystals of a pale green colour occur, with crystals of yellowish-red garnet (hessonite) and chlorite, in veins traversing serpentine in the Ala valley near Turin in Piedmont: a crystal of this variety ("alalite") is represented in the accompanying figure. These, as well as the long, transparent, bottle-green crystals from the Zillerthal in the Tyrol, have occasionally been cut as gem-stones. Good crystals have been found also at Achmatovsk near Zlatoust in the Urals, Traversella near Ivrea in Piedmont ("traversellite"), Nordmark in Sweden, Monroe in New York, Burgess in Lanark county, Ontario, and several other places: at Nordmark the large, rectangular black crystals occur with magnetite in the iron mines. (L. J. S.)

DIOPTASE, a rare mineral species consisting of acid copper orthosilicate, H2CuSiO4, crystallizing in the parallel-faced hemihedral class of the rhombohedral system. The degree of symmetry is the same as in the mineral phenacite, there being only an axis of triad symmetry and a centre of symmetry. The crystals have the form of a hexagonal prism m terminated by a rhombohedron r, the alternate edges between these being sometimes replaced by the faces of a rhombohedron s. The faces are striated parallel to the edges between r, s and m. There are perfect cleavages parallel to the faces of a rhombohedron which truncate the polar edges of r: from the cleavage cracks internal reflections are often to be seen in the crystal, and it was on account of this that the mineral was named dioptase, by R. J. Haüy in 1797, from [Greek: diopteuein], "to see into." The crystals vary from transparent to translucent with a vitreous lustre, and are bright emerald-green in colour; they thus have a certain resemblance to emerald, hence the early name emerald-copper (German, _Kupfer-Smaragd_). Hardness 5; sp. gr. 3.3. The mineral is decomposed by hydrochloric acid with separation of gelatinous silica. At a red heat it blackens and gives off water. The fine crystals from Mount Altyn-Tübe on the western slopes of the Altai Mountains in the Kirghiz Steppes, Asiatic Russia, line cavities in a compact limestone; they were first sent to Europe in 1785 by Achir Mahmed, a Bucharian merchant, after whom the mineral has been named archirite. More recently, in 1890, good crystals of similar habit, but rather darker in colour, have been found with quartz and malachite near Komba in the French Congo. As drusy crystalline crusts it has been found at Copiapo in Chile and in Arizona.

Dioptase has occasionally been used as a gem-stone, especially in Russia and Persia; it has a fine colour, but a low degree of hardness and the transparency is imperfect. (L. J. S.)

DIORITE (from the Gr. [Greek: diorizein] to distinguish, from [Greek: dia] through, [Greek: oros], a boundary), in petrology, the name given by Haüy to a family of rocks of granitic texture, composed of plagioclase felspar and hornblende. As they are richer in the dark coloured ferromagnesian minerals they are usually grey or dark grey, and have a higher specific gravity than granite. They also rarely show visible quartz. But there are diorites of many kinds, as the name applies rather to a family of rocks than to a single species. Some contain biotite, others augite or hypersthene; many have a small amount of quartz. Orthoclase is rarely entirely absent, and when it is fairly common the rock becomes a tonalite; in this way a transition is furnished between diorites and granites. It is rare to find the pure types of "hornblende-diorite," "augite-diorite," &c., but in most cases the rocks contain two or more ferromagnesian silicates, and such combinations as "hornblende-biotite-diorite" are commonest in nature.

The felspar of the diorites ranges in composition from oligoclase to labradorite, and is often remarkably zonal, the external layers being more alkaline than the internal. Small fluid enclosures and black grains, probably iron oxides, often occur in it in great numbers. Weathering produces epidote, calcite, sericite and kaolin. The biotite is always brown or yellow; the hornblende usually green, but sometimes brown or yellowish brown in those diorites which have affinities to lamprophyres. The augite is nearly always green but sometimes has a reddish tinge; bronzite and hypersthene have their usual green and brown shades. Apatite, iron oxides and zircon are almost invariably present; sphene, garnet and orthite are occasionally observed; calcite, chlorite, muscovite, kaolin, epidote and bastite are secondary. The structure is not essentially different from that of granite. The ferromagnesian minerals crystallize comparatively early and have some idiomorphism; the felspar usually follows and only in part shows good crystalline outlines. Orthoclase and quartz, if present, are last to separate out, and fill the spaces between the other minerals; often they interpenetrate to form micropegmatite. In many diorites the plagioclase felspar has crystallized before the hornblende, which consequently has less perfect outlines and forms irregular plates which enclose sharply formed individuals of felspar. This produces the ophitic structure (very common also in the dolerites). More rarely biotite and augite exhibit the same relations to the plagioclase. Orbicular structure also occasionally appears in these rocks; in fact the orbicular diorite of Corsica (also called "Napoleonite" or "Corsite") was for a long time the best-known example of this structure. The rock seems composed of spheroids, about an inch in diameter, surrounded by a smaller amount of dark-coloured dioritic matrix. The spheroids have a radiate structure and often show concentric dark and pale shells. These consist of hornblende (dark green) and basic plagioclase felspar, labradorite and bytownite (grey or nearly white). Occasionally diorites have a parallel banded or foliated structure, but these must not be confounded with the epidiorites, which are metamorphic rocks and also have a conspicuous foliation.

Diorites must also be distinguished from hornblendic gabbros, which contain more basic felspars, rarely quartz and occasionally olivine; but the boundary lines between diorites and gabbros are admittedly somewhat vague, e.g. some authors would call rocks gabbro which others would regard as augite-diorite. The hornblendites differ from the diorites in containing little felspar, and consist principally of hornblende. Among varietal designations given to rocks of the diorite family are "banatite" for an augite-diorite with or without quartz (from the Schemnitz district), "granodiorite" for a quartz-hornblende-diorite (essentially the same as tonalite) from California, &c., "adamellite" for the quartz-mica-diorite or tonalite of Monte Adamello (Alps), "ornite" for a hornblende-diorite rich in felspar, from Sweden. (J. S. F.)

DIP (Old Eng. _dyppan_, connected with the common Teutonic root seen in "deep"), the angle which the magnetic needle makes with the horizon. A freely suspended magnetic needle will not maintain a horizontal position except at the magnetic equator. Over the N. magnetic pole the north-seeking end of the needle points directly downwards and dips at an intermediate angle at intermediate distances between the magnetic poles and equator. There are secular progressive variations of dip as well as of declination and the maxima are independent of each other. In 1576 the dip at London was 71° 50', in 1720 (max.) 74° 42', in 1900 67° 9'. (For Dip Circle see INCLINOMETER.)

DIPHENYL (phenyl benzene), C6H5·C6H5, a hydrocarbon found in that fraction of the coal-tar distillate boiling between 240-300° C., from which it may be obtained by warming with sulphuric acid, separating the acid layer and strongly cooling the undissolved oil. It may be artificially prepared by passing benzene vapour through a red-hot tube; by the action of sodium on brombenzene dissolved in ether; by the action of stannous chloride on phenyldiazonium chloride; or by the addition of solid phenyldiazonium sulphate to warm benzene (R. Möhlau, _Berichte, 1893, 26_, 1997) C6H5N2·HSO4 + C6H6 = H2SO4 + N2 + C6H5·C6H5. L. Gattermann (_Berichte, 1890, 23_, 1226) has also prepared it by the decomposition of a solution of phenyldiazonium sulphate with alcohol and copper powder. It crystallizes in plates (from alcohol) melting at 70-71° C. and boiling at 254° C. It is oxidized by chromic acid in glacial acetic acid solution to benzoic acid, dilute nitric acid and chromic acid mixture being without effect. It is not reduced by hydriodic acid and phosphorus, but sodium in the presence of amyl alcohol reduces it to tetrahydrodiphenyl C12H14.

Many substitution derivatives are known: the monosubstitution derivatives being capable of existing in three isomeric forms. Of the disubstitution derivatives the most important are those derived from diparadiaminodiphenyl or benzidine (q.v.).

_Orthoaminodiphenyl_,

NH2 __ |__ / \__/ \ , \__/ \__/

is prepared by the action of bromine and caustic soda on orthophenylbenzamide (R. Hirsch, _Berichte, 1892, 25_, 1974); when its vapour is passed over heated lime, carbazol (q.v.) is formed.

_Diorthodiaminodiphenyl_,

NH2 NH2 __| |__ / \__/ \ , \__/ \__/

is obtained by the reduction of the corresponding nitro compound (obtained by the action of ethyl nitrite at 0° C. on metadinitrobenzidine hydrochloride). Its tetrazo compound on reduction gives a hydrazine which, on warming with hydrochloric acid at 150° C., decomposes into ammonium chloride and _phenazone_,

N = N __| |__ / \___/ \ \__/ \__/

(C12H8N2). One of the most important derivatives of diphenyl, from the theoretical point of view, is _diphenic acid_ or diorthodiphenyl carboxylic acid, which can be obtained from diparadiaminodiphenyldiorthocarboxylic acid, __ __ H2N / \__/ \ NH2 , \__/ \__/ | | HOOC COOH

or from phenanthrene (q.v.), the constitution of which it determines. See BENZIDINE for diparadiaminodiphenyl.

DIPHILUS, of Sinope, poet of the new Attic comedy and contemporary of Menander (342-291 B.C.). Most of his plays were written and acted at Athens, but he led a wandering life, and died at Smyrna. He was on intimate terms with the famous courtesan Gnathaena (Athenaeus xiii. pp. 579, 583). He is said to have written 100 comedies, the titles of fifty of which are preserved. He sometimes acted himself. To judge from the imitations of Plautus. (_Casina_ from the [Greek: Klêroumenoi], _Asinaria_ from the [Greek: Onagos], _Rudens_ from some other play), he was very skilful in the construction of his plots. Terence also tells us that he introduced into the _Adelphi_ (ii. 1) a scene from the [Greek: Synapothnêskontes], which had been omitted by Plautus in his adaptation (_Commorientes_) of the same play. The style of Diphilus was simple and natural, and his language on the whole good Attic; he paid great attention to versification, and was supposed to have invented a peculiar kind of metre. The ancients were undecided whether to class him among the writers of the New or Middle comedy. In his fondness for mythological subjects (_Hercules_, _Theseus_) and his introduction on the stage (by a bold anachronism) of the poets Archilochus and Hipponax as rivals of Sappho, he approximates to the spirit of the latter.

Fragments in H. Koch, _Comicorum Atticorum fragmenta_, ii.; see J. Denis, _La Comédie grecque_ (1886), ii. p. 414; R. W. Bond in _Classical Review_ (Feb. 1910, with trans. of _Emporos_ fragm.).

DIPHTHERIA (from [Greek: diphthera], a skin or membrane), the term applied to an acute infectious disease, which is accompanied by a membranous exudation on a mucous surface, generally on the tonsils and back of the throat or pharynx.

In general the symptoms at the commencement of an attack of diphtheria are comparatively slight, being those commonly accompanying a cold, viz. chilliness and depression. Sometimes more severe phenomena usher in the attack, such as vomiting and diarrhoea. A slight feeling of uneasiness in the throat is experienced along with some stiffness of the back of the neck. When looked at the throat appears reddened and somewhat swollen, particularly in the neighbourhood of the tonsils, the soft palate and upper part of pharynx, while along with this there is tenderness and swelling of the glands at the angles of the jaws. The affection of the throat spreads rapidly, and soon the characteristic exudation appears on the inflamed surface in the form of greyish-white specks or patches, increasing in extent and thickness until a yellowish-looking false membrane is formed. This deposit is firmly adherent to the mucous membrane beneath or incorporated with it, and if removed leaves a raw, bleeding, ulcerated surface, upon which it is reproduced in a short period. The appearance of the exudation has been compared to wet parchment or washed leather, and it is more or less dense in texture. It may cover the whole of the back of the throat, the cavity of the mouth, and the posterior nares, and spread downwards into the air-passages on the one hand and into the alimentary canal on the other, while any wound on the surface of the body is liable to become covered with it. This membrane is apt to be detached spontaneously, and as it loosens it becomes decomposed, giving a most offensive and characteristic odour to the breath. There is pain and difficulty in swallowing, but unless the disease has affected the larynx no affection of the breathing. The voice acquires a snuffling character. When the disease invades the posterior nares an acrid, fetid discharge, and sometimes also copious bleeding, takes place from the nostrils. Along with these local phenomena there is evidence of constitutional disturbance of the most severe character. There may be no great amount of fever, but there is marked depression and loss of strength. The pulse becomes small and frequent, the countenance pale, the swelling of the glands of the neck increases, which, along with the presence of albumen in the urine, testifies to a condition of blood poisoning. Unless favourable symptoms emerge death takes place within three or four days or sooner, either from the rapid extension of the false membrane into the air-passage, giving rise to asphyxia, or from a condition of general collapse, which is sometimes remarkably sudden. In cases of recovery the change for the better is marked by an arrest in the extension of the false membrane, the detachment and expectoration of that already formed, and the healing of the ulcerated mucous membrane beneath. Along with this there is a general improvement in the symptoms, the power of swallowing returns, and the strength gradually increases, while the glandular enlargement of the neck diminishes, and the albumen disappears from the urine. Recovery, however, is generally slow, and it is many weeks before full convalescence is established. Even, however, where diphtheria ends thus favourably, the peculiar sequelae already mentioned are apt to follow, generally within a period of two or three weeks after all the local evidence of the disease has disappeared. These secondary affections may occur after mild as well as after severe attacks, and they are principally in the form of paralysis affecting the soft palate and pharynx, causing difficulty in swallowing with regurgitation of food through the nose, and giving a peculiar nasal character to the voice. There are, however, other forms of paralysis occurring after diphtheria, especially that affecting the muscles of the eye, which produces a loss of the power of accommodation and consequent impairment of vision. There may be, besides, paralysis of both legs, and occasionally also of one side of the body (hemiplegia). These symptoms, however, after continuing for a variable length of time, almost always ultimately disappear.

Under the name of the _Malum Egyptiacum_, Aretaeus in the 2nd century gives a minute description of a disease which in all its essential characteristics corresponds to diphtheria. In the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries epidemics of diphtheria appear to have frequently prevailed in many parts of Europe, particularly in Holland, Spain, Italy, France, as well as in England, and were described by physicians belonging to those countries under various titles; but it is probable that other diseases of a similar nature were included in their descriptions, and no accurate account of this affection had been published till M. Bretonneau of Tours in 1821 laid his celebrated treatise on the subject before the French Academy of Medicine. By him the term _La Diphthérite_ was first given to the disease.

Great attention has been paid to diphtheria in recent years, with some striking results. Its cause and nature have been definitely ascertained, the conditions which influence its prevalence have been elucidated, and a specific "cure" has been found. In the last respect it occupies a unique position at the present time. In the case of several other zymotic diseases much has been done by way of prevention, little or nothing for treatment; in the case of diphtheria prevention has failed, but treatment has been revolutionized by the introduction of antitoxin, which constitutes the most important contribution to practical medicine as yet made by bacteriology.

Causation.

The exciting cause of diphtheria is a micro-organism, identified by Klebs and Loffler in 1883 (see PARASITIC DISEASES). It has been shown by experiment that the symptoms of diphtheria, including the after-effects, are produced by a toxin derived from the micro-organisms which lodge in the air-passages and multiply in a susceptible subject. The natural history of the organism outside the body is not well understood, but there is some reason to believe that it lives in a dormant condition in suitable soils. Recent research does not favour the theory that it is derived from defective drains or "sewer gas," but these things, like damp and want of sunlight, probably promote its spread, by lowering the health of persons exposed to them, and particularly by causing an unhealthy condition of the throat, rendering it susceptible to the contagion. Defective drainage, or want of drainage, may also act, by polluting the ground, and so providing a favourable soil for the germ, though it is to be noted that "the steady increase in the diphtheria mortality has coincided, in point of time, with steady improvement in regard of such sanitary circumstances as water supply, sewerage, and drainage" (Thorne Thorne). Cats and cows are susceptible to the diphtheritic bacillus, and fowls, turkeys and other birds have been known to suffer from a disease like diphtheria, but other domestic animals appear to be more or less resistant or immune. In human beings the mere presence of the germ is not sufficient to cause disease; there must also be susceptibility, but it is not known in what that consists. Individuals exhibit all degrees of resistance up to complete immunity. Children are far more susceptible than adults, but even children may have the Klebs-Loffler bacillus in their throats without showing any symptoms of illness. Altogether there are many obscure points about this micro-organism, which is apt to assume a puzzling variety of forms. Nevertheless its identification has greatly facilitated the diagnosis of the disease, which was previously a very difficult matter, often determined in an arbitrary fashion on no particular principles.

Diphtheria, as at present understood, may be defined as sore throat in which the bacillus is found; if it cannot be found, the illness is regarded as something else, unless the clinical symptoms are quite unmistakable. One result of this is a large transference of registered mortality from other throat affections, and particularly from croup, to diphtheria. Croup, which never had a well-defined application, and is not recognized by the College of Physicians as a synonym for diphtheria, appears to be dying out from the medical vocabulary in Great Britain. In France the distinction has never been recognized.

Prevalence.

Diphtheria is endemic in all European and American countries, and is apparently increasing, but the incidence varies greatly. It is far more prevalent on the continent than in England, and still more so in the United States and Canada. The following table, compiled from figures collected by Dr Newsholme, shows how London compares with some foreign cities. The figures give the mean death-rate from diphtheria and croup for the term of years during which records have been kept. The period varies in different cases, and therefore the comparison is only a rough one.

_Mean Death-Rates from Diphtheria and Croup per Million living._

New York 1610 | Munich 990 Chicago 1400 | Milan 990 Buenos Aires 1360 | Florence 830 Trieste 1300 | Vienna 770 Dresden 1290 | Stockholm 720 Berlin 1190 | St Petersburg 650 Boston 1160 | Moscow 640 Marseilles 1130 | Paris 630 Christiania 1090 | Hamburg 490 Budapest 1880 | London 386

There is comparatively little diphtheria in India and Japan, but in Egypt, the Cape and Australasia it prevails very extensively among the urban populations. The mortality varies greatly from year to year in all countries and cities. In Berlin, for instance, it has oscillated between a maximum of 2420 in 1883 and a minimum of 340 in 1896; in New York between 2760 in 1877 and 680 in 1868; in Christiania between 3290 in 1887 and 170 in 1871. In some American cities still higher maxima have been recorded. In other words, diphtheria, though always endemic, exhibits at times a great increase of activity, and becomes epidemic or even pandemic. The following table for 1859-99 shows fairly well the periodical rise and fall in England and Wales. Diphtheria and croup are given both separately and together, showing the increasing transference from one to the other of late years. Diphtheria was first entered separately in the year 1859.

_Deaths from Diphtheria and Croup per Million living in England and Wales._

+---------------+-------------+----------+-------------+ | Years. | Diphtheria. | Croup. | Diphtheria | | | | | and Croup. | +---------------+-------------+----------+-------------+ | 1859 | 517 | 286 | 803 | | 1860 | 261 | 220 | 481 | | 1861-70 | 185 | 246 | 431 | | 1871-80 | 121 | 168 | 289 | | 1881-90 | 163 | 144 | 307 | | 1891-95 | 254 | 70 | 324 | | 1896-97 | 269 | 43 | 312 | | 1898 | 244 | 27 | 271 | | 1899 | 293 | 32 | 325 | +---------------+-------------+----------+-------------+

The combined figures for diphtheria and croup in later years are:--(1900) 316; (1901) 296; (1902) 255; (1903) 195; (1904) 184; (1905) 174; (1906) 190; (1907) 175; (1908) 166.

Several facts are roughly indicated by the table. It begins with an extremely severe epidemic, which has not been approached since. Then follows a fall extending over twenty years. On the whole this diminution was progressive, though not in reality so steady as the decennial grouping makes it appear, being interrupted by smaller oscillations in single years and groups of years. Still the main fact holds good. After 1880 an opposite movement began, likewise interrupted by minor oscillations, but on the whole progressive, and culminating in the year 1893 with a death-rate of 389, the highest recorded since 1865. After 1896 a marked fall again took place. This is partly accounted for by the use of antitoxin, which only began on a considerable scale in 1895, and did not become general until a year or two later at least. Its effects were only then fully felt. The registrar-general's returns record mortality, not prevalence--that is to say, the number of deaths, not of cases.

On the whole, we get clear evidence of an epidemic rise and fall, which may serve to dispose of some erroneous conceptions. The belief, held until recently, that diphtheria is steadily increasing in Great Britain was obviously premature; it did rise over a series of years, but has now ebbed again. Moreover, the general prevalence during the last thirty years has been notably less than in the previous twelve years. Yet it is during years since 1870 that compulsory education has been in existence and main drainage chiefly carried out. It follows that neither school attendance nor sewer gas exercises such an important influence over the epidemicity of diphtheria as some other conditions. What are those conditions? Dr Newsholme has advanced the theory, based on an elaborate examination of statistics in various countries, that the activity of diphtheria is connected with the rainfall, and he lays down the following general induction from the facts: "Diphtheria only becomes epidemic in years in which the rainfall is deficient, and the epidemics are on the largest scale when three or more years of deficient rainfall follow each other." He points out that the comparative rarity of diphtheria in tropical climates, which are characterized by excessive rainfall, and its greater prevalence in continental than in insular countries, confirm his theory. His observations seem quite contrary to the view laid down by various authorities, and hitherto accepted, that wet weather favours diphtheria. The two, however, are not irreconcilable. The key to the problem--and possibly to many other epidemiological problems--may perhaps be found in the movements of the subsoil water. It has been suggested by different observers, and particularly by Mr M. A. Adams, who has for some years made a study of the subsoil water at Maidstone, that there is a definite connexion between it and diphtheria. In England the underground water normally reaches its lowest level at the end of the summer; then it gradually rises, fed by percolation from the winter rains, reaching a maximum level about the end of March, after which it gradually sinks. This maximum level Mr Adams calls the annual spring cleaning of the soil, and his observations go to show that when the normal movement is arrested or disturbed, diphtheria becomes active. Now that is what happens in periods of drought. The underground water does not rise to its usual level, and there is no spring cleaning. The hypothesis, then, is this: The diphtheria bacillus lives in the soil, but is "drowned out" in wet periods by the subsoil water. In droughty ones it lives and flourishes in the warm, dry soil; then when rain comes, it is driven out with the ground air into the houses. This process will continue for some time, so that epidemic outbreaks may well seem to be associated with wet. But they begin in drought, and are stopped by long-continued periods of copious rainfall. This is quite in keeping with the observed fact that diphtheria is a seasonal disease, always most prevalent in the last quarter of the year. The summer develops the poison in the soil, the autumnal rains bring it out. The fact that the same cause does not produce the same effect in tropical countries may perhaps be explained by the extreme violence of the alternations, which are too great to suit this particular micro-organism, or possibly the regularity of the rainfall prevents its development.

The foregoing hypothesis is supported by a good deal of evidence, and notably by the concurrence of the great epidemic or pandemic prevalence in Great Britain, culminating in 1859, with a prolonged period of exceptionally deficient rainfall. Again, the highest death-rate registered since 1865 was in 1893, a year of similarly exceptional drought. But it is no more than an hypothesis, and the fate of former theories is a warning against drawing conclusions from statistics and records extending over too short a period of time. The warning is particularly necessary in connexion with meteorological conditions, which are apt to upset all calculations. As it happens, a period of deficient rainfall even greater than that of 1854-1858 has recently been experienced. It began in 1893 and culminated in the extraordinary season of 1899. The dry years were 1893, 1895, 1896, 1898 and 1899, and the deficiency of rainfall was not made good by any considerable excess in 1894 and 1897. It surpassed all records at Greenwich; streams and wells ran dry all over the country, and the flow of the Thames and Lea was reduced to the lowest point ever recorded. There should be, according to the theory, at least a very large increase in the prevalence of diphtheria. To a certain extent it has held good. There was a marked rise in 1893-1896 over the preceding period, though not so large as might have been expected, but it was followed by a decided fall in 1897-1898. The experience of 1898 contradicts, that of 1899 supports, the theory. Further light is therefore required; but perhaps the failure of the recent drought to produce results at all comparable with the epidemic of the 'fifties may be due to variations in the resistance of the disease, which differs widely in different years. It may also be due in part to improved sanitation, to the notification of infectious diseases, the use of isolation hospitals, which have greatly developed in quite recent years, and, lastly, to the beneficial effects of antitoxin. If these be the real explanations, then scientific and administrative work has not been thrown away after all in combating this very painful and fatal enemy of the young.

Dissemination.

The conditions governing the general prevalence of diphtheria, and its epidemic rise and fall, which have just been discussed, do not touch the question of actual dissemination. The contagion is spread by means which are in constant operation, whether the general amount of disease is great or small. Water, so important in some epidemic diseases, is believed not to be one of them, though a negative proof based on absence of evidence cannot be accepted as conclusive. On the other hand, milk is undoubtedly a means of dissemination. Several outbreaks of an almost explosive character, besides minor extensions of disease from one place to another, have been traced to this cause. Milk may be contaminated in various ways--at the dairy, for instance, or on the way to customers,--but several cases, investigated by the officers of the Local Government Board and others, have been thought to point to infection from cows suffering from a diphtheritic affection of the udder. The part played by aërial convection is undetermined, but there is no reason to suppose that the infecting material is conveyed any distance by wind or air currents. Instances which seem to point to the contrary may be explained in other ways, and particularly by the fact, now fully demonstrated, that persons suffering from minor sore throats, not recognized as diphtheria, may carry the disease about and introduce it into other localities. Human intercourse is the most important means of dissemination, the contagion passing from person to person either by actual contact, as in kissing, or by the use of the same utensils and articles, or by mere proximity. In the last case the germs must be supposed to be air-borne for short distances, and to enter with the breath. Rooms appear liable to become infected by the presence of diphtheritic cases, and so spread the disease among other persons using them. At a small outbreak which occurred at Darenth Asylum in 1898 the infection clung obstinately to a particular ward, in spite of the prompt removal of all cases, and fresh ones continued to occur until it had been thoroughly disinfected, after which there were no more. The part played by human intercourse in fostering the spread of the disease suggests that it would naturally be more prevalent in urban communities, where people congregate together more, than in rural ones. This is at variance with the conclusion laid down by some authorities, that in this country diphtheria used to affect chiefly the sparsely populated districts, and though tending to become more urban, is still rather a rural disease. That view is based upon an analysis of the distribution by counties in England and Wales from 1855 to 1880, and it has been generally accepted and repeated until it has become a sort of axiom. Of course the facts of distribution are facts, but the general inference drawn from them, that diphtheria peculiarly affects the country and is changing its _habitat_, may be erroneous. Dr Newsholme, by taking a wider basis of experience, has arrived at the opposite conclusion, and finds that diphtheria does not, in fact, flourish more in sparsely-peopled districts. "When a sufficiently long series of years is taken," he says, "it appears clear that there is more diphtheria in urban than in rural communities." The rate for London has always been in excess of that for the whole of England and Wales. Its distribution at any given time is determined by a number of circumstances, and by their incidental co-operation, not by any property or predilection for town or country inherent in the disease. There are the epidemic conditions of soil and rainfall, previously discussed, which vary widely in different localities at different times; there is the steady influence of regular intercourse, and the accidental element of special distribution by various means. These things may combine to alter the incidence. In short, accident plays too great a part to permit any general conclusion to be drawn from distribution, except from a very wide basis of experience. The variations are very great and sometimes very sudden. For instance, the county of London for some years headed the list, having a far higher death-rate than any other. In 1898 it dropped to the fifth place, and was surpassed by Rutland, a purely rural county, which had the lowest mortality of all in the previous year and very nearly the lowest for the previous ten years. Again, South Wales, which had had a low mortality for some years, suddenly came into prominence as a diphtheria district, and in 1898 had the highest death-rate in the country. Staffordshire and Bedfordshire show a similar rise, the one an urban, the other a rural, county. All the northern counties, both rural and urban,--namely, Northumberland, Durham, Cumberland, Westmorland, Lancashire, Yorkshire, Cheshire and Lincolnshire,--had a very high rate in 1861-1870, and a low one in 1896-1898. It is obviously unsafe to draw general conclusions from distribution data on a small scale. Diphtheria appears to creep about very slowly, as a rule, from place to place, and from one part of a large town to another; it forsakes one district and appears in another; occasionally it attacks a fresh locality with great energy, presumably because the local conditions are exceptionally favourable, which may be due to the soil or, possibly, to the susceptibility of the inhabitants, who are, so to speak, virgin ground. But through it all personal infection is the chief means of spread.

The acceptance of this doctrine has directed great attention to the practical question of school influence. There is no doubt whatever that it plays a very considerable part in spreading diphtheria. The incidence of the disease is chiefly on children, and nothing so often and regularly brings large numbers together in close contact under the same roof as school attendance. Nothing, in fact, furnishes such constant and extensive opportunities for personal infection. Many outbreaks have definitely been traced to schools. In London the subject has been very fully investigated by Sir Shirley Murphy, the medical officer of health to the London County Council, and by Dr W. R. Smith, formerly medical officer of health to the London School Board. Sir Shirley Murphy has shown that a special incidence on children of school age began to manifest itself after the adoption of compulsory education, and that the summer holidays are marked by a distinct diminution of cases, which is succeeded by an increase on the return to school. Dr W. R. Smith's observations are directed rather to minimizing the effect of school influence, and to showing that it is less important than other factors; which is doubtless true, as has been already remarked. It appears that the heaviest incidence falls upon infants under school age, and that liability diminishes progressively after school age is reached. But this by no means disposes of the importance of school influence, as the younger children at home may be infected by older ones, who have picked up the contagion at school, but, being less susceptible, are less severely affected and exhibit no worse symptoms than a sore throat. From a practical point of view the problem is a difficult one to deal with, as it is virtually impossible to ensure the exclusion of all infection, on account of the deceptively mild forms it may assume; but considering how very often outbreaks of diphtheria necessitate the closing of schools, it would probably be to the advantage of the authorities to discourage, rather than to compel, the attendance of children with sore throats. A fact of some interest revealed by statistics is that in the earliest years of life the incidence of diphtheria is greater upon male than upon female children, but from three years onwards the position is reversed, and with every succeeding year the relative female liability becomes greater. This is probably due to the habit of kissing maintained among females, but more and more abandoned by boys from babyhood onwards.

All these considerations suggest the importance of segregating the sick in isolation hospitals. Of late years this preventive measure has been carried out with increasing efficiency, owing to the better provision of such hospitals and the greater willingness of the public to make use of them; and probably the improvement so effected has had some share in keeping down the prevalence of the disease to comparatively moderate proportions. Unfortunately, the complete segregation of infected persons is hardly possible, because of the mild symptoms, and even absence of symptoms, exhibited by some individuals. A further difficulty arises with reference to the discharge of patients. It has been proved that the bacillus may persist almost indefinitely in the air-passages in certain cases, and in a considerable proportion it does persist for several weeks after convalescence. On returning home such cases may, and often do, infect others.

Treatment.

Since the antitoxin treatment was introduced in 1894 it has overshadowed all other methods. We owe this drug originally to the Berlin school of bacteriologists, and particularly to Dr Behring. The idea of making use of serum arose about 1890, out of researches made in connexion with Mechnikov's theory of phagocytosis, by which is meant the action of the phagocytes or white corpuscles of the blood in destroying the bacteria of disease. It was shown by the German bacteriologists that the serum or liquid part of the blood plays an equally or more important part in resisting disease, and the idea of combating the toxins produced by pathogenic bacteria with resistant serum injected into the blood presented itself to several workers. The idea was followed up and worked out independently in France and Germany, so successfully that by the year 1894 the serum treatment had been tried on a considerable scale with most encouraging results. Some of these were published in Germany in the earlier part of that year, and at the International Hygienic Congress, held in Budapest a little later, Dr Roux, of the Institut Pasteur, whose experience was somewhat more extensive than that of his German colleagues, read a paper giving the result of several hundred cases treated in Paris. When all allowance for errors had been made, they showed a remarkable and even astonishing reduction of mortality, fully confirming the conclusions drawn from the German experiments. This consensus of independent opinion proved a great stimulus to further trial, and before long one _clinique_ after another told the same tale. The evidence was so favourable that Professor Virchow--the last man to be carried away by a novelty--declared it "the imperative duty of medical men to use the new remedy" (_The Times_, 19th October 1894). Since then an enormous mass of facts has accumulated from all quarters of the globe, all testifying to the value of antitoxin in the treatment of diphtheria. The experience of the hospitals of the London Metropolitan Asylums Board for five years before and after antitoxin may be given as a particularly instructive illustration; but the subsequent reduction in the rate of mortality (12 in 1900, 11.3 in 1901, 10.8 in 1902, 9.3 in 1903, and an average of 9 in 1904-1908) added further confirmation.

_Annual Case Mortality in Metropolitan Asylums Board's Hospitals._

Before Antitoxin. | After Antitoxin. Mortality | Mortality Year. per cent. | Year. per cent. | 1890 33.55 | 1895 22.85 1891 30.61 | 1896 21.20 1892 29.51 | 1897 17.79 1893 30.42 | 1898 15.37 1894 29.29 | 1899 13.95

The number of cases dealt with in these five antitoxin years was 32,835, or an average of 6567 a year, and the broad result is a reduction of mortality by more than one-half. It is a fair inference that the treatment saves the lives of about 1000 children every year in London alone. This refers to all cases. Those which occur in the hospitals as a sequel to scarlet fever, and consequently come under treatment from the commencement, show very much more striking results. The case mortality, which was 46.8% in 1892 and 58.8% in 1893, has been reduced to 3.6% since the introduction of antitoxin. But the evidence is not from statistics alone. The beneficial effect of the treatment is equally attested by clinical observation. Dr Roux's original account has been confirmed by a cloud of witnesses year after year. "One may say," he wrote, "that the appearance of most of the patients is totally different from what it used to be. The pale and leaden faces are scarcely seen in the wards; the expression of the children is brighter and more lively." Adult patients have described the relief afforded by inoculation; it acts like a charm, and lifts the deadly feeling of oppression off like a cloud in the course of a few hours. Finally, the counteracting effect of antitoxin in preventing the disintegrating action of the diphtheritic toxin on the nervous tissues has been demonstrated pathologically. There are some who still affect scepticism as to the value of this drug. They cannot be acquainted with the evidence, for if the efficacy of antitoxin in the treatment of diphtheria has not been proved, then neither can the efficacy of any treatment for anything be said to be proved. Prophylactic properties are also claimed for the serum; but protection is necessarily more difficult to demonstrate than cure, and though there is some evidence to support the claim, it has not been fully made out.

AUTHORITIES.--Adams, _Public Health_, vol. vii.; Thorne Thorne, _Milroy Lectures_ (1891); Newsholme, _Epidemic Diphtheria_; W. R. Smith, _Harben Lectures_ (1899); Murphy, _Report to London County Council_ (1894); Sims Woodhead, _Report to Metropolitan Asylums Board_ (1901).

DIPLODOCUS, a gigantic extinct land reptile discovered in rocks of Upper Jurassic age in western North America, the best-known example of a Sauropodous Dinosaur. The first scattered remains of a skeleton were found in 1877 by Prof. S.W. Williston near Cañon City, Colorado; and the tail and hind-limb of this specimen were described in the following year by Prof. O.C. Marsh. He noticed that in the part of the tail which dragged on the ground, each chevron bone below the vertebral column consisted of a pair of bars; and as so peculiar an arrangement for the protection of the artery and vein beneath the tail had not previously been observed in any animal, he proposed the name _Diplodocus_ ("double beam" or "double bar") for the new reptile, adding the specific name _longus_ in allusion to the elongated shape of the tail vertebrae. In 1884 Prof. Marsh described the head, vertebrae and pelvis of the same skeleton, which is now in the National Museum, Washington. In 1897 the next important specimen, a tail associated with other fragments, apparently of _Diplodocus longus_, was obtained by the American Museum of Natural History, New York, from Como Bluffs, Wyoming. In 1899-1900 large parts of two skeletons of another species, in a remarkable state of preservation, were disinterred by Messrs J. L. Wortman, O. A. Peterson and J. B. Hatcher in Sheep Creek, Albany county, Wyo., and these are now exhibited with minor discoveries in the Carnegie Museum, Pittsburg. There are also other specimens in New York, Chicago and the University of Wyoming. In 1901 Mr J. B. Hatcher studied the new species at Pittsburg, named it _Diplodocus carnegii_, and published the first restored sketch of a complete skeleton. Shortly afterwards plaster casts of the finest specimens were prepared under the direction of Mr J. B. Hatcher and Dr W. J. Holland, and these were skilfully combined to form the cast of a completely reconstructed skeleton, which was presented to the British Museum by Andrew Carnegie in 1905. This reconstruction is based primarily on a well-preserved chain of vertebrae, extending from the second cervical to the twelfth caudal, associated with the ribs, pelvis and several limb-bones. The tail is completed from two other specimens in the Carnegie Museum, having caudals 13 to 36 and 37 to 73 respectively in apparently unbroken series. Prof. Marsh's specimen in Washington supplied the greater part of the skull; and the fore-foot is copied from a specimen in New York.

The cast of the reconstructed skeleton of _Diplodocus carnegii_ measures 84 ft. in length and 12 ft. 9 in. in maximum height at the hind-limbs. It displays the elongated neck and tail and the relatively small head so characteristic of the Sauropodous Dinosaurs. The skull is inclined to the axis of the neck, denoting a browsing animal; while the feeble blunt teeth and flat expanded snout suggest feeding among succulent water-weeds. The large narial opening at the highest point of the head probably indicates an aquatic mode of life, and there seems to have been a soft valve to close the nostrils when under water. The diminutive brain-cavity, scarcely large enough to contain a walnut, is noteworthy. There are 104 vertebrae, namely, 15 in the neck, 11 in the back, 5 in the sacrum and 73 in the tail. The presacral vertebrae are of remarkably light construction, the plates and struts of bone being arranged to give the greatest strength with the least weight. The end of the tail is a flexible lash, which would probably be used as a weapon, like the tail of some existing lizards. The feet, notwithstanding the weight they had to support, are as unsymmetrical as those of a crocodile, with claws only on the three inner toes. There is no external armour.

See O. C. Marsh, _Amer. Journ. Sci._ ser. 3, vol. xvi. (1878), p. 414, pl. viii., and loc. cit. vol. xxvii. (1884), p. 161, pls. iii., iv.; H. F. Osborn, Mem. _Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist._ vol. i. pt. v. (1899); J. B. Hatcher, _Mem. Carnegie Mus._ vol. i. No. 1 (1901), and vol. ii. No. 1 (1903); W. J. Holland, _Mem. Carnegie Mus._ vol. ii. No. 6 (1906). (A. S. Wo.)

DIPLOMACY (Fr. _diplomatie_), the art of conducting international negotiations. The word, borrowed from the French, has the same derivation as Diplomatic (q.v.), and, according to the _New English Dictionary_, was first used in England so late as 1796 by Burke. Yet there is no other word in the English language that could supply its exact sense. The need for such a term was indeed not felt; for what we know as diplomacy was long regarded, partly as falling under the _Jus gentium_ or international law, partly as a kind of activity morally somewhat suspect and incapable of being brought under any system. Moreover, though in a certain sense it is as old as history, diplomacy as a uniform system, based upon generally recognized rules and directed by a diplomatic hierarchy having a fixed international status, is of quite modern growth even in Europe. It was finally established only at the congresses of Vienna (1815) and Aix-la-Chapelle (1818), while its effective extension to the great monarchies of the East, beyond the bounds of European civilization, was comparatively an affair of yesterday. So late as 1876 it was possible for the writer on this subject in the 9th edition of the _Encyclopaedia Britannica_ to say that "it would be an historical absurdity to suppose diplomatic relations connecting together China, Burma and Japan, as they connect the great European powers."

_Principles._--Though diplomacy has been usually treated under the head of international law, it would perhaps be more consonant with the facts to place international law under diplomacy. The principles and rules governing the intercourse of states, defined by a long succession of international lawyers, have no sanction save the consensus of the powers, established and maintained by diplomacy (see BALANCE OF POWER); in so far as they have become, by international agreement, more than mere pious opinions of theorists, they are working rules established for mutual convenience, which it is the function of diplomacy to safeguard or to use for its own ends. In any case they by no means cover the whole field of diplomatic activity; and, were they swept away, the art of diplomacy, developed through long ages of experience, would survive.

This experience may perhaps be called the science, as distinct from the art, of diplomacy. It covers not only the province of international law, but the vast field of recorded experience which we know as history, of which indeed international law is but a part; for, as Bielfeld in his _Institutions politiques_ (La Haye, 1760, t. I. ch. ii. § 13) points out, "public law is founded on facts. To know it we must know history, which is the soul of this science as of politics in general." The broad outlook on human affairs implied in "historical sense" is more necessary to the diplomatist under modern conditions than in the 18th century, when international policy was still wholly under the control of princes and their immediate advisers. Diplomacy was then a game of wits played in a narrow circle. Its objects too were narrower; for states were practically regarded as the property of their sovereigns, which it was the main function of their "agents" to enlarge or to protect, while scarcely less important than the preservation or rearrangement of territorial boundaries was that of precedence and etiquette generally, over which an incredible amount of time was wasted. The _haute diplomatie_ thus resolved itself into a process of exalted haggling, conducted with an utter disregard of the ordinary standards of morality, but with the most exquisite politeness and in accordance with ever more and more elaborate rules. Much of the outcome of these dead debates has become stereotyped in the conventions of the diplomatic service; but the character of diplomacy itself has undergone a great change. This change is threefold: firstly, as the result of the greater sense of the community of interests among nations, which was one of the outcomes of the French Revolution; secondly, owing to the rise of democracy, with its expression in parliamentary assemblies and in the press; thirdly, through the alteration in the position of the diplomatic agent, due to modern means of communication.

The first of these changes may be dated to the circular of Count Kaunitz of the 17th of July 1791, in which, in face of the Revolution, he impressed upon the powers the duty of making common cause for the purpose of preserving "public peace, the tranquillity of states, the inviolability of possessions, and the faith of treaties." The duty of watching over the common interests of Europe, or of the world, was thus for the first time officially recognized as a function of diplomacy, since common action could only be taken as the result of diplomatic negotiations. It would be easy to exaggerate the effective results of this idea, even when it had crystallized in the Grand Alliance of 1814 and been proclaimed to the world in the Holy Alliance of the 26th of September 1815 and the declaration of Aix-la-Chapelle. The cynical picture given by La Bruyère of the diplomatist of the 18th century still remained largely true: "His talk is only of peace, of alliances, of the public tranquillity, and of the public interests; in reality he is thinking only of his own, that is to say, of those of his master or of his republic."[1] The proceedings of the congress of Vienna proved how little the common good weighed unless reinforced by particular interests; but the conception of "Europe" as a political entity none the less survived. The congresses, notably the congress of Aix-la-Chapelle (q.v.) in 1818, were in a certain sense European parliaments, and their ostensible object was the furtherance of common interests. Had the imperial dreamer Alexander I. of Russia had his way, they would have been permanently established on the broad basis of the Holy Alliance, and would have included, not the great powers only, but representatives of every state (see ALEXANDER I. and EUROPE: _History_). Whatever the effective value of that "Concert of Europe" which was the outcome of the period of the congresses, it certainly produced a great effect on the spirit and the practice of diplomacy. In the congresses and conferences diplomacy assumes international functions both legislative and administrative. The diplomat is responsible, not only to his own government, but to "Europe." Thus Castlereagh was accused of subordinating the interests of Great Britain to those of Europe; and the same charge was brought, perhaps with greater justice, against Metternich in respect of Austria. Canning's principle of "Every nation for itself and God for us all!" prevailed, it is true, over that of Alexander's "Confederation of Europe"; yet, as one outcome of the congresses, every diplomatic agent, though he represents the interests of his own state, has behind him the whole body of the treaties which constitute the public law of the world, of which he is in some sort the interpreter and the guardian.

Parallel with this development runs the second process making for change: the increasing responsibility of diplomacy to public opinion. To discuss all the momentous issues involved in this is impossible; but the subject is too important to be altogether passed over, since it is one of the main problems of modern international intercourse, and concerns every one who by his vote may influence the policy of the state to which he belongs. The question, broadly speaking, is: how far has the public discussion of international affairs affected the legitimate functions of diplomacy for better or for worse? To the diplomatist of the old school the answer seems clear. For him diplomacy was too delicate and too personal an art to survive the glare and confusion of publicity. Metternich, the last representative of the old _haute diplomatie_, lived to moralize over the ruin caused by the first manifestations of the "new diplomacy," the outcome of the rise of the power of public opinion. He had early, from his own point of view, unfavourably contrasted the "limited" constitutional monarchies of the west with the "free" autocracies of the east of Europe, free because they were under no obligation to give a public account of their actions. He himself was a master of the old diplomatic art, of intrigue, of veiling his purpose under a cloud of magniloquence, above all, of the art of personal fascination. But public opinion was for him only a dangerous force to be kept under control; and, even had he realized the necessity for appealing to it, he had none of the qualities that would have made the appeal successful. In direct antagonism to him was George Canning, who may be called the great prototype of the "new diplomacy," and to Metternich was a "malevolent meteor hurled by divine providence upon Europe." Canning saw clearly the immense force that would be added to his diplomatic action if he had behind him the force of public opinion. In answer to Metternich's complaint of the tone of speeches in parliament and of the popular support given in England to revolutionary movements, he wrote, "Our influence, if it is to be maintained abroad, must be secure in its sources of strength at home: and the sources of that strength are in the sympathy between the people and the government; in the union of the public sentiment with the public counsels; in the reciprocal confidence of the House of Commons and the crown."[2]

It would be a mistake to jump to the conclusion that Canning was wholly right and Metternich wholly wrong. The conditions of the Habsburg monarchy were not those of Great Britain,[3] and even if it had been possible to speak of a public opinion in the Austrian empire at all, it certainly possessed no such organ as the British parliament. But the argument may be carried yet further. In the abstract the success of the policy of a minister in a democratic state must ultimately rest upon the support of public opinion; yet the necessity for this support has in the conduct of foreign affairs its peculiar dangers. In the difficult game of diplomacy a certain reticence is always necessary. Secret sources of information would be dried up were they to be lightly revealed; a plain exposition of policy would often give an undue advantage to the other party to a negotiation. Thus, even in Great Britain, the diplomatic correspondence laid before parliament is carefully edited, and all governments are jealous of granting access to their modern archives. Yet a representative assembly is apt to be resentful of such reservations. Its members know little or nothing of the conditions under which foreign affairs are conducted, and they are not unnaturally irritated by explanations which seem to lack candour or completeness. Canning himself had experience of this in the affair of the capture of the Danish fleet at Copenhagen; and Castlereagh's diplomacy was hampered by the bitter attacks of an opposition which accused him, with little justice, of pursuing a policy which he dared not reveal in its full scope to parliament. Moreover, the appeal to public opinion may be used as a diplomatic weapon for ends no less "selfish" than any aimed at by the old diplomacy. Bismarck, whose statesmanship was at least as cynical as that of Metternich, was a master of the art of taking the world into his confidence--when it suited him to do so; and the "reptile press," hired to give a seemingly independent support to his policy, was one of his most potent weapons. So far the only necessary consequence of the growth of the power of public opinion on the art of diplomacy has been to extend the sphere of its application; it is but one more factor to be dealt with; and experience has proved that it is subject to the wiles of a skilful diplomatist no less than were the princes and statesmen with whom the old diplomacy was solely concerned.

The third factor making for change--the revolution in the means of communication which has brought all the world into closer touch--remains to be discussed. It is obvious that before the invention of the telegraph, the diplomatic agent was in a far more responsible position than he is now, when he can, in most cases, receive immediate instructions from his government on difficult questions as they arise. When communication was still slow there was often no time to await instructions, or the instructions when they arrived were not seldom already out of date and had to be set aside on the minister's own responsibility. It would, however, be easy to exaggerate the importance of this change as affecting the character and status of diplomatic agents. It is true that the tendency has been for ministers of foreign affairs to hold the threads of diplomacy in their own hands to a far greater extent than was formerly the case; but they must still depend for information and advice on the "man on the spot," and the success of their policy largely depends upon his qualities of discretion and judgment. The growth of democracy, moreover, has given to the ambassador a new and peculiar importance; for he represents not only the sovereign to the sovereign, but the nation to the nation; and, as a succession of notable American ambassadors to Great Britain has proved, he may by his personal qualities do a large amount to remove the prejudices and ignorances which stand as a barrier between the nations. It marks an immense advance in the comity of international intercourse when the representatives of friendly powers are no longer regarded as "spies rather than ambassadors," to be "quickly heard and dismissed," as Philippe de Commines would have them, but as agreeable guests to be parted from with regret.

As to the qualifications for an ambassador, it is clearly impossible to lay down a general rule, for the same qualities are obviously not required in Washington as in Vienna, nor in Paris as in Pekin. Yet the effort to depict the ideal ambassador bulks largely in the works of the earlier theorists, and the demands they make are sufficiently alarming. Ottaviano Maggi, himself a diplomatist of the brilliant age of the Renaissance, has left us in his _De legato_ (Hanoviae, 1596) his idea of what an ambassador should be. He must not only be a good Christian but a learned theologian; he must be a philosopher, well versed in Aristotle and Plato, and able at a moment's notice to solve in correct dialectical form the most abstruse problems; he must be well read in the classics, and an expert in mathematics, architecture, music, physics and civil and canon law. He must not only know how to write and speak Latin with classical refinement, but he must be a master of Greek, Spanish, French, German and Turkish. He must have a sound knowledge of history, geography and the science of war; but at the same time is not to neglect the poets, and never to be without his Homer. Add to this that he must be well born, rich and of a handsome presence, and we have a portrait of a diplomatist whose original can hardly have existed even in that age of brilliant versatility. The Dutchman Frederikus de Marselaer, in his [Greek: kêrukeion] _sive legationum insigne_ (Antwerp, 1618), is scarcely less exacting than the Venetian. His ideal ambassador is a nobleman of fine presence and in the prime of life, famous, rich, munificent, abstemious, not violent, nor quarrelsome, nor morose, no flatterer, learned, eloquent, witty without being talkative, a good linguist, widely read, prudent and cautious, but brave and--as he adds somewhat superfluously--many-sided.

With these theoretical perfections one or two instances of the qualifications demanded by the exigencies of practical politics may be cited by way of illuminating contrast. At the court of the empress Elizabeth of Russia good looks were a surer means of diplomatic success than all the talents and virtues, and the princess of Zerbst (mother of the empress Catherine II.) wrote to Frederick of Prussia advising him to replace his elderly ambassador by a handsome young man with a good complexion; and the essential qualification for an ambassador to Switzerland, Germany, Poland, Denmark and Russia used to be that he should be able to drink the native diplomatists, seasoned from babyhood to strong liquors, under the table.

_History._--In its widest sense the history of diplomacy is that of the intercourse between nations, in so far as this has not been a mere brute struggle for the mastery;[4] in a narrower sense, with which the present article is alone concerned, it is that of the methods and spirit of diplomatic intercourse and of the character and status of diplomatic agents. Earlier writers on the office and functions of ambassadors, such as Gentilis or Archbishop Germonius, conscientiously trace their origin to God himself, who created the angels to be his legates; and they fortify their arguments by copious examples drawn from ancient history, sacred and profane. But, whatever the influence upon it of earlier practice, modern diplomacy really dates from the rise of permanent missions, and the consequent development of the diplomatic hierarchy as an international institution. Of this the first beginnings are traceable to the 15th century and to Italy. There had, of course, during the middle ages been embassies and negotiations; but the embassies had been no more than temporary missions directed to a particular end and conducted by ecclesiastics or nobles of a dignity appropriate to each occasion; there were neither permanent diplomatic agents nor a professional diplomatic class. To the evolution of such a class the Italy of the Renaissance, the nursing-ground of modern statecraft, gave the first impetus. This was but natural; for Italy, with its numerous independent states, between which there existed a lively intercourse and a yet livelier rivalry, anticipated in miniature the modern states' system of Europe. In feudal Europe there had been little room for diplomacy; but in northern and central Italy feudalism had never taken root, and in the struggles of the peninsula diplomacy had early played a part as great as, or greater than, war. Where all were struggling for the mastery, the existence of each depended upon alliances and counter-alliances, of which the object was the maintenance of the balance of power. In this school there was trained a notable succession of men of affairs. Thus, in the 13th and 14th centuries Florence counted among her envoys Dante, Petrarch and Boccaccio, and later on could boast of agents such as Capponi, Vettori, Guicciardini and Machiavelli. Papal Rome, too, as was to be expected, had always been a fruitful nursing-mother of diplomatists; and some authorities have traced the beginnings of modern diplomacy to a conscious imitation of her legatine system.[5]

It is, however, in Venice, that the origins of modern diplomacy are to be sought.[6] So early as the 13th century the republic, with a view to safeguarding the public interests, began to lay down a series of rules for the conduct of its ambassadors. Thus, in 1236, envoys to the court of Rome are forbidden to procure a benefice for anyone without leave of the doge and little council; in 1268 ambassadors are commanded to surrender on their return any gifts they may have received, and by another decree they are compelled to take an oath to conduct affairs to the honour and advantage of the republic. About the same time it was decided that diplomatic agents were to hand in, on their return, a written account of their mission; in 1288 this was somewhat expanded by a law decreeing that ambassadors were to deposit, within fifteen days of their return, a written account of the replies made to them during their mission, together with anything they might have seen or heard to the honour or in the interests of the republic. These provisions, which were several times renewed, notably in 1296, 1425 and 1533, are the origin of the famous reports of the Venetian ambassadors to the senate, which are at once a monument to the political genius of Venetian statesmen and a mine of invaluable historical material.[7]

These are but a few examples of a long series of regulations, many others also dating to the 13th century, by which the Venetian government sought to systematize its diplomatic service. That permanent diplomatic agencies were not established by it earlier than was the case is probably due to the distrust of its agents by which most of this legislation of the republic is inspired. In the 13th century two or three months was considered over-long a period for an ambassador to reside at a foreign court; in the 15th century the period of residence was extended to two years, and in the 16th century to three. This latter rule continued till the end of the republic; the embassy had become permanent, but the ambassador was changed every three years.

The origin of the change from temporary to permanent missions has been the subject of much debate and controversy. The theory that it was due, in the first instance, to the evolution of the Venetian consulates (_bajulats_) in the Levant into permanent diplomatic posts, and that the idea was thence transferred to the West, is disproved by the fact that Venice had established other permanent embassies before the baylo (q.v.) at Constantinople was transformed into a diplomatic agent of the first rank. Nor is the first known instance of the appointment of a permanent ambassador Venetian. The earliest record[8] is contained in the announcement by Francesco Sforza, duke of Milan, in 1455, of his intention to maintain a permanent embassy at Genoa[9]; and in 1460 the duke of Savoy sent Eusebio Margaria, archdeacon of Vercelli, as his permanent representative to the Curia.[10] Though, however, the early records of such appointments are rare, the practice was probably common among the Italian states. Its extension to countries outside Italy was a somewhat later development. In 1494 Milan is already represented in France by a permanent ambassador. In 1495 Zacharia Contarini, Venetian ambassador to the emperor Maximilian, is described by Sanuto (_Diarii_, i. 294) as _stato ambasciatore_; and from the time of Charles V. onwards the succession of ambassadors of the republic at the imperial court is fairly traceable. In 1496 "as the way to the British Isles is very long and very dangerous," two merchants resident in London, Pietro Contarini and Luca Valaressa, were appointed by the republic _subambasciatores_; and in June of the same year Andrea Trevisano arrived in London as permanent ambassador at the court of Henry VII.[11] Florence, too, from 1498 onwards, was represented at the courts of Charles V. and of France by permanent ambassadors.

During the same period the practice had been growing up among the other European powers. Spain led the way in 1487 by the appointment of Dr Roderigo Gondesalvi de Puebla as ambassador in England. As he was still there in 1500, the Spanish embassy in London may be regarded as the oldest still surviving post of the new permanent diplomacy. Other states followed suit, but only fitfully; it was not till late in the 16th century that permanent embassies were regarded as the norm. The precarious relations between the European powers during the 16th century, indeed, naturally retarded the development of the system. Thus it was not till after good relations had been established with France by the treaty of London that, in 1519, Sir Thomas Boleyn and Dr West were sent to Paris as resident English ambassadors, and, after the renewed breach between the two countries, no others were appointed till the reign of Elizabeth. Nine years before, Sir Robert Wingfield, whose simplicity earned him the nickname of "Summer-shall-be-green," had been sent as ambassador to the court of Charles V., where he remained from 1510 to 1517; and in 1520 the mutual appointment of resident ambassadors was made a condition of the treaty between Henry VIII. and Charles V. In 1517 Thomas Spinelly, who had for some years represented England at the court of the Netherlands, was appointed "resident ambassador to the court of Spain," where he remained till his death on the 22nd of August 1522. These are the most important early instances of the new system. Alone of the great powers, the emperor remained permanently unrepresented at foreign courts. In theory this was the result of his unique dignity, which made him superior to all other potentates; actually it was because, as emperor, he could not speak for the practically independent princes nominally his vassals. It served all practical purposes if he were represented abroad by his agents as king of Spain or archduke of Austria.

All the evidence now available goes to prove that the establishment of permanent diplomatic agencies was not an unconscious and accidental development of previous conditions, but deliberately adopted as an obvious convenience. But, while all the powers were agreed as to the convenience of maintaining such agencies abroad, all were equally agreed in viewing the representatives accredited to them by foreign states with extreme suspicion. This attitude was abundantly justified by the peculiar ethics of the new diplomacy. The old "orators" of the Summer-shall-be-green type could not long hold their own against the new men who had studied in the school of Italian statecraft, for whom the end justified the means. Machiavelli had gathered in _The Prince_ and _The Discourses on Livy_ the principles which underlay the practice of his day in Italy; Francis I., the first monarch to establish a completely organized diplomatic machinery, did most to give these principles a European extension. By the close of the 16th century diplomacy had become frankly "Machiavellian," and the ordinary rules of morality were held not to apply to the intercourse between nations. This was admitted in theory as well as in practice. Germonius, after a vigorous denunciation of lying in general, argues that it is permissible for the safety or convenience (_commodo_) of princes, since _salus populi suprema lex_, and _quod non permittit naturalis ratio, admittit civilis_; and he adduces in support of this principle the answer given by Ulysses to Neoptolemus, in the _Ajax_ of Sophocles, and the examples of Abraham, Jacob and David. Paschalius, while affirming that an ambassador must study to speak the truth, adds that he is not such a "rustic boor" as to say that an "official lie" (_officiosum mendacium_) is never to be employed, or to deny that an ambassador should be, on occasion, _splendide mendax_.[12] The situation is summed up in the famous definition of Sir Henry Wotton, which, though excused by himself as a jest, was held to be an indiscreet revelation of the truth: "An ambassador is an honest man sent to lie abroad for the good of his country."[13] The most successful liar, in fact, was esteemed the most successful diplomatist. "A prime article of the catechism of ambassadors," says Bayle in his _Dictionnaire critique_ (1699), "whatever their religion, is to invent falsehoods and to go about making society believe them." So universally was this principle adopted that, in the end, no diplomatist even expected to be believed; and the best way to deceive was--as Bismarck cynically avowed--to tell the truth.

But, in addition to being a liar _ex officio_, the ambassador was also "an honourable spy." "The principal functions of an envoy," says Francois de Callières, himself an ex-ambassador of Louis XIV., "are two; the first is to look after the affairs of his own prince; the second is to discover the affairs of the other." A clever minister, he maintains, will know how to keep himself informed of all that goes on in the mind of the sovereign, in the councils of ministers or in the country; and for this end "good cheer and the warming effect of wine" are excellent allies.[14] This being so, it is hardly to be wondered at that foreign ambassadors were commonly regarded as perhaps necessary, but certainly very unwelcome, guests. The views of Philippe de Commines have already been quoted above, and they were shared by a long series of theoretical writers as well as by men of affairs. Gentilis is all but alone in his protest against the view that all ambassadors were _exploratores magis quam oratores_, and to be treated as such. So early as 1481 the government of Venice had decreed the penalty of banishment and a heavy fine for any one who should talk of affairs of state with a foreign envoy, and though the more civilized princes did not follow the example of the sultan, who by way of precaution locked the ambassador of Ferdinand II., Jerome Laski, into "a dark and stinking place without windows," they took the most minute precautions to prevent the ambassadors of friendly powers from penetrating into their secrets. Charles V. thought it safest to keep them as far away as possible from his court. So did Francis I.; and, when affairs were critical, he made his frequent changes of residence and his hunting expeditions the excuse for escaping from their presence. Henry VII. forbade his subjects to hold any intercourse with them, and, later on, set spies upon them and examined their correspondence--a practice by no means confined to England. If the system of permanent embassies survived, it is clear that this was mainly due to the belief of the sovereigns that they gained more by maintaining "honourable spies" at foreign courts than they lost by the presence of those of foreign courts at their own. It was purely a question of the balance of advantage. Neither among statesmen nor among theorists was there any premonition of the great part to be played by the permanent diplomatic body in the development and maintenance of the concert of Europe. To Paschalius the permanent embassies were "a miserable outgrowth of a miserable age."[15] Grotius himself condemned them as not only harmful, but useless, the proof of the latter being that they were unknown to antiquity.[16]

_Development of the Diplomatic Hierarchy._--The history of the diplomatic body[17] is, like that of other bodies, that of the progressive differentiation of functions. The middle ages knew no classification of diplomatic agents; the person sent on mission is described indifferently as _legatus_, _orator_, _nuntius_, _ablegatus_, _commissarius_, _procurator_, _mandatarius_, _agens_ or _ambaxator_ (_ambassator_, &c.). In Gundissalvus, _De legato_ (1485), the oldest printed work on the subject, the word _ambasiator_, first found in a Venetian decree of 1268, is applied to any diplomat. Florence was the first to make distinction; the _orator_ was appointed by the council of the republic; the _mandatorio_, with inferior powers, by the Council of Ten. In 1500 Machiavelli, who held only the latter rank, wrote from France urging the Signoria to send _ambasiadori_. This was, however, rather a question of powers than of dignity. But the causes which ultimately led to the elaborate differentiation of diplomatic ranks were rather questions of dignity than of functions.[18] The breakdown of feudalism, with the consequent rise of a series of sovereign states or of states claiming to be sovereign, of very various size and importance, led to a certain confusion in the ceremonial relation between them, which had been unknown to the comparatively clearly defined system of the middle ages. The smaller states were eager to assert the dignity of their actual or practical independence; the greater powers were equally bent on "keeping them in their place." If the emperor, as has been stated above, was too exalted to send ambassadors, certain of the lesser states were soon esteemed too humble to be represented at the courts of the great powers save by agents of an inferior rank. By the second half of the 16th century, then, there are two classes of diplomatists, ambassadors and residents or agents, the latter being accounted ambassadors of the second class.[19] At first the difference of rank was determined by the status of the sovereign by whom or to whom the diplomatic agent was accredited; but early in the 16th century it became fairly common for powers of the first rank to send agents of the second class to represent them at courts of an equal status. The reasons were various, and not unamusing. First and foremost came the question of expense. The ambassador, as representing the person of his sovereign, was bound by the sentiment of the age to display an exaggerated magnificence. His journeys were like royal progresses, his state entries surrounded with every circumstance of pomp, and it was held to be his duty to advertise the munificence of his prince by boundless largesses. Had this munificence been as unlimited in fact as in theory, all might have been well, but, in that age of vaulting ambitions, depleted exchequers were the rule rather than the exception in Europe; the records are full of pitiful appeals from ambassadors for arrears of pay, and appointment to an embassy often meant ruin, even to a man of substance. To give but one example, Sir Richard Morison, Edward VI.'s ambassador in Germany, had to borrow money to pay his debts before he could leave Augsburg (_Cal. State Pap. Edw. VI._, No. 467), and later on he writes from Hamburg (April 9, 1552) that he could buy nothing, because everyone believed that he had packed up in readiness to flit secretly, for "How must they buy things, where men know their stuff is ready trussed up, and they fleeting every day?" (ib. No. 544). But the dignity of ambassador carried another drawback besides expense; his function of "honourable spy" was seriously hampered by the trammels of his position. He was unable to move freely in society, but lived a ceremonial existence in the midst of a crowd of retainers, through whom alone it was proper for him to communicate with the world outside. It followed that, though the office of ambassador was more dignified, that of agent was more generally useful.

Yet a third cause, possibly the most immediately potent, encouraged the growth of the lesser diplomatic ranks: the question of precedence among powers theoretically equal. Modern diplomacy has settled a difficulty which caused at one time much heart-burning and even bloodshed by a simple appeal to the alphabet. Great Britain feels no humiliation in signing after France, if the reason be that her name begins with G; had she not been Great, she would sign before. The vexed question of the precedence of ambassadors, too, has been settled by the rule, already referred to above, as to seniority of appointment. But while the question remained unsettled it was obviously best to evade it; and this was most easily done by sending an agent of inferior rank to a court where the precedence claimed for an ambassador would have been refused.

Thus set in motion, the process of differentiation continues until the system is stereotyped in the 19th century. It is unnecessary to trace this evolution here in any detail. It is mainly a question of names, and diplomatic titles are no exception to the general rule by which all titles tend to become cheapened and therefore, from time to time, need to be reinforced by fresh verbal devices. The method was the familiar one of applying terms that had once implied a particular quality in a fashion that implied actually nothing. The ambassador extraordinary had originally been one sent on an extraordinary mission; for the time and purpose of this mission his authority superseded that of the resident ambassador. But by the middle of the 17th century the custom had grown up of calling all ambassadors "extraordinary," in order to place them on an equality with the others. The same process was extended to diplomatists of the second rank; and envoys (_envoyé_ for _ablegatus_) were always "extraordinary," and as such claimed and received precedence over mere "residents," who in their day had asserted the same claim against the agents--all three terms having at one time been synonymous. Similarly a "minister plenipotentiary" had originally meant an agent armed with full powers (_plein-pouvoir_); but, by a like process, the combination came to mean as little as "envoy extraordinary"--though a plenipotentiary _tout simple_ is still an agent, of no ceremonially defined dignity, despatched with full powers to treat and conclude. Finally, the evolution of the title of a diplomatist of the second rank is crowned by the high-sounding combination, now almost exclusively used, of "envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary." The ultimate fate of the simple title "resident" was the same as that of "agent." Both had been freely sold by needy sovereigns to all and sundry who were prepared to pay for what gave them a certain social status. The "agent" fell thus into utter discredit, and those "residents" who were still actual diplomatic agents became "ministers resident" to distinguish them from the common herd.

The classification of diplomatic agents was for the first time definitively included in the general body of international law by the _Règlement_ of the 19th of March 1815 at Vienna[20]; and the whole question was finally settled at the congress of Aix-la-Chapelle (November 21, 1818) when, the proposal to establish precedence by the status of the accrediting powers having wisely been rejected, diplomatic agents were divided into four classes: (1) Ambassadors, legates, nuncios; (2) Envoys extraordinary and ministers plenipotentiary, and other ministers accredited direct to the sovereign; (3) Ministers resident; (4) Chargés d'affaires. With a few exceptions (e.g. Turkey), this settlement was accepted by all states, including the United States of America.

_Rights and Privileges of Diplomatic Agents._--These are partly founded upon immemorial custom, partly the result of negotiations embodied in international law. The most important, as it is the most ancient, is the right of personal _inviolability_ extended to the diplomatic agent and the members of his suite. This inviolability is maintained after a rupture between the two governments concerned, and even after the outbreak of war. The habit of the Ottoman government of imprisoning in the Seven Towers the ambassador of a power with which it quarrelled was but an exception which proved the rule. The second important right is that of exterritoriality (q.v.), a convenient fiction by which the house and equipages of the diplomatic agent are regarded as the territory of the power by whom he is accredited. This involves the further principle that the agent is in no way subject to the receiving government. He is exempt from taxation and from the payment at least of certain local rates. He also enjoys immunity (1) from civil jurisdiction, e.g. he cannot be sued, nor can his goods be seized, for debt; (2) from criminal jurisdiction, e.g. he cannot be arrested and tried for a criminal offence. For a crime of violence, however, or for plotting against the state, he can be placed under the necessary restraint and expelled the country.[21] These immunities extend to all the members of an envoy's suite. The difficulties that might be supposed to arise from such exemptions have not in practice been found very serious; for though, in the case of crimes committed by servants of agents of the first or second class the procedure is not clearly defined, each case would easily be made the subject of arrangement. In certain cases, e.g. embassies in Turkey, the exterritoriality of ambassadors implies a fairly extensive criminal jurisdiction; in other cases the dismissal of the servant would deprive him of his diplomatic immunity and bring him under the law of the land. The right of granting asylum claimed by diplomatic agents in virtue of that of exterritoriality, at one time much abused, is now strictly limited. A political or criminal offender may seek asylum in a foreign embassy; but if, after a request has been formally made for his surrender, the ambassador refuses to deliver him up, the authorities may take the measures necessary to effect his arrest, and even force an entrance into the embassy for the purpose. The "right of chapel" (_droit de chapelle_, or _droit de culte_), enjoyed by envoys in reference to their exterritoriality, i.e. the right of free exercise of religious worship within their house, formerly of great importance, has been rendered superfluous by the spread of religious toleration. (See L. Oppenheim, _Internat. Law_ (London, 1905), i. p. 441, &c.; A.W. Haffter, _Das europäische Völkerrecht_ (Berlin, 1888), p. 435, &c.)

_The Personnel of the "Corps diplomatique."_--The establishment of diplomacy as a regular branch of the civil service is of modern growth, and even now by no means universal. From old time states naturally chose as their agents those who would best serve their interests in the matter in hand. In the middle ages diplomacy was practically a monopoly of the clergy, who as a class alone possessed the necessary qualifications: and in later times, when learning had spread to the laity as well, there were still potent reasons why the clergy should continue to be employed as diplomatic agents. Of these reasons the most practical was that of expense; for the wealth of the church formed an inexhaustible reserve which was used without scruple for secular purposes. Francis I. of France, who by the Concordat with Rome had in his hands the patronage of all the sees and abbeys in France, used this partly to reward his clerical ministers, partly as a great secret service fund for bribing the ambassadors of other powers, partly for the payment of those high-placed spies at foreign courts maintained by the elaborately organized system known as the _Secret du Roi_.[22] None the less, in the 16th century, laymen as diplomats are already well in evidence. They are usually lawyers, rarely soldiers, occasionally even simple merchants. Not uncommonly they were foreigners, like the Italian Thomas Spinelly mentioned above, drawn from that cosmopolitan class of diplomats who were ready to serve any master. Though nobles were often employed as ambassadors by all the powers, Venice alone made nobility a condition of diplomatic service. They were professional in the sense that, for the most part, diplomacy was the main occupation of their lives; there was, however, no graded diplomatic service in which, as at present, it was possible to rise on a fixed system from the position of simple _attaché_ to that of minister and ambassador. The "attaché to the embassy" existed[23]; but he was not, as is now the case, a young diplomat learning his profession, but an experienced man of affairs, often a foreigner employed by the ambassador as adviser, secret service agent and general go-between, and he was without diplomatic status.[24] The 18th century saw the rise of the diplomatic service in the modern sense. The elaboration of court ceremonial, for which Versailles had set the fashion, made it desirable that diplomatic agents should be courtiers, and young men of rank about the court began to be attached to missions for the express purpose of teaching them the art of diplomacy. Thus arose that aristocratic diplomatic class, distinguished by the exquisite refinement of its manners, which survived from the 18th century into the 19th. Modern democracy has tended to break with this tradition, but it still widely prevails. Even in Great Britain, where the rest of the public services have been thrown open to all classes, a certain social position is still demanded for candidates for the diplomatic service and the foreign office, and in addition to passing a competitive examination, they must be nominated by someone of recognized station prepared to vouch for their social qualifications. In America, where no regular diplomatic service exists, all diplomatic agents are nominated by the president.

The existence of an official diplomatic service, however, by no means excludes the appointment of outsiders to diplomatic posts. It is, in fact, one of the main grievances of the regular diplomatic body that the great rewards of their profession, the embassies, are so often assigned to politicians or others who have not passed through the drudgery of the service. But though this practice has, doubtless, sometimes been abused, it is impossible to criticize the wisdom of its occasional application.

A word may be added as to the part played by women in diplomacy. So far as their unofficial influence upon it is concerned, it would be impossible to exaggerate its importance; it would suffice to mention three names taken at random from the annals of the 19th century, Madame de Staël, Baroness von Krüdener, and Princess Lieven. Gentz comments on the "feminine intrigues" that darkened the counsels of the congresses of Vienna and Aix-la-Chapelle, and from which the powers so happily escaped in the bachelor seclusion of Troppau. Nor is it to be supposed that statesmen will ever renounce a diplomatic weapon so easy of disguise and so potent for use. A brilliant _salon_ presided over by a woman of charm may be a most valuable centre of a political propaganda; and ladies are still widely employed in the secret diplomacy of the powers. Their employment as regularly accredited diplomatic agents, however, though not unknown, has been extremely rare. An interesting instance is the appointment of Catherine of Aragon, when princess of Wales, as representative of her father, Ferdinand the Catholic, at the court of Henry VII. (G. A. Bergenroth, _Calendar of State Papers ... England and Spain--in the Archives at Simancas, &c._, i. pp. xxxiii, cxix).

LITERATURE.--Besides general works on international law (q.v.) which necessarily deal with the subject of diplomacy, a vast mass of treatises on diplomatic agents exists. The earliest printed work is the _Tractatus de legato_ (Rome, 1485) of Gundissalvus (Gonsalvo de Villadiego), professor of law at Salamanca, auditor for Spain at the Roman court of the Rota, and bishop of Oviedo; but the first really systematic writer on the subject was Albericus Gentilis, _De legationibus libri iii_. (London, 1583, 1585, Hanover, 1596, 1607, 1612). For a full bibliography of works on ambassadors see Baron Diedrich H. L. von Ompteda, _Litteratur des gesammten sowohl natürlichen als positiven Völkerrechts_ (Regensburg, 1785), p. 534, &c., which was completed and continued by the Prussian minister Karl Albert von Kamptz, in _Neue Literatur des Völkerrechts seit dem Jahre 1784_ (Berlin, 1817), p. 231. A list of writers, with critical and biographical remarks, is also given in Ernest Nys's "Les Commencements de la diplomatie et le droit d'ambassade jusqu'à Grotius," in the _Revue de droit international_, vol. xvi. p. 167. Other useful modern works on the history of diplomacy are: E. C. Grenville-Murray, _Embassies and Foreign Courts, a History of Diplomacy_ (2nd ed., 1856); J. Zeller, _La Diplomatie française vers le milieu du XVI^e siècle_ (Paris, 1881); A. O. Meyer, _Die englische Diplomatie in Deutschland zur Zeit Eduards VI. und Mariens_ (Breslau, 1900); and, above all, Otto Krauske, _Die Entwickelung der ständgien Diplomatie vom fünfzehnten Jahrhundert bis zu den Beschlüssen von 1815 und 1818_, in Gustav Schmoller's _Staats- und socialwissenschaftliche Forschungen_, vol. v. (Leipzig, 1885). To these may be added, as admirably illustrating in detail the early developments of modern diplomacy, Logan Pearsall Smith's _Life and Letters of Sir Henry Wotton_ (Oxford, 1907). Of works on modern diplomacy the most important are the _Guide diplomatique_ of Baron Charles de Martens, new edition revised by F. H. Geffcken, 2 vols. (Leipzig, 1866), and P. Pradier-Fodéré, _Cours de droit diplomatique_, 2 vols. (Paris, 1881). (W. A. P.)

FOOTNOTES:

[1] La Bruyère, _Caractères_, ii. 77 (ed. P. Jouast, Paris, 1881).

[2] To Wellesley, in Stapleton's _Canning_, i. 374.

[3] For the motives of Metternich's foreign policy see AUSTRIA-HUNGARY: _History_ (iii. 332-333).

[4] e.g. _A History of Diplomacy in the International Development of Europe_, by D. J. Hill (London and New York, 1905).

[5] For this see Hinschius, _Kirchenrecht_, i. p. 498.

[6] The Venetians, however, in their turn, doubtless learned their diplomacy originally from the Byzantines, with whom their trade expansion in the Levant early brought them into close contact. For Byzantine diplomacy see ROMAN EMPIRE, LATER: _Diplomacy_.

[7] See Eugenio Albèri, _Le Relazioni degli ambasciatori Veneti al senato_, 15 vols. (Florence, 1839-1863).

[8] The _apocrisiarii_ ([Greek: apokrisiarioi]) or _responsales_ should perhaps be mentioned, though they certainly did not set the precedent for the modern permanent missions. They were resident agents, practically legates, of the popes at the court of Constantinople. They were established by Pope Leo I., and continued until the Iconoclastic controversy broke the intimate ties between East and West. See Luxardo, _Das vordekretalische Gesandtschaftsrecht der Päpste_ (Innsbruck, 1878); also Hinschius, _Kirchenrecht_, i. 501.

[9] N. Bianchi, _Le Materie politiche relative all' estero degli archivi di stato piemontese_ (Bologna, Modena, 1875), p. 29.

[10] Ib. Note 2, _teneamus et deputemus ibidem continue mansurum._

[11] The first ambassador of Venice to visit England was Zuanne da Lezze, who came in 1319 to demand compensation for the plundering of Venetian ships by English pirates.

[12] Germonius, _De legatis principum et populorum libri tres_ (Rome, 1627), chap. vi. p. 164; Paschalius, _Legatus_ (Rouen, 1598), p. 302. Étienne Dolet, who had been secretary to Cardinal Jean du Bellay, and was burned for atheism in 1546, in his _De officio legati_ (1541) advises ambassadors to surround themselves with taciturn servants, to employ vigilant spies, and to set afoot all manner of fictions, especially when negotiating with the court of Rome or with the Italian princes.

[13] See Pearsall Smith, _Sir Henry Wotton_, pp. 49, 126 et seq.

[14] François de Callières, _De la manière de négocier avec les souverains_ (Brussels, 1716). See also A. Sorel, _Recueil des instructions données aux ambassadeurs et ministres de France_ (Paris, 1884), e.g. vol. _Autriche_, pp. 77, 88, 102, 112.

[15] "Nova res est, quod sciam, et infelicis hujus aetatis infelix partus.... Hinc oriri securitatem universorum, hinc stabiliri pacem gentium. Quae utinam tam vere dicerentur, quam speciose. Ego quidem, ne quid dissimulem, ab istis seorsum sentio. Nimirum, effoeta virtutis, foecunda fraudis haec saecula video peperisse spissata haec imperia, sive summas potestates, unde, ut e vomitariis, hae legationes undatim se fundunt." Paschalius, _Legatus_ (1598), p. 447. So too Félix de la Mothe Le Vayer (1547-1625), in his _Legatus_ (Paris, 1579), says "Legatos tunc primum aut non multum post institutos fuisse cum Pandora malorum omnium semina in hunc mundum ... demisit."

[16] _De jure belli et pacis_ (Amsterdam, 1621), ii. c. 18, § 3, n. 2.

[17] The term _corps diplomatique_ originated about the middle of the 18th century. "The Chancellor Furst," says Ranke (xxx. 47, note), "does not use it as yet in his report (1754) but he knows it," and it would appear that it had just been invented at Vienna. "Corps diplomatique, nom qu'une dame donna un jour à ce corps nombreux de ministres étrangers à Vienne."

[18] So too Pradier-Fodéré, vol. i. p. 262.

[19] Thus Charles V. would not allow the representatives of the duke of Mantua, Ferrara, &c., to style themselves "ambassadors," on the ground that this title could be borne only by the agents of kings and of the republic of Venice, and not by those of states whose sovereignty was impaired by any feudal relation to a superior power. (See Krauske p. 155.)

[20] See Pradier-Fodéré, i. 265.

[21] Gentilis, who had been consulted by the government in the case of the Spanish ambassador, Don Bernardino de Mendoza, expelled for intriguing against Queen Elizabeth, lays this down definitely. An ambassador, he says, need not be received, and he may be expelled. In actual practice a diplomatic agent who has made himself objectionable is withdrawn by his government on the representations of that to which he is accredited, and it is customary, before an ambassador is despatched, to find out whether he is a _persona grata_ to the power to which he is accredited.

[22] See Zeller.

[23] A. O. Meyer, p. 22.

[24] See the amusing account of the methods of these agents in Morysine to Cecil (January 23, 1551-1552), _Cal. State Pap. Edw. VI._, No. 530.

DIPLOMATIC, the science of diplomas, founded on the critical study of the "diplomatic" sources of history: diplomas, charters, acts, treaties, contracts, judicial records, rolls, chartularies, registers, &c. The employment of the word "diploma," as a general term to designate an historical document, is of comparatively recent date. The Roman diploma, so called because it was formed of two sheets of metal which were shut together (Gr. [Greek: diploun], to double) like the leaves of a book, was the passport or licence to travel by the public post; also, the certificate of discharge, conferring privileges of citizenship and marriage on soldiers who had served their time; and, later, any imperial grant of privileges. The word was adopted, rather pedantically, by the humanists of the Renaissance and applied by them to important deeds and to acts of sovereign authority, to privileges granted by kings and by great personages; and by degrees the term became extended and embraced generally the documents of the middle ages.

_History of the Study._--The term "diplomatic," the French _diplomatique_, is a modern adaptation of the Latin phrase _res diplomatica_ employed in early works upon the subject, and more especially in the first great text-book, the _De re diplomatica_, issued in 1681 by the learned Benedictine, Dom Jean Mabillon, of the abbey of St Germain-des-Prés. Mabillon's treatise was called forth by an earlier work of Daniel van Papenbroeck, the editor of the _Acta Sanctorum_ of the Bollandists, who, with no great knowledge or experience of archives, undertook to criticize the historical value of ancient records and monastic documents, and raised wholesale suspicions as to their authenticity in his _Propylaeum antiquarium circa veri ac falsi discrimen in vetustis membranis_, which he printed in 1675. This was a rash challenge to the Benedictines, and especially to the congregation of St Maur, or confraternity of the Benedictine abbeys of France, whose combined efforts produced great literary works which still remain as monuments of profound learning. Mabillon was at that time engaged in collecting material for a great history of his order. He worked silently for six years before producing the work above referred to. His refutation of Papenbroeck's criticisms was complete, and his rival himself accepted Mabillon's system of the study of diplomatic as the true one. The _De re diplomatica_ established the science on a secure basis; and it has been the foundation of all subsequent works on the subject, although the immediate result of its publication was a flood of controversial writings between the Jesuits and the Benedictines, which, however, did not affect its stability.

In Spain, the Benedictine Perez published, in 1688, a series of dissertations following the line of Mabillon's work. In England, Madox's _Formulare Anglicanum_, with a dissertation concerning ancient charters and instruments, appeared in 1702, and in 1705 Hickes followed with his _Linguarum septentrionalium thesaurus_, both accepting the principles laid down by the learned Benedictine. In Italy, Maffei appeared with his _Istoria diplomatica_ in 1727, and Muratori, in 1740, introduced dissertations on diplomatic into his great work, the _Antiquitates Italicae_. In Germany, the first diplomatic work of importance was that by Bessel, entitled _Chronicon Gotwicense_ and issued in 1732; and this was followed closely by similar works of Baring, Eckhard and Heumann.

France, however, had been the cradle of the science, and that country continued to be the home of its development. Mabillon had not taken cognizance of documents later than the 13th century. Arising out of a discussion relative to the origin of the abbey of St Victor en Caux and the authenticity of its archives, a more comprehensive work than Mabillon's was compiled by the two Benedictines, Dom Toustain and Dom Tassin, viz. the _Nouveau Traité de diplomatique_, in six volumes, 1750-1765, which embraced more than diplomatic proper and extended to all branches of Latin palaeography. With great industry the compilers gathered together a mass of details; but their arrangement is faulty, and the text is broken up into such a multitude of divisions and subdivisions that it is tediously minute. However, its more extended scope has given the _Nouveau Traité_ an advantage over Mabillon's work, and modern compilations have drawn largely upon it.

As a result of the Revolution, the archives of the middle ages lost in France their juridical and legal value; but this rather tended to enhance their historical importance. The taste for historical literature revived. The Académie des Inscriptions fostered it. In 1821 the École des Chartes was founded; and, after a few years of incipient inactivity, it received a further impetus, in 1829, by the issue of a royal ordinance re-establishing it. Thenceforth it has been an active centre for the teaching and for the encouragement of the study of diplomatic throughout the country, and has produced results which other nations may envy. Next to France, Germany and Austria are distinguished as countries where activity has been displayed in the systematic study of diplomatic archives, more or less with the support of the state. In Italy, too, diplomatic science has not been neglected. In England, after a long period of regrettable indifference to the study of the national and municipal archives of the country, some effort has been made in recent years to remove the reproach. The publications of the Public Record Office and of the department of MSS. in the British Museum are more numerous and are issued more regularly than in former times; and an awakened interest is manifested by the foundation in the universities of a few lectureships in diplomatic and palaeography, and by the attention which those subjects receive in such an institution as the London School of Economics, and in the publications of private literary societies. But such efforts can never show the systematic results which are to be attained by a special institution of the character of the French École des Chartes.

_Extent of the Science._--The field covered by the study of diplomatic is so extensive and the different kinds of documents which it takes into its purview are so numerous and various, that it is impossible to do more than give a few general indications of their nature. No nation can have advanced far on the path of civilization before discovering the necessity for documentary evidence both in public and in private life. The laws, the constitutions, the decrees of government, on the one hand, and private contracts between man and man, on the other, must be embodied in formal documents, in order to ensure permanent record. In the case of a nation advancing independently from a primitive to a later stage of civilization we should have to trace the origin of its documentary records and examine their development from a rudimentary condition. But in an inquiry into the history of the documents of the middle ages in Europe we do not begin with primitive forms. Those ages inherited the documentary system which had been created and developed by the Romans; and, imperfect and limited in number as are the earliest surviving charters and diplomas of European medieval history, they present themselves to us fully developed and cast in the mould and employing the methods and formulae of the earlier tradition. Based on this foundation the chanceries of the several countries of Europe, as they came into existence and were organized, reduced to method and rule on one general system the various documents which the exigencies of public and of private life from time to time called into existence, each individual chancery at the same time following its own line of practice in detail, and evolving and confirming particular formulas which have become characteristic of it.

_Classification of Documents._--If we classify these documents under the two main heads of public and private deeds, we shall have to place in the former category the legislative, administrative, judicial, diplomatic documents emanating from public authority in public form: laws, constitutions, ordinances, privileges, grants and concessions, proclamations, decrees, judicial records, pleas, treaties; in a word, every kind of deed necessary for the orderly government of a civilized state. In early times many of these were comprised under the general term of "letters," _litterae_, and to the large number of them which were issued in open form and addressed to the community the specific title of "letters patent," _litterae patentes_, was given. In contradistinction those public documents which were issued in closed form under seal were known as "close letters," _litterae clausae_.

Such public documents belong to the state archives of their several countries, and are the monuments of administrative and political and domestic history of a nation from one generation to another. In no country has so perfect a series been preserved as in our own. Into the Public Record Office in London have been brought together all the collections of state archives which were formerly stored in different official repositories of the kingdom. Beginning with the great survey of Domesday, long series of enrolments of state documents, in many instances extending from the times of the Angevin kings to our own day in almost unbroken sequence, besides thousands of separate deeds of all descriptions, are therein preserved (see RECORD).

Under the category of private documents must be included, not only the deeds of individuals, but also those of corporate bodies representing private interests and standing in the position of individual units in relation to the state, such as municipal bodies and monastic foundations. The largest class of documents of this character is composed of those numerous conveyances of real property and other title deeds of many descriptions and dating from early periods which are commonly described by the generic name of "charters," and which are to be found in thousands, not only in such public repositories as the Public Record Office and the British Museum, but also in the archives of municipal and other corporate bodies throughout the country and in the muniment-rooms of old families. There are also the records of the manorial courts preserved in countless court-rolls and registers; also the scattered muniments of the dissolved monasteries represented by the many collections of charters and the valuable chartularies, or registers of charters, which have fortunately survived and exist both in public and in private keeping.

It will be noticed that in this enumeration of public and private documents in England reference is made to rolls. The practice of entering records on rolls has been in favour in England from a very early date subsequent to the Norman Conquest; and while in other countries the comprehensive term of "charters" (literally "papers": Gr. [Greek: chartês]) is employed as a general description of documents of the middle ages, in England the fuller phrase "charters and rolls" is required. The master of the rolls, the _Magister Rotulorum_, is the official keeper of the public records.

From the great body of records, both public and private, many fall easily and naturally into the class in which the text takes a simpler narrative form; such as judicial records, laws, decrees, proclamations, registers, &c., which tell their own story in formulae and phraseology early developed and requiring little change. These we may leave on one side. For fuller description we select those deeds which, conferring grants and favours and privileges, conform more nearly to the idea of the Roman diploma and have received the special attention of the chanceries in the development and arrangement of their formulae and in their methods of execution.

Structure of medieval diplomas.

All such medieval deeds are composed of certain recognized members or sections, some essential, others special and peculiar to the most elaborate and solemn documents. A deed of the more elaborate character is made up of two principal divisions: 1. the TEXT, in which is set out the object of the deed, the statement of the considerations and circumstances which have led to it, and the declaration of the will and intention of the person executing the deed, together with such protecting clauses as the particular circumstances of the case may require; 2. the PROTOCOL (originally, the first sheet of a papyrus roll; Gr. [Greek: prôtos], first, and [Greek: kollan], to glue), consisting of the introductory and of the concluding formulae: superscription, address, salutation, &c., at the beginning, and date, formulae of execution, &c., at the end, of the deed. The latter portion of the protocol is sometimes styled the eschatocol (Gr. [Greek: eschatos], last, and [Greek: kollan], to glue). While the text followed certain formulae which had become fixed by common usage, the protocol was always special and varied with the practices of the several chanceries, changing in a sovereign chancery with each successive reign.

The Invocation.

The Superscription.

The Address.

The Salutation.

The different sections of a full deed, taking them in order under the heads of Initial Protocol, Text and Final Protocol or Eschatocol, are as follows:--The initial protocol consists of the Invocation, the Superscription, the Address and the Salutation. 1. The INVOCATION, lending a character of sanctity to the proceedings, might be either verbal or symbolic. The verbal invocation consisted usually of some pious ejaculation, such as _In nomine Dei, In nomine domini nostri Jesu Christi_; from the 8th century, _In nomine Sanctae et individuae Trinitatis_; and later, _In nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti_. The symbolic form was usually the _chrismon_, or monogram composed of the Greek initials [Chi][Rho] of the name of Christ. In the course of the 10th and 11th centuries this symbol came to be so scrawled that it had probably lost all meaning with the scribes. From the 9th century the letter C (initial of _Christus_) came gradually into use, and in German imperial diplomas it superseded the _chrismon_. Stenographic signs of the system known as Tironian notes were also sometimes added to this symbol down to the end of the 10th century, expressing such a phrase as _Ante omnia Christus_, or _Christus_, or _Amen_. From the Merovingian period, too, a cross was often used. The symbol gradually died out after the 12th century for general use, surviving only in notarial instruments and wills. 2. The SUPERSCRIPTION (_superscriptio, intitulatio_) expressed the name and titles of the grantor or person issuing the deed. 3. The ADDRESS. As diplomas were originally in epistolary form the address was then a necessity. While in Merovingian deeds the old pattern was adhered to, in the Carolingian period the address was sometimes omitted. From the 8th century it was not considered necessary, and a distinction arose in the case of royal acts, those having the address being styled letters, and those omitting it, charters. The general form of address ran in phrase as _Omnibus_ (or _Universis_) _Christi fidelibus presentes litteras inspecturis_. 4. The SALUTATION was expressed in such words as _Salutem_; _Salutem et dilectionem_; _Salutem et apostolicam benedictionem_, but it was not essential.

The Preamble.

The Notification.

The Exposition.

The Disposition.

The Final Clauses.

Then follows the text in five sections: the Preamble, the Notification, the Exposition, the Disposition and the Final Clauses. 5. The PREAMBLE (_prologus_, _arenga_): an ornamental introduction generally composed of pious or moral sentiments, a _prefatio ad captandam benevolentiam_ which _facit ad ornamentum_, degenerating into tiresome platitudes. It became stereotyped at an early age: in the 10th and 11th centuries it was a most ornate performance; in the 12th century it was cut short; in the 13th century it died out. 6. The NOTIFICATION (_notificatio_, _promulgatio_) was the publication of the purport of the deed introduced by such a phrase as _notum sit_, &c. 7. The EXPOSITION set out the motives influencing the issue of the deed. 8. The DISPOSITION described the object of the deed and the will and intention of the grantor. 9. The FINAL CLAUSES ensured the fulfilment of the terms of the deed; guarded against infringement, by comminatory anathemas and imprecations, not infrequently of a vehement description, or by penalties; guaranteed the validity of the deed; enumerated the formalities of subscription and execution; reserved rights, &c.

The Date.

The Appreciation.

The Authentication.

Next comes the final protocol or eschatocol comprising: the Date, the Appreciation, the Authentication. It was particularly in this portion of the deed that the varying practices of the several chanceries led to minute and intricate distinctions at different periods. 10. The DATE. By the Roman law every act must be dated by the day and the year of execution. Yet in the middle ages, from the 9th to the 12th century, a large proportion of deeds bears no date. In the most ancient charters the date clause was frequently separated from the body of the deed and placed in an isolated position at the foot of the sheet. From the 12th century it commonly followed the text immediately. Certain classes of documents, such as decrees of councils, notarial deeds, &c., began with the date. The usual formula was _data, datum, actum, factum, scriptum_. In the Carolingian period a distinction grew up between _datum_ and _actum_, the former applying to the time, the latter to the place, of date. In the papal chancery from an early period down to the 12th century the use of a double date prevailed, the first following the text and being inserted by the scribe when the deed was written (_scriptum_), the second being added at the foot of the deed on its execution (_actum_), by the chancellor or other high functionary. From the Roman custom of dating by the consular year arose the medieval practice of dating by the regnal year of emperor, king or pope. Special dates were sometimes employed, such as the year of some great historical event, battle, siege, pestilence, &c. 11. The APPRECIATION. The _feliciter_ of the Romans became the medieval _feliciter in Domino_, or _In Dei nomine feliciter_, or the more simple _Deo gratias_ or the still more simple _Amen_, for the auspicious closing of a deed. In Merovingian and Carolingian diplomas it follows the date; in other cases it closes the text. In the greater papal bulls it appears in the form of a triple _Amen_. _Benevalete_ was also employed as the appreciation in early deeds; but in Merovingian diplomas and in papal bulls this valedictory salutation becomes a mark of authentication, as will be noticed below. 12. The AUTHENTICATION was a solemn proceeding which was discharged by more than one act. The most important was the subscription or subscriptions of the person or persons from whom the deed emanated. The laws of the late Roman empire required the subscriptions and the impressions of the signet seals of the parties and of the witnesses to the deed. The subscription (_subscriptio_) comprised the name, signature and description of the person signing. The impression of the signet (not the signature) was the _signum_, sometimes _signaculum_, rarely _sigillum_. The practice of subscribing with the autograph signature obtained in the early middle ages, as appears from early documents such as those of Ravenna. But from the 7th century it began to decline, and by the 12th century it had practically ceased. In Roman deeds an illiterate person affixed his mark, or _signum manuale_, which was attested. The cross being an easy form for a mark, it was very commonly used and naturally became connected with the Christian symbol. Hence, in course of time, it came to be attached very generally to subscriptions, autograph or otherwise. Great personages who were illiterate required something more elaborate than a common mark. Hence arose the use of the monogram, the _caracter nominis_, composed of the letters of the name. The emperor Justin, who could not write, made use of a monogram, as did also Theodoric, king of the Ostrogoths. Those Merovingian kings, likewise, who were illiterate, had their individual monograms; and at length Charlemagne adopted the monogram as his regular form of signature. From his reign down to that of Philip the Fair the monogram was the recognized sign manual of the sovereigns of France (see AUTOGRAPHS). It was employed by the German emperors down to the reign of Maximilian I. The royal use of the monogram was naturally imitated by great officers and ecclesiastics. But another form of sign manual also arose out of the subscription. The closing word (usually _subscripsi_), written or abbreviated as _sub._, or _ss._ or _s._, was often finished off with flourishes and interlacings, sometimes accompanied with Tironian notes, the whole taking the shape of a domed structure to which the French have given the name of _ruche_ or bee-hive. Thus in the early middle ages we have deeds authenticated by the subscription, usually autograph, giving the name and titles of the person executing, and stating the part taken by him in the deed, and closing with the _subscripsi_, often in shape of the ruche and constituting the _signum manuale_. If not autograph, the subscription might be impersonal in such form as _signum_ (or _signum manus_) + N. In the Carolingian period, while phrases were constantly used in the body of the deed implying that it was executed by autograph subscription, it did not necessarily follow that such subscription was actually written in person. The ruche was also adopted by chancellors, notaries and scribes as their official mark. While autograph subscriptions continued to be employed, chiefly by ecclesiastics, down to the beginning of the 12th century, the monogram was perpetuated from the 10th century by the notaries. Their marks, simple at first, became so elaborate from the end of the 13th century that they found it necessary to add their names in ordinary writing, or also to employ a less complicated design. This was the commencement of the modern practice of writing the signature which first came into vogue in the 14th century.

The Benevalete.

The Rota.

To lend further weight and authority to the subscription, certain symbols and forms were added at different periods. Imitating, the corroborative _Legi_ of the Byzantine quaestor and the _Legimus_ of the Eastern emperors, the Frankish chancery in the West made use of the same form, notably in the reign of Charles the Bald, in some of whose diplomas the _Legimus_ appears written in larger letters in red. The valedictory _Benevalete_, employed in early deeds as a form of appreciation (see above), appears in Merovingian and in early Carolingian royal diplomas, and also in papal bulls, as an authenticating addition to the subscription. In the diplomas it was written in cursive letters in two lines, _Bene valete_, just to the right of the incision cut in the sheet to hold fast the seal, which sometimes even covered part of the word. In the most ancient papal bulls it was written by the pope himself at the foot of the deed. in two lines, generally in larger capital or uncial characters, placed between two crosses. From the beginning of the 11th century it became the fashion to link the letters; and, dating from the time of Leo IX., A.D. 1048-1054, the _Benevalete_ was inscribed in form of a monogram. During Leo's pontificate it was also accompanied with a flourish called the _Komma_, which was only an exaggeration of the mark of punctuation (_periodus_) which from the 9th to the 11th century closed the subscription and generally resembled the modern semicolon. Leo's successors abandoned the _Komma_, but the monogrammatic _Benevalete_ continued, invariable in form, but from time to time varying in size. In Leo IX.'s pontificate also was introduced the _Rota_. This sign, when it had received its final shape in the 11th century, was in form of a wheel, composed of two concentric circles, in the space between which was written the motto or device of the pope (_signum papae_), usually a short sentence from one of the Psalms or some other portion of Scripture; preceded by a small cross, which the pontiff himself sometimes inscribed. The central space within the wheel was divided (by cross lines) into four quarters, the two upper ones being occupied by the names of the apostles St Peter and St Paul, and the two lower ones by the name of the pope. The _Rota_ was placed on the left of the subscription, the monogrammatic _Benevalete_ on the right. The two signs were likewise adopted by certain ecclesiastical chanceries and by feudal lords, particularly in the 12th century. From the same period also the Spanish and Portuguese monarchs adopted the _Rota_, the _signo rodado_, which is so conspicuous in the royal charters of the Peninsula.

Sealing.

Besides the subscription, an early auxiliary method of authentication was by the impression of the seal which, as noticed above, was required by the Roman law. But the general use of the signet gradually failed, and by the 7th century it had ceased. Still it survived in the royal chanceries, and the sovereigns both of the Merovingian and of the Carolingian lines had their seals; and, in the 8th century, the mayors of the palace likewise. It is interesting to find instances of the use of antique intaglios for the purpose by some of them. In England too there is proof that the Mercian kings Offa and Coenwulf used seals, in imitation of the Frankish monarchs. In the 7th century, and still more so in the 8th and 9th centuries, the royal seals were of exaggerated size: the precursors of the great seals of the later sovereigns of western Europe. The waxen seals of the early diplomas were in all cases _en placard_: that is, they were attached to the face of the document and not suspended from it, being held in position by a cross-cut incision in the material, through which the wax was pressed and then flattened at the back. On the cessation of autograph signatures in subscriptions, the general use of seals revived, beginning in the 10th century and becoming the ordinary method of authentication from the 12th to the 15th century inclusive. Even when signatures had once again become universal, the seal continued to hold its place; and thus sealing is, to the present day, required for the legal execution of a deed. The attachment _en placard_ was discontinued, as a general practice, in the middle of the 11th century; and seals thenceforward were, for the most part, suspended, leathern thongs being used at first, and afterwards silken and hempen cords or parchment labels. In documents of minor importance it was sometimes the custom to impress the seal or seals on one or more strips of the parchment of the deed itself, cut, but not entirely detached, from the lower margin, and left to hang loose. Besides waxen impressions of seals, impressions in metal, bearing a device on both faces, after the fashion of a coin, and suspended, were employed from an early period. The most widely known instances are the _bullae_ attached to papal documents, generally of lead. The earliest surviving papal _bulla_ is one of Pope Zacharias, A.D. 746, but earlier examples are known from drawings. The papal _bulla_ was a disk of metal stamped on both sides. From the time of Boniface V. to Leo IV., A.D. 617-855, the name of the pontiff, in the genitive case, was impressed on the obverse, and his title as pope on the reverse, e.g. _Bonifati/ papae_. After that period, for some time, the name was inscribed in a circle round a central ornament. Other variations followed; but at length in the pontificate of Paschal II., A.D. 1099, the _bulla_ took the form which it afterwards retained: on the obverse, the heads of the apostles St Peter and St Paul; on the reverse, the pope's name, title and number in succession. In the period of time between his election and consecration, the pope made use of the half-bull, that is, the obverse only was impressed. It should be mentioned that, in order to conform to modern conditions and for convenience of despatch through the post, Leo XII., in 1878, substituted for the leaden _bulla_ a red ink stamp bearing the heads of the two apostles with the name of the pope inscribed as a legend.

The Carolingian monarchs also used metal _bullae_. None of Charlemagne's have survived, but there are still extant leaden examples of Charles the Bald. The use of lead was not persisted in either in the chancery of France or in that of Germany. Golden _bullae_ were employed on special occasions by both popes and temporal monarchs; for example, they were attached to the confirmations of the elections of the emperors in the 12th and 13th centuries; the bull of Leo X. conferring the title of Defender of the Faith on Henry VIII. in 1524, and the deed of alliance between Henry and Francis I. in 1527, had golden _bullae_; and other examples could be cited. But lead has always been the common metal to be thus employed. In the southern countries of Europe, where the warmth of the climate renders wax an undesirable material, leaden _bullae_ have been in ordinary use, not only in Italy but also in the Peninsula, in southern France, and in the Latin East (see SEALS).

Formularies.

The necessity of conforming to exact phraseology in diplomas and of observing regularity in expressing formulas naturally led to the compilation of formularies. From the early middle ages the art of composition, not only of charters but also of general correspondence, was commonly taught in the monasteries. The teacher was the _dictator_, his method of teaching was described by the verb _dictare_, and his teaching was _dictamen_ or the _ars dictaminis_. For the use of these monastic schools, formularies and manuals comprising formulas and models for the composition of the various acts and documents soon became indispensable. At a later stage such formularies developed into the models and treatises for epistolary style which have had their imitations even in modern times. The widespread use of the formularies had the advantage of imposing a certain degree of uniformity on the phrasing of documents of the western nations of Europe. Those compilations which are of an earlier period than the 11th century have been systematically examined and are published; those of more recent date still remain to be thoroughly edited. The early formularies are of the simpler kind, being collections of formulas without dissertation. The _Formulae Marculfi_, compiled by the monk Marculf about the year 650, was the most important work of this nature of the Merovingian period and became the official formulary of the time; and it continued in use in a revised edition in the early Carolingian chancery. Of the same period there are extant formularies compiled at various centres, such as Angers, Tours, Bourges, Sens, Reichenau, St Gall, Salzburg, Passau, Regensburg, Cordova, &c. (see Giry, _Manuel de diplomatique_, pp. 482-488). The _Liber diurnus Romanorum Pontificum_ was compiled in the 7th and 8th centuries, and was employed in the papal chancery to the end of the 11th century. Of the more developed treatises and manuals of epistolary rhetoric which succeeded, and which originated in Italy, the earliest example was the _Breviarium de dictamine_ of the monk Alberic of Monte Cassino, compiled about the year 1075. Another well-known work, the _Rationes dictandi_, is also attributed to the same author. Of later date was the _Ars dictaminis_ of Bernard of Chartres of the 12th century. Among special works on formularies are: E. de Rozière, _Recueil général des formules usitées dans l'empire des Francs_ (3 vols., Paris, 1861-1871); K. Zeumer, _Formulae Merovingici et Karolini aevi_ (Hanover, 1886); and L. Rockinger, _Briefsteller und Formelbücher des 11 bis. 14 Jahrhunderts_ (Munich, 1863-1864).

_Organization._--The formalities observed by the different chanceries of medieval Europe, which are to be learned from a study of the documents issued by them, are so varied and often so minute, that it is impossible to give a full account of them within the limits of the present article. We can only state some of the results of the investigations of students of diplomatic.

Papal Chancery.

The chancery which stands first and foremost is the papal chancery. On account of its antiquity and of its steady development, it has served as a model for the other chanceries of Europe. Organized in remote times, it adopted for the structure of its letters a number of formulas and rules which developed and became more and more fixed and precise from century to century. The Apostolic court being organized from the first on the model of the Roman imperial court, the early pontiffs would naturally have collected their archives, as the emperors had done, into _scrinia_. Pope Julius I., A.D. 337-353, reorganized the papal archives under an official _schola notariorum_, at the head of which was a _primicerius notariorum_. Pope Damasus, A.D. 366-384, built a record office at the Lateran, _archivium sanctae Romanae ecclesiae_, where the archives were kept and registers of them compiled. The collection and orderly arrangement of the archives provided material for the establishment of regular diplomatic usages, and the science of formulae naturally followed.

For the study of papal documents four periods have been defined, each successive period being distinguished from its predecessor by some particular development of forms and procedure. The first period is reckoned from the earliest times to the accession of Leo IX., A.D. 1048. For almost the whole of the first eight centuries no original papal documents have survived. But copies are found in canonical works and registers, many of them false, and others probably not transcribed in full or in the original words; but still of use, as showing the growth of formulas. The earliest original document is a fragment of a letter of Adrian I., A.D. 788. From that date there is a series, but the documents are rare to the beginning of the 11th century, all down to that period being written on papyrus. The latest existing papyrus document in France is one of Sergius IV., A.D. 1011; in Germany, one of Benedict VIII., A.D. 1022. The earliest document on vellum is one of John XVIII., A.D. 1005. The nomenclature of papal documents even at an early period is rather wide. In their earliest form they are Letters, called in the documents themselves, _litterae_, _epistola_, _pagina_, _scriptum_, sometimes _decretum_. A classification, generally accepted, divides them into: 1. Letters or Epistles: the ordinary acts of correspondence with persons of all ranks and orders; including constitutions (a later term) or decisions in matters of faith and discipline, and encyclicals giving directions to bishops of the whole church or of individual countries. 2. Decrees, being letters promulgated by the popes of their own motion. 3. Decretals, decisions on points of ecclesiastical administration or discipline. 4. Rescripts (called in the originals _preceptum_, _auctoritas_, _privilegium_), granting requests to petitioners. But writers differ in their terms, and such subdivisions must be more or less arbitrary. The comprehensive term "bull" (the name of the leaden papal seal, _bulla_, being transferred to the document) did not come into use until the 13th century.

Copies of papal deeds were collected into registers or _bullaria_. Lists showing the chronological sequence of documents are catalogues of acts. When into such lists indications from narrative sources are introduced they become _regesta_ (_res gestae_): a term not to be confused with "register."

Clearness and conciseness have been recognized as attributes of early papal letters; but even in those of the 4th century certain rhythmical periods have been detected in their composition which became more marked under Leo the Great, A.D. 440-461, and which developed into the _cursus_ or prose rhythm of the pontifical chancery of the 11th and 12th centuries.

In the most ancient deeds the pope styles himself _Episcopus_, sometimes _Episcopus Catholicae Ecclesiae_, or _Episcopus Romanae Ecclesiae_, rarely _Papa_. Gregory I, A.D. 590, was the first to adopt the form _Episcopus, servus servorum Dei_, which became general in the 9th century, and thenceforth was invariable.

The second period of papal documents extends from Leo IX. to the accession of Innocent III., A.D. 1048-1198. At the beginning of the period formulae tended to take more definite shape and to become fixed. In the superscription of bulls a distinction arose: those which conferred lasting privileges employing the words _in perpetuum_ to close this clause; those whose benefaction was of a transitory character using the form of salutation, _salutem et apostolicam benedictionem_. But it was under Urban II., A.D. 1088-1099, that the principal formulae became stereotyped. Then the distinction between documents of lasting, and those of transitory, value became more exactly defined; the former class being known as greater bulls, _bullae majores_ (also called _privilegia_), the latter lesser bulls, _bullae minores_. The leading characteristics of the greater bulls were these: The first line containing the superscription and closing with the words _in perpetuum_ (or, sometimes, _ad perpetuam_, or _aeternam_, _rei memoriam_) was written in tall and slender ornamental letters, close packed; the final clauses of the text develop with tendency to fixity; the pope's subscription is accompanied with the _rota_ on the left and the _benevalete_ monogram on the right; and certain elaborate forms of dating are punctiliously observed. The introduction of subscriptions of cardinals as witnesses had gradually become a practice. Under Victor II., A.D. 1055-1057, the practice became more confirmed, and after the time of Innocent II., A.D. 1130-1145, the subscriptions of the three orders were arranged according to rank, those of the cardinal bishops being placed in the centre under the papal subscription, those of the priests under the _rota_ on the left, and those of the deacons under the _benevalete_ on the right. In the lesser bulls simpler forms were employed; there was no introductory line of stilted letters; the salutation, _salutem et apostolicam benedictionem_, closed the superscription; the final clauses were shortened; there was neither papal subscription, nor _rota_, nor _benevalete_; the date was simple.

From the time of Adrian I., A.D. 772-795, the system of double dating was followed in the larger bulls. The first date was written by the scribe of the document, _scriptum per manum N._ with the month (rarely the day of the month) and year of the indiction. The second, the actual date of the execution of the deed, was entered (ostensibly) by some high official, _data_, or _datum, per manum N._, and contained the day of the month (according to the Roman calendar), the year of indiction, the year of pontificate (in some early deeds, also the year of the empire and the post-consulate year), and the year of the Incarnation, which, however, was gradually introduced and only became more common in the course of the 11th century. For example, a common form of a full date would run thus: _Datum Laterani, per manum N., sanctae Romanae ecclesiae diaconi cardinalis, xiiii. kl. Maii, indictione V., anno dominicae Incarnationis mxcvii., pontificatus autem domini papae Urbani secundi Xº_. The simpler form of the date of a lesser bull might be: _Datum Laterani, iii. non. Jan., pontificatus nostri anno iiii_.

By degrees the use of the lesser bulls almost entirely superseded that of the greater bulls, which became exceptional in the 13th century and almost ceased after the migration to Avignon in 1309. In modern times the greater bulls occasionally reappear for very solemn acts, as _bullae consistoriales_, executed in the consistory.

The third period of papal documents extends from Innocent III. to Eugenius IV., A.D. 1198-1431. The pontificate of Innocent III. was a most important epoch in the history of the development of the papal chancery. Formulas became more exactly fixed, definitions more precise, the observation of rules and precedents more constant. The staff of the chancery was reorganized. The existing series of registers of papal documents was then commenced. The growing use of lesser bulls for the business of the papal court led to a further development in the 13th century. They were now divided into two classes: _Tituli_ and _Mandamenta_. The former conferred favours, promulgated precepts, judgments, decisions, &c. The latter comprised ordinances, commissions, &c., and were executive documents. There are certain features which distinguish the two classes. In the _tituli_, the initial letter of the pope's name is ornamented with openwork and the other letters are stilted. In the _mandamenta_, the initial is filled in solid and the other letters are of the same size as the rest of the text. In the _tituli_, enlarged letters mark the beginnings of the text and of certain clauses; but not in the _mandamenta_. In the former the mark of abbreviation is a looped sign; in the latter it is a horizontal stroke. In the former the old practice of leaving a gap between the letters s and t, and c and t, whenever they occur together in a word (e.g. _is te_, _sanc tus_), and linking them by a coupling stroke above the line is continued; in the latter it disappears. The leaden bulla attached to a _titulus_ (as a permanent deed) is suspended by cords of red and yellow silks; while that of a _mandamentum_ (a temporary deed) hangs from a hempen cord.

In the fourth period, extending from 1431 to the present time, the _tituli_ and _mandamenta_ have continued to be the ordinary documents in use; but certain other kinds have also arisen. Briefs (_brevia_), or apostolic letters, concerning the personal affairs of the pope or the administration of the temporal dominion, or conceding indulgences, came into general use in the 13th century in the pontificate of Eugenius IV. They are written in the italic hand on thin white vellum; and the name of the pope with his style as _papa_ is written at the head of the sheet, e.g. _Eugenius papa iiii_. They are closed and sealed with Seal of the Fisherman, _sub anulo Piscatoris_. Briefs have almost superseded the _mandamenta_. The documents known as Signatures of the court of Rome or Latin letters, and used principally for the expedition of indulgences, were first introduced in the 15th century. They were drawn in the form of a petition to the pope, which he granted by the words _fiat ut petatur_ written across the top. They were not sealed; and only the pontifical year appears in the date. Lastly, the documents to which the name of _Motu proprio_ is given are also without seal and are used in the administration of the papal court, the formula _placet et ita motu proprio mandamus_ being signed by the pope.

The character of the handwriting employed by the papal chancery is discussed in the article PALAEOGRAPHY. Here it will be enough to state that the early style was derived from the Lombardic hand, and that it continued in use down to the beginning of the 12th century; but that, from the 10th century, owing to the general adoption of the Caroline minuscule writing, it began to fall and gradually became so unfamiliar to the uninitiated, that, while it still continued in use for papal bulls, it was found necessary to accompany them with copies written in the more intelligible Caroline script. The intricate, fanciful character, known as the _Litera sancti Petri_, was invented in the time of Clement VIII., A.D. 1592-1605, was fully developed under Alexander VIII., 1689-1691, and was only abolished at the end of the year 1878 by Leo XIII.

Merovingian chancery.

Of the chancery of the Merovingian line of kings as many as ninety authentic diplomas are known, and, of these, thirty-seven are originals, the earliest being of the year 625. The most ancient examples were written on papyrus, vellum superseding that material towards the end of the 7th century. All these diplomas are technically letters, having the superscription and address and, at the foot, close to the seal, the valedictory _benevalete_. They commence with a monogrammatic invocation, which, together with the superscription and address written in fanciful elongated letters, occupies the first line. The superscription always runs in the form, _N. rex Francorum_. The most complete kinds of diplomas were authenticated by the king's subscription, that of the _referendarius_ (the official charged with the custody of the royal seal), the impression of the seal, and exceptionally by subscriptions of prelates and great personages. The royal subscription was usually autograph; but, if the sovereign were too young or too illiterate to write, a monogram was traced by the scribe. The referendary, if he countersigned the royal subscription, added the word _optulit_ to his own signature; if he subscribed independently, he wrote _recognovit et subscripsit_, the end of the last word being usually lost in flourishes forming a _ruche_. The date gave the place, day, month and year of the reign. The Merovingian royal diplomas are of two classes: (1) Precepts, conferring gifts, favours, immunities and confirmations, entitled in the documents themselves as _praeceptum_, _praeceptio_, _auctoritas_; some drawn up in full form, with preamble and ample final clauses; others less precise and formal. (2) Judgments (_judicia_), which required no preamble or final clauses as they were records of the sovereign's judicial decisions; they were subscribed by the referendary and were sealed with the royal seal. Other classes of documents were the _cartae de mundeburde_, taking persons under the royal protection, and _indiculi_ or letters transmitting orders or notifying decisions; but no examples have survived.

Carolingian chancery.

The diplomas of the early Carolingians differed, as was natural, but little from those of their predecessors. As mayors of the palace, Charles Martel and Pippin took the style of _vir inluster_. On becoming king, Pippin retained it; _Pippinus, vir inluster, rex Francorum_, and it continued to be part of the royal title till Charlemagne became emperor. The royal subscription was in form of a sign-manual or mark, but Charlemagne elaborated this into a monogram of the letters of his name built up on a cross. In 775 the royal title of Charlemagne became _Carolus, gratia Dei rex Francorum et Langobardorum, ac patricius Romanorum_, the last words being assumed on his visit to Rome in 774. On becoming emperor in 800, he was styled _Imperator, Romanum gubernans imperium, rex Francorum et Langobardorum_. It is to be noticed that thenceforth his name was spelt with initial K (as it was on the monogram), having previously been written with C in the deeds. Most of his diplomas were authenticated by the subscription of the chancellor and impression of the seal. A novelty in the form of dating was also introduced, two words, _datum_ (for time) and _actum_ (for place), being now employed. The character of the writing of the diplomas, founded on the Roman cursive hand, which had become very intricate under the Merovingians, improved under their successors, yet the reform which was introduced into the literary script hardly affected the cursive writing of diplomatic until the latter part of Charlemagne's reign. The archaic style was particularly maintained in judgments, which were issued by the private chancery of the palace, a department more conservative in its methods than the imperial chancery. It was in the reign of Louis Debonair, A.D. 814-840, that the Carolingian diploma took its final shape. A variation now appears in the monogram, that monarch's sign-manual being built up, not on a cross as previously, but on the letter H., the initial of his name Hludovicus, and serving as the pattern for successive monarchs of the name of Louis.

In the Carolingian chancery the staff was exclusively ecclesiastical; at its head was the chancellor, whose title is traced back to the _cancellarius_, or petty officer under the Roman empire, stationed at the bar or lattice (_cancelli_) of the basilica or other law court and serving as usher. As keeper of the royal archives his subscription was indispensable for royal acts. The diplomas were drawn up by the notaries, an important body, upon whom devolved the duty of maintaining the formulae and traditions of the office. It has been observed that in the 9th century the documents were drawn carefully, but that in the 10th century there was a great degeneration in this respect. Under the early Capetian kings there was great confusion and want of uniformity in their diplomas; and it was not until the reign of Louis VI., A.D. 1108, that the formulae were again reduced to rules.

Imperial German chancery.

The acts of the imperial chancery of Germany followed the patterns of the Carolingian diplomas, with little variation down to the reign of Frederick Barbarossa, A.D. 1152-1190. The sovereign's style was _N. divina favente clementia rex_; after coronation at Rome he became _imperator augustus_. At the end of the 10th century, Otto III. developed the latter title into _Romanorum imperator augustus_. Under Henry III., and regularly from the time of Henry V., A.D. 1106-1125, the title before coronation has been _Romanorum rex_. The royal monogram did not necessarily contain all the letters of the name; but, on the other hand, from the year 976, it became more complicated and combined the imperial title with the name. For example, the monogram of Henry II. combines the words _Henricus Romanorum imperator augustus_. The flourished _ruches_ also, as in the Frankish chanceries, were in vogue. Eventually they were used by certain of the chancellors as a sign-manual and took fanciful shapes, such as a building with a cupola, or even a diptych. They disappear early in the 12th century, the period when in other respects the chancery of the Holy Roman Empire largely adopted a more simple style in its diplomas. Lists of witnesses, in support of the royal and official subscriptions, were sometimes added in the course of the 11th century, and they appear regularly in documents a hundred years later.

Diplomatic in England.

For the study of diplomatic in England, material exists in two distinct series of documents, those of the Anglo-Saxon period, and those subsequent to the Norman Conquest. The Anglo-Saxon kings appear to have borrowed, partially, the style of their diplomas from the chanceries of their Frankish neighbours, introducing at the same time modifications which give those documents a particular character marking their nationality. In some of the earlier examples we find that the lines of the foreign style are followed more or less closely; but very soon a simpler model was adopted which, while it varied in formulas from reign to reign, lasted in general construction down to the time of the Norman Conquest. The royal charters were usually drawn up in Latin, sometimes in Anglo-Saxon, and began with a preamble or exordium (in some instances preceded by an invocation headed with the chrismon or with a cross), in the early times of a simple character, but, later, drawn out not infrequently to great length in involved and bombastic periods. Then immediately followed the disposing or granting clause, often accompanied with a few words explaining the motive, such as, for the good of the soul of the grantor; and the text was closed with final clauses of varying extent, protecting the deed against infringement, &c. In early examples the dating clause gave the day and month (often according to the Roman calendar) and the year of the indiction; but the year of the Incarnation was also immediately adopted; and, later, the regnal year also. The position of this clause in the charter was subject to variation. The subscriptions of the king and of the personages witnessing the deed, each preceded by a cross, but all written by the hand of the scribe, usually closed the charter. A peculiarity was the introduction, in many instances, either in the body of the charter, or in a separate paragraph at the end, of the boundaries of the land granted, written in the native tongue. The sovereigns of the several kingdoms of the Heptarchy, as well as those of the United Kingdom, usually styled themselves _rex_. But from the time of Æthelstan, A.D. 825-840, they also assumed fantastic titles in the text of their charters, such as: _rex et primicerius_, _rex et rector_, _gubernator et rector_, _monarchus_, and particularly the Greek _basileus_, and _basileus industrius_. At the same time the name of Albion was also frequently used for Britain.

A large number of documents of the Anglo-Saxon period, dating from the 7th century, has survived, both original and copies entered in chartularies. Of distinct documents there are nearly two hundred; but a large proportion of these must be set aside as copies (both contemporary and later) or as spurious deeds.

Although there is evidence, as above stated, of the use of seals by certain of the Mercian kings, the method of authentication of diplomas by seal impression was practically unknown to the Anglo-Saxon sovereigns, save only to Edward the Confessor, who, copying the custom which obtained upon the continent, adopted the use of a great seal.

With the Norman Conquest the old tradition of the Anglo-Saxons disappeared. The Conqueror brought with him the practice of the Roman chancery, which naturally followed the Capetian model; and his diplomas of English origin differed only from those of Normandy by the addition of his new style, _rex Anglorum_, in the superscription. But even from the first there was a tendency to simplicity in the new English chancery, not improbably suggested by the brief formalities of Anglo-Saxon charters, and, side by side with the more formal royal diplomas, others of shorter form and less ceremony were issued, which by the reign of Henry II. quite superseded the more solemn documents. These simpler charters began with the royal superscription, the address, and the salutation, e.g. _Willelmus, Dei gratia rex Anglorum, N. episcopo et omnibus baronibus et fidelibus suis Francis et Anglis salutem_. Then followed the notification and the grant, e.g. _Sciatis me concessisse_, &c., generally without final clauses, or, if any, brief clauses of protection and warranty; and, at the end, the list of witnesses and the date. The regnal year was usually cited; but the year of the Incarnation was also sometimes given. The great seal was appended. To some of the Conqueror's charters his subscription and those of his queen and sons are attached, written by the scribe, but accompanied with crosses which may or may not be autograph. By the reign of John the simpler form of royal charters had taken final shape, and from this time the acts of the kings of England have been classified under three heads: viz. (1) Charters, generally of the pattern described above; (2) Letters patent, in which the address is general, _Universis presentes litteras inspecturis_, &c.; the corroborative clause describes the character of the document, _In cujus rei testimonium has literas nostras fieri fecimus patentes_; the king himself is his own witness, _Teste me ipso_; and the great seal is appended; (3) Close letters, administrative documents conveying orders, the king witnessing, _Teste me ipso_.

The style of the English kings down to John was, with few exceptions, _Rex Anglorum_; thenceforward, _Rex Angliae_. Henry II. added the feudal titles, _dux Normannorum et Aquitanorum et comes Andegavorum_, which Henry III. curtailed to _dux Aquitaniae_. John added the title _dominus Hiberniae_; Edward III., on claiming the crown of France, styled himself rex _Angliae et Franciae_, the same title being borne by successive kings down to the year 1801; and Henry VIII., in 1521, assumed the title of _fidei defensor_. The formula _Dei gratia_ does not consistently accompany the royal title until the reign of Henry II., who adopted it in 1173 (see L. Delisle, _Mémoire sur la chronologie des chartes de Henri II._, in the _Bibl. de l'École des Chartes_, lxvii. 361-401).

Private deeds.

The forms adopted in the royal chanceries were naturally imitated in the composition of private deeds which in all countries form the mass of material for historical and diplomatic research. The student of English diplomatic will soon remark how readily the private charters, especially conveyances of real property, fall into classes, and how stereotyped the phraseology and formulae of each class become, only modified from time to time by particular acts of legislation. The brevity of the early conveyances is maintained through successive generations, with only moderate growth as time progresses through the 12th, 13th and 14th centuries. The different kinds of deeds which the requirements of society have from time to time called into existence must be learned by the student from the text-books. But a particular form of document which was especially in favour in England should be mentioned. This was the chirograph (Gr. [Greek: cheir], a hand, [Greek: graphein], to write), which is found even in the Anglo-Saxon period, and which got its name from the word _chirographum_, _cirographum_ or _cyrographum_ being written in large letters at the head of the deed. At first the word was written, presumably, at the head of each of the two authentic copies which the two parties to a transaction would require. Then it became the habit to use the word thus written as a tally, the two copies of the deed being written on one sheet, head to head, with the word between them, which was then cut through longitudinally in a straight, or more commonly waved or indented (_in modum dentium_) line, each of the two copies thus having half of the word at the head. Any other word, or a series of letters, might thus be employed; and more than two copies of a deed could thus be made to tally. The chirograph was the precursor of the modern indenture, the commonest form of English deeds, though no longer a tally. In other countries, the notarial instrument has performed the functions which the chirograph and indenture have discharged for us.

AUTHORITIES.--General treatises, handbooks,, &c., are J. Mabillon, _De re diplomatica_ (1709); Tassin and Toustain, _Nouveau Traité de diplomatique_ (1750-1765); T. Madox, _Formulare Anglicanum_ (1702); G. Hickes, _Linguarum septentrionalium thesaurus_ (1703-1705); F. S. Maffei, _Istoria diplomatica_ (1727); G. Marini, _I Papiri diplomatici_ (1805); G. Bessel, _Chronicon Gotwicense (De diplomatibus imperatorum ac regum Germaniae)_ (1732); A. Fumagalli, _Delle istituzioni diplomatiche_ (1802); M. F. Kopp, _Palaeographia critica_ (1817-1829); K. T. G. Schönemann, _Versuch eines vollstandigen Systems der Diplomatik_ (1818); T. Sickel, _Lehre von den Urkunden der ersten Karolinger_ (1867); J. Ficker, _Beiträge zur Urkundenlehre_ (1877-1878); A. Gloria, _Compendio delle lezioni di paleografia e diplomatica_ (1870); C. Paoli, _Programma scolastico di paleografia Latina e di diplomatica_ (1888-1890); H. Bresslau, _Handbuch der Urkundenlehre für Deutschland und Italien_ (1889); A. Giry, _Manuel de diplomatique_ (1894); F. Leist, _Urkundenlehre_ (1893); E. M. Thompson, _Handbook of Greek and Latin Palaeography_, cap. xix. (1906); J. M. Kemble, _Codex diplomaticus aevi Saxonici_ (1839-1848); W. G. Birch, _Cartularium Saxonicum_ (1885-1893); J. Muñoz y Rivero, _Manuel de paleografia diplomatica Española_ (1890); M. Russi, _Paleografia e diplomatica de' documenti delle provincie Napolitane_ (1883). Facsimiles are given in J. B. Silvestrestre _Paléographie universelle_ (English edition, 1850); and in the _Facsimiles_, &c., published by the Palaeographical Society (1873-1894) and the New Palaeographical Society (1903, &c.); and also in the following works:--A. Champollion-Figeac, _Chartes et manuscrits sur papyrus_ (1840); J. A. Letronne, _Diplómes et chartes de l'époque mérovingienne_ (1845-1866); J. Tardif, _Archives de l'Empire: Facsimilé de chartes et diplômes mérovingiens et carlovingiens_ (1866); G. H. Pettz, _Schrifttafeln zum Gebrauch bei diplomatischen Vorlesungen_ (1844-1869); H. von Sybel and T. Sickel, _Kaiserurkunden in Abbildungen_ (1880-1891); J. von Pflugk-Harttung, _Specimina selecta chartarum Pontificum Romanorum_ (1885-1887); _Specimina palaeographica regestorum Romanorum pontificum_ (1888); _Recueil de fac-similés à l'usage de l'École des Chartes_ (not published) (1880, &c.); J. Muñoz y Rivero, _Chrestomathia palaeographica: scripturae Hispanae veteris specimina_ (1890); E. A. Bond, _Facsimiles of Ancient Charters in the British Museum_ (1873-1878): W. B. Sanders, _Facsimiles of Anglo-Saxon Manuscripts_ (charters) (1878-1884); G. F. Warner and H. J. Ellis, _Facsimiles of Royal and other Charters in the British Museum_ (1903). (E. M. T.)

DIPOENUS and SCYLLIS, early Greek sculptors, who worked together, and are said to have been pupils of Daedalus. Pliny assigns to them the date 580 B.C., and says that they worked at Sicyon, which city from their time onwards became one of the great schools of sculpture. They also made statues for Cleonae and Argos. They worked in wood, ebony and ivory, and apparently also in marble. It is curious that no inscription bearing their names has come to light.

DIPPEL, JOHANN KONRAD (1673-1734), German theologian and alchemist, son of a Lutheran pastor, was born at the castle of Frankenstein, near Darmstadt, on the 10th of August 1673. He studied theology at Giessen. After a short visit to Wittenberg he went to Strassburg, where he lectured on alchemy and chiromancy, and occasionally preached. He gained considerable popularity, but was obliged after a time to quit the city, owing to his irregular manner of living. He had up to this time espoused the cause of the orthodox as against the pietists; but in his two first works, published under the name "Christianus Democritus," _Orthodoxia Orthodoxorum_ (1697) and _Papismus vapulans Protestantium_ (1698), he assailed the fundamental positions of the Lutheran theology. He held that religion consisted not in dogma but exclusively in love and self-sacrifice. To avoid persecution he was compelled to wander from place to place in Germany, Holland, Denmark and Sweden. He took the degree of doctor of medicine at Leiden in 1711. He discovered Prussian blue, and by the destructive distillation of bones prepared the evil-smelling product known as Dippel's animal oil. He died near Berleburg on the 25th of April 1734.

An enlarged edition of Dippel's collected works was published at Berleburg in 1743. See the biographies by J. C. G. Ackermann (Leipzig, 1781), H. V. Hoffmann (Darmstadt, 1783), K. Henning (1881) and W. Bender (Bonn, 1882); also a memoir by K. Bucher in the _Historisches Taschenbuch_ for 1858.

DIPSOMANIA (from [Gr. dipsa], thirst, and [Greek: mania], madness), a term formerly applied to the attacks of delirium (q.v.) caused by alcoholic poisoning. It is now sometimes loosely used as equivalent to the condition of incurable inebriates, but strictly should be confined to the pathological and insatiable desire for alcohol, sometimes occurring in paroxysms.

DIPTERA ([Greek: dis], double, [Greek: ptera], wings), a term (first employed in its modern sense by Linnaeus, _Fauna Suecica_, 1st ed., 1746, p. 306) used in zoological classification for one of the Orders into which the _Hexapoda_, or Insecta, are divided. The relation of the Diptera (two-winged flies, or flies proper) to the other Orders is dealt with under Hexapoda (q.v.).

The chief characteristic of the Diptera is expressed in the name of the Order, since, with the exception of certain aberrant and apterous forms, flies possess but a single pair of membranous wings, which are attached to the meso-thorax. Wing-covers and hind-wings are alike absent, and the latter are represented by a pair of little knobbed organs, the halteres or balancers, which have a controlling and directing function in flight. The other structural characters of the Order may be briefly summarized as:--mouth-parts adapted for piercing and sucking, or for suction alone, and consisting of a proboscis formed of the labium, and enclosing modifications of the other usual parts of the mouth, some of which, however, may be wanting; a thorax fused into a single mass; and legs with five-jointed tarsi. The wings, which are not capable of being folded, are usually transparent, but occasionally pigmented and adorned with coloured spots, blotches or bands; the wing-membrane, though sometimes clothed with minute hairs, seldom bears scales; the wing-veins, which are of great importance in the classification of Diptera, are usually few in number and chiefly longitudinal, there being a marked paucity of cross-veins. In a large number of Diptera an incision in the posterior margin of the wing, near the base, marks off a small lobe, the posterior lobe or alula, while connected with this but situated on the thorax itself there is a pair of membranous scales, or squamae, which when present serve to conceal the halteres. The antennae of Diptera, which are also extremely important in classification, are thread-like in the more primitive families, such as the _Tipulidae_ (daddy-long-legs), where they consist of a considerable number of joints, all of which except the first two, and sometimes also the last two, are similar in shape; in the more specialized families, such as the _Tabanidae_ (horse-flies), _Syrphidae_ (hover-flies) or _Muscidae_ (house-flies, blue-bottles and their allies), the number of antennal joints is greatly reduced by coalescence, so that the antennae appear to consist of only three joints. In these forms, however, the third joint is really a complex, which in many families bears in addition a jointed bristle (arista) or style, representing the terminal joints of the primitive antenna. Although in the case of the majority of Diptera the body is more or less clothed with hair, the hairy covering is usually so short that to the unaided eye the insects appear almost bare; some forms, however, such as the bee-flies (_Bombylius_) and certain robber-flies (_Asilidae_) are conspicuously hairy. Bristles are usually present on the legs, and in the case of many families on the body also; those on the head and thorax are of great importance in classification.

Between 40,000 and 50,000 species of Diptera are at present known, but these are only a fraction of those actually in existence. The species recognized as British number some 2700, but to this total additions are constantly being made. As a rule flies are of small or moderate size, and many, such as certain blood-sucking midges of the genus _Ceratopogon_, are even minute; as extremes of size may be mentioned a common British midge, _Ceratopogon varius_, the female of which measures only 1¼ millimetre, and the gigantic _Mydaidae_ of Central and South America as well as certain Australian robber-flies, which have a body 1¾ in. long, with a wing-expanse of 3¼ in. In bodily form Diptera present two main types, either, as in the case of the more primitive and generalized families, they are gnat- or midge-like in shape, with slender bodies and long, delicate legs, or else they exhibit a more or less distinct resemblance to the common house-fly, having compact and stoutly built bodies and legs of moderate length. Diptera in general are not remarkable for brilliancy of coloration; as a rule they are dull and inconspicuous in hue, the prevailing body-tints being browns and greys; occasionally, however, more especially in species (_Syrphidae_) that mimic Hymenoptera, the body is conspicuously banded with yellow; a few are metallic, such as the species of _Formosia_, found in the islands of the East Indian Archipelago, which are among the most brilliant of all insects. The sexes in Diptera are usually alike, though in a number of families with short antennae the males are distinguished by the fact that their eyes meet together (or nearly so) on the forehead. Metamorphosis in Diptera is complete; the larvae are utterly different from the perfect insects in appearance, and, although varying greatly in outward form, are usually footless grubs; those of the _Muscidae_ are generally known as maggots. The pupa either shows the appendages of the perfect insect, though these are encased in a sheath and adherent to the body, or else it is entirely concealed within the hardened and contracted larval integument, which forms a barrel-shaped protecting capsule or puparium.

Diptera are divided into some sixty families, the exact classification of which has not yet been finally settled. The majority of authors, however, follow Brauer in dividing the order into two sections, Orthorrhapha and Cyclorrhapha, according to the manner in which the pupa-case splits to admit of the escape of the perfect insect. The general characteristics of the pupae in these two sections have already been described.

In the Orthorrhapha, in the pupae of which the appendages of the perfect insect are usually visible, the pupa-case generally splits in a straight line down the back near the cephalic end; in front of this longitudinal cleft there may be a small transverse one, the two together forming a T-shaped fissure. In the Cyclorrhapha on the other hand, in which the actual pupa is concealed within the hardened larval skin, the imago escapes through a circular orifice formed by pushing off or through the head end of the puparium. The Diptera Orthorrhapha include the more primitive and less specialized families such as the _Tipulidae_ (daddy-long-legs), _Culicidae_ (gnats or mosquitoes), _Chironomidae_ (midges), _Mycetophilidae_ (fungus-midges), _Tabanidae_ (horse-flies), _Asilidae_ (robber-flies), &c. The Diptera Cyclorrhapha on the other hand consist of the most highly specialized families, such as the _Syrphidae_ (hover-flies), _Oestridae_ (bot and warble flies), and _Muscidae_ (_sensu latiore_--the house-fly and its allies, including tsetse-flies, flesh-flies, _Tachininae_, or flies the larvae of which are internal parasites of caterpillars, &c). It is customary to divide the Orthorrhapha into the two divisions Nematocera and Brachycera, in the former of which the antennae are elongate and in a more or less primitive condition, as described above, while in the latter these organs are short, and, as already explained, apparently composed of only three joints.

Within the divisions named--Orthorrhapha Nematocera, Orthorrhapha Brachycera and Cyclorrhapha--the constituent families are usually grouped into a series of "superfamilies," distinguished by features of structure or habit. Certain extremely aberrant Diptera, which, in consequence of the adoption of a parasitic mode of life, have undergone great structural modification, are further remarkable for their peculiar mode of reproduction, on account of which the families composing the group are often termed Pupipara. In these forms the pregnant female, instead of laying eggs, as Diptera usually do, or even producing a number of minute living larvae, gives birth at one time but to a single larva, which is retained within the oviduct of the mother until adult, and assumes the pupal state immediately on extrusion. The Pupipara are also termed Eproboscidea (although they actually possess a well-developed and functional proboscis), and by some dipterists the Eproboscidea are regarded as a suborder and contrasted as such with the rest of the Diptera, which are styled the suborder Proboscidea. By other writers Proboscidea and Eproboscidea are treated as primary divisions of the Cyclorrhapha. In reality, however, the families designated Eproboscidea (_Hippoboscidae_, _Braulidae_, _Nycteribiidae_ and _Streblidae_), are not entitled to be considered as constituting either a suborder, or even a main division of the Cyclorrhapha; they are simply Cyclorrhapha much modified owing to parasitism, and in view of the closely similar mode of reproduction in the tsetse-flies the special designation Pupipara should be abandoned. Before leaving the subject of classification it may be noted in passing that in 1906 Professor Lameere, of Brussels, proposed a scheme for the classification of Diptera which as regards both the limits of the families and their grouping into higher categories differs considerably from that in current use.

Little light on the relationship and evolution of the various families of Diptera is afforded by fossil forms, since as a rule the latter are readily referable to existing families. With the exception of a few species from the Solenhofen lithographic Oolite, fossil Diptera belong to the Tertiary Period, during which the members of this order attained a high degree of development. In amber, as proved by the deposits on the shores of the Baltic, the proverbial "fly" is more numerous than any other creatures, and with very few exceptions representatives of all the existing families have been found. The famous Tertiary beds at Florissant, Colorado, have yielded a considerable number of remarkably well-preserved _Tipulidae_ (in which family are included the most primitive of existing Diptera), as also species belonging to other families, such as _Mycetophilidae_ and even _Oestridae_.

Diptera as an order are probably more widely distributed over the earth's surface than are the representatives of any similar division of the animal kingdom. Flies seem capable of adapting themselves to extremes of cold equally as well as to those of heat, and species belonging to the order are almost invariably included in the collections brought back by members of Arctic expeditions. Others are met with in the most isolated localities; thus the Rev. A. E. Eaton discovered on the desolate shores of Kerguelen's Island apterous and semi-apterous Diptera (_Tipulidae_ and _Ephydridae_) of a degraded type adapted to the climatic peculiarities of the locality. Many bird parasites belonging to the _Hippoboscidae_ have naturally been carried about the world by their hosts, while other species, such as the house-fly, blow-fly and drone-fly, have in like manner been disseminated by human agency. Most families and a large proportion of genera are represented throughout the world, but in some cases (e.g. _Glossina_--see TSETSE-FLY) the distribution of a genus is limited to a continent. As a rule the general _facies_ as well as dimensions are remarkably uniform throughout a family, so that tropical species often differ little in appearance from those inhabiting temperate regions. Many instances of exaggerated and apparently unnatural structure nevertheless occur, as in the case of the genera _Pangonia_, _Nemestrina_, _Achias_, _Diopsis_ and the family _Celyphidae_, and, as might be expected, it is chiefly in tropical species that these peculiarities are found. To a geographical distribution of the widest extent, Diptera add a range of habits of the most diversified nature; they are both animal and vegetable feeders, an enormous number of species acting, especially in the larval state, as scavengers in consuming putrescent or decomposing matter of both kinds. The phytophagous species are attached to various parts of plants, dead or alive; and the carnivorous in like manner feed on dead or living flesh, or its products, many larvae being parasitic on living animals of various classes (in Australia the larva of a species of _Muscidae_ is even a parasite of frogs), especially the caterpillars of Lepidoptera, which are destroyed in great numbers by _Tachininae_. The recent discovery of a bloodsucking maggot, which is found in native huts throughout the greater part of tropical and subtropical Africa, and attacks the inmates when asleep, is of great interest.

It may confidently be asserted that, of insects which directly or indirectly affect the welfare of man, Diptera form the vast majority, and it is a moot point whether the good effected by many species in the rapid clearing away of animal and vegetable impurities, and in keeping other insect enemies in check, counterbalances the evil and annoyance wrought by a large section of the Order. The part played by certain blood-sucking Diptera in the dissemination of disease is now well known (see MOSQUITO and TSETSE-FLY), and under the term _myiasis_ medical literature includes a lengthy recital of instances of the presence of Dipterous larvae in various parts of the living human body, and the injuries caused thereby. That Diptera of the type of the common house-fly are often in large measure responsible for the spread of such diseases as cholera and enteric fever is undeniable, and as regards blood-sucking forms, in addition to those to which reference has already been made, it is sufficient to mention the vast army of pests constituted by the midges, sand-flies, horse-flies, &c., from the attacks of which domestic animals suffer equally with man, in addition to being frequently infested with the larvae of the bot and warble flies (_Gastrophilus_, _Oestrus_ and _Hypoderma_). Lastly, as regards the phytophagous forms, there can be no doubt that the destruction of grass-lands by "leather-jackets" (the larvae of crane-flies, or daddy-long-legs,--_Tipula oleracea_ and _T. paludosa_), of divers fruits by _Ceratitis capitata_ and species of _Dacus_, and of wheat and other crops by the Hessian-fly (_Mayetiola destructor_) and species of _Oscinis_, _Chlorops_, &c., is of very serious consequence.

With many writers it is customary to treat the fleas as a sub-order of Diptera, under the title Aphaniptera or Siphonaptera. Since, however, although undoubtedly allied to the Diptera, they must have diverged from the ancestral stem at an early period, before the existing forms of Diptera became so extremely specialized, it seems better to regard the fleas as constituting an independent order (see FLEA). (E. E. A.)

DIPTERAL (Gr. for "double-winged"), the architectural term applied to those temples which have a double range of columns in the peristyle, as in the temple of Diana at Ephesus.

DIPTYCH (Gr. [Greek: diptychos], two-folding), (1) A tablet made with a hinge to open and shut, used in the Roman empire for letters (especially love-letters), and official tokens of the commencement of a consul's, praetor's or aedile's term of office. The latter variety of diptych was inscribed with the magistrate's name and bore his portrait, and was issued to his friends and the public generally. They were made of boxwood or maple. More costly examples were in cedar, ivory (q.v.), silver or sometimes gold. They were often sent as New Year gifts.

(2)In the primitive church when the worshippers brought their own offerings of bread and wine, from which were taken the Communion elements, the names of the contributors were recorded on diptychs and read aloud. To these names were early added those of deceased members of the community whom it was desired to commemorate. This custom rapidly developed into a kind of commemoration of saints and benefactors, living and dead; especially, in each church, were the names of those who had been its bishops recorded. The custom was maintained until the lists became so long that it was impossible to read them through, and the observance in this form had to be abandoned. The insertion of a name on the diptych, thereby securing the prayers of the church, was a privilege from which a person could be excluded on account of suspicion of heresy or by the intrigues of enemies. His name could, if written, be expunged under similar circumstances. The names thus written were read from the ambo, in which the diptych was kept. The reading of these names during the canon of the mass gave rise to the term _canonization_. By various councils it was ordained that the name of the pope should always be inserted in the diptych list.

The addition of _dates_ resulted from the custom of recording baptisms and deaths; and thus the diptych developed into a calendar and formed the germ of the elaborate system of festologies, martyrologies and calendars which developed in the church.

The diptych went by various names in the early church--mystical tablets, anniversary books, ecclesiastical matriculation registers or books of the living. According to the names inscribed, bishops, the dead or the living, a diptych might be a _diptycha episcoporum_, _diptycha mortuorum_ or _diptycha vivorum_.

In course of time the list of the names swelled to such proportions that the space afforded by the diptych was insufficient. A third fold was consequently provided, and the tablet became a _triptych_ (though the name _diptych_ was retained as a general term for the object). Further room was afforded by the insertion of leaves of parchment or wood between the folds. The custom of reading names from the diptychs died out about the 8th century. The diptychs, however, were retained as altar ornaments. From the original consular documents onwards, the outsides of the folds had always been richly ornamented, and when they ceased to be of immediate practical use they became merely decorative. Instead of the list of names the inside was ornamented like the outer, and in the middle ages the best painters of the day would often paint them. When folded, the portraits of the donor and his wife might be shown; when open there would be three paintings, one on each fold, of a religious character. (R. A. S. M.)

DIR, an independent state in the North-West Frontier Province of India, lying to the north-east of Swat. Its importance chiefly arises from the fact that it commands the greater part of the route between Chitral and the Peshawar frontier. The quarrels and intrigues between the khan of Dir and Umra Khan of Jandol were among the chief events that led up to the Chitral Campaign of 1895. During that expedition the khan made an agreement with the British Government to keep the road to Chitral open in return for a subsidy. Including the Bashkars, an aboriginal tribe allied to the Torwals and Garhuis, who inhabit Panjkora Kohistan, the population is estimated at about 100,000.

DIRCE, in Greek legend, daughter of Helios the sun-god, the second wife of Lycus, king of Thebes. She sorely persecuted Antiope, his first wife, who escaped to Mount Cithaeron, where her twin sons Amphion and Zethus were being brought up by a herdsman who was ignorant of their parentage. Having recognized their mother, the sons avenged her by tying Dirce to the horns of a wild bull, which dragged her about till she died. Her body was cast into a spring near Thebes, which was ever afterwards called by her name. Her punishment is the subject of the famous group called "The Farnese Bull," by Apollonius and Tauriscus of Tralles, in the Naples museum (see GREEK ART, Plate I. fig. 51).

DIRECT MOTION, in astronomy, the apparent motion of a body of the solar system on the celestial sphere in the direction from west to east; so called because this is the usual direction of revolution and rotation of the heavenly bodies.

DIRECTORS, in company law, the agents by whom a trading or public company acts, the company itself being a legal abstraction and unable to do anything. As joint-stock companies have multiplied and their enterprise has extended, the position of directors has become one of increasing influence and importance. It is they who control the colossal funds now invested in trading companies, and who direct their policy (for shareholders are seldom more than dividend-drawers). Upon their uprightness, vigilance and sound judgment depends the welfare of the greatest part of the trade of the country concerned. It is not to be wondered at that in view of this influence and independence of action the law courts have held directors to a strict standard of duty, and that the parliament of the United Kingdom has singled out directors from other agents for special legislation in the Directors Liability Act 1890, the Larceny Act 1861, the Companies Act 1867 and the Winding-up