Chapter 14

Very much depends on the governor. Hence the French saying, “tant vaut l’homme, tant vaut la place.” Among modern men we think of Todleben (not governor, but the soul of the defence) at Sevastopol, Fenwick Williams at Kars, Denfert-Rochereau at Belfort, and Osman Pasha at Plevna. The sieges of the 16th and 17th centuries offer many instances in which the event turned absolutely on the personal qualities of the governor; in some cases distinguished by courage, skill and foresight, in others by incapacity, cowardice or treachery. The reader is referred to Carnot’sDéfense des places fortesfor a most interesting summary of such cases, one or two of which are quoted below.

Naarden was besieged by the prince of Orange in September 1673 and defended by Philippe de Procé, sieur Dupas. The duke of Luxemburg visited the place some hours before it was invested, and arranged with Dupas toThe spirit of the defence.relieve him as soon as he had collected his cavalry. But the governor lost his head when he saw the enemy encamped round the place, and surrendered it before he had even lost the covered way. He was subsequently tried by a council of war and sentenced to be degraded before the troops and imprisoned for life. The reason the court gave for not condemning him to death was that they could find no regulation which condemned a man to loss of life for being a coward. (At that period the decapitation of a governor who was considered to have failed in his duty was not uncommon.) This man, however, was not wanting in physical courage. He was in prison at Grave when it was besieged a year later, obtained leave to serve as a volunteer in the defence, fought well and was killed.

A similar case occurred in the English Civil War. In 1645 the young governor of the royal post at Bletchingdon House was entertaining a party of ladies from Oxford, when Cromwell appeared and summoned him to surrender. The attacking force had no firearm more powerful than a carbine, but the governor, overawed by Cromwell’s personality, yielded. Charles I., who was usually merciful to his officers, caused this governor to be shot.

A defence of another kind was that of Quillebœuf in 1592. Henry IV. had occupied it and ordered it to be fortified. Before the works had been well begun, Mayenne sent 5000 men to retake it. Bellegarde undertook its defence, with 115 soldiers, 45 gentlemen and a few inhabitants. He had ammunition but not much provisions. With these forces and a line of defence a league in length, he sustained a siege, beat off an assault on the 17th day, and was relieved immediately afterwards. The relieving forces were astonished to find that he had been defending not a fortified town but a village, with a ditch which, in the places where it had been begun, measured no more than 4 ft. wide and deep.

At that period the business aspect of siege warfare alreadyalluded to had been recognized, but many commanders retained the old spirit of chivalry in their reluctance to say the “loth word.” The gallant Marshal d’Essé, who feared nothing but the idea of dying in his bed, was lying ill at his country house when he was sent for by the king. He was ordered to take command at Thérouanne, then threatened by Charles V., and made his farewell with these words, which remind us somewhat of Grenville: “Sire, je m’y en vais donc de bon et loyal cœur; mais j’ai ouï dire que la place est mal envitaillée, non pas seulement pourvue de palles, de tranches, ni de hottes pour remparer et remuer la terre; mais lors, quand entendrez que Thérouanne est prise, dites hardiment que d’Essé est guéri de sa jaunisse et mort.” And he made good his word, for he was killed at the breach by a shot from the arquebus of a Spanish soldier.

Sometimes the ardour of defence inspired the whole body of the inhabitants. Fine examples of this are the defences of Rochelle (1627) and Saint-Jean de Lône (1636), but these are too long to quote. We may, however, mention Livron, which is curious. In 1574 Henry III. sent one of his favourites, Saint Lary Bellegarde, against the Huguenots in the Dauphiné. Being entrusted with a good army, this gentleman hoped to achieve some distinction. He began by attacking the little town of Livron, which had no garrison and was defended only by the inhabitants. But he was repulsed in three assaults, and the women of the town conceived such a contempt for him that they came in crowds to empty their slops at the breach by way of insult. This annoyed him very much, and he ordered a fresh assault. The women alone sustained this one, repulsed it lightheartedly, and the siege was raised.

The history of siege warfare has more in it of human interest than any other branch of military history. It is full of the personal element, of the nobility of human endurance and of dramatic surprises. And more than any battlesArcot.in the open field, it shows the great results of the courage of men fighting at bay. Think of Clive at Arcot. With 4 officers, 120 Europeans and 200 sepoys, with two 18-pounders and 8 lighter guns, he held the fort against 150 Europeans and some 10,000 native troops. “The fort” (says Orme) “seemed little capable of sustaining the impending siege. Its extent was more than a mile in circumference. The walls were in many places ruinous; the rampart too narrow to admit the firing of artillery; the parapet low and slightly built; several of the towers were decayed, and none of them capable of receiving more than one piece of cannon; the ditch was in most places fordable, in others dry and in some choked up,” &c. These feeble ramparts were commanded almost everywhere by the enemy’s musketry from the houses of the city outside the fort, so that the defenders were hardly able to show themselves without being hit, and much loss was suffered in this way. Yet with his tiny garrison, which timbered about one man for every 7 yds. of the enclosure, Clive sustained a siege of 50 days, ending with a really severe assault on two large open breaches, which was repulsed, and after which the enemy hastily decamped.

Such feats as this make arguments aboutsuccessive lines of defenceand thenecessity of keepsseem very barren. History, as far as the writer knows, shows no instances where successive lines have been held with such brilliant results.

Clive’s defence of his breaches, which by all the then accepted rules of war were untenable, brings us to another point which has been already mentioned, namely, that a garrison might honourably make terms when there was an open breach in their main line of defence. This is a question upon which Carnot delivers himself very strongly in endeavouring to impress upon French officers the necessity of defence to the last moment. Speaking of Cormontaingne’s imaginaryJournal of the Attack of a Fortress(which is carried up to the 35th day, and finishes by the words “It is now time to surrender”), he says with great scorn: “Crillon would have cried, ‘It is time to begin fighting.’ He would have said as at the siege of Quillebœuf, ‘Crillon is within, the enemy is without.’ Thus when Bayard was defending the shattered walls of Mézières, M. de Cormontaingne, if he had been there, would have said, ‘It is time to surrender.’ Thus when Guise was repairing the breaches of Metz under the redoubled fire of the enemy, M. de Cormontaingne, if he had been there, would have said, ‘It is time to surrender.’” Carnot of course allows that Cormontaingne was personally brave. His scorn is for the accepted principle, not for the man.

It is interesting to contrast with this passage some remarks by Sir John Jones, made in answer to Carnot’s book. He says in the notes to the second volume of theJournals of the Sieges in Spain: “When the breach shall beResisting “to the last.”pushed properly forward, if the governor insists upon the ceremony of his last retrenchment being stormed, as by so doing he spills the blood of many brave men without a justifiable object, his life and the lives of the garrison should be made the forfeit. A system enforced by terror must be counteracted by still greater terror. Humanity towards an enemy in such a case is cruelty to one’s own troops.... The principle to be combated is not the obligation to resist behind the breach—for where there is a good retrenchment the bastion should be disputed equally with the counter-guard or the ravelin and can as safely be so—but the doctrine that surrender shall not take place when successful resistance becomes hopeless.”

Carnot’s word is “fight to the last.” Sir John Jones says the commander has no right to provoke further carnage when resistance is hopeless. The question of course is, When is resistance hopeless? Sir John Jones’s reputation leaves little doubt that if he had been commanding a fortress on British soil he would not have thought resistance hopeless as long as there was anything whatever left to defend. The reason why these two men of similar temper are found in opposition is quite simple. When Carnot wrote, the French army occupied most of the important fortresses of Europe, and it was to the interest of the emperor that if attacked they should be held to the last moment, in order to cause the enemy as much delay and loss as possible. Jones, on the other hand, was one of the engineers who were engaged in besieging those fortresses, and his arguments were prompted by sympathy for his own countrymen whose lives were sacrificed by the prolongation of such resistance.

A century has passed since Carnot and Jones wrote, and the ideas in which they had been educated were those of the pre-Napoleonic era. In the 18th century fortresses were many, good roads few, and campaigns for the most part leisurely. To the European nations of that time, inheritors of a perennial state of war, the idea of concentrating the national resources on a short and decisive campaign had not occurred. The “knock-out blow” had not been invented. All these conditions are now so changed that new standards must be and indeed have been set up, both for the defence of places and the general employment of fortification.

As regards the conduct of the defence, the massacre of a garrison as a penalty for holding out too long would meet with no sympathy in the present day. On the other hand, the issue of modern wars is worked out so rapidly that if a fortress is well defended, with the advantage of the present weapons, there is always a chance of holding out till the close of the war. If the place is worth holding, it should as a rule be held to the bitter end on the chance of a favourable turn in affairs; moreover, the maintenance of an important siege under modern conditions imposes a severe strain on the enemy and immobilizes a large number of his troops.

In concluding this article some elementary considerations in connexion with the use of permanent defences may be noticed, though the general question of strategic fortification is outside its scope. The objects of fortification differ,Permanent defences.as has been shown, from age to age. In former times a peaceful people exposed to the raids of piratical Norsemen might find their refuge tower essential; later, a robber-baron might look on his castle as so much capital invested; a wealthy medieval town might prove the value of its walls more than once in a generation; a country without a standing army might gain time for preparation by means of fortresses barring the roads across the frontier. But how does the question stand to-day among European countries which can mobilizetheir full fighting strength at a few hours’ notice? It can only be answered when the circumstances of a particular country are examined.

If we assume such an impossible case as that of two nations of equal fighting strength and equal resources standing ready in arms to defend a common frontier, and that the theatre of war presents no difficulties on either side,The use and abuse of fortresses.then the use of permanent fortifications, merely as an adjunct to military strength, is wrong. Fortresses do not decide the issue of a campaign; they can only influence it. It is better, therefore, to put all the money the fortress would have cost, and all the man-power that its maintenance implies, into the increase and equipment of the active army. For the fate of the fortress must dependultimatelyon the result of the operations of the active armies. Moreover, the very assumption that resources on both sides are equal means that the nation which has spent money on permanent fortifications will have the smaller active army, and therefore condemns itself beforehand to a defensive rôle.

This general negation is only useful as a corrective to the tendency to over-fortify, for such a case cannot occur. In practice there will always be occasion for some use of fortification. A mountain range may lend itself to an economical defence by a few men and some inexpensive barrier forts. A nation may have close to its frontier an important strategic centre, such as a railway junction, or a town of the first manufacturing importance, which must be protected. In such a case it may be necessary to guard against accidents by means of a fortress. Again, if one nation is admittedly slower in mobilization than the other, it may be desirable to guard one portion of the frontier by fortresses so as to force invasion into a district where concentration against it is easiest.

As for the defence of a capital, this cannot become necessary if it stands at a reasonable distance from the frontier until the active armies have arrived at some result. If the fighting strength of the country has been practically destroyed, it is not of much use to stand a siege in the capital. There can be but one end, and it is better, as business men say, to cut losses. If the fighting strength is not entirely destroyed and can be recruited within a reasonable time, say two or three months, then it appears that under modern conditions the capital might be held for that time by means of extemporized defences. The question is one that can only be decided by going into the circumstances of each particular case.

The case of a weak country with powerful and aggressive neighbours is in a different category. If she stands alone she will be eaten up in time, fortifications or no fortifications; but if she can reckon on assistance from outside, it may be worth while to expend most of the national resources on permanent defences.

These hypothetical cases have, however, no value, except as illustrations to the most elementary arguments. The actual problems that soldiers and statesmen have to consider are too complex to be dealt with in generalities, and no mere treatise can supply the place of knowledge, thought and practice.

Bibliography.—The more important works on the subject are: Dürer,Unterricht zur Befestigung(Nüremberg, 1527); Speckle,Architectur von Festungen(Strassburg, 1589); Fritach,L’Architecture mil. ou la f. nouvelle(Paris, 1637); Pagan,Les Fortif.(Paris, 1689); de Ville,Les Fortif.(Lyons, 1629); de Fer,Introduction à la fortification(Paris, 1723); B.F. de Belidor,Science des Ingénieurs, &c.(Paris, 1729); works of Coehoorn, Vauban, Montalembert, Cormontaingne; Mandar,De l’architecture des forteresses(Paris, 1801); Chasseloup-Laubat,Essais sur quelques parties de l’artil. et de la fortification(Milan, 1811); Carnot,Défense des places fortes(Paris, 1812); Jones,Journals of Sieges in Spain(3rd ed., London, 1846); T. Choumara,Mémoire sur la fortification(1847); A. von Zastrow,Geschichte der beständigen Befestigung(N.D., Fr. trans.); works of Sir C. Pasley; Noizet,Principes de fortif.(Paris, 1859); Dufour,De la fortif. permanente(Paris, 1850); E. Viollet le Duc,L’Architecture militaire au moyen âge(Paris, 1854); Cosseron de Villenoisy,Essai historique sur la fortification(Paris, 1869); works of Brialmont (q.v.); Delambre,La Fortification dans ses rapports avec la tactique et la stratégie(Paris, 1887); v. Sauer,Angriff und Verteidigung fester Plätze(Berlin, 1885); Schroeter,Die Festung in der heutigen Kriegführung(Berlin, 1898-1906); Baron E. v. Leithner,Die beständige Befestigung und der Festungskrieg(Vienna, 1894-1899); W. Stavenhagen,Grundriss der Befestigungslehre(Berlin, 1900-1909); Plessix and Legrand,Manuel complet de fortification(Paris, 1900, new edition 1909); Ritter v. Brunner,Die beständige Befestigung(Vienna, 1909),Die Feldbefestigung(Vienna, 1904); Rocchi,Traccia per lo studio della fortificazione permanente(Turin, 1902); Sir G.S. Clarke,Fortification(1907); V. Deguise,La Fortification permanente contemporaine(Brussels, 1908); Royal Military Academy,Text-book of Fortification, pt. ii. (London, 1893); British officialInstruction in Military Engineering, pts. i., ii. and iv. (London, 1900-1908).

(L. J.)

FORTLAGE, KARL(1806-1881), German philosopher, was born at Osnabrück. After teaching in Heidelberg and Berlin, he became professor of philosophy at Jena (1846), a post which he held till his death. Originally a follower of Hegel, he turned to Fichte and Beneke (q.v.), with whose insistence on psychology as the basis of all philosophy he fully agreed. The fundamental idea of his psychology is impulse, which combines representation (which presupposes consciousness) and feeling (i.e.pleasure). Reason is the highest thing in nature,i.e.is divine in its nature, God is the absolute Ego and the empirical egos are his instruments.

Fortlage’s chief works are:Genetische Geschichte d. Philos. seit Kant(Leipzig, 1852);System d. Psych, als empirische Wissenschaft(2 vols., Leipzig, 1855);Darstellung und Kritik der Beweise für das Dasein Gottes(Heidelberg, 1840);Beiträge zur Psych. als Wissenschaft(Leipzig, 1875).

FORT LEE,a borough of Bergen county, New Jersey, U.S.A., in the N.E. part of the state, on the W. bank of the Hudson river, opposite the northern part of New York City. Pop. (1905) 3433; (1910) 4472. It is connected with the neighbouring towns and cities by electric railways, and by ferry with New York City, of which it is a residential suburb. The main part of the borough lies along the summit of the Palisades; north of Fort Lee is an Interstate Palisades Park. Early in the War of Independence the Americans erected here a fortification, first called Fort Constitution but later renamed Fort Lee, in honour of General Charles Lee. The name of the fort was subsequently applied to the village that grew up in its vicinity. From the 15th of September until the 20th of November 1776 Fort Lee was held by Gen. Nathanael Greene with a garrison of 3500 men, but the capture by the British of Fort Washington on the opposite bank of the river and the crossing of the Hudson by Lord Cornwallis with 5000 men made it necessary for Greene to abandon this post and join Washington in the famous “retreat across the Jerseys.” An attempt to recapture Fort Lee was made by General Anthony Wayne in 1780, but was unsuccessful. On the site of the fort a monument, designed by Carl E. Tefft and consisting of heroic figures of a Continental trooper and drummer boy, was erected in 1908. The borough of Fort Lee was incorporated in 1904.

FORT MADISON,a city and the county-seat of Lee county, Iowa, U.S.A., on the Mississippi river, in the S.E. corner of the state, and about 20 m. S.W. of Burlington. Pop. (1890) 7901; (1900) 9278, of whom 1025 were foreign-born; (1905) 8767; (1910) 8900. Fort Madison is served by the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fé (which has repair shops here) and the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy railways. The city has various manufactures, including canned goods, chairs, paper and farm implements; the value of its factory product in 1905 was $2,378,892, an increase of 50.8% over that of 1900. Fort Madison is the seat of one of Iowa’s penitentiaries. A stockade fort was erected on the site of the city in 1808, but was burned in 1813. Permanently settled in 1833, Fort Madison was laid out as a town in 1836, and was chartered as a city in 1839.

FORTROSE(Gaelic fort’rois, “the wood on the promontory”), a royal and police burgh, and seaport of the county of Ross and Cromarty, Scotland. Pop. (1901) 1179. It is situated on the south-eastern coast of the peninsula of the Black Isle, 8 m. due N.N.E. of Inverness, 26¼ m. by rail. It is the terminus of the Black Isle branch of the Highland railway; there is communication by steamer with Inverness and also with Fort George, 2½ m. distant, by ferry from Chanonry Ness. Fortrose consists of the two towns of Rosemarkie and Chanonry, about 1 m. apart, which were united into a free burgh by James II. in 1455 and created a royal burgh in 1590. It is a place of considerable antiquity, a monastery having been established in the 6th century by St Moluag, a friend of Columba’s, and St Peter’schurch built in the 8th century. In 1124 David I. instituted the bishopric of Ross, with its seat here, and the town acquired some fame for its school of theology and law. The cathedral is believed to have been founded in 1330 by the countess of Ross (her canopied tomb, against the chancel wall, still exists) and finished in 1485 by Abbot Fraser, whose previous residence at Melrose is said to account for the Perpendicular features of his portion of the work. It was Early Decorated in style, cruciform in plan, and built of red sandstone, but all that is left are the south aisles of the nave and the chancel, with the chapter-house, a two-storeyed structure, standing apart near the north-eastern corner. The cathedral and bishop’s palace were destroyed by order of Cromwell, who used the stones for his great fort at Inverness. Another relic of the past survives in the bell of 1460. These ruins form the chief object of interest in the town, but other buildings include the academy and the Black Isle combination poorhouse. The town is an agricultural centre of some consequence, and the harbour is kept in repair. Rosemarkie, in the churchyard of which is an ancient Celtic cross, is much resorted to for sea-bathing, and there is a golf course in Chanonry Ness. The burgh belongs to the Inverness district group of parliamentary burghs.

FORT SCOTT,a city and the county-seat of Bourbon county, Kansas, U.S.A., on the Marmaton river, about 100 m. S. of Kansas City, Missouri. Pop. (1880) 5372; (1890) 11,946; (1900) 10,322, of whom 1205 were negroes; (1910 census) 10,463. It is the point of intersection of the Kansas City, Fort Scott & Memphis (St Louis & San Francisco system), the Missouri, Kansas & Texas, and the Missouri Pacific railways, and has in consequence a large traffic. The city is built on a rolling plain. Among its institutions are an Epworth house (1899), Mercy hospital (1889), the Goodlander home, and a Carnegie library. Near the city there is a national cemetery. Fort Scott is in the midst of the Kansas mineral fields, and its trade in bituminous coal is especially important. Building stones, cement rock, clays, oil and gas, lead and zinc are also found in the neighbourhood. An excellent white sulphur water is procured from artesian wells about 800 ft. deep, and there is a mineral-water bath house. The city is also a trading centre for a rich farming region, and is a horse and mule market of considerable importance. Among its manufactures are mattresses, syrup, bricks, pottery, cement and foundry products. In 1905 the total value of the city’s factory product was $1,349,026, being an increase of 89% since 1900. The city owns and operates its waterworks. The fort after which the city is named was established by the Federal government in 1842, at a time when the whole of eastern Kansas was still parcelled out among Indian tribes; it was abandoned in 1855. The town was platted in 1857, and Fort Scott was chartered as a city in 1860.

FORT SMITH,a city and the county-seat of Sebastian county, on the extreme W. border of Arkansas, U.S.A., lying about 440 ft. above sea-level, on the S. bank of the Arkansas river, at its junction with the Poteau, and at the point where the Arkansas breaks through the Boston mountains. Pop. (1890) 11,311; (1900) 11,587, of whom 2407 were of negro descent and 684 were foreign-born; (1910 census) 23,975. Transportation is afforded by the river and by six railways, the St Louis & San Francisco, the St Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern, the Arkansas Central, the Fort Smith & Western, the Midland Valley and the Kansas City Southern. A belt line round the business centre of the city facilitates freight transfers. Some of the business streets are unusually broad, and the streets in the residential district are well shaded. Fort Smith is the business centre of a fine agricultural country and of the Arkansas coal and natural gas region. It has extensive wholesale jobbing interests and a large miscellaneous trade, partly in its own manufactures, among which are cotton and timber products, chairs, mattresses and other furniture, wagons, brooms and bricks. In 1905 the total value of the factory product was $2,329,454, an increase of 66.2% since 1900. The public schools have a rich endowment: the proceeds of lands (about 200 acres) once belonging to the local military reservation, which—except the part occupied by a national cemetery—was given by Congress to the city in 1884. Near the centre of the city are a Catholic academy, convent and infirmary; and there is a Carnegie library. A United States army post was established here in 1817; the town was laid out in 1821; and the county was created in 1851. Fort Smith was incorporated as a town in 1842, and was chartered as a city in 1845. All transportation was by river and wagon until 1876, when the railway was completed from Little Rock. The military post, in earlier years the chief depôt for the western forts, was abandoned in 1871. During the Civil War Fort Smith was strongly in sympathy with the Confederacy. The fort was seized by state troops in April 1861, and was reoccupied by the Union forces in September 1863. There was considerable unrest due to border “bushwhacking” throughout the war, and several skirmishes took place here in 1864. The area of the city was more than doubled in 1905.

FORTUNA(Fortune), an Italian goddess of great antiquity, but apparently not native at Rome, where, according to universal Roman tradition, she was introduced by the king Servius Tullius as Fors Fortuna, and established in a temple on the Etruscan side of the Tiber outside the city, and also under other titles in other shrines. In Latium she had two famous places of worship, one at Praeneste, where there was an oracle ofFortuna primigenia(the first-born), frequented especially by women who, as we may suppose, desired to know the fortunes of their children or their own fortune in child-birth; the other at Antium, well known from Horace’s ode (i. 35). It is highly probable that Fortuna was never a deity of the abstract idea of chance, but represented the hopes and fears of men and especially of women at different stages of their life and experience; thus we find her worshipped as time went on under numerous cult-titles, such asmuliebris,virilis,hujusce diei,equestris,redux, &c., which connected her supposed powers with individuals, groups of individuals, or particular occasions. Gradually she became more or less closely identified with the Gr.Τύχη, and was represented on coins, &c., with a cornucopia as the giver of prosperity, a rudder as the controller of destinies, and with a wheel, or standing on a ball, to indicate the uncertainty of fortune. In this semi-Greek form she came to be worshipped over the whole empire, and Pliny (N.H.ii. 22) declares that in his day she was invoked in all places and every hour. She even became identified with Isis, and asPantheawas supposed to combine the attributes of all other deities.

The best account of this difficult subject is to be found in Roscher’sMythological Lexicon(s.v.); see also Wissowa,Religion und Kultus der Römer, p. 206 foll.

(W. W. F.*)

FORTUNATIANUS, ATILIUS,Latin grammarian, flourished in the 4th centuryA.D.He was the author of a treatise on metres, dedicated to one of his pupils, a youth of senatorial rank, who desired to be instructed in the Horatian metres. The manual opens with a discussion of the fundamental ideas of metre and the chief rules of prosody, and ends with a detailed analysis of the metres of Horace. The chief authorities used are Caesius Bassus and the Latin adaptation by Juba the grammarian of theΤέχνηof Heliodorus. Fortunatianus being a common name in the African provinces, it is probable that the author was a countryman of Juba, Terentianus Maurus and Victorinus.

Editions of theArsin H. Keil,Grammatici Latini, vi., and separately by him (1885).

FORTUNATUS,the legendary hero of a popular European chap-book. He was a native, says the story, of Famagusta in Cyprus, and meeting the goddess of Fortune in a forest received from her a purse which was continually replenished as often as he drew from it. With this he wandered through many lands, and at Cairo was the guest of the sultan. Among the treasures which the sultan showed him was an old napless hat which had the power of transporting its wearer to any place he desired. Of this hat he feloniously possessed himself, and returned to Cyprus, where he led a luxurious life. On his death he left thepurse and the hat to his sons Ampedo and Andelosia; but they were jealous of each other, and by their recklessness and folly soon fell on evil days. The moral of the story is obvious: men should desire reason and wisdom before all the treasures of the world. In its full form the history of Fortunatus occupies in Karl Simrock’sDie deutschen Volksbücher, vol. iii., upwards of 158 pages. The scene is continually shifted—from Cyprus to Flanders, from Flanders to London, from London to France; and a large number of secondary characters appear. The style and allusions indicate a comparatively modern date for the authorship; but the nucleus of the legend can be traced back to a much earlier period. The stories of Jonathas and the three jewels in theGesta Romanorum, of the emperor Frederick and the three precious stones in theCento Novelle antiche, of the Mazin of Khorassan in theThousand and one Nights, and the flying scaffold in theBahar Danush, have all a certain similarity. The earliest known edition of the German text of Fortunatus appeared at Augsburg in 1509, and the modern German investigators are disposed to regard this as the original form. Innumerable versions occur in French, Italian, Dutch and English. The story was dramatized by Hans Sachs in 1553, and by Thomas Dekker in 1600; and the latter’s comedy appeared in a German translation inEnglische Komödien und Tragödien, 1620. Ludwig Tieck has utilized the legend in hisPhantasus, and Adelbert von Chamisso in hisPeter Schlemihl; and Ludwig Uhland left an unfinished narrative poem entitled “Fortunatus and his Sons.”

See Dr Fr. W.V. Schmidt’sFortunatus und seine Söhne, eine Zauber-Tragödie, von Thomas Decker, mit einem Anhang, &c. (Berlin, 1819); Joseph Johann Görres,Die deutschen Volksbücher(1807).

FORTUNATUS, VENANTIUS HONORIUS CLEMENTIANUS(530-609), bishop of Poitiers, and the chief Latin poet of his time, was born near Ceneda in Treviso in 530. He studied at Milan and Ravenna, with the special object of excelling as a rhetorician and poet, and in 565 he journeyed to France, where he was received with much favour at the court of Sigbert, king of Austrasia, whose marriage with Brunhild he celebrated in anepithalamium. After remaining a year or two at the court of Sigbert he travelled in various parts of France, visiting persons of distinction, and composing short pieces of poetry on any subject that occurred to him. At Poitiers he visited Queen Radegunda, who lived there in retirement, and she induced him to prolong his stay in the city indefinitely. Here he also enjoyed the friendship of the famous Gregory of Tours and other eminent ecclesiastics. He was elected bishop of Poitiers in 599, and died about 609. The later poems of Fortunatus were collected in 11 books, and consist of hymns (including theVexilla regis prodeunt, Englished by J.M. Neale as “The royal banners forward go”), epitaphs, poetical epistles, and verses in honour of his patroness Radegunda and her sister Agnes, the abbess of a nunnery at Poitiers. He also wrote a large poem in 4 books in honour of St Martin, and several lives of the saints in prose. His prose is stiff and mechanical, but most of his poetry has an easy rhythmical flow.

An edition of the works of Fortunatus was published by C. Brower at Fulda in 1603 (2nd ed., Mainz, 1617). The edition of M.A. Luschi (Rome, 1785) was afterwards reprinted in Migne’sPatrologiae cursus completus, vol. lxxxviii. See the edition by Leo and Krusch (Berlin, 1881-1885). There are French lives by Nisard (1880) and Leroux (1885).

FORTUNE, ROBERT(1813-1880), Scottish botanist and traveller, was born at Kelloe in Berwickshire on the 16th of September 1813. He was employed in the botanical garden at Edinburgh, and afterwards in the Royal Horticultural Society’s garden at Chiswick, and upon the termination of the Chinese War in 1842 was sent out by the Society to collect plants in China. His travels resulted in the introduction to Europe of many beautiful flowers; but another journey, undertaken in 1848 on behalf of the East India Company, had much more important consequences, occasioning the successful introduction into India of the tea-plant. In subsequent journeys he visited Formosa and Japan, described the culture of the silkworm and the manufacture of rice paper, and introduced many trees, shrubs and flowers now generally cultivated in Europe. The incidents of his travels were related in a succession of interesting books. He died in London on the 13th of April 1880.

FORTUNY, MARIANO JOSE MARIA BERNARDO(1838-1874), Spanish painter, was born at Reus on the 11th of June 1838. His parents, who were in poor circumstances, sent him for education to the primary school of his native town, where he received some instruction in the rudiments of art. When he was twelve years old his parents died and he came under the care of his grandfather, who, though a joiner by trade, had made a collection of wax figures, with which he was travelling from town to town. In the working of this show the boy took an active part, modelling and painting many of the figures; and two years later, when he reached Barcelona, the cleverness of his handiwork made so much impression on some people in authority there that they induced the municipality to make him an allowance of forty-two francs monthly, so that he might be enabled to go through a systematic course of study. He entered the Academy of Barcelona and worked there for four years under Claudio Lorenzale, and in March 1857 he gained a scholarship that entitled him to complete his studies in Rome. Then followed a period of more than two years, during which he laboured steadily at copies of the old pictures to which he had access at Rome. To this period an end was put by the outbreak of the war between Spain and the emperor of Morocco, as Fortuny was sent by the authorities of Barcelona to paint the most striking incidents of the campaign. The expedition lasted for about six months only, but it made upon him an impression that was powerful enough to affect the whole course of his subsequent development, and to implant permanently in his mind a preference for the glitter and brilliancy of African colour. He returned to Spain in the summer of 1860, and was commissioned by the city of Barcelona to paint a large picture of the capture of the camps of Muley-el-Abbas and Muley-el-Hamed by the Spanish army. After making a large number of studies he went back to Rome, and began the composition on a canvas fifteen metres long; but though it occupied much of his time during the next few years, he never finished it. He busied himself instead with a wonderful series of pictures, mostly of no great size, in which he showed an astonishing command over vivacities of technique and modulations of colour. He visited Paris in 1868 and shortly afterwards married the daughter of Federico Madrazo, the director of the royal museum at Madrid. Another visit to Paris in 1870 was followed by a two years’ stay at Granada, but then he returned to Rome, where he died somewhat suddenly on the 21st of November 1874 from an attack of malarial fever, contracted while painting in the open air at Naples and Portici in the summer of 1874.

The work which Fortuny accomplished during his short life is distinguished by a superlative facility of execution and a marvellous cleverness in the arrangement of brilliant hues, but the qualities of his art are those that are attainable by a master of technical resource rather than by a deep thinker. His insight into subtleties of illumination was extraordinary, his dexterity was remarkable in the extreme, and as a colourist he was vivacious to the point of extravagance. At the same time in such pictures as “La Vicaria” and “Choosing a Model,” and in some of his Moorish subjects, like “The Snake Charmers” and “Moors playing with a Vulture,” he showed himself to be endowed with a sensitive appreciation of shades of character and a thorough understanding of the peculiarities of a national type. His love of detail was instinctive, and he chose motives that gave him the fullest opportunity of displaying his readiness as a craftsman.

See Davillier,Fortuny, sa vie, son œuvre, sa correspondance, &c.(Paris, 1876); C. Yriarte,Fortuny(Artistes célèbresseries) (Paris, 1889).

(A. L. B.)

FORT WAYNE,a city and the county-seat of Allen county, Indiana, U.S.A., 102 m. N.E. of Indianapolis, at the point where the St Joseph and St Mary’s rivers join to form the Maumee river. Pop. (1880) 26,880; (1890) 35,393; (1900) 45,115, of whom 6791 were foreign-born; (1910, census) 63,933. It is served by the Cincinnati, Hamilton & Dayton, the Fort Wayne,Cincinnati & Louisville, the Grand Rapids & Indiana, the Lake Shore & Michigan Southern, the New York, Chicago & St Louis, the Pennsylvania and the Wabash railways, and also by interurban electric lines. The site of the city is high (about 770 ft. above sea-level) and level, and its land area was in 1906 a little more than 6 sq. m. The streets are laid out on a rectangular plan and bordered by a profusion of shade trees. The city has several parks, including Lawton Park (31 acres), in which there is a monument in honour of Major-General Henry Ware Lawton (1843-1899), who lived in Fort Wayne for a time, Lake Side Park (22 acres), Reservoir Park (13 acres), Piqua Park (1 acre), and Old Fort Park (¼ acre), which is on the site of Old Fort Wayne. The educational institutions include the German Concordia Collegium (Lutheran), founded in 1839, and having 220 students in 1908, and the state school for feeble-minded youth (1879). The city has a Carnegie library. Fort Wayne is one of the most important railway centres in the Middle West, and several railways maintain here their principal car and repair shops, which add greatly to the value of its manufacturing industries; in 1905 it ranked first among the cities of the state in the value of cars constructed and repaired by steam-railway companies. The other manufactories include foundries and machine shops, iron and steel mills, knitting mills, planing mills, sash and door, car-wheel, electrical machinery, and woodenware factories and flour mills. In 1905 the total value of the factory product of the city was $15,129,562, showing an increase of 34.3% since 1900.

The Miami Indians had several villages in the immediate neighbourhood, and the principal one, Kekionaga (Miami Town or Great Miami Village), was situated on the E. bank of the St Joseph river, within the limits of the present city. On the E. bank of the St Mary’s a French trading post was built about 1680. In 1749-1750 the French fort (Fort Miami) was moved to the E. bank of the St Joseph. The English occupied the fort in 1760 and Pontiac captured it in May 1763, after a siege of more than three months. In 1790 the Miami villages were destroyed. In September 1794 General Anthony Wayne built on the S. bank of the Maumee river the stockade fort which was named in his honour, the site of which forms the present Old Fort Park. By the treaty of Greenville, concluded by General Wayne on the 3rd of August 1795, a piece of land 6 sq. m. in area, including the tract of the Miami towns, was ceded to the United States, and free passage to Fort Wayne and down the Maumee to Lake Erie was guaranteed to the people of the United States by the Indians. By the treaty of Fort Wayne, concluded by General W.H. Harrison on the 7th of June 1803, the tract about Vincennes reserved to the United States by the treaty of Greenville was described and defined; by the second treaty of Fort Wayne, concluded by Harrison on the 30th of September 1809, the Indians sold to the United States about 2,900,000 acres of land, mostly S.E. of the Wabash river. In September 1813 Fort Wayne was besieged by Indians, who withdrew on the arrival, on the 12th of September, of General Harrison with about 2700 men from Kentucky and Ohio. The fort was abandoned on the 19th of April 1819 and no trace of it remains. The first permanent settlement here was made in 1815, and the village was an important fur-trading depôt until 1830. The opening of the Wabash & Erie canal in 1843 stimulated its growth. A town was platted and was made the county-seat in 1824; and in 1840 Fort Wayne was chartered as a city.

See W.A. Brice,History of Fort Wayne(Ft. Wayne, 1868); John B. Dillon,History of Indiana, from its Earliest Exploration by Europeans to the Close of the Territorial Government in 1816(Indianapolis, Ind., 1859); and Charles E. Slocum,History of the Maumee River Basin, from the Earliest Accounts to its Organization into Counties(Defiance, Ohio, 1905).

FORT WILLIAM,the principal town of Thunder Bay district, Ontario, Canada, 426 m. (by rail) E.S.E. of Winnipeg, on the Kaministiquia river, about a mile from Lake Superior. It is the lake terminus of the Canadian Pacific railway, of the new Grand Trunk Pacific railway, and of several steamship lines. Port Arthur, the terminus of the Canadian Northern railway, lies 4 m. to the N.E. Fort William contains numerous grain elevators, railway repair shops and docks, and has a large export trade in grain and other farm produce. Minerals are also exported from the mining district, of which it is the centre. Industries, such as saw, planing and flour mills, have also sprung up. The population was 4800 in 1901, but has since increased with great rapidity.

FORT WILLIAM,a police burgh of Inverness-shire, Scotland. Pop. (1901) 2087. It lies at the north-eastern end of Loch Linnhe, an arm of the sea, about 62 m. S.S.W. of Inverness by road or canal, and was, in bygone days, one of the keys of the Highlands. It is 122½ m. N.E. of Glasgow by the West Highland railway. The fort, at first called Kilmallie, was built by General Monk in 1655 to hold the Cameron men in subjection, and was enlarged in 1690 by General Hugh Mackay, who renamed it after William III., the burgh then being known as Maryburgh in honour of his queen. Here the perpetrators of the massacre of Glencoe met to share their plunder. The Jacobites unsuccessfully besieged it in 1715 and 1746. The fort was dismantled in 1860, and demolished in 1890 to provide room for the railway and the station. Amongst the public buildings are the Belford hospital, public hall, court house and the low-level meteorological observatory, constructed in 1891, which was in connexion with the observatory on the top of Ben Nevis, until the latter was closed in 1904. Its great industry is distilling, and the distilleries, about 2 m. N.E., are a familiar feature in the landscape. Beyond the railway station stands the obelisk to the memory of Ewen Maclachlan (1775-1822), the Gaelic poet, who was born in the parish. Fort William is a popular tourist resort and place of call for the steamers passing through the Caledonian canal. The town is the point from which the ascent of Ben Nevis—4½ m. E.S.E. as the crow flies—is commonly made. At Corpach, about 2 m. N., the Caledonian canal begins, the series of locks between here and Banavie—within little more than a mile—being known as “Neptune’s Staircase.” Both the Lochy and the Nevis enter Loch Linnhe immediately to the north of Fort William. A mile and a half from the town, on the Lochy, stands the grand old ruin of Inverlochy Castle, a massive quadrangular pile with a round tower at each corner, a favourite subject with landscape painters. Close by is the scene of the battle of the 2nd of February 1645, in which Montrose completely defeated the earl of Argyll. The modern castle, in the Scottish Baronial style, 1½ m. to the N.E. of this stronghold and farther from the river, is the seat of Lord Abinger.

FORT WORTH,a city and the county-seat of Tarrant county, Texas, U.S.A., about 30 m. W. of Dallas, on the S. bank of the West Fork of the Trinity river. Pop. (1880) 6663; (1890) 23,076; (1900) 26,688, of whom 1793 were foreign-born and 4249 were negroes; (1910, census) 73,312. It is served by the Chicago, Rock Island & Gulf, the Fort Worth & Denver City, the Fort Worth & Rio Grande, and the St Louis, San Francisco & Texas of the “Frisco” system, the Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fé, the Houston & Texas Central, the International & Great Northern, the Missouri, Kansas & Texas, the St Louis South-Western, the Texas & Pacific, and the Trinity & Brazos Valley (Colorado & Southern) railways. Fort Worth is beautifully situated on a level space above the river. It is the seat of Fort Worth University (coeducational), a Methodist Episcopal institution, which was established as the Texas Wesleyan College in 1881, received its present name in 1889, comprises an academy, a college of liberal arts and sciences, a conservatory of music, a law school, a medical school, a school of commerce, and a department of oratory and elocution, and in 1907 had 802 students; the Polytechnic College (coeducational; Methodist Episcopal, South), which was established in 1890, has preparatory, collegiate, normal, commercial, and fine arts departments and a summer school, and in 1906 had 12 instructors and (altogether) 696 students; the Texas masonic manual training school; a kindergarten training school; St Andrews school (Protestant Episcopal), and St Ignatius Academy (Roman Catholic). There are several good business, municipal and county buildings, and a Carnegie library. On the 3rd of April 1909 a fire destroyed ten blocks in the centre of the city. Fort Worth lies in themidst of a stock-raising and fertile agricultural region; there is an important stockyard and packing establishment just outside the city; and considerable quantities of cotton are raised in the vicinity. Among the products are packed meats, flour, beer, trunks, crackers, candy, paint, ice, paste, cigars, clothing, shoes, mattresses, woven wire beds, furniture and overalls; and there are foundries, iron rolling mills and tanneries. In 1905 the total value of the city’s factory product was $5,668,391, an increase of 62.5% since 1900; Fort Worth in 1900 ranked fifth among the cities of the state in the value of its factory product; in 1905 it ranked fourth. Fort Worth’s numerous railways have given it great importance as a commercial centre. The municipality owns and operates the waterworks and the electric-lighting plant.

A military post was established here in 1849, being called first Camp Worth and then Fort Worth. It was abandoned in 1853. A settlement grew up about the fort, and the city was incorporated in 1873. The fort and the settlement were named in honour of General William Jenkins Worth (1794-1849), a native of Hudson, New York, who served in the War of 1812, commanded the United States forces against the Seminole Indians in 1841-1842, served under both General Taylor and General Scott in the Mexican War, distinguishing himself at Monterey (where he earned the brevet of major-general) and in other engagements, and later commanded the department of Texas. In 1907 Fort Worth adopted a commission form of government.

FORTY,the cardinal number equal to four tens. The word is derived from the O. Eng.feówertig, a combination offeówer, four, andtig, an old form of “ten,” used as a suffix, cf. Icel.tiu, Dan.ti, ten, and Ger.vierzig, forty. The name “The Forty” has been given to various bodies composed of that number of members, particularly to a judicial body in ancient Athens, who tried small cases in the rural districts, and to a court of criminal jurisdiction and two civil appeal courts in the Venetian republic. The French Academy (seeAcademies) has also been known as “The Forty” or “The Forty Immortals.” The period just before the repeal of the corn laws in the United Kingdom is frequently alluded to, particularly by the free trade school, as the “hungry forties”; and the “roaring forties” is a sailor’s name for the stormy region between the 40th and 50th latitudes N. and S., but more particularly applied to the portion of the north Atlantic lying between those latitudes.

FORUM(Lat. fromforis, “out of doors”), in Roman antiquity, any open place used, like the Greekἀγορά, for the transaction of mercantile, judicial or political business, sometimes merely as a promenade. It was level, rectangular in form, surrounded by porticoes, basilicas, courts of law and other public buildings. In the laws of the Twelve Tables the word is used of the vestibule of a tomb (Cicero,De legibus, ii. 24); in a Roman camp the forum was an open place immediately beside the praetorium; and the term was no doubt originally applied generally to the space in front of any public building or gateway. In Rome (q.v.) itself, however, during the period of the early history, forum was almost a proper name, denoting the flat and formerly marshy space between the Palatine and Capitoline hills (also called Forum Romanum), which probably even during the regal period afforded the accommodation necessary for such public meetings as could not be held within the area Capitolina. In early times the Forum Romanum was used for athletic games, and over the porticoes were galleries for spectators; there were also shops of various kinds. But with the growth of the city and the increase of provincial business, more than one forum became necessary, and under the empire a considerable number ofcivilia(judicial) andvenalia(mercantile) fora came into existence. In addition to the Forum Romanum, the Fora of Caesar and Augustus belonged to the former class; the Forumboarium(cattle),holitorium(vegetable),piscarium(fish),pistorium(bread),vinarium(wine), to the latter. The Fora of Nerva (also calledtransitoriumorpervium, because a main road led through it to the Forum Romanum), Trajan, and Vespasian, although partly intended to facilitate the course of public business, were chiefly erected to embellish the city. The construction of separate markets was not, however, necessarily the rule in the provincial fora; thus, in Pompeii, at the north-east end of the forum, there was amacellum(market), and shops for provisions and possibly money changers, and on the east side a building supposed to have been the clothworkers’ exchange, and at Timgad in North Africa (a military colony founded under Trajan) the whole of the south side of the forum was occupied by shops. The forum was usually paved, and although on festal occasions chariots were probably driven through, it was not a thoroughfare and was enclosed by gates at the entrances, of which traces have been found at Pompeii. When the sites for new towns were being selected, that for the forum was in the centre, and the two main streets crossed one another close to but not through it. At Timgad the main streets are some 5 or 6 ft. lower than the forum. The wordforumfrequently appears in the names of Roman market towns; as, for example, in Forum Appii, Forum Julii (Fréjus), Forum Livii (Forli), Forum Sempronii (Fossombrone). Theseforawere distinguished from mereviciby the possession of a municipal organization, which, however, was less complete than that of a prefecture. In legal phraseology, which distinguishes theforum communefrom theforum privilegiatum, and theforum generalefrom theforum speciale, the word is practically equivalent to “court” or “jurisdiction.”

Back to Index Next