Chapter 7

Bibliography.—G. Capus,A travers la Bosnie et l’Herzégovine(Paris, 1896) contains a detailed and fully illustrated account of the combined provinces, their resources and population. J. Asbóth,An Official Tour through Bosnia and Herzegovina(London, 1890) is valuable for details of local history, antiquities and topography: A. Bordeaux,La Bosnie populaire(Paris, 1904) for social life and mining. Much information is also contained in the works by Lamouche, Miller, Thomson, Joanne, Cambon, Millet, Hamard and Laveleye, cited under the headingBalkan Peninsula. See also B. Nikašinović,Bosnien und die Herzegovina unter der Verwaltung der österreich-ungarischen Monarchie(Berlin, 1901, &c.), and M. Oransz,Auf dem Rade durch Kroatien und Bosnien(Vienna, 1903). The best map is that of the Austrian General Staff. See also for geology, J. Cvijić,Morphologische und glaciale Studien aus Bosnien(Vienna, 1900); F. Katzer,Geologischer Führer durch Bosnien und Herzegovina(Serajevo, 1903); P. Ballif,Wasserbauten in Bosnien und Herzegovina(Vienna, 1896). Sport: “Snaffle,”In the Land of the Bora(London, 1897). Agriculture and Commerce: annual British consular reports, and the officialErgebnisse der Viehzahlungen(1879 and 1895), andLandwirtschaft in Bosnien und Herzegovina(1899). The chief official publications are in German. For antiquities, see R. Munro,Through Bosnia-Herzegovina and Dalmatia(Edinburgh, 1900); A.J. Evans,Illyrian Letters(London, 1878); W. Radimský,Die neolithische Station von Butmir(Vienna 1895-1898); P. Ballif,Römische Strassen in Bosnien und Herzegovina(Vienna, 1893, &c.). No adequate history of Bosnia was published up to the 20th century; but the chief materials for such a work are contained in the following books:—A. Theiner,Vetera monumenta historica Hungariam sacram illustrantia(Rome, 1860) andVetera monumenta Slavorum Meridionalium(1. Rome, 1863; 2. Agram, 1875),—these are collections of Latin documents from the Vatican library; V. Makushev,Monumenta historica Slavorum Meridionalium(Belgrade, 1885); Y. Shafarik,Acta archivi Veneti spectantia ad historiam Serborum, &c. (Belgrade, 1860-1862); F. Miklosich,Monumenta Serbica(Vienna, 1858). Other important authorities are G. Lucio,De Regno Dalmatiae et Croatiae(Amsterdam, 1666); M. Orbini,Regno degli Slavi(Pesaro 1601); D. Farlatus and others,Illyricum Sacrum(Venice, 1751-1819); C. du Fresne du Cange,Illyricum vetus et novum(1746); M. Simek,Politische Geschichte des Königreiches Bosnien und Rama(Vienna, 1787). The best modern history, though valueless for the period after 1463, is by P. Coquelle,Histoire du Monténégro et de la Bosnie(Paris, 1895). See also V. Klaić,Geschichte Bosniens(Leipzig 1884). J. Spalaïkovitch (Spalajković), inLa Bosnie et l’Herzégovine(Paris, 1897), give a critical account of the Austro-Hungarian administration.

(K. G. J.)

1This was soon modified in detail. Arrears of debt, for instance, were made recoverable for one year only, instead of the ten years allowed by Turkish law.2De Administrando Imperio, 33 and 34. The names ofChulmiaandChelmo, applied to this region by later Latin and Italian chroniclers, are occasionally adopted by English writers.3For the commercial and political relations of Ragusa and Bosnia, see L. Villari,The Republic of Ragusa(London, 1904).4Given by Theiner,Vetera monumenta Hungariam ... illustrantia, 173-185.5This is the first recorded instance of such an alliance. The Slavs were probably Bogomils.6These magnates played a considerable part in the politics of south-eastern Europe; see especially their correspondence with the Venetian Republic, given by Shafarik,Acta archivi Veneti, &c.7For details of these events see Umar Effendi,History of the War in Bosnia(1737-1739). Translated by C. Fraser (London, 1830).8For the Christian rebellion and its causes, see A.J. Evans,Through Bosnia and Herzegovina on Foot(London, 1876); and W.J. Stillman,Herzegovina and the Late Uprising(London, 1877).

1This was soon modified in detail. Arrears of debt, for instance, were made recoverable for one year only, instead of the ten years allowed by Turkish law.

2De Administrando Imperio, 33 and 34. The names ofChulmiaandChelmo, applied to this region by later Latin and Italian chroniclers, are occasionally adopted by English writers.

3For the commercial and political relations of Ragusa and Bosnia, see L. Villari,The Republic of Ragusa(London, 1904).

4Given by Theiner,Vetera monumenta Hungariam ... illustrantia, 173-185.

5This is the first recorded instance of such an alliance. The Slavs were probably Bogomils.

6These magnates played a considerable part in the politics of south-eastern Europe; see especially their correspondence with the Venetian Republic, given by Shafarik,Acta archivi Veneti, &c.

7For details of these events see Umar Effendi,History of the War in Bosnia(1737-1739). Translated by C. Fraser (London, 1830).

8For the Christian rebellion and its causes, see A.J. Evans,Through Bosnia and Herzegovina on Foot(London, 1876); and W.J. Stillman,Herzegovina and the Late Uprising(London, 1877).

BOSPORUS,orBosphorus(Gr.Βόσπορος= ox-ford, traditionally connected with Io, daughter of Inachus, who, in the form of a heifer, crossed the Thracian Bosporus on her wanderings). By the ancients this name, signifying a strait, was especially applied to theBosporus Cimmerius(see below), and theBosporus Thracius; but when used without any adjective it now denotes the latter, which unites the Black Sea with the Sea of Marmora and forms part of the boundary between Europe and Asia. The channel is 18 m. long, and has a maximum breadth at the northern entrance of 2¾ m., a minimum breadth of about 800 yds., and a depth varying from 20 to 66 fathoms in mid-stream. In the centre there is a rapid current from the Black Sea to the Sea of Marmora, but a counter-current sets in the opposite direction below the surface and along the shores. The surface current varies in speed, but averages nearly 3 m. an hour; though at narrow places it may run at double this pace. The strait is very rarely frozen over, though history records a few instances; and the Golden Horn, the inlet on either side of which Constantinople lies, has been partially frozen over occasionally in modern times. The shores of the Bosporus are composed in the northern portion of different volcanic rocks, such as dolerite, granite and trachyte; but along the remaining course of the channel the prevailing formations are Devonian, consisting of sandstones, marls, quartzose conglomerates, and calcareous deposits of various kinds. The scenery on both sides is of the most varied and beautiful description, many villages lining each well-wooded shore, while on the European side are numerous fine residences of the wealthy class of Constantinople. The Bosporus is under Turkish dominion, and by treaty of 1841, confirmed by the treaty of Berlin in 1878 and at other times, no ship of war other than Turkish may pass through the strait (or through the Dardanelles) without the countenance of the Porte. (See alsoConstantinople.)

BOSPORUS CIMMERIUS,the ancient name for the Straits of Kerch or Yenikale, connecting the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov; the Cimmerii (q.v.) were the ancient inhabitants. The straits are about 25 m. long and 2½ m. broad at the narrowest, and are formed by an eastern extension of the Crimea and the peninsula of Taman, a kind of continuation of the Caucasus. This in ancient times seems to have formed a group of islands intersected by arms of the Hypanis or Kuban and various sounds now silted up. The whole district was dotted with Greek cities; on the west side, Panticapaeum (Kerch,q.v.), the chief of all, often itself called Bosporus, and Nymphaeum (Eltegen); on the east Phanagoria (Sênnája), Cepi, Hermonassa, Portus Sindicus, Gorgippia (Anapa). These were mostly settled by Milesians, Panticapaeum in the 7th or early in the 6th centuryB.C., but Phanagoria (c.540B.C.) was a colony of Teos, and Nymphaeum had some connexion with Athens—at least it appears to have been a member of the Delian Confederacy. The towns have left hardly any architectural or sculptural remains, but the numerous barrows in their neighbourhood have yielded very beautiful objects now mostly preserved in the Hermitage in St Petersburg. They comprise especially gold work, vases exported from Athens, textiles and specimens of carpentry and marquetry. The numerous terra-cottas are rather rude in style.

According to Diodorus Siculus (xii. 31) the locality was governed from 480 to 438B.C.by the Archaeanactidae, probably a ruling family, who gave place to a tyrant Spartocus (438-431B.C.), apparently a Thracian. He founded a dynasty which seems to have endured untilc. 110B.C.The Spartocids have left many inscriptions which tell us that the earlier members of the house ruled as archons of the Greek cities and kings of various native tribes, notably the Sindi of the island district and other branches of the Maitae (Maeotae). The text of Diodorus, the inscriptions and the coins do not supply sufficient material for a complete list of them. Satyrus (431-387), the successor of Spartocus, established his rule over the whole district, adding Nymphaeum to his dominions and laying siege to Theodosia, which was a serious commercial rival by reason of its ice-free port and direct proximity to the cornfields of the eastern Crimea. It was reserved for his son Leucon (387-347) to take this city. He was succeeded by his two sons conjointly, Spartocus II. and Paerisades; the former died in 342 and his brother reigned alone until 310. Then followed a civil war in which Eumelus (310-303) was successful. His successor was Spartocus III. (303-283) and after him Paerisades II. Succeeding princes repeated the family names, but we cannot assign them any certain order. We know only that the last of them, a Paerisades, unable to make headway against the power of the natives, called in the help of Diophantus, general of Mithradates VI. (the Great) of Pontus, promising to hand over his kingdom to that prince. He was slain by a Scythian Saumacus who led a rebellion against him. The house of Spartocus was well known as a line of enlightened and wise princes; although Greek opinion could not deny that they were, strictly speaking, tyrants, they are always described as dynasts. They maintained close relations with Athens, their best customers for the Bosporan corn export, of which Leucon I. set the staple at Theodosia, where the Attic ships were allowed special privileges. We have many references to this in the Attic orators. In return the Athenians granted him Athenian citizenship and set up decrees in honour of him and his sons. Mithradates the Great entrusted the Bosporus Cimmerius to his son Machares, who, however, deserted to the Romans. But even when driven out of his own kingdom by Pompey, Mithradates was strong enough to regain the Bosporus Cimmerius, and Machares slew himself. Subsequently the Bosporans again rose in revolt under Pharnaces, another of the old king’s sons. After the death of Mithradates (B.C.63), this Pharnaces (63-47) made his submission to Pompey, but tried to regain his dominion during the civil war. He was defeated by Caesar at Zela, and on his return to Rome was slain by a pretender Asander who married his daughter Dynamis, and in spite of Roman nominees ruled as archon, and later as king, until 16B.C.After his death Dynamis was compelled to marry an adventurer Scribonius, but the Romans under Agrippa interfered and set Polemon (14-8) in his place. To him succeeded Aspurgus (8B.C.-A.D.38?), son of Asander, who founded a line of kings which endured with certain interruptions untilA.D.341. These kings, who mostly bore the Thracian names of Cotys, Rhescuporis, Rhoemetalces, and the native name Sauromates, claimed descent from Mithradates the Great, and used the Pontic era (starting from 297B.C.) introduced by him, regularly placing dates upon their coins and inscriptions. Hence we know their names and dates fairly well, though scarcely any events of their reigns are recorded. Their kingdom covered the eastern half of the Crimea and the Taman peninsula, and extended along the east coast of the Sea of Azov to Tanais at the mouth of the Don, a great mart for trade with the interior. They carried on a perpetual war with the native tribes, and in this were supported by their Roman suzerains, who even lent the assistance of garrison and fleet. At times rival kings of some other race arose and probably produced some disorganization. At one of these periods (A.D.255) the Goths and Borani were enabled to seize Bosporan shipping and raid the shores of Asia Minor. With the last coin of the last Rhescuporis,A.D.341, materials for a connected history of the Bosporus Cimmerius come to an end. Thekingdom probably succumbed to the Huns established in the neighbourhood. In later times it seems in some sort to have been revived under Byzantine protection, and from time to time Byzantine officers built fortresses and exercised authority at Bosporus, which was constituted an archbishopric. They also held Ta Matarcha on the Asiatic side of the strait, a town which in the 10th and 11th centuries became the seat of the Russian principality of Tmutarakan, which in its turn gave place to Tatar domination.

The Bosporan kingdom is interesting as the first Hellenistic state, the first, that is to say, in which a mixed population adopted the Greek language and civilization. It depended for its prosperity upon the export of wheat, fish and slaves, and this commerce supported a class whose wealth and vulgarity are exemplified by the contents of the numerous tombs to which reference has been made. In later times a Jewish element was added to the population, and under its influence were developed in all the cities of the kingdom, especially Tanais, societies of “worshippers of the highest God,” apparently professing a monotheism which without being distinctively Jewish or Christian was purer than any found among the inhabitants of the Empire.

We possess a large series of coins of Panticapaeum and other cities from the 5th centuryB.C.The goldstatersof Panticapaeum bearing Pan’s head and a griffin are specially remarkable for their weight and fine workmanship. We have also coins with the names of the later Spartocids and a singularly complete series of datedsolidiissued by the later or Achaemenian dynasty; in them may be noticed the swift degeneration of the goldsolidusthrough silver and potin to bronze (see alsoNumismatics).

See, for history, introduction to V.V. Latyshev,Inscrr. orae Septent. Ponti Euxini, vol. ii. (St Petersburg, 1890); art. “Bosporus” (2) by C.G. Brandis in Pauly-Wissowa,Realencycl.vol. iii. 757 (Stuttgart, 1899); E.H. Minns,Scythians and Greeks(Cambridge, 1907). For inscriptions, Latyshev as above and vol. iv. (St Petersburg, 1901). Coins: B. Koehne,Musée Kotschoubey(St Petersburg, 1855). Religious Societies: E. Schürer inSitzber. d. k. pr. Akad. d. Wissenschaft zu Berlin(1897), i. pp. 200-227. Excavations:Antiquités du Bosphore cimmérien(St Petersburg, 1854, repr. Paris, 1892) andCompte renduandBulletin de la Commission Imp. Archéologique de St. Pétersbourg.

(E. H. M.)

BOSQUET, PIERRE FRANÇOIS JOSEPH(1810-1861), French marshal, entered the artillery in 1833, and a year later went to Algeria. Here he soon did good service, and made himself remarkable not only for technical skill but the moral qualities indispensable for high command. Becoming captain in 1839, he greatly distinguished himself at the actions of Sidi-Lakhdar and Oued-Melah. He was soon afterwards given the command of a battalion of nativetirailleurs, and in 1843 was thanked in general orders for his brilliant work against the Flittahs. In 1845 he became lieutenant-colonel, and in 1847 colonel of a French line regiment. In the following year he was in charge of the Oran district, where his swift suppression of an insurrection won him further promotion to the grade of general of brigade, in which rank he went through the campaign of Kabulia, receiving a severe wound. In 1853 he returned to France after nineteen years’ absence, a general of division. Bosquet was amongst the earliest chosen to serve in the Crimean War, and at the battle of the Alma his division led the French attack. When the Anglo-French troops formed the siege of Sevastopol, Bosquet’s corps of two divisions protected them against interruption. His timely intervention at Inkerman (November 5, 1854) secured the victory for the allies. During 1855 Bosquet’s corps occupied the right wing of the besieging armies opposite the Mamelon and Malakov. He himself led his corps at the storming of the Mamelon (June 7), and at the grand assault of the 8th of September he was in command of the whole of the storming troops. In the struggle for the Malakov he received another serious wound. At the age of forty-five Bosquet, now one of the foremost soldiers in Europe, became a senator and a marshal of France, but his health was broken, and he lived only a few years longer. He had the grand cross of the Bath, the grand cross of the Legion of Honour, and the Medjidieh of the 1st class.

BOSS.(1) (From the O. Eng.boce, a swelling, cf. Ital.bozza, and Fr.bosse, possibly connected with the O. Ger.bōzan, to beat), a round protuberance; the projecting centre or “umbo” of a buckler; in geology a projection of rock through strata of another species; in architecture, the projecting keystone of the ribs of a vault which masks their junction; the term is also applied to similar projecting blocks at every intersection. The boss was often richly carved, generally with conventional foliage but sometimes with angels, animals or grotesque figures. The boss was also employed in the flat timber ceilings of the 15th century, where it formed the junction of cross-ribs. (2) (From the Dutchbaas, a word used by the Dutch settlers in New York for “master,” and so generally used by the Kaffirs in South Africa; connected with the Ger.Base, cousin, meaning a “chief kinsman,” the head of a household or family), a colloquial term, first used in America, for an employer, a foreman, and generally any one who gives orders, especially in American political slang for the manager of a party organization.

BOSSI, GIUSEPPE(1777-1816), Italian painter and writer on art, was born at the village of Busto Arsizio, near Milan. He was educated at the college of Monza; and his early fondness for drawing was fostered by the director of the college, who supplied him with prints after the works of Agostino Caracci for copies. He then studied at the academy of Brera at Milan, and about 1795 went to Rome, where he formed an intimate friendship with Canova. On his return to Milan he became assistant secretary, and then secretary, of the Academy of Fine Arts. He rendered important service in the organization of this new institution. In 1804, in conjunction with Oriani, he drew up the rules of the three academies of art of Bologna, Venice and Milan, and soon after was rewarded with the decoration of the Iron Crown. On the occasion of the visit of Napoleon I. to Milan in 1805, Bossi exhibited a drawing of the Last Judgment of Michelangelo, and pictures representing Aurora and Night, Oedipus and Creon, and the Italian Parnassus. By command of Prince Eugene, viceroy of Italy, Bossi undertook to make a copy of the Last Supper of Leonardo, then almost obliterated, for the purpose of getting it rendered in mosaic. The drawing was made from the remains of the original with the aid of copies and the best prints. The mosaic was executed by Raffaelli, and was placed in the imperial gallery of Vienna. Bossi made another copy in oil, which was placed in the museum of Brera. This museum owed to him a fine collection of casts of great works of sculpture acquired at Paris, Rome and Florence. Bossi devoted a large part of his life to the study of the works of Leonardo; and his last work was a series of drawings in monochrome representing incidents in the life of that great master. He left unfinished a large cartoon in black chalk of the Dead Christ in the bosom of Mary, with John and the Magdalene. In 1810 he published a special work in large quarto, entitledDel Cenacolo di Leonardo da Vinci, which had the merit of greatly interesting Goethe. His other works areDelle Opinioni di Leonardo intorno alla simmetria de’ corpi umani(1811), andDel Tipo dell’ arte della pittura(1816). Bossi died at Milan on the 15th of December 1816. A monument by Canova was erected to his memory in the Ambrosian library, and a bust was placed in the Brera.

BOSSU, RENÉ LE(1631-1680), French critic, was born in Paris on the 16th of March 1631. He studied at Nanterre, and in 1649 became one of the regular canons of Sainte-Geneviève. He wroteParallèle des principes de la physique d’Aristote et de celle de René Descartes(1674), and aTraité du poème épique, highly praised by Boileau, the leading doctrine of which was that the subject should be chosen before the characters, and that the action should be arranged without reference to the personages who are to figure in the scene. He died on the 14th of March 1680.

BOSSUET, JAQUES BÉNIGNE(1627-1704), French divine, orator and writer, was born at Dijon on the 27th of September 1627. He came of a family of prosperous Burgundian lawyers; his father was a judge of the parliament (a provincial high court) at Dijon, afterwards at Metz. The boy was sent to school with the Jesuits of Dijon till 1642, when he went up to the college of Navarre in Paris to begin the study of theology; for a pious mother had brought him up to look on the priesthood as his natural vocation. At Navarre he gained a great reputation forhard work; fellow-students nicknamed himBos suetus aratro—an ox broken in to the plough. But his abilities became known beyond the college walls. He was taken up by the Hôtel de Rambouillet, a great centre of aristocratic culture and the original home of thePrécieuses. Here he became the subject of a celebrated experiment. A dispute having arisen about extempore preaching, the boy of sixteen was put up, late one night, to deliver an impromptu discourse. He acquitted himself as well as in more conventional examinations. In 1652 he took a brilliant degree in divinity, and was ordained priest. The next seven years he spent at Metz, where his father’s influence had got him a canonry at the early age of thirteen; to this was now added the more important office of archdeacon. He was plunged at once into the thick of controversy; for nearly half Metz was Protestant, and Bossuet’s first appearance in print was a refutation of the Huguenot pastor Paul Ferry (1655). To reconcile the Protestants with the Roman Church became the great object of his dreams; and for this purpose he began to train himself carefully for the pulpit, an all-important centre of influence in a land where political assemblies were unknown, and novels and newspapers scarcely born. Not that he reached perfection at a bound. His youthful imagination was unbridled, and his ideas ran easily into a kind of paradoxical subtlety, redolent of the divinity school. But these blemishes vanished when he settled in Paris (1659), and three years later mounted the pulpit of the Chapel Royal.

In Paris the congregations had no mercy on purely clerical logic or clerical taste; if a preacher wished to catch their ear, he must manage to address them in terms they would agree to consider sensible and well-bred. Not that Bossuet thought too much of their good opinion. Having very stern ideas of the dignity of a priest, he refused to descend to the usual devices for arousing popular interest. The narrative element in his sermons grows shorter with each year. He never drew satirical pictures, like his great rival Bourdaloue. He would not write out his discourses in full, much less learn them off by heart: of the two hundred printed in hisWorksall but a fraction are rough drafts. No wonder ladies like Mme de Sévigné forsook him, when Bourdaloue dawned on the Paris horizon in 1669; though Fénelon and La Bruyère, two much sounder critics, refused to follow their example. Bossuet possessed the full equipment of the orator, voice, language, flexibility and strength. He never needed to strain for effect; his genius struck out at a single blow the thought, the feeling and the word. What he said of Martin Luther applies peculiarly to himself: he could “fling his fury into theses,” and thus unite the dry light of argument with the fire and heat of passion. These qualities reach their highest point in theOraisons funèbres. Bossuet was always best when at work on a large canvas; besides, here no conscientious scruples intervened to prevent him giving much time and thought to the artistic side of his subject. For theOraison, as its name betokened, stood midway between the sermon proper and what would nowadays be called a biographical sketch. At least, that was what Bossuet made it; for on this field he stood not merely first, but alone. His three great masterpieces were delivered at the funerals of Henrietta Maria, widow of Charles I. (1669), her daughter, Henrietta, duchess of Orleans (1670), and the great soldier Condé (1687).

Apart from these state occasions, Bossuet seldom appeared in a Paris pulpit after 1669. In that year he was gazetted bishop of Condom in Gascony, though he resigned the charge on being appointed tutor to the dauphin, only child of Louis XIV., and now a boy of nine (1670). The choice was scarcely fortunate. Bossuet unbent as far as he could, but his genius was by no means fitted to enter into the feelings of a child; and the dauphin was a cross, ungainly, sullen lad, who grew up to be a merely genealogical incident at his father’s court. Probably no one was happier than the tutor, when his charge’s sixteenth birthday came round, and he was promptly married off to a Bavarian princess. Still the nine years at court were by no means wasted. Hitherto Bossuet had published nothing, except his answer to Ferry. Now he sat down to write for his pupil’s instruction—or rather, to fit himself to give that instruction—a remarkable trilogy. First came theTraité de la connaissance de Dieu et de soi-même, then theDiscours sur l’histoire universelle, lastly thePolitique tirée de l’Écriture Sainte. The three books fit into each other. TheTraitéis a general sketch of the nature of God and the nature of man. TheDiscoursis a history of God’s dealings with humanity in the past. ThePolitiqueis a code of rights and duties drawn up in the light thrown by those dealings. Not that Bossuet literally supposed that the last word of political wisdom had been said by the Old Testament. His conclusions are only “drawn from Holy Scripture,” because he wished to gain the highest possible sanction for the institutions of his country—to hallow the France of Louis XIV. by proving its astonishing likeness to the Israel of Solomon. Then, too, the veil of Holy Scripture enabled him to speak out more boldly than court-etiquette would have otherwise allowed, to remind the son of Louis XIV. that kings have duties as well as rights. Louis had often forgotten these duties, but Louis’ son would bear them in mind. The tutor’s imagination looked forward to a time when France would blossom into Utopia, with a Christian philosopher on the throne. That is what made him so stalwart a champion of authority in all its forms:”le roi, Jésus-Christ et l’Église, Dieu en ces trois noms”, he says in a characteristic letter. And the object of his books is to provide authority with a rational basis. For Bossuet’s worship of authority by no means killed his confidence in reason; what it did was to make him doubt the honesty of those who reasoned otherwise than himself. The whole chain of argument seemed to him so clear and simple. Philosophy proved that a God exists, and that He shapes and governs the course of human affairs. History showed that this governance is, for the most part, indirect, exercised through certain venerable corporations, as well civil as ecclesiastical, all of which demand implicit obedience as the immediate representatives of God. Thus all revolt, whether civil or religious, is a direct defiance of the Almighty. Cromwell becomes a moral monster, and the revocation of the edict of Nantes is “the greatest achievement of the second Constantine.” Not that Bossuet glorified thestatus quosimply as a clerical bigot. The France of his youth had known the misery of divided counsels and civil war; the France of his manhood, brought together under an absolute sovereign, had suddenly shot up into a splendour only comparable with ancient Rome. Why not, then, strain every nerve to hold innovation at bay and prolong that splendour for all time? Bossuet’s ownDiscours sur l’histoire universellemight have furnished an answer, for there the fall of many empires is detailed. But then theDiscourswas composed under a single preoccupation. To Bossuet the establishment of Christianity was the one point of real importance in the whole history of the world. Over Mahomet and the East he passed without a word; on Greece and Rome he only touched in so far as they formed part of thePraeparatio Evangelica. And yet hisDiscoursis far more than a theological pamphlet. Pascal, in utter scorn for science, might refer the rise and fall of empires to Providence or chance—the nose of Cleopatra, or “a little grain of sand” in the English lord protector’s veins. Bossuet held fast to his principle that God works through secondary causes. “It is His will that every great change should have its roots in the ages that went before it.” Bossuet, accordingly, made a heroic attempt to grapple with origins and causes, and in this way his book deserves its place as one of the very first of philosophic histories.

From writing history he turned to history in the making. In 1681 he was gazetted bishop of Meaux; but before he could take possession of his see, he was drawn into a violent quarrel between Louis XIV. and the pope (seeGallicanism). Here he found himself between two fires. To support the pope meant supporting the Jesuits; and he hated their casuists anddévotion aiséealmost as much as Pascal himself. To oppose the pope was to play into the hands of Louis, who was frankly anxious to humble the Church before the State. So Bossuet steered a middle course. Before the general assembly of the French clergy he preached a great sermon on the unity of the Church, and made it a magnificent plea for compromise. As Louisinsisted on his clergy making an anti-papal declaration, Bossuet got leave to draw it up, and made it as moderate as he could. And when the pope declared it null and void, he set to work on a giganticDefensio Cleri Gallicani, only published after his death.

The Gallican storm a little abated, he turned back to a project very near his heart. Ever since the early days at Metz he had been busy with schemes for uniting the Huguenots to the Roman Church. In 1668 he converted Turenne; in 1670 he published anExposition de la foi catholique, so moderate in tone that adversaries were driven to accuse him of having fraudulently watered down the Roman dogmas to suit a Protestant taste. Finally in 1688 appeared his greatHistoire des variations des églises protestantes, perhaps the most brilliant of all his works. Few writers could have made the Justification controversy interesting or even intelligible. His argument is simple enough. Without rules an organized society cannot hold together, and rules require an authorized interpreter. The Protestant churches had thrown over this interpreter; and Bossuet had small trouble in showing that, the longer they lived, the more they varied on increasingly important points. For the moment the Protestants were pulverized; but before long they began to ask whether variation was necessarily so great an evil. Between 1691 and 1701 Bossuet corresponded with Leibnitz with a view to reunion, but negotiations broke down precisely at this point. Individual Roman doctrines Leibnitz thought his countrymen might accept, but he flatly refused to guarantee that they would necessarily believe to-morrow what they believe to-day. “We prefer,” he said, “a church eternally variable and for ever moving forwards.” Next, Protestant writers began to accumulate some startling proofs of Rome’s own variations; and here they were backed up by Richard Simon, a priest of the Paris Oratory, and the father of Biblical criticism in France. He accused St Augustine, Bossuet’s own special master, of having corrupted the primitive doctrine of Grace. Bossuet set to work on aDéfense de la tradition, but Simon calmly went on to raise issues graver still. Under a veil of politely ironical circumlocutions, such as did not deceive the bishop of Meaux, he claimed his right to interpret the Bible like any other book. Bossuet denounced him again and again; Simon told his friends he would wait until “the old fellow” was no more. Another Oratorian proved more dangerous still. Simon had endangered miracles by applying to them lay rules of evidence, but Malebranche abrogated miracles altogether. It was blasphemous, he argued, to suppose that the Author of nature would break through a reign of law He had Himself established. Bossuet might scribblenova, mira, falsa, in the margins of his book and urge on Fénelon to attack them; Malebranche politely met his threats by saying that to be refuted by such a pen would do him too much honour. These repeated checks soured Bossuet’s temper. In his earlier controversies he had borne himself with great magnanimity, and the Huguenot ministers he refuted found him a kindly advocate at court. Even his approval of the revocation of the edict of Nantes stopped far short of approving dragonades within his diocese of Meaux. But now his patience was wearing out. A dissertation by one Father Caffaro, an obscure Italian monk, became his excuse for writing certain violentMaximes sur la comédie(1694) wherein he made an outrageous attack on the memory of Molière, dead more than twenty years. Three years later he was battling with Fénelon over the love of God, and employing methods of controversy at least as odious as Fénelon’s own (1697-1699). All that can be said in his defence is that Fénelon, four-and-twenty years his junior, was an old pupil, who had suddenly grown into a rival; and that on the matter of principle most authorities thought him right.

Amid these gloomy occupations Bossuet’s life came slowly to an end. Till he was over seventy he had scarcely known what illness was; but in 1702 he was attacked by the stone. Two years later he was a hopeless invalid, and on the 12th of April 1704 he passed quietly away. Of his private life there is little to record. Meaux found him an excellent and devoted bishop, much more attentive to diocesan concerns than his more stirring occupations would seem to allow. In general society he was kindly and affable enough, though somewhat ill at ease. Until he was over forty, he had lived among purely ecclesiastical surroundings; and it was probably want of self-confidence, more than want of moral courage, that made him shut his eyes a little too closely to the disorders of Louis XIV.’s private life. After all, he was not the king’s confessor; and to “reform” Louis, before age and Mme de Maintenon had sobered him down, would have taxed the powers of Daniel or Ezekiel. But in his books Bossuet was anything but timid. All of them, even the attacks on Simon, breathe an air of masculine belief in reason, rare enough among the apologists of any age. Bossuet would willingly have undertaken, as Malebranche actually undertook, to make an intelligent Chinaman accept all his ideas, if only he could be induced to lend them his attention. But his best praise is to have brought all the powers of language to paint an undying picture of a vanished world, where religion and letters, laws and science, were conceived of as fixed unalterable planets, circling for ever round one central Sun.

Authorities.—The best edition of Bossuet’s sermons is theŒuvres oratoires de Bossuet, edited by Abbé Lebarq, in 6 vols. (Paris, 1890-1896). His complete works were edited by Lachat, in 31 vols. (Paris, 1862-1864). A complete list of the innumerable works relating to him will be found in theBossuetnumber of theBibliothèque des bibliographies critiques, compiled by Canon Charles Urbain, and published by the Société des Études Historiques (Paris, 1900). The general reader will find all he requires in the respective studies of M. Rebelliau,Bossuet(Paris, 1900), and M. Gustave Lanson,Bossuet(Paris, 1901). In English there is a modestBossuetby Mrs Sidney Lear (London, 1874), and two remarkable studies by Sir J. Fitz-James Stephen in the second volume of hisHorae Sabbaticae(London, 1892).

(St. C.)

BOSTANAI,the name of the first exilarch under Mahommedan rule, in the middle of the 7th century. The exilarchs had their seat in Persia, and were practically the secular heads of the Jewish community in the Orient.

BOSTON, THOMAS(1676-1732), Scottish divine, was born at Duns on the 17th of March 1676. His father, John Boston, and his mother, Alison Trotter, were both Covenanters. He was educated at Edinburgh, and licensed in 1697 by the presbytery of Chirnside. In 1699 he became minister of the small parish of Simprin, where there were in all “not more than 90 examinable persons.” In 1704 he found, while visiting a member of his flock, a book which had been brought into Scotland by a commonwealth soldier. This was the famousMarrow of Modern Divinity, by Edward Fisher, a compendium of the opinions of leading Reformation divines on the doctrine of grace and the offer of the Gospel. Its object was to demonstrate the unconditional freeness of the Gospel. It cleared away such conditions as repentance, or some degree of outward or inward reformation, and argued that where Christ is heartily received, full repentance and a new life follow. On Boston’s recommendation, Hog of Carnock reprintedThe Marrowin 1718; and Boston also published an edition with notes of his own. The book, being attacked from the standpoint of high Calvinism, became the standard of a far-reaching movement in Scottish Presbyterianism. The “Marrow men” were marked by the zeal of their service and the effect of their preaching. As they remained Calvinists they could not preach a universal atonement; they were in fact extreme particular redemptionists. In 1707 Boston was translated to Ettrick. He distinguished himself by being the only member of the assembly who entered a protest against what he deemed the inadequate sentence passed on John Simson, professor of divinity at Glasgow, who was accused of heterodox teaching on the Incarnation. He died on the 20th of May 1732. His books,The Fourfold State, The Crook in the Lot, and hisBody of DivinityandMiscellanies, long exercised a powerful influence over the Scottish peasantry.

HisMemoirswere published in 1776 (ed. G.D. Low, 1908). An edition of his works in 12 volumes appeared in 1849.

(D. Mn.)

BOSTON,a municipal and parliamentary borough and seaport of Lincolnshire, England, on the river Witham, 4 m. from its mouth in the Wash, 107 m. N. of London by the Great Northern railway. Pop. (1901) 15,667. It lies in a flat agricultural fen district, drained by numerous cuts, some of which are navigable. The church of St Botolph is a superb Decoratedbuilding, one of the largest and finest parish churches in the kingdom. A Decorated chapel in it, formerly desecrated, was restored to sacred use by citizens of Boston, Massachusetts, U.S.A., in 1857, in memory of the connexion of that city with the English town. The western tower, commonly known as Boston Stump, forms a landmark for 40 m. Its foundations were the first to be laid of the present church (which is on the site of an earlier one), but the construction was arrested until the Perpendicular period, of the work of which it is a magnificent example. It somewhat resembles the completed tower of Antwerp cathedral, and is crowned by a graceful octagonal lantern, the whole being nearly 290 ft. in height. The church of Skirbeck, 1 m. south-east, though extensively restored, retains good Early English details. Other buildings of interest are the guildhall, a 15th-century structure of brick; Shodfriars Hall, a half-timbered house adjacent to slight remains of a Dominican priory; the free grammar school, founded in 1554, with a fine gateway of wrought iron of the 17th century brought from St Botolph’s church; and the Hussey Tower of brick, part of a mansion of the 16th century. Public institutions include a people’s park and large municipal buildings (1904).

As a port Boston was of ancient importance, but in the 18th century the river had silted up so far as to exclude vessels exceeding about 50 tons. In 1882-1884 a dock some 7 acres in extent was constructed, with an entrance lock giving access to the quay sides for vessels of 3000 tons. The bed of the river was deepened to 27 ft. for 3 m. below the town, and a new cut of 3 m. was made from the mouth into deep water. An iron swing-bridge connects the dock with the Great Northern railway. There is a repairing slipway accommodating vessels of 800 tons. Imports, principally timber, grain, cotton and linseed, increased owing to these improvements from £116,179 in 1881 to £816,698 in 1899; and exports (coal, machinery and manufactured goods) from £83,000 in 1883 to £261,873 in 1899. The deep-sea and coastal fisheries are important. Engineering, oil-cake, tobacco, sail and rope works are the principal industries in the town. Boston returns one member to parliament. The parliamentary borough falls within the Holland or Spalding division of the county. The municipal borough is under a mayor, 6 aldermen and 18 councillors. Area, 2727 acres.

Boston (Icanhoe, St Botolph or Botolph’s Town) derives its name from St Botolph, who in 654 founded a monastery here, which was destroyed by the Danes, 870. Although not mentioned in Domesday, Boston was probably granted as part of Skirbeck to Alan, earl of Brittany. The excellent commercial position of the town at the mouth of the Witham explains its speedy rise into importance. King John by charter of 1204 granted the bailiff of Boston sole jurisdiction in the town. By the 13th century it was a great commercial centre second only to London in paying £780 for two years to the fifteenth levied in 1205, and Edward III. made it a staple port for wool in 1369. The Hanseatic and Flemish merchants largely increased its prosperity, but on the withdrawal of the Hanseatic League about 1470 and the break-up of the gild system Boston’s prosperity began to wane, and for some centuries it remained almost without trade. Nevertheless it was raised to the rank of a free borough by Henry VIII.’s charter of 1546, confirmed by Edward VI. in 1547, by Mary in 1553, by Elizabeth (who granted a court of admiralty) in 1558 and 1573, and by James I. in 1608. Boston sent members to the great councils in 1337, 1352 and 1353; and from 1552 to 1885 two members were returned to each parliament. The Redistribution Act 1885 reduced the representation to one member. In 1257 a market was granted to the abbot of Crowland and in 1308 to John, earl of Brittany. The great annual mart was held before 1218 and attended by many German and other merchants. Two annual fairs and two weekly markets were granted by Henry VIII.’s charter, and are still held. The Great Mart survives only in the Beast Mart held on the 11th of December.See Pishey Thompson,History and Antiquities of Boston and the Hundred of Skirbeck(Boston, 1856); George Jebb,Guide to the Church of St Botolph, with Notes on the History of Boston; Victoria County History: Lincolnshire.

See Pishey Thompson,History and Antiquities of Boston and the Hundred of Skirbeck(Boston, 1856); George Jebb,Guide to the Church of St Botolph, with Notes on the History of Boston; Victoria County History: Lincolnshire.

BOSTON,the capital of the state of Massachusetts, U.S.A., in Suffolk county; lat. 42° 21′ 27.6″ N., long. 71° 3′ 30″ W. Pop. (1900) 560,892, (197,129 being foreign born); (1905, state census) 595,580; (1910), 670,585. Boston is the terminus of the Boston & Albany (New York Central), the Old Colony system of the New York, New Haven & Hartford, and the Boston & Maine railway systems, each of which controls several minor roads once independent. The city lies on Massachusetts bay, on what was once a pear-shaped peninsula attached to the mainland by a narrow, marshy neck, often swept by the spray and water. On the north is the Charles river, which widens here into a broad, originally much broader, inner harbour or back-bay. The surface of the peninsula was very hilly and irregular, the shore-line was deeply indented with coves, and there were salt marshes that fringed the neck and the river-channel and were left oozy by the ebbing tides. Until after the War of Independence the primitive topography remained unchanged, but it was afterwards subjected to changes greater than those effected on the site of any other American city. The area of the original Boston was only 783 acres, but by the filling in of tidal flats (since 1804) this was increased to 1829 acres; while the larger corporate Boston of the present day—including the annexed territories of South Boston (1804), Roxbury (1868), Charlestown, Dorchester, Brighton and West Roxbury (1874)—comprehends almost 43 sq. m. The beautiful Public Garden and the finest residential quarter of the city—the Back Bay, so called from that inner harbour from whose waters it was reclaimed (1856-1886)—stand on what was once the narrowest, but to-day is the widest and fairest portion of the original site. Whole forests, vast quarries of granite, and hills of gravel were used in fringing the water margins, constructing wharves, piers and causeways, redeeming flats, and furnishing piling and solid foundations for buildings. At the edge of the Common, which is now well within the city, the British troops in 1775 took their boats on the eve of the battle of Lexington; and the post-office, now in the very heart of the business section of the city, stands on the original shore-line. The reclaimed territory is level and excellently drained. The original territory still preserves to a large degree its irregularity of surface, but its hills have been much degraded or wholly razed. Beacon Hill, so called from its ancient use as a signal warning station, is still the most conspicuous topographical feature of the city, but it has been changed from a bold and picturesque eminence into a gentle slope. After the great fire of 1872 it became possible, in the reconstruction of the business district, to widen and straighten its streets and create squares, and so provide for the traffic that had long outgrown the narrow, crooked ways of the older city. Atlantic Avenue, along the harbour front, was created, and Washington Street, the chief business artery, was largely remade after 1866. It is probable that up to 1875, at least, there had been a larger outlay of labour, material and money, in reducing, levelling and reclaiming territory, and in straightening and widening thoroughfares1in Boston, than had been expended for the same purposes in all the other chief cities of the United States together. Washington Street, still narrow, is perhaps the most crowded and congested thoroughfare in America. The finest residence streets are in the Back Bay, which is laid out, in sharp contrast with the older quarters, in a regular, rectangular arrangement. The North End, the original city and afterwards the fashionable quarter, is now given over to the Jews and foreign colonies.

The harbour islands, three of which have been ceded to the United States for the purpose of fortification, are numerous, and render the navigation of the shipping channels difficult and easily guarded. Though tortuous of access, the channels afford a clear passage of 27-35 ft. since great improvements were undertaken by the national government in 1892, 1899, 1902 and 1907, and the harbour, when reached, is secure. It affords nearly 60 sq. m. of anchorage, but the wharf line, for lack of early reservation, is not so large as it might and should have been. The islands in the harbour, now bare, were for the most part heavily wooded when first occupied. It has been found impossible to afforest them on account of the roughness of the sea-air, and the wash from their bluffs into the harbour has involved large expense in the erection of sea-walls. Castle Island has been fortified since the earliest days; Fort Independence, on this island, and Forts Winthrop and Warren on neighbouring islands, constitute permanent harbour defences. The broad watercoursesaround the peninsula are spanned by causeways and bridges, East Boston only, that the harbours may be open to the navy-yard at Charlestown, being reached by ferry (1870), and by the electric subway under the harbour. At the Charlestown navy-yard (1800) there are docks, manufactories, foundries, machine-shops, ordnance stores, rope-walks, furnaces, casting-pits, timber sheds, ordnance-parks, ship-houses, &c. The famous frigate “Independence” was launched here in 1814, the more famous “Constitution” having been launched while the yard was still private in 1797. The first bridge over the Charles, to Charlestown, was opened in 1786. The bridge of chief artistic merit is the Cambridge Bridge (1908), which replaced the old West Boston Bridge, and is one feature of improvements long projected for the beautifying of the Charles river basin.

Comparatively few relics of the early town have been spared by time and the improvements of the modern city. Three cemeteries remain intact—King’s chapel burying ground, with the graves of John Winthrop and John Cotton; the Old Granary burial ground in the heart of the city, where Samuel Sewall, the parents of Franklin, John Hancock, James Otis and Samuel Adams are buried; and Copp’s Hill burial ground, containing the tombs of the Mathers. Christ church (1723) is the oldest church of the city; in its tower the signal lanterns were displayed for Paul Revere on the night of the 18th of April 1775. The Old South church (1730-1782), the old state house (1748, restored 1882), and Faneuil Hall (1762-1763, enlarged 1805, reconstructed 1898) are rich in memorable associations of the period preceding the War of Independence. The second was the seat of the royal government of Massachusetts during the provincial period, and within its walls from 1760 to 1775 the questions of colonial dependence or independence probably first came into evident conflict. The Old South church has many associations; it was, for instance, the meeting-place of the people after the “Boston Massacre” of 1770, when they demanded the removal of the British troops from the city; and here, too, were held the meetings that led up to the “Boston Tea Party” of 1773. Faneuil Hall (the original hall of the name was given to the city by Peter Faneuil, a Huguenot merchant, in 1742) is associated, like the Old South, with the patriotic oratory of revolutionary days and is called “the cradle of American liberty.” Its association with reform movements and great public issues of later times is not less close and interesting.2The adjoining Quincy market may be mentioned because its construction (1826) was utilized to open six new streets, widen a seventh, and secure flats, docks and wharf rights—all without laying tax or debt upon the city. The original King’s chapel (1688, present building 1749-1754) was the first Episcopal church of Boston, which bitterly resented the action of the royal governor in 1687 in using the Old South for the services of the Church of England. The new state house, the oldest portion of which (designed by Charles Bulfinch) was erected in 1795-1798, was enlarged in 1853-1856, and again by a huge addition in 1889-1898 (total cost about $6,800,000 to 1900). Architecturally, everything is subordinated to a conformity with the style of the original portion; and its gilded dome is a conspicuous landmark. Other buildings of local importance are the city hall (1865); the United States government building (1871-1878, cost about $6,000,000); the county court-house (1887-1893, $2,250,000); the custom-house (1837-1848); and the chamber of commerce (1892).

Copley Square, in the Back Bay, is finely distinguished by a group of exceptional buildings: Trinity church, the old Museum of Fine Arts, the public library and the new Old South church. Trinity (1877, cost $800,000), in yellowish granite with dark sandstone trimmings, the masterpiece of H.H. Richardson, is built in the Romanesque style of southern France; it is a Latin cross surmounted by a massive central tower, with smaller towers and an adjacent chapel reached by open cloisters that distribute the balance (seeArchitecture, Plate XVI. fig. 137). It has windows by La Farge, William Morris, Burne-Jones and others.

The library (1888-1895; cost $2,486,000, exclusive of the site, given by the state) is a dignified, finely proportioned building of pinkish-grey stone, built in the style of the Italian Renaissance, suggesting a Florentine palace. It has an imposing exterior (seeArchitecture, Plate XVI. fig. 135), a beautiful inner court, and notable decorative features and embellishments, including bronze doors by D.C. French, a statue of Sir Henry Vane by Macmonnies, a fine staircase in Siena marble, some characteristic decorative panels by Puvis de Chavannes (illustrating the history of science and literature), and other notable decorative paintings by John S. Sargent (on the history of religion), Edwin A. Abbey (on the quest of the Holy Grail). The old Museum of Fine Arts (1876) is a red brick edifice in modern Gothic style, with trimmings of light stone and terra-cotta. The new Old South (the successor of the Old South, which is now a museum) is a handsome structure of Italian Gothic style, with a fine campanile. The dignified buildings of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology are near. In Huntington Avenue, at its junction with Massachusetts Avenue, is another group of handsome new buildings, including Horticultural Hall, Symphony Hall (1900) and the New England Conservatory of Music. In the Back Bay Fens, reclaimed swamps laid out by F.L. Olmsted, still other groups have formed—among others those of the marble buildings of the Harvard medical school; Fenway Court, a building in the style, internally, of a Venetian palace, that houses the art treasures of Mrs. J.L. Gardner, and Simmons College. Here, too, is the new building (1908) of the Museum of Fine Arts. Throughout the Fens excellently effective use is being made of monumental buildings grouped in ample grounds.

Boston compares favourably with other American cities in the character of its public and private architecture. The height of buildings in the business section is limited to 125 ft., and in some places to 90 ft.

One of the great public works of Boston is its subway for electric trams, about 3 m. long, in part with four tracks and in part with two, constructed since 1895 at a cost of about $7,500,000 up to 1905. The branch to East Boston (1900-1904) passes beneath the harbour bed and extends from Scollay Square, Boston, to Maverick Square, East Boston; it was the first all-cement tunnel (diameter, 23.6 ft.) in the world. The subway was built by the city, but leased and operated by a private company on such terms as to repay its cost in forty years. Another tunnel has been added to the system, under Washington Street. The narrow streets and the traffic congestion of the business district presented difficult problems of urban transit, but the system is of exceptional efficiency. There is an elevated road whose trains, like the surface cars, are accommodated in the centre of the city by the subway. All the various roads—surface, elevated (about 7 m., built 1896-1901), and subway—are controlled, almost wholly, by one company. They all connect and interchange passengers freely; so that the ordinary American five-cent fare enables a passenger to travel between almost any two points over an area of 100 sq. m. The two huge steam-railway stations of the Boston & Maine and the Boston & Albany systems also deserve mention. The former (the North, or Union station, 1893) covers 9 acres and has 23 tracks; the latter (the South Terminal, 1898), one of the largest stations in the world, covers 13 acres and has 32 tracks, and is used by the Boston & Albany and by the New York, New Haven & Hartford railways.

A noteworthy feature of the metropolitan public water service was begun in 1896 in the Wachusett lake reservoir at Clinton, on the Nashua river. The basin here excavated by ten years of labour, lying 385 ft. above high-tide level of Boston harbour, has an area of 6.5 sq. m., an average depth of 46 ft., and a capacity of 63,068,000,000 gallons of water. It is the largest municipal reservoir in the world3, yetit is only part of a system planned for the service of the metropolitan area.

The park system is quite unique among American cities. The Common, a park of 48 acres, in the centre of the city, has been a public reservation since 1634, and no city park in the world is cherished more affectionately for historical associations. Adjoining it is the Public Garden of 24 acres (1859), part of the made area of the city. Commonwealth Avenue, one of the Back Bay streets running from the foot of the Public Garden, is one of the finest residence streets of the country. It is 240 ft. wide, with four rows of trees shading the parking of its central mall, and is a link through the Back Bay Fens with the beautiful outer park system. The park system consists of two concentric rings, the inner being the city system proper, the outer the metropolitan system undertaken by the commonwealth in co-operation with the city. The former has been laid out since 1875, and includes upwards of 2300 acres, with more than 100 m. of walks, drives and rides. Its central ornament is Franklin Park (527 acres). The metropolitan system, which extends around the city on a radius of 10 to 12 m., was begun in 1893. It embraces over 10,000 acres, including the Blue Hill reservation (about 5000 acres), the highest land in eastern Massachusetts, a beautiful reservation of forest, crag and pond known as Middlesex Fells, two large beach bath reservations on the harbour at Revere and Hull (Nantasket), and the boating section of the Charles river. At the end of 1907 more than $13,000,000 had been expended on the system. Including the local parks of the cities and towns of the metropolitan district there are over 17,000 acres of pleasure grounds within the metropolitan park district. Boston was the pioneer municipality of the country in the establishment of open-air gymnasiums. A great improvement, planned for many years, was brought nearer by the completion of the new Cambridge Bridge. This improvement was projected to include the damming of the Charles river, and the creation of a great freshwater basin, with drive-ways of reclaimed land along the shores, and other adornments, somewhat after the model of the Alster basins at Hamburg.

Art and Literature.—The Museum of Fine Arts was founded in 1870 (though there were art exhibits collected from 1826 onward) and its present building was erected in 1908. It has one of the finest collections of casts in existence, a number of original pieces of Greek statuary, the second-best collection in the world of Aretine ware, the finest collection of Japanese pottery, and probably the largest and finest of Japanese paintings in existence. Among the memorials to men of Massachusetts (a large part of them Bostonians) commemorated by monuments in the Common, the Public Garden, the grounds of the state house, the city hall, and other public places of the city, are statues of Charles Sumner, Josiah Quincy and John A. Andrew by Thomas Ball; of Generals Joseph Hooker and William F. Bartlett, and of Rufus Choate by Daniel C. French; of W.L. Garrison and Charles Devens by Olin L. Warner; of Samuel Adams by Anne Whitney; of John Winthrop and Benjamin Franklin by R.S. Greenough; of Edward Everett (W.W. Story), Colonel W. Prescott (Story), Horace Mann (E. Stebbins), Daniel Webster (H. Powers), W.E. Channing (H. Adams), N.P. Banks (H.H. Kitson), Phillips Brooks (A. St Gaudens), and J.B. O’Reilly (D.C. French).

Among other important monuments are a group by J.Q.A. Ward commemorating the first proof of the anaesthetic properties of ether, made in 1846 in the Massachusetts General Hospital by Dr W.T.G. Morton; an emancipation group of Thomas Ball with a portrait statue of Lincoln; a fine equestrian statue, by the same sculptor, of Washington, one of the best works in the country (1869); an army and navy monument in the Common by Martin Millmore, in memory of the Civil War; another (1888) recording the death of those who fell in the Boston Massacre of 1770; statues of Admiral D.G. Farragut (H.H. Kitson), Leif Ericson (Anne Whitney), and Alexander Hamilton (W. Rimmer); and a magnificent bronze bas-relief (1897) by Augustus St Gaudens commemorating the departure from Boston of Colonel Robert G. Shaw with the first regiment of negro soldiers enlisted in the Civil War. There is an art department of the city government, under unpaid commissioners, appointed by the mayor from candidates named by local art and literary institutions; and without their approval no work of art can now become the property of the city.

The public library, containing 922,348 volumes in January 1908, is the second library of the country in size, and is the largest free circulating library in the world (circulation 1907, 1,529,111 volumes). There was a public municipal library in Boston before 1674—probably in 1653; but it was burned in 1747 and was apparently never replaced. The present library (antedated by several circulating, social and professional collections) may justly be said to have had its origin in the efforts of the Parisian, Alexandre Vattemare (1796-1864), from 1830 on, to foster international exchanges. From 1847 to 1851 he arranged gifts from France to American libraries aggregating 30,655 volumes, and a gift of 50 volumes by the city of Paris in 1843 (reciprocated in 1849 with more than 1000 volumes contributed by private citizens) was the nucleus of the Boston public library. Its legal foundation dates from 1848. Among the special collections are the George Ticknor library of Spanish and Portuguese books (6393 vols.), very full sets of United States and British public documents, the Bowditch mathematical library (7090 vols.), the Galatea collection on the history of women (2193 vols.), the Barton library, including one of the finest existing collections of Shakespeariana (3309 vols., beside many in the general library), the A.A. Brown library of music (9886 vols.), a very full collection on the anthropology and ethnology of Europe, and more than 100,000 volumes on the history, biography, geography and literature of the United States. The library is supported almost entirely by municipal appropriations, though holding also considerable trust funds ($388,742 in 1905). The other notable book-collections of the city include those of the Athenaeum, founded in 1807 (about 230,000 vols. and pamphlets), the Massachusetts Historical Society (founded 1791; 50,300), the Boston medical library (founded 1874; about 80,000), the New England Historic-Genealogical Society (founded 1845; 33,750 volumes and 34,150 pamphlets), the state library (founded 1826; 140,000), the American Academy of Arts and Sciences (founded 1780; 30,000), the Boston Society of Natural History (founded 1830; about 35,000 volumes and 27,000 pamphlets).

The leading educational institutions are the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the largest purely scientific and technical school in the country, opened to students (including women) in 1865, four years after the granting of a charter to Prof. W.B. Rogers, the first president; Boston University (chartered in 1869; Methodist Episcopal; co-educational); the New England Conservatory of Music (co-educational; private; 1867, incorporated 1880), the largest in the United States, having 2400 students in 1905-1906; the Massachusetts College of Pharmacy (1852); the Massachusetts Normal Art School (1873); the School of Drawing and Painting (1876) of the Museum of Fine Arts; Boston College (1860), Roman Catholic, under the Society of Jesus; St John’s Theological Seminary (1880), Roman Catholic; Simmons College (1899) for women, and several departments of Harvard University. The Institute of Technology has an exceptional reputation for the wide range of its instruction and its high standards of scholarship. It was a pioneer in introducing as a feature of its original plans laboratory instruction in physics, mechanics and mining. The architects of the United States navy are sent here for instruction in their most advanced courses. Boston University was endowed by Isaac Rich (1801-1872), a Boston fish-merchant, Lee Claflin (1791-1871), a shoe manufacturer and a benefactor of Wesleyan University and of Wilbraham Seminary, and Jacob Sleeper. It has been co-educational from the beginning. Its faculties of theology—founded in 1841 at Newbury, Vt., as the Biblical Institute; in 1847-1867 in Concord, N.H.; and in 1867-1871 the Boston Theological Seminary—law, music, medicine, liberalarts and agriculture (at Amherst, in association with the Massachusetts Agricultural College), all antedate 1876. The funds for Simmons College were left by John Simmons in 1870, who wished to found a school to teach the professions and “branches of art, science and industry best calculated to enable the scholars to acquire an independent livelihood.” The Lowell Institute (q.v.), established in 1839 (by John Lowell, Jr., who bequeathed $237,000 for the purpose), provides yearly courses of free public lectures, and its lecturers have included many of the leading scholars of America and Europe. During each winter, also, a series of public lectures on American history is delivered in the Old South meeting house. The public schools, particularly the secondary schools, enjoy a very high reputation. The new English High and Latin school, founded in 1635, is the oldest school of the country. A girls’ Latin school, with the same standards as the boys’ school, was established in 1878 (an outcome of the same movement that founded Radcliffe College). There are large numbers of private schools, in art, music and academic studies.

In theatrical matters Boston is now one of the chief American centres. The Federal Street theatre—the first regular theatre—was established in 1794, the old Puritan feeling having had its natural influence in keeping Boston behind New York and Philadelphia in this respect. The dramatic history of the city is largely associated with the Boston Museum, built in 1841 by Moses Kimball on Tremont Street, and rebuilt in 1846 and 1880; here for half a century the principal theatrical performances were given (see an interesting article in theNew England Magazine, June 1903), in later years under the management of R. Montgomery Field, until in 1903 the famous Boston Museum was swept away, as other interesting old places of entertainment (the old Federal Street theatre, the Tremont theatre, &c.) had been, in the course of further building changes. The Boston theatre dates from 1854, and there were seventeen theatres altogether in 1900.

As a musical centre Boston rivals New York. Among musical organizations may be mentioned the Handel and Haydn Society (1815), the Harvard Musical Association (1837), the Philharmonic (1880) and the Symphony Orchestra, organized in 1881 by the generosity of Henry Lee Higginson. This orchestra has done much for music not only in Boston but in the United States generally. In 1908 the Boston Opera Company was incorporated, and an opera house has been erected on the north side of Huntington Avenue.

Boston was the undisputed literary centre of America until the later decades of the 19th century, and still retains a considerable and important colony of writers and artists. Its ascendancy was identical with the long predominance of the New England literary school, who lived in Boston or in the country round about. Two Boston periodicals (one no longer so) that still hold an exceptional position in periodical literature, theNorth American Review(1815) and theAtlantic Monthly(1857), date from this period. The great majority of names in the long list of worthies of the commonwealth—writers, statesmen, orators, artists, philanthropists, reformers and scholars, are intimately connected with Boston. Among the city’s daily newspapers theBoston Herald(1846), theBoston Globe, theEvening Transcript(1830), theAdvertiser(1813) and thePost(1831) are the most important.

Industry and Commerce.—Boston is fringed with wharves. Commercial interests are largely concentrated in East Boston. Railway connexion with Worcester, Lowell and Providence was opened in 1835; with Albany, N.Y., and thereby with various lines of interior communication, in 1841 (double track, 1868); with Fitchburg, in 1845; and in 1851 connexion was completed with the Great Lakes and Canada. In 1840 Boston was selected as the American terminus of the Cunard Line, the first regular line of trans-Atlantic steamers. The following decade was the most active of the city’s history as regards the ocean carrying trade. Boston ships went to all parts of the globe. The Cunard arrangement was the first of various measures that worked for a commercial rapprochement between the New England states and Canada, culminating in the reciprocity treaty of 1854, and Boston’s interests are foremost to-day in demanding a return to relations of reciprocity. Beginning about 1855 the commerce of the port greatly declined. The Cunard service has not been continuous. In 1869 there was not one vessel steaming directly for Europe; in 1900 there were 973 for foreign ports. Great improvements of the harbour were undertaken in 1902 by the United States government, looking to the creation of two broad channels 35 ft. deep. Railway rates have also been a matter of vital importance in recent years; Boston, like New York, complaining of discriminations in favour of Philadelphia, Baltimore, New Orleans and Galveston. Boston also feels the competition of Montreal and Portland; the Canadian roads being untrammelled in the matter of freight differentials. Boston is the second import port of the United States, but its exports in 1907 were less than those of Philadelphia, of Galveston, or of New Orleans. The total tonnage in foreign trade entering and leaving in 1907 was 5,148,429 tons; and in the same year 9616 coasting vessels (tonnage, 10,261,474) arrived in Boston. The value of imports and exports for 1907 were respectively $123,414,168 and $104,610,908. Fibres and vegetable grasses, wool, hides and skins, cotton, sugar, iron and steel and their manufactures, chemicals, coal, and leather and its manufactures are the leading imports; provisions, leather and its manufactures, cotton and its manufactures, breadstuffs, iron and steel and their manufactures are the leading exports. In the exportation of cattle, and of the various meat and dairy products classed as provisions, Boston is easily second to New York. It is the largest wool and the largest fish market of the United States, being in each second in the world to London only.

Manufacturing is to-day the most distinctive industry, as was commerce in colonial times. The value of all manufactured products from establishments under the “factory system” in 1900 was $162,764,523; in 1905 it was $184,351,163. Among the leading and more distinctive items were printing and publishing ($21,023,855 in 1905); sugar and molasses refining ($15,746,547 in 1900; figures not published in 1905 because of the industry being in the hands of a single owner); men’s clothing (in 1900, $8,609,475, in 1905, $11,246,004); women’s clothing (in 1900, $3,258,483, in 1905, $5,705,470); boots and shoes (in 1900, $3,882,655, in 1905, $5,575,927); boot and shoe cut stock (in 1905, $5,211,445); malt liquors (in 1900, $7,518,668, in 1905, $6,715,215); confectionery (in 1900, $4,455,184, in 1905, $6,210,023); tobacco products (in 1900, $3,504,603, in 1905, $4,592,698); pianos and organs ($3,670,771 in 1905); other musical instruments and materials (in 1905, $231,780); rubber and elastic goods (in 1900, $3,139,783, in 1905, $2,887,323); steam fittings and heating apparatus (in 1900, $2,876,327, in 1905, $3,354,020); bottling, furniture, &c. Art tiles and pottery are manufactured in Chelsea. Shipbuilding and allied industries early became of great importance. The Waltham watch and the Singer sewing-machine had their beginning in Boston in 1850. The making of the Chickering pianos goes back to 1823, and of Mason & Hamlin reed organs to 1854; these are to-day very important and distinctive manufactures of the city. The ready-made clothing industry began about 1830.

Government.—Beyond a recognition of its existence in 1630, when it was renamed, Boston can show no legal incorporation before 1822; although the uncertain boundaries between the powers of colony and township prompted repeated petitions to the legislature for incorporation, beginning as early as 1650. In 1822 Boston became a city. Thus for nearly two centuries it preserved intact its old “town” government, disposing of all its affairs in the “town-meeting” of its citizens. Excellent political training such a government unquestionably offered; but it became unworkable as disparities of social condition increased, as the number of legal voters (above 7000 in 1822) became greater, and as the population ceased to be homogeneous in blood. All the citizens did not assemble; on the contrary ordinary business seldom drew out more than a hundred voters, and often a mere handful. From very early days executive officers known as “select-men,” constables, clerks of markets, hog reeves, packers of meat and fish, &c., were chosen; and theselect-men, particularly, gained power as the attendance of the freemen on meetings grew onerous. Interested cliques could control the business of the town-meeting in ordinary times, and boisterousness marred its democractic excellence in exciting times. Large sums were voted loosely, and expended by executive boards without any budgetary control. The whole system was full of looseness, complexity and makeshifts. But the tenacity with which it was clung to, proved that it was suited to the community; and whether helpful or harmful to, it was not inconsistent with, the continuance of growth and prosperity. Various other Massachusetts townships, as they have grown older, have been similarly compelled to abandon their old form of government. The powers of the old township were much more extensive than those of the present city of Boston, including as they did the determination of the residence of strangers, the allotment of land, the grant of citizenship, the fixing of wages and prices, of the conditions of lawsuits and even a voice in matters of peace and war. The city charter was revised in 1854, and again reconstructed in important particulars by laws of 1885 separating the executive and legislative powers, and by subsequent acts. A complete alteration of the government has indeed been effected since 1885. Boston proper is only the centre of a large metropolitan area, closely settled, with interests in large part common. This metropolitan area, within a radius of approximately 10 m. about the state house, contained in 1900 about 40% of the population of the state. In the last two decades of the 19th century the question of giving to this greater city some general government, fully consolidated or of limited powers, was a standing question of expediency. The commonwealth has four times recognized a community of metropolitan interests in creating state commissions since 1882 for the union of such interests, beginning with a metropolitan health district in that year. The metropolitan water district (1895) included in 1908 Boston and seventeen cities or townships in its environs; the metropolitan sewerage district (1889) twenty four; the park service (1893) thirty-nine. Local sentiment was firmly against complete consolidation. The creation of the state commissions, independent of the city’s control, but able to commit the city indefinitely by undertaking expensive works and new debt, was resented. Independence is further curtailed by other state boards semi-independent of the city—the police commission of three members from 1885 to 1906, and in 1906 a single police commissioner, appointed by the governor, a licensing board of three members, appointed by the governor; the transit commission, &c. There are, further, county offices (Suffolk county comprises only Boston, Chelsea, Revere and Winthrop), generally independent of the city, though the latter pays practically all the bills.

Back to Index Next