Consonants (part 1)

Of the consonants, b, d, f, h, j, k, l, m, n, ng, p, sh, t, v, z, always have their common English sounds, when used to transliterate foreign words. The letter c is not used by itself in re-writing for pronunciation, s or k being used instead. The only consonantal symbols, therefore, that require explanation are the following:—

ch is always as in rich.

d, nearly as th in this = Sp. d in Madrid, &c.

g is always hard, as in go.

h represents the guttural in Scotch loch, Ger. nach, also other similar gutturals.

n˙, Fr. nasal n as in bon.

r represents both English r, and r in foreign words, which is generally much more strongly trilled.

s, always as in so.

th, as th in thin.

th, as th in this.

w always consonantal, as in we.

x = ks, which are used instead.

y always consonantal, as in yea (Fr. ligne would be re-written lēny).

zh, as s in pleasure = Fr. j.

Estremoz´, a town of Portugal, in the province of Alemtejo, 22 miles west of Elvas. Pop. about 8000.

Eszek (es-sek´), or Esseg, a town of Yugo-Slavia, formerly in Hungary, on the Drave, 13 miles from its confluence with the Danube. It has barracks, town house, normal school, an important trade, and several fairs. Pop. 31,000.

Étampes (ā-tän˙p), a town of France, department of Seine-et-Oise, 30 miles s. by w. of Paris. Pop. 9450.

Étaples, a town of Northern France, department of Pas-de-Calais, on the right bank of the estuary of the Canche, 17 miles south of Boulogne. During the European War, Étaples became a place of great importance. It was a huge British encampment, including many hospitals, and a cemetery with over 11,000 graves. It was also of importance as a training-centre, and the famous 'Bull-ring' was there. Pop. 6000.

Etap´pen (Ger.), a department in Continental armies the business of which is to relieve the commanders of the field army of all responsibility for their communications in the rear. The officers of this department supervise all arrangements for loading and unloading at stations, forwarding, feeding, and billeting.

Eta´wah, a town, Hindustan, United Provinces, capital of district of the same name, on left bank of the Jumna, picturesquely situated among ravines, and richly planted with trees. It has some good buildings, and a considerable trade. Pop. 45,350.—The district has an area of 1694 sq. miles, and a pop. of 760,120.

Etching, a method of engraving lines upon a metal plate by means of acid, whence the term has come to denote an impression taken on paper or similar material from the etched plate. Sometimes, though incorrectly, applied to a line-drawing in pen and ink. The usual process is to cover the plate (generally of copper) with an etching-ground of waxes and resins, on which the lines are opened up by means of a sharp-pointed etching-needle, either from a design transferred to the ground, or by the artist working directly. The lines are then bitten by putting the plate into dilute nitric or hydrochloric acid, the back and edges being protected by stopping-out varnish. The plate is removed when the lightest lines are sufficiently bitten. If some lines need deeper biting, the rest may be covered with stopping-out varnish, and the plate replaced in the acid; or acid may be applied locally. If a plate is removed before biting is complete, in order to take a trial impression, it is recovered with a transparent ground, additional lines opened up if necessary, and rebitten. In soft-ground etching, the ground is mixed with tallow, thin paper laid upon it, and the design firmly drawn thereon with a pencil. When the paper is removed, the ground adheres to it where the lines were drawn. The plate is bitten in the usual way. This produces the effect of a chalk or pencil drawing. Dry-point is a method of working direct on to the copper with a sharp point, which raises a burr on each side of the line, giving it a characteristic quality. Dry-point, etching proper, and engraving proper are often combined in one plate; and a mixture of etching with mezzotint or aquatint is not uncommon. In printing, a matter of first-rate importance, the ink is rubbed into the lines and superfluous ink wiped from the surface of the plate, ink being left in any place where a tint is required. Impressions may then be taken by hand; but a press is generally used, being more expeditious and yielding more even results. The papers used are various, but those of Japanese make are most popular. The number of good impressions possible from one plate is limited by the wearing of the plate; in particular, the burr of dry-point soon disappears. A state is the name given to each stage in the progress of a print, which is the result of new work on the plate. Differences due to variations in the amount of ink used, or to wiping, do not constitute states; but the addition of a title, artist's signature, &c., will make a state. As distinct from the engraved line, the etched line has a freedom and spontaneity resembling that made by pen or pencil.

The process was apparently used as a means of decorating metal some time before prints were taken. The earliest-known etching is dated 1513. Among the first to use the process was Albrecht Dürer (1471-1528), who between 1515 and 1518 produced six plates on iron, showing great power and precision, but hardly realizing all the qualities of the medium. Among his followers, the German Little Masters, Hans Sebald Beham and Albrecht Altdorfer were responsible for some interesting plates, as was Lucas van Leyden (1494-1533), the Dutchman. Among the earliest Italian etchers were Francesco Mazzuoli (1503-40) and Andrea Schiavone (1522-82), who show more freedom and delicacy than the Germans. But at this time etching was mainly the by-product of artists whose chief work was painting or engraving. Its great period opened in the seventeenth century. Jacques Callot (1592-1635), born at Nancy, who worked there and at Rome, produced about one thousand plates of small size, the most important being two series of the Miseries of War. He is remarkable for his fine sense of design, the fantastic, grotesque quality of his figures, and the delicacy and variety of his line, obtained by rebiting and by combining engraving with etching. Claude Lorrain (1600-82), the landscape painter, possibly under the influence of Callot, produced some fifty plates, very delicately etched, and suggestive of atmosphere. Sir Anthony Van Dyck (1599-1641), beside being court painter to Charles I of England, was the greatest Flemish etcher of his day. His eighteen etched portraits of famous contemporaries (fifteen of which were included in his Iconography, published 1645), in their direct handling and vivid characterization, are among the finest work of the kind ever done. But the central figure in etching, not only of the seventeenth century but of all time, is Rembrandt van Ryn (1606-69), whose work is unrivalled both in quality and influence. His etchings show the same realism, understanding of humanity, and creative imagination which mark all his work. Roughly, they fall into three groups, according to the time at which they were produced. In the first period, the ordinary etched line is mainly used, and the artist is evidently feeling his way; in the second, chiaroscuro is more marked, and dry-point used freely; in the third, the handling is very free and vigorous, chiaroscuro becomes the dominant feature, and dry-point the usual method. Development on these lines marks all his plates, which consist of (1) portraits, e.g. Jan Six (c. 1646) and Clement de Jonghe (1651); (2) figure compositions, many of scriptural subjects, which include the masterpiece Christ receiving Little Children (c. 1650), commonly known as 'The Hundred Guilder Print'; (3) landscapes, e.g. The Goldweigher's Field, the least numerous class, but one which has inspired the greatest mass of work. The Dutch painters contemporary with or following Rembrandt were in some cases prolific etchers, notably Ferdinand Bol and Adrian van Ostade, and reproduce in that medium the characteristics of their painting. In the eighteenth century etching fell somewhat into disuse, save in Italy, where G. B. Tiepolo (1696-1770), the decorative painter, produced some fifty plates, and Antonio Canale (Canaletto, 1697-1768) showed in his few etchings the same power to express structure and aerial perspective as in his painting. More prolific was G. B. Piranesi (1720-88), who published a series of views of the Classical and Renaissance architecture of Rome, professedly with an archæological aim, but of great artistic interest. His imaginative power, bold design, and vigorous handling are best seen in the fantastic plates of his Carceri. In England, William Hogarth (1697-1764) produced a few etchings; Thomas Rowlandson (1756-1827), the caricaturist, used etching as the basis of his aquatints; and John Crome (1768-1821), the landscape painter, etched some characteristic plates. But it was Francisco Goya (1746-1828) whose work ushered in a new era. His bitterly satirical Caprichos (1793-6, 72 plates), Proverbios (1810-5, 18 plates), Desastres de la Guerra (c. 1810, 82 plates), and the more popular but no less remarkable Tauromaquia (c. 1815, 33 plates illustrating bull-fighting), in all of which the bitten line is allied with aquatint, show a powerful and fantastic imagination, brilliant design and draughtsmanship, and superb technique. Widely different in character are the 71 plates of the Liber Studiorum, one of the most remarkable works of J. M. W. Turner (1775-1851). In these etching merely provides the ground plan for the use of mezzotint, or, more rarely, aquatint. In the nineteenth century the revival inaugurated by Goya was carried on in France by several of the Barbizon group of landscape painters, notably by J. F. Millet (1814-75), responsible for some simple but impressive plates. A more important figure as an etcher is Alphonse Legros (1837-1911), whose admirable portraits recall those of Van Dyck, though elsewhere he shows something of Goya's taste for the grotesque. This last also appears in the work of Charles Méryon (1821-68), one of the greatest of French etchers, whose feeling for decorative design and decisive handling are best seen in his views of Paris. Apart from other etchers of the period are Jules Jacquemart and Félix Braquemond, remarkable for their exquisite delicacy in the reproduction of surface texture. Of the Impressionist painters, Camille Pissarro (1830-1903) produced some very individual plates, marked by the use of broken lines and much rebiting, in the effort to secure atmospheric effect. Similarly, by means of open shading and absence of outline, Anders Zorn (1860-1918), the Swede, has aimed at reproducing the play of light round objects; but his portraits are his best work. The chief figure in nineteenth-century etching, however, is J. A. M‘N. Whistler (1834-1903), whose French Set (1858), Thames Set (1871), Venice Set (1880), and Twenty-six Etchings (1886) show his delicate yet decisive handling, his economy of means, his feeling for design, and his power of securing luminosity and atmosphere. Part of his success was due to insistence upon printing his own plates. His brother-in-law, Sir Francis Seymour Haden (1818-1910), the distinguished doctor, also took a prominent part in the revival of etching, and in his plates showed remarkable skill. The same accomplishment marks the work of William Strang, A.R.A. (died 1921), who has produced many notable portraits of contemporary celebrities, including R. L. Stevenson and Thomas Hardy. Another artist of great technical skill, excelling in the use of dry-point, is Félicien Rops (1833-98), a Belgian, whose work is remarkable for its union of satire and licentiousness. The most notable living etchers are chiefly found in England, and include Sir Frank Short, famous also for his mezzotints; D. Y. Cameron, a disciple of Whistler, though of marked individuality in his treatment of architecture; Muirhead Bone, whose architectural work is unrivalled and has inspired many followers; James M‘Bey; and Augustus John, who stands apart from his contemporaries in his preference for figure subjects. In France, Jean-Louis Forain has produced some remarkable work, notably series dealing with the life of Christ, and with Lourdes, which show his satiric power and a very distinctive technique. See Engraving.—Bibliography: A. M. Hind, A Short History of Engraving and Etching (very complete and authoritative). For technical details, M. Lalanne, Etching; Paton, Etching and Mezzotint Engraving.

Ete´ocles and Polyni´ces, two heroes of ancient Greek legend, sons of Œdipus, King of Thebes. After their father's banishment from Thebes, Eteocles usurped the throne to the exclusion of his brother, an act which led to an expedition of Polynices and six others against Thebes. This war is known as the Seven against Thebes, and forms the basis of Æschylus's The Seven against Thebes. The two brothers fell by each other's hand. See Antigone.

Ete´sian Winds (Gr. etos, year), winds which, blowing over the Mediterranean regions from a general northerly direction during some weeks of the summer, replace the heated air that rises from the Sahara and other parts of Africa. By carrying with them moisture from the sea, they add greatly to the fertility of Egypt.

Ethane, (C2H6), a hydrocarbon belonging to the paraffin series. It is a colourless inflammable gas, and is found amongst the gaseous constituents of the Pennsylvanian oil-wells.

Eth´elbert, King of Kent, born about A.D. 560, died 616. He succeeded his father, Hermenric, and reduced all the English states, except Northumberland, to the condition of his dependents. Ethelbert married Bertha, the daughter of Caribert, King of Paris, and a Christian princess, an event which led indirectly to the introduction of Christianity into England by St. Augustine. Ethelbert was the first English king to draw up a code of laws.

Ethelbert, King of England, son of Ethelwulf, succeeded to the government of the eastern side of the kingdom in A.D. 857, and in 860, on the death of his brother Ethelbald, became sole king. His reign was much disturbed by the inroads of the Danes. He died in 866.

Eth´elred I, King of England, son of Ethelwulf, succeeded his brother Ethelbert in A.D. 866. The Danes became so formidable in his reign as to threaten the conquest of the whole kingdom. Ethelred died in consequence of a wound received in an action with the Danes in 871, and was succeeded by his brother Alfred.

Ethelred II, King of England, son of Edgar, born A.D. 968, succeeded his brother, Edward the Martyr, in 978, and, for his want of vigour and capacity, was surnamed the Unready. In his reign began the practice of buying off the Danes by presents of money. After repeated payments of tribute, he effected, in 1002, a massacre of the Danes; but this led to Sweyn gathering a large force together and carrying fire and sword through the country. They were again bribed to depart; but, upon a new invasion, Sweyn obliged the nobles to swear allegiance to him as King of England; while Ethelred, in 1013, fled to Normandy. On the death of Sweyn he was invited to resume the government, and died at London in the midst of his struggle with Canute (1016).

Eth´elwulf, King of England, succeeded his father, Egbert, about A.D. 837, died 857. His reign was in great measure occupied in repelling Danish incursions; but he is best remembered for his donation to the clergy, which is often quoted as the origin of the system of tithes. Alfred the Great was the youngest of his five children.

Eth´endun, Battle of, the victory which Alfred the Great gained over the Danes (878), and which led to the treaty with Guthrum, the Danish king of East England. The locality is doubtful.

Ether, or Æther, sometimes called luminiferous ether to prevent confusion with the well-known volatile liquid of the same name, a hypothetical medium filling the whole of what seems to be empty space, and even the interstices between the atoms of material bodies. Most thinkers believe that such a medium must be postulated if we are to explain the transmission of physical actions between bodies at a distance from one another. With the exception of ordinary mechanical pressures and tensions, the simplest examples of influences that can pass across space are sound and light. Sound, we know, is carried by the air, a medium more subtle than solid or liquid bodies, but still easily recognizable by its effects on our senses, and by its mechanical, physical, and chemical properties. We know a good deal about air, and about the process that goes on when sound is passing through it. But the ether is incomparably more elusive than air. It affects the sense of sight, indeed, as the air affects the sense of hearing; but, so far as we know, it has no weight, no specific heat, no chemical affinity. Except that it is the medium which conveys light, electric and magnetic actions, and possibly gravitation, we know extremely little about it. An extreme school of modern physicists is even inclined to deny, or at least to ignore, its existence altogether.

Early speculators regarded the ether as a species of fluid, which could be displaced by ordinary matter, so that upholders of the wave theory of light necessarily thought of waves like those of sound, in which the direction of vibration is in the line of transmission, for no other kind of wave can occur in a fluid. Young and Fresnel, however, insisted on the view that the movements of the medium are at right angles to the direction of propagation, and pointed out that this might be explained by supposing the medium to possess elasticity of shape. The obvious objection to the conception of a solid which permits the planets to move through it with apparently perfect freedom was met long afterwards by Stokes and Kelvin, who instanced such substances as shoemaker's wax and jelly, which are rigid enough to be capable of elastic vibration, and yet permit bodies to pass through them with more or less ease. Fresnel's work called attention to the subject of the elasticity of bodies, and led to the discovery of the general equations of vibration of an elastic solid by Navier in 1821. Navier's equations, slightly generalized, were used by Cauchy with a certain amount of success to explain reflection, refraction, and the phenomena of crystal-optics. In 1837 George Green published a variety of elastic solid theory which was a decided improvement on Cauchy's, but many difficulties remained, and it is now almost universally agreed that the vibrations of an ordinary elastic solid do not furnish an exact parallel to the vibrations which constitute light. One of the chief difficulties is that in an ordinary elastic solid two types of waves can occur, one distortional, with the displacement of a particle perpendicular to the direction of transmission, and the other dilatational, with the displacement along the line of transmission, as in sound. Waves of light must be of the distortional kind, and the velocity of the other kind of wave may be quite different from the velocity of light. A kind of ether in which this difficulty of the longitudinal wave does not occur was imagined by Cauchy and afterwards discussed by Lord Kelvin, who called it the contractile, or labile, ether. This is an elastic body with negative compressibility, like homogeneous foam which is prevented from collapsing by attachment to the sides of a containing vessel. Another type of quasi-elastic solid was brought forward by James MacCullagh in 1839. MacCullagh's solid possesses what may be called elasticity of rotation, but offers no resistance to deformations in which elementary parts of the solid preserve their orientation. The equations of motion of this ether devised by MacCullagh are very similar to those obtained much later from a very different physical point of view by Clerk Maxwell. Elastic solid theories, however, have fallen into the background before the advancing popularity of the electromagnetic theory of James Clerk Maxwell. Maxwell's equations of the electromagnetic field are deduced from easily demonstrable experimental facts, supplemented by the characteristic hypothesis that the electric current always travels in a closed circuit, even in cases where, as in the discharge of a condenser, the material circuit is open, so that the path of the current has to be completed through the ether. Other essential features of Maxwell's view are that electric, magnetic, and electromagnetic action is transmitted by means of stresses in a medium which possesses some sort of elasticity and inertia not exactly of an ordinary mechanical kind, and that the energy of all such action resides in the medium. 'Maxwell's equations', especially as modified by H. A. Lorentz so as to take account of the atomic structure of electricity, are fundamental in modern electrodynamics and the electron theory of matter. The form of Maxwell's equations shows that electromagnetic action can be propagated in waves with a definite velocity, which depends on the specific inductive capacity and the magnetic permeability of the medium. Maxwell had no difficulty in showing from experimental data that the velocity given by his theory, which turns out to depend on the ratio of the electrostatic and electromagnetic units of charge, is identical with the known velocity of light. He concludes that waves of light are electric waves. The actual production of waves by electrical means was experimentally demonstrated by Sir Oliver Lodge, and more completely by Heinrich Hertz, and is now a commonplace of wireless telegraphy and telephony. The question of the nature of the mechanical process by which physical actions are carried on in the ether weighed heavily on Maxwell, as on other nineteenth-century physicists. Mechanical models of many kinds have been devised to represent ethereal action. Were it sufficient for the purpose, certainly nothing could be simpler than the elastic solid model. Other models of much interest are the gyrostatic ether and the vortex sponge ether of Lord Kelvin, and the molecular vortex ether of Maxwell. It is recorded that the celebrated mathematician Gauss had made out a theory of electrodynamics, but always declined to publish it because he was unable to devise a mental picture of the physical action represented by his mathematics; and it was probably a similar reason that led Lord Kelvin to declare, so late as 1904, that "the electromagnetic theory has not helped us hitherto". Sir J. J. Thomson has developed a theory of moving tubes of electric force, which produce magnetic fields by their motion. Possibly light may consist of tremors in these tubes, and if the tubes are discrete, it may become practicable to reconcile the modern quantum theory (q.v.) with the phenomena of interference of light, with which at present it seems to be utterly inconsistent.

The extraordinary developments in both theoretical and experimental physics during recent years have diverted attention to some extent from the question of the constitution of the ether, and the problem of its mode of working is more frequently considered from a mathematical and pseudo-metaphysical point of view than from the old standpoint of Newtonian dynamics. It was from a question about the ether, however, that the theory of relativity, the most important of recent speculations, took its origin. Is the ether fixed, or does it move? Is it carried along with the earth in its motion round the sun, or does the ether pass through the atoms of material bodies as the sea passes through the meshes of a net? The elastic solid analogy, and the simplicity of the classical explanation of the aberration of light, are evidence in favour of a fixed ether. But the celebrated interference experiment of Michelson and Morley, which was capable of detecting a comparatively small relative velocity of earth and ether, gave a null result. Various electrical experiments also point to the conclusion that the medium in which optical and electrical effects take place is carried along with the earth in its motion. We are thus placed in a dilemma. We must either reconcile the idea of a fixed ether with the Michelson-Morley and kindred experiments, or we must explain aberration on the supposition that earth and ether move together. Both alternatives have had their supporters. Those who, like Sir Joseph Larmor and Sir Oliver Lodge, believe in a fixed ether rely on the hypothesis of the 'Fitzgerald contraction', according to which bodies moving through the ether with velocity v are contracted in the direction of their motion by the fraction √(1 - v/c) of their length, c being the velocity of light. This contraction is in ordinary cases very small, amounting only to a few inches for the diameter of the earth when moving round the sun. The hypothesis follows naturally enough from the accepted theory of the motion of electrons, and leads to a perfectly simple explanation of the Michelson-Morley result. The most prominent champion of a moving ether was Sir George Stokes. He assumed that, so far as the earth's motion through it is concerned, the ether behaves as a perfect liquid, so that it moves along with the earth, and he proved that aberration would be unaffected by this motion, provided it is everywhere irrotational, or free from spin. Stokes's theory has been extended by Larmor so as to cover a very important set of phenomena found by Arago and Airy, and explained in a general way by Fresnel. These phenomena relate to the velocity of light in material media which are in motion relative to the earth, running water for example. Fresnel proved that all the experimental results are explained if the velocity of light in the water, with respect to the earth, is given by the formula c´ + v(1 - 1/m), where c´ is the velocity of light in still water, v is the velocity of the water relative to the earth, and m is the index of refraction of water. At present the fashionable view of all the phenomena is that taken in Einstein's theory of relativity (q.v.), which makes revolutionary suppositions with respect to the measurement of space and time, and assumes that the velocity of light is a universal constant, independent of the motion either of the source of light or of the observer. Once its initial assumptions are granted, the theory undoubtedly gives simple and natural explanations of the chief optical and electrical phenomena, and in particular leads at once to Fresnel's formula given above. Most English writers on the subject, among whom A. S. Eddington, E. Cunningham, and A. N. Whitehead are prominent, continue to believe that an ether exists, in spite of the fact that as relativists they hold that no experiment can ever enable us to determine our motion through it.—Bibliography: E. T. Whittaker, History of the Theories of Æther and Electricity; Sir Joseph Larmor, Æther and Matter; A. S. Eddington, Space, Time, and Gravitation; O. W. Richardson, Electron Theory of Matter; R. W. Wood, Physical Optics.

Ether, or Ethyl Ether, (C2H5)2O, a colourless, inflammable liquid produced by distillation of alcohol with concentrated sulphuric acid. It is almost immiscible with water, lighter than alcohol, has a sweet taste, and evaporates rapidly in air, producing extreme cold. The vapour of ether mixed with air forms an explosive mixture. Ether is a valuable solvent for many organic substances, fats, oils, &c., and is also used in surgery as an anæsthetic.

Etherege (eth´ė-rej), Sir George, English writer of comedy, born about 1635, died about 1691. He studied at Cambridge, travelled afterwards on the Continent, and then returned to enter himself at one of the Inns of Court. Devoting himself less to legal studies than to literature and society, he wrote several plays. In 1664 he had his first comedy represented, The Comical Revenge, or, Love in a Tub, which was well received. Four years later his She Would if She Could appeared, a brilliant play, though frivolous and immoral. Eight years afterwards (1676) he produced his best comedy, The Man of Mode, or Sir Fopling Flutter. Etherege's plays are witty and sparkling, and the characters, genuine portraits of the men and women he saw, are vividly if lightly drawn.

Ethical Culture. It has been said by a prominent leader of the movement for ethical culture that the one dogma admitted is the doctrine of personality. The movement eliminates from its teaching all hitherto received religions, admits no Christian symbolism, and acknowledges neither a personal Creator nor a personal Saviour. Christ is, however, highly reverenced as a man. The world as it should be is regarded not as an unattainable though beautiful ideal to be admired and longed for, but as a possible reality to be achieved by strenuous concerted action. The means by which it is hoped to bring about this much-to-be-desired result is the reaction on each other of carefully selected and highly cultivated personalities. Such virtues, therefore, as kindness, pity, justice, charity, temperance, and chastity are deemed less necessary as a personal moral duty in each human being than as a means by which a perfect world may be attained. Man's duty is towards no divine being, but to his fellow-man. In place of that help from above which theologians deem needful to attain even a short step in the direction of perfection, the power of conscience is considered as sufficient for all needs, and disciples are counselled that they should

More strictly, then, the inward judge obey,

since they no longer believe in divine anger or approval.

Germs of the movement may be found in many writers, and Emerson seems to have foreseen it when he said: "The mind of this age has fallen away from theology to morals. I conceive it to be an advance." But the obvious founder of ethical societies was Felix Adler (born 1851), who, in 1876, established in New York a Society of Ethical Culture. He also set in motion such useful work as training-schools, kindergartens, and nursing. In 1885 his associate, W. Salter, established the Chicago Ethical Society. Both have written extensively on the subject; while English supporters of the movement include Sir Leslie Stephen, Sir J. Seeley, Professor Sidgwick, and others. Several ethical societies exist in Britain, carrying out much educational and philanthropic work. There are both Sunday services and Sunday schools, and in many cases the branches are more or less closely affiliated with labour and its associations. With regard to this community of work and aim, it may be noted that while ethical culturists look forward to a time when no man shall exploit his fellow human beings for personal ends, absolute equality for all is not promised, being recognized as impossible.—Bibliography: Felix Adler, Creed and Deed; W. M. Salter, Ethical Religion.

Eth´ics, otherwise called Moral Philosophy or Morals, is the science which treats of the nature and laws of the actions of intelligent beings, considered as to whether they are right or wrong, good or bad. Its subject-matter is human conduct and character in view of a standard or ideal. It refers to constant elements in human nature, and, like æsthetics and logic, is of universal application. The science is more or less closely connected with theology, psychology, politics, political economy, and jurisprudence, but what most strictly belongs to it is the investigation of the principles and basis of duty or the moral law, and an inquiry into the nature and origin of the faculty by which duty is recognized. Various answers have been given to the question why we call an action good or bad, such as that it is consistent or not with the will of God, or with the nature of things, or with the greatest happiness of the greatest number, or that an inward faculty decides it to be such or such; and a great variety of ethical systems has been proposed. The foundations of the leading systems were laid in antiquity, the names of Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Epicurus, the Cynics, and the Stoics being especially prominent. All the Greek philosophers, however, considered ethics from an individualistic standpoint, and paid little attention either to politics or to sociology. The introduction of Christianity brought a new element into ethical speculation, and among Christians ethics were intimately associated with theology, and morality was regarded as based on and regulated by a definite code contained in the sacred writings. The speculations of the Greeks were not, however, disregarded, and some of the ablest Christian moralists (as Augustine, Peter Lombard, Erigena, Anselm, and Aquinas) endeavoured to harmonize the Greek theories with the Christian dogmatics. Most modern ethical systems consider the subject as apart from theology and as based on independent philosophical principles, and they fall into one of two great classes—the utilitarian systems, which recognize as the chief good, happiness, or the greatest possible satisfaction of the tendencies of our nature; and the rationalistic systems, which recognize that ideas of law and obligation can have their source only in reason. Utilitarianism has been rightly called universal hedonism, as distinguished from the hedonism of Epicurus, which was egoistic. The first of the modern Utilitarian school in England was Hobbes (1588-1679). Among subsequent names are those of Cudworth, Locke, Clarke, Shaftesbury, Butler, Hutcheson, Hume, Adam Smith, Reid, Paley, Whewell, Bentham, J. S. Mill, &c. Paley held that men ought to act so as to further the greatest possible happiness of the race, because God wills the happiness of men, and rewards and punishes them according to their actions, the divine commands being ascertained from Scripture and the light of nature. Bentham's utilitarianism is considerably different from Paley's. It was entirely dissociated from theology or Scripture, and maintained that increase of happiness ought to be the sole object of the moralist and legislator, pleasure and pain being the sole test of actions. To utilitarianism as a special development belong the later 'evolution ethics' represented by Herbert Spencer, in which biological conceptions, such as 'the preservation of the human race', take the place of the Benthamite criterion for determining what is good and bad in actions. Another theory of ethics places the moral principle in the sentimental part of our nature, that is, in the direct sympathetic pleasure or sympathetic indignation we have with the impulses which prompt to action or expression. By means of this theory, which he treats as an original and inexplicable fact in human nature, Adam Smith explains all the phenomena of the moral consciousness. In considering the ethical systems of the Rationalistic school, systems which recognize that the ideas of law and obligation can have their source only in reason, the question, what is the source of the laws by which reason governs, gives rise to a number of psychological theories, amongst which we may notice Clarke's view of the moral principles as rational intuitions or axioms analogous to those of mathematics; Butler's theory of the natural authority of conscience; the position of Reid, Stewart, and other members of the later Intuitional school, who conceive a moral faculty implanted in man which not only perceives the 'rightness' or 'moral obligation' of actions, but also impels the will to perform what is seen to be right. Very similar, as far as classification goes, is the position of Kant, who holds that reason recognizes the immediate obligation of certain kinds of conduct, and that an action is only good when done from a good motive, and that this motive must be essentially different from a natural inclination of any kind.—Bibliography: H. Sidgwick, The Method of Ethics; A. C. Bradley, Ethical Studies; H. Spencer, Principles of Ethics; L. Stephen, The Science of Ethics; The English Utilitarians; W. Wundt, Ethics; J. Martineau, Types of Ethical Theory; A. Sutherland, The Origin and Growth of the Moral Instinct; E. Westermarck, The Origin and Development of Moral Ideas; W. R. Sorley, The Moral Life; C. Read, Natural and Social Morality.

Ethiopia, or Æthiopia (Heb. Cush), in ancient geography, the country lying to the south of Egypt, and comprehending the modern Nubia, Kordofan, Abyssinia, and other adjacent districts; but its limits were not clearly defined. It was vaguely spoken of in Greek and Roman accounts as the land of the Ichthyophagi or fish-eaters, the Macrobii or long-livers, the Troglodytes or dwellers in caves, and of the Pygmies or dwarf races. In ancient times its history was closely connected with that of Egypt, and about the eighth century B.C. it imposed a dynasty on Lower Egypt, and acquired a predominant influence in the valley of the Nile. In sacred history Ethiopia is repeatedly mentioned as a powerful military kingdom (see particularly Is. xx, 5). In the sixth century B.C. the Persian Cambyses invaded Ethiopia; but the country maintained its independence till it became tributary to the Romans in the reign of Augustus. Subsequently Ethiopia came to be the designation of the country now known as Abyssinia (q.v.), and the Abyssinian monarchs still call themselves rulers of Ethiopia.

Ethiopian Language, The, or more accurately the Geez language, is the old official and ecclesiastical language of Abyssinia, introduced into that kingdom by settlers from South Arabia. In the fourteenth century it was supplanted as the language of the Christian Church of Abyssinia by the Amharic. It is a Semitic language resembling Aramaic and Hebrew as well as Arabic. It has a Christian literature of some importance. The principal work is a translation of the Bible, including the Old and New Testaments and Apocrypha, to which are appended some non-canonical writings, such as the Shepherd of Hermas and the Book of Enoch. The language is to some extent represented by the modern dialects of Tigre, and by that spoken by some nomadic tribes of the Sudan. For the Ethiopian or Abyssinian Church, see Abyssinia and Copt.

Eth´moid Bone (Gr. ēthmoeides, like a sieve), a light spongy bone situated in the upper part of the cavity of the nose. The olfactory nerves pass upward through its numerous perforations to reach the brain.

Ethnol´ogy and Ethnog´raphy, sciences dealing with man, the aim of the former being to analyse and interpret the meaning of the social phenomena of mankind, as shown in their customs, languages, institutions, &c., the latter being more concerned with descriptive details and the orderly collection of facts relating to particular tribes and localities. Both terms, however, are used very loosely and in a variety of ways, often being confused with anthropology, the general science or natural history of mankind, of which the other two are parts. Anthropology, again, is sometimes used in the narrower sense implied in the word somatology, the study of the physical structure and distinctive characteristics of the various races of mankind. When the term ethnology is used by the politician or journalist, in most cases it is intended to refer to the racial components in a given territory; in other words, it is used in the sense in which the scientific writer would employ the word anthropology. For instance, when the endeavour was made in the earlier part of the nineteenth century to liberate the Greeks from Turkish dominion, the plea was put forward that they differed in race; and the delimitation of the territory of the Greek state was claimed on what was called 'the ethnological basis', the geographical distribution of people of Greek nationality. Even since then, and especially during the European War and the subsequent attempt at a settlement, claims have been put forward to fix the boundaries of Italy, Yugo-Slavia, Czecho-Slovakia, Poland, &c., on the basis of race and nationality. But further confusion arises from the attempt to apply this anthropological or ethnological test in deciding whether physical type, language, religion, or social traditions and usages are to be the test of nationality. In this article it will be convenient to give the term ethnology its widest meaning, and to consider not merely the customs, beliefs, and institutions of various peoples, but also the early history of the human family, its differentiation into races and the significance of their geographical distribution, and the different phases of culture which are found in the various communities even of the same race.

During the last eighty years the discovery of a series of fossilized remains of extinct genera and species of the human family and of apes has given us a glimpse of the origin and early history of mankind. Man's ancestors probably parted company with those of the anthropoid apes somewhere in the neighbourhood of Northern India early in the Miocene period; and before the close of the Pliocene period their descendants had gradually acquired the highly developed brain and the intelligence which imply the emergence of the distinctively human characteristics. The most significant token of the attainment of the status of men was the acquisition of the power of speech, which enabled its possessors to hand on the accumulated knowledge and the fruits of experience, and so enormously to increase their powers. The earliest-known representative of the human family was the Ape-man, Pithecanthropus, who at the end of the Pliocene period wandered east as far as Java, where the fossilized remains of a skull were found thirty years ago by Professor Eugen Dubois. At a later date a much more highly developed type, one, moreover, that was much closer to the ancestry of modern men than the aberrant Ape-man of Java, wandered as far west as England, where a representative of this extinct genus was discovered by the late Mr. Charles Dawson in 1912 at Piltdown, in Sussex. This very primitive member of the human family has been called the 'Dawn-man' or Eoanthropus by Dr. Smith Woodward. He has a brain which, though poorly developed, is definitely human, but his face (and especially the jaws) retains considerable resemblance to that of an ape. Of the other fossilized remains of extinct varieties of the human family, the most important are those known respectively as Heidelberg man and Neanderthal man. The former is almost as old as the Piltdown man, and its former existence was revealed by the discovery in the Mauer Sands, near Heidelberg, in 1908, of a very massive and chinless jaw. At a much later date Europe was inhabited by a brutal species of mankind, Neanderthal man, which became extinct when in the Neoanthropic Age men of our own species made their way into Europe and completely superseded the less efficient Neanderthal species. The latter were men of vast strength, with short, clumsy, thick-set limbs, a stooping gait, thick neck, and a great flattened head with a coarse face. These people inhabited Europe in the days when the elephant and the woolly rhinoceros lived there; they made the rough stone implements known as Mousterian. But, in spite of their enormous strength, these people were not able to hold their own in competition with the nimbler wits and the more skilled hands of Homo sapiens, who introduced into Europe a more finished technique in making implements, and revealed his genius and manual dexterity in the remarkable pictures which he painted on the walls of caves, especially in Southern France and Northern Spain. We have no information concerning the place of origin or the course of the wanderings of these earliest members of our own species.

But an extremely primitive race has survived until the present time to demonstrate the original type of Homo sapiens. The aboriginal Australian, like all existing races of men, belongs to the same species as ourselves, but it represents with singularly little modification the original type and colouring of Homo sapiens. Fossilized remains of the proto-Australian race have been found in Queensland (at Talgai) and in Java (at Wadjak); but the wandering of the race from its original Asiatic centre of characterization is indicated by the survival of remnants of this people in the pre-Dravidian jungle tribes of India (mainly in the Deccan), the Vedda of Ceylon, the Sakai of the Malay Peninsula, the Toala of Celebes, and other peoples of the Malay Archipelago, whose existence blazes the track from India to Australia.

The Australian race is on the average about 5 feet 2 inches in height; their skin is dark-brown or black; hair black and wavy or curly; skull typically long (dolichocephalic), with a relatively small brain-case; the nose is flat and broad, and the jaws large and prominent. What lowly culture these people now possess has been mainly acquired within relatively recent times by contact with more civilized peoples.

Long after the proto-Australians separated from the rest of mankind and wandered east, another group wandered west, and, probably in tropical Africa, became specialized in structure to become the Negro race. The negro, like the Australian, retains many primitive characters, such as the black skin, and the small brain, but in other respects, such, for example, as the extremely flattened and curved hair ('pepper-corns'), he has become highly specialized and sharply differentiated from all other varieties of mankind. At an early period in the history of the race the negro divided into two groups—a pygmy variety or Negrillo, and the ordinary tall negro. One of the branches of the pygmy stock became further specialized in structure (in the course of which the black colour of the skin was lost), and became the Bushman race which has gradually been pushed into the deserts of South Africa (see Hottentot).

After the differentiation of the Negro race into pygmy and tall varieties, representatives of both divisions spread along the southern coast of Asia, the former, known in the East as Negritos, reaching the Andaman Islands, the Malay Peninsula (Semangs), the Philippines (Aetas), and New Guinea (Pygmies), and the taller Negroids to Melanesia, New Guinea, and the neighbouring islands of the Malay Archipelago. Many authorities regard the extinct Tasmanian people as a branch of this race.

But the vast majority of the Negro race is found in Africa south of the Sahara Desert and the populations sprung from them in the American continent and the West Indies.

The African negro is subdivided into two main groups known respectively as Nilotic and Bantu; but in addition there are the pygmies of the equatorial and Congo regions, and the Bushmen and Hottentots of the Kalahari Desert, Namaqualand, Lake Ngami, and the Orange River. The Nilotic negro ranges across the continent from Somaliland to Nigeria, and is differentiated from the Bantu chiefly from the fact that along this belt there has been a constant passing to and fro of Hamitic and Semitic peoples for many centuries, leading not only to very considerable recent racial admixture, but also to cultural and especially linguistic influences, which have brought about the breaking up of the population into a series of nations of varied speech and customs. Among the Bantus, on the other hand, although their culture is lower than that of the Nilotic negroes, there is more uniformity both of race and customs. In race they are negro mixed in early times with the proto-Hamitic peoples of East Africa, whence the mongrel population moved south, driving the Bushmen and Hottentots before them.

After the ancestors of the Australian and Negro races had separated from the rest of mankind, which had spread throughout a great part of Asia, North-Eastern Africa, and Europe, the coming of the Glacial epoch created barriers of ice which shut up the various groups each within its own domain. Somewhere in Eastern Asia, possibly in the basin of the Yellow River, the proto-Mongolian race gradually assumed its characteristic traits. In East Africa and the neighbouring tract of Asia the ancestors of the Brown or so-called Mediterranean race were free to roam east and west from India to the African and European coasts of the Atlantic. Farther north, probably in Europe, the Nordic or Blond race (in the map labelled Northern or Teutonic race) assumed its distinctive features; and somewhere in the region between its area of characterization and that of the Yellow race—probably in the region to the north-east of the Caspian—the so-called Alpine (Armenoid) or proto-Slav race developed. It is distinguished from the Brown and Blond races by the broad skull and heavy jaw, no less than by the robustness of build and the great tendency to hairiness; from the Mongolian people the Armenoids are distinguished by the prominence of the nose, the character of the hair, and the colour of the skin. The term Alpine, which is usually applied to this race, is singularly inappropriate; for, although in Europe and Asia Minor the members of this race show a partiality for high mountains, the vast majority of the members of the race dwell in the plains of Russia, which also may have been the original home of the race. In view of the topographical relationship of the area of characterization of this race to the homes of the other races, Nordic, Brown, Negro, Australian, and Mongol, arranged in a great arc around it, it might not be inappropriate to call the so-called Alpine (Armenoid or proto-Slav) race by the non-committal title 'Central'. At the close of the Glacial epoch, when the melting of the ice unlocked the domains of these races, members of the Central race poured into Asia Minor and Syria, and down to the head of the Persian Gulf; they also made their way north of the Caspian and Black Sea into Europe, mingling there with the Nordic people. But they also moved east in Siberia and mingled with the proto-Mongolian race. It was soon after this event that members of the proto-Mongolian stock, possibly with some admixture of people of the Central race, wandered to North-Eastern Asia and crossed the Behring Strait to colonize America for the first time. From the north-west coast of America these immigrants in course of time made their way south and east, until eventually the whole of the New World from Hudson Bay to Cape Horn was inhabited. Many centuries afterward (especially between 300 B.C. and A.D. 1000) there was a great influx of a variety of other peoples from Polynesia and the Old World on to the Pacific coast of the Americas, which profoundly altered the physical type of the population of Central America and the Andean coast.

The members of the proto-Mongolian race who remained in Asia spread over a large area from the Arctic Ocean south to Tibet, China, Indo-China and the Malay Archipelago, the Philippines, Formosa, Nicobar Islands, and Madagascar. Their domain became divided geographically into three minor areas of characterization, of the Northern, Southern, and Oceanic Mongols respectively. In the Northern Mongols are included the Koreans, the Japanese and the people of Liu-Kiu, the Tungus (including the Manchu, Gold, &c.), the Kalmuks, Buriats, Koryaks, Chuckchis, Kamchadales, Gilyaks.

The Central race became differentiated into a considerable number of varieties. Apart from the Slavs, there were several groups which became isolated the one from the other in Asia Minor and Syria. One of these developed in an extreme degree the characteristic features of the race—the brachycephaly, the prominence of the nose and the high-ramus of the jaw. These are the Armenian and kindred people. Another branch gave origin to the Northern Semites, who made their way into Palestine and Mesopotamia. (The Southern Semites belong to another race—the Brown.) Another branch of the Central race preceded these two in making their way to the sea-coasts of the Levant and the Persian Gulf—this may be called the Maritime branch of the Central race.

The Slav branch of the Central race was making its way into Europe long before the Neolithic phase of culture there. It passed north of the Black Sea via Poland. But at the end of the Neolithic phase there were two streams of other branches of the race—the true Alpine subdivision passing from Anatolia into the Carpathians and the Alps, to Switzerland, Bavaria, Savoy, and Brittany, and the Maritime division passing round the coasts to the Iberian Peninsula, the British Isles, and Western Europe.

The Brown race spread in East Africa from Somaliland to the Mediterranean and all its coasts, to Western Europe, and the British Isles; in the other direction to Arabia, the shores of the Persian Gulf, and eastward along the coast to India, where it mingled with the pre-Dravidian (proto-Australian) population to give rise to the mongrel Dravidian people. The spread of these Brown people farther east into the Malay Archipelago explains the origin of the Indonesians, who occupied the islands before the coming south of the Mongols, but after the proto-Australians and the proto-Negroes had passed through towards Australia and Melanesia respectively.

From very early times there has been an intermingling of the different races. In East Africa every degree of intermingling of the Hamitic branch of the Brown race has been taking place for more than sixty centuries with negroes, both of the Sudanese and the Bantu stocks. At a later time Arabs poured into Africa and added their quota to the mixture. In India the original pre-Dravidian (proto-Australian) aborigines became diluted with a large influx of the Brown race to form the Dravidian people, who acquired a high civilization from the west. At a later date people of the Central race speaking an Aryan language swarmed through the north-western frontier and introduced their language and culture into India.

Before this happened the Brown race had extended farther east and provided the basis for the population of Indonesia, supplanting to a great extent the earlier proto-Australian and Negroid peoples there. Then the Malays came down from the north and added to the Indonesian mixture a strong Mongolian element. Colonists from the Malay Archipelago settled in Madagascar and added to its mixture of Brown (Semites and Hamites) and Black (Bantu) elements representatives of the Mongolian (Malay) race. In the course of their maritime expeditions the Malay Archipelago gave to Japan a not inconsiderable contribution both of people and culture.

But the area of the most complex admixture of races in ancient times was Siberia. With the melting of the ice barriers at the close of the Glacial epoch the proto-Mongolian and proto-Central peoples came into intimate contact; and to this mixture was added a proto-Nordic element, as well as a not inconsiderable influx of members of the Brown race, who came from the south through Turkestan to exploit the gold and copper of the Yenesei region. The presence of their dolichocephalic skulls in a region where brachycephaly is the rule has been a perpetual puzzle to anthropologists, who at the present time attempt to solve the problem by assuming the presence of an aboriginal race of long-headed people, who were exterminated by the Mongols and the Turks. The greed for the riches of the head-waters of the Yenesei has made Siberia the home of strife for fifty centuries. This has led not only to a puzzling admixture of races in the affected area, but has started raids of Mongols and Turks, which at various times extended as far as Europe (Huns and Avars), India, and China. So mixed are the races in Siberia that it is not easy to determine whether some of them should be classed as mainly Turki or mainly Mongol; and this applies also to the colonies (Bulgars, Magyars, Finns, Lapps, &c.) which at various times the Asiatic invaders left behind them in Europe, each of which has been profoundly altered by admixture since then.

In the great Mongolian domain that occupies so great a part of Northern and Eastern Asia there are certain definitely alien elements. The Yakuts (of the region near the Lena River) are definitely Turki in race, and the curious hairy Ainus (of Yezo, Sakhalin, and some of the Kurile Islands) are certainly members of the Central race.

A peculiar branch of the northern Mongols is clearly differentiated from the rest to form the Eskimo people who occupy Greenland and Arctic America. They present a marked contrast to the American Indians. The American Indian may be regarded essentially as a branch of the proto-Mongolian race mixed to some extent with a proto-Central element. But on the Pacific littoral there has been considerable admixture with a variety of peoples from Eastern Asia and Oceania for several centuries (c. 300 B.C. to A.D. 1000). Although the peoples conform on the whole to a definite type as regards the characters of their hair and features, there is a considerable range of variation as regards height, skull-form, and other racial features. The people of the states where a high civilization prevailed ten centuries ago—Mexico, Central America, Peru, and Chile—are clearly differentiated from the rest of the American population by the more obtrusive evidence of admixture with Polynesian and Asiatic peoples. In addition to the peoples of the north-west coast (Haidas and Salish) and of the ancient civilizations (Mayas and Aztecs) of Central America and Mexico, the population of North America can be divided (see map) into the following tribes: (1) Athabascan, (2) Algonquin, (3) Iroquoian, (4) Siouan, (5) Shoshonean (in the map called 'Kiowan'), (6) Muskhogean, and (7) Pueblo (not indicated in the map, but in Arizona, north of Mexico).

In South America the centre of the ancient civilization was in the region of the Quichua (Inca) and Aymara peoples. The semi-civilized Chibcha people occupied the table-land of Bogota. To the south of Peru the coastal people (Araucanians) were to some extent influenced by the more highly civilized Incas to their north. The presence of gold in the Matto Grosso region of Brazil attracted men from Peru, and set in motion migrations of people towards the Rio de la Plata in the south and towards Venezuela in the north. Among the linguistically distinct peoples found in the latter area are the Tupi, Arawaks, and Caribs. A very primitive people, the Botocudo, occupy the eastern coast of Brazil south of the River San Francisco.

From the beginning man was a maker of implements of stone and bone: but for a vast number of centuries he was merely a hunter who did not attempt anything more in the way of industry. Civilization probably originated in the Nile Valley when men found barley growing there naturally, and discovered that it provided them with a supply of food which could maintain them throughout the year. When the population in the valley increased, so that the natural supply of barley became inadequate, men learned to imitate the inundation, and by scraping channels in the sand to render the desert fertile. Thus was agriculture and irrigation invented, and thus were men led to organize the labour of the community under the direction of a leader who was primarily an irrigation engineer, but eventually became a king and the god Osiris, the dead king, whose reputation as the bestower of life-giving water became apotheosized as the giver of life and immortality.

Pottery was probably invented as an outcome of the mode of life and the needs of these early agriculturists, and the domestication of cattle and the use of their milk for food helped to neutralize the ill-effects of a too exclusively cereal diet. Other events followed in the train of this first adoption of a settled mode of life. The disposal of the dead in the sands that fringed the area of cultivation, and the natural preservation of the corpse that often resulted, shaped the beliefs of the people with reference to the fate of the dead. Incidentally it led to the invention of the arts of the carpenter, the stone-mason, and the embalmer; and as an outcome of these practices architecture, as well as the ritual of the temple, had its origin.

Long before these events primitive man had begun to ponder over the meaning of death. At first he associated it with such injuries as he had learned by experience killed animals that he hunted; and as the escape of blood caused unconsciousness and death, he framed the belief that blood was the substance of consciousness and of life. To exchange blood was to share knowledge; to give blood was to confer fresh vital substance, i.e. to minimize the risk of extinction or prolong the existence of living or dead. This is the fundamental idea underlying all religious belief and ritual—the giving of life and immortality.

But the act of birth is also a process of life-giving. The cowrie-shell (and subsequently other shells and the pearls contained in them) came to be regarded as a symbol of this life-giving power, and an amulet which could protect both the living and the dead from the risk of extinction. The demand for these precious elixirs of life became so intense that they acquired a fictitious value as currency, and models of them were made to serve as amulets in their stead. The beauty and the lightness of the models of such shells made of the soft useless plastic metal found in the Egyptian and Nubian deserts was probably the means by which gold first acquired any value, and afterwards by confusion came to be credited with the same life-giving attributes as were at first bestowed merely upon the form of the amulets made from it. Thus gold came to be regarded as an elixir of life, and men began to search for the precious substance far and wide, incidentally spreading abroad the germs of the arts and crafts, the beliefs and practices of our common civilization. The use of malachite as a cosmetic provided the circumstances that eventually led men to discover how a gold-like substance, copper, could be obtained from the green ore; and in course of time it came to be realized that the metal was useful for other purposes than the mere making of amulets and jewellery. When the full value of copper as a material for making tools and weapons was fully appreciated, the ore became of tremendous economic importance, and men sought for it far and wide, as they had previously prospected for flint and gold.

The people who introduced the Neolithic culture into Europe brought with them from Egypt a knowledge of agriculture, of pottery-making, of domestication of animals, of linen, and of the characteristic burial customs and religious beliefs. But these rudiments of civilization were also diffused to Crete and Cyprus, to Syria and Asia Minor, to Elam and Sumer by prospectors searching for the things which the growth of civilization was making valuable, the incense and the timber, the gold and precious stones, the copper and other metals. It is probable that the germs of Egyptian civilization were first planted in Elam by men prospecting for copper, and that Sumerian and Babylonian civilization received their initial inspiration in this way. Crete was inoculated with the germs of civilization by Egypt directly, as well as indirectly, from Asia Minor, which was subjected to the double influence of Egyptian and Sumerian culture. In the Age of Copper, Elamite culture was diffused abroad by miners to Turkestan and Baluchistan, thence respectively to Siberia and China (Shensi province), and to India. In the neighbourhood of the south-eastern corner of the Caspian the alloy bronze was probably invented soon after 3000 B.C. by mixing tin and copper; and the influence of this epoch-making event rapidly spread to Babylonia, to Crete, and to Europe, where it inaugurated the Age of Bronze. It also spread to China, to India, and many centuries later across the Pacific to Central America.

The needs of the early Egyptians compelled them to devise sea-going ships, which in turn became the models of the Cretans, the people of East Africa, the Babylonians, the Phœnicians, and the Greeks. These ships trafficked in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Red Sea, then farther west and east, to the Atlantic seaboard of Western Europe and the shores of the Indian Ocean. The search for gold and pearls led early mariners to Southern India and Ceylon, to Burmah and Indonesia, to the whole coast-line of Eastern Asia, New Guinea, and Melanesia, and in course of time to Polynesia and the coasts of Central America and Peru. Wherever these adventurers found gold or copper, pearls or precious stones, they settled to exploit these sources of wealth, and incidentally planted the germs of their methods of cultivation, their stonework, their burial customs and beliefs. Such expeditions were probably responsible for introducing into Polynesia its first colonists, a mixture of people of Brown and Maritime Central races, mingled with other elements in the course of their easterly wanderings. The earliest movement into Polynesia apparently took with it a considerable element of Melanesian blood, which eventually was carried to New Zealand and the Moriori Islands in the south, and to Easter Island and the American coast in the east. The germs of the ancient civilizations of Central America and Peru were carried across the Pacific from Cambodia and Indonesia between the years 300 B.C. and A.D. 1000, the periods of greatest activity being probably the third and fourth centuries A.D.

The elements of this imported culture were planted in Honduras and Guatemala and the Isthmus region (Costa Rica, Panama, and Colombia), and from there spread in the fifth century A.D. to Yucatan and then to Mexico. It also spread from the isthmus down the Pacific littoral of South America, the earliest centre of civilization being the region around Lake Titicaca. From Mexico the culture spread in a degraded form up the Mississippi to the Great Lakes, as well as north-west into Arizona.—Bibliography: A. H. Keane, Man, Past and Present, revised edition by A. Hingston Quiggin and A. C. Haddon, is a useful guide to the literature of anthropology and ethnology; see also Robert Munro, Prehistoric Britain; W. J. Sollas, Ancient Hunters and their Modern Representatives; M. Boule, Les Hommes fossiles; G. Elliot Smith, The Migrations of Early Culture; such periodicals as the Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, Man, and especially L'Anthropologie, give the current literature.

Eth´yl, the name given to the radicle C2H5, contained in ether, (C2H5)2O, alcohol, C2H5OH, &c. Ethyl has not been isolated, as it immediately combines with another ethyl group forming diethyl or butane, C2H5—C2H5. Ethyl chloride, C2H5Cl, formed by the action of hydrochloric acid on alcohol, is much used for the production of low temperature—as a local anæsthetic. Ethyl nitrite, C2H5NO2, constitutes sweet spirits of nitre when dissolved in alcohol.

Eth´ylamine, C2H5NH2, an organic base formed by the substitution of 1 atom of hydrogen in ammonia by ethyl group. Thus ammonia ethylamine. It has the odour and many of the characteristic reactions of ammonia, but unlike ammonia it is inflammable and liquid at ordinary temperature.

Eth´ylene, or Olefiant Gas, C2H4, an unsaturated hydrocarbon, the first member of the olefine series. It is a colourless gas with a faint odour, and burns with a bright luminous flame. It is a constituent of ordinary coal-gas, and may be obtained from alcohol by heating it with twice its volume of concentrated sulphuric acid.

Étienne (ā-ti-ān), St., a town of Southern France, department of Loire, on the Furens, 32 miles S.W. of Lyons. It has spacious streets with substantial houses, but, owing to the number of public works, presents a dingy appearance. The principal buildings and institutions are the cathedral, an ancient Romanesque structure; the town house, court-house, exchange, communal college, mining school, gallery of arts, library, and museum. The town stands in the centre of one of the most valuable mineral fields of France; and in addition to the extensive collieries, blast-furnaces, and other ironworks in the vicinity, has manufactures of ribbons, silks, cutlery, and fire-arms. Pop. 148,656.

Etiolation (Fr. étioler, to blanch), or Blanching, of plants, is a state produced by the absence of light, by which the green colour is prevented from appearing. It is effected artificially, as in the case of celery, by raising up the earth about the stalks of the plants; by tying the leaves together to keep the inner ones from the light; by covering with pots, boxes, or the like, or by setting in a dark place. The green colour of etiolated plants may be restored by exposure to light. Etiolated plants are also abnormal in other respects; the stems, or in some cases the leaves, become extraordinarily elongated, and the internal structure undergoes modification in various ways.

Etiology (Gr. aitia, cause, and logos, discourse, account), a biological term introduced by Huxley, and denoting that branch of biology which deals with the origin and mode of development of organic beings. In medicine the word etiology, signifies the study of the causes and origin of disease. The term is also applied in philosophy to the science of Cause and Effect.

Etive (et´iv), Loch, an inlet of the sea on the west coast of Scotland, Argyleshire, nearly 20 miles long, of very unequal breadth, but at the broadest part about 1½ miles. The scenery of its shores is very beautiful. About 3 miles from the sea, at Connel Ferry, a ridge of sunken rocks crossing it causes a turbulent rapid, which at half-tide forms a sort of waterfall.

Etna, or Ætna, Mount, the greatest volcano in Europe, a mountain in the province of Catania in Sicily; height, 10,758 feet. It rises immediately from the sea, has a circumference of more than 100 miles, and dominates the whole north-east part of Sicily, having a number of towns and villages on its lower slopes. The top is covered with perpetual snow; midway down is the woody or forest region; at the foot is a region of orchards, vineyards, olive groves, &c. Etna thus presents the variety of climates common to high mountains in lower latitudes, oranges and lemons and other fruits growing at the foot, the vine rather higher up, then oaks, chestnuts, beeches, and pines, while on the loftiest or desert region vegetation is of quite a stunted character. A more or less distinct margin of cliff separates the mountain proper from the surrounding plain; and the whole mass seems formed of a series of superimposed mountains, the terminal volcano being surrounded by a number of cones, all of volcanic origin, and nearly 100 of which are of considerable size. The different aspects of the mountain present an astonishing variety of features—woods, forests, pastures, cultivated fields, bare rocky precipices, streams of lava, masses of ashes and scoriæ, as also picturesque towns and villages. From the summit the view presents a splendid panorama, embracing the whole of Sicily, the Lipari Islands, Malta, and Calabria. The eruptions of Etna have been numerous, and many of them destructive. That of 1169 overwhelmed Catania and buried 15,000 persons in the ruins. In 1669 the lava spread over the country for forty days, and 10,000 persons are estimated to have perished. In 1693 there was an earthquake during the eruption, when over 60,000 lives were lost. One eruption was in 1755, the year of the Lisbon earthquake. There were also eruptions in 1832, 1865, 1874, 1879, and 1886. Among more recent eruptions are those of 1892, 1899, 1911, and 1914. An eruption is ordinarily preceded by premonitory symptoms of longer or shorter duration. The population of the district of Etna is about 300,000.

E´ton, a town of England, in Buckinghamshire, on the left bank of the Thames, 22 miles west of London. An iron bridge connects it with Windsor, on the opposite side of the river. Eton derives its celebrity wholly from its college, called the King's College of Our Lady of Eton beside Windsor, one of the great public schools of England, founded by Henry VI in 1440. The building, which was commenced in 1441 and finished in 1523, has received important additions in recent times in the shape of mathematical and science schools, and a museum. The college foundation now consists of provost, headmaster, lower master, seventy scholars, and two conducts (or chaplains). The oppidans, or boys not on the foundation, number about 1100. They are mostly lodged and boarded in the masters' houses. Pop. 3366.

Etrépilly, (1) a small town of France, department of Aisne, is situated near Château-Thierry. Millstones are obtained from quarries in the neighbourhood. (2) A small town of France, department of Seine-et-Marne, stands on the left bank of an affluent of the Marne. Agricultural implements are manufactured.

Etru´ria (Gr. Tyrrhenia), the name anciently given to that part of Italy which corresponded partly with the modern Tuscany, and was bounded by the Mediterranean, the Apennines, the River Magra, and the Tiber. The name of Tusci or Etrusci was used by the Romans to designate the race of people anciently inhabiting this country, but the name by which they called themselves was Rasena (or perhaps more correctly Ta-rasena). These Rasena entered Italy at a very early period from the north, and, besides occupying Etruria proper, extended their influence to Campania, Elba, and Corsica. Etruria proper was in a flourishing condition before the foundation of Rome, 753 B.C. It was known very early as a confederation of twelve great cities, each of which formed a republic by itself. Amongst the chief were Veii, Clusium, Volsinii, Arretium, Cortona, Falerii, and Faesulae; but the list may have varied at different epochs. The chiefs of these republics were styled lucumōnes, and united the office of priest and general. They were elected for life. After a long struggle with Rome, the Etruscan power was completely broken by the Romans in a series of victories, from the fall of Veii in 396 B.C. to the battle at the Vadimonian Lake (283 B.C.). The Etruscans had attained a high state of civilization. They carried on a flourishing commerce, and at one time were powerful at sea. They were less warlike than most of the nations around them, and had the custom of hiring mercenaries for their armies. Of the Etruscan language little is known, although about 6000 inscriptions have been preserved. It was written in characters essentially the same as the ancient Greek. The Etruscans were specially distinguished by their religious institutions and ceremonies, which reveal tendencies gloomy and mystical. Their gods were of two orders, the first nameless, mysterious deities, exercising a controlling influence in the background on the lower order of gods, who manage the affairs of the world. At the head of these is a deity resembling the Roman Jupiter (in Etruscan Tinia). But it is characteristic of the Etruscan religion that there is also a Vejovis or evil Jupiter. The Etruscan name of Venus was Turan, of Vulcan Sethlans, of Bacchus Phuphluns, of Mercury Turms. Etruscan art was in the main borrowed from Greece. For articles in terra-cotta, a material which they used mainly for ornamental tiles, sarcophagi, and statues, Etruscans were especially celebrated. In the manufacture of pottery they had made great advances; but most of the painted vases popularly known as Etruscan are undoubtedly productions of Greek workmen. The skill of the Etruscans in works of metal is attested by ancient writers, and also by numerous extant specimens, such as necklaces, ear-rings, and bracelets. The bronze candelabra, of which many examples have been preserved, were eagerly sought after both in Greece and Rome. A peculiar manufacture was that of engraved bronze mirrors. These were polished on one side, and have on the other an engraved design, taken in most cases from Greek legend or mythology. The Etruscans showed great constructive and engineering skill. They were acquainted with the principle of the arch, and the massive ruins of the walls of their ancient cities still testify to the solidity of their constructions. Various arts and inventions were derived by the Romans from the Etruscans.—Bibliography: G. Dennis, Cities and Cemeteries in Etruria; Seymour, Up Hill and Down Dale in Ancient Etruria.

Etruria, a village of England, in Staffordshire, between Hanley and Burslem, famous as the place where Josiah Wedgwood established his pottery works in 1769. Pop. 8056.

Etruria, Kingdom of, in Italy, founded by Napoleon I in 1801. Its capital was Florence. In 1807 Napoleon incorporated it with the French Empire.

Etruscan Vases, a class of beautiful ancient painted vases made in Etruria, but not strictly speaking a product of Etruscan art, since they were really the productions of a ripe age of Greek art, the workmanship, subjects, style, and inscriptions being all Greek. They are elegant in form and enriched with bands of beautiful foliage and other ornaments, figures and similar subjects of a highly artistic character. One class has black figures and ornaments on a red ground—the natural colour of the clay; another has the figures left of the natural colour and the ground painted black. The former class belong to a date about 600 B.C., the latter date about a century later, and extend over a period of about 300 or 350 years, when the manufacture seems to have ceased. During this period there was much variety in the form and ornamentation, gold and other colours besides the primitive ones of black and red being frequently made use of. The subjects represented upon these vases frequently relate to heroic personages of the Greek mythology, but many scenes of an ordinary and even of a domestic character are depicted. The figures are usually in profile: temples are occasionally introduced; and many curious particulars may be learned from these vase pictures regarding the Hellenic ritual, games, festivities, and domestic life.

Ett´rick, a pastoral district of Scotland, in Selkirkshire, watered by the Ettrick, and anciently part of Ettrick Forest, which included Selkirk with parts of Peebles and Edinburgh. The Ettrick receives the Yarrow 2 miles above Selkirk, and enters the Tweed 3 miles below. The Ettrick Shepherd, the Scottish poet James Hogg, was a native of this district.

Etty, William, an English painter, born in 1787, died in 1849. He studied at the Royal Academy, worked long without much recognition, but at length in 1820 he won public notice by his Coral Finders. In 1828 he was elected an academician. Among his works, which were greatly admired, are a series of three pictures (1827-31) illustrating the Deliverance of Bethulia by Judith, Benaiah (one of David's mighty men), and Women Interceding for the Vanquished. All these are very large pictures, and are now in the National Gallery of Scotland (Edinburgh). Others of note are: The Judgment of Paris; The Rape of Proserpine; and Youth at the Prow, and Pleasure at the Helm. Etty especially excelled at painting undraped figures.

Etymol´ogy (Gr. etymos, true, and logos, account), a term applied (1) to that part of grammar which treats of the various inflections and modifications of words and shows how they are formed from simple roots; (2) to that branch of philology which traces the history of words from their origin to their latest form and meaning. Etymology in this latter sense, or the investigation of the origin and growth of words, is amongst the oldest of studies. Plato and other Greek philosophers, the Alexandrian grammarians, the scholiasts, the Roman Varro, and others wrote much on this subject. Their work, however, is made up of conjectures at best ingenious rather than sound, and very often wild and fantastic. It was not till recent times, and particularly since the study of Sanskrit, that etymology has been scientifically studied. Languages then began to be properly classed in groups and families, and words were studied by a comparison of their growth and relationship in different languages. It was recognized that the development of language is not an arbitrary or accidental matter, but proceeds according to general laws. The result was a great advance in etymological knowledge and the formation of a new science of philology.—Cf. W. W. Skeat, The Science of Etymology.

Eu (eu), a town in Northern France, department of Seine-Inférieure, about 17 miles north-east of Dieppe. It is notable for its old twelfth-century church and the celebrated Château d'Eu, part of which was destroyed in 1902. Pop. 4900.

Eubœ´a, formerly called Negropont, a Greek island, the second largest island of the Ægean Sea. It is 90 miles in length; 30 in greatest breadth, reduced at one point to 4 miles. It is separated from the mainland of Greece by the narrow channels of Egripo and Talanta. It is connected with the Bœotian shore by a bridge. There are several mountain peaks over 2000 feet in height, and one over 7000 feet. The island is well-wooded and remarkably fertile. Wine is a staple product, and cotton, wool, pitch, and turpentine are exported. The chief towns are Chalcis and Karysto. The island was anciently divided among seven independent cities, the most important of which were Chalcis and Eretria, and its history is for the most part identical with that of those two cities. With some small islands it forms a modern nomarchy, with a pop. of 116,900.

Eubu´lus, a Greek comic poet, who flourished at Athens about 375 B.C. His subjects were chiefly mythological, and he delighted in ridiculing the tragic poets, especially Euripides.

Eucalyp´tus, a genus of trees, nat. ord. Myrtaceæ, mostly natives of Australia, and remarkable for their gigantic size, some of them attaining the height of 480 or 500 feet. In the Australian colonies they are known by the name of gum trees, from the gum which exudes from their trunks; individual species are known as 'stringy bark', 'iron bark', karri, or jarrah. The wood of some is excellent for building and many purposes. The E. globŭlus, or blue gum, yields an essential oil which is valuable as a febrifuge, antasthmatic, and antispasmodic. The medicinal properties of this tree also make it useful as a disinfectant, and as an astringent in affections of the respiratory passages, being employed in the form of an infusion, a decoction, or an extract, and cigarettes made of the leaves being also smoked. The E. globŭlus and the E. amygdalina are found to have an excellent sanitary effect when planted in malarious districts such as the Roman Campagna, parts of which have already been reclaimed by their use. This result is partly brought about by the drainage of the soil (the trees absorbing great quantities of moisture), partly perhaps by the balsamic odour given out. E. mannifĕra and others yield a sweet secretion resembling manna. Some, especially E. rostrata, yield a kind of gum kino. The Eucalyptus has been introduced with success into India, Palestine, Algiers, and Southern France.

Eucharist (ū´ka-rist; Gr. eucharistia, from eu, well, and charis, grace), a name for the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, in reference to the blessing and thanksgiving which accompany it.

Eucharistic Congresses, gatherings of the Roman Catholic clergy and laity, held with the object of glorifying the Sacrament of the Eucharist, were inaugurated by Bishop de Sègur, of Lille. The first congress, held in that city (1881) excited little but local interest; but the movement rapidly developed, succeeding congresses being held at Avignon (1882), Liège (1883), Paris (1888), Jerusalem (1893), Lourdes (1899), Rome (1905), and elsewhere. In 1908 the congress held in London was attended by Cardinal Vannutelli, the first Papal legate to visit England for three centuries, by six other cardinals, fourteen archbishops, and seventy bishops. A proposal to carry the Sacrament through London in procession aroused much opposition, and the project was abandoned on the personal intervention of Mr. Asquith, then Premier.

Euchre (ū´kėr), a card-game very popular in America, is usually played by two or four persons. After the cut for deal five cards are dealt (either by twos and threes or by threes and twos) to each player, and the uppermost card of those undealt is turned up for trump. The first player has the option either to 'order up' (namely to make this card trump) or to pass. In the latter case it is left to the next player to decide if he will play first or pass, and so on till the turn of the dealer comes. He must either play on this trump or turn it down, when all the players have again in turn their choice of making a new trump or passing. If a trump is 'ordered up' or taken in the first round, the dealer may take it into his cards, discarding in its place his poorest card. If the player who elects to play wins five tricks, he counts two; if he wins three tricks, he counts one; if he wins fewer than three tricks, he is euchred, and each independent opponent counts two. The cards rank as at whist, except that the knave of the trump suit, called the right bower (from the Ger. bauer, a peasant), is the highest card, the knave of the other suit of the same colour being the second highest.

Eucken, Rudolf Christoph, German philosopher and theologian, born in East Friesland in 1846. Educated at the Universities of Göttingen and Berlin, he was professor of philosophy at Basel from 1871 to 1874, when he obtained a similar appointment at Jena. Opposed both to utilitarianism and positivism. Eucken is one of the leaders of those German philosophers who maintain that the spiritual interests of man should be taken into consideration, and oppose the philosophic systems which treat life only from the physical and biological points of view. His spiritualistic philosophy has found many adherents, and his works are very popular. In 1908 he won the Nobel prize for literature, and in 1910 he was made a D.D. of the University of Glasgow. His works include: The Life of the Spirit (1909), The Problem of Human Life as viewed by the Great Thinkers (1909), The Meaning and Value of Life (1909), Main Currents of Modern Thought (1911), Life's Basis and Life's Ideal (1911), Can we still be Christians? (1913).

Euclid (Eucleidēs), of Alexandria, a distinguished Greek mathematician, who flourished about 300 B.C. His Stoicheia (Elements of Geometry), in thirteen books, are still extant, and form the most usual introduction to the study of geometry. The work was known to the Arabs, translations of it having appeared in the time of Harun-al-Rashid and of Al-Mamun. It was translated from the Arabic into Latin by Adelard of Bath, and an English translation from the Latin appeared in 1570. The severity and accuracy of Euclid's methods of demonstration have as a whole never been surpassed. Besides the Elements, some other works are attributed to Euclid.—Cf. R. S. Heath, The Thirteen Books of Euclid's Elements.

Euclid (Eucleidēs), of Megara, an ancient Greek philosopher, the founder of the Megaric school of philosophy, and a pupil of Socrates.

Eudiom´eter (Gr. eudios, serene), an instrument originally designed for ascertaining the purity of the air or the quantity of oxygen it contains, but now employed generally in the analysis of gaseous mixtures. It consists of a graduated glass tube, either straight or bent in the shape of the letter U, hermetically sealed at one end and open at the other. Two platinum wires, intended for the conveyance of electric sparks through any mixture of gases, are inserted through the glass near the closed end of the tube, and approach but do not touch each other. To determine the proportion of oxygen in a given specimen of air, hydrogen is introduced into the tube with a measured volume of the air, and the mixture is fired by an electric spark. Water is formed, and the quantity of oxygen can be estimated from the diminution of volume. In a mixture of gases, chemical absorbents may be used to remove the gases one by one, the amounts present being determined by the successive changes of volume.

Eugene (ū-jēn´), or François Eugène, Prince of Savoy, fifth son of Eugène Maurice, Duke of Savoy-Carignan, and Olympia Mancini, a niece of Cardinal Mazarin. He was born at Paris 18th Oct., 1663, and died in Vienna 21st April, 1736. Offended with Louis XIV, he entered the Austrian service in 1683, serving his first campaign as a volunteer against the Turks. Here he distinguished himself so much that he received a regiment of dragoons. Later, at the sieges of Belgrade and Mayence, he increased his reputation, and on the outbreak of war between France and Austria he received the command of the Imperial forces sent to Piedmont to act in conjunction with the troops of the Duke of Savoy. At the end of the war he was sent as commander-in-chief to Hungary, where he defeated the Turks at the battle of Zenta (11th Sept., 1697). The War of the Spanish Succession brought Eugene again into the field. In Northern Italy he outmanœuvred Catinat and Villeroi, defeating the latter at Cremona (1702). In 1703 he commanded the Imperial army in Germany, and in co-operation with Marlborough frustrated the plans of France and her allies. In the battle of Blenheim, Eugene and Marlborough defeated the French and Bavarians under Marshal Tallard, 13th Aug., 1704. Next year Eugene, returning to Italy, forced the French to raise the siege of Turin, and in one month drove them out of Italy. During the following years he fought on the Rhine, took Lille, and, in conjunction with Marlborough, defeated the French at Oudenarde (1708), and Malplaquet (1709), where he himself was dangerously wounded. After the recall of Marlborough, which Eugene opposed in person at London, without success, and the defection of England from the alliance against France, his further progress was in a great measure checked. In the war with Turkey, in 1716, Eugene defeated two superior armies at Peterswardein and Temesvar, and, in 1717, took Belgrade, after having gained a decisive victory over a third army that came to its relief. During fifteen years of peace which followed, Eugene served Austria as faithfully in the Cabinet as he had done in the field. He was one of the great generals of modern times.—Cf. G. B. Malleson, Prince Eugene of Savoy.

Euge´nia (so named in honour of Prince Eugene), a genus of Myrtaceæ, nearly related to the myrtle. It contains numerous species, some of which produce delicious fruits. Cloves are the dried flower-buds of E. caryophyllata.

Eugenics has been defined as "the study of agencies under social control that may improve or impair the racial qualities of future generations, either physically or mentally". It is concerned with the investigation of the physical, mental, and moral traits of mankind, and especially with the factors of inheritance of desirable and undesirable qualities. The interest in the subject is largely due to the untiring zeal of the late Sir Francis Galton, who devoted most of his life to the study of the manifold problems that came within the scope of 'eugenics', and, in accordance with the terms of his will (1908), founded the Galton Chair of Eugenics in the University of London. The library and laboratory of the Galton benefaction form part of the Department of Applied Statistics, under the direction of Professor Karl Pearson, F.R.S., at University College, London, who is also the editor of the journal Biometrika, which is devoted to the statistical side of the problems of anthropology and heredity. The aim of the Galton laboratory is to collect material relating to human heredity, and to investigate its significance; and also to extend the knowledge of eugenics by professional instruction, lectures, publications, and experimental work. The scope of its activities will best be appreciated by the study of such works as the late Sir Francis Galton's Natural Inheritance (1889) and Essays in Eugenics (1909), and Professor Karl Pearson's Groundwork of Eugenics (1909), Practical Problems of Eugenics (1909), and State of National Eugenics (1909). The Treasury of Human Inheritance, issued in parts from the Galton laboratory, is a monumental record of facts relating to the hereditary transmission of human qualities. The Eugenics Education Society, under the presidency of Major Leonard Darwin, has for its aim the stimulation of public interest in the subject, and the discussion of the problems of heredity. It issues a journal, The Eugenics Review, now in its twelfth year.

It has long been known that by means of careful selection of parents it was possible to breed horses, cattle, dogs, &c., and a great variety of food- and flowering-plants, with desirable qualities highly developed. But it is obvious that such direct methods cannot be applied to human beings for the purpose of breeding men and women with special traits. What the eugenic societies aim at doing is to educate the people to realize the far-reaching effects of the inheritance of good or bad qualities, in the hope that such knowledge may exert some influence in the choice of partners in matrimony. But their efforts are especially directed to the exposure of the disastrous results that may ensue from the contamination of a family by the intermarriage of one of its members with an individual subject to some hereditary defect of a physical, mental, or moral nature.

The study of eugenics is intimately related to a wide range of subjects: to genetics, which explains the laws that govern the heredity of specific traits in man, and suggests certain practical applications of the rules of breeding to race improvement by cutting off undesirable strains and by selecting mates desirable from the eugenic standpoint; to the study of biographies of individuals and the genealogies of families, for the purpose of obtaining data for the investigation of the working of inheritance; to anthropology, history, and archæology, law and politics, economics and sociology, medicine and psychology, and statistical science.

The tremendous stimulus which the rapid development of eugenics has given to the wider recognition of the significance of heredity in human affairs has tended to obscure the importance of social environment and individual experience, especially in children of tender age, in shaping the attitude of the individual. Education is a vastly more important factor—the manner and attitude of the teacher, rather than the subject-matter of his or her lessons—than the eugenic enthusiasts, with their over-emphasis on the dominance of hereditary influences, are willing to admit. In the causation of many diseases, commonly reputed to be hereditary, such as tuberculosis and certain forms of insanity, the social and physical circumstances probably play a more important part than heredity in determining the onset of the illness, even when some undoubted hereditary aptitude to fall a victim to one or other of these affections is admitted. In no branch of medicine or sociology is this fallacy more fruitful of error than in the domain of mental disease. Apart from certain physical defects of the nervous system and specific infections, such as syphilis, the causes of mental alienation are to be sought rather in some maladjustment to the individual's social circumstances, often the result of some emotional disturbance, even in early childhood, which created the attitude of mind that eventually determined the mental conflict expressed by the insanity. The study of the effects of the strain of war has shown that anxiety, if sufficiently intense and prolonged, can produce mental disturbance in anyone, whatever his heredity and antecedents. By over-emphasizing the importance of inheritance in the causation of such conditions as insanity and epilepsy, and ignoring the effects of the profound social disturbance an insane parent may inflict upon any home, and especially upon the impressionable minds of young children in it, the eugenic societies have been responsible for raising up a growing body of opposition to their views. Not only in the domains of medicine and psychology, but also in those of ethnology and sociology, there is a feeling that the eugenic claims have been pushed too far. But when the subject of eugenics has been pruned of these extravagances, it will exert a far-reaching influence upon social and political organization and events by compelling respect for the vast importance of heredity as a factor that plays some part in determining the physical, mental, and moral qualities of mankind. References to the voluminous literature will be found in The Eugenics Review (published by the Eugenics Education Society, Kingsway, London).

Eugénie (eu-zhā-nē), Marie de Guzman, ex-Empress of the French, born at Granada, in Spain, 5th May, 1826, died at Seville 11th July, 1920. Her father, the Count de Montijo, was of a noble Spanish family; her mother was of Scotch extraction, maiden name Kirkpatrick. On 29th Jan., 1853, she became the wife of Napoleon III and Empress of the French. On 16th March, 1856, a son was born of the marriage. When the war broke out with Germany, she was appointed regent (15th July, 1870) during the absence of the emperor, but on the 4th Sept. the Revolution forced her to flee from France. She went to England, where she was joined by the Prince Imperial and afterwards by the emperor. Camden House, Chislehurst, became the residence of the imperial exiles. On 9th Jan., 1873, the emperor died, and six years later the Prince Imperial was slain while with the British army in the Zulu War. In 1881 the empress transferred her residence to Farnborough, in Hampshire. During the European War she established a hospital at Farnborough. In 1918 she handed over to Clemenceau the letters which she had received from William I in 1870. The letters shed a striking light upon the ambitions of Prussia. She was buried in the mausoleum at Farnborough.—Bibliography: De Lano, The Empress Eugénie; Tschuddi, Eugéne, Empress of the French; Stoddart, The Life of Empress Eugénie; E. Legge, The Empress Eugénie and her Son.

Euge´nius, the name of four Popes.—1. Eugenius I, elected 8th Sept., 654, while his predecessor, Martin I, was still living; died in 657 without having exerted any material influence on his times.—2. Eugenius II held the see from 824-827.—3. Eugenius III, born at Pisa, was a disciple of St. Bernard of Clairvaux. He was raised to the popedom in 1145; was obliged to quit Rome in 1146 in consequence of the commotions caused by Arnold of Brescia; returned with the help of King Roger of Sicily in 1150, and died in 1153.—4. Eugenius IV, from Venice, originally called Gabriel Condolmero, was raised to the popedom in 1431. In consequence of his opposition to the Council of Basel he was deposed. He died in 1447.

Eugenol, or Allylguaiacol, is found in cloves, the leaves of cinnamon, and other plants. About 90 per cent of clove oil is composed of eugenol.

Eu´gubine Tables, the name given to seven bronze tablets or tables found in 1444 at the town of Gubbio, the ancient Iguvium or Eugubium, now in the Italian province of Perugia, bearing inscriptions in the language of the ancient Umbrians, which seems to have somewhat resembled the ancient Latin as well as the Oscan. They seem to have been inscribed three or four centuries B.C., and refer to sacrificial usages and ritual.

Euhem´erism, a method or system (so named from its founder Euhemerus, a Greek philosopher) of interpreting myths and mythological deities, by which they are regarded as deifications of dead heroes and poetical exaggerations of real histories.

Eulenspiegel (oi´len-spē-gl), Till, a name which has become associated in Germany with all sorts of wild, whimsical frolics, and with many amusing stories. Some such popular hero of tradition and folk-lore seems to have really existed in Germany, probably in the first half of the fourteenth century, and a collection of popular tales of a frolicsome character, originally written in Low German, purports to contain his adventures. The earliest edition of such is a Strasbourg one of the year 1515 in the British Museum. Better known, however, is that of 1519, published also at Strasbourg by Thomas Mürner (under the title Howle-glass). The work was early translated into English and almost all European tongues. A modern English translation appeared in 1890.

Euler (oi´lėr or ü´lėr), Leonard, a distinguished mathematician, born at Basel in 1707, died at St. Petersburg (Petrograd) in 1783. He was educated at the University of Basel under the Bernouillis, through whose influence he procured a place in the Academy of St. Petersburg. In 1741 he accepted an invitation from Frederick the Great to become professor of mathematics in the Berlin Academy, but in 1766 returned to St. Petersburg, where he became director of the mathematical class of the academy. Euler's profound and inventive mind gave a new form to the science. He applied the analytic method to mechanics, and greatly improved the integral and differential calculus. He also wrote on physics, and employed himself in metaphysical and philosophical speculations. Amongst his numerous writings are: the Theoria Motuum Planetarum et Cometarum, Introductio in Analysin Infinitorum, and Opuscula Analytica.

Eu´menes (-nēz), the name of two kings of Pergamus.—1. Eumenes I succeeded his uncle Philetærus 263 B.C. He reigned for twenty-two years, and then died in a fit of drunkenness.—2. Eumenes II succeeded his father Attalus 197 B.C., and, like him, attached himself to the Romans, who, as a reward for his services in the war against Antiochus of Syria, bestowed upon him the Thracian Chersonesus and almost all Asia on this side of the Taurus. He died in 159 B.C.

Eumenides (ū-men´i-dēz). See Furies.

Eumycetes, or Higher Fungi, a common name for those Fungi which possess a septate mycelium. They also have a well-marked type of 'principal' spore—either the ascospore (Ascomycetes) or the basidiospore (Basidiomycetes)—and rarely produce definite sexual organs. Opposed to Phycomycetes.

Eunomians, the followers of Eunomius, Bishop of Cyzicum, in the fourth century A.D., who held that Christ was a created being of a nature unlike that of the Father.

Eu´nuch, an emasculated male. The term is of Greek origin (eunouchos, from eunē, a couch or bed, echein, to hold or guard); but eunuchs became known to the Greeks no doubt from the practice among Eastern nations of having them as guardians of their women's apartments. Eunuchs were employed in somewhat similar duties among the Romans in the luxurious times of the empire, and under the Byzantine monarchs they were common. The Mohammedans still have them about their harems. Emasculation, when effected in early life, produces singular changes in males and assimilates them in some respects to women, causing them in particular to have the voice of a female. Hence it was not uncommon in Italy to castrate boys in order to fit them for soprano singers when adults.

Euon´ymus, the spindle trees or prickwoods, a genus of shrubs or trees, nat. ord. Celastrineæ, containing about fifty species, natives of the temperate regions of the northern hemisphere. The root-bark of E. atropurpureus is the source of euonymin, a bitter principle with a powerful stimulating effect on the liver.

Eupato´ria, formerly Koslov, a seaport on the western coast of the Crimea, government of Taurida. It was here that the allied forces landed at the commencement of the Crimean War (14th to 18th Sept., 1854). Pop. 30,432.

Eupato´rium, a genus of plants, chiefly natives of America, belonging to the nat. ord. Compositæ. Their roots are perennial, possessing a rough, bitter, or aromatic taste; the flowers are small, white, reddish, or bluish, in corymbs. Amongst the many species are E. cannabīnum, or hemp-agrimony, a British plant.

Eupen (oi´pen), a town and district of Belgium, formerly part of Rhenish Prussia, 7 miles S.S.W. of Aix-la-Chapelle. It has manufactures of woollen and linen cloth, hats, soap, leather, and chemicals; paper, flax, and worsted mills; and an important trade. The town was ceded to Prussia at the Peace of Paris in 1814. On 26th May, 1919, Eupen was occupied by Belgian troops, and by the Treaty of Versailles Eupen and Malmédy were handed over to Belgium. Pop. 13,540.

Eupho´nium, a brass bass instrument, generally introduced into military bands, and frequently met with in the orchestra as a substitute for the superseded ophicleide. It is one of the saxhorn family of instruments. It is tuned in C or in B flat, and is furnished with three or four valves or pistons.

Euphorbia. See Spurge.

Euphorbia´ceæ, the spurgeworts, a nat. ord. of herbaceous plants, shrubs, or very large trees, which occur in all regions of the globe. Most of them have an acrid milky juice, and diclinous or monœcious flowers. The fruit is dry or slightly fleshy, and three-lobed. Among the genera are: Euphorbia, which yields an oil used as a powerful cathartic; Croton, affording croton-oil; the Ricĭnus commŭnis, or castor-oil plant; the Buxus sempervirens, or box-wood plant; the Manihot utilissima, which yields the food known as tapioca or cassava. In most members of the genera the milky juice contains caoutchouc.

Euphor´bium, a yellowish-white body, which is the solidified juice of certain plants of the genus Euphorbia, either exuding naturally or from incisions made in the bark. It is a powerfully acrid substance, virulently purgative and emetic.

Euphra´tes, or El Frat, a celebrated river of Western Asia, Mesopotamia, having a double source in two streams rising in the Anti-Taurus range. Its total length is about 1750 miles, and the area of its basin 260,000 sq. miles. It flows mainly in a south-easterly course through the great alluvial plains of Babylonia and Chaldæa till it falls into the Persian Gulf by several mouths, of which only one in Persian territory is navigable. About 100 miles from its mouth it is joined by the Tigris, when the united streams take the name of Shatt-el-Arab. It is navigable for about 1200 miles, but navigation is somewhat impeded by rapids and shallows. The melting of snow in the Taurus and Anti-Taurus causes a flooding in spring. The water is highest in May and June, when the current, which rarely exceeds 3 miles an hour, rises to 5. In the Bible (Gen. XV, 18) the Euphrates is The River, or The Great River.

Eu´phuism (Gr. euphues, well endowed by nature), an affected style of speech which distinguished the conversation and writings of many of the wits of the court of Queen Elizabeth. The name and the style were derived from Euphues, the Anatomy of Wit (about 1580), and Euphues and his England (about 1582), both written by John Lyly (1554-1606). A well-known euphuist in fiction is Sir Piercie Shafton in Scott's Monastery. Scott, however, had not studied Lyly sufficiently, and Sir Piercie raves bombastically rather than talks euphuistically. The chief characteristics of genuine euphuism were extreme artificiality and numerous allusions to natural history embellished by imagination.

Eu´polis, an Athenian comic poet, who flourished about 429 B.C. Neither the date of his birth nor that of his death is known with certainty. He belongs, like Aristophanes and Cratinus, to the Old Comedy. His works are all lost except small fragments. According to Suidas, he produced seventeen plays, seven of which won the first prize. His best-known plays are the Kolakes (Flatterers), in which he attacked the prodigal Callias, and the Baptæ (Dippers), in which he attacked Alcibiades and the exotic ritual practised at his clubs.

Eura´sians (syncopated from European-Asians), a name euphemistically given to the 'half-castes' of India, the offspring of European fathers and Indian mothers. They are particularly common in the three presidential capitals—Calcutta, Madras, and Bombay. Belonging strictly to neither race, Eurasians are not infrequently ostracized by both; and their anomalous position often exerts a baneful influence upon their character. They generally receive a European education, and the young men are often engaged in Government or mercantile offices. The girls, in spite of their dark tint, are generally very pretty and often marry Europeans.

Eure (eur), a river of North-West France, which rises in the department of the Orne, and falls into the Seine after a course of 124 miles, being navigable for about half the distance. It gives its name to a department in the north-west of France, forming part of Normandy; area, 2330 sq. miles. The surface consists of an extensive plain, intersected by rivers, chief of which is the Seine. It is extensively cultivated; apples, pears, plums, and cherries form important crops, and a little wine is produced. The mining and manufacturing industries are extensive, and the department has a considerable trade in woollen cloth, linen and cotton fabrics, carpets, leather, paper, glass. Evreux is the capital. Pop. 303,092.

Eure-et-Loir (eur-ė-lwär), a department in the north-west of France, forming part of the old provinces of Orléannais and Île-de-France; area, 2293 sq. miles. A ridge of no great height divides the department into a north and a south basin, traversed respectively by the Eure and the Loire. The soil is extremely fertile, and there is scarcely any waste land. A considerable portion is occupied by orchards and vineyards, but the greater part is devoted to cereal crops. The department is essentially agricultural, and has few manufactures. The capital is Chartres. Pop. 251,259.

Eure´ka (Gr. heurēka, I have found it), the exclamation of Archimedes when, after long study, he discovered a method of detecting the amount of alloy in King Hiero's crown. Hence the word is used as an expression of triumph at a discovery or supposed discovery.

Eurhythmics, a general term, but usually used to denote a system of education evolved by Émile Jaques-Dalcroze of Geneva. This form of training bears on all art, but especially on the art of music. Eurhythmics is essentially an original contribution to education. It aims at training musical sense on the broadest lines, using the body as an instrument of expression. Breaking away from preconceived ideas of music as a phenomenon of sound only, M. Dalcroze claims that music is innate. From this standpoint it follows that musicality as such is capable of cultivation apart from instrumental performance. Rhythm, not being a quality confined to music, but found common to all art, and fundamental to life, can, therefore, be developed from within the human being. This the Dalcroze system claims to do. Rhythm of sound plays a leading part in that it is allied to movement. Exercises at the piano are played to which the pupil listens, and to which he responds in movement—movement so closely allied to the music that it is a form of musical imagery. The technique is developed on simple lines to serve this end only. The system is progressive, starting from elementary rhythmic structure, and ending with complete musical form. It is far-reaching in educative purpose. It claims to free innate rhythm, to develop it for individual self-expression; to bring mind and body into closer unity, and in their interaction to give poise to both; to train accurate musical listening, ready assimilation of musical language and its spontaneous translation into terms of movement; to give musical experiences which shall be heard and felt; to cultivate musical expression and creation (in movement); to blend self-discipline with emotion.

Eurip´ides, the last of the three great Greek writers of tragedies, was born about 480 B.C., and died 406 B.C. Tradition declares that he was born at Salamis, on the very day of the Greek naval victory there. He was, as far as we can tell, of good birth; at any rate, he was well educated, and was able to live a life of ease and leisure, and to collect one of the largest libraries of the time. The comic poets, especially Aristophanes, delighted to say that his mother, Cleito, was a cabbage-woman, but there is probably little or no truth in this statement. Euripides was originally trained as an athlete, but conceived an intense dislike for that occupation. Greatly daring, he expressed his view openly (Fragment 284). Like a popular modern dramatist, his recreation was probably 'anything except sport'. He then took to painting, but abandoned it in favour of writing tragedies. His first play (not preserved), the Peliades, was produced when he was twenty-five years of age. He is said to have written ninety-two dramas, eight of which were satyr-plays. Ancient critics allow seventy-five of these to have been genuine. During his long career he only won the first prize five times. Euripides did not take any part in public life, but devoted himself entirely to a life of speculation and to writing plays. There is a tradition, not, however, on a very firm basis, that he was twice married, and that both marriages were failures. He is represented by Aristophanes as a woman-hater, but indeed he portrays women more sympathetically than Æschylus or Sophocles. The women had little cause to congratulate themselves on securing Aristophanes as a champion, for his scorpions are far more stinging then Euripides' whips. Euripides left Athens about 409 B.C., and went to the court of King Archelaus in Macedonia. There he died in 406 B.C.; according to some accounts, he was killed by savage dogs which were set on him by some of his rivals at the king's court.

Seventeen tragedies and one satyr-play have been preserved to us. The latter (The Cyclops) is interesting as being the only example of a satyr-play which we possess. In itself it is not amusing. It has been admirably translated by Shelley. The seventeen tragedies in the order of their production are: Alcestis, Medea, Hippolytus, Hecuba, Andromache, Ion, Suppliants, Heracleidæ, Hercules Furens, Iphigenia among the Tauri, Trojan Women, Helena, Phœnissæ, Electra, Orestes, Iphigenia at Aulis, and The Bacchæ. The Rhesus, a feeble production long attributed to Euripides, is almost certainly not his work.

The work of Euripides still retains the power of arousing strong likes and dislikes. He has had sturdy supporters and fanatical detractors. The truth is that if the tragedies of Æschylus and Sophocles are looked upon as models for all Greek tragedy, Euripides falls far short of his models. Euripides, however, though he died shortly before Sophocles, belonged to a younger and quite different generation, and held different views about art, morality, religion, and almost everything of importance. His aim was rather different from that of the earlier poets, and he must be judged, not by their standards, but on his own merits. His own merits are amply sufficient to justify the high opinion held of him in the ancient world, and supported by many of the greatest of the moderns. The dethroning of Euripides was the result of a German conspiracy, carried out with much energy by Niebuhr, and with even more by Schlegel. They enjoyed themselves while pulling Euripides to pieces much as schoolboys who have detected a flaw in the armour of their master. Many proofs can be adduced that Euripides was not a sophistical trifler; but one glance at his bust is enough to assure anyone of unbiased judgment that he was a man of remarkable breadth of mind and intellectual gifts. The fact remains, however, that the extant plays of Euripides are of very unequal merit. The Helena is not a good play; it was ridiculed by Aristophanes, but he did not succeed in making it much more absurd than it was already. The Hecuba and the Heracleidæ are not well constructed, and the Electra and Orestes challenge too directly the masterpieces of the earlier tragedians. In his greatest plays, however, Euripides can bear comparison with any poet. The Medea is a play which still never fails to please; the Hippolytus and the Ion are admirable dramas and admirably constructed; above all, the Bacchæ is a masterpiece, more picturesque than any other Greek tragedy, a play not unworthy to be set near The Tempest and Cymbeline.

Euripides has been accused by his detractors of degrading his art, because he opened his plays with a prologue and ended them with the intervention of a god. Both devices, if not desirable, are quite pardonable. Possible plots were becoming more and more scarce; Euripides did not wish to adopt trite themes, and so went into the by-ways of mythology, or adopted a less well-known alternative version of a well-known legend. He could not count on his audience already possessing enough knowledge of the story to enable them to understand his plays without a prologue. The deus ex machina, as the god who ends some of the plays is called, was often warranted or required by the plot which called for a conventional ending. Euripides has also been accused, by Aristophanes and by many less entertaining writers, of taking away all the dignity of tragedy. It is quite true that he is a realist. Sophocles represented men as they ought to be, Euripides represented them as they were. This was an unforgiveable offence in the eyes of the 'men of Marathon' at Athens. The tragic heroes were not mere stage characters, they considered; they were often ancestors or national heroes, and it was impious to represent them as speaking ordinary language, or sharing the weaknesses of ordinary men. Euripides did do this, did it intentionally, and did it excellently. He came at an awkward transition period, and the lack of success of some of his work is owing to the impossibility of pouring new wine into old bottles. The old tragedy was too tightly bound by convention to suit Euripides, who wished to portray living men and women, and to have an exciting plot. The new comedy—the romantic comedy of Menander—had not yet been invented. Had it been, Euripides would surely have written comedies. The comic poets of the next century turned to him for a model, and it was one of them, Philemon, who said that if he were quite sure that dead men retained their perception he would hang himself to see Euripides. Euripides is, in fact, the earliest writer of romantic plays, a fact well illustrated by his Alcestis, which is one of his best plays. In it tragedy and comedy are harmoniously blended, and it has a happy ending.

For better and for worse Euripides is a very modern poet, and makes a special appeal to the present generation. But his pathos, his wide sympathies, and his wonderful poetry have appealed to the best judges in all ages. Theocritus, Virgil, Ovid, Horace, Milton, and Browning have been among his admirers; his detractors include a few Teutonic professors, and a few who honour the memory of Æschylus and Sophocles on the other side idolatry.—Bibliography: A. W. Verrall, Euripides the Rationalist; G. G. A. Murray, Euripides and his Age (Home University Library); W. B. Donne, Euripides (Ancient Classics for English Readers); Sir J. P. Mahaffy, Euripides: an Account of his Life and Works; N. J. Patin, Étude sur Euripide; P. Masqueray, Euripide et ses idées. There is a complete verse translation by A. S. Way, and verse translations of several plays by G. G. A. Murray. There is a 'transcript' of the Alcestis in Browning's Balaustion's Adventure, and of the Hercules Furens in his Aristophanes' Apology.

Euripus (ū-rī´pus), in ancient geography, the strait between the Island of Eubœa and Bœotia in Greece.

Euroc´lydon, a tempestuous wind of the Levant, which was the occasion of the shipwreck of the vessel in which St. Paul sailed, as narrated in Acts, XXVII, 14-44. The north-east wind is the wind evidently meant in the narrative; and an alternative reading adopted in the revised version is euraculon (euraquilo) or north-easter.

Euro´pa, in Greek mythology, the daughter of Agēnor, King of the Phœnicians, and the sister of Cadmus. The fable relates that she was abducted by Jupiter, who for that occasion had assumed the form of a white bull, and swam with his prize to the Island of Crete. Here Europa bore to him Minos, Sarpēdon, and Rhadamanthus.

Europe, the smallest of the great continents, but the most important in the history of civilization for the last two thousand years. It forms a huge peninsula projecting from Asia, and is bounded on the north by the Arctic Ocean; on the west by the Atlantic Ocean; on the south by the Mediterranean, the Black Sea, and the Caucasus Range; on the east by the Caspian Sea, the Ural River, and the Ural Mountains. The most northerly point on the mainland is Cape Nordkyn, in Lapland, in lat. 71° 6´; the most southerly points are Punta da Tarifa, lat. 36° N., in the Strait of Gibraltar, and Cape Matapan, lat. 36° 17´, which terminates Greece. The most westerly point is Cape Roca in Portugal, in long. 9° 28´ W., while Ekaterinburg is in long. 60° 36´ E. From Cape Matapan to North Cape is a direct distance of 2400 miles, from Cape St. Vincent to Ekaterinburg, north-east by east, 3400 miles; area of the continent, about 3,865,000 sq. miles. Great Britain and Ireland, Iceland, Novaya Zemlya, Corsica, Sardinia, Sicily, Malta, Crete, the Ionian and the Balearic Islands are the chief islands of Europe. The shores are very much indented, giving Europe an immense length of coast-line (estimated at nearly 50,000 miles). The chief seas or arms of the sea are: the White Sea on the north; the North Sea on the west, from which branches off the great gulf or inland sea known as the Baltic; the English Channel, between England and France; the Mediterranean, communicating with the Atlantic by the Strait of Gibraltar (at one point only 19 miles wide); the Adriatic and Archipelago, branching off from the Mediterranean: and the Black Sea, connected with the Archipelago through the Hellespont, Sea of Marmora, and Bosporus.

Surface.—The mountains form several distinct groups or systems of very different geological dates, the loftiest mountain masses being in the south central region. The Scandinavian mountains in the north-west, to which the great northern peninsula owes its form, extend above 900 miles from the Polar Sea to the south point of Norway. The highest summits are about 8000 feet. The Alps, the highest mountains in Europe (unless Mount Elbruz in the Caucasus is claimed as European), extend from the Mediterranean first in a northerly and then in an easterly direction, and attain their greatest elevation in Mont Blanc (15,780 feet), Monte Rosa, and other summits. Branching off from the Alps, though not geologically connected with them, are the Apennines, which run south-east through Italy, constituting the central ridge of the peninsula. The highest summit is Monte Corno (9541 feet). Mount Vesuvius, the celebrated volcano in the south of the peninsula, is quite distinct from the Apennines. By south-eastern extensions the Alps are connected with the Balkan and the Despoto-Dagh of the south-eastern peninsula of Europe. Among the mountains of South-Western Europe are several massive chains, the loftiest summits being in the Pyrenees, and in the Sierra Nevada in the south of the Iberian Peninsula. The highest point in the former, La Maladetta or Mount Maudit, has an elevation of 11,165 feet; Mulahacen, in the latter, is 11,703 feet, and capped by perpetual snow. West and north-west of the Alps are the Cevennes, Jura, and Vosges; north and north-east, the Harz, the Thüringerwald Mountains, the Fichtelgebirge, the Erzgebirge and Böhmerwaldgebirge. Farther to the east the Carpathian chain encloses the great plain of Hungary, attaining an elevation of 8000 or 8500 feet. The Ural Mountains between Europe and Asia reach the height of 5540 feet. Besides Vesuvius, other two volcanoes are Etna in Sicily, and Hecla in Iceland. A great part of Northern and Eastern Europe is level. The great plain of North Europe occupies part of France, Western and Northern Belgium, Holland, the northern provinces of Germany, and the greater part of Russia. A large portion of this plain, extending through Holland and North Germany, is a low sandy level not infrequently protected from inroads of the sea only by means of strong dykes. The other great plains of Europe are the Plain of Lombardy (the most fertile district in Europe) and the Plain of Hungary. Part of Southern and South-Eastern Russia consists of steppes.

Rivers and Lakes.—The main European watershed runs in a winding direction from south-west to north-east, at its north-eastern extremity being of very slight elevation. From the Alps descend some of the largest of the European rivers, the Rhine, the Rhône, and the Po, while the Danube, a still greater stream, rises in the Black Forest north of the Alps. The Volga, which enters the Caspian Sea, an inland sheet without outlet, is the longest of European rivers, having a direct length of nearly 1700 miles, including windings 2400 miles. Into the Mediterranean flow the Ebro, the Rhône, and the Po; into the Black Sea, the Danube, Dnieper, Dniester, and Don (through the Sea of Azov); into the Atlantic, the Guadalquivir, the Guadiana, the Tagus, and Loire: into the English Channel, the Seine; into the North Sea, the Rhine, Elbe; into the Baltic, the Oder, the Vistula, and the Duna; into the Arctic Ocean, the Dvina. The lakes of Europe may be divided into two groups, the southern and the northern. The former run along both sides of the Alps, and among them, on the north side, are the lakes of Geneva, Neuchâtel, Thun, Lucerne, Zürich, and Constance; on the south side, Lago Maggiore, and the lakes of Como, Lugano, Iseo, and Garda. The northern lakes extend across Sweden from west to east, and on the east side of the Baltic a number of lakes, stretching in the same direction across Finland on the borders of Russia, mark the continuation of the line of depression. It is in Russia that the largest European lakes are found—Lakes Ladoga and Onega.

Geology.—The geological features of Europe are exceedingly varied. The older formations prevail in the northern part as compared with the southern half and the middle region. North of the latitude of Edinburgh and Moscow there is very little of the surface of more recent origin than the strata of the Upper Jura belonging to the Mesozoic period, and there are vast tracts occupied either by eruptive rocks or one or other of the older sedimentary formations. Denmark belongs to the Cretaceous period, as does also a large part of Russia between the Volga and the basin of the Dnieper. Middle and Eastern Germany, with Poland and the valley of the Dnieper, present on the surface Eocene formations of the Tertiary period. The remainder of Europe is remarkable for the great diversity of its superficial structure, rocks and deposits belonging to all periods being found within it, and having for the most part no great superficial extent. Europe possesses abundant stores of those minerals which are of most importance to man, such as coal and iron, Britain being particularly favoured in this respect. Coal and iron are also obtained in France, Belgium, and Germany. Gold is found to an unimportant extent, and silver is widely spread in small quantities. The richest silver ores are in Norway, Spain, the Erzgebirge, and the Harz Mountains. Spain is also rich in quicksilver. Copper ores are abundant in the Ural Mountains, Thuringia, Cornwall, and Spain. Tin ores are found in Cornwall, the Erzgebirge, and Brittany.

Climate.—Several circumstances concur to give Europe a climate peculiarly genial, such as its position almost wholly within the temperate zone, and the great extent of its maritime boundaries. Much benefit is also derived from the fact that its shores are exposed to the warm marine currents and warm winds from the south-west, which prevent the formation of ice on most of its northern shores. The eastern portion has a less favourable climate than the western. The extremes of temperature are greater, the summer being hotter and the winter colder, while the lines of equal mean temperature decline south as we go east. The same advantages of mild and genial temperature which western has over eastern Europe, the continent collectively has over the rest of the Old World. The diminution of mean temperature, as well as the intensity of the opposite seasons, increases as we go east. Peking, in lat. 40° N., has as severe a winter as Petrograd in lat. 60° N.

Vegetable Productions.—With respect to the vegetable kingdom, Europe may be divided into four zones. The first, or most northern, is that of fir and birch. The birch reaches almost to North Cape; the fir ceases a degree farther south. The cultivation of grain extends farther north than might be supposed. Barley ripens even under the seventieth parallel of north latitude; wheat ceases at 64° in Norway, 62° in Sweden. Within this zone, the southern limit of which extends from lat. 64° in Norway to lat. 62° in Russia, agriculture has little importance, its inhabitants being chiefly occupied with the care of reindeer or cattle, and in fishing. The next zone, which may be called that of the oak and beech, and cereal produce, extends from the limit above mentioned to the forty-eighth parallel. The Alps, though beyond the limit, by reason of their elevation belong to this zone, in the moister parts of which cattle husbandry has been brought to perfection. Next we find the zone of the chestnut and vine, occupying the space between the forty-eighth parallel and the mountain chains of Southern Europe. Here the oak still flourishes, but the pine species become rarer. Rye, which characterizes the preceding zone on the continent, gives way to wheat, and in the southern portion of it to maize also. The fourth zone, comprehending the southern peninsulas, is that of the olive and evergreen woods. The orange flourishes in the southern portion of it, and rice and even cotton are cultivated in some places in Italy and Spain.

Animals.—As regards animals, the reindeer and polar-bears are peculiar to the north. In the forests of Poland and Lithuania the urus, a species of wild ox, is still occasionally met with. Bears and wolves still inhabit the forests and mountains; but, in general, cultivation and population have expelled wild animals. The domesticated animals are nearly the same throughout. The ass and mule lose their size and beauty north of the Pyrenees and Alps. The Mediterranean Sea has many species of fish, but no great fishery; the northern seas, on the other hand, are annually filled with countless shoals of a few species, chiefly the herring, mackerel, cod, and salmon.

Inhabitants.—Europe is occupied by several different peoples or races, in many parts now greatly intermingled. The Celts once possessed the west of Europe from the Alps to the British Islands. But the Celtic nationalities were broken by the wave of Roman conquest, and the succeeding invasions of the Germanic tribes completed their political ruin. At the present day the Celtic language is spoken only in the Scottish Highlands (Gaelic), in some parts of Ireland (Irish), in Wales (Cymric), and in Brittany (Armorican). Next to the Celtic comes the Teutonic race, comprehending the Germanic and Scandinavian branches. The former includes the Germans, the Dutch, and the English. The Scandinavians are divided into Danes, Swedes, and Norwegians. To the east, in general, of the Teutonic race, though sometimes mixed with it, come the Slavonians, that is, the Russians, the Poles, the Czechs or Bohemians, the Serbians, Croatians, &c. In the south and south-east of Europe are the Greek and Latin peoples, the latter comprising the Italians, French, Spanish, and Portuguese. All the above peoples are regarded as belonging to the Indo-European or Aryan stock. To the Mongolian stock belong the Turks, Finns, Lapps, and Magyars or Hungarians, all immigrants into Europe in comparatively recent times. The Basques at the western extremity of the Pyrenees are a people whose affinities have not yet been determined. The total population of Europe is about 400 millions; nine-tenths speak the languages of the Indo-European family, the Teutonic group, the Slavonic, and the Latin. The prevailing religion is the Christian, embracing the Roman Catholic Church, which is the most numerous, the various sects of Protestants (Lutheran, Calvinistic, Anglican, Baptists, Methodists, &c.), and the Greek Church. A part of the inhabitants profess the Jewish, a part the Mohammedan religion.

Political Divisions.—In 1921 Europe consisted of the following independent states, kingdoms, or republics: Albania, Armenia, Austria, Azerbijan, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czecho-Slovakia, Denmark, Esthonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Great Britain and Ireland, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxemburg, Monaco, Montenegro, Netherlands (Holland), Norway, Poland, Portugal, Roumania, Russia, Serbia (Yugo-Slavia), Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine. Of these the following were kingdoms: Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, Great Britain, Greece, Italy, Montenegro, Netherlands (Holland), Norway, Serbia (Yugo-Slavia), Spain, and Sweden. Turkey (whose possessions in Europe were limited to Constantinople) was an empire, Luxemburg was a grand-duchy, Liechtenstein and Monaco principalities, whilst all the other European states were republics.

History.—Europe was probably first peopled from Asia, but at what date we know not. The first authentic history begins in Greece at about 776 B.C. Greek civilization was at its most flourishing period about 430 B.C. After Greece came Rome, which by the early part of the Christian era had conquered Spain, Greece, Gaul, Helvetia, Germany between the Danube and the Alps, Illyria, and Dacia. Improved laws and superior arts of life spread with the Roman Empire throughout Europe, and the unity of government was also extremely favourable to the extension of Christianity. With the decline of the Roman Empire a great change in the political constitution of Europe was produced by the universal migration of the northern nations. The Ostrogoths and Lombards settled in Italy, the Franks in France, the Visigoths in Spain, and the Anglo-Saxons in South Britain, reducing the inhabitants to subjection, or becoming incorporated with them. Under Charlemagne (771-814) a great Germanic empire was established, so extensive that the kingdoms of France, Germany, Italy, Burgundy, Lorraine, and Navarre were afterwards formed out of it. About this time the northern and eastern nations of Europe began to exert an influence in the affairs of Europe. The Slavs, or Slavonians, founded kingdoms in Bohemia, Poland, Russia, and the north of Germany; the Magyars appeared in Hungary; and the Normans agitated all Europe, founding kingdoms and principalities in England, France, Sicily, and the East. The Crusades and the growth of the Ottoman power are amongst the principal events which influenced Europe from the twelfth to the fifteenth century. The conquest of Constantinople by the Turks (1453), by driving the learned Greeks from this city, gave a new impulse to letters in Western Europe, which was carried onwards by the invention of printing and the Reformation. The discovery of America was followed by the temporary preponderance of Spain in Europe, and next of France. Subsequently Prussia and Russia gradually increased in territory and strength. The French revolution (1789) and the Napoleonic wars had a profound effect on Europe, the dissolution of the old German Empire being one of the results. The most important events in European history from the revolution of 1789 to 1914, the beginning of the European War, were: the establishment of the independence of Greece; the disappearance of Poland as a separate state; the unification of Italy under Victor Emmanuel; the Franco-German War, resulting in the consolidation of Germany into an empire under the leadership of Prussia: and the partial dismemberment of the Turkish Empire. The European War, 1914-8 (q.v.), revolutionized the continent and altered the map of Europe. The chief results were the disintegration of the Dual Monarchy and of Russia, the abolition of the German Empire, and the deposition of hereditary rulers in the smaller German states, which instituted republican Governments. The following new states were formed from the constituent parts of Russia and Austria-Hungary: Albania, Armenia, Azerbijan, Czecho-Slovakia, Esthonia, Finland, Georgia, Latvia, Lithuania, Yugo-Slavia, and Ukraine. Poland, dissolved in the eighteenth century, was again reconstituted. France regained Alsace and Lorraine, Turkey lost almost all her possessions in Europe, whilst Belgium, Denmark, Greece, Italy, and Roumania were greatly enlarged, acquiring new territories. All these alterations of boundaries and additions of territories were based on ethnological grounds, the new states being inhabited by peoples belonging to the same ethnical group and speaking the same language. See articles on the various countries.—Bibliography: E. A. Freeman, General Sketch of European History; A. Hassall (editor), Periods of European History; European History Chronologically Arranged; A. S. Rappoport, History of European Nations; O. Browning, General History of the World; H. S. Williams, The Historian's History of the World.

European War, 1914-8. The European War, which began in Aug., 1914, and involved the greater part of the globe before the last shot was fired in Nov., 1918, had its ostensible origin in the assassination of the Austrian heir-apparent, the Archduke Franz Ferdinand, and his wife, at Serajevo, capital of Bosnia, once part of the ancient kingdom of Serbia. This crime was committed by a Bosnian student, but Austria-Hungary held Serbia responsible, and, inspired by Germany, sent an ultimatum on 23rd July, amounting to a demand that Serbia should surrender her independence. Two days later, notwithstanding that Serbia conceded every demand, with two reservations which she offered to submit to the Hague Tribunal, Austria-Hungary declared war on her. Germany, who had seen in the Serajevo tragedy a pretext for making her long-premeditated bid for world dominion, "knew very well what she was about in backing up Austria-Hungary in this matter", as the German Ambassador in Vienna frankly told the British representative at the time; and when Russia, as the traditional protector of the Slavs, mobilized her southern armies to save Serbian independence if necessary, she threatened instant mobilization on her own part unless Russia stopped these military measures within twelve hours. It was technically impossible for Russia to do anything of the kind, but her protest to this effect was unavailing. Germany declared war on Russia on 3rd Aug., and as this inevitably involved war at the same time with Russia's ally France, she sent a note on the following day to Belgium demanding safe passage for German troops through Belgian territory, though Prussia as well as Great Britain, France, Russia, and Austria had guaranteed the neutrality and independence of Belgium by the treaty of 1839, repeatedly confirming this on subsequent occasions. When the British Ambassador in Berlin protested against the threatened violation of treaty rights, the German Chancellor, Bethmann-Hollweg, repudiated the treaty as a mere "scrap of paper".

On 3rd Aug., when Germany formally declared war on France—though her troops had already invaded French territory at various points—Belgium refused Germany's demands, and called on Great Britain and France for assistance. It was this call, and Germany's refusal on the following day to accede to the British demands that Belgian neutrality should be respected—declaring war on Belgium instead and violating her territory early that morning—which decided Great Britain to range herself wholly on the Franco-Russian side. The German Ambassador in London had already been warned (on 31st July) that we should be drawn into the struggle if Germany persisted in her threatened attack on France. Two days previously Germany had made the 'infamous bid' to Great Britain that if she would remain neutral no territory would be taken from France herself, though no undertaking could be given with regard to the French colonies. British mobilization orders were issued on 4th Aug., and at 11 p.m. on that date Great Britain declared war on Germany.

Fortunately the British navy was ready for any emergency, with the Grand Fleet—the command of which was given to Admiral Sir John Jellicoe—still assembled in full strength at Portland, after the manœuvres, the order for its dispersal having been countermanded on 27th July. Lord Kitchener, home on leave from Egypt, had also been stopped by a telegram from Mr. Asquith, then Prime Minister, as he was stepping on the Channel boat at Dover on his return journey (3rd Aug.), and two days later was appointed Secretary of State for War. Meantime the Austrians had already bombarded Belgrade (29th July); Italy had declined (1st Aug.) to be drawn into the conflict with her Austro-German partners of the Triple Alliance on the grounds that their war was an aggressive one; and German troops, as already mentioned, had invaded France at several points on 2nd Aug., before formally declaring war on that country.

Western Front, 1914

The struggle on the Western front began in earnest on the following day, when war was declared on France and the Germans captured Trieux, near Briey, and Lunéville was bombarded by German aeroplanes. The German system of mobilization had been quicker than the French and Russian, but the opening moves filled the Allied commanders with too-confident hopes. Although slower to mobilize than the Germans, a Russian army under Rennenkampf succeeded in invading East Prussia in force; the Belgians made a magnificent stand for their frontier fortresses when the Germans, denied the right of way which they had demanded, endeavoured to force the great highway of Western Europe which passes through Liége; and the French, besides checking the enemy at Dinant, had already recovered part of the lost provinces of Alsace-Lorraine.

On 16th Aug. the First British Expeditionary Force, under General Sir John French, completed its landing at Boulogne, and four days later had arrived and concentrated on the line Avesnes-Le Cateau, on the left or exposed flank of the French Fifth Army under General de Lanzerac. It consisted of 50,000 infantry with its artillery, and five brigades of cavalry—some 70,000 troops altogether, a mere drop in the ocean compared with the millions of men who were marching to battle for the great military powers, but destined to play a part in the forthcoming struggle out of all proportion to its size.

The position at this juncture was, briefly, as follows: the Germans having at length captured the last forts of Liége, with its gallant commander General Leman, were overrunning Belgium. Brussels had just been evacuated (20th Aug.), and the main Belgian army, menaced by greatly superior forces of the enemy, and disappointed in its hope of effective support from the Franco-British troops, was retiring to seek the protection of the forts of Antwerp. Having occupied Brussels on the 20th, the German Higher Command appointed Baron von der Goltz as Governor. A reign of terror in Belgium had already been inaugurated as part of Germany's deliberate policy of 'frightfulness', including the ruthless execution of civilians on unsubstantiated charges of shooting at the invaders.

The French armies, under the supreme command of General Joffre, who, like Lord Kitchener, had been an engineer student when the Franco-Prussian War broke out, and had been Chief of the General Staff since 1911, were now disposed for the double purpose of meeting the threatened German onslaught and preparing the counter-offensive on which French doctrines of strategy had been based. Starting from the Swiss frontier there were nine divisions forming the Alsace force, the main offensive group, consisting of the French First and Second Armies, being extended along the Lorraine frontier, and the Third Army about Verdun. The Fourth Army formed the mass of manœuvre held in reserve behind the centre, while the Fifth, whose left wing was now extended by the British Expeditionary Force, faced the Ardennes as far as the Belgian frontier.

Germany was not seriously alarmed by the spectacular advance of the French into their lost provinces. It suited the strategy of her War Staff to keep the French mass of manœuvre as far as possible from the point at which it would soon be sorely needed; and their feint attacks in the direction of Longwy, Lunéville, and Belfort were designed to strengthen the belief that their real offensive would come in the frontal assault which the French dispositions had assumed. Germany, however, had always intended to strike through Belgium when the time came to deliver the knock-out blow to France before Russia had time to mobilize her millions.

The German advance was proceeding according to the plan which had been worked out in detail as far back as 1904 by the soldier-scholar of the Garde-Ulanen, Count von Schlieffen, who died two years before his great scheme was put into execution. Based on the assumption that Germany and Austria-Hungary would have to fight France, Russia, Great Britain, and Belgium without the aid of Italy, it provided for an immediate attack by the right wing of the German army of such weight and ferocity as to destroy the French left by a single blow, and then roll up the main French armies one after the other. The South and Russian fronts were meantime to be lightly held, everything being staked on the sudden, overwhelming blow in the north through Belgium. One of the bitter controversies in Germany, after the war, raged round the responsibility for the failure of this plan, the execution of which devolved on General von Moltke, nephew of the great strategist of the Franco-Prussian War. The Kaiser believed that the name of Moltke would strike terror into the hearts of Germany's enemies, but the second Moltke lacked the genius of his predecessor, and the course of events proved that he was not equal to the task of carrying out so prodigious a plan.

It was doubly necessary to strike at once with an immediate maximum of strength now that Britain had already ranged herself alongside the Allies. This maximum of strength was attained long before France had completed her mobilization, and enabled Germany to launch her unexpected blow with crushing effect. She had reckoned, however, without the stubborn defence of the Belgians in the opening moves of the game, a defence which clogged the wheels of her mighty war machine at the critical moment; and was wholly unprepared for Britain's great achievement in transporting her 'insignificant' but indomitable army, without a hitch, complete in every detail, and establishing it in its place in the line of battle, hundreds of miles from its base, in less than three weeks from the declaration of war. Clearly there was no time to be lost in solving the military problem on the Western front before the Russians could throw their full weight into the scales.

The secret of Germany's sudden attempt to overwhelm the Allied left by an outflanking movement was well kept. The position in Belgium was obviously grave; but Joffre still clung to the belief that if the Germans attacked the Allied left in force, they would leave their own position in front of the French Fifth Army so exposed as to give him an opening for a successful counter-stroke with de Lanzerac's troops in co-operation with the British. Up to the 22nd General French's preparations were all in the direction of offensive action on these lines; his two corps had taken up their positions through Binche and Mons and along the canal to Condé.

The German tide which now swept through the plains of Belgium entirely upset the Allied calculations. General French woke on 22nd Aug. to find the troops of the French Fifth Army on his right in unmistakeable retreat. The full force of the German blow, delivered by von Buelow's Second Army, had been felt by de Lanzerac's troops on the Sambre at daybreak, and had pressed them back from the river. The British position held by the 1st Corps (1st and 2nd Divisions) under General Sir Douglas Haig, the 2nd Corps (3rd and 5th Divisions) under General Sir H. Smith-Dorrien, and the Cavalry Division under General Allenby, became isolated by the retreat of de Lanzerac—"the most complete example", as Lord French long afterwards described him, "of the Staff College pedant whose 'superior education' had given him little idea of how to conduct war". De Lanzerac asked General French if he would attack the flank of the German columns which were pressing him back from the Sambre, but the British Commander, who had received definite instructions from Lord Kitchener that his command was to be an entirely independent one, "and that you will in no case come in any sense under the orders of any Allied general", replied that with his own position so seriously threatened by the retreat of de Lanzerac's troops such an operation was impracticable, but he agreed to retain his present position for the next twenty-four hours.

The British army fulfilled this pledge, and the barrier thus held and maintained during the subsequent retreat, though shattered in parts, saved the French left from being outflanked by the invading right wing of the Germans under von Kluck. The whole situation became extremely critical on the following day (23rd Aug.). Namur, the forts of which had been regarded as impregnable, fell before the crushing attack of the heavy Austrian howitzers brought up by the advancing Germans; the French thrust into Alsace-Lorraine had just been countered by the German Fifth Army under the Crown Prince Rupprecht of Bavaria, which compelled the French to retreat from all but a corner of Alsace; and the main German attack, launched at the other end of the line, forced the French back both from the Sambre and the Meuse. The French Fifth Army, the position of which was considerably weakened by the fall of Namur, was attacked both by von Buelow's army in front, and by a Saxon army under von Hausen on its right. It was forced back until von Hausen found a gap on its right flank, through which he proceeded to pour his Saxons with the object of rolling up the French Third and Fourth Armies under Ruffey and Langle de Cary. These retreated in turn, to recover alignment with de Lanzerac's Fifth Army, which had retreated from the British right. The British army was thus left 'in the air', outflanked not only on the right, where von Buelow was now advancing on it from Charleroi, but also on the left, where von Kluck's right wing was sweeping down in full force from the north-west.

The onslaught on the British front began shortly after noon with a bombardment of some 600 guns along the whole line of 25 miles; followed by a great frontal attack in mass formation. The British troops, all experts at musketry, used their rifles with such deadly effect that the frontal attack crumpled up. The line held; but with the German tide surging round on either flank the position became increasingly critical. Under the threatened turning movement General Smith-Dorrien withdrew from the Mons salient, and before nightfall took up a fresh line some 3 miles south of the canal. The advanced troops of the 1st Corps had not been seriously engaged, and held their ground. It was not until late that night that the desperate situation on his right was fully revealed to General French; and when news also arrived from Joffre that the British army would probably be attacked the next day by at least three German corps and two cavalry divisions, it became clear that a general and immediate retirement was inevitable. What actually happened was that the enemy attacked with no fewer than four corps, and at least two cavalry divisions.

The Retreat from Mons

The great retreat began shortly after dawn on the 24th with a feint attack by the 1st Division, under cover of which the 2nd Corps moved back 5 miles, and then stood in turn to protect the retirement of the 1st Corps. Further withdrawals were effected that day by alternate corps, covered by heavy rear-guard actions, until the 1st Corps had reached the line between Maubeuge and Bavai, with the 2nd Corps extending the line from Bavai to Bry. Von Kluck's army, though kept in check by the retreating troops, followed closely on their heels and round their left flank, their design apparently being to turn the British left and press them back on Maubeuge, the fortress close on their right rear, which, well fortified and provisioned as it was, offered, as General French afterwards pointed out (in 1914), a terrible temptation to an army seeking shelter against overwhelming odds. Bazaine's example at Metz in 1870, and a shrewd suspicion that the German move was deliberately planned with that end in view, proved sufficient reasons for avoiding the trap. A further retreat was accordingly ordered to the line Le Cateau-Cambrai, some miles farther back.

Tournai, which was held by a French Territorial brigade, fell that day. There was nothing apparently to prevent the German host at this juncture from continuing its course to the coast and seizing the Channel ports as far as the Seine. That, doubtless, would have been included in the programme had the Germans anticipated a campaign of any considerable duration. The Kaiser, however, had promised his troops that they should be home again "before the leaves fall"; and to bring this about it was necessary to settle with the Allied army once and for all. Where von Moltke failed, according to Ludendorff and other critics after the war, was in not striking farther to the north or north-west, and in not throwing still more weight into the scale from his left wing.

On the 25th the French were still retreating all along the line save at Maubeuge, the garrison of which held out until 7th Sept., and at Longwy, north of Verdun, which fell on 28th Aug. The British army, battle-worn and suffering severely from the heat, but resisting all the German efforts to turn its western flank, marched stubbornly back, gallantly assisted by Allenby's cavalry. The French were a day's march ahead of them when the British reached the Le Cateau position. General French decided, therefore, that, sorely as the troops needed rest, there was nothing for it but to resume the retreat at daybreak, and issued orders to that effect. The hardest fighting on the 25th had fallen to the 1st Corps at Landrecies, where Haig's weary troops were violently attacked at nightfall, before they could snatch any rest, by fresh enemy troops sent forward in pursuit in motors and lorries. The German infantry paid dearly for their temerity in advancing through the narrow streets of the town in close order, two or three British machine-guns mowing them down in hundreds. The attack was a disastrous failure.

The 2nd Corps did not reach Le Cateau until ten or eleven o'clock that night, thoroughly exhausted after a hard day's fighting and marching. Smith-Dorrien had lost heavily in the operations, and was so convinced that his troops were unfit to resume the march at daybreak that he elected to stand and abide by the result. The magnificent fight put up by his troops on the following day, assisted by Allenby and Sordet's cavalry, and two divisions of French Territorial troops under d'Amade, which had been detailed to guard the British left flank, saved the situation, and averted, in the considered opinion expressed by General French five years later, "a stupendous repetition of Sedan". The actual result was a total loss of some 14,000 officers and men, about 80 guns, and numbers of machine-guns, as well as quantities of ammunition and material. According to General French, these losses heavily handicapped the British army in the subsequent stages of the retreat, and were felt throughout the first battle of the Marne and the early operations on the Aisne. In his dispatch of Sept., 1914, the British Commander-in-Chief had written of this battle in eulogistic terms. It was not till some time later, he explains, that he came to know the full details of the battle and to appreciate it in all its details. For General Smith-Dorrien it is urged that his stand at Le Cateau broke the full force of the German pursuit, and checked its course in time.

On the 27th the shattered 2nd Corps, having broken off the action, continued the retreat with the 1st Corps. On the 28th Gough, with the 3rd Cavalry Brigade at St. Quentin, and Chetwode, with the 5th at Cérizy, turned on the leading German cavalry at both these places and threw them back on their main bodies in confusion. For the first time since the retreat began the worn-out British infantry, having reached the line of the Oise between Noyon and La Fère, were able to rest and sleep in peace.

On the 29th the British troops reached the line Compiègne-Soissons, the Germans on the same day occupying La Fère and Amiens, as well as Rethel and other towns along the French front. Bapaume held out until the rolling-stock had been removed from Amiens, but the flood-tide of invasion now seemed to be carrying everything before it. Uhlans threatened to cut Sir John French's communications with his base at Boulogne and Dieppe. The base was accordingly transferred to St. Nazaire, at the mouth of the Loire. Timely help came to the retiring British troops on the 29th by a brilliant counter-stroke near Guise on the part of the French Fifth Army on their right; but neither the British nor the French troops on de Lanzerac's right were in a position to make a stand in support of that reaction. The Aisne was forced by the invaders on the 28-29th, and Rheims, Châlons, and Laon abandoned to them within the ensuing forty-eight hours. Falling back doggedly from the Aisne and the Oise, the British troops withdrew on 2nd Sept. to Chantilly-Nanteuil, the German advance having been checked on the previous day by the 4th (Guards) Brigade in a stiff rear-guard action at Villers-Cotterets.

The great retreat was coming to an end. Victory and Paris seemed within the enemy's grasp. He had—as he thought—so shattered the British army that it was now entirely negligible as a fighting force. He was ignorant of the real strength of the force that was gathering on the British left north of Paris—the new French Sixth Army under General Maunoury. It seemed both to von Kluck and the German Higher Command that they had only the shaken French Fifth Army seriously to reckon with on the Allied left, and, as von Kluck was considered more than strong enough for the task, von Moltke took the Garde Reserve Corps and 11th Army Corps from his right wing to East Prussia, where the Russians were now carrying the war well into the Fatherland.

The help rendered by the Russians at this critical phase of the war was invaluable, and played no small part in the approaching struggle on the Marne. In his fears for the safety of Paris, Joffre was naturally anxious to profit by this relief, and discussed with Sir John French the possibility of taking the offensive at the earliest possible moment. There appears to have been some misunderstanding as to Sir John's plans at this point. The British Commander-in-Chief declares that he had every intention of remaining in the line and filling the gap between the French Fifth and Sixth Armies, but the French Higher Command was apparently under the impression that he was determined not to fight any more until his troops had been given a week to reorganize and refit. Lord Kitchener himself hurried to Paris to clear the matter up, but "full accord", according to President Poincaré, long afterwards, "was not re-established without trouble". As soon, however, as the offensive was ordered, continued the same authority, the British Commander-in-Chief gave his assistance without reserve. "His army fought with magnificent courage, and Great Britain played a brilliant part in the common victory."

In the meantime the retreat continued, the British, on 2nd Sept., reaching the line of the Marne towards Lagny and Meaux, with the French Fifth Army, now under the command of Franchet d'Esperey, on their right, retiring on Château-Thierry, and Maunoury's new Sixth Army, on their left, retiring towards Paris. It was at this point that von Kluck made the fatal mistake of dismissing the British army as practically crushed and out of action. Diverting the advance of the German First Army, he left Paris on his right in order to deal what he hoped would be a decisive blow at the French Fifth Army south of the Marne. By 5th Sept. the British army had fallen back to the Forest of Crécy to bring it in line with the French Fifth Army.

Not only was the British army at length receiving sorely needed reinforcements, but the French army was every moment increasing in strength and numbers as it fell back on its reserves. Besides the French Sixth Army on the British left, another new French army had sprung into being behind the marshes of St. Gond—the Ninth, under Foch, who filled the gap between Franchet d'Esperey's Fifth and Langle de Cary's Fourth Army—behind Vitry. Eastward the line was continued by the French Third Army, now commanded by Sarrail in place of Ruffey; and Castlenau's Second Army, now fighting the battle of the Grand Couronné de Nancy which stemmed the German invasion at this point, and prevented the threatened envelopment on the Allies' right, where the Kaiser himself had gone to inspire the troops of Prince Rupprecht of Bavaria.

First Battles of Marne and Aisne

Secure on the right, Joffre was at last able to deliver the great counter-stroke on the left which the Germans had invited by their tremendous bid for swift and decisive victory. The retreat came to an end on 5th Sept., when Joffre gave Sir John French his final plans for the coming offensive, and von Kluck, ignorant of the recuperative powers of the British, as well as of the strength of the French Sixth Army on their left, marched across their front in pursuit of d'Esperey's Fifth. That night the Germans crossed the Marne, and the Grand and Petit Morin—two streams which branch off roughly parallel to one another south of the Marne—while some of their patrols reached the Seine, there catching a fleeting glimpse of the capital where they confidently hoped the French would soon be brought to terms.

When at last the retreat came to an end, the British army had been reinforced by the 4th Division, which, with the 19th Infantry Brigade—and subsequently the 6th Division—became the Third Army Corps under General Pulteney, who arrived in France to take command of it on 30th Aug. Deficiencies in armament and material had also been partially made good, but, most important of all, Sir John French bore witness, "the promise of an immediate advance against the enemy had sent a thrill of exultation and enthusiasm throughout the whole force".

The first battle of the Marne had scarcely opened on 6th Sept., 1914, when von Kluck, realizing that Maunoury's force on his extreme right was becoming dangerous, sent two army corps northwards to deal with it. Maunoury had already crossed the Marne and fought the first battle of the Ourcq on the 5th. The dispatch of the two German corps to keep him in check made a way now for the British troops, when, according to plan, they turned on the invaders with the object of assailing their flank with the French Sixth Army on their left; while the French Fifth Army, and the French armies to its right, made a simultaneous frontal attack.

Both Joffre and French were under the impression that the German thrust was still in full career when their counter-stroke was delivered. Already, however, the tide had begun to turn. Von Kluck, realizing too late—what should have been obvious from the first—that his communications were being seriously threatened on the Ourcq, saw that retreat was inevitable unless he could crush the forces gathering so ominously against his right flank. The opening of the battle of the Marne thus became on von Kluck's part an effort to overwhelm Maunoury on his right, while he kept the British army and French Fifth Army at bay with strong rear-guards and cavalry. The surprise of the day to the Germans was probably the remarkable part played by the British, who, instead of being practically wiped out, as the enemy fondly believed, attacked with an energy and dash which carried everything before them, and, but for filling their allotted rôle of maintaining alignment with the French armies on each flank, would doubtless have advanced farther than they did. As it was, the progress made was considerable. The Germans were driven back to the Grand Morin, and the line of that stream made good on the following day.

Meantime the French Fifth Army on their right, materially helped by this success, had also recovered a good deal of ground, while Foch and Langle de Cary, farther east, held their own against the fierce assaults of the German centre. A last desperate effort was being made to hack a way through at this point, and Sarrail, on Langle de Cary's right, had to give way a little along the Meuse. That day the Germans reached the most southerly point of their advance, at Provins. The deciding phase of the battle, however, was developing with dramatic swiftness on von Kluck's right wing. Maunoury was hard pressed by the repeated onslaughts of the enemy, whose heavy reinforcements at this point held the issue in the balance for several days. General Gallieni, the Governor of Paris, hurried up fresh troops to Maunoury in motor-buses and taxis, and the French line held.

The British army helped matters considerably by driving the Germans across the Grand Morin at Coulommiers on the 7th, and on the following day from the Petit Morin, thus also helping d'Esperey with the French Fifth Army, on its right, to continue his advance farther east as far as Montmirail. On the 9th came the decisive blows which removed all doubts as to the issue of the battle. Von Kluck's retreat on his left flank exposed the right of von Buelow's Second Army, which was further jeopardized by a gap which appeared on its left, where it should have linked up with von Hausen's Third Army. This double opening gave Foch, facing von Buelow in the marshes of St. Gond, the opportunity which he sought of smashing the enemy's centre. He seized it by a series of lightning blows which drove the German centre back on the morning of the 10th in complete disorder, pursued by Foch's victorious infantry.

All the reinforcements sent to von Kluck were now of no avail against the French Sixth Army, which had been fighting against odds since 6th Sept., helped not a little by Pulteney's 3rd Corps on its right flank. Maunoury carried the Ourcq on the 9th, and Pulteney's corps was able to cross the Marne, after stiff fighting at La Ferté-sous-Jouarre, at dawn on the following day, when the German retreat became general. The left of the British 2nd Corps had crossed the Marne at Nanteuil, where the bridges were found unbroken and the enemy gone, on the morning of the 9th, but was ordered not to advance too far north until the 1st and 2nd Corps were firmly established on the northern bank. The 1st crossed later in the day at Charly-sur-Marne and Saulchéry, clearing the ground of the enemy and making many captures; but the 3rd Corps had a harder task at La Ferté-sous-Jouarre, and, as already mentioned, was not completely established on the other side until the following morning. The first battle of the Marne ended on the night of the 10th with the enemy in full retreat to the north and north-east and the Allies in hot pursuit. By the 12th he had been driven back from the Seine a distance of 65 miles, and the great German plan of a sudden crushing defeat of the Allies in the West had collapsed like a house of cards.

The hopes thus raised among the Allies of a speedy termination of the war in their favour were, on the other hand, equally illusory. Though the Germans lost heavily in officers and men, as well as in guns and other war material, their retreat was no disorderly flight. Many desperate rear-guard actions were fought all along the line, but the enemy retired steadily to prepared positions on the Aisne, where the eyes of all the commanders were to be opened to the possibilities of trench warfare under modern conditions. It needed many hard lessons before the truth was driven home.

When the first battle of the Aisne opened on 13th Sept., the British army already had its outposts on that river, the main body being in positions somewhat to the south, between Soissons and Bourg. Throwing bridges across during the night, the advance was continued on the opposite bank on the following day, though not without heavy British casualties, amounting to between 1500 and 2000, including 3 commanding officers. The 6th Division arrived from England at this stage, and joined its own 3rd Corps on the left. Further advance was stayed by the strength of the enemy's entrenched positions, in which he now determined to make his stand. Here he was backed by an overpowering superiority in artillery which, with fierce counter-attacks on the part of his infantry, gallantly repulsed though they were, caused such severe losses that the British Commander-in-Chief was forced to assume a defensive rôle, while Maunoury, de Castlenau, and Foch each made stupendous efforts to break the enemy's line and renew the war of movement and manœuvre on which their military principles had been based. All, however, ended in the same dreary deadlock of entrenchments.

Failing to shift the enemy from these impregnable positions, Joffre endeavoured to outflank the German right wing, already threatened by Maunoury's advance along the Oise. Two new French armies were formed from the reserves to extend the Allied left—the Seventh, entrusted to de Castlenau, whose Second Army was transferred to Dubail, and the Tenth, the command of which was given to Maud'huy. De Castlenau's Seventh Army, though it failed to turn the enemy's flank—the movement having been anticipated by him—succeeded in extending the pressure of Maunoury's left, which had swung round by the 20th until it ran north from Compiègne to west of Lassigny, and in building the first section of Joffre's great besieging wall which, gradually extending from the Alps to the sea, became the impenetrable barrier between the enemy and his main objectives. The Allies' line was continued by de Castlenau through Roye to Albert, and thence, by Maud'huy's Tenth Army, through Arras to Lens.

Von Moltke had now been superseded in the German Higher Command by Falkenhayn, who promptly countered Joffre's new strategy by similar extensions of the German front, thus beginning the outflanking race destined only to end in stalemate on the coast. While extending their right the Germans made a strenuous effort to regain the initiative by a blow with the army group nominally commanded by the German Crown Prince on Sarrail's flank on the Meuse. It was a blow aimed at Verdun and the whole of the Allied line, which it hoped to break through at this point and so take in the rear. Verdun, however, had been rendered impenetrable by miles of powerfully protected outer defences, and practically the only success which fell to the Crown Prince on this occasion was the capture of the Camp-des-Romains and St. Mihiel on the Meuse, thus creating the remarkable salient east of Verdun which was destined to remain until the Franco-American force flattened it out in the victorious advance of the Allies four years later. The German Crown Prince fared even worse a week later, when he attacked along the main road through the Argonne towards Verdun, only to be flung back. It was after this double failure that the Germans bombarded Rheims and shattered her noble cathedral.

The crucial phase of the struggle in the West had shifted towards the coast as the first battle of the Aisne died down on 28th Sept., and the campaigns began in Artois which led in due course to the fierce struggles for the Labyrinth, the Vimy Ridge, Lens, and Loos. The extension of the French left placed the British army in an anomalous position. Even before Joffre had begun to build his barrier in this direction the British Commander-in-Chief had felt strongly that his proper sphere of action was on the Belgian frontier on the left flank of the French armies, for the two-fold purpose of defending the Channel ports and being in position to concert combined action with the British navy. He suggested this move to the north to Joffre on 29th Sept., pointing out its strategical advantages and the possibility of doing so now that the position of his force on the right bank of the Aisne had been thoroughly well entrenched. Joffre agreed in principle to General French's proposal, but postponed the movement until 3rd Oct.

Retreat from Antwerp

By this time the critical situation of the Belgian army at Antwerp had become hopeless, and the danger of a German descent on the Channel ports suddenly became acute. Since their retreat towards Antwerp after their evacuation of Brussels on 20th Aug., the Belgians had kept the Germans at bay by vigorous counter-attacks, and threatened their communications by sundry sorties from the fortress. These sorties and counter-attacks, calling for reinforcements at a time when every soldier was needed on the main fighting fronts, infuriated the Germans and led to the reign of terror which included the deliberate destruction of Louvain and similar outrages at Malines, Termonde, and elsewhere.

Having made his position secure on the Aisne, and brought up his heavy guns, the enemy began his bombardment of the outer forts of Antwerp on 28th Sept. By the 3rd of Oct. the Belgians were endangered not only by the besieging army, but also by the ever-lengthening German line which, having now been extended from Lassigny to Lille—only 38 miles from the sea—threatened to isolate the Belgian forces from the Franco-British armies. They accordingly decided that plans must be made at once to withdraw from Antwerp in the direction of Ghent, both to protect the coast-line and gain touch with the Allies. The British troops hurriedly sent to reinforce the Belgians—a brigade of Royal Marines and part of the recently formed Naval Division—had no influence on the fate of the fortress, but helped in protecting the flight of the citizens and in the final retreat of the Belgian army. Some 1500 of the Royal Naval Division were forced across the Dutch frontier and interned, and about 800 were made prisoners. The remnants of the British force, and the bulk of the Belgian army, escaped westward, leaving the Germans on 9th Oct. in possession of the deserted city. A little more and the German commander (von Beseler) might have closed the gap beyond the Scheldt through which this retreat had been made. Luckily for the Allies, too, the German Higher Command failed, as Lord French long afterwards expressed it, to gather the richer harvest which had been put within its grasp by the capture of Antwerp. There was then apparently no insuperable obstacle to an immediate German advance on Dunkirk, Calais, and Boulogne, before the Allied troops could arrive from the main theatres to prevent it. "As on the Marne, so at Antwerp, they were not prepared to seize the psychological moment and to play boldly for the great stake".

General French, who had been given no voice in the Antwerp dispositions, was now in the midst of the British move from the Aisne front to the north, where he was to be reinforced by the 7th Infantry and 3rd Cavalry Divisions, which had been landed on the Belgian coast to defend Zeebrugge and Ostend under Rawlinson's command, and the Indian contingent, which had just arrived at Orleans under Willcocks.

First Battle of Ypres

The two corps under de Castlenau and de Maud'huy were now under the supreme command of General Foch, who had orders to control all the French armies operating in the northern theatre, and was confident that it was still possible to outflank the Germans and bend them back behind the Scheldt. At the end of a fortnight the British army had been successfully transported to the north from the Aisne—after successfully holding the line of that river for twenty-five days against many desperate efforts of the enemy to break through—and had taken up its position on the left of Maud'huy's corps, the Allies' line being extended thence into Flanders by the French 8th Corps (under d'Urbal), which had been called up by Joffre to this end, as well as to help the sorely tried Belgians. Meantime the Germans, besides pressing Maud'huy hard in front of Arras, and forcing his Territorials out of Lille, had driven the retreating Belgian army out of Houthulst Forest to the line of the Yser north of Ypres, whence it took refuge behind the Yser and completed the Allied line to the coast. Rawlinson's 4th Corps, covering the retreat of the Belgian army, had hard fighting most of the way before it succeeded in joining the main British army, the German forces from Antwerp concentrating westwards in ever increasing numbers. By the 15th Capper's 7th Division was east of Ypres, while Byng's 3rd Cavalry Division, a day earlier, had connected up with Gough's 2nd Cavalry Division in front of Kemmel and assisted in the capture of that position, a gain which proved of the utmost importance in the subsequent struggle for Ypres. Allenby's Cavalry Corps had greatly distinguished itself during the two previous days, driving the enemy back all the way in a magnificent sweep to the north and north-east.

A brilliant series of advances by Pulteney's 3rd Corps on 12-15th Oct., leading to the capture of Bailleul and Meteren, and the line Sailly-Nieppe, confirmed French in the belief which he shared with Foch that the enemy had exhausted his strength, and that the time was ripe for a strong offensive eastwards. The advance had scarcely been started, however, before reports arrived of a powerful offensive on the part of the Germans towards Ypres and the Yser. The power and weight of the enemy's opposition on the British front increased each day. Armentières and the Bois Grenier were won by 15th Oct., but the failure of the 4th Corps in its advance on Menin was one of numerous indications that the Germans were being heavily reinforced. By the 21st all General French's worst forebodings were realized by the certainty established that the small German force which had been operating between Ostend and Menin on the 18th had been increased by no fewer than four corps. This discovery, in the British Commander-in-Chief's own words, "came like a veritable bolt from the blue". There was no longer any hope of continuing the offensive on the part of the comparatively weak British line, extended as it was on too long a front. It was a case of holding on now until relief arrived.

The threat was twofold. Not only were the Germans massing in tremendous strength in the north; they were also seriously threatening the British right. Maud'huy, round Arras, was fighting a battle which, like that which the British were waging round Ypres, was one of the landmarks of the war. He sent word on the 16th that the enemy was intent on driving in a wedge between Ypres and La Bassée—a threat which, had it matured, would have finally separated the Allies, and compelled the British either to surrender or be driven into the sea. Faced by this double threat, General French decided to risk the possible disaster on his right, and concentrate against the German tide in the north, which otherwise must gain the seaboard, with possibly fatal consequences to the whole British campaign.

Fortunately the First Army under Haig had already been ordered in the direction best calculated to meet the new situation, though there was no longer any hope of its original orders—to turn the enemy's flank and drive him back to Ghent—being carried out. In this first phase of the battle of Ypres, which lasted until the night of 26th Oct., the northern portion of the British line, notwithstanding the enemy's immense reinforcements, progressed slowly but surely, and took heavy toll in killed, wounded, and prisoners. A certain amount of ground was lost to the south, between Zonnebeke and La Bassée—the commanders of both the 2nd and 3rd Corps being anxious about their positions on more than one occasion—but at no point was any serious break made in the line. Maud'huy at the same time was gallantly keeping the enemy in check in the Arras region, though he could not drive him from Lens and the Vimy Ridge; while on the left the French and Belgians were withstanding repeated assaults on the swaying front between Dixmude and the sea. The line held, and was now more or less firmly established.

The second phase of the battle of Ypres consisted in the repeated attempts of the Germans to break through this line at all costs. It began on 27th Oct., and lasted through five of the most momentous days in the history of the British army. On this day the French 9th Corps, which had been sent by Joffre to the assistance of the sorely tried British troops, took over the trenches in the northern part of the British salient. Capper's 7th Division, exhausted by incessant fighting and fearful losses, was temporarily attached to Haig's 1st Corps in the centre, and took over the ground south of the Ypres-Menin road. Byng's 3rd Cavalry Division was at the same time placed under Allenby. The 4th Corps was thus temporarily broken up, Rawlinson being sent home to supervise the preparation of the 8th Division for France.

The British line was further reduced in numbers during the opening days of this new phase of the battle by the repeated but unavailing attempt of the enemy to advance, the Germans meantime mounting up reserves of reinforcements for a decisive blow until, by the 30th, they outnumbered the battle-worn British by two to one. Then came the onslaught in full, almost overpowering strength. "October 31st and November 1st", afterwards wrote the British Commander-in-Chief in his story of 1914, "will remain for ever memorable in the history of our country, for during those two days, no more than one thin and straggling line of tired-out British soldiers stood between the Empire and its practical ruin as an independent first-class Power." The storm centre of the British battle-line was the Wytschaete-Messines ridge, where Allenby's Cavalry Corps and Shaw's 9th Brigade of the 3rd Division withstood for forty-eight hours the supreme efforts of two and a half German army corps to dislodge them. The honours of those heroic days were shared by the French 9th Corps and the British 1st Corps (with the 7th Division attached) in their continued defence of the Ypres salient; and the British 2nd Corps, which held a long line on the right in difficult country, and, though forced to give up Neuve Chapelle on the 28th, withstood repeated attacks by superior numbers until the Indian Corps took over their positions.

The culminating phase of the battle began on the 29th, when overwhelming masses of the enemy stormed the centre of the Ypres salient, held by Haig's 1st Corps and the 7th Division, and forced our troops back on Gheluvelt. The ground was recovered before nightfall, but fighting of the fiercest character continued all round and beyond the salient, the critical sector of the 31st extending from Gheluvelt to Messines, on the south, where the 1st Cavalry Division was heavily pressed, and the London Scottish received their costly baptism of fire. The Germans got into Messines that day, but were hurled out again, and the line in this sector was completely restored by nightfall. The climax of the crisis had been reached shortly after midday in the Gheluvelt area, when the 1st Corps, after doing more than could be expected of any men in their prolonged stand against the heaviest odds, was at last broken, part of the 1st Division falling back rapidly along the Ypres-Menin road, with the Germans at their heels. "I felt", afterwards wrote General French, who was not more than a mile or so away at the time, "as if the last barrier between the Germans and the Channel seaboard was broken down", and he spent the worst half-hour his life had ever known. The situation was saved by Brigadier-General FitzClarence, V.C., commanding the 1st Guards Brigade of the 1st Division, who, on his own initiative, and in the nick of time, ordered the 2nd Worcesters to counter-attack. The Worcesters, who were in reserve to the 2nd Division, rushed up to fill the gap, and, saving the South Wales Borderers, drove the Germans out of Gheluvelt and re-established the line, which was completely restored before dark. FitzClarence was killed only a week or two later in the same part of the field.

The third phase of the battle of Ypres lasted from 1st Nov. to the 10th. Its most dangerous hours were at the very beginning, when both Messines and Wytschaete were lost, and only the timely arrival of the French 16th Corps, which partially restored the situation, and the devoted bravery of Allenby's Cavalry Corps, staved off this new threat of disaster. It is impossible here to follow all the confused operations in the remainder of this phase, in which fighting continued with varying intensity, and mingled success, all along the line from La Bassée to the sea.

The outstanding feature of the fourth and final phase, which extended from 11th Nov. to the 21st, was the succession of heavy assaults by the pick of the Prussian Guard, ordered by the Kaiser personally to carry the Ypres salient at all hazards. It failed, but not before the Germans had pierced the front along the Menin road in the first clash of arms on the morning of the 11th, a battalion of Royal Fusiliers being practically wiped out in gallantly disputing their passage. Haig met the situation "with the same grim determination, steadfast courage, and skilful forethought"—the words are those of Lord French—"which had characterized his handling of the operations throughout". The line was re-established, but only after fearful losses on both sides. The 1st (Guards) Brigade mustered at night only 4 officers and 300 men.

The French and Belgians were also attacked all along their line between Ypres and the sea—where British monitors swept the coast with shells for 6 miles inland—but the enemy was held off, save at Dixmude, which he captured and held. Between Dixmude, which had been stubbornly defended by Admiral Ronarc'h and his French marines, and Nieuport the sluices of the Yser had been opened by the Belgians, and the low-lying country across which the Germans were striving to force a way so flooded as to render all their efforts futile.

It was during this final effort of the Germans to reach the Channel ports in 1914 that Lord Roberts arrived at the front to visit the Indian Corps, who had withstood some heavy assaults on the old line of the Second Army, between Armentières and La Bassée. Lord Roberts had scarcely fulfilled his mission, inspiring the troops with his presence at a critical time, when he was taken suddenly ill on 13th Oct. and died on the following day.

North of Armentières the British 3rd Corps under Pulteney, which held the line thence towards Messines, had its share of fighting on the left bank of the Lys, and though its deeds in maintaining its positions were overshadowed by the epic struggles in the salient, its minor battles played their part in the victory of First Ypres. The great battle died down with the failure of the supreme effort of the Prussian Guard. Rains and floods and mud combined to call a halt in the struggle for the Channel ports, and the Western front was now established for the winter. There were occasionally attacks by the Germans at Ypres and Festubert, and more than one attempt on their part to cross the flooded Yser on rafts; but all to no purpose; and before the end of the year (20th Dec.) a five days' battle between the Indian troops and the Germans round Givenchy left matters much as they were before, the British positions, with the aid of British troops, being held. The French also broke the monotony of trench warfare with encouraging advances in Alsace, towards Noyon, in the Argonne, and elsewhere, but no vital changes took place in the general situation.

Eastern Front, 1914

Foiled in their grandiose plans in the West, the Germans were forced to rest content with their valuable territorial gains in France and Belgium, and remain on the defensive there while they turned to the more threatening situation on the Eastern front. As already noted, the Germans had under-estimated the rapidity of the Russian mobilization. They had not anticipated an offensive on that front until they could spare as many reserves as necessary from the West, and the forces left to guard their vulnerable frontier of East Prussia were as inadequate to stay the unexpected advance which the Grand Duke Nicholas, who was in supreme command of the Russian armies, ordered under Generals Rennenkampf and Samsonoff, as were the Belgians to prevent the march of the Germans across their territory. By 25th Aug. the Russian armies, whose advance had begun as early as the 7th, had pushed so far ahead that all East Prussia seemed in danger of falling into their hands. General von François, commanding the German troops, had been driven into Königsberg, the cradle of the Prussian monarchy; Gumbinnen, Justerberg, Allenstein, Soldau, had all been captured; and the hopes of a flight to Berlin before the Russian 'steam-roller'—too often raised in the early stages of the war—seemed not unlikely to be realized.

Germany's hour of danger, however, produced the man who was destined to play a ruling part in the remaining phases of the struggle—Paul von Hindenburg, a veteran of the Franco-Prussian War, then on the retired list. Hindenburg knew the topography of East Prussia by heart, and had commanded army corps in manœuvres along that frontier for many years. Appointed at this critical moment to supersede General von François, he collected 160,000 men from every available source, and by means of Germany's unequalled strategic railway system had concentrated them in a favourable position between Allenstein and Soldau for delivering the blow which would cut the communications of the southern army under Samsonoff, and smash it piecemeal in the treacherous marshes of the Masurian Lakes, the tracks through which, though well known to Hindenburg, were a veritable tangle to the Russians.

Tempted by their initial triumphs, the Russians had themselves courted disaster by placing themselves in precarious positions. Samsonoff's southern army had not only lost touch with the northern force under Rennenkampf, which had occupied Insterberg on the 23rd on its march on Königsberg, but had also failed to secure either Allenstein or Soldau. Hindenburg was quick to seize every advantage, and his lethal thrust on the 26th, when he retook Soldau and outflanked the Russian left, was followed by a similar enveloping movement on their right before they realized what had happened. Masses of German guns came up and completed the move. Too late the Russians fled along the only road left open to them—by way of Ortelsberg and Johannisberg, across a narrow slip of land between the marshes. Save for little more than one corps, which succeeded in escaping along this route before it was closed, practically the whole of Samsonoff's army was wiped out in this decisive battle of Tannenberg, as the victors named it. Samsonoff himself was killed by a shell on 31st Aug. Altogether the Russians lost in killed and wounded some 30,000; no fewer than 90,000 were taken prisoners.

Hindenburg, whose Chief of Staff was General von Ludendorff—already distinguished in the war as the leader in the assault on Liége—at once became a national hero throughout Germany. The Central Powers, however, had little further cause for rejoicing on the Eastern front in 1914, once Hindenburg had been enticed to the Niemen by the rapid retreat of Rennenkampf after the Tannenberg débâcle. The Grand Duke Nicholas had sent General Ruzsky from Galicia to retrieve the situation, and the new leader made as good use of the Niemen River—a formidable obstacle to cross with its width of some 200 yards—as Hindenburg had done of the Masurian Lakes. The operations, which ended in the failure of the Germans to cross the river, and their heavy defeat at Augustovo after a sanguinary nineteen days' battle beginning on 1st Oct., restored confidence to the Russian army.

General Ruzsky had already made his mark in the opening campaign in Galicia, where the Austro-Hungarian armies, after invading Russian Poland at the opening of the war, were driven back in a series of mighty battles which left the Russians in possession of Lemberg and all Eastern Galicia. Brussiloff was meantime sweeping on towards the Carpathian passes, while Ivanoff, commanding the Russians in Poland, forced back the invading armies under Dankl and the Archduke Joseph Ferdinand beyond the Vistula and Cracow. Przemysl alone held out in Galicia, and this was invested by the Russians towards the end of September, when the Germans, far to the north on the Niemen, were rapidly losing the advantage and prestige they had won at Tannenberg. Hence Germany's increasing need for help from the Western front.

In order to check the Russian advance on the key position of Cracow, Hindenburg was now called from the East Prussian front to take over the supreme command of the unified German and Austro-Hungarian armies in a crushing blow at the Russian centre in Poland. Hindenburg's advance on Warsaw was planned by his Chief of Staff, Ludendorff, to keep pace with a parallel advance of the Austro-German armies in the south, intended to raise the siege of Przemysl and turn the Russians out of Lemberg. The combined forces of the Central Powers amounted to some two million men, outnumbering the Russians by at least half a million, and outgunning them completely. It speaks volumes not only for the fighting spirit of the Russian armies at this period of the war, but also for the strategy inspired by the Grand Duke Nicholas, that in both the first and second battles of Warsaw the combined Austro-German armies were both outfought and outmanœuvred. "The Grand Duke Nicholas", to quote from Lord French's tribute to his leadership some years later, "proved that he possessed that highest of military gifts—the power of renunciation, of 'cutting down', of sacrificing the less essential for the more."

Foreseeing the danger of Hindenburg's march on Warsaw, the Grand Duke promptly recalled the first great Russian advance on Cracow, and the armies concerned were safely withdrawn behind the Vistula and the San before the enemy could cut the main line from Warsaw to Kiev. Ivanoff's army in Galicia conformed to the general movement. While thus suggesting the abandonment of Poland and a general retirement on Brest-Litovsk, the Grand Duke placed a field army in defence of Warsaw, assisted by Japanese heavy artillery, and prepared a great counter-offensive from the north-west, under cover of the guns of Novo Georgievsk.

Hindenburg's main blow was delivered at Josefov, higher up the Vistula, with the intention of taking Warsaw in the rear. Ruzsky had been brought down to take command at Josefov, and here repeated the disaster which he had recently inflicted on the Germans at Augustovo. This time he lured the enemy across the river before falling on him in difficult country, and cut him to pieces. Rennenkampf was equally successful with the counter-attack from Novo Georgievsk, striking so hard that the German left centre was forced back from the Vistula with heavy losses. With both flanks turned—for Ruzsky had followed up his victory by himself crossing the river at Novo Alexandriev, and driving the Germans back first to Radowa (15th Oct.) and then to Kielce (3rd Nov.)—Hindenburg had no alternative but to seek safety within the German frontier, and prepare another counter-stroke. The only success of the first advance on Warsaw was achieved by the Austrians under the Archduke Joseph Ferdinand and Generals Woyrsch and Dankl, who succeeded in temporarily relieving Przemysl and recovering Jaroslav. Hindenburg's retreat, however, compelled them to withdraw in conformity to that movement. Przemysl was again invested, the Austrians again fell back in Galicia, and the Russian advance on Cracow was renewed, the Grand Duke Nicholas having set his heart on reaching that convenient gateway both to Berlin and Vienna before the end of the year.

The second Russian advance on Cracow commenced with the second German advance on Warsaw, and both operations naturally reacted on each other. The Russians were at the very gates of Cracow by 5th Dec., but were then checked by an Austro-Hungarian counter-offensive which threatened both their flanks. The loss of the Dukla Pass (12th Dec.) forced a general retreat on this front, and was followed by the loss in turn of the Lupkow and Uszok Passes. By 20th Dec., however, the Russians, who had fallen back behind the River Nida, turned on their pursuers and drove them north again until they were once more in possession of the Carpathian passes.

The Germans were no more successful in their second advance on Warsaw than the Russians had been in their march on Cracow. Hindenburg's urgent call for reinforcements, which had helped to relieve the pressure on the Western front in those critical days round Ypres, enabled him to attack all along the line on 18th Nov. The main assault was delivered by von Mackensen on the line held by Ruzsky from Gombin, on the Vistula, to Uniejov, on the Warta. Ruzsky's retreat to the Bzura in face of Mackensen's terrific onrush was one of the brilliant episodes of the war. It continued, with an increasing bulge, until Mackensen, on 23rd Nov., burst right through this and split it in halves. The halves held, and began to close up, with two German army corps all but bottled up within. But for some blunder in timing, for which Rennenkampf was held responsible, their only way of escape would have been cut off. As it was, after three days of desperate fighting, the German corps fought their way out—but only in remnants.

The Russians themselves had suffered heavy losses and were running short of ammunition, and when Hindenburg retaliated by blow upon blow in every sector, the Grand Duke Nicholas shortened his front, evacuated Lodz, and defended Warsaw from behind the Rawka and the Bzura. Here he sustained repeated onslaughts for nearly three weeks, the fiercest fighting taking place between the 19th Dec. and Christmas Eve against Bolimov and Sochaczew. In the end the Germans failed to hack a way through to Warsaw, just as they had failed a few weeks previously in their efforts to break through to Ypres and the Channel ports on the Western front. They were still 35 miles from the Polish capital at the close of 1914.

Opening Campaign in Serbia

In the meantime the Austro-Hungarian armies, which had somewhat atoned for their earlier failures by their successes in the recent advance which had temporarily relieved Przemysl, were making little headway in their campaign against Serbia. That heroic little nation, though sadly depleted in her manhood by two years of Balkan warfare, was more than a match for her mightier neighbours in the opening stages of the European War. Austria's first punitive expedition, heralded by the bombardment of Belgrade on 29th July, was easily checked, the main invading forces being withdrawn to meet the new situation on the Russian front. Serbia and Montenegro thereupon invaded Bosnia, and an unproductive campaign of withdrawals and advances led, towards the end of October, when Turkey threw in her lot with the Central Powers, to an Austrian invasion of Serbia in earnest. At first the Austrians, an army corps strong, and advancing in three columns, carried all before them. Valjevo fell on 29th Nov., and Belgrade ten days later. In withdrawing, however, the Serbians, ably led by the Crown Prince, Marshal Putnik, and General Mishitch, were falling back towards their bases and new supplies of ammunition; and in the battle of Rudnik, or 'Battle of the Ridges', which followed, turned on their pursuers and practically destroyed them. The battle lasted three days, at the end of which the remnants of the Austrian army corps, with the victorious Serbians hard on their heels, were in full flight to the frontier, leaving behind them 15,000 prisoners and 19 guns. All told their casualties amounted to some 80,000 and the bulk of their guns before the survivors were back in their own country, across the Danube, the Drina, and the Save.

First Months of the War at Sea

At sea the first months of the war had seen the Germans very discreetly sheltering in Kiel and Wilhelmshaven, leaving it to submarines, mine-layers, raiders, and a few commerce-destroyers to do as much damage as possible and reduce the disparity between its own force and that of the Allied fleets.

The first naval action of any importance took place in the Bight of Heligoland, on 23rd Aug., when a force of destroyers, led by Commander Tyrwhitt in the new light cruiser Arethusa, with another light cruiser, the Fearless, and a flotilla of submarines under Commodore Keyes, served as a lure to draw out the Germans. They drew first a German force of destroyers and two cruisers (Ariadne and Strasburg) from Heligoland. The Arethusa greatly distinguished herself in the general engagement which followed, but, though she played the main part in driving the Germans back, she was so badly cut up that she had to be taken in tow at the end of the action. This was not until the Germans, deceived into the belief that the British ships were unsupported, sent out their heavier cruisers, the Mainz, Köln, and Aurora, just in time for Beatty's battle-cruisers, which arrived at the critical moment, led by the Lion, to settle the issue by sinking the three enemy cruisers above mentioned, besides a number of their destroyers. No British units were lost. Apart from this engagement the war in home waters for the next few months resolved itself into such isolated incidents as the sinking of the three old sister cruisers Aboukir, Hogue, and Cressy by the German submarine commanded by Otto Weddigen (22nd Sept.); the destruction of four German destroyers by the British light cruiser Undaunted, supported by destroyers, on 17th Oct.; and raids by fast German cruisers on Yarmouth (3rd Nov.), on Scarborough, Whitby, and the Hartlepools (16th Dec.), the first of which led to the loss of the German cruiser Yorck while crossing the minefield at Wilhelmshaven.

The scattered units of the German navy in other seas were gradually bottled up or destroyed. The Dreadnought Goeben, and the light cruiser Breslau, which were in the Mediterranean on the outbreak of hostilities, succeeded in evading the British fleet and reached the Dardanelles, where they played no small part in persuading the pro-German Turks, a few months later, openly to side with the Central Powers. Other German warships caught by the war in more distant waters included the light cruiser Emden, on the China station. The Emden disappeared for six weeks and then turned up in the Bay of Bengal, bombarding Madras on 22nd Sept., and capturing some twenty British steamers in the same month. On 28th Oct. she sank a Russian cruiser in Penang Roads, as well as a French destroyer, but twelve days later (9th Nov.) ended her eventful cruise off Cocos (Keeling) Islands, where she called to destroy the cable and wireless station. The telegraphists on the island sent out a warning message which reached the Sydney, a British cruiser of the Australian squadron then escorting Australian and New Zealand troops to the war. Within three hours the Sydney arrived on the scene, and having the range of the Emden with 6-inch guns to 4.1-inch guns, forced the German cruiser ashore. After losing 7 officers and 104 men the Emden, burning and half-sunk, surrendered.

More dangerous than the Emden was the German cruiser squadron under Admiral Graf von Spee, which concentrated in the South Pacific from Kiao-Chau and elsewhere. The squadron consisted of the twin cruisers Scharnhorst and Gneisenau, each of 11,400 tons, 22 knots speed, and an armament which included eight 8.2-inch guns; and three smaller cruisers, Dresden, Nürnberg, and Leipzig, each of 3500 tons, and carrying ten 4.1-inch guns. On 1st Nov. von Spee fell in with the weak British squadron under Admiral Cradock, who had been sent in August to protect the South Pacific trade, and was expecting reinforcements to cope with the German concentration. Cradock's squadron consisted of old ships like the cruisers Good Hope and Monmouth; the light cruiser Glasgow, and the armed liner Otranto; the pre-Dreadnought battleship Canopus, which had been left behind for repairs, being some twelve hours away. Outsteamed and outranged—though the Good Hope (14,000 tons) had two 9·2-inch guns on board—with the setting sun silhouetting their surfaces against the sky, they were no match for the Germans, who made the most of the added advantage which their inshore position gave them, obscuring their outlines when, as the light began to fail, they drew nearer to Cradock's ships and opened fire. The Good Hope's two 9.2-inch guns could not find their target in the fading light, and were soon put out of action by von Spee's flagship, the Scharnhorst, whose eight 8.2-inch guns, like those of the Gneisenau, which meantime was engaged in a similar duel with the Monmouth, now had the British at their mercy. The 6-inch guns of Cradock's ships, almost awash in the rolling seas, were useless. At 7.50 p.m. the Good Hope blew up, but not before Cradock had ordered the Glasgow to get away with all speed and warn the Canopus. The useless Otranto had been ordered away before the battle opened. The Monmouth, after being silenced and set on fire by the 8.2-inch guns of the Gneisenau, was finally sunk by the Nürnberg. No survivors were picked up by the Germans, either from the Good Hope or the Monmouth. With Cradock perished in this naval disaster off Coronel some 1500 officers and men.

Meanwhile the Glasgow, making full use of her 25-knot speed, had warned the slow old Canopus, and together they made their way back to the Falkland Islands to await developments. Four days later Lord Fisher, who had just succeeded Prince Louis of Battenberg as First Lord of the Admiralty (20th Oct.), dispatched Admiral Sturdee with a squadron bent on avenging Cradock, and protecting the valuable base and coaling-station of the Falklands. Sturdee's squadron included the two first battle-cruisers built—the Invincible and Inflexible, each of 17,250 tonnage, with a speed of 27 knots, and eight 12-inch guns, besides sixteen 4-inch guns and five torpedo tubes. There were also four lighter cruisers—Carnarvon, Kent, Cornwall, and Bristol; and to these were added the Canopus when Sturdee reached the Falklands on 7th December. The Glasgow had already been picked up in the South Atlantic. The superiority both in number and weight of guns was now overwhelmingly on the side of the British.

Von Spee, who claimed to have suffered little loss in his victory off Coronel, had returned in the meanwhile to Valparaiso to refit, leaving again for the Falklands on 15th Nov. His programme apparently was to do as much damage as possible to the British base and coaling-station at Port Stanley; account for the Canopus and Glasgow, which he expected to find defending the port; and thence make for South Africa in support of the rebellion there. Only some twenty-four hours before he approached Port Stanley Admiral Sturdee had arrived, and the news sent by the signallers on the island at 8 a.m., that the unsuspecting enemy was approaching, found the crews grimy from coaling, but alert and ready. Von Spee sent the Gneisenau and Nürnberg ahead to shell the wireless station, but a salvo of 12-inch shells from the Canopus in the harbour at 9.20 a.m. caused them to change their course. It was not, however, until 9.45 a.m., when the Invincible and Inflexible put out to sea with the Glasgow and Kent, that the presence of the battle-cruisers was revealed to them. It was then too late to escape. The German ships were no match for the British battle-cruisers either in speed or gun-power. With the conditions of Coronel thus reversed, Von Spee, abandoning the attempt to run as hopeless, decided to die fighting, and met his death as gallantly as Cradock had done some five short weeks before. Both the Scharnhorst and her sister the Gneisenau, battered by the two British battle-cruisers, who were later joined by the Carnarvon, until they were mere helpless hulks, fought to the last before they capsized, the first at 4.15 p.m., the second just after six. Boats were ordered out to save survivors, and some 200 Germans were picked up from these and other ships that were sunk. The Leipzig, pursued by the Glasgow and Cornwall, kept up a running fight for three hours, and then, hammered to pieces, hauled her flag, but afterwards sank. The Nürnberg, after a longer chase, suffered a similar fate at the hands of the Kent, sinking an hour after surrendering. Only the Dresden escaped, seeking refuge at Juan Fernandez, but three months later she was called to account there by the Kent and Glasgow (14th March, 1915), when, after a five minutes' action, she was blown up by her commander.

With no enemy fleet at sea the task of the British navy was reduced to guarding British commerce from submarines and raiders, keeping watch and ward in the North Sea, and conveying troops to and from the widely scattered theatres of war. Every month added to Britain's commitments in various parts of the globe. All hope of an early peace had vanished by the end of 1914.

Mobilizing the Empire

Happily for the British Empire, Lord Kitchener had from the first anticipated a long-drawn struggle. His call for volunteers "for three years, or the duration of the war", showed how clearly he realized the gravity of the situation. One of his first demands had been for another half-million men to go on with, and history has recorded how nobly the young manhood of the nation responded to his call. All the Dominions and Overseas possessions rallied to the Motherland with equal enthusiasm. We have shown how Indian troops—fighting for the first time on European soil—had already stepped into the breach on the Western front. The Canadians, nearest at hand, were the first of the Dominions to follow suit, but Australia and New Zealand, before their campaigns in Egypt and Gallipoli—and subsequently in France and Flanders—had already occupied Samoa, the Bismarck Archipelago, and other German islands in the Pacific.

South Africa, 1914

South Africa, on the outbreak of hostilities, had offered to carry the war into the German territory of South-West Africa, but General Botha had first to crush a revolt of Colonel Maritz's force; and this was succeeded by a more formidable rising in the Orange River Colony under De Wet, and in the Transvaal under Beyers. The response to Botha's call to arms proved the striking loyalty of the rest of the Union, and with the force thus mustered the South African Prime Minister completely defeated the rebels before the end of November. De Wet was captured, and Beyers was drowned in attempting to escape. The colonial campaign which followed will be dealt with subsequently.

1915 on the European Fronts

The Russian Campaign.—The heaviest burden of the war on the main fronts was now borne by Russia. Having failed to force a decision in the West, Germany looked to the Eastern front for compensating triumphs, confident that she could maintain her defensive positions against the Franco-British armies until such time as, with Austria-Hungary's help, she had brought Russia to her knees. It was also necessary to overawe Roumania and any other hesitating Balkan state that might be disposed to throw in its lot with Russia and her allies. Russia herself was provoking this reversal of German strategy by her renewed advances both on the Carpathian and East Prussian fronts. Hindenburg made two attacks on Warsaw early in the year (February and March), one by way of the Narew and the other by that of the Niemen, but both failed, thanks chiefly to the indomitable spirit of the Russian infantrymen, ill-equipped though they were. It was not until Mackensen's great 'drive' began on the southern flank in Galicia that Germany's new strategy revealed itself. Russia had then reached the culminating point in her military career. Besides holding up the German offensive in Poland, she had made herself mistress of all East Galicia, Przemysl having fallen to General Selivanoff on 22nd March after an investment of five months, thus releasing 100,000 men to reinforce the armies under Ivanoff, Dmitrieff, and Brussiloff—then battling for the passes which led through the Carpathians into the Plain of Hungary. Przemysl alone yielded 126,000 Austrian prisoners, including the commander, General von Kusmanek, and 1000 guns. Between that period and the middle of April, when the Russians claimed possession of all the Carpathian heights along a front of 70 miles from south of the Dukla Pass to north of the Uszok Pass, another 70,000 Austrian prisoners were taken.

It was a dazzling, but an illusory triumph. The Russians had been deliberately led by the Austrians—under instructions from the German Higher Command—into their hazardous Carpathian adventure as part of the secret preparations for Mackensen's mighty blow elsewhere. Von Falkenhayn, then Chief of Staff, afterwards gave the credit for the plan to the German General Head-quarters. Germany, with all her factories turning out munitions of war far in excess of anything that the Allies could then muster, had been accumulating guns and ammunition for this purpose for months past, together with poison-gas and liquid fire, and a total force of some 2,000,000 well-armed men. Russia, on the other hand, though she might oppose this force with fully as many men, was coming to the end of her resources, and her troops were ill-equipped to meet the massed guns of the artillery brought against them when the German phalanx, after minor thrusts to left and right to cloak the real designs of the German Higher Command, began its overpowering advance on 1st May against the Dunajec lines, where Dmitrieff's Russian army believed itself securely entrenched. Mackensen's guns, opening up a way for the strongest army yet mustered under one general, blew the Dunajec lines to fragments. The Russian infantry clung to their positions to the last moment, but their rifles, often empty, were useless against high-explosive shells, or the waves of poison-gas which preceded the advance of Mackensen's shock troops.

On 5th May, with its front wholly turned, Dmitrieff's shattered army withdrew as best it could from the Dunajec lines to the San River. All Russia's gains in Galicia were destined to be sacrificed in similar fashion. Brussiloff's advance through the Carpathians was at once arrested; by 14th May, when Everts' army on the Nida had also fallen back, all the passes had been evacuated, though not without appalling losses. In the Bukovina, however, the Russian army under General Lechitsky maintained a stubborn resistance south of the Dniester until 27th June, when it fell back to the Gnila Lipa. It was high time to retreat. Przemysl had again fallen into Austro-German hands (2nd June) as the first outstanding result of Mackensen's advance; Lemberg followed suit on 22nd June; and Halicz, abandoned by Brussiloff, fell on the day on which Lechitsky's army retreated from the Dniester to the Gnila Lipa. The end of June saw these positions abandoned and a further retreat in progress towards the line of the Lublin-Cholm railway.

Not cheaply were these spectacular triumphs won by the advancing armies of Mackensen and the Archduke Joseph Ferdinand. Their troops had been twice thrown back on the Dniester before that river had been finally won—a passage which cost them, all told, some 150,000 men; and in the successive retreats which followed, the Russian infantrymen turned repeatedly on their pursuers to prove that they were still capable of enforcing a price for every yard of ceded territory.

Mackensen's 'drive' was only part of the German Higher Command's plan for destroying the Russian armies in 1915. While the Austro-German phalanx was thus thrusting its way towards the Lublin-Cholm railway line, a simultaneous movement was in progress in the north, which had for its first objectives the great fortresses of the Polish salient, and Warsaw itself. Here Hindenburg, who was still in supreme command of the Austro-German forces on the Eastern front, had no longer General Ruzsky opposing him, Ruzsky having handed over the Russian northern command to Alexieff owing to ill-health. No matter how bravely the Russian infantrymen fought, or how ably they were led, they could not stand up against the hurricane of shot and shell which now blasted a path for the fully-equipped armies of von Below, von Eichhorn, von Gallwitz, von Scholtz, Leopold of Bavaria, and von Woyrsch. Prasnysz was won by von Gallwitz after a fierce battle in the middle of July, the Russians retiring to the shelter of the Narew fortresses guarding Warsaw from the north-east. Mackensen's advance to the south was resumed the next day, and the Grand Duke Nicholas, foreseeing the peril of this double threat, realized that his only hope lay in flattening the Warsaw salient and thus shortening his line. This sealed the fate of Warsaw, which was entered by Prince Leopold of Bavaria on 4th Aug. Ivangorod fell on the following day; Kovno on the 17th; Novo Georgievsk on the 19th. These losses, though deplorable, were not vital while the Russian armies still retained power to retaliate and recoup. Hindenburg strained every nerve to crush them once and for all. Ossowiec fell on 22nd Aug., the Russians resuming their retreat from the Niemen and Bobhr. Brest-Litovsk had already been threatened by the converging movement of Mackensen and Prince Leopold of Bavaria. Seeing no hope of saving it in the face of the continued pressure, the Grand Duke Nicholas evacuated this most easterly of the Polish quadrilateral of forts on the 25th, having previously stripped it, as in the case of the other evacuated fortresses, of all war material.

Hindenburg strove to complete the discomfiture of the main Russian armies by a fresh advance on his extreme left, where von Below was ordered to push through Courland towards Riga, with Petrograd as the ultimate goal in the following year. On this front the Russians had already been forced to relinquish Memel, just across the German frontier, as well as Libau. German naval forces had shared in the operations on the Riga coast-line, and when von Below, after carrying Mitau, some 30 miles from Riga itself, met with prolonged resistance, they made an ill-fated attempt to capture the port from the sea. This was on 18th Aug., when the Russian fleet appeared on the scene while the German naval contingents were attempting to land in flat-bottomed barges at Pernau. The landing forces were annihilated, and the German ships beaten off with a loss of two cruisers and eight torpedo-boats. The Russians only lost an old gunboat in this one-sided action.

The naval operations, however, had little effect on the main issue. Russian fortresses continued for another month to fall like ninepins before the Austro-German armies. Grodno was evacuated at the beginning of September, and though General Everts escaped from Brest-Litovsk with his supplies and guns, he could not hold up Mackensen's irresistible march on Pinsk, even in the Pripet marshes, which were dry at that season of the year. Pinsk was occupied on 16th Sept. Nowhere was the pressure relaxed. In the south, where the flood-tide of the Teutonic advance had never set so strongly, the attack on the Volhynian fortresses had been vigorously opposed by Ivanoff; but Boehm-Ermolli entered Lutsk on 1st Sept., and the Austrians recaptured Brody on the same day.

The vital blow at this stage was being delivered in the north, where von Below, bent on reaching Riga for his winter quarters, was marching on the Dvina lines with the immediate object of crossing that river and turning the whole Russian front as far as Dvinsk. The extreme left flank of the Germans fought desperately for the Dvina crossing at Friedrichstadt, but failed to make it good, and the danger-point shifted towards Vilna, the ten days' battle for which was decided at Meiszagowla on 12th Sept. Though two Russian divisions of the Imperial Guard were brought up to defend this key position, they were powerless to hold it against the great weight of German artillery. With its capture on 12th Sept., Vilna's fall became merely a matter of days. Before the Vilna armies could make good their escape, Hindenburg endeavoured to crown his triumph by outflanking them on both sides, von Eichhorn's cavalry sweeping round from Vilkomir in the north, and von Scholtz pressing forward, though less rapidly, on the southern side of the salient.

In this supreme crisis on the Eastern front, Ruzsky, recovered from his illness, returned to his command of the northern battlefields, and signalized his reappearance—not for the first time—by changing the whole complexion of affairs. Reinforcements enabled him in the first place methodically to evacuate the Vilna salient under their protection. Hindenburg endeavoured to counter this by rushing up cavalry reinforcements, with 140 guns, to support his outflanking thrust in the north, which, reaching Vidzy on the 16th and Vileika on the following day—this being well to the rear of the Vilna armies—threatened irremediable disaster to the retreating Russians. They were saved by the series of flank-guard battles securing their one avenue of retreat, and Ruzsky's counter-offensive from Dvinsk—a stroke so effective that the long German cavalry arm was in itself now in danger of being cut off. Vidzy was recaptured on the 20th; Smorgon, south of Novo Grodek, on the 21st; and Vileika before the end of the month.

On 15th Sept. Lord Kitchener had publicly declared that the Germans had "shot their bolt" on the Eastern front; and, so far as the immediate destruction of the Russian army as a force in being was concerned, this was true, though it was hard to believe while the wide sweep of the German advance was in full force. Ivanoff's reaction was equally marked in the south, where Brussiloff and Lechitsky took von Bothmer and Pflanzer-Baltin by surprise. Before the end of September the Austro-Germans had not only been pushed back to the Strypa, but had also lost both Dubno and Lutsk (23rd).

Germany's great summer offensive was over, but Hindenburg tried hard to secure good winter quarters in the north by a renewed advance on Dvinsk and Riga. A frontal attack was launched on Dvinsk on 3rd Oct. and was a costly failure. Ruzsky had defended Dvinsk with a semicircle of far-flung trenches on the Verdun model, against which the German shock-troops and guns could make practically no progress. After three weeks of vain endeavour Hindenburg shifted the attack to Riga, with no better success and heavy additional casualties. Thrust and counter-thrust succeeded one another with little change in the general situation until the end of November, when, after temporarily securing a crossing at Dahlend Island, south-east of Riga, in the River Dvina, Hindenburg was forced to abandon the attempt as futile. With the help of their fleet the Russians won their way back to Kemmern; and in their counter-offensive from Dvinsk in the same month recaptured Illutsk. All hope was then abandoned by the Germans of taking either Riga or Dvinsk that year. The German effort in the south, below the Pripet marshes, also slackened. Ivanoff not only maintained the ground he had won, but scored several notable victories in the Strypa sector; but both here and along the Styr, where Lechitsky was opposing Bothmer, there was both give and take and nothing decisive—apart from the fact that Roumania was saved by this evidence of Russia's recuperative powers from choosing the wrong side.

In order further to influence the dubious attitude of Roumania, a fresh Russian offensive in the Bukovina was begun in the last days of the year, with Czernowitz as the objective; but as this rightly belongs to 1916 it will be dealt with in our summary of the operations for that year. Though Russia had not succumbed as a military power under the staggering blows she had received in 1915, she had lost 2,000,000 of her best fighting men, and the moral of her army was never so high again. Falkenhayn has hinted in his Memoirs that the Germans knew that the blind faith of the Russians in their rulers was already shaken before they started Mackensen's 'drive'. It could not be expected to endure in face of the criminal neglect and corruption which every day added to their hardships and losses at the front. The Russian court at that period has been described as a mixture of folly and intrigue, with 'dark forces' at work under pro-German influence, led by the impostor Rasputin. The Grand Duke Nicholas, who was above the treacherous influences now undermining all departments of the Russian system, had been transferred to the command in the Caucasus in the most critical hours of the Austro-Germanic advance, the supreme command of the Russian armies being taken over by the Tsar himself (5th Sept.), with Alexieff as Chief of Staff. The Tsar's motives were above suspicion; but he lacked the efficiency and generalship of the Grand Duke, and stood for a system which, under the searching test of war, was proving itself unworthy of the continued sacrifices of his subjects. The sacrifices were repeated in 1916, but the seeds were already sown of the red harvest which was to lead to Russia's downfall and the end of the Romanoffs.

The Balkans, 1915

The progress of German arms in 1915 had decided Bulgaria to throw in her lot with the Central Powers. Her price—fixed by secret treaty with Germany in July of that year—was the whole of Macedonia possessed by Serbia, and other valuable slices of territory. It was not until 12th Oct. that formal war was declared by Bulgaria against Serbia, five days after the fresh invasion of Serbia had begun under Mackensen's leadership, with two Austro-German armies, one under General Koevess, advancing west of Belgrade in a wide flanking movement along the old roads over the Save and the Drina, and the other, under General von Gallwitz, advancing east of Belgrade against the main Serbian forces. Against this new Mackensen 'drive', with fully-equipped forces larger than the whole Serbian army, organized with all the Teutonic thoroughness which marked the same leader's Galician triumph, the Serbians had no chance, though they fought, as ever, with stoic resistance, and exacted a price for every inch of ceded territory. While they were thus stubbornly retreating, Bulgaria threw in two of her armies on the Eastern front, thus threatening, with the advancing Austro-German forces, to enclose them in a wide loop. The tragedy of it was that Serbia's allies were powerless to save her; and that Greece, who by the terms of her treaty with Serbia should have gone to her assistance as soon as Bulgaria attacked her, declined through King Constantine to do so, notwithstanding the insistent advice of his Prime Minister, M. Venizelos. Convinced, like King Ferdinand of Bulgaria, that Germany was winning the war, King Constantine maintained to the end an attitude which, though he chose to call it neutral, was never friendly towards the Allies. Russia had her hands too full to go to Serbia's aid, and though a Franco-British attempt was made as the net closed round the encircled Serbians, it was too late to save the situation.

The story of the Serbian disaster of 1915, when the fall of Monastir on 2nd Dec. robbed the Serbians of their last stronghold, is that of a desperate flight across the frontier and over the mountains of Albania and Montenegro to the Adriatic. Thanks to the Serbians' heroic efforts, the Austro-German armies had not been able to close the net tight, and though the Bulgarians followed hard on their heels, they could not quite complete their victory. All told, however, the Serbians lost some 50,000 men, killed, wounded, captured, or starved, in the retreat, together with their guns and equipment. Their aged monarch shared the retreat and succeeded in reaching Brindisi.

Meanwhile the Franco-British force, which, as already related, arrived too late to prevent this final act of the Serbian tragedy, had established a strong base at Salonika, notwithstanding Greek protests on the grounds of neutrality. It was not until 14th Oct. that the combined force, under the leadership of General Sarrail—the British column being commanded by General Mahon—began to move up the Vardar valley, the British advancing on the right towards Lake Doiran, and the French towards Strumnitza. Both forces were soon in touch with the Bulgarians, and fought a number of minor engagements in their forlorn hope of effecting a junction with the hard-pressed Serbians. Besides being too late, however, the Franco-British forces were not strong enough to effect their purpose, and when the remnants of the Serbian army had been forced across the frontier towards the Adriatic, they were themselves attacked by powerful Bulgarian columns. The object of his expedition having been eliminated, General Sarrail prepared for retreat to his base. The Bulgarians did their best to harry his retirement. They launched a determined attack, which he repulsed with heavy loss; and then endeavoured to isolate the two columns by an assault on the British force at Lake Doiran. Though some 1300 casualties were sustained in defeating this attack, the British, acting as flank-guard to the French, enabled the retreat to be made jointly. By 13th Dec. the Allied troops, having administered a severe check to the pursuing Bulgarians two days previously, were across the Greek frontier in good order, and in due course had entrenched themselves about Salonika.

With the fall of Serbia came the collapse of Montenegro, in circumstances considerably less heroic than those which marked the Serbian retreat. The key position of Mont Lovtchen was abandoned to the Austrians with little if any show of resistance, and Cettinje, the capital, similarly entered by the invaders. King Nicholas of Montenegro sought refuge in Paris; Prince Mirko of Montenegro in Vienna.

The Serbian soldiers who survived the great retreat, numbering some 100,000 in all, were met on the Adriatic coast by units of the Italian fleet and transferred to Corfu—to recoup and refit for the later campaigns which were to lead to the recovery of their country.

Italy, 1915

Italy, whose warships were thus instrumental in salving the Serbian army, had thrown in her lot with the Allies by declaring war against Austria-Hungary on 23rd May, 1915. Austria had refused to offer adequate 'compensation' for her disturbance of the Balkans; and, moreover, the time had obviously arrived to complete Italian unity. A few weeks previously Italy had signed the Treaty of London, under which the Allies agreed to satisfy most of her territorial ambitions when the time came to share the spoils of victory an agreement which led to some of the most difficult problems in the final peace settlement. To Italy's honour be it added that she joined forces with the Allies when their prospects were none too bright, when they were able to report little or no progress either on the Western front or in Gallipoli, and Austro-German arms, on the other hand, were beginning to carry all before them in Mackensen's great drive in Galicia.

Italy was in no position to throw her whole weight into the struggle in 1915. Though her war strength was reckoned at a million men, her army was ill-equipped with guns, especially with modern heavy artillery and machine-guns, and her industrial resources were wholly inadequate to make good the deficiency. The mountainous frontier which she had to defend, too, gave every advantage to the Austrians. She succeeded in seizing three of the passes, the Stelvio, Tonale, and Guidriari, on the east side of the Trentino, and in blocking others on the west side, as the opening moves of her campaign, the object being to secure her flank in the subsequent offensive operations which aimed at Trieste by an advance across the Isonzo. Though these operations succeeded in pinning to the Italian front considerable forces of Austro-Hungarian troops which might have been thrown into the Russian furnace, the Italian effort fell far short of its objectives. General Cadorna, the Italian Commander-in-Chief, won a number of small successes in deploying his Third Army on the right bank of the Isonzo during June and July, securing the bridge-heads at Caporetto—the scene of Italian disaster two years later—Plava, Gradisca, and Monfalcone, thus holding the western bank of the river from Tolmino down to the sea. But the Italians were now faced with powerful defences, buttressed by the Carso Plateau in the south, which could only be carried at that time at prohibitive cost. All attempts to capture these strongholds broke down, and though a footing was gained on the Carso, and slight gains were constantly reported from the Trentino, the operations along the Italian front settled down before the year was out to the give-and-take fighting which characterized the siege operations in the West.

Western Front in 1915

On the Western front neither France nor Great Britain was ready in 1915 to undertake any advance comparable with the great offensives of the Central Powers in the East. Russia in her agony complained that France was not doing enough, but all the Allies' efforts this year were crippled by their inability to supply the wholly unprecedented demands for munitions of war. Great Britain was still struggling months behind to catch up a foe who had been preparing for years. Mr. Lloyd George subsequently related how, in the month of May, 1915, when the Germans were turning out 250,000 shells a day, most of them high-explosives, Great Britain was producing a mere 2500 a day in high-explosives, and 13,000 in shrapnel. The French, accustomed to supplying the demands of armies on a Continental scale, had naturally done considerably better than this, but even their most strenuous efforts were inadequate to cope with the enormous output of the German arsenals. Mr. Lloyd George retired from the Chancellorship of the Exchequer in order to assume control of the newly created Ministry of Munitions, which in due course more than made good all these defects. That, however, was not in 1915. Up to the end of that year, according to Lord French, "the scanty supply of munitions of war paralysed all our power of initiative, and at critical times menaced our defence with irretrievable disaster".

At the end of the first long winter of dreary trench warfare the British Commander-in-Chief deemed it necessary to undertake an offensive in order to prevent the moral of his army from deteriorating. Hence the battle of Neuve Chapelle, which, begun on 10th March, was fought with a small reserve of ammunition accumulated for the purpose, and had to be broken off after three days' struggle through lack of further supplies. The troops chosen for the main assault were Rawlinson's Fourth Army Corps, with the Indian Corps on the right. Following the preliminary bombardment, they quickly overran Neuve Chapelle itself and made 1000 yards progress on a 3-mile front. But to left and right the attacks were held up, and two further days' fighting failed to add to the gains—purchased at the excessive cost of 562 officers and 12,239 men. The total German losses, including 1680 officers and men as prisoners, were estimated as rather higher than this, but the net result, though ranking as a British victory, was admittedly disappointing.

Earlier in the year Lord French had endeavoured to convince Joffre that the proper rôle for the British army to fulfil was an advance on the extreme north in co-operation with the British navy. Joffre was unsympathetic, though he held out hopes of co-operating in such an advance with the French army at a later date. His plan for the 1915 campaign was to break through the German line from the south at Rheims, and from the west at Arras. To do this he must mass as many French corps as possible behind these points, meanwhile keeping the enemy busy elsewhere in order to prevent him from reinforcing the threatened positions. This general strategic idea, as Lord French has pointed out, was the foundation of all the Allied efforts in the West throughout 1915. It led to numerous local successes along many parts of the line, but no real advance was made towards the main objectives. These were not defined until the combined offensive was launched in September.

The Germans themselves, though content to leave to the Allies most of the attacking in the West in 1915, maintained a sufficiently active offensive-defensive. While the French in Alsace were making a fresh advance on Mulhouse at the beginning of the year, they counter-attacked at Soissons, after bombarding the cathedral on 9th Jan. It was only after a week's desperate fighting and heavy French losses—including a bridge-head on the Aisne—that they were checked. In Champagne the French managed to capture Perthes (8th Jan.), and strove valiantly but vainly to wipe out the St. Mihiel salient. The most ambitious effort of the opening months of the year was the British offensive at Neuve Chapelle, which, as already pointed out, failed largely through lack of ammunition. In his report on that battle the British Commander-in-Chief referred to the pressing need of "an almost unlimited supply of ammunition"; and the lack of it was the real explanation of the Allied failure in 1915.

Germany knew well enough how matters stood in this respect, and added ruthlessly to the handicap which their own superior supplies gave them by suddenly attacking with chlorine gas—the first use of poison-gas in the war. This was on 22nd April, following a grim struggle south-east of Ypres for Hill 60, the flattened remains of which, after five days' incessant fighting, remained in British possession. Having been careful beforehand to accuse the French of using poison-gas near Verdun on the 14th—a charge without justification—the Germans launched it in dense volumes from pipes previously laid down for the purpose north-east of Ypres. The attack was preceded by a heavy bombardment, the gas-clouds following at 5 p.m. on the 22nd. The Allied line was held at this point by French Colonial and Territorial troops, with the Canadian Division on their right. All unprotected as they were against this diabolical form of warfare, the French troops, gasping for breath, broke and fled. Many fell asphyxiated. With a gap in the Allied line 5 miles wide, the Canadians suddenly found their flank left in the air. Less affected by the gas than the French, they were chiefly instrumental in saving the situation by a valiant resistance until reinforcements could be sent to fill the gap.

The gap was evidently wider than the Germans either anticipated or realized; otherwise the disaster might have been irretrievable. As it was, the situation remained precarious until the 27th, when a counter-attack in conjunction with the French recovered some of the ground, and a large portion of the sorely tried Canadian Division was relieved by the Lahore Indian Division. Altogether seven British divisions were involved in this hard-fought battle, the net result of which was to bring the Germans 2 miles nearer to Ypres on a 5-mile front, and to give the Allies a worse line to hold. Eight batteries of French field-guns were lost and four British guns of position. These last were recaptured by the Canadians, but the enemy had already destroyed them. In all the Allied casualties amounted to nearly 25,000. The Germans estimated theirs at 16,000. In his report on the gas-attack Sir John French declared that protest against this form of warfare would probably be useless, and Lord Kitchener intimated in the House of Lords on 18th May that retaliation might be inevitable. Respirators more or less effective were supplied to the troops, and the use of poison-gas, followed by liquid-fire—another German innovation—became permanent additions to the horrors of modern warfare.

Before the new battle round Ypres died down—it lasted, indeed, until the end of May—the storm centre shifted to the southern end of the British line, where it joined hands with the French left. Here General French began the battle of Festubert, undertaken to relieve the intense pressure on the troops at Ypres, but also serving as part of Joffre's general plan of attack in the direction of Lens and Lille. British and French alike were launched against the German lines on 9th May, the British taking the offensive between Rougebanc and Givenchy, and the French between Neuville St. Vaast and Notre Dame de Lorette. The renewed struggle for Ypres, however, had drawn heavily on the scanty British reserves of ammunition, and the preliminary bombardment of forty minutes proved wholly inadequate to crush the resistance offered by the enemy's numerous fortified posts when the First Army advanced to the attack. This disastrous engagement, in which the greatest bravery was displayed against overwhelming odds, cost over 12,000 casualties. It achieved nothing in the field, but the lessons which it taught led to the formation of the Coalition Government, with Mr. Lloyd George as Minister of Munitions. The second stage of the battle of Festubert, which began at midnight on 15th May, was more successful, the enemy's front-line trenches being captured on a front of 3000 yards; but the losses incurred in winning and holding the positions were disproportionately high.

The French effort began more auspiciously as a result of the longer and more intense bombardment which preceded their attack on the 9th, but the series of minor successes which they won round Souchez, after weeks of incessant fighting, made little real impression on the defences of Lens. The truth was that Germany had so expanded her war-material factories that, with the aid of the Austrians, she could turn out sufficient shells and guns for her main offensive on the Eastern front, and at the same time overweight the Allies in the West.

Throughout the summer the line, though never quiescent, and often breaking out in furious bombardments, minor attacks and counter-attacks, and raids on both sides, remained little altered. The hardest fighting of all was round the war-scarred salient of Ypres, still held, as in the first gas-attack, by the Second Army, to which some of 'Kitchener's Men' were now attached. It fell to this advance-guard of the New Army to bear the brunt of the first attack on the British with liquid-fire, the Germans, who had already used this new device of the flammenwerfer against the French, employing it in another desperate assault on the British lines round Hooge. The New Army units fought with almost incredible gallantry, but were blinded by the unexpected, burning sheets of flame, and while they were still blind the enemy charged and took the first-line trenches on a front of some 500 yards. The losses were avenged on 9th Aug., when the 6th Division recovered all the captured positions, and 400 yards of German trench into the bargain.

With the arrival of the reinforcing British divisions of the New Army, General French was able to take over some 17 miles of additional front, the British line thus extending over about 50 miles, with the Belgians on the left holding the remaining 18 miles to the sea. This still left the French army 500 miles to hold, from the British right to the Alps.

The summer of 1915 passed away without any great offensive on either side. The Germans, now at the flood-tide of their sweeping advance against Russia, were content to continue their vigorous offensive-defensive in the West. Besides the fighting already referred to, there was incessant warfare in the Argonne Forest, where the German Crown Prince was noisily active throughout the summer, threatening Verdun, but making no serious advance. The French continued the deadly trench-to-trench warfare in the Souchez area and the 'Labyrinth' region nearer Arras, and steadily tightened their hold on the reconquered corner of Alsace, consolidating their positions on the Hartmannsweilerkopf, which had been the scene of continuous fighting in the renewed advance towards Mulhouse. For the most part, however, the French, like the British, were now storing up reserves of ammunition and completing their dispositions for the joint offensive planned for the autumn, when the main objects of Joffre's general strategic idea for 1915 were for the first time clearly defined, though unattained.

A great Allied offensive in the West had become increasingly necessary in view of the prestige gained by the Central Powers, not only by their tremendous advance into Russia, but also by the Allies' disastrous campaign in Gallipoli, where the failure of the Suvla Bay landing—subsequently dealt with in our account of the operations against Turkey—had just given the enemy additional cause for rejoicing. Joffre's plan of attack, designed "to drive the Germans out of France", was not ripe for execution until towards the end of September. Even then, though General French had for months been gradually accumulating troops and ammunition for the blow—the British army now numbering nearly a million men—full strength in both respects was still only half developed.

There were two main assaults in the combined offensive, launched on 25th Sept., 1915, the chief of which was in the French centre in Champagne, where de Castlenau, Joffre's right-hand man, attacked with Langle de Cary's Fourth Army on a 16-mile front between Auberive and Massiges, the object being to force the Germans back on the Aisne, and, if possible, cut off the army of the German Crown Prince in the Argonne. Second in importance was the Franco-British advance on the same day in Artois, General French's object being to push through between Lens and La Bassée on the north, while Generals Foch and d'Urbal, on his right, stormed the Vimy heights and attacked Lens from the south. Secondary operations were carried out at various other points in order to distract the enemy's attention, feint attacks being made by Sir Herbert Plumer with the 5th Corps—part of the Second Army—east of Ypres, where Bellewarde was temporarily taken; as well as by those units of the First Army occupying the line north of the Béthune-La Bassée Canal. Similar demonstrations were made at Bois Grenier, and along the slopes of the Aubers Ridge, where British and Indian troops alike fought heroically for ground which, though captured in the first onrush, could not be held under the powerful fire concentrated against them.

Battle of Loos

The main British attack was delivered by the First Army under Sir Douglas Haig along a front extending from La Bassée Canal in the north to the mining village of Grenay on the south, and is conveniently named the battle of Loos. The task of the 4th Corps (Rawlinson), with the 47th (London Territorial) Division on the right, the 15th (New Army) Division in the centre, and the 1st Division on the left, was to carry, as its first objective, Loos and the heights between Lens and Hulluch. The 1st Corps (Hubert Gough), with the 7th Division on its right, the 9th (New Army) Division in the centre, and the 2nd Division (Horne) on the left extended to the canal, was to link up with the Fourth Army at Hulluch, taking in its stride the Hohenzollern Redoubt and the formidable German fortresses in the Quarries and Fosse 8. Had this general plan succeeded, and the Tenth French Army on the British right advanced in line with it, a great gap would have been made in the German positions in Artois, which, with a similar success from the mightier French blow in Champagne, would at least have brought relief to the hard-pressed Russians in the East, if it did not achieve all that Joffre had hoped for it. As it was, the Allied victory, both in Artois and Champagne, fell far short of its aims, and, save for insubstantial advances, was fruitful chiefly in bloody experience.

An intense bombardment for four days preceded the main British advance, and was followed by a gas-attack—used by the British on this occasion for the first time. Many parts of the German defences along the 7-mile front, however, were far from obliterated when the infantry advanced to the attack, especially on the left, where the 2nd Division was held up by impassable wire defences. The 9th Division had a similar experience on its left wing, where the undemolished defences of the Hohenzollern Redoubt became a veritable shambles. On its right, however, the leading Scottish battalions scored a fine success in reaching Fosse 8. On their right the 7th Division did equally well, capturing the Quarries and reaching Cité St. Elie, north of Hulluch, though subsequently forced to rest on the Quarries. In the meantime the 4th Corps, like the 1st, had been repulsed on the left and victorious on the right. Held up on the left by unbroken wire and undamaged German defences, the 1st Division could make no appreciable advance on the Lens-Hulluch road, thus exposing the left flank of the next division in line—the 15th (Scottish). The Scotsmen on their part had made a magnificent advance, first sharing with the Londoners of the 47th Division the honour of capturing Loos, and then rushing on impetuously to Hill 70, and beyond as far as Cité St. Auguste, on the outskirts of Lens. Had reserves been available at once to consolidate the gains thus won, Lens itself might have been taken, and a door flung open leading to Lille. But as it was impossible to say at which part of the long British line they would be needed, Sir John French had retained his reserves far in the rear. When at last they were forthcoming—the new 21st and 24th Divisions, hitherto untried—they were put into the battle-line after nightfall, tired and hungry after a heavy 8-mile march.

It was impossible to hold all the ground won during the day. Without reinforcements, and no sufficient artillery support, the 15th Division had already been forced to relinquish its hold on Cité St. Auguste, and fell back to the western slopes of Hill 70 on the Lens-Hulluch road. Misdirected and drenched with rain, the two tired reinforcing divisions could do little to help amid the confusion of the battlefield. Their supporting attacks at various points broke against the still intact German wire or simultaneous counter-attacks by the enemy. One brigade alone (the 72nd) lost 78 officers and 2000 men out of the 3600 with which it started. Altogether the losses of these two divisions amounted to 8000. Along the southern section they succeeded in maintaining contact with the 47th Division, and in the north helped the Scots of the 9th Division to maintain their hold on Fosse 8; but the Quarries, close by, were lost, and along most of this northern front the day's gains were gradually whittled away.

Another heavy handicap was the fact that the French Tenth Army, on the right of Rawlinson's Corps, had to postpone its advance until one o'clock in the afternoon—the British attack had been launched at 6.30 a.m.—and then was forced to direct the corps operating on its left in a south-easterly direction. This involved a considerable gap on the British right, when Rawlinson's men made their victorious advance. The Londoners of the 47th Division, however, not only held on to Loos, but formed a strong defensive flank which averted what might have been a complete disaster. Apart from the captured positions, 57 German officers and 3000 other prisoners had been taken during the day on the British front, together with 26 field-guns and 40 machine-guns.

On the following day the Germans counter-attacked in force and recovered Fosse 8, but on the 27th the Guards Division, under the Earl of Cavan, was sent forward and almost restored the earlier gains, including Chalk Pit Wood and the slopes of Hill 70. It cost the Guards 3000 casualties to make good the restored British line. They continued to hold it until the end of the month, when they were relieved. The 15th (Scottish) Division had also been withdrawn, after suffering no fewer than 6000 casualties. All told, the British losses in the battle of Loos amounted to 50,000 men and 2000 officers, including three divisional commanders—Major-General Sir Thompson Capper (7th Division), Major-General G. H. Thesiger (9th Division), and Major-General F. D. V. Wing (12th Division)—each of whom was killed. A series of costly counter-attacks on the enemy's part failed to make much impression on the new British line, and mounted up the German casualties until they were estimated at many more than those of the British. The battle died down; the gains were consolidated; but the murderous struggle at close quarters for the Hohenzollern Redoubt and its adjoining entrenchments continued for weeks and months, an outstanding feature of which was the attempt of the 46th (North Midland Territorial) Division to carry the redoubt by storm on 13th Oct. The Midlanders' task was handicapped, like so many British operations at this period, by inadequate artillery preparation, and though they fought like veterans they could only win the western side of the stronghold at a cost of 4000 casualties.

The advance of the 10th French Army on the right of the British was held up in front of Souchez on the opening day of the combined offensive, but made better progress on 26th Sept., when d'Urbal's troops made themselves masters not only of long-contested Souchez, but also of Thelus, La Folie Farm, and most of the Givenchy Wood. But the Vimy heights, notwithstanding that some progress was made along their slopes, still barred the road to Lens from the south. On the 28th the French 9th Corps, at the British Commander-in-Chief's request, took over the defence of Loos, and the British line was rearranged.

The main French effort in 1915, as already pointed out, was in Champagne, where a solid week's bombardment paved the way for the great advance on 25th Sept. Inspired by Joffre's stirring Order of the Day, "Remember the Marne: Conquer or Die!", the French troops carried all before them on the greater part of the front. General Marchand's Colonial Division broke clean through 2 miles of the main German defences, Marchand himself falling severely wounded at the head of his men. The greatest advance was made on Marchand's right, from Navarin Farm to the Butte de Tahure, where an advance of 2½ miles was made before the day closed. But the troops in the centre were robbed of decisive victory by a double check on the wings. On the right the two German strongholds at the Butte de Mesnil and the Main de Massiges—comparable with the Hohenzollern Redoubt in their strength—held out stubbornly until, after days and nights of ceaseless combat, both fell into the attackers' hands. On the extreme left the assailants could make practically no headway.

Thenceforward the French advance made little progress towards the main objectives, though a breach was made in the enemy's second line in a fresh attack on the 29th; and a third advance (6th Oct.) won the village and Butte de Tahure. On 20th Oct. the Germans recovered the Butte de Tahure, and in other counter-attacks prevented the French from developing their first initial advance into the greater victory which Joffre had hoped for it. The battle had yielded an impressive list of captures—the total number of German prisoners being over 23,000 before the end of September, and the captured guns 80—but the Allies' long line had not materially altered before the autumn offensive gave place to another winter of tedious siege warfare.

The year closed with the appointment of Joffre as Commander-in-Chief of all the French forces, General de Castlenau taking over the immediate command of the French troops in France; and the resignation of Sir John French—now created a Viscount of the United Kingdom, and appointed to the Home Command—after more than sixteen months of severe and incessant strain at the front. Lord French was succeeded by General Sir Douglas Haig, who had been singled out for promotion by his brilliant achievements since the British army first landed in France.

The Naval War in 1915

Throughout 1915 the operations at sea contained no movements so striking as some of those which marked the opening months of the war. The careers of all the scattered German cruisers were over, the last of them, the Königsberg, being finally destroyed in the Rufigi River, German East Africa, by the shallow-draught monitors Severn and Mersey, sent out for the purpose from Great Britain. The German High Seas Fleet remained in harbour, waiting for Lord Jellicoe to be tempted or goaded into some imprudent disposition of his forces. Hence the sudden raids on the British East Coast, begun in the closing months of 1914. They repeated them once too often, on 24th Jan., 1915, when the raiders, consisting of 4 battle-cruisers, 6 light cruisers, and a force of destroyers, were encountered off the Dogger Bank by the British battle-cruiser squadron under Admiral Beatty, consisting of the Lion, Tiger, and Princess Royal, as well as the New Zealand and Indomitable, and the light cruisers Southampton, Nottingham, Birmingham, and Lowestoft, together with the Arethusa, Aurora, and Undaunted. Outmatched by the 13.5-inch guns of Beatty's 'Cat' Squadron of battle-cruisers, the Germans made for home. In the hot chase which followed, the Blücher, last in line of the German battle-cruisers, was hit repeatedly, fell behind, and was eventually sunk by a torpedo from the destroyer Meteor. Her survivors were picked up by the Arethusa. Beatty's flagship, the Lion, which was leading the pursuit, was partly disabled by a chance shot and had to be towed home, Beatty himself following the chase at some distance in a destroyer. Before he could pick up his place in the pursuit he met his three battle-cruisers returning, these having broken off the action owing to the increasing risk of straying into an enemy mine-field or of falling foul of the mines which the retreating Germans were strewing in their path. Two other German battle-cruisers had been set on fire by the British shells, the Seydlitz and the Derfflinger, but, with the rest of the German ships, they made good their escape. Taught by this experience, the Germans made no further naval raids on the East Coast.

In the following month (4th Feb.) Vice-Admiral von Pohl, Chief of the German Admiralty Staff, proclaimed a submarine blockade of the whole of the British Isles, declaring all the waters round Great Britain and Ireland a military area in which Allied merchant-ships were to be destroyed and neutral ships would incur danger of running the same risk. If the Germans thought they could scare British shipping away by these means, they were soon undeceived. They took heavy toll of peaceful shipping from the first, and shocked the rest of the world by the lengths to which they were prepared to go in developing this ruthless policy, but all their efforts failed to paralyse British trade as they anticipated. The crowning tragedy of this submarine campaign was the sinking of the Cunard liner Lusitania off the south coast of Ireland on 7th May, 1915, with its loss of upwards of 1000 non-combatants, including over 100 Americans. It was one of the German crimes against humanity in general and Americans in particular which brought the United States into the war on the side of the Allies in 1917.

1916 on the European Fronts

The Western Campaign.—During the year 1916 the unity of command which was postulated as an indispensable preliminary to the victory of the Allies so long before it became a fact was achieved neither as between Britain and France in the West and Russia in the East, nor even as between Britain and France along the Western front. The most that can be said of the co-ordination between the forces under the British and French Commanders-in-Chief is that liaison was established between them, and that as far as was possible each endeavoured to help the other by diverting to itself the energies of the German forces. The Western fighting embraced two main episodes: the powerful German attacks on Verdun, eventually unsuccessful; and the Allied offensive on the Somme, in which by far the greater share was borne by the British.

The year began with numerous German attacks widely separated in locality, and intended to mask the main offensive while keeping the French and British occupied. Hartmannsweilerkopf, in Alsace (2nd to 8th Jan.); Champagne (9th Jan.); Givenchy, Arras, Neuville, Loos (14th Jan. to 6th Feb.); Vimy Ridge, Frise, Soissons, Ypres-Comines area, and Tahure (9th to 20th Feb.) were among them.

On 21st Feb. the new battle of Verdun began. This enterprise, though officially accredited to the German Crown Prince, was the design of General von Falkenhayn. Verdun was one of the four fortresses, of which the other three were Belfort, Toul, and Épinal, on which French armies defending the capital and the country from an invasion from the east would base themselves. The town lies sunk in the Meuse valley, and the German invasion in 1914 flowed past it along the heights of the Meuse down to St. Mihiel. At the beginning of the war Verdun was protected by an outer line of forts, with batteries pushed out in a circuit of 30 miles. The forts were not, however, strong enough in 1914, nor the perimeter of defence extended enough, to withstand the new artillery that had reduced Liége and Namur, and a fierce struggle went on during 1915 along the Meuse heights on the east of Verdun and beyond the low hills on the western side of the town and river, with a view to pushing out the defences all round. As previously pointed out, much had been done in this direction by General Sarrail, but not enough to deter von Falkenhayn and the German General Staff from selecting Verdun as a point for an attack which, if successful, would disorganize seriously the continuity of the French defences. In 1916, as for two years more, the problem of either combatant was to break through a line of trenches which extended continuously from the sea to Switzerland; and failing a complete break-through, comparable to that which had crippled Russia in 1915, to effect a fracture or a deep dent which would compel the loser to reconstruct his system of communications. At the best such a thrust might disclose a fatal weakness in the assailed; at the next best it would disastrously hamper his future activities.

Verdun as a fortress had strong and modern defences. West of the Meuse, north of the town, are low hills the chief of which is the Charny Ridge with dominating strategic points beyond known as Hill 304, Hill 295, Hill 265. The French lines were pushed beyond these into the woods of Avocourt and Forges, but below the heights of Montfaucon, which were the Crown Prince's head-quarters. On the east of the Meuse the heights rise to a tableland severed by wooded ravines and overlooking the plain of the Woevre. The line of French trenches embraced all this tableland and a good deal of the plain beyond. Its outer line ran in a bold convex curve from Forges and Consenvoye on the Meuse to Fresnes on the Woevre, but it did not penetrate the woods of Forges or Spincourt, and it was below the gun positions on the hills of Ornes. Inside this outer circle was the inner line of Samogneux, Beaumont, Fosses Wood, and Bezonvaux. Inside that again the line of Bras, Douaumont Fort, Hardaumont Wood, Vaux Fort, and Eix.

The multiple defences were most elaborate between these two inner lines. A weak point was that though such defences would be very exacting of life and effort, yet the outer ones were not pushed out far enough to place the bridges of the Meuse out of reach of long-range gun-fire; and an overwhelming attack might have jammed a defending army on the east of the Meuse against the river. The French had provided against the possibility by the multiplication of transport, as well as of inner defences. The Germans hoped by the weight, volume, and suddenness of their attack to bring about the not impossible catastrophe. They massed an amount of artillery which, though surpassed afterwards in the war, was at that time the greatest assemblage that had ever been seen together, and accumulated a supply of ammunition exceeding the quantity which all previous experience prescribed. The heavier guns were placed at Ornes, Spincourt, and Forges. The woods below afforded cover for a concentration of men; and this concentration, amounting to fourteen divisions, with others in immediate reserve, was at first thrown at the 7-mile sector from Brabant-sur-Meuse to Herbebois, which was held by three French divisions under General Humbert.

The attack began on the morning of 21st Feb. with an artillery bombardment lasting four hours. The great weight of shell demolished the French first-line defences, so that the German troops had little to do but walk over them, while a remnant of the defenders fell back to their supporting positions. These were not sufficiently strong or well constructed to enable weak forces to hold them long against the force of three army corps (18th, 3rd, and 10th, with a Bavarian Division) which the Germans sent in after the guns had done their work. The effectiveness of the German artillery was due in part to its weight, and in part to the fact that French counter-battery work effected little, owing to the thick weather.

The trench systems in the Haumont and Caures Woods were carried, but the resistance of parts of the first line at Brabant, Herbebois, and elsewhere was even at this dangerous moment reducing the speed of the German advance, though the momentum was far from exhausted. It was not till next day that the first line was definitely abandoned by the French; and on 23rd Feb. the line Samogneux-Herbebois was temporarily held. Before the morning of 24th Feb. the French contracted their line still further by drawing in their outposts from the Woevre. It seemed a matter for surprise at the time that no flank attack was made by the Germans in the Woevre; it had been perhaps thought an unnecessary extension of their general scheme, though the weather, which was bitter and snowy, was unfavourable for operations in that sodden plain.

But the German second wave of attack was now rising in fury, and General Pétain, who had undertaken the command of operations on the French side, was still awaiting reinforcements. The character of von Falkenhayn's attack had become clear, and while to the French the need for holding on was imperative, the Germans had a need no less urgent for hastening operations and exploiting their preliminary success to a point at which General Pétain could not repair the breach. They had, in fact, two days in which to achieve their aim—24th and 25th Feb. On the 24th they flowed round the Beaumont Woods and came close to the Talou Ridge, the Poivre Ridge, and the rest of the French line where it ran past Haudremont and Douaumont to Vaux. On the 25th they attacked the Poivre Ridge without much success, but pressed the more important sector of their attack close to Douaumont.

Next day, 26th Feb., brought the fateful hour of the struggle. Pétain's reinforcements were at hand. The Germans made their supreme effort on a 2-mile front at Douaumont, and the picked 24th Brandenburger Regiment was the spear-head of an assault which at one moment burst its way into the Fort Douaumont trenches between the village and redoubt—a fine feat of arms which evoked this telegram from the Crown Prince's head-quarters: "Douaumont, the eastern pillar of the Verdun defences, is solidly in German hands". The adverb alone was misplaced. The position was not held solidly, for Pétain's reserves, thrown in at the exact moment, flung back the Germans and prevented the leak in the defences from being widened by any further inrush.

This counter-attack, made by men of Balfourier's 20th Corps, marked, indeed, the turn of the struggle, for though Douaumont, and Vaux after it, were subsequently to be lost, together with many other historic redoubts and shell-battered points of vantage on either side of the Meuse, and though many thousands of lives were to be swept away in attack and counter-attack on the barren hills about Verdun, yet henceforward the assaults were no different, except in weight, from others which in 1916 and 1917 were projected by the Germans or the Allies on the amplifying complexities of the armoured defence lines. Von Falkenhayn's subsequent comment on the operations, which marked the beginning of the creeping paralysis of his plan, was that violent French counter-attacks began, and the German forward movement on the heights was stayed.

Though the crisis was over there were many great moments of sleepless effort, of anxiety, and heroism in the months to come, for the last purposeful German assaults on the fortress were made on 15th June, and on 14th July the Germans were still occupying the French with assaults developing from the Thiaumont redoubts, which marked the farthest point southwards to which their long-sustained efforts had taken them. Following on these attacks was a considerable pause, during which the Germans were fully occupied elsewhere in dealing with the British attacks on the Somme. The last phase at Verdun in 1916 was that in which the French, inspired by the methods of General Nivelle, thrust the Germans out of all the positions so painfully won, and re-occupied by mid-December very much the same lines as those from which the great push of the last week in February had ejected them. The story of Verdun cannot here be told in detail; its principal events are dated as follows:

27th Feb.—Germans take Talou Ridge.

3rd March.—Germans enter Douaumont village.

7th March.—Germans, transferring their efforts to the west of the Meuse, capture Hills 360 and 265.

14th March.—Germans penetrate west of Verdun the line Béthincourt-Mort Homme.

20th March.—Germans enter Avocourt Wood.

29th March.—French recover Avocourt Redoubt.

1st April.—Germans, renewing their attacks east of Verdun, capture part of Vaux village.

10th April.—Germans make extended attack on both sides of the Meuse, failing at the Mort Homme, but gaining at Poivre Ridge.

5th May.—Germans, renewing westerly attacks, gain a footing on Hill 304.

20th May.—Germans in a great attack on Mort Homme capture summit of Hill 295. The attack next day enlarged the gains.

24th May.—Cumières and Fort Douaumont captured by Germans.

1st June.—Fresh German attack at Fort Vaux east of Verdun.

7th June.—Fort Vaux captured after six days' fighting.

17th June.—Attack renewed at Mort Homme. The attacks on both sides of the Meuse were prosecuted with increasing vigour till 28th, during which period the Germans took Hills 321 and 320, as well as Thiaumont Fort (23rd June) and Fleury (24th June). Fleury marked the point of their farthest advance towards the inner line of defences east of the Meuse at Forts Souville and Tavannes. The tide now paused, and on 30th June, a day before the British attack on the Somme, the French retook Thiaumont. The fighting went on in a restricted but incessant way through the rest of June and July, the French gradually improving their position. In August activity was renewed at Thiaumont and Fleury.

18th Aug.—French retake whole of Fleury.

9th Sept.—French retake trenches between Fleury and Douaumont.

24th Oct.—The French, after a long pause for readjustment, and now under the direction of General Nivelle, recapture village and fort of Douaumont, Haudremont quarries, and 4500 prisoners. They thus advanced to lines held in May.

3rd Nov.—Vaux recaptured. On 30th Nov. the German Crown Prince resigned the command of the Verdun front.

15th to 16th Dec.—General Nivelle (who succeeded General Joffre as French Commander-in-Chief on 12th Dec.) orders new attack at Verdun. Vacherauville, Poivre Ridge, Bezonvaux, Hardaumont recaptured with 11,000 prisoners.

In early 1916 the British army was still finding itself, and its new Commander-in-Chief, Sir Douglas Haig, regarded it as insufficiently trained and equipped for the great tasks which lay before it. As an instrument of war it was still not yet ready. It also remained, if not in a water-tight compartment in respect of the French armies at its side, yet with a separate command and in separate control. This may have been merely the necessary consequence of its state of training; but it is certain that in 1916 there was no one with authority to compel that unity of action and command which in 1918, but not till then, directed the Franco-British armies as one force. Fortunately, perhaps, the German High Command elected to attack the French at Verdun instead of throwing their whole weight on the British, though there were numerous smaller actions along the worn and dangerous Ypres front and elsewhere in the first half of the year.

On 14th Feb. the enemy captured some 600 yards of 'International Trench', south-east of Ypres, but they were regained on 17th March, when a bitter and protracted struggle also began for the mine craters at St. Eloi. These were lost and recovered more than once, with heavy casualties on both sides. The Canadians, who had their full share of these costly operations, were again sorely tried at the beginning of June, when the Germans penetrated their front trenches in a surprise attack on the 2nd of that month. Major-General Mercer was killed in this assault, and General Williams captured. Eleven days later the Canadians atoned for this set-back by completely re-establishing their broken line. Throughout the first half of 1916 the enemy, not only round Ypres, but also round Loos, at Ploegsteert, Givenchy, and elsewhere, persevered in similar local attempts to keep the British occupied and upset their plans, while he was concentrating his chief efforts towards beating down the French defences at Verdun. The attack on Verdun, as already related, ultimately broke down, and the period in which it was at its height was utilized by Sir Douglas Haig to bring his forces as near as possible to the point at which they could undertake with success an attack of the first magnitude against the entrenched German lines. The date of the attack was premature, and was hurried on in order to take some weight off the harassed French armies at Verdun. It began on 1st July; the chosen terrain was the River Somme, and the great offensive, in which the French joined, was over a 28-mile front from Gommecourt, north of the Somme, to Dompierre, south of that river.

First Battle of the Somme

The German position in the Somme area was situated on the high ground which is the watershed between the Scheldt and the Somme. The ground runs east-south-east, and its hills fall into long irregular spurs divided by wide valleys. On the forward slopes of the hills the German first-line defences ran from the Somme at Curlu to Fricourt; at Fricourt the defence line turned north, crossing the Ancre, thence passing over the summit of the watershed near Hébuterne and Gommecourt to Arras. Between the Somme and the Ancre a second line of defence had been constructed 2 miles behind the first, and on it had been lavished all the ingenuities of fortification which the German engineers afterwards developed in the so-called Hindenburg lines. South of the Somme, where the French were to co-operate with Sir Douglas Haig, the defences were not so elaborate; it was not here that the Germans, who were fully aware of the impending British attack, expected the blow to fall. They expected the greatest weight to be felt towards the Ancre.

The British preparatory bombardment, delivered by a force of artillery far greater than any British army had heretofore possessed, began on 24th June, and deluged the German positions with shells for a week. It was aided by the efforts of the Royal Flying Corps, which, at this time, had a decided superiority over that of the Germans. The British attack on 1st July began in broad daylight, and was delivered principally by Rawlinson's Fourth Army of five corps, with a subsidiary attack by the Third Army (Allenby) opposite Gommecourt, where one corps only was sent forward. The sectors attacked, beside that at Gommecourt, may be designated: Beaumont-Hamel; River Ancre, including Thiepval; La Boisselle and Contalmaison; Fricourt; River Somme at Montauban. The French attack, designed by Foch and delivered by the French Sixth Army (Fayolle), and Tenth Army (Micheler), was delivered along an 8-mile front, taking in a sector on either side of the Somme from Maricourt, through Frise and Dompierre, to Fay.

Severe as were the British preparatory and final bombardments, they did not succeed in demolishing the German systems of defences, and had left machine-gun nests intact. The efficacy of the machine-gun was one of the bitterest lessons to be learnt by the flower of the British armies of 1916, and the great losses of 1st July were largely due to the German handling of this weapon. Taking the British and French attack as a whole, it may be said to have failed towards the north and succeeded towards the south. The heaviest rebuff was inflicted on the corps of Allenby's Third Army which operated opposite Gommecourt. From Thiepval, across the Ancre, the Germans had massed their best fighting material and the greatest weight of their artillery. The 10th Corps (Morland), which included the famous 36th (Ulster) Division, Highlanders, and North Countrymen, did wonders, and actually penetrated the Thiepval Redoubt but could not hold on to its gains. Hunter-Weston's 8th Corps of picked troops, including the 29th Division from Gallipoli, found the task of assaulting Beaumont-Hamel too strong for them. Farther south there were successes which increased in value towards the Somme. The 13th Corps (Congreve) carried Montauban and Mametz; the 15th Corps (Horne) surrounded Fricourt; the 3rd Corps (Pulteney) forced its way at great cost into La Boisselle.

The French armies, well handled, and aided by the advantage of finding the Germans less on their guard, made ground on either side of the Somme. Three corps participated in the assault—the 20th (Balfourier) from Maricourt to the Somme, where the hardest fighting was at Curlu and Hardicourt; the 1st Corps (Brandelat); and the 35th Corps (Allonier). The last two walked through the Germans, and the French losses were light. As the result of the day's fighting along the whole extent of the front, the British captured 3500, and the French 6000 prisoners; but the casualties of the assailants were close on 50,000. The second day's fighting, though it emphasized the certainty that no great German defeat had been inflicted, enabled both the French and British commanders to enlarge the ground they had won, and the advantage was further exploited in the few days that followed. By the 5th of July over a front of 6 miles the Germans had been pushed back a mile; the British had captured 6000, the French 8000 prisoners.

This was the first blow in the Somme battle. Its results, compared with those of the German attack at Verdun, do not afford warrant for regarding it as a great victory. It became clear that there was no precedent to follow other than that set by the Germans at Verdun, namely that of systematically reducing the enemy's position. This heavy task was entered on by the British forces with unbroken determination; and the effort relaxed scarcely any of its vigour till 18th Sept., while the last big British attack on the Ancre began on 13th Nov. The principal events in this protracted struggle for positions and fortified strongholds after the opening phase already described were:

14th to 15th July.—British attack German second line, capturing Longueval, Trônes Wood, Delville Wood, and 2000 prisoners.

23rd July.—Second phase of Somme battle begun. Pozières captured 26th July.

16th Aug.—French take Belloy near the Somme; 1300 prisoners.

29th Aug.—Total British captures on Somme to date: 266 officers, 15,203 men, 86 guns.

15th Sept.—British advance (third phase of Somme battle) using tanks for the first time; Martinpuich and High Wood taken. Lesbœufs and Morval captured 25th Sept. Combles and Thiepval captured 26th Sept.

30th Sept.—Thiepval Ridge captured.

10th Oct.—French take Ablaincourt, south of Somme, and 1300 prisoners.

21st to 23rd Oct.—British take 1018 prisoners.

12th Nov.—French take Saillisel.

13th Nov.—Battle of the Ancre (fourth phase of Somme battle). British take 4000 prisoners.

29th Dec.—Sir D. Haig's dispatches relating to Somme battle. During the period 1st July to 18th Nov. were captured 38,000 prisoners, 125 guns, 514 machine-guns. The number of casualties inflicted on the Germans has not been made known. Those of the British amounted to 22,923 officers and 476,553 men. A number of these were, of course, not permanent casualties.

Russian Campaign, 1916

During the winter of 1915-6 the Russian armies were reorganized by General Alexieff under the nominal command of the Tsar. The Grand Duke Nicholas, as already stated, went to the Caucasus in 1915, and while Viceroy there the successful advance of General Yudenitch to Erzerum (captured 16th Feb.) was made. The Russian armies of the north were placed under General Kuropatkin (Riga to Dvinsk) and General Everts (Vilna to the Pripet), and the commands embraced respectively the Twelfth, Fifth, and First; and the Second, Tenth, Fourth, and Third Armies. In the southern group of armies, commanded by General Ivanoff till April, and by General Brussiloff afterwards, were included the Eighth Army (Kaledin) in the Rovno sector, Eleventh Army of Volhynia (Sakharoff), Seventh Army of Eastern Galicia (Scherbatcheff), and Ninth Army of the Dniester (Lechitsky). Facing the northern group of armies were German forces directed nominally by General Hindenburg, actually by General Ludendorff. The local commanders were von Below and von Scholtz (Riga to Dvinsk), von Eichhorn (Lake Narotch), von Fabeck and von Woyrsch with an Austrian army corps. A force under the nominal command of Prince Leopold of Bavaria connected these German armies with those which faced General Brussiloff (successor to Ivanoff). The Volhynian sector (Third Austro-Hungarian Army) was under von Brlog; Rovno sector (Fourth Army) under the Archduke Joseph Ferdinand, stiffened by a reserve under von Linsingen. Farther south were General Boehm-Ermolli's army (Second), and the two armies of Bothmer and Pflanzer-Baltin. The Russians, who had been recruiting far larger numbers than they could feed or employ, were much more numerous. The Germans were well entrenched and superior in artillery.

The German effort in 1916 was diverted to the West. The Russians, who were now better supplied in guns and ammunition than heretofore, seized the opportunity to take and keep the initiative in the East. They began before the end of 1915 with an offensive in Galicia on the Styr and Strypa, and continued their attacks through January; while in February there was severe fighting on the Dniester, in the Bukovina, and in Volhynia. The first full-dress attack was made, however, in the northern sector, where General Everts began the battle of Lake Narotch on 18th March. Fighting here was renewed eight times before 14th April, and the Russian gain on the Vilna road did not warrant the heavy losses (12,000), which were increased by a German counter-attack on 28th April.

The important part of the Russian campaign took place in the southern group of armies commanded by Brussiloff, who used his superiority of numbers against the Austrian generals and their very mixed troops with brilliant effect. On 4th June the Russian armies from the Pripet to the Bukovina were set in motion simultaneously against the long unequally guarded Austrian front, seeking the weak places. Generals Kaledin and Sakharoff, in the sectors nearest the Pripet, engaged the armies of von Brlog and the Archduke Joseph Ferdinand; and the Russian columns, though held up in the marshes supporting von Brlog near Kolki, swept through the archduke's defences like paper. They marched swiftly forward over rolling country to the Styr, driving the Austro-Hungarian levies before them. By 16th June the leading Russian columns were 12 miles from Vladimir Volhynok. North of this apex Kolki and Svidniki, on the Stokhod, were captured; south of the so-called Lutsk salient thus created Sakharoff captured Dubno, and was outside Brody on the 16th. In twelve days this most damaging attack captured 70,000 men, 83 guns, and created a salient which, at its greatest depth, was 50 miles from the 80-foot base from which it had been started. Von Linsingen's reserves were sent in, and Ludendorff took matters in hand.

General Scherbatcheff had simultaneously attacked von Bothmer from Kozlov to the Dniester. The Russian general reached Bucacz (8th June) and crossed the Strypa. He also captured 17,000 prisoners and 30 guns, but von Bothmer, athwart a good line of railway, could not be enveloped, and fell back sullenly and without disaster.

General Lechitsky, in the most southerly sector, struck with fury at Pflanzer-Baltin, and cut through his centre on the hills between the Dniester and the Pruth while turning his flank at the Dniester bridge-heads at Zaleszczyki and Biskupie. The net result was the wreck of Pflanzer-Baltin's army, which was forced to retreat across the Pruth to the Carpathians. Lechitsky captured 39,000 men; and Brussiloff's great attack had succeeded triumphantly on both wings. It had made less headway in the centre. There were two lines of subsequent pressure or advance open to him, one, the more northerly, towards Kovel; the other, with, as object, the further destruction of the southern Austro-Hungarian armies, towards Halicz.

Ludendorff, however, had by this time formed his plans for the restoration of equilibrium; and Linsingen, with his reserves, was employed to make amplification of the Russian success at the most northerly portion of the salient impracticable. Linsingen struck at the Stokhod River crossings. Brussiloff countered by bringing up a fresh army under General Lesch with the object of outflanking Linsingen in his turn; and another army, under General Rogoza, was ordered to occupy General Woyrsch's attention farther north. These manœuvres had considerable success, Lesch and Rogoza capturing 17,000 men. But though in these and subsequent engagements the largest numbers of captures fell to the Russians, and though in the extreme south they were again able to advance to the Carpathian passes, no disaster on the largest scale was inflicted. The Germans were able to withdraw their allies and to allow the Russian attack to wear itself out.

Nevertheless, the Russian victories were of immense service to the Allies, and by the autumn of 1916 it seemed that the prospects of the Central Empires were darker than at any period of the war. The Russian advance, in its resolution and generalship, need not shrink from a comparison with that with which Foch ended the war two years later. By the middle of September, Generals Kaledin, Lesch, Sakharoff, Scherbatcheff, with Bezobrazoff and Lechitsky in the south, had captured 370,000 prisoners, 450 guns, and an amount of supplies as great as that which fell into Ludendorff's hands at St. Quentin in 1918.

Balkan Campaign, 1916

After the conclusion of Brussiloff's triumphant dissipation of the Austro-Hungarian armies in the early autumn of 1916, the way was open for Roumanian co-operation with the Allies, and Roumania, though neither united nor completely ready, was urged to enter the war. This she did on 28th Aug., when Germany declared war on her, and Italy made a belated declaration of war on Germany. On 29th Aug. von Hindenburg was appointed Chief of the German General Staff in succession to von Falkenhayn, to whom was relegated the task of dealing with Roumania. The Russians during the rest of the year advanced towards the foot of the Carpathian passes and to the junctions of the knot of railways in South-Eastern Galicia, in order to gain complete contact with the Roumanians through the Bukovina. Meanwhile the Roumanians, instead of concentrating on their southern front, where a mixed force of Bulgarians, Turks, and Germans under the command of von Mackensen was preparing to take them in the flank, pressed forward through the easterly passes of the Carpathians into Transylvania. They advanced here some distance, practically striking a blow in the air, but neither raising the Transylvanian population nor capturing any strategic points. On 2nd Sept. Russian forces in aid of Roumania crossed the Danube into the Dobrudja, while on 3rd Sept. Brussiloff's troops won a considerable victory in South-East Galicia, and on 7th Sept. took Halicz. But this success was more than offset by the loss to the Roumanians on their southern front of Tutrakan, on the Danube, with 20,000 prisoners. Occurrences were symptomatic of what was to come; and again, on the Eastern, as on the Western front, the Allies suffered from the lack of unity of command. The Russians and Roumanians joined hands on 10th Sept., but never concerted their strategy. Mackensen continued to advance along the Danube towards the vital Cernavoda Bridge, and so to threaten the whole of Southern Roumania, while the Russian forces which, on the east, had ventured into Roumania, found themselves by 18th and 19th Sept. faced with the new forces concentrated by the Germans against their eastern Transylvanian front. The rest of the Roumanian campaign is the history of the stages by which the two arms of these German-made 'nut-crackers' closed on the Roumanian armies, which had been placed in a false strategical position and were badly led. On neither front did the Roumanian soldiery, who fought well under very trying conditions, with inferior artillery and a poor medical service, give way without a struggle. Mackensen was stoutly held up on 20th Sept. in the Dobrudja, and on the Transylvanian side the Roumanians had a success on 27th Sept. But on 30th Sept. Falkenhayn developed his eastern attack near the Roter Turm Pass, and by 7th Oct. the whole Roumanian front in Transylvania was retiring by the way it had come. A week later it was out of Transylvania and defending the not very defensible passes.