Chapter 18

SeeVictoria County History, Yorkshire; Dugdale,Monasticon; Surtees Society,Memorials of the Abbey of St Mary of Fountains, collected and edited by J.R. Walbran (1863-78).

FOUQUÉ, FERDINAND ANDRÉ(1828-1904), French geologist and petrologist, was born at Mortain, dept. of La Manche, on the 21st of June 1828. At the age of twenty-one he entered theÉcole Normalein Paris, and from 1853 to 1858 he held the appointment of keeper of the scientific collections. In 1877 he became professor of natural history at theCollège de France, in Paris, and in 1881 he was elected a member of the Academy of Sciences. As a stratigraphical geologist he rendered much assistance on the Geological Survey of France, but in the course of time he gave his special attention to the study of volcanic phenomena and earthquakes, to minerals and rocks; and he was the first to introduce modern petrographical methods into France. His studies of the eruptive rocks of Corsica, Santorin and elsewhere; his researches on the artificial reproduction of eruptive rocks, and his treatise on the optical characters of felspars deserve special mention; but he was perhaps best known for the joint work which he carried on with his friend Michel Lévy. He died on the 7th of March 1904. His chief publications were:Santorin et ses éruptions, 1879; (with A. Michel Lévy)Minéralogie micrographique, Roches éruptives françaises(2 vols., 1879); andSynthèse des minéraux et des roches(1882).

FOUQUÉ, FRIEDRICH HEINRICH KARL DE LA MOTTE,Baron(1777-1843), German writer of the romantic movement, was born on the 12th of February 1777 at Brandenburg. His grandfather had been one of Frederick the Great’s generals and his father was a Prussian officer. Although not originally intended for a military career, Friedrich de la Motte Fouqué ultimately gave up his university studies at Halle to join the army, and he took part in the Rhine campaign of 1794. The rest of his life was devoted mainly to literary pursuits. Like so many of the younger romanticists, Fouqué owed his introduction toliterature to A.W. Schlegel, who published his first book,Dramatische Spiele von Pellegrinin 1804. His next work,Romanzen vom Tal Ronceval(1805), showed more plainly his allegiance to the romantic leaders, and in theHistorie vom edlen Ritter Galmy(1806) he versified a 16th-century romance of medieval chivalry.Sigurd der Schlangentöter, ein Heldenspiel(1808), the first modern German dramatization of theNibelungensaga, attracted attention to him, and influenced considerably subsequent versions of the story, such as Hebbel’sNibelungenand Wagner’sRing des Nibelungen. These early writings indicate the lines which Fouqué’s subsequent literary activity followed; his interests were divided between medieval chivalry on the one hand and northern mythology on the other. In 1813, the year of the rising against Napoleon, he again fought with the Prussian army, and the new patriotism awakened in the German people left its mark upon his writings.

Between 1810 and 1815 Fouqué’s popularity was at its height; the many romances and novels, plays and epics, which he turned out with extraordinary rapidity, appealed exactly to the mood of the hour. The earliest of these are the best—Undine, which appeared in 1811, being, indeed, one of the most charming of all GermanMärchenand the only work by which Fouqué’s memory still lives to-day. A more comprehensive idea of his powers may, however, be obtained from the two romancesDer Zauberring(1813) andDie Fahrten Thiodulfs des Isländers(1815). From 1820 onwards the quality of Fouqué’s work rapidly degenerated, partly owing to the fatal ease with which he wrote, partly to his inability to keep pace with the changes in German taste. He remained the belated romanticist, who, as the reading world turned to new interests, clung the more tenaciously to the paraphernalia of romanticism; but in the cold, sober light of the post-romantic age, these appeared merely flimsy and theatrical. The vitalizing imaginative power of his early years deserted him, and the sobriquet of a “Don Quixote of Romanticism” which his enemies applied to him was not unjustified.

Fouqué’s first marriage had been unhappy and soon ended in divorce. His second wife, Karoline von Briest (1773-1831) enjoyed some reputation as a novelist in her day. After her death Fouqué married a third time. Some consolation for the ebbing tide of popular favour was afforded him by the munificence of Frederick William IV. of Prussia, who granted him a pension which allowed him to spend his later years in comfort. He died in Berlin on the 23rd of January 1843.

Fouqué’sAusgewählte Werke, edited by himself, appeared in 12 vols. (Berlin, 1841); a selection, edited by M. Koch, will be found in Kürschner’sDeutsche Nationalliteratur, vol. 146, part ii. (Stuttgart, 1893);Undine,Sintram, &c., in innumerable reprints. Bibliography in Goedeke’sGrundriss zur Geschichte der deutschen Dichtung(2nd ed., vi. pp. 115 ff., Dresden, 1898). Most of Fouqué’s works have been translated, and the English versions ofAslauga’s Knight(by Carlyle),Sintram and his CompanionsandUndine, have been frequently republished. For Fouqué’s life cp.Lebensgeschichte des Baron Friedrich de la Motte Fouqué. Aufgezeichnet durch ihn selbst(Halle, 1840), (only to the year 1813), and also the introduction to Koch’s selections in theDeutsche Nationalliteratur.

(J. G. R.)

FOUQUET(orFoucquet),NICOLAS(1615-1680), viscount of Melun and of Vaux, marquis of Belle-Isle, superintendent of finance in France under Louis XIV., was born at Paris in 1615. He belonged to an influential family of thenoblesse de la robe, and after some preliminary schooling with the Jesuits, at the age of thirteen was admitted asavocatat the parlement of Paris. While still in his teens he held several responsible posts, and in 1636, when just twenty, he was able to buy the post ofmaître des requêtes. From 1642 to 1650 he held various intendancies at first in the provinces and then with the army of Mazarin, and, coming thus in touch with the court, was permitted in 1650 to buy the important position ofprocureur généralto the parlement of Paris. During Mazarin’s exile Fouquet shrewdly remained loyal to him, protecting his property and keeping him informed of the situation at court.

Upon the cardinal’s return, Fouquet demanded and received as reward the office of superintendent of the finances (1653), a position which, in the unsettled condition of the government, threw into his hands not merely the decision as to which funds should be applied to meet the demands of the state’s creditors, but also the negotiations with the great financiers who lent money to the king. The appointment was a popular one with the moneyed class, for Fouquet’s great wealth had been largely augmented by his marriage in 1651 with Marie de Castille, who also belonged to a wealthy family of the legal nobility. His own credit, and above all his unfailing confidence in himself, strengthened the credit of the government, while his high position at the parlement (he still remainedprocureur général) secured financial transactions from investigation. As minister of finance, he soon had Mazarin almost in the position of a suppliant. The long wars, and the greed of the courtiers, who followed the example of Mazarin, made it necessary at times for Fouquet to meet the demands upon him by borrowing upon his own credit, but he soon turned this confusion of the public purse with his own to good account. The disorder in the accounts became hopeless; fraudulent operations were entered into with impunity, and the financiers were kept in the position of clients by official favours and by generous aid whenever they needed it. Fouquet’s fortune now surpassed even Mazarin’s, but the latter was too deeply implicated in similar operations to interfere, and was obliged to leave the day of reckoning to his agent and successor Colbert. Upon Mazarin’s death Fouquet expected to be made head of the government; but Louis XIV. was suspicious of his poorly dissembled ambition, and it was with Fouquet in mind that he made the well-known statement, upon assuming the government, that he would be his own chief minister. Colbert fed the king’s displeasure with adverse reports upon the deficit, and made the worst of the case against Fouquet. The extravagant expenditure and personal display of the superintendent served to intensify the ill-will of the king. Fouquet had bought the port of Belle Isle and strengthened the fortifications, with a view to taking refuge there in case of disgrace. He had spent enormous sums in building a palace on his estate of Vaux, which in extent, magnificence, and splendour of decoration was a forecast of Versailles. Here he gathered the rarest manuscripts, the finest paintings, jewels and antiques in profusion, and above all surrounded himself with artists and authors. The table was open to all people of quality, and the kitchen was presided over by Vatel. Lafontaine, Corneille, Scarron, were among the multitude of his clients. In August 1661 Louis XIV., already set upon his destruction, was entertained at Vaux with afêterivalled in magnificence by only one or two in French history, at which Molière’sLes Fâcheuxwas produced for the first time. The splendour of the entertainment sealed Fouquet’s fate. The king, however, was afraid to act openly against so powerful a minister. By crafty devices Fouquet was induced to sell his office ofprocureur général, thus losing the protection of its privileges, and he paid the price of it into the treasury.

Three weeks after his visit to Vaux the king withdrew to Nantes, taking Fouquet with him, and had him arrested when he was leaving the presence chamber, flattered with the assurance of his esteem. The trial lasted almost three years, and its violation of the forms of justice is still the subject of frequent monographs by members of the French bar. Public sympathy was strongly with Fouquet, and Lafontaine, Madame de Sévigné and many others wrote on his behalf; but when Fouquet was sentenced to banishment, the king, disappointed, “commuted” the sentence to imprisonment for life. He was sent at the beginning of 1665 to the fortress of Pignerol, where he undoubtedly died on the 23rd of March 1680.1Louis acted throughout “as though he were conducting a campaign,” evidently fearing that Fouquet would play the part of a Richelieu. Fouquet bore himself with manly fortitude, and composed several mediocre translations in prison. The devotional works bearing his name are apocryphal. A report of his trial was published in Holland, in 15 volumes, in 1665-1667, in spite of the remonstrances which Colbert addressed to the States-General. A second edition under the title ofŒuvres de M. Fouquetappeared in 1696.

See Chéruel,Mémoires sur la vie publique et privée de Fouquet ... d’après ses lettres et des pièces inédites(2 vols., Paris, 1864); J. Lair,Nicolas Foucquet, procureur général, surintendant des finances, ministre d’État de Louis XIV(2 vols., Paris, 1890); U.V. Châtelain,Le Surintendant Nicolas Fouquet, protecteur des lettres, des arts et des sciences(Paris, 1905); R. Pfnor et A. France,Le Château de Vaux-le-Vicomte dessiné et gravé(Paris, 1888).

1Fouquet has been identified with the “Man with the Iron Mask” (seeIron Mask), but this theory is quite impossible.

FOUQUIER-TINVILLE, ANTOINE QUENTIN(1746-1795), French revolutionist, was born at Hérouel, a village in the department of the Aisne. Originally aprocureurattached to the Châtelet at Paris, he sold his office in 1783, and became a clerk under the lieutenant-general of police. He seems to have early adopted revolutionary ideas, but little is known of the part he played at the outbreak of the Revolution. When the Revolutionary Tribunal of Paris was established on the 10th of March 1793, he was appointed public prosecutor to it, an office which he filled until the 28th of July 1794. His activity during this time earned him the reputation of one of the most terrible and sinister figures of the Revolution. His function as public prosecutor was not so much to convict the guilty as to see that the proscriptions ordered by the faction for the time being in power were carried out with a due regard to a show of legality. He was as ruthless and as incorrupt as Robespierre himself; he could be moved from his purpose neither by pity nor by bribes; nor was there in his cruelty any of that quality which made the ordinary Jacobinenragéby turns ferocious and sentimental. It was this very quality of passionless detachment that made him so effective an instrument of the Terror. He had no forensic eloquence; but the cold obstinacy with which he pressed his charges was more convincing than any rhetoric, and he seldom failed to secure a conviction.

His horrible career ended with the fall of Robespierre and the terrorists on the 9th Thermidor. On the 1st of August 1794 he was imprisoned by order of the Convention and brought to trial. His defence was that he had only obeyed the orders of the Committee of Public Safety; but, after a trial which lasted forty-one days, he was condemned to death, and guillotined on the 7th of May 1795.

SeeMémoire pour A.Q. Fouquier ex-accusateur public près le tribunal révolutionnaire, &c. (Paris, 1794); Domenget,Fouquier-Tinville et le tribunal révolutionnaire(Paris, 1878); H. Wallon,Histoire du tribunal révolutionnaire de Paris(1880-1882) (a work of general interest, but not always exact); George Lecocq,Notes et documents sur Fouquier-Tinville(Paris, 1885). See also the documents relating to his trial enumerated by M. Tourneux inBibliographie de l’histoire de Paris pendant la Révolution Française, vol. i. Nos. 4445-4454 (1890).

FOURCHAMBAULT,a town of central France in the department of Nièvre, on the right bank of the Loire, 4½ m. N.W. of Nevers, on the Paris-Lyon railway. Pop. (1906) 4591. It owes its importance to its extensive iron-works, established in 1821, which give employment to 2000 workmen and produce engineering material for railway, military and other purposes. Among the more remarkablechefs-d’œuvrewhich have been produced at Fourchambault are the metal portions of the Pont du Carrousel, the iron beams of the roof of the cathedral at Chartres, and the vast spans of the bridge over the Dordogne at Cubzac. A small canal unites the works to the Lateral canal of the Loire.

FOURCROY, ANTOINE FRANÇOIS,Comte de(1755-1809), French chemist, the son of an apothecary in the household of the duke of Orleans, was born at Paris on the 15th of June 1755. He took up medical studies by the advice of the anatomist Félix Vicq d’Azyr (1748-1794), and after many difficulties caused by lack of means finally in 1780 obtained his doctor’s diploma. His attention was specially turned to chemistry by J.B.M. Bucquet (1746-1780), the professor of chemistry at the Medical School of Paris, and in 1784 he was chosen to succeed P.J. Macquer (1718-1784) as lecturer in chemistry at the college of the Jardin du Roi, where his lectures attained great popularity. He was one of the earliest converts to the views of Lavoisier, which he helped to promulgate by his voluminous writings, but though his name appears on a large number of chemical and also physiological and pathological memoirs, either alone or with others, he was rather a teacher and an organizer than an original investigator. A member of the committees for public instruction and public safety, and later, under Napoleon, director general of instruction, he took a leading part in the establishment of schools for both primary and secondary education, scientific studies being especially provided for. Fourcroy died at Paris on the 16th of December 1809, the very day on which he had been created a count of the French empire. By his conduct as a member of the Convention he has been accused of contributing to the death of Lavoisier. Baron Cuvier in hisÉloge historiqueof Fourcroy repels the charge, but he can scarcely be acquitted of time-serving indifference, if indeed active, though secret, participation be not proved against him.

The Royal Society’sCatalogue of Scientific Papersenumerates 59 memoirs by Fourcroy himself, and 58 written jointly by him and others, mostly L.N. Vauquelin.

FOURIER, FRANÇOIS CHARLES MARIE(1772-1837), French socialist writer, was born at Besançon in Franche-Comté on the 7th of April 1772. His father was a draper in good circumstances, and Fourier received an excellent education at the college in his native town. After completing his studies there he travelled for some time in France, Germany and Holland. On the death of his father he inherited a considerable amount of property, which, however, was lost when Lyons was besieged by the troops of the Convention. Being thus deprived of his means of livelihood Fourier entered the army, but after two years’ service as a chasseur was discharged on account of ill-health. In 1803 he published a remarkable article on European politics which attracted the notice of Napoleon, some of whose ideas were foreshadowed in it. Inquiries were made after the author, but nothing seems to have come of them. After leaving the army Fourier entered a merchant’s office in Lyons, and some years later undertook on his own account a small business as broker. He obtained in this way just sufficient to supply his wants, and devoted all his leisure time to the elaboration of his first work on the organization of society.

During the early part of his life, and while engaged in commerce, he had become deeply impressed with the conviction that social arrangements resulting from the principles of individualism and competition were essentially imperfect and immoral. He proposed to substitute for these principles co-operation or united effort, by means of which full and harmonious development might be given to human nature. The scheme, worked out in detail in his first work,Théorie des quatre mouvements(2 vols., Lyons, 1808, published anonymously), has for foundation a particular psychological proposition and a special economical doctrine. Psychologically Fourier held what may with some laxity of language be called natural optimism,—the view that the full, free development of human nature or the unrestrained indulgence of human passion is the only possible way to happiness and virtue, and that misery and vice spring from the unnatural restraints imposed by society on the gratification of desire. This principle of harmony among the passions he regarded as his grandest discovery—a discovery which did more than set him on a level with Newton, the discoverer of the principle of attraction or harmony among material bodies. Throughout his works, in uncouth, obscure and often unintelligible language, he endeavours to show that the same fundamental fact of harmony is to be found in the four great departments,—society, animal life, organic life and the material universe. In order to give effect to this principle and obtain the resulting social harmony, it was needful that society should be reconstructed; for, as the social organism is at present constituted, innumerable restrictions are imposed upon the free development of human desire. As practical principle for such a reconstruction Fourier advocated co-operative or united industry. In many respects what he says of co-operation, in particular as to the enormous waste of economic force which the actual arrangements of society entail, still deserves attention, and some of the most recent efforts towards extension of the co-operative method,e.g.to house-keeping, were in essentials anticipated by him. But the full realization of his scheme demanded much more than the mere admission that co-operation is economically moreefficacious than individualism. Society as a whole must be organized on the lines requisite to give full scope to co-operation and to the harmonious evolution of human nature. The details of this reorganization of the social structure cannot be given briefly, but the broad outlines may be thus sketched. Society, on his scheme, is to be divided into departments orphalanges, eachphalangenumbering about 1600 persons. Eachphalangeinhabits aphalanstèreor common building, and has a certain portion of soil allotted to it for cultivation. Thephalanstèresare built after a uniform plan, and the domestic arrangements are laid down very elaborately. The staple industry of thephalangesis, of course, agriculture, but the variousseriesandgroupesinto which the members are divided may devote themselves to such occupations as are most to their taste; nor need any occupation become irksome from constant devotion to it. Any member of a group may vary his employment at pleasure, may pass from one task to another. The tasks regarded as menial or degrading in ordinary society can be rendered attractive if advantage is taken of the proper principles of human nature: thus children, who have a natural affinity for dirt, and a fondness for “cleaning up,” may easily be induced to accept with eagerness the functions of public scavengers. It is not, on Fourier’s scheme, necessary that private property should be abolished, nor is the privacy of family life impossible within thephalanstère. Each family may have separate apartments, and there may be richer and poorer members. But the rich and poor are to be locally intermingled, in order that the broad distinction between them, which is so painful a feature in actual society, may become almost imperceptible. Out of the common gain of thephalangea certain portion is deducted to furnish to each member the minimum of subsistence; the remainder is distributed in shares to labour, capital and talent,—five-twelfths going to the first, four-twelfths to the second and three-twelfths to the third. Upon the changes requisite in the private life of the members Fourier was in his first work more explicit than in his later writings. The institution of marriage, which imposes unnatural bonds on human passion, is of necessity abolished; a new and ingeniously constructed system of licence is substituted for it. Considerable offence seems to have been given by Fourier’s utterances with regard to marriage, and generally the later advocates of his views are content to pass the matter over in silence or to veil their teaching under obscure and metaphorical language.

The scheme thus sketched attracted no attention when theThéoriefirst appeared, and for some years Fourier remained in his obscure position at Lyons. In 1812 the death of his mother put him in possession of a small sum of money, with which he retired to Bellay in order to perfect his second work. TheTraité de l’association agricole domestiquewas published in 2 vols. at Paris in 1822, and a summary appeared in the following year. After its publication the author proceeded to Paris in the hope that some wealthy capitalist might be induced to attempt the realization of the projected scheme. Disappointed in this expectation he returned to Lyons. In 1826 he again visited Paris, and as a considerable portion of his means had been expended in the publication of his book, he accepted a clerkship in an American firm. In 1829 and 1830 appeared what is probably the most finished exposition of his views,Le Nouveau Monde industriel. In 1831 he attacked the rival socialist doctrines of Saint-Simon and Owen in the small workPièges et charlatanisme de deux sectes, St Simon et Owen. His writings now began to attract some attention. A small body of adherents gathered round him, and the most ardent of them was Victor Considérant (q.v.). In 1832 a newspaper,Le Phalanstère ou la réforme industriellewas started to propagate the views of the school, but its success was not great. In 1833 it declined from a weekly to a monthly, and in 1834 it died of inanition. It was revived in 1836 asLe Phalange, and in 1843 became a daily paper,La Démocratie pacifique. In 1850 it was suppressed.

Fourier did not live to see the success of his newspaper, and the only practical attempt during his lifetime to establish aphalanstèrewas a complete failure. In 1832 M. Baudet Dulary, deputy for Seine-et-Oise, who had become a convert, purchased an estate at Condé-sur-Vesgre, near the forest of Rambouillet, and proceeded to establish a socialist community. The capital supplied was, however, inadequate, and the community broke up in disgust. Fourier was in no way discouraged by this failure, and till his death, on the 10th of October 1837, he lived in daily expectation that wealthy capitalists would see the merits of his scheme and be induced to devote their fortunes to its realization. It may be added that subsequent attempts to establish thephalanstèrehave been uniformly unsuccessful.1

Fourier seems to have been of an extremely retiring and sensitive disposition. He mixed little in society, and appeared, indeed, as if he were the denizen of some other planet. Of the true nature of social arrangements, and of the manner in which they naturally grow and become organized, he must be pronounced extremely ignorant. The faults of existing institutions presented themselves to him in an altogether distorted manner, and he never appears to have recognized that the evils of actual society are immeasurably less serious than the consequences of his arbitrary scheme. Out of the chaos of human passion he supposed harmony was to be evolved by the adoption of a few theoretically disputable principles, which themselves impose restraints even more irksome than those due to actual social facts. With regard to the economic aspects of his proposed new method, it is of course to be granted that co-operation is more effective than individual effort, but he has nowhere faced the question as to the probable consequences of organizing society on the abolition of those great institutions which have grown with its growth. His temperament was too ardent, his imagination too strong, and his acquaintance with the realities of life too slight to enable him justly to estimate the merits of his fantastic views. That this description of him is not expressed in over-strong language must be clear to any one who not only considers what is true in his works,—and the portion of truth is by no means a peculiar discovery of Fourier’s,—but who takes into account the whole body of his speculations, the cosmological and historical as well as the economical and social. No words can adequately describe the fantastic nonsense which he pours forth, partly in the form of general speculation on the universe, partly in the form of prophetic utterances with regard to the future changes in humanity and its material environment. From these extraordinary writings it is no extreme conclusion that there was much of insanity in Fourier’s mental constitution.

Authorities.—Ch. Pellarin,Fourier, sa vie et sa théorie(5th ed., 1872); Sargant,Social Innovators(1859); Reybaud,Réformateurs modernes(7th ed., 1864); Stein,Socialismus und Communismus des heutigen Frankreichs(2nd ed., 1848); A.J. Booth,Fortnightly Review, N. S., vol. xii.; Czynski,Notice bibliographique sur C. Fourier(1841); Ferraz,Le Socialisme, le naturalisme et le positivisme(1877); Considérant,Exposition abrégée du système de Fourier(1845); Transon,Théorie sociétaire de Charles Fourier(1832); Stein,Geschichte der sozialen Bewegung in Frankreich(1850); Marlo,Untersuchungen über die Organisation der Arbeit(1853); J.H. Noyes,History of American Socialisms(1870); Bebel,Charles Fourier(1888); Varschauer,Geschichte des Sozialismus und Kommunismus im 19. Jahrhundert(1903); Sambuc,Le Socialisme de Fourier(1900); M. Hillquit,History of Socialism in the United States(1903); H. Bourgin,Fourier, contribution à l’étude de socialisme français(1905).

(R. Ad.)

1Several experiments were made to this end in the United States (seeCommunism) by American followers of Fourier, whose doctrines were introduced there by Albert Brisbane (1809-1890). Indeed, in the years between 1840 and 1850, during which the movement waxed and waned, no fewer than forty-onephalangeswere founded, of which some definite record can be found. The most interesting of all the experiments, not alone from its own history, but also from the fact that it attracted the support of many of the most intellectual and cultured Americans was that of Brook Farm (q.v.).

FOURIER, JEAN BAPTISTE JOSEPH(1768-1830), French mathematician, was born at Auxerre on the 21st of March 1768. He was the son of a tailor, and was left an orphan in his eighth year; but, through the kindness of a friend, admission was gained for him into the military school of his native town, which was then under the direction of the Benedictines of Saint-Maur. He soon distinguished himself as a student and made rapid progress, especially in mathematics. Debarred from entering the army on account of his lowness of birth and poverty, he was appointedprofessor of mathematics in the school in which he had been a pupil. In 1787 he became a novice at the abbey of St Benoît-sur-Loire; but he left the abbey in 1789 and returned to his college, where, in addition to his mathematical duties, he was frequently called to lecture on other subjects,—rhetoric, philosophy and history. On the institution of the École Normale at Paris in 1795 he was sent to teach in it, and was afterwards attached to the École Polytechnique, where he occupied the chair of analysis. Fourier was one of the savants who accompanied Bonaparte to Egypt in 1798; and during this expedition he was called to discharge important political duties in addition to his scientific ones. He was for a time virtually governor of half Egypt, and for three years was secretary of the Institut du Caire; he also delivered the funeral orations for Kléber and Desaix. He returned to France in 1801, and in the following year he was nominated prefect of Isère, and was created baron and chevalier of the Legion of Honour. He took an important part in the preparation of the famousDescription de l’Égypteand wrote the historical introduction. He held his prefecture for fourteen years; and it was during this period that he carried on his elaborate and fruitful investigations on the conduction of heat. On the return of Napoleon from Elba, in 1815, Fourier published a royalist proclamation, and left Grenoble as Napoleon entered it. He was then deprived of his prefecture, and, although immediately named prefect of the Rhone, was soon after again deprived. He now settled at Paris, was elected to the Académie des Sciences in 1816, but in consequence of the opposition of Louis XVIII. was not admitted till the following year, when he succeeded the Abbé Alexis de Rochon. In 1822 he was made perpetual secretary in conjunction with Cuvier, in succession to Delambre. In 1826 Fourier became a member of the French Academy, and in 1827 succeeded Laplace as president of the council of the École Polytechnique. In 1828 he became a member of the government commission established for the encouragement of literature. He died at Paris on the 16th of May 1830.

As a politician Fourier achieved uncommon success, but his fame chiefly rests on his strikingly original contributions to science and mathematics. The theory of heat engaged his attention quite early, and in 1812 he obtained a prize offered by the Académie des Sciences with a memoir in two parts,Théorie des mouvements de la chaleur dans les corps solides. The first part was republished in 1822 asLa Théorie analytique de la chaleur, which by its new methods and great results made an epoch in the history of mathematical and physical science (see below:Fourier’s Series). An English translation has been published by A. Freeman (Cambridge, 1872), and a German by Weinstein (Berlin, 1884). His mathematical researches were also concerned with the theory of equations, but the question as to his priority on several points has been keenly discussed. After his death Navier completed and published Fourier’s unfinished work,Analyse des équations indéterminées(1831), which contains much original matter. In addition to the works above mentioned, Fourier wrote many memoirs on scientific subjects, andélogesof distinguished men of science. His works have been collected and edited by Gaston Darboux with the titleŒuvres de Fourier(Paris, 1889-1890).

For a list of Fourier’s publications see theCatalogue of Scientific Papers of the Royal Society of London. Reference may also be made to Arago, “Joseph Fourier,” in theSmithsonian Report(1871).

FOURIER’S SERIES,in mathematics, those series which proceed according to sines and cosines of multiples of a variable, the various multiples being in the ratio of the natural numbers; they are used for the representation of a function of the variable for values of the variable which lie between prescribed finite limits. Although the importance of such series, especially in the theory of vibrations, had been recognized by D. Bernoulli, Lagrange and other mathematicians, and had led to some discussion of their properties, J.B.J. Fourier (see above) was the first clearly to recognize the arbitrary character of the functions which the series can represent, and to make any serious attempt to prove the validity of such representation; the series are consequently usually associated with the name of Fourier. More general cases of trigonometrical series, in which the multiples are given as the roots of certain transcendental equations, were also considered by Fourier.

Back to Index Next