Literature.—The chief recent books are: F. Chapman,The Foraminifera(1902), and J.J. Lister, “The Foraminifera,” in E.R. Lankester’sTreatise on Zoology(1903), in which full bibliographies will be found. For a final résumé of the long controversy on Eozoon, see George P. Merrill inReport of the U.S. National Museum(1906), p. 635. Other classifications of the Foraminifera will be found by G.H. Theodor Eimer and C. Fickert inZeitschr. für wissenschaftliche Zoologie, lxv. (1899), p. 599, and L. Rhumbler inArchiv für Protistenkunde, iii. (1903-1904); the account of the reproduction is based on the researches of J.J. Lister, summarized in the above-cited work, and of F. Schaudinn, inArbeiten des kaiserlichen Gesundheitsamts, xix. (1903). We must also cite W.B. Carpenter, W.K. Parker and T. Rymer Jones,Introduction to the Study of the Foraminifera(Ray Society) (1862); W.B. Carpenter, “Foraminifera,” inEncy. Brit., 9th ed.; W.C. Williamson,On the Recent Foraminifera of Great Britain(Ray Society), (1858); H.B. Brady, “The Foraminifera,” inChallenger Reports, ix. (1884); A. Kemna, inAnn. de la soc. royale zoologique et malacologique de Belgique, xxxvii. (1902), p. 60; xxxix. (1904), p. 7.Appendix.—TheXenophyophoridaeare a small group of bottom-dwelling Sarcodina which show a certain resemblance to arenaceous Foraminifera, though observations in the living state show that the character of the pseudopodia is lacking. The multinucleate protoplasm is contained in branching tubes, aggregated into masses of definite form, bounded by a common wall of foreign bodies (sponge spicules, &c.) cemented into a membrane. The cytoplasm contains granules of BaSO4and pellets of faecal matter. All that is known of reproduction is the resolution of the pellets into uninucleate cells. (F.E. Schultze,Wissenschaftliche Ergebnisse der deutschen Tiefsee-Expedition, vol. xi., 1905, pt. i.)
Literature.—The chief recent books are: F. Chapman,The Foraminifera(1902), and J.J. Lister, “The Foraminifera,” in E.R. Lankester’sTreatise on Zoology(1903), in which full bibliographies will be found. For a final résumé of the long controversy on Eozoon, see George P. Merrill inReport of the U.S. National Museum(1906), p. 635. Other classifications of the Foraminifera will be found by G.H. Theodor Eimer and C. Fickert inZeitschr. für wissenschaftliche Zoologie, lxv. (1899), p. 599, and L. Rhumbler inArchiv für Protistenkunde, iii. (1903-1904); the account of the reproduction is based on the researches of J.J. Lister, summarized in the above-cited work, and of F. Schaudinn, inArbeiten des kaiserlichen Gesundheitsamts, xix. (1903). We must also cite W.B. Carpenter, W.K. Parker and T. Rymer Jones,Introduction to the Study of the Foraminifera(Ray Society) (1862); W.B. Carpenter, “Foraminifera,” inEncy. Brit., 9th ed.; W.C. Williamson,On the Recent Foraminifera of Great Britain(Ray Society), (1858); H.B. Brady, “The Foraminifera,” inChallenger Reports, ix. (1884); A. Kemna, inAnn. de la soc. royale zoologique et malacologique de Belgique, xxxvii. (1902), p. 60; xxxix. (1904), p. 7.
Appendix.—TheXenophyophoridaeare a small group of bottom-dwelling Sarcodina which show a certain resemblance to arenaceous Foraminifera, though observations in the living state show that the character of the pseudopodia is lacking. The multinucleate protoplasm is contained in branching tubes, aggregated into masses of definite form, bounded by a common wall of foreign bodies (sponge spicules, &c.) cemented into a membrane. The cytoplasm contains granules of BaSO4and pellets of faecal matter. All that is known of reproduction is the resolution of the pellets into uninucleate cells. (F.E. Schultze,Wissenschaftliche Ergebnisse der deutschen Tiefsee-Expedition, vol. xi., 1905, pt. i.)
(M. Ha.)
FORBACH,a town of Germany in the imperial province of Alsace-Lorraine, on an affluent of the Rossel, and on the railway from Metz to Saarbrücken, 5½ m. S.W. of the latter. Pop. (1905) 8193. It has a Protestant and a Roman Catholic (Gothic) church, a synagogue and a Progymnasium. Its industries include the manufacture of tiles, pasteboard wares and gardening implements, while there are coal mines in the vicinity. After the battle on the neighbouring heights of Spicheren (6th of August 1870), in which the French under General Frossard were defeated by the Germans under General von Glümer, the town was occupied by the German troops, and at the conclusion of the war annexed to Germany. On the Schlossberg near the town are the ruins of the castle of the counts of Forbach, a branch of the counts of Saarbrücken.
See Besler,Geschichte des Schlosses, der Herrschaft und der Stadt Forbach(1895).
See Besler,Geschichte des Schlosses, der Herrschaft und der Stadt Forbach(1895).
FORBES, ALEXANDER PENROSE(1817-1875), Scottish divine, was born at Edinburgh on the 6th of June 1817. He was the second son of John Henry Forbes, Lord Medwyn, a judge of the court of session, and grandson of Sir William Forbes of Pitsligo. He studied first at the Edinburgh Academy, then for two years under the Rev. Thomas Dale, the poet, in Kent, passed one session at Glasgow University in 1833, and, having chosen the career of the Indian civil service, completed his studies with distinction at Haileybury College. In 1836 he went to Madras and secured early promotion, but in consequence of ill-health he was obliged to return to England. He then entered Brasenose College, Oxford, where in 1841 he obtained the Boden Sanskrit scholarship, and graduated in 1844. He was at Oxford during the early years of the movement known as Puseyism, and was powerfully influenced by association with Newman, Pusey and Keble. This led him to resign his Indian appointment. In 1844 he was ordained deacon and priest in the English Church, and held curacies at Aston, Rowant and St Thomas’s, Oxford; but being naturally attracted to the Episcopal Church of his native land, then recovering from long depression, he removed in 1846 to Stonehaven, the chief town of Kincardineshire. The same year, however, he was appointed to the vicarage of St Saviour’s, Leeds, a church founded to preach and illustrate Tractarian principles. In 1848 Forbes was called to succeed Bishop Moir in the see of Brechin. He removed the episcopal residence to Dundee, where he resided till his death, combining the pastoral charge of the congregation with the duties of the see. When he came to Dundee the churchmen were accustomed owing to their small numbers to worship in a room over a bank. Through his energy several churches were built, and among them the pro-cathedral of St Paul’s. He was prosecuted in the church courts for heresy, the accusation being founded on his primary charge, delivered and published in 1857, in which he set forth his views on the Eucharist. He made a powerful defence of the charge, and was acquitted with “a censure and an admonition.” Keble wrote in his defence, and was present at his trial at Edinburgh. Forbes was a good scholar, a scientific theologian and a devoted worker, and was much beloved. He died at Dundee on the 8th of October 1875.
Principal works:A Short Explanation of the Nicene Creed(1852);An Explanation of the Thirty-nine Articles(2 vols., 1867 and 1868);Commentary on the Seven Penitential Psalms(1847);Commentary on the Canticles(1853). See Mackey’sBishop Forbes, a Memoir.
Principal works:A Short Explanation of the Nicene Creed(1852);An Explanation of the Thirty-nine Articles(2 vols., 1867 and 1868);Commentary on the Seven Penitential Psalms(1847);Commentary on the Canticles(1853). See Mackey’sBishop Forbes, a Memoir.
FORBES, ARCHIBALD(1838-1900), British war correspondent, the son of a Presbyterian minister in Morayshire, was born on the 17th of April 1838, and was educated at Aberdeen University. Entering the Royal Dragoons as a private, he gained, while in the service, considerable practical experience of military life and affairs. Being invalided from his regiment, he settled in London, and became a journalist. When the Franco-German War broke out in 1870, Forbes was sent to the front as war correspondent to theMorning Advertiser, and in this capacity he gained valuable information as to the plans of the Parisians for withstanding a siege. Transferring his services to theDaily News, his brilliant feats in the transmission of intelligence drew world-wide attention to his despatches. He was with the German army from the beginning of the campaign, and he afterwards witnessed the rise and fall of the Commune. Forbes afterwards proceeded to Spain, where he chronicled the outbreak of the second Carlist War; but his work here was interrupted by a visit to India, where he spent eight months upon a mission of investigation into the Bengal famine of 1874. Then he returned to Spain, and followed at various times the Carlist, the Republican and the Alfonsist forces. As representative of theDaily News, he accompanied the prince of Wales in his tour through India in 1875-1876. Forbes went through the Servian campaign of 1876, and was present at all the important engagements. In the Russo-Turkish campaign of 1877 he achieved striking journalistic successes at great personal risk. Attached to the Russian army, he witnessed most of the principal operations, and remained continuously in the field until attacked by fever. His letters, together with those of his colleagues, MacGahan and Millet, were republished by theDaily News. On recovering from his fever, Forbes proceeded to Cyprus, in order to witness the British occupation. The same year (1878) he went to India, and in the winter accompanied the Khyber Pass force to Jalalabad. He was present at the taking of Ali Musjid, and marched with several expeditions against the hill tribes. Burma was Forbes’s next field of adventure, and at Mandalay, the capital, he had several interesting interviews with King Thibaw. He left Burmahurriedly for South Africa, where, in consequence of the disaster of Isandlwana, a British force was collecting for the invasion of Zululand. He was present at the victory of Ulundi, and his famous ride of 120 m. in fifteen hours, by which he was enabled to convey the first news of the battle to England, remains one of the finest achievements in journalistic enterprise. Forbes subsequently delivered many lectures on his war experiences to large audiences. His closing years were spent in literary work. He had some years before published a military novel entitledDrawn from Life, and a volume on his experiences of the war between France and Germany. These were now followed by numerous publications, includingGlimpses through the Cannon Smoke(1880);Souvenirs of some Continents(1885);William I. of Germany: a Biography(1888);Havelock, in the “English Men of Action” Series (1890);Barracks, Bivouacs, and Battles(1891);The Afghan Wars, 1839-80 (1892);Czar and Sultan(1895);Memories and Studies of War and Peace(1895), in many respects autobiographic; andColin Campbell, Lord Clyde(1896). He died on the 30th of March 1900.
FORBES, DAVID(1828-1876), British mineralogist, metallurgist and chemist, brother of Edward Forbes (q.v.), was born on the 6th of September 1828, at Douglas, Isle of Man, and received his early education there and at Brentwood in Essex. When a boy of fourteen he had already acquired a remarkable knowledge of chemistry. This subject he studied at the university of Edinburgh, and he was still young when he was appointed superintendent of the mining and metallurgical works at Espedal in Norway. Subsequently he became a partner in the firm of Evans & Askin, nickel-smelters, of Birmingham, and in that capacity during the years 1857-1860 he visited Chile, Bolivia and Peru. Besides reports for the Iron and Steel Institute, of which, during the last years of his life, he was foreign secretary, he wrote upwards of 50 papers on scientific subjects, among which are the following: “The Action of Sulphurets on Metallic Silicates at High Temperatures,”Rep. Brit. Assoc., 1855, pt. ii. p. 62; “The Relations of the Silurian and Metamorphic Rocks of the south of Norway,”ib.p. 82; “The Causes producing Foliation in Rocks,”Journ. Geol. Soc.xi., 1855; “The Chemical Composition of the Silurian and Cambrian Limestones,”Phil. Mag.xiii. pp. 365-373, 1857; “The Geology of Bolivia and Southern Peru,”Journ. Geol. Soc.xvii. pp. 7-62, 1861; “The Mineralogy of Chile,”Phil. Mag., 1865; “Researches in British Mineralogy,”Phil. Mag., 1867-1868. His observations on the geology of South America were given in a masterly essay, and these and subsequent researches threw much light on igneous and metamorphic phenomena and on the resulting changes in rock-formations. He also contributed important articles on chemical geology to theChemical NewsandGeological Magazine(1867 and 1868). In England he was a pioneer in microscopic petrology. He was elected F.R.S. in 1858. He died in London on the 5th of December 1876.
See Obituary by P.M. Duncan inQuart. Journ. Geol. Soc., vol. xxxiii., 1877, p. 41; and by J. Morris inGeol. Mag., 1877, p. 45.
See Obituary by P.M. Duncan inQuart. Journ. Geol. Soc., vol. xxxiii., 1877, p. 41; and by J. Morris inGeol. Mag., 1877, p. 45.
FORBES, DUNCAN,of Culloden(1685-1747), Scottish statesman, was born at Bunchrew or at Culloden near Inverness on the 10th of November 1685. After he had completed his studies at the universities of Edinburgh and Leiden, he was admitted advocate at the Scottish bar in 1709. His own talents and the influence of the Argyll family secured his rapid advancement, which was still further helped by his loyalty to the Hanoverian cause at the period of the rebellion in 1715. In 1722 Forbes was returned member for Inverness, and in 1725 he succeeded Dundas of Arniston as lord advocate. He inherited the patrimonial estates on the death of his brother in 1734, and in 1737 he attained to the highest legal honours in Scotland, being made lord president of the court of session. As lord advocate, he had laboured to improve the legislation and revenue of the country, to extend trade and encourage manufactures, and no less to render the government popular and respected in Scotland. In the proceedings which followed the memorable Porteous mob, for example, when the government brought in a bill for disgracing the lord provost of Edinburgh, for fining the corporation, and for abolishing the town-guard and city-gate, Forbes both spoke and voted against the measure as an unwarranted outrage on the national feeling. As lord president also he carried out some useful legal reforms; and his term of office was characterized by quick and impartial administration of the law.
The rebellion of 1745 found him at his post, and it tried all his patriotism. Some years before (1738) he had repeatedly and earnestly urged upon the government the expediency of embodying Highland regiments, putting them under the command of colonels whose loyalty could be relied upon, but officering them with the native chieftains and cadets of old families in the north. “If government,” said he, “pre-engages the Highlanders in the manner I propose, they will not only serve well against the enemy abroad, but will be hostages for the good behaviour of their relations at home; and I am persuaded that it will be absolutely impossible to raise a rebellion in the Highlands.” In 1739, with Sir Robert Walpole’s approval, the original (1730) six companies (locally enlisted) of the Black Watch were formed into the famous “Forty-second” regiment of the line. The credit given to the earl of Chatham in some histories for this movement is an error; it rests really with Forbes and his friend Lord Islay, afterwards 3rd duke of Argyll (see theAutobiographyof the 8th duke of Argyll, vol. i. p. 8 sq., 1906).
On the first rumour of the Jacobite rising Forbes hastened to Inverness, and through his personal influence with the chiefs of Macdonald and Macleod, those two powerful western clans were prevented from taking the field for Charles Edward; the town itself also he kept loyal and well protected at the commencement of the struggle, and many of the neighbouring proprietors were won over by his persuasions. His correspondence with Lord Lovat, published in the Culloden papers, affords a fine illustration of his character, in which the firmness of loyal principle and duty is found blended with neighbourly kindness and consideration. But at this critical juncture of affairs, the apathy of the government interfered considerably with the success of his negotiations. Advances of arms and money arrived too late, and though Forbes employed all his own means and what money he could borrow on his personal security, his resources were quite inadequate to the emergency. It is doubtful whether these advances were ever fully repaid. Part was doled out to him, after repeated solicitations that his credit might be maintained in the country; but it is evident he had fallen into disgrace in consequence of his humane exertions to mitigate the impolitic severities inflicted upon his countrymen after their disastrous defeat at Culloden. The ingratitude of the government, and the many distressing circumstances connected with the insurrection, sunk deep into the mind of Forbes. He never fairly rallied from the depression thus caused, and after a period of declining health he died on the 10th of December 1747.
Forbes was a patriot without ostentation or pretence, a true Scotsman with no narrow prejudice, an accomplished and even erudite scholar without pedantry, a man of genuine piety without asceticism or intolerance. His country long felt his influence through her reviving arts and institutions; and the example of such a character in that coarse and venal age, and among a people distracted by faction, political strife, and national antipathies, while it was invaluable to his contemporaries in a man of high position, is entitled to the lasting gratitude and veneration of his countrymen. In his intervals of leisure he cultivated with some success the study of philosophy, theology and biblical criticism. He is said to have been a diligent reader of the Hebrew Bible. His published writings, some of them of importance, include—A Letter to a Bishop, concerning some Important Discoveries in Philosophy and Theology(1732);Some Thoughts concerning Religion, natural and revealed, and the Manner of Understanding Revelation(1735); andReflections on Incredulity(2nd ed., 1750).
His correspondence was collected and published in 1815, and a memoir of him (from the family papers) was written by Mr Hill Burton, and published along with aLife of Lord Lovat, in 1847. His statue by Roubillac stands in the Parliament House, Edinburgh.
His correspondence was collected and published in 1815, and a memoir of him (from the family papers) was written by Mr Hill Burton, and published along with aLife of Lord Lovat, in 1847. His statue by Roubillac stands in the Parliament House, Edinburgh.
FORBES, EDWARD(1815-1854), British naturalist, was born at Douglas, in the Isle of Man, on the 12th of February 1815. While still a child, when not engaged in reading, or in the writing of verses and drawing of caricatures, he occupied himself with the collecting of insects, shells, minerals, fossils, plants and other natural history objects. From his fifth to his eleventh year, delicacy of health precluded his attendance at any school, but in 1828 he became a day scholar at Athole House Academy in Douglas. In June 1831 he left the Isle of Man for London, where he studied drawing. In October, however, having given up all idea of making painting his profession, he returned home; and in the following month he matriculated as a student of medicine in the university of Edinburgh. His vacation in 1832 he spent in diligent work on the natural history of the Isle of Man. In 1833 he made a tour in Norway, the botanical results of which were published in Loudon’sMagazine of Natural Historyfor 1835-1836. In the summer of 1834 he devoted much time to dredging in the Irish Sea; and in the succeeding year he travelled in France, Switzerland and Germany.
Born a naturalist, and having no relish for the practical duties of a surgeon, Forbes in the spring of 1836 abandoned the idea of taking a medical degree, resolving to devote himself to science and literature. The winter of 1836-1837 found him at Paris, where he attended the lectures at the Jardin des Plantes on natural history, comparative anatomy, geology and mineralogy. Leaving Paris in April 1837, he went to Algiers, and there obtained materials for a paper on land and freshwater Mollusca, published in theAnnals of Natural History, vol. ii. p. 250. In the autumn of the same year he registered at Edinburgh as a student of literature; and in 1838 appeared his first volume,Malacologia Monensis, a synopsis of the species of Manx Mollusca. During the summer of 1838 he visited Styria and Carniola, and made extensive botanical collections. In the following autumn he read before the British Association at Newcastle a paper on the distribution of terrestrial Pulmonifera in Europe, and was commissioned to prepare a similar report with reference to the British Isles. In 1841 was published hisHistory of British Star-fishes, embodying extensive observations and containing 120 illustrations, inclusive of humorous tail-pieces, all designed by the author. On the 17th of April of the same year Forbes, accompanied by his friend William Thompson, joined at Malta H.M. surveying ship “Beacon,” to which he had been appointed naturalist by her commander Captain Graves. From that date until October 1842 he was employed in investigating the botany, zoology and geology of the Mediterranean region. The results of these researches were made known in his “Report on the Mollusca and Radiata of the Aegean Sea, presented to the British Association in 1843,” and inTravels in Lycia, published in conjunction with Lieut. (afterwards Admiral) T.A.B. Spratt in 1847. In the former treatise he discussed the influence of climate and of the nature and depth of the sea bottom upon marine life, and divided the Aegean into eight biological zones; his conclusions with respect to bathymetrical distribution, however, have naturally been modified to a considerable extent by the more recent explorations of the deep seas.
Towards the end of the year 1842 Forbes, whom family misfortunes had now thrown upon his own resources, sought and obtained the curatorship of the museum of the Geological Society of London. To the duties of that post he added in 1843 those of the professorship of botany at King’s College. In November 1844 he resigned the curatorship of the Geological Society, and became palaeontologist to the Geological Survey of Great Britain. Two years later he published in theMemoirs of the Geological Survey, i. 336, his important essay “On the Connexion between the distribution of the existing Fauna and Flora of the British Isles, and the Geological Changes which have affected their Area, especially during the epoch of the Northern Drift.” It is therein pointed out that, in accordance with the theory of their origin from various specific centres, the plants of Great Britain may be divided into five well-marked groups: the W. and S.W. Irish, represented in the N. of Spain, the S.E. Irish and S.W. English, related to the flora of the Channel Isles and the neighbouring part of France; the S.E. English, characterized by species occurring on the opposite French coast; a group peculiar to mountain summits, Scandinavian in type; and, lastly, a general or Germanic flora. From a variety of arguments the conclusion is drawn that the greater part of the terrestrial animals and flowering plants of the British Islands migrated thitherward, over continuous land, at three distinct periods, before, during and after the glacial epoch. On this subject Forbes’s brilliant generalizations are now regarded as only partially true (see C. Reid’sOrigin of the British Flora, 1899). In the autumn of 1848 Forbes married the daughter of General Sir C. Ashworth; and in the same year was published hisMonograph of the British Naked-eyed Medusae(Ray Society). The year 1851 witnessed the removal of the collections of the Geological Survey from Craig’s Court to the museum in Jermyn Street, and the appointment of Forbes as professor of natural history to the Royal School of Mines just established in conjunction therewith. In 1852 was published the fourth and concluding volume of Forbes and S. Hanley’sHistory of British Mollusca; also hisMonograph of the Echinodermata of the British Tertiaries(Palaeontographical Soc.).
In 1853 Forbes held the presidency of the Geological Society of London, and in the following year he obtained the fulfilment of a long-cherished wish in his appointment to the professorship of natural history in the university of Edinburgh, vacant by the death of R. Jameson, his former teacher. Since his return from the East in 1842, the determination and arrangement of fossils, frequent lectures, and incessant literary work, including the preparation of his palaeontological memoirs, had precluded Forbes from giving that attention to the natural history pursuits of his earlier life which he had earnestly desired. It seemed that at length he was to find leisure to reduce to order his stores of biological information. He lectured at Edinburgh, in the summer session of 1854, and in September of that year he occupied the post of president of the geological section at the Liverpool meeting of the British Association. But he was taken ill just after he had commenced his winter’s course of lectures in Edinburgh, and after not many days’ illness he died at Wardie, near Edinburgh, on the 18th of November 1854.
SeeLiterary Gazette(November 25, 1854);Edinburgh New Philosophical Journal(New Ser.), (1855);Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc.(May 1855); G. Wilson and A. Geikie,Memoir of Edward Forbes(1861), in which, pp. 575-583, is given a list of Forbes’s writings. See alsoLiterary Papers, edited by Lovell Reeve (1855). The following works were issued posthumously: “On the Tertiary Fluviomarine Formation of the Isle of Wight” (Geol. Survey), edited by R.A.C. Godwin-Austen (1856); “The Natural History of the European Seas,” edited and continued by R.A.C. Godwin-Austen (1859).
SeeLiterary Gazette(November 25, 1854);Edinburgh New Philosophical Journal(New Ser.), (1855);Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc.(May 1855); G. Wilson and A. Geikie,Memoir of Edward Forbes(1861), in which, pp. 575-583, is given a list of Forbes’s writings. See alsoLiterary Papers, edited by Lovell Reeve (1855). The following works were issued posthumously: “On the Tertiary Fluviomarine Formation of the Isle of Wight” (Geol. Survey), edited by R.A.C. Godwin-Austen (1856); “The Natural History of the European Seas,” edited and continued by R.A.C. Godwin-Austen (1859).
FORBES, JAMES DAVID(1809-1868), Scottish physicist, was the fourth son of Sir William Forbes, 7th baronet of Pitsligo, and was born at Edinburgh on the 20th of April 1809. He entered the university of Edinburgh in 1825, and soon afterwards began to contribute papers to theEdinburgh Philosophical Journalanonymously under the signature “Δ.” At the age of nineteen he became a fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, and in 1832 he was elected to the Royal Society of London. A year later he was appointed professor of natural philosophy in Edinburgh University, in succession to Sir John Leslie and in competition with Sir David Brewster, and during his tenure of that office, which he did not give up till 1860, he not only proved himself an active and efficient teacher, but also did much to improve the internal conditions of the university. In 1859 he was appointed successor to Brewster in the principalship of the United College of St Andrews, a position which he held until his death at Clifton on the 31st of December 1868.
As a scientific investigator he is best known for his researches on heat and on glaciers. Between 1836 and 1844 he published in theTrans. Roy. Soc. Ed.four series of “Researches on Heat,” in the course of which he described the polarization of heat by tourmaline, by transmission through a bundle of thin mica plates inclined to the transmitted ray, and by reflection from the multiplied surfaces of a pile of mica plates placed at the polarizing angle, and also its circular polarization by two internalreflections in rhombs of rock-salt. His work won him the Rumford medal of the Royal Society in 1838, and in 1843 he received its Royal medal for a paper on the “Transparency of the Atmosphere and the Laws of Extinction of the Sun’s Rays passing through it.” In 1846 he began experiments on the temperature of the earth at different depths and in different soils near Edinburgh, which yielded determinations of the thermal conductivity of trap-tufa, sandstone and pure loose sand. Towards the end of his life he was occupied with experimental inquiries into the laws of the conduction of heat in bars, and his last piece of work was to show that the thermal conductivity of iron diminishes with increase of temperature. His attention was directed to the question of the flow of glaciers in 1840 when he met Louis Agassiz at the Glasgow meeting of the British Association, and in subsequent years he made several visits to Switzerland and also to Norway for the purpose of obtaining accurate data. His observations led him to the view that a glacier is an imperfect fluid or a viscous body which is urged down slopes of a certain inclination by the mutual pressure of its parts, and involved him in some controversy with Tyndall and others both as to priority and to scientific principle. Forbes was also interested in geology, and published memoirs on the thermal springs of the Pyrenees, on the extinct volcanoes of the Vivarais (Ardêche), on the geology of the Cuchullin and Eildon hills, &c. In addition to about 150 scientific papers, he wroteTravels through the Alps of Savoy and Other Parts of the Pennine Chain, with Observations on the Phenomena of Glaciers(1843);Norway and its Glaciers(1853);Occasional Papers on the Theory of Glaciers(1859);A Tour of Mont Blanc and Monte Rosa(1855). He was also the author (1852) of the “Dissertation on the Progress of Mathematical and Physical Science,” published in the 8th edition of theEncyclopaedia Britannica.
SeeForbes’s Life and Letters, by Principal Shairp, Professor P.G. Tait and A. Adams-Reilly (1873);Professor Forbes and his Biographers, by J. Tyndall (1873).
SeeForbes’s Life and Letters, by Principal Shairp, Professor P.G. Tait and A. Adams-Reilly (1873);Professor Forbes and his Biographers, by J. Tyndall (1873).
FORBES, SIR JOHN(1787-1861), British physician, was born at Cuttlebrae, Banffshire, in 1787. He attended the grammar school at Aberdeen, and afterwards entered Marischal College. After serving for nine years as a surgeon in the navy, he graduated M.D. at Edinburgh in 1817, and then began to practise in Penzance, whence he removed to Chichester in 1822. He took up his residence in London in 1840, and in the following year was appointed physician to the royal household. He was knighted in 1853, and died on the 13th of November 1861 at Whitchurch in Berkshire. Sir John Forbes was better known as an author and editor than as a practical physician. His works include the following:—Original Cases ... illustrating the Use of the Stethoscope and Percussion in the Diagnosis of Diseases of the Chest(1824);Illustrations of Modern Mesmerism(1845);A Physician’s Holiday(1st ed., 1849);Memorandums made in Ireland in the Autumn of 1852(2 vols., 1853);Sightseeing in Germany and the Tyrol in the Autumn of 1855(1856). He was joint editor with A. Tweedie and J. Conolly ofThe Cyclopaedia of Practical Medicine(4 vols., 1833-1835); and in 1836 he founded theBritish and Foreign Medical Review, which, after a period of prosperity, involved its editor in pecuniary loss, and was discontinued in 1847, partly in consequence of the advocacy in its later numbers of doctrines obnoxious to the profession.
FORBES,a municipal town of Ashburnham county, New South Wales, Australia, 289 m. W. by N. from Sydney, on the Lachlan river, and with a station on the Great Western railway. Pop. (1901) 4313. Its importance as a commercial centre is due to its advantageous position between the northern and southern markets. It has steam-sawing and flour-mills, breweries and wool-scouring establishments; while the surrounding country produces good quantities of cereals, lucerne, wine and fruit.
FORBES-ROBERTSON, JOHNSTON(1853- ), English actor, was the son of John Forbes-Robertson of Aberdeen, an art critic. He was educated at Charterhouse, and studied at the Royal Academy schools with a view to becoming a painter. But though he kept up his interest in that art, in 1874 he turned to the theatre, making his first appearance in London as Chastelard, inMary, Queen of Scots. He studied under Samuel Phelps, from whom he learnt the traditions of the tragic stage. He played with the Bancrofts and with John Hare, supported Miss Mary Anderson in both England and America, and also acted at different times with Sir Henry Irving. His refined and artistic style, and beautiful voice and elocution made him a marked man on the English stage, and in Pinero’sThe Profligateat the Garrick theatre (1889), under Hare’s management, he established his position as one of the most individual of London actors. In 1895 he started under his own management at the Lyceum with Mrs Patrick Campbell, producingRomeo and Juliet,Hamlet,Macbethand also some modern plays; his impersonation as Hamlet was especially fine, and his capacity as a romantic actor was shown to great advantage also in John Davidson’sFor the Crownand in Maeterlinck’sPelléas and Mélisande. In 1900 he married the actress Gertrude Elliott, with whom, as his leading lady, he appeared at various theatres, producing in subsequent yearsThe Light that Failed, Madeleine Lucette Riley’sMice and Men, and G. Bernard Shaw’sCaesar and Cleopatra, Jerome K. Jerome’sPassing of the Third Floor Back, &c. His brothers, Ian Robertson (b. 1858) and Norman Forbes (b. 1859), had also been well-known actors from about 1878 onwards.
FORBIN, CLAUDE DE(1656-1733), French naval commander, was born in Provence, of a family of high standing, in 1656. High-spirited and ungovernable in his boyhood, he ran away from his home, and through the influence of an uncle entered the navy, serving his first campaign in 1675. For a short time he quitted the navy and entered the army, but soon returned to his first choice. He made under D’Estrées the American campaign, and under Duquesne that of Algiers in 1683, on all occasions distinguishing himself by his impetuous courage. The most remarkable episode of his life was his mission to Siam. During the administration of the Greek adventurer Phaulcon in that country, the project was formed of introducing the Christian religion and European civilization, and the king sent an embassy to Louis XIV. In response a French embassy was sent out, Forbin accompanying the chevalier de Chaumont with the rank of major. When Chaumont returned to France, Forbin was induced to remain in the service of the Siamese king, and accepted, though with much reluctance, the posts of grand admiral, general of all the king’s armies and governor of Bangkok. His position, however, was soon made untenable by the jealousy and intrigues of the minister Phaulcon; and at the end of two years he left Siam, reaching France in 1688. He was afterwards fully engaged in active service, first with Jean Bart in the war with England, when they were both captured and taken to Plymouth. They succeeded in making their escape and were soon serving their country again. Forbin was wounded at the battle of La Hogue, and greatly distinguished himself at the battle of Lagos. He served under D’Estrées at the taking of Barcelona, was sent ambassador to Algiers, and in 1702 took a brilliant part in the Mediterranean in the War of the Spanish Succession. In 1706 he took command of a squadron at Dunkirk, and captured many valuable prizes from the Dutch and the English. In 1708 he was entrusted with the command of the squadron which was to convey the Pretender to Scotland; but so effectually were the coasts guarded by Byng that the expedition failed, and returned to Dunkirk. Forbin was now beginning to be weighed down with the infirmities of age and the toils of service, and in 1710 he retired to a country house near Marseilles. There he spent part of his time in writing his memoirs, published in 1730, which are full of interest and are written in a graphic and attractive style. Forbin died on the 4th of March 1733.
FORCELLINI, EGIDIO(1688-1768), Italian philologist, was born at Fener in the district of Treviso and belonged to a very poor family. He went to the seminary at Padua in 1704, studied under Facciolati, and in due course attained to the priesthood. From 1724 to 1731 he held the office of rector of the seminary at Ceneda, and from 1731 to 1765 that of father confessor in the seminary of Padua. The remaining years of his life weremainly spent in his native village. He died at Padua in 1768 before the completion of the great work on which he had long co-operated with Facciolati. This was the vastLatin Lexicon(seeFacciolati), which has formed the basis of all similar works that have since been published. He was engaged with his Herculean task for nearly 35 years, and the transcription of the manuscript by Luigi Violato occupied eight years more.
FORCHHAMMER, JOHANN GEORG(1794-1865), Danish mineralogist and geologist, was born at Husum, Schleswig, on the 24th of July 1794, and died at Copenhagen on the 14th of December 1865. After studying at Kiel and Copenhagen from 1815 to 1818, he joined Oersted and Lauritz Esmarch in their mineralogical exploration of Bornholm, and took a considerable share in the labours of the expedition. In 1820 he obtained his doctor’s degree by a chemical treatiseDe mangano, and immediately after set out on a journey through England, Scotland and the Faeroe Islands. In 1823 he was appointed lecturer at Copenhagen University on chemistry and mineralogy; in 1829 he obtained a similar post in the newly established polytechnic school; and in 1831 he was appointed professor of mineralogy in the university, and in 1848 became curator of the geological museum. From 1835 to 1837 he made many contributions to the geological survey of Denmark. On the death of H.C. Oersted in 1851, he succeeded him as director of the polytechnic school and secretary of the Academy of Sciences. In 1850 he began with J. Steenstrup and Worsaae various anthropological publications which gained a high reputation. As a public instructor Forchhammer held a high place and contributed potently to the progress of his favourite studies in his native country. He interested himself in such practical questions as the introduction of gas into Copenhagen, the establishment of the fire-brigade at Rosenberg and the boring of artesian wells.
Among his more important works are—Loerebog i de enkelte Radicalers Chemi(1842);Danmarks geognostiske Forhold(1835);Om de Bornholmske Kulformationer(1836);Dit myere Kridt i Danmark(1847);Bidrag til Skildringen af Danmarks geographiske Forhold(1858). A list of his contributions to scientific periodicals, Danish, English and German, will be found in theCatalogue of Scientific Paperspublished by the Royal Society of London. One of the most interesting and most recent is “On the Constitution of Sea Water at Different Depths and in Different Latitudes,” in theProceedings of the Roy. Soc.xii. (1862-1863).
Among his more important works are—Loerebog i de enkelte Radicalers Chemi(1842);Danmarks geognostiske Forhold(1835);Om de Bornholmske Kulformationer(1836);Dit myere Kridt i Danmark(1847);Bidrag til Skildringen af Danmarks geographiske Forhold(1858). A list of his contributions to scientific periodicals, Danish, English and German, will be found in theCatalogue of Scientific Paperspublished by the Royal Society of London. One of the most interesting and most recent is “On the Constitution of Sea Water at Different Depths and in Different Latitudes,” in theProceedings of the Roy. Soc.xii. (1862-1863).
FORCHHAMMER, PETER WILHELM(1801-1894), German classical archaeologist, was born at Husum in Schleswig on the 23rd of October 1801. He was educated at the Lübeck gymnasium and the university of Kiel, with which he was connected for nearly 65 years. In 1830-1834 and 1838-1840 he travelled in Italy, Greece, Asia Minor and Egypt. In 1843 he was appointed professor of philology at Kiel and director of the archaeological museum founded by himself in co-operation with Otto Jahn. He died on the 8th of January 1894. Forchhammer was a democrat in the best sense of the word, and from 1871 to 1873 represented the progressive party of Schleswig-Holstein in the German Reichstag. His published works deal chiefly with topography and ancient mythology. His travels had convinced him that a full and comprehensive knowledge of classical antiquity could only be acquired by a thorough acquaintance with Greek and Roman monuments and works of art, and a detailed examination of the topographical and climatic conditions of the chief localities of the ancient world. These principles are illustrated in hisHellenika. Griechenland. Im Neuen das Alte(1837), which contains his theory of the origin and explanation of the Greek myths, which he never abandoned, in spite of the attacks to which it was subjected. According to him, the myths arose from definite local (especially atmospheric and aquatic) phenomena, and represented the annually recurring processes of nature as the acts of gods and heroes; thus, inAchill(1853), the Trojan War is the winter conflict of the elements in that district. Other similar short treatises are:Die Gründung Roms(1868);Daduchos(1875), on the language of the myths and mythical buildings;Die Wanderungen der Inachostochter Io(1880);Prolegomena zur Mythologie als Wissenschaft und Lexikon der Mythensprache(1891). Amongst his topographical works mention may be made of:Topographie von Athen(1841);Beschreibung der Ebene von Troja(1850), a commentary on a map of the locality executed by T.A. Spratt (seeJournal of the Royal Geographical Society, xii., 1842);Topographia Thebarum Heptapylarum(1854);Erklärung der Ilias(1884), on the basis of the topographical and physical peculiarities of the plain of Troy. HisDemokratenbüchlein(1849), in the main a discussion of the Aristotelian theory of the state, andDie Athener und Sokrates(1837), in which, contrary to the almost universal opinion, he upheld the procedure of the Athenians as perfectly legal and their verdict as a perfectly just one, also deserve notice.
For a full list of his works see the obituary notice by E. Alberti in C. Bursian’sBiographisches Jahrbuch für Altertumskunde, xx. (1897); also J. Sass inAllgemeine deutsche Biographie, and A. Hoeck and L.C. Pertsch,P.W. Forchhammer(1898).
For a full list of his works see the obituary notice by E. Alberti in C. Bursian’sBiographisches Jahrbuch für Altertumskunde, xx. (1897); also J. Sass inAllgemeine deutsche Biographie, and A. Hoeck and L.C. Pertsch,P.W. Forchhammer(1898).
FORCHHEIM,a town of Germany, in the kingdom of Bavaria, near the confluence of the Wiesent and the Regnitz, 16 m. S.S.E. of Bamberg. Pop. (1905) 8417. It has four Roman Catholic churches, including the Gothic Collegiate church and a Protestant church. Among the other public buildings are the progymnasium and an orphanage. The industries of the town include spinning and weaving, bleaching and dyeing, bone and glue works, brewing and paper-making. The spacious château occupies the site of the Carolingian palace which was destroyed in 1246.
Forchheim is of very early origin, having been the residence of the Carolingian sovereigns, including Charlemagne, in the 9th century. Consequently many diets were held here, and here also Conrad I. and Louis the Child were chosen German kings. The town was given by the emperor Henry II. in 1007 to the bishopric of Bamberg, and, except for a short period during the 11th century, it remained in the possession of the bishops until 1802, when it was ceded to Bavaria. In August 1796 a battle took place near Forchheim between the French and the Austrians. The fortifications of the town were dismantled in 1838.
See Hübsch,Chronik der Stadt Forchheim(Nüremberg, 1867).
See Hübsch,Chronik der Stadt Forchheim(Nüremberg, 1867).
FORD, EDWARD ONSLOW(1852-1901), English sculptor, was born in London. He received some education as a painter in Antwerp and as a sculptor in Munich under Professor Wagmüller, but was mainly self-taught. His first contribution to the Royal Academy, in 1875, was a bust of his wife, and in portraiture he may be said to have achieved his greatest success. His busts are always extremely refined and show his sitters at their best. Those (in bronze) of his fellow-artists Arthur Hacker (1894), Briton Riviere and Sir W.Q. Orchardson (1895), Sir L. Alma Tadema (1896), Sir Hubert von Herkomer and Sir John Millais (1897), and of A.J. Balfour are all striking likenesses, and are equalled by that in marble of Sir Frederick Bramwell (for the Royal Institution) and by many more. He gained the open competition for the statue of Sir Rowland Hill, erected in 1882 outside the Royal Exchange, and followed it in 1883 with “Henry Irving as Hamlet,” now in the Guildhall art gallery. This seated statue, good as it is, was soon surpassed by those of Dr Dale (1898, in the city museum, Birmingham) and Professor Huxley (1900), but the colossal memorial statue of Queen Victoria (1901), for Manchester, was less successful. The standing statue of W.E. Gladstone (1894, for the City Liberal Club, London) is to be regarded as one of Ford’s better portrait works. The colossal “General Charles Gordon,” camel-mounted, for Chatham, “Lord Strathnairn,” an equestrian group for Knightsbridge, and the “Maharajah of Mysore” (1900) comprise his larger works of the kind. A beautiful nude recumbent statue of Shelley (1892) upon a cleverly-designed base, which is not quite impeccable from the point of view of artistic taste, is at University College, Oxford, and a simplified version was presented by him to be set up on the shore of Viareggio, where the poet’s body was washed up. Ford’s ideal work has great charm and daintiness; his statue “Folly” (1886) was bought by the trustees of the Chantrey Fund, and was followed by other statues or statuettes of a similar order: “Peace” (1890), which secured his election as an associate of the Royal Academy, “Echo” (1895), on which he was elected full member, “TheEgyptian Singer” (1889), “Applause” (1893), “Glory to the Dead” (1901) and “Snowdrift” (1902). Ford’s influence on the younger generation of sculptors was considerable and of good effect. His charming disposition rendered him extremely popular, and when he died a monument was erected to his memory (C. Lucchesi, sculptor, J.W. Simpson, architect) in St John’s Wood, near to where he dwelt.
SeeSculpture; also M.H. Spielmann,British Sculpture and Sculptors of To-day(London, 1901).
SeeSculpture; also M.H. Spielmann,British Sculpture and Sculptors of To-day(London, 1901).
FORD, JOHN(1586-c.1640), English dramatist, was baptized on the 17th of April 1586 at Ilsington in north Devon. He came of a good family; his father was in the commission of the peace and his mother was a sister of Sir John Popham, successively attorney-general and lord chief justice. The name of John Ford appears in the university register of Oxford as matriculating at Exeter College in 1601. Like a cousin and namesake (to whom, with other members of the society of Gray’s Inn, he dedicated his play ofThe Lover’s Melancholy), the future dramatist entered the profession of the law, being admitted of the Middle Temple in 1602; but he seems never to have been called to the bar. Four years afterwards he made his first appearance as an author with an elegy calledFame’s Memorial, or the Earl of Devonshire deceased, and dedicated to the widow of the earl (Charles Blount, Lord Mountjoy, “coronized,” to use Ford’s expression, by King James in 1603 for his services in Ireland)—a lady who would have been no unfitting heroine for one of his own tragedies of lawless passion, the famous Penelope, formerly Lady Rich. This panegyric, which is accompanied by a series of epitaphs and is composed in a strain of fearless extravagance, was, as the author declares, written “unfee’d”; it shows that Ford sympathized, as Shakespeare himself is supposed to have done, with the “awkward fate” of the countess’s brother, the earl of Essex. Who the “flint-hearted Lycia” may be, to whom the poet seems to allude as his own disdainful mistress, is unknown; indeed, the record of Ford’s private life is little better than a blank. To judge, however, from the dedications, prologues and epilogues of his various plays, he seems to have enjoyed the patronage of the earl, afterwards duke, of Newcastle, “himself a muse” after a fashion, and Lord Craven, the supposed husband of the ex-queen of Bohemia. Ford’s tract ofHonor Triumphant, or the Peeres Challenge(printed 1606 and reprinted by the Shakespeare Society with theLine of Life, in 1843), and the simultaneously published versesThe Monarches Meeting, or the King of Denmarkes Welcome into England, exhibit him as occasionally meeting the festive demands of court and nobility; and a kind of moral essay by him, entitledA Line of Life(printed 1620), which contains references to Raleigh, ends with a climax of fulsome praise to the address of King James I. Yet at least one of Ford’s plays (The Broken Heart, iii. 4) contains an implied protest against the absolute system of government generally accepted by the dramatists of the early Stuart reigns. Of his relations with his brother-authors little is known; it was natural that he should exchange complimentary verses with James Shirley, and that he should join in the chorus of laments over the death of Ben Jonson. It is more interesting to notice an epigram in honour of Ford by Richard Crashaw, morbidly passionate in one direction as Ford was in another. The lines run:
“Thou cheat’st us, Ford; mak’st one seem two by art:What is Love’s Sacrifice but the Broken Heart?”
“Thou cheat’st us, Ford; mak’st one seem two by art:
What is Love’s Sacrifice but the Broken Heart?”
It has been concluded that in the latter part of his life he gratified the tendency to seclusion for which he was ridiculed inThe Time Poets(Choice Drollery, 1656) by withdrawing from business and from literary life in London, to his native place; but nothing is known as to the date of his death. His career as a dramatist very probably began by collaboration with other authors. With Thomas Dekker he wroteThe Fairy KnightandThe Bristowe Merchant(licensed in 1624, but both unpublished), with John WebsterA late Murther of the Sonne upon the Mother(licensed in 1624). A play entitledAn ill Beginning has a good End, brought on the stage as early as 1613 and attributed to Ford, was (if his) his earliest acted play; whetherSir Thomas Overbury’s Life and untimely Death(1615) was a play is extremely doubtful; some lines of indignant regret by Ford on the same subject are still preserved. He is also said to have written, at dates unknown,The London Merchant(which, however, was an earlier name for Beaumont and Fletcher’sKnight of the Burning Pestle) andThe Royal Combat; a tragedy by him,Beauty in a Trance, was entered in the Stationers’ Register in 1653, but never printed. These three (or four) plays were among those destroyed by Warburton’s cook.The Queen, or the Excellency of the Sea, a play of inverted passion, containing some fine sensuous lines, printed in 1653 by Alexander Singhe for private performance, has been recently edited by W. Bang (Materialien zur Kunde d. älteren engl. Dramas, 13, Louvain, 1906), and is by him on internal evidence confidently claimed as Ford’s. Of the plays by Ford preserved to us the dates span little more than a decade—the earliest,The Lover’s Melancholy, having been acted in 1628 and printed in 1629, the latest,The Lady’s Trial, acted in 1638 and printed in 1639.
When writingThe Lover’s Melancholy, it would seem that Ford had not yet become fully aware of the bent of his own dramatic genius, although he was already master of his powers of poetic expression. He was attracted towards domestic tragedy by an irresistible desire to sound the depths of abnormal conflicts between passion and circumstances, to romantic comedy by a strong though not widely varied imaginative faculty, and by a delusion that he was possessed of abundant comic humour. In his next two works, undoubtedly those most characteristically expressive of his peculiar strength,’Tis Pity she’s a Whore(actedc.1626) andThe Broken Heart(actedc.1629), both printed in 1633 with the anagram of his nameFide Honor, he had found horrible situations which required dramatic explanation by intensely powerful motives. Ford by no means stood alone among English dramatists in his love of abnormal subjects; but few were so capable of treating them sympathetically, and yet without that reckless grossness or extravagance of expression which renders the morally repulsive aesthetically intolerable, or converts the horrible into the grotesque. For in Ford’s genius there was real refinement, except when the “supra-sensually sensual” impulse or the humbler self-delusion referred to came into play. In a third tragedy,Love’s Sacrifice(actedc.1630; printed in 1633), he again worked on similar materials; but this time he unfortunately essayed to base the interest of his plot upon an unendurably unnatural possibility—doing homage to virtue after a fashion which is in itself an insult. InPerkin Warbeck(printed 1634; probably acted a year later) he chose an historical subject of great dramatic promise and psychological interest, and sought to emulate the glory of the great series of Shakespeare’s national histories. The effort is one of the most laudable, as it was by no means one of the least successful, in the dramatic literature of this period.The Fancies Chaste and Noble(acted before 1636, printed 1638), though it includes scenes of real force and feeling, is dramatically a failure, of which the main idea is almost provokingly slight and feeble; andThe Lady’s Trial(acted 1638, printed 1639) is only redeemed from utter wearisomeness by an unusually even pleasingness of form. There remain two other dramatic works, of very different kinds, in which Ford co-operated with other writers, the mask ofThe Sun’s Darling(acted 1624, printed 1657), hardly to be placed in the first rank of early compositions, andThe Witch of Edmonton(printed 1658, but probably acted about 1621), in which we see Ford as a joint writer with Dekker and Rowley of one of the most powerful domestic dramas of the English or any other stage.