It is settled as to the United States admiralty jurisdiction not that it is ``co-equal with that of the original English, or that of continental European admiralty, but is rather that defined by the statutes of Richard II., under the construction given to them by contemporary or immediately subsequent courts of admiralty'' (2 Parsons Adm. 176), and that it embraced all maritime contracts, torts, injuries or offences (De Lovio v. Boit, 2 Gallisons Rep. 398; Waring v. Clark, 5 Howards U.S. Rep. 441), and that it has never been restricted by the action of the common law courts as in England under Lord Coke (2 Parsons Adm. 166 n.; Waring v. Clark; De Lovio v. Bolt.)
Original admiralty jurisdiction was by the Judiciary Act of 1789 (U.S. Rev. Stats. sec. 563) granted to the United States district courts exclusively, except that concurrent original jurisdiction was given to United States circuit courts over seizures for slave trading, and condemnations of property used by persons in insurrection (sec. 629; sec. 5309), and in the coolie trade (sec. 2159), and by the act of the 3rd of March 1901; the supreme court of the District of Columbia is given the same jurisdiction as the district and circuit courts. The Supreme Court of the United States has no original jurisdiction in admiralty. All suits are brought in the first instance in the district court. Appeals lie, both on the law and on the facts, from a final decree of that court to the circuit court of appeals only, except in cases involving the jurisdiction of the court, the constitutionality of a law of any state or of the United States, or the validity or construction of any treaty of the United States, and except cases of prize and capital or infamous crime, in which cases of appeal lies directly to the supreme court. In cases of gravity and importance the Supreme Court may by certiorari review the judgment of the circuit court of appeals, but such cases are rare (re Lau Ow Bew, 141 U.S. Rep 587; Benedict's The American Admiralty, sec. 607). Formerly the Judiciary Act authorized an appeal from the district court to the circuit court, and thence to the Supreme Court. But the act of the 3rd of March 1891 (Ch. 517) abolished this and created the circuit court of appeals, making it the final appellate court in admiralty, except as above stated. In any case where the district judge is unable to perform his duties or is disqualified by reason of interest or of relationship, or has acted as counsel for one of the parties to the action, it may be removed to the circuit court in that district (U.S. Rev. Stats. sec. sec. 587, 589 and 601). These are now the only cases in which admiralty suits can come before the circuit court (Benedict's Adm. sec. 321).
The subject matter in cases of contract determines the jurisdiction (the ``General Smith,'' 4 Wheaton U.S. Rep. 438), and not the presence or absence of tide, salt water, current, nor that the water be an inland basin or land-locked, or a river, nor by its being a harbour, or a port within the body of the county, nor that a remedy exists at common law. The admiralty courts have jurisdiction over all matters that concern owners and proprietors of ships as such; possessory actions and petitory actions to try title of a ship; cases of mariners' wages, wharfage, dockage, lighterage, stevedores, contracts of affreightment, charter parties, rights of passengers as such (the ``Moses Taylor,'' 71 U.S. Rep. 411), pilotage, towage, maritime liens and loans, bottomry, respondentia and hypothecation of ship and cargo, marine insurance, average, jettison, demurrage, collisions, consortship, bounties, survey and sale of vessel, salvage; seizures under the laws of impost navigation or trade, cases of prize, ransom, condemnation, restitution and damages; assaults, batteries, damages and trespasses on the high seas and navigable waters of the United States; but not suits in rem for duties (Benedict's Adm. sec. 303a).
The U.S. Supreme Court has held in Peoples Ferry Co. v. Beers, 20 Howards U.S. Rep. 393, and in a series of subsequent cases that a contract to build a vessel is not a maritime contract (the ``Robert W. Parsons''). Contracts to furnish cargo for ships and to furnish ships to carry the cargoes are maritime contracts (Graham v. Oregon R. & N. Co., [1905] 135 Fed. Rep. 608).
Whenever there is a maritime lien, even though created by state statute as to a ship in her home port, it may be enforced by suit in rem in admiralty in the federal courts (the `` General . Smith''; the ``Lottawanna,'' 21 Wallace Rep. 558, Benedict's Adm. sec. 270). In all suits by material men for supplies and repairs or other necessaries for a foreign ship, the libellant may proceed against the ship and freight in rem or against the master or owner in personam (12th Admiralty Rule; Benedict's Adm. sec. 268; the ``General Smith''). Actions in rem and in personam may be joined in the same libel (Newell v. Norton, 3 Wallace 257; the ``Normandie,'' 40 Fed. Rep. 590). But a contract to furnish fishermen with clothing, tobacco and other personal effects for use on a voyage is not a maritime contract, and a court of admiralty has no jurisdiction to enforce it in rem (the ``May F. Chisholm,'' 1904; 129 Fed. Rep. 814). The state courts have no jurisdiction in rem over any maritime contract or tort (the ``Lottawanna,'' the ``Belfast,'' 7 Wallace Rep. 624). Admiralty jurisdiction in tort depends on locality; it must have occurred on the high seas or other navigable waters within admiralty cognizance (2 Farsons Adm. 347; the ``Plymouth,'' 3 Wallace Rep. 20; the ``Genesee Chief'' v. Fitz-Hugh, the ``Blackheath,'' [1903] 122 Fed. Rep. 112).
The U.S. Supreme Court in the ``Harrisburg'' (119 U.S. 199) and the ``Alaska'' (130 U.S. 207), after some conflict of opinion, held that the admiralty courts have no jurisdiction under the general admiralty law to try an action for damages for negligence on the high seas, causing death of a human being, while there was no act of Congress and no statute of the state to which the vessel belonged giving such right of action (Benedict's Adm. sec. sec. 275-309a), nor where such statute is that of a foreign country (Rundell v. Compagnie Generale, [1899] 94 Fed. Rep. 366).
Admiralty has jurisdiction in cases of spoliation and piracy, collision and proceedings by owners to limit their liability under U.S. Rev. Stats. sec. sec. 4281-9.
The United States admiralty courts have always had jurisdiction in matters of prize (The Prize Cases, 2 Black U.S. Rep. 635). The district courts have exclusive original jurisdiction (except that circuit courts also have jurisdiction when prize is taken from persons in insurrection), and the supreme court of the District of Columbia now has concurrent jurisdiction (U.S. v. Sampson, 1902, 187 U.S. 436) and appeals are direct to the Supreme Court. Special commissioners are appointed on the breaking out of hostilities to act under the orders of the district courts (U.S. Rev. Stats. sec. 4621, Prize Rule 9; Benedict's Adm. sec. 509; 680 Pieces Merchandise, 2 Sprague 233). These commissioners take the depositions of witnesses and report to the court the evidence upon which it adjudicates. Proceedings in prize cases must be in conformity with admiralty proceedings, where the seizure is on land (Union Insurance Co. v. U.S., 6 Wallace 759; 2 Parsons Adm. 174). The district courts have all the powers of a court of admiralty whether as instance or prize courts (Glass v. sloop ``Betsy,'' 3 Dallas 6). To adjudicate in matters of prize is one of the ordinary functions of that court (Benedict's Adm. sec. 509).
The admiralty courts have jurisdiction over crimes and offences committed upon vessels belonging to citizens of the United States on the high seas or any arm of the sea or any waters within the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of the United States (U.S. Rev. Stats. sec. 5339). High seas include the great lakes ( U.S. v. Rogers, 150 U.S. 249). (J. A. BA.)
France, and countries following France.
In France, and in Belgium, Spain, Portugal, Italy and Greece —countries which have adopted codes based on the Code Napoleon—the civil, or, as it would have been formerly called in England, the ``instance,'' jurisdiction of the admiralty is exercised by the ordinary tribunals, and there are no separate courts of admiralty for this purpose. France and some other countries have special commercial tribunals, which deal with shipping matters, but also with ordinary commercial cases. France has also tribunaux maritimes commerciaux (Code disciplinaire et penal de la marine marchande du 24 mars 1852, loi du 11 mars 1891) to deal with maritime offences. Austria adopts the French law in commercial matters. Italy had tribunals of commerce, but has given them up. She has, however, by Art. 14 of her Merchant Shipping Code, given jurisdiction to captains of ports to decide collision cases when the sum in dispute does not exceed 200 lire.
Germany.
In Germany there are no special tribunals for admiralty matters. Kammern fur Handelssachen, commercial courts, have been established in Berlin and some of the principal seaports. These deal with shipping matters, but also with all other commercial suits.
Scandinavian nations.
In Denmark, Sweden and Norway there is a maritime code which came into force in Sweden in 1891, in Denmark in 1892, and in Norway in 1893. This was intended to be one code for the three countries; but each country as it finally adopted the code made some modifications of its own. Under this code there are in Norway permanent maritime courts for each town presided over by the judge of the inferior local civil court (civile underdommer), or if there be more than one such judge then by the president, with two assessors chosen out of a list. Temporary local courts, consisting of the same judge with two other members of nautical skill and knowledge, can be constituted in districts where there are no permanent courts. Appeals lie to the supreme court (Hoiesterei.) In Denmark maritime cases are brought before the local courts constituted for maritime and commercial causes (So-og-Handelsret.) In Sweden maritime cases are brought before local courts of first instance consisting of a judge and assessors. There is an intermediate appeal to courts of second instance, and then to the supreme court, which finally decides upon all causes civil and commercial.
Maritime cases in Holland are tried by the ordinary civil tribunals, with the same right of appeal.
Prize jurisdiction.
``By the maritime law of nations universally and immemorially received there is an established method of determination whether the capture be or be not lawful prize. Before the ship or goods can be disposed of by the captor there must be a regular judicial proceeding wherein both parties may be heard and condemnation thereupon as prize in a court of admiralty judging by the law of nations and treaties. . . . If the sentence of the court of admiralty is thought to be erroneous, there is in every maritime country a superior court of review. . . .'' (duke of Newcastle's letter to M. Michell, secretary to the embassy of the king of Prussia, 1753). ``So far as belligerent states do not make a practice of giving up the taking of booty at sea . . . they are required by international law to establish prize tribunals and thus give to their proceedings in the matter of prize a judicial character'' (v . Holtzendorff, Rechtslexikon, tit. ``Prisengerichte'').
In France till the death of the duke of Montmorency in 1632 prize matters were adjudicated upon by the admiral. The duke had sold the office of admiral some years before his death to Cardinal Richelieu; but about the period of the duke's death the office of admiral appears to have been abolished, and one of grand master of navigation established in lieu. This new office was first held by Cardinal Richelieu and continued till 1695. The grand master took the admiral's place in matters of prize; but in 1659 a commission of councillors of state and masters of requests was appointed to assist the grand master and form a Conseil des Prises. From this conseil there was an appeal to the Conseil d'Etat. When the office of admiral was restored in 1695 he exercised his jurisdiction in prize matters with the assistance of the Conseil des Prises. The appeal was then given to the Conseil Royal des Finances. The Ordonnance sur la marine of August 1681 regulated the procedure. This system continued till the Revolution. The last Conseil des Prises was appointed in 1778. A law of the 14th of February 1793 abolished the Conseil des Prises and gave cognizance of prize matters ``provisionally'' to the tribunals of commerce. On the 8th of November 1793 (18 Brumaire, an II.) this jurisdiction was taken from the tribunals of commerce and given to the Conseil Executif. Later it was given to the Comite de Salut Public. On the 25th of October 1795 (3 Brumaire, an IV.) the jurisdiction was restored to the tribunals of commerce. This was again altered on the 27th of March 1800 (6 Germinal, an VIII.), when a Conseil des Prises was established, consisting of nine councillors of state, a commissary of the government and a secretary, all nominated by the First Consul.
On the 11th of June 1806 an appeal was given to the Conseil d'Etat. It was disputed among French jurists whether the Conseil des Prises was to be considered as a body actuated only by political considerations or one exercising what the French term an ``administrative jurisdiction''; which is, as nearly as a parallel to it can be found in England, administration of justice between individuals and the state.
As most of the cases arising out of the great wars had been dealt with, an ordinance of the 9th of January 1815 suppressed the Conseil des Prises and directed the Comite du contentieux of the Conseil d'Etat to prepare the remaining prize matters for decision by the Conseil d'Etat. Such prize matters (probably including captures for trading in slaves) as required to be dealt with till 1854, appear to have been dealt with by this body; an ordinance of the 9th of September 1831 directing that the proceedings before the Conseil d'Etat should be private, was held to show that the jurisdiction was not political but administrative.
An Imperial decree, however, of the 18th of July 1854 restored the Conseil des Prises, with appeal to the Conseil d'Etat. This was for the war with Russia. A similar decree was published on the 9th of May 1859 for the war with Austria in Italy.
On the 28th of November 1861 a further decree ordered that the Conseil instituted in 1859 should so long as it was kept in being decide all prize matters; and this Conseil has decided on prizes taken in the wars with Mexico and Germany and in Cochin China. It consists of seven judges and a commissary of the government. An appeal to the government in the Conseil d'Etat can be brought within three months. It is then decided by l'Assemblee du Conseil d'Etat.
Under the First Empire there were commissions des ports, commissions colonials and commissions consulaires, established mainly to collect materials for the Conseil des Prises, but sometimes, when the ship and cargo were clearly those of the enemy, proceeding to actual condemnation.
In Prussia Regulations of the 20th of June 1864 established a prize council consisting of a president and six associates with a law officer. An appeal was given to an upper prize council (v. Holtzendorff, Rechtslexikon, tit. ``Prisengerichte'').
By a law of the German empire of the 3rd of May 1884 the legality of prizes made during war has to be decided by prize courts, and the imperial government is authorized to determine the particulars as to the seat of such courts, their members and their proceedings (Reichsgesetzblatt of 1884, p. 49). Prize courts were established under this law on the occasion of the East African blockade in 1889 (Reichsgesetzblatt of 1889, pp. 5 sqq.).
In Italy Art. 14 of the Merchant Shipping Code provides that prize matters shall be tried by a special commission established by royal decree. On the occasion of the war with Austria such a special commission was established by royal decree of the 20th of June 1866. For the war with Abyssinia a fresh commission was established by royal decree of the 16th of August 1896. The composition of this commission, which was slightly different in character from that established in 1866, was as follows: (a) a first president of a court of appeal or a retired one, or a president of a section of the council of state or of cassation; (b) two general officers of the navy; (c) a member of the ``contentious part'' of the diplomatic service; (d) two councillors of a court of appeal; (e) a captain of a port, with a commissary of the government and a secretary; five to be a quorum. There was no appeal; but the ordinary right to have recourse to the Court of Cassation at Rome, if the prize commission proceeded without jurisdiction or in excess of jurisdiction, was preserved.
By an ordinance of the 27th of March 1895 regulating the whole matter of prize in Russia, two sorts of prize tribunals of first instance were contemplated—port tribunals and fleet tribunals. The latter are for captures made by ships of the fleet, and are to be composed of some of the principal officers of the fleet. The former are to have presidents named by the emperor from among those ``qui font partie de l'administration maritime judiciaire''; the other members are to be appointed by the ministers of the navy, justice and foreign affairs. The court of appeal is formed by the council of the admiralty with the addition of two members of the senate and a nominee of the minister of foreign affairs (Clunet, 1904, p. 271).
On the occasion of the Russo-Japanese war, port tribunals were established under the authority of this ordinance by the lord high admiral, the Grand Duke Alexis, on the 13th of March 1904, at Sebastopol—Port Alexander III., Port Arthur and Vladivostock (Clunet, 1904, p. 479; London Gazette, 22nd March 1904). Many cases were heard before these tribunals and on appeal.
The procedure in prize cases under the old law of Spain is described in Abreu (Felix Joseph de Abreu y Bertodano), Tratado juridico Politico sobre Presas de Mar (Cadiz, 1746). On the occasion of the war with the United States the Spanish government published a proclamation stating the circumstances in which captures were to be made and prizes taken; but information is lacking as to the particular constitution of the prize court or courts.
In Greece prize questions are apparently left to be tried by the ordinary tribunals. See decision of Civil Tribunal of Athens, 1898, No. 3385 (reported Clunet, 1900, p. 826).
Turkey during her war of 1877 with Russia established a prize court and a court of appeal. The ordinance establishing these courts is set out in the London Gazette of the 6th of July 1877.
Japan established, in the war (1904-5) with Russia, prize courts at Sasebo and Yokosco with a court of appeal at Tokyo. Advocates were heard before these courts, and the procedure seems generally to have been modelled upon European patterns.
AUTHORITIES.—Clunet, Journal du droit international prive, cited shortly as Clunet; v. Holzendorff, Rechtslexikon, Leipzig, 1881; De Pistoye et Duverdy, Traite des prises maritimes, Paris, 1855, vol. ii., tit. viii.; Phillimore, International Law, vol. i., vol. iii. part xi.; Autran, Code international de l'abordage, de l'assistance, et du sauvetage maritimes, Paris, 1902; Raikes, The Maritime Codes of Spain and Portugal (1896), of Holland and Belgium (1898), of Italy (1900), London. (W. G. F. P.)
ADMISSION, in law, a statement made out of the witness-box by a party to legal proceedings, whether civil or criminal, or by some person whose statements are binding on that party against the interest of that party. (See EVIDENCE.)
ADO (d. 874), archbishop of Vienne in Lotharingia, belonged to a famous Frankish house, and spent much of his middle life in Italy. He held his archiepiscopal see from 850 till his death on the 16th of December 874. Several of his letters are extant and reveal their writer as an energetic man of wide sympathies and considerable influence. Ado's principal works are a Martyrologium (printed inter al. in Migne, Patrolog. lat. cxxiii. pp. 181-420; append. pp. 419-436), and chronicle, Chronicon sive Breviarium chronicorum de sex mundi aetalibus de Adamo usque ad ann. 869 (in Migne, cxxiii. pp. 20-138, and Pertzn Monumenta Germ. ii. pp. 315-323, &c.). Ado's chronicle is based on that of Bede, with which he combines extracts from the ordinary sources, forming the whole into a consecutive narrative founded on the conception of the unity of the Roman empire, which he traces in the succession of the emperors, Charlemagne and his heirs following immediately after Constantine and Irene. ``It is,'' says Wattenbach, ``history from the point of view of authority and preconceived opinion, which exclude any independent judgment of events.'' Ado wrote also a book on the miracles (Miracula) of St Bernard, archbishop of Vienne (9th century), published in the Bollandist Acta Sanctorum; a life or Martyrium of St Desiderius, bishop of Vienne (d. 608), written about 870 and published in Migne, cxxiii. pp. 435-442; and a life of St Theudericus, abbot of Vienne (563), published in Mabillon, Acta Sanct. i. pp. 678-681, Migne, cxxiii. pp. 443-450, and revised in Bollandist Acta Sanct. 29th Oct. xii. pp. 840-843.
See W. Wattenbach, Deutschlands Geschichtsquellen, vol. i. (Stuttgart and Berlin, 1904).
ADOBE (pronounced a-do-be; also corrupted to dobie; from the Span. adobar, to plaster, traceable through Arabic to an Egyptian hieroglyph meaning ``brick''), a Spanish-American word for the sun-dried clay used by the Indians for building in some of the south-western states of the American Union, this method having been imported in the 16th century by Spaniards from Mexico, Peru, &c. A distinction is made between the smaller ``adobes,'' which are about the size of ordinary baked bricks, and the larger ``adobines,'' some of which are as much as from one to two yards long.
ADOLESCENCE (Lat. adolescentia, from adolescere, to grow up, past part. adultus, grown up, Eng. ``adult''), the term now commonly adopted for the period between childhood and maturity, during which the characteristics—mental, physical and moral—that are to make or mar the individual disclose themselves, and then mature, in some cases by leaps and bounds, in others by more gradual evolution. The annual rate of growth, in height, weight and strength, increases to a marked extent and may even be doubled. The development in the man takes place in the direction of a greater strength, in the woman towards a fitter form for maternity. The sex sense develops, the love of nature and religion, and an overmastering curiosity both individual and general. This period of life, so fraught with its power for good and ill, is accordingly the most important and by far the most difficult for parents and educationists to deal with efficiently. The chief points for attention may be briefly indicated. Health depends mainly on two factors, heredity, or the sum total of physical and mental leanings of the individual, and environment. In an ideal system of training these two factors will be so fitted in and adapted to one another, that what is weak or unprovided for in the first will be amply compensated for in the second.
In an ideal condition children should be brought up in the country as much as possible rather than in the town. Though adults may live where they like within very wide limits and take no harm, children, even of healthy stock, living in towns, are continually subject to many minor ills, such as chronic catarrh, tonsillitis, bronchitis,and even the far graver pneumonia. Removed to healthier conditions in the country their ailments tend to disappear, and normal physical development supervenes. The residence should be on a well-drained soil, preferably near the sea in the case of a delicate child, on higher ground for those of more robust constitution. The child should be lightly clad in woollen garments all the year round, their thickness being slightly greater in winter than in summer. An abundance of simple well-cooked food in sufficient variety, ample time at table, where an atmosphere of light gaiety should be cultivated, and a period free from restraint both before and after meals, should be considered fundamental essentials. As regards the most suitable kinds of food—milk and fruit should be given in abundance, fresh meat once a day, and fish or eggs once a day. Bread had better be three days old, and baked in the form of small rolls to increase the ratio of crust to crumb. Both butter and sugar are good foods, and should be freely allowed in many forms. The exercise of the body must be duly attended to. Nowadays this is provided for in the shape of games, some being optional, others prescribed, and such sports as boating, swimming, fencing, &c. But severe exercise should only be allowed under adequate medical control, and should be increased very gradually. In the case of girls, let them run, leap and climb with their brothers for the first twelve years or so of life. But as puberty approaches, with all the change, stress and strain dependent thereon, their lives should be appropriately modified. Rest should be enforced during the menstrual periods of these earlier years, and milder, more graduated exercise taken at other times. In the same way all mental strain should be diminished. Instead of pressure being put on a girl's intellectual education at about this time, as is too often the case, the time devoted to school and books should be diminished. Education should be on broader, more fundamental lines, and much time should be passed in the open air. With regard to the mental training of both sexes two points must be borne in mind. First, that an ample number of hours should be set on one side for sleep, up to ten years of age not less than eleven, and up to twenty years not less than nine. Secondly, that the time devoted to ``bookwork'' should be broken up into a number of short periods, very carefully graduated to the individual child.
In every case where there is a family tendency towards any certain disease or weakness, that tendency must determine the whole circumstances of the child's life. That diathesis which is most serious and usually least regarded, the nervous excitable one, is by far the most important and the most difficult to deal with. Every effort should be made to avoid the conditions in which the hereditary predisposition would be aroused into mischievous action, and to encourage development on simple unexciting lines. The child should be confined to the schoolroom but little and receive most of his training in wood and field. Other diatheses—the tuberculous, rheumatic, &c.—-must be dealt with in appropriate ways.
The adolescent is prone to special weaknesses and moral perversions. The emotions are extremely unstable, and any stress put on them may lead to undesirable results. Warm climates, tight-fitting clothes, corsets, rich foods, soft mattresses, or indulgences of any kind, and also mental over-stimulation, are especially to be guarded against. The day should be filled with interests of an objective—in contradistinction to subjective—kind, and the child should retire to bed at night healthily fatigued in mind and body. Let there be confidence between mother and daughter, father and son, and, as the years bring the bodily changes, those in whom the children trust can choose the fitting moments for explaining their meaning and effect, and warning against abuses of the natural functions. For bibliography see CHILD.
ADOLPH OF NASSAU (c. 1255-.1298), German king, son of Walram, count of Nassau. He appears to have received a good education, and inherited his father's lands around Wiesbaden in 1276. He won considerable fame as a mercenary in many of the feuds of the time, and on the 5th of May 1292 was chosen German king, in succession to Rudolph I., an election due rather to the political conditions of the time than to his personal abilities. He made large promises to his supporters, and was crowned on the 1st of July at Aix-la-Chapelle. Princes and towns did homage to him, but his position was unstable, and the allegiance of many of the princes, among them Albert I., duke of Austria, son of the late king Rudolph, was merely nominal. Seeking at once to strengthen the royal position, he claimed Meissen as a vacant fief of the Empire, and in 1294 allied himself with Edward I., king of England, against France. Edward granted him a subsidy, but owing to a variety of reasons Adolph did not take the field against France, but turned his arms against Thuringia, which he had purchased from the landgrave Albert II. This bargain was resisted by the sons of Albert, and from 1294 to 1296 Adolph was campaigning in Meissen and Thuringia. Meissen was conquered, but he was not equally successful in Thuringia, and his relations with Albert of Austria were becoming more strained. He had been unable to fulfil the promises made at his election, and the princes began to look with suspicion upon his designs. Wenceslaus II., king of Bohemia, fell away from his allegiance, and his deposition was decided on, and was carried out at Mainz, on the 23rd of May 1298, when Albert of Austria was elected his successor. The forces of the rival kings met at Gollheim on the 2nd of July 1298, where Adolph was killed, it is said by the hand of Albert. He was buried at Rosenthal, and in 1309 his remains were removed to Spires.
See F. W. E. Roth, Geschichte des Romischen Konigs Adolf I. von Nassau (Wiesbaden, 1879); V. Domeier, Die Absetzung Adolf von Nassau (Berlin, 1889); L. Ennen, Die Wahl des Konigs Adolf von Nassau (Cologne, 1866); L. Schmid, Die Wahl des Grossen Adolf von Nassau zum Romischen Konig; B. Gebhardt, Handbuch der deutschen Geschichte, Band i. (Berlin, 1901).
ADOLPHUS, JOHN LEYCESTER (1795-1862), English lawyer and author, was the son of John Adolphus (1768—1845), a well-known London barrister who wrote a History of England to 1783 (1802), a History of France from 1790 (1803) and other works. He was educated at Merchant Taylors' School and at St. John's College, Oxford. In 1821 he published Letters to Richard Heber, Esq., in which he discussed the authorship of the then anonymous Waverley novels, and fixed it upon Sir Walter Scott. This conclusion was based on the resemblance of the novels in general style and method to the poems acknowledged by Scott. Scott thought at first that the letters were written by Reginald Heber, afterwards bishop of Calcutta, and the discovery of J. L. Adolphus's identity led to a warm friendship. Adolphus was called to the bar in 1822, and his Circuiteers, an Eclogue, is a parody of the style of two of his colleagues on the northern circuit. He became judge of the Marylebone County Court in 1852, and was a bencher of the Inner Temple. He was the author of Letters from Spain in 1816 and 1817 (1858), and was completing his father's History of England at the time of his death on the 24th of December 1862.
ADOLPHUS FREDERICK (1710-1771), king of Sweden, was born at Gottorp on the 14th of May 1710. His father was Christian Augustus (1673—1726), duke of Schleswig-Holstein-Gottorp, bishop of Lubeck, and administrator, during the war of 1700—1721, of the duchies of Holstein-Gottorp for his nephew Charles Frederick; his mother was Albertina Frederica of Baden-Durlach. From 1727 to 1750 he was bishop of Lubeck, and administrator of Holstein-Kiel during the minority of Duke Charles Peter Ulrich, afterwards Peter III. of Russia. In 1743 he was elected heir to the throne of Sweden by the ``Hat'' faction in order that they might obtain better conditions of peace from the empress Elizabeth, whose fondness for the house of Holstein was notorious (see SWEDEN, History). During his whole reign (1751-1771) Adolphus Frederick was little more than a state decoration, the real power being lodged in the hands of an omnipotent riksdag, distracted by fierce party strife. Twice he endeavoured to free himself from the intolerable tutelage of the estates. The first occasion was in 1755 when, stimulated by his imperious consort Louisa Ulrica, sister of Frederick the Great, he tried to regain a portion of the attenuated prerogative, and nearly lost his throne in consequence. On the second occasion, under the guidance of his eldest son, the crown prince Gustavus, afterwards Gustavus III., he succeeded in overthrowing the tyrannous ``Cap'' senate, but was unable to make any use of his victory. He died of surfeit at Stockholm on the 12th of February 1771. See R. Nisbet Bain, Gustavus III. and his Contemporaries, vol. i. (London, 1895). (R. N. B.)
ADONI, a town of British India, in the Bellary district of Madras, 307 m. from Madras by rail. It has manufactures of carpets, silk and cotton goods, and several factories for ginning and pressing cotton. The hill-fort above, now in ruins, was an important seat of government in Mahommedan times and is frequently mentioned in the wars of the 18th century. Pop. (1901) 30,416.
ADONIJAH (Heb. Adoniyyah or Adoniyyahu, ``Yah is Lord''), a name borne by several persons in the Old Testament, the most noteworthy of whom was the fourth son of David. He was born to Haggith at Hebron (2 Sam. iii. 4; 1 Ch. iii. 2). The natural heir to the throne, on the death of Absalom, he sought with the help of Joab and Abiathar to seize his birthright, and made arrangements for his coronation (1 Kings i. 5 ff.). Hearing, however, that Solomon, with the help of Nathan the prophet and Bathsheba, and apparently with the consent of David, had ascended the throne, he fled for safety to the horns of the altar. Solomon spared him on this occasion (1 Kings i. 50 ff.), but later commanded Benaiah to slay him (ii. 13 ff.), because with the approval of Bathsheba he wished to marry Abishag, formerly David's concubine, and thus seemed to have designs on the throne.
ADONIS, in classical mythology, a youth of remarkable beauty, the favourite of Aphrodite. According to the story in Apollodorus (iii. 14. 4), he was the son of the Syrian king Theias by his daughter Smyrna (Myrrha), who had been inspired by Aphrodite with unnatural love. When Theias discovered the truth he would have slain his daughter, but the gods in pity changed her into a tree of the same name. After ten months the tree burst asunder and from it came forth Adonis. Aphrodite, charmed by his beauty, hid the infant in a box and handed him over to the care of Persephone, who afterwards refused to give him up. On an appeal being made to Zeus, he decided that Adonis should spend a third of the year with Persephone and a third with Aphrodite, the remaining third being at his own disposal. Adonis was afterwards killed by a boar sent by Artemis. There are many variations in the later forms of the story (notably in Ovid, Metam. x. 298). The name is generally supposed to be of Phoenician origin (from adon—``lord''), Adonis himself being identified with Tammuz (but see F. Dummler in Pauly-Wissowa's Realencyklopadie, who does not admit a Semitic origin for either name or cult). The name Abobas, by which he was known at Perga in Pamphyha, certainly seems connected with abub (a Semitic word for ``flute''; cf. ``ambubaiarum collegia'' in Horace, Satires, i. 2. 1). (See also ATTIS.) Annual festivals, called Adonia, were held in his honour at Byblus, Alexandria, Athens and other places. Although there were variations in the ceremony itself and in its date, the central idea was the death and resurrection of Adonis. A vivid description of the festival at Alexandria (for which Bion probably wrote his Dirge cf. Adonis) is given by Theocritus in his fifteenth idyll, the Adoniazusae. On the first day, which celebrated the union of Adonis and Aphrodite, their images were placed side by side on a silver couch, around them all the fruits of the season, ``Adonis gardens'' in silver baskets, golden boxes of myrrh, cakes of meal, honey and oil, made in the likeness of things that creep and things that fly. On the day following the image of Adonis was carried down to the shore and cast into the sea by women with dishevelled hair and bared breasts. At the same time a song was sung, in which the god was entreated to be propitious in the coming year. This festival, like that at Athens, was held late in summer; at Byblus, where the mourning . ceremony preceded, it took place in spring.
It is now generally agreed that Adonis is a vegetation spirit, whose death and return to life represent the decay of nature in winter and its revival in spring. He is born from the myrrh-tree, the oil of which is used at his festival; he is connected with Aphrodite in her character of vegetation-goddess. A special feature of the Athenian festival was the ``Adonis gardens,'' small pots of flowers forced to grow artificially, which rapidly faded (hence the expression was used to denote any transitory pleasure). The dispute between Aphrodite and Persephone for the possession of Adonis, settled by the agreement that he is to spend a third (or half) of the year in the lower-world (the seed at first underground and then reappearing above it), finds a parallel in the story of Tammuz and Ishtar (see APHRODITE) The ceremony of the Adonia was intended as a charm to promote the growth of vegetation, the throwing of the gardens and images into the water being supposed to procure a supply of rain (for European parallels see Mannhardt). It is suggested (Frazer) that Adonis is not a god of vegetation generally, but specially a corn-spirit, and that the lamentation is not for the decay of vegetation in winter, but for the cruel treatment of the corn by the reaper and miller (cf. Robert Burns's John Barleycorn.)
All important element in the story is the connexion of Adonis with the boar, which (according to one version) brings him into the world by splitting with his tusk the bark of the tree into which Smyrna was changed, and finally kills him. It is probable that Adonis himself was looked upon as incarnate in the swine, so that the sacrifice to him by way of expiation on special occasions of an animal which otherwise was specially sacred, and its consumption by its worshippers, was a sacramental act. Other instances of a god being sacrificed to himself as his own enemy are the sacrifice of the goat and bull to Dionysus and of the bear to Artemis. The swine would be sacrificed as having caused the death of Adonis, which explains the dislike of Aphrodite for that animal. It has been observed that whenever swine sacrifices occur in the ritual of Aphrodite there is reference to Adonis. In any vase, the conception of Adonis as a swine-god does not contradict the idea of him as a vegetation or corn spirit, which in many parts of Europe appears in the form of a boar or sow.
AUTHORITIES.—H. Brugsch, Die Adonisklage und das Linoslied (Berlin, 1852); Grove, De Adonide (Leipzig, 1877); W. H. Engel, Kypros, ii. (1841), still valuable; W. Mannhardt, Wald- und Feldkulte, ii. (1905); M. P. Nilsson, Griechische Feste (Leipzig, 1906); articles in Roscher's Lexikon and Pauly-Wissowa's Encyklopadie J. G. Frazer, The Golden Bough, ii. (2nd ed.), p. 113, and Adonis, Attis and Osiris (1906); L. R. Farnell, Cults of the Greek States, ii. p. 646; W. Robertson Smith (Religion of the Semites, new ed., 1894, pp. 191, 290, 411), who, regarding Adonis as the swine-god, characterizes the Adonia as an annual piacular sacrifice (of swine), ``in which the sacrifice has come to be overshadowed by its popular and dramatic accompaniments, to which the Greek celebration, not forming part of the state religion, was limited.''
ADONIS, a genus of plants belonging to the natural order Ranunculaceae, known commonly by the nomes of pheasant's eye and Flos Adonis. They are annual or perennial herbs with much divided leaves and yellow or red flowers. Adonis autumnalis has become naturalized in some parts of England; the petals are scarlet with a dark spot at the base. An early flowering species, Adonis vernalis, with large bright yellow flowers, is well worthy of cultivation. It prefers a deep light soil. The name is also given to the butterfly, Mazarine or Clifton Blue (Polyomreatus Adonis).
ADOPTIANISM. As the theological doctrine of the Logos which bulks so largely in the writings of the apologists of the 2nd century came to the front, the trinitarian problem became acute. The necessity of a constant protest against polytheism led to a tenacious insistence on the divine unity, and the task was to reconcile this unity with the deity of Jesus Christ. Some thinkers fell back on the ``modalistic'' solution which regards ``Father'' and ``Son'' as two aspects of the same subject, but a simpler and more popular method was the ``adoptionist'' or humanitarian. Basing their views on the synoptic Gospels, and tracing descent from the obscure sect of the Alogi, the Adoptianists under Theodotus of Byzantium tried to found a school at Rome c. 185, asserting that Jesus was a man, filled with the Holy Spirit's inspiration from his baptism; and sa attaining such a perfection of holiness that he was adopted by God and exalted to divine dignity. Theodotus was excommunicated by the bishop of Rome, Victor, c. 195, but his followers lived on under a younger teacher of the same name and under Artemon. while in the Fast similar views were expounded by Beryllus of Bostra and Paul of Samosata, who undoubtedly influenced Lucian of Antioch and his school, including Arius and, later, Nestorius. There is thus a traceable historical connexion between the early adoptian controversy and the struggle in Spain at the end of the 8th century, to which that name is usually given. It was indeed only a renewal, under new conditions, of the conflict between two types of thought, the rational and the mystical, the school of Antioch and that of Alexandria. The writings of Theodore of Mopsuestia had become well known in the West, especially since the strife over the ``three chapters'' (544-553), and the opposition of Islam also partly determined the form of men's views on the doctrine of Christ's person. We must further remember the dyophysitism which had been sanctioned at the council of Chalcedon. About 780 Ehpandus (b. 718), archbishop of Toledo, revived and vehemently defended the expression Christus Filius Dei adoptivus, and was aided by his much more gifted friend Felix, bishop of Urgella. They held that the duality of natutes implied a distinction between two modes of sonship in Christ—-the natural or proper, and the adoptive. In support of their views they appealed to scripture and to the Western Fathers, who had used the term ``adoption'' as synonymous with ``assumption'' in the orthodox sense; and especially to Christ's fraternal relation to Christians—the brother of God's adopted sons. Christ, the firstborn among many brethren, had a natural birth at Bethlehem and also a spiritual birth begun at his baptism and consummated at his resurrection. Thus they did not teach a dual personality, nor the old Antiochene view that Christ's divine exaltation was due to his sinless virtue; they were less concerned with old disputes than with the problem as the Chalcedon decision had left it—the relation of Christ's one personality to his two natures.
Felix introduced adoptian views into that part of Spain which belonged to the Franks, and Charlemagne thought it necessary to assemble a synod at Regensburg (Ratisbon), in 792, before which the bishop was summoned to explain and justify the new doctrine. Instead of this he renounced it, and confirmed his renunciation by a solemn oath to Pope Adrian, to whom the synod sent him. The recantation was probably insincere, for on returning to his diocese he taught adoptianism as before. Another synod was held at Frankfort in 794, by which the new doctrine was again formally condemned, though neither Felix nor any of his followers appeared.
In this synod Alcuin of York took part. A friendly letter from Alcuin, and a controversial pamphlet, to which Felix replied, were followed by the sending of several commissions of clergy to Spain to endeavour to put down the heresy. Archbishop Leidrad (d. 816) of Lyons, being on one of these commissions, persuaded Felix to appear before a synod at Aix-la-Chapelle in 799. There, after six days' disputing with Alcuin, he again recanted his heresy. The rest of his life was spent under the supervision of the archbishop at Lyons, where he died in 816. Elipapdus, secure in his see at Toledo, never swerved from the adoptian views, which, however, were almost universally abandoned after the two leaders died. In the scholastic discussions of the 12th century the question came to the front again, for the doctrine as framed by Alcuin was not universally accepted. Thus both Abelard and Peter Lombard, in the interest of the immutability of the divine substance (holding that God could not ``become', anything), gravitated towards a Nestorian position. The great opponent of their Christology, which was known as Nihilianism, was the German scholar Gerhoch, who, for his bold assertion of the perfect interpenetration of deity and humanity in Christ, was accused of Eutychianism. The proposition Deus non factus est aliquid secundum quod est homo was condemned by a synod of Tours in 1163 and again by the Lateran synod of 1179, but Adoptianism continued all through the middle ages to be a source of theological dispute.
See A. Harnack, Hist. of Dogma, esp. vol. v. pp. 279-292; R. Ottley, The Doctrine of the Incarnation, vol. i. p. 228 ff, vol. ii. pp. 151-161; Herzog-Hauck, Realenclyk., art. ``Adoptianismus.'' (A. J. G.)
ADOPTION (Lat. adoptio, for adoptatio, from adoptare, to choose for oneself), the act by which the relations of paternity and filiation are recognized as legally existing between persons not so related by nature. Cases of adoption were very frequent among the Greeks and Romans, and the custom was accordingly very strictly regulated in their laws. In Athens the power of adoption was allowed to all citizens who were of sound mind, and who possessed no male offspring of their own, and it could be exercised either during lifetime or by testament. The person adopted, who required to be himself a citizen, was enrolled in the family and demus of the adoptive father, whose name, however, he did not necessarily assume. In the interest of the next of kin, whose rights were affected by a case of adoption, it was provided that the registration should be attended with certain formalities, and that it should take place at a fixed time—the festival of the Thargelia. The rights and duties of adopted children were almost identical with those of natural offspring, and could not be renounced except in the case of one who had begotten children to take his place in the family of his adoptive father. Adopted into another family, children ceased to have any claim of kindred or inheritance through their natural father, though any rights they might have through their mother were not similarly affected. Among the Romans the existence of the patria potestas gave a peculiar significance to the custom of adoption. The motive to the act was not so generally childlessness, or the gratification of affection, as the desire to acquire those civil and agnate rights which were founded on the patria potestas. It was necessary, however, that the adopter should have no children of his own, and that he should be of such an age as to preclude reasonable expectation of any being born to him. Another limitation as to age was imposed by the maxim adoptio imitatur naturam, which required the adoptive father to be at least eighteen years older than the adopted children. According to the same maxim eunuchs were not permitted to adopt, as being impotent to beget children for themselves. Adoption was of two kinds according to the state of the person adopted, who might be either still under the patria potestas (alieni juris), or his own master (sui juris). In the former case the act was one of adoption proper, in the latter case it was styled adrogation, though the term adoption was also used in a general sense to describe both species. In adoption proper the natural father publicly sold his child to the adoptive father, and the sale being thrice repeated, the maxim of the Twelve Tables took effect, Si pater filium ter venunduit, filius a patre liber esto. The process was ratified and completed by a fictitious action of recovery brought by the adoptive father against the natural parent, which the latter did not defend, and which was therefore known as the cessio in jure. Adrogation could be accomplished originally only by the authority of the people assembled in the Comitia, but from the time of Diocletian it was effected by an imperial rescript. Females could not be adrogated, and, as they did not possess the patria potestas, they could not exercise the right of adoption in either kind. The whole Roman law on the subject of adoption will be found in Justinian's Institutes, lib. i. tit. II.
In Hindu law, as in nearly every ancient system, wills were formerly unknown, and adoptions took their place. (See INDIAN LAW.) Adoption is not recognized in the laws of England, Scotland or the Netherlands, though there are legal means by which one may be enabled to assume the name and arms and to inherit the property of a stranger. (See NAME.)
In France and Germany, countries which may he said to have embodied the Roman law in their jurisprudence, adoption is regulated according to the principles of Justinian, though with several more or less important modifications, rendered necessary by the usages of these countries respectively. Under French law the rights of adoption can be exercised only by those who are over fifty years of age, and who, at the time of adoption, have neither children nor legitimate descendants. They must also be fifteen years older than the person adopted. In German law the person adopting must either be fifty years of age, or at least eighteen years older than the adopted, unless a special dispensation is obtained. If the person adopted is a legitimate child, the consent of his parents must be obtained; if illegitimate, the consent of the mother. Both in Germany and France the adopted child remains a member of his original family, and acquires no rights in the family of the adopter other than that of succession to the person adopting.
In the United States adoption is regulated by the statutes of the several states. Adoption of minors is permitted by statute in many of the states. These statutes generally require some public notice to be given of the intention to adopt, and an order of approval after a hearing before some public authority. The consequence commonly is that the person adopted becomes, in the eyes of the law, the child of the person adopting, for all purposes. Such an adoption, if consummated according to the law of the domicile, is equally effectual in any other state into which the parties may remove. The relative status thus newly acquired is ubiquitous. (See Whitmore, Laws of Adoption; Ross v. Ross, 129 Massachusetts Reports, 243.) The part played by the legal fiction of adoption in the constitution of primitive society and the civilization of the race is so important, that Sir Henry S. Maine, in his Ancient Law, expresses the opinion that, had it never existed, the primitive groups of mankind could not have coalesced except on terms of absolute superiority on the one side and absolute subjection on the other. With the institution of adoption, however, one people might feign itself as descended from the same stock as the people to whose sacra gentilicia it was admitted; and amicable relations were thus established between stocks which, but for this expedient, must have submitted to the arbitrament of the sword with all its consequences.
ADORATION (Lat. ad, to, and os, mouth; i.e. ``carrying to one's mouth''), primarily an act of homage or worship, which, among the Romans, was performed by raising the hand to the mouth, kissing it and then waving it in the direction of the adored object. The devotee had his head covered, and after the act turned himself round from left to right. Sometimes he kissed the feet or knees of the images of the gods themselves, and Saturn and Hercules were adored with the head bare. By a natural transition the homage, at first paid to divine beings alone, came to be paid to monarchs. Thus the Greek and Roman emperors were adored by bowing or kneeling, laying hold of the imperial robe, and presently withdrawing the hand and pressing it to the lips, or by putting the royal robe itself to the lips. In Eastern countries adoration has ever been performed in an attitude still more lowly. The Persian method, introduced by Cyrus, was to bend the knee and fall on the face at the prince's feet, striking the earth with the forehead and kissing the ground. This striking of the earth with the forehead, usually a fixed number of times, is the form of adoration usually paid to Eastern potentates to-day. The Jews kissed in homage. Thus in 1 Kings xix. 18, God is made to say, ``Yet I have left me seven thousand in Israel, all the knees which have not bowed unto Baal, and every mouth which hath not kissed him.'' And in Psalms ii. 12, ``Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way.'' (See also Hosea xiii. 2.) In England the ceremony of kissing the sovereign's hand, and some other acts which are performed kneeling, may be described as forms of adoration. Adoration is applied in the Roman Church to the ceremony of kissing the pope's foot, a custom which is said to have been introduced by the popes following the example of the emperor Diocletian. The toe of the famous statue of the apostle in St Peter's, Rome, shows marked wear caused by the kisses of pilgrims. In the Roman Church a distinction is made between Latria, a worship due to God alone, and Dulia or Hyperdulia, the adoration paid to the Virgin, saints, martyrs, crucifixes, &c. (See further HOMAGE.)
ADORF, a town of Germany, in the kingdom of Saxony, 3 m. from the Bohemian frontier, at an elevation of 1400 ft. above the sea, on the Plauen-Eger and Aue-Adorf lines of railway. Pop. 5000. It has lace, dyeing and tanning industries, and manufactures of toys and musical instruments; and there is a convalescent home for the poor of the city of Leipzig.
ADOUR (anc. Aturrus or Adurus, from Celtic dour, water), a river of south-west France, rising in the department of Hautes Pyrenees, and flowing in a wide curve to the Bay of Biscay. It is formed of several streams having their origin in the massif of the Pic d'Arbizon and the Pic du Midi de Bigorre, but during the first half of its course remains an inconsiderable river. In traversing the beautiful valley of Campan it is artificially augmented in summer by the waters of the Lac Bleu, which are drawn off by means of a siphon, and flow down the valley of I esponne. After passing Bagneres de Bigorre the Adour enters the plain of Tarbes, and for the remainder of its course in the department of Hautes Pyrenees is of much less importance as a waterway than as a means of feeding the numerous irrigation canals which cover the plains on each side. Of these the oldest and most important is the Canal d'Alaric, which follows the right bank for 36 m. Entering the department of Gers, the Adour receives the Arros on the right bank and begins to describe the large westward curve which takes it through the department of Landes to the sea. In the last-named department it soon becomes navigable, namely, at St Sever, after passing which it is joined on the left by the Larcis, Gabas, Louts and Luy, and on the right by the Midouze, which is formed by the union of the Douze and the Midour, and is navigable for 27 m.; now taking a south-westerly course it receives on the left the Gave de Pau, which is a more voluminous river than the Adour itself, and flowing past Bayonne enters the sea through a dangerous estuary, in which sandbars are formed, after a total course of 208 m., of which 82 are navigable. The mouth of the Adout has repeatedly shifted. its old bed being represented by the series of etangs and lagoons extending northward as far as the village of Vieux Boucau, 22 1/2 m. north of Bayonne, where it found a new entrance into the sea at the end of the 14th century. Its previous mouth had been 10 m. south of Vieux Boucau. The present channel was constructed by the engineer Louis de Foix in 1579. There is a depth over the bar at the entrance of 10 1/2 to 16 ft. at high tide. The area of the basin of the Adour is 6565 sq. m.
ADOWA (properly ADUA), the capital of Tigre, northern Abyssinia, 145 m. N.E. of Gondar and 17 m. E. by N. of Axum, the ancient capital of Abyssinia. Adowa is built on the slope of a hill at an elevation of 6500 ft., in the midst of a rich agricultural district. Being on the high road from Massawa to central Abyssinia, it is a meeting-place of merchants from Arabia and the Sudan for the exchange of foreign merchandise with the products of the country. During the wars between the Italians and Abyssinia (1887-96) Adowa was on three or four occasions looted and burnt; but the churches escaped destruction. The church of the Holy Trinity, one of the largest in Abyssinia, contains numerous wall-paintings of native art. On a hill about 2 1/2 m. north-west of Adowa are the ruins of Fremona, the headquarters of the Portuguese Jesuits who lived in Abyssinia during the 16th and 17th centuries. On the 1st of March 1896, in the hills north of the town, was fought the battle of Adowa, in which the Abyssinians inflicted a crushing defeat on the Italian forces (see ITALY, History, and ABYSSINIA, History).
ADRA (anc. Abdera), a seaport of southern Spain, in the province of Almeria; at the mouth of the Rio Grande de Adra, and on the Mediterranean Sea. Pop. (1900) 11,188. Adra is the port of shipment for the lead obtained near Berja, 10 m. north-east; but its commercial development is retarded by the lack of a railway. Besides lead, the exports include grapes, sugar and esparto. Fuel is imported, chieffly from the United Kingdom.
ADRAR (Berber for ``uplands''), the name of various districts of the Saharan desert, Northern Africa. Adrar Suttuf is a hilly region forming the southern part of the Spanish protectorate of the Rio de Oro (q.v.). Adrar or Adrar el Jebli, otherwise Adghagh, is a plateau north-east of Timbuktu. It is the headquarters of the Awellimiden Tuareg (see TUAREG and SAHARA). Adrar n'Ahnet and Adrar Adhafar are smaller regions in the Ahnet country south of Insalah. Adrar Temur, the country usually referred to when Adrar is spoken of, is in the western Sahara, 300 m. north of the Senegal and separated on the north-west from Adrar Suttuf by wide valleys and sand dunes. Adrar is within the French sphere of influence. In general barren, the country contains several oases, with a total population of about 10,000. In 1900 the oasis of Atar, on the western borders of the territory, was reached by Paul Blanchet, previously known for his researches on ancient Berber remains in Algeria. (Blanchet died in Senegal on the 6th of October 1900, a few days after his return from Adrar.) Atar is inhabited by Yrab and Berber tribes, and is described as a wretched spot. The other centres of population are Shingeti, Wadan and Ujeft, Shingeti being the chief commercial centre, whence caravans take to St Louis gold-dust, ostrich feathers and dates. A considerable trade is also done in salt from the sebkha of Ijil, in the north-west. Adrar occupies the most elevated part of a plateau which ends westwards in a steep escarpment and falls to the east in a succession of steps.
Adrar or Adgar is also the name sometimes given to the chief settlement in the oasis of Tuat in the Algerian Sahara.
ADRASTUS, in Greek legend, was the son of Talaus, king of Argos, and Lysianassa, daughter of Polybus, king of Sicyon. Having been driven from Argos by Amphiaraus, Adrastus fled to Sicyon, where he became king on the death of Polybus. After a time he became reconciled to Amphiaraus, gave him his sister Eriphyle in marriage, and returned to Argos and occupied the throne. In consequence of an oracle which had commanded him to marry his daughters to a lion and a boar, he wedded them to Polyneices and Tydeus, two fugitives, clad in the skins of these animals or carrying shields with their figures on them, who claimed his hospitality. He was the instigator of the famous war against Thebes for the restoration of his son-in-law Polyneices, who had been deprived of his rights by his brother Eteocles. Adrastus, followed by Polyneices and Tydeus, his two sons-inlaw, Amphiaraus, his brother-in-law, Capaneus, Hippomedon and Parthenopaeus, marched against the city of Thebes, and on his way is said to have founded the Nemean games. This is the expedition of the ``Seven against Thebes,'' which the poets have made nearly as famous as the siege of Troy. As Amphiaraus had foretold, they all lost their lives in this war except Adrastus, who was saved by the speed of his horse Arion (Iliad, xxiii. 346). Ten years later, at the instigation of Adrastus, the war was renewed by the sons of the chiefs who had fallen. This expedition was called the war of the ``Epigoni'' or descendants, and ended in the taking and destruction of Thebes. None of the followers of Adrastus perished except his son Aegialeus, and this affected him so greatly that he died of grief at Megara, as he was leading back his victorious army.
Apollodorus iii. 6, 7; Aeschylus, Septem contra Thebes; Euripides,Phoenissae, Supplices; Statius, Thebais; Herodotus v. 67.
ADRIA (anc. Atria; the form Adria or Hadria is less correct: Hatria was a town in Picenum, the modern Atri), a town and episcopal see of Venetia, Italy, in the province of Rovigo, 15 m. F. by rail from the town of Rovigo. It is situated between the mouths of the Adige and the Po, about 13 1/2 m. from the sea and but 13ft. above it. Pop. (1901) 15,678. The town occupies the site of the ancient Atria, which gave its name to the Adriatic. Its origin is variously ascribed by ancient writers, but it was probably a Venetian, i.e. Illyrian, not an Etruscan, foundation—still less a foundation of Dionysius I. of Syracuse. Imported vases of the second half of the 5th century B.C. prove the existence of trade with Greece at that period; and the town was famous in Aristotle's day for a special breed of fowls. Even at that period, however, the silt brought down by the rivers rendered access to the harbour difficult, and the historian Philistus excavated a canal to give free access to the sea. This was still open in the imperial period, and the town, which was a municipium, possessed its own gild of sailors; but its importance gradually decreased. Its remains lie from 10 to 20 ft. below the modern level. The Museo Civico and the Bocchi collection contain antiquities.
See R. Schone, Le antichita del MuseoBocchi di Adria (Rome, 1878). (T. As.)
ADRIAN, or HADRIAN (Lat. Hadrianus), the name of six popes. ADRIAN I., pope from 772 to 705, was the son of Theodore, a Roman nobleman. Soon after his accession the territory that had been bestowed on the popes by Pippin was invaded by Desiderius, king of the Lombards, and Adrian found it necessary to invoke the aid of Charlemagne, who entered Italy with a large army, besieged Desiderius in his capital of Pavia, took that town, banished the Lombard king to Corbie in France and united the Lombard kingdom with the other Frankish possessions. The pope, whose expectations had been aroused, had to content himself with some additions to the duchy of Rome, and to the Exarchate, and the Pentapolis. In his contest with the Greek empire and the Lombard princes of Benevento, Adrian remained faithful to the Frankish alliance, and the friendly relations between pope and emperor were not disturbed by the difference which arose between them on the question of the worship of images, to which Charlemagne and the Gallican Church were strongly opposed, while Adrian favoured the views of the Eastern Church, and approved the decree of the council of Nicaea (787), confirming the practice and excommunicating the iconoclasts. It was in connexion with this controversy that Charlemagne wrote the so-called Libri Carolini, to which Adrian replied by letter, anathematizing all who refused to worship the images of Christ, or the Virgin, or saints. Notwithstanding this, a synod, held at Frankfort in 794, anew condemned the practice, and the dispute remained unsettled at Adrian's death. An epitaph written by Charlemagne in verse, in which he styles Adrian ``father,'' is still to be seen at the door of the Vatican basilica. Adrian restored the ancient aqueducts of Rome, and governed his little state with a firm and skilful hand.
ADRIAN II., pope from 867 to 872, was a member of a noble Roman family, and became pope in 867, at an advanced age. He maintained, but with less energy, the attitude of his predecessor. Rid of the affair of Lothair, king of Lorraine, by the death of that prince (869), he endeavoured in vain to mediate between the Frankish princes with a view to assuring to the emperor, Louis II., the heritage of the king of Lorraine. Photius, shortly after the council in which he had pronounced sentence of deposition against Pope Nicholas, was driven from the patriarchate by a new emperor, Basil the Macedonian, who favoured his rival Ignatius. An oecumenical council (called by the Latins the 8th) was convoked at Constantinople to decide this matter. At this council Adrian was represented by legates, who presided at the condemnation of Photius, but did not succeed in coming to an understanding with Ignatius on the subject of the jurisdiction over the Bulgarian converts. Like his predecessor Nicholas, Adrian II. was forced to submit, at least in temporal affairs, to the tutelage of the emperor, Louis II., who placed him under the surveillance of Arsenius, bishop of Orta, his confidential adviser, and Arsenius's son Anastasius, the librarian. Adrian had married in his youth, and his wife and daughter were still living. They were carried off and assassinated by Anastasius's brother, Eleutherius, whose reputation, however, suffered but a momentary eclipse. Adrian died in 872.
ADRIAN III., pope, was born at Rome. He succeeded MartinII. in 884, and died in 885, on a journey to Worms. (L. D.*)
ADRIAN IV. (Nicholas Breakspear), pope from 1154 to 1159, the only Englishman who has occupied the papal chair, was born before A.D. 1100 at Langley near St Albans in Hertfordshire, His father was Robert, a priest of the diocese of Bath, who entered a monastery and left the boy to his own resources. Nicholas went to Paris and finally became a monk of the cloister of St Rufus near Arles. He rose to be prior and in 1137 was unanimously elected abbot. His reforming zeal led to the lodging of complaints against him at Rome; but these merely attracted to him the favourable attention of Eugenius III., who created him cardinal bishop of Albano. From 1152 to 1154 Nlicholas was in Scandinavia as legate, organizing the affairs of the new Norwegian archbishopric of Trondhjem, and making arrangements which resulted in the recognition of Upsala as seat of the Swedish metropolitan in 1164. As a compensation for territory thus withdrawn the Danish archbishop of Lund was made legate and perpetual vicar and given the title of primate of Denmark and Sweden. On his return Nicholas was received with great honour by Anastasius IV., and on the death of the latter was elected pope on the 4th of December 1154. He at once endeavoured to compass the overthrow of Arnold of Brescia, the leader of anti-papal sentiment in Rome. Disorders ending with the murder of a cardinal led Adrian shortly before Palm Sunday 1155 to take the previously-unheard-of step of putting Rome under the interdict. The senate thereupon exiled Arnold, and the pope, with the impolitic co-operation of Frederick I. Barbarossa, was instrumental in procuring his execution. Adrian crowned the emperor at St Peter's on the 18th of June 1155, a ceremony which so incensed the Romans that the pope had to leave the city promptly, not returning till November 1156. With the aid of dissatisfied barons, Adrian brought William I. of Sicily into dire straits; but a change in the fortunes of war led to a settlement (June 1156) not advantageous to the papacy and displeasing to the emperor. At the diet of Besancon in October 1157, the legates presented to Barbarossa a letter from Adrian which alluded to the beneficia conferred upon the emperor, and the German chancellor translated this beneficia in the feudal sense. In the storm which ensued the legates were glad to escape with their lives, and the incident at length closed with a letter from the pope, declaring that by beneficium he meant merely bonum factum. The breach subsequently became wider, and Adrian was about to excommunicate the emperor when he died at Anagnia on the 1st of September 1159. A controversy exists concerning an embassy sent by Henry II. of England to Adrian in 1155. According to the elaborate investigation of Thatcher, the facts seem to be as follows. Henry asked for permission to invade and subjugate Ireland, in order to gain absolute ownership of that isle. Unwilling to grant a request counter to the papal claim (based on the forged Donation of Constantine) to dominion over the islands of the sea, Adrian made Henry a conciliatory proposal, namely, that the king should become hereditary feudal possessor of Ireland while recognizing the pope as overlord. This compromise did not satisfy Henry, so the matter dropped; Henry's subsequent title to Ireland rested on conquest, not on papal concession, and was therefore absolute. The much-discussed bull Laudabiliter is, however, not genuine. See Herzog-Hauck, Realencyklopadie, 3rd ed. (excellent bibliography), and Wetzer and Welte, Kirchenlexikon, 2nd ed., under ``Hadrian IV.''; also Oliver J. Thatcher, Studies concerning Adriani IV`. (The University of Chicago: Decennial Publications, 1st series, vol. iv., Chicago, 1903); R. Raby, Pope Adrian IV.: An Historical Sketch (London, 1849); and A. H.Tarleton, Life of Nicholas Breakspear (London, 1896)
ADRIAN V. (Ottobuono de' Fieschi), pope in 1276, was a Genoese who was created cardinal deacon by his uncle Innocent IV. In 1264 he was sent to England to mediate between Henry III. and his barons. He was elected pope to succeed Innocent V. on the 11th of July 1276, but died at Viterbo on the 18th of August, without having been ordained even to the priesthood.
ADRIAN VI. (Adrian Dedel, not Boyens, probably not Rodenburgh, 1459-1523), pope from 1522 to 1523, was born at Utrecht in March 1459, and studied under the Brethren of the Common Life either at Zwolle or Deventer. At Louvain he pursued philosophy, theology and canon law, becoming a doctor of theology (1491), dean of St Peter's and vice-chancellor of the university. In 1507 he was appointed tutor to the seven-year old Charles V. He was sent to Spain in 1515 on a very important diplomatic errand; Charles secured his succession to the see of Tortosa, and on the 14th of November 1516 commissioned him inquisitor-general of Aragon. During the minority of Charles, Adrian was associated with Cardinal Jimenes in governing Spain. After the death of the latter Adrian was appointed, on the 14th of March 1518, general of the reunited inquisitions of Castile and Aragon, in which capacity he acted till his departure from Tarragona for Rome on the 4th of August 1522: he was, however, too weak and confiding to cope with abuses which Jimenes had been able in some degree to check. When Charles left for the Netherlands in 1520 he made Adrian regent of Spain: as such he had to cope with a very serious revolt. In 1517 Leo X. had created him cardinal priest SS. Ioannis et Pauli; on the 9th of January 1522 he was almost unanimously elected pope. Crowned in St Peter's on the 31st of August at the age of sixty-three, he entered upon the lonely path of the reformer. His programme was to attack notorious abuses one by one; but in his attempt to improve the system of granting indulgences he was hampered by his cardinals; and reducing the number of matrimonial dispensations was impossible, for the income had been farmed out for years in advance by Leo X. The Italians saw in him a pedantic foreign professor, blind to the beauty of classical antiquity, penuriously docking the stipends of great artists. As a peacemaker among Christian princes, whom he hoped to unite in a protective war against the Turk, he was a failure: in August 1523 he was forced openly to ally himself with the Empire, England, Venice, &c., against France; meanwhile in 1522 the sultan Suleiman I. had conquered Rhodes. In dealing with the early stages of the Protestant revolt in Germany Adrian did not fully recognize the gravity of the situation. At the diet which opened in December 1522 at Nuremberg he was represented by Chieregati, whose instructions contain the frank admission that the whole disorder of the church had perchance proceeded from the Curia itself, and that there the reform should begin. However, the former professor and inquisitor-general was stoutly opposed to doctrinal changes, and demanded that Luther be punished for heresy. The statement in one of his works that the pope could err in matters of faith (``haeresim per suam determinationem aut Decretalem assurondo'') has attracted attention; but as it is a private opinion, not an ex cathedra pronouncement, it is held not to prejudice the dogma of papal infallibility. On the 14th of September 1523 he died, after a pontificate too short to be effective.
Most of Adrian VI's official papers disappeared soon after his death. He published Quaestiones in quartum sententiarum praesertim circa sacrementa (Paris, 1512, 1516, 1518, 1537; Rome, 1522), and Quaestiones quodlibeticae XII. (1st ed., Louvain, 1515). See L. Pastor, in Geschichte der Papste, vol. iv. pt. ii.; Adrian VI und Klemens VII. (Freiburg, 1907); also Wetzer and Welte, Kirchenlexikon, 2nd ed., and Herzog-Hauck, Realencyklopadie, 3rd ed., under ``Hadrian VI.''; H. Hurter, Nomenclator literarius recentioris theologiae catholicae, tom. iv. (Innsbruck. 1899), 1027; The Cambridge Modern History, vol. ii. (1904), 19-21; H. C. Lea, A History of the Inquisition of Spain, vol. i. (1906); Janus, The Pope and the Council, 2nd ed. (London, 1869), 376. Biographies—A. Lepitre, Adrien VI. (Paris, 1880); C. A. C. von Hofler, Papst Adrian VI. (Vienna, 1880); L. Casartelli, ``The Dutch Pope,'' in Miscellaneous Essays (London, 1906). (W. W. R.*)
ADRIAN, SAINT, one of the praetorian guards of the emperor Galerius Maximian, who, becoming a convert to Christianity, was martyred at Nicomedia on the 4th of March 303. It is said that while presiding over the torture of a band of Christians he was so amazed at their courage that he publicly confessed his faith. He was imprisoned, and the next day his limbs were struck off on an anvil, and he was then beheaded, dying in his wife's, St Natalia's, arms. St Adrian's festival, with that of his wife, is kept on the 8th of September. He is specially a patron of soldiers, and is much reverenced in Flanders, Germany and the north of France. He is usually represented armed, with an anvil in his hands or at his feet.
ADRIAN, a city and the county-seat of Lenawee county, Michigan, U.S.A., on the S. branch of Raisin river, near the S.E. corner of the state. Pop.(1890) 8736; (1900) 9654, of whom 1186 were foreign-born: (1910 census) 10,763. It is served by five branches of the Lake Shore railway system, and by the Wabash, the Toledo and Western, and the Toledo, Detroit and Ironton railways. Adrian is the seat of Adrian College (1859; co-educational), controlled by the Wesleyan Methodist Church in 1859-1867 and since 1867 by the Methodist Protestant Church, and having departments of literature, theology, music, fine arts, commerce and pedagogy, and a preparatory school; and of St Joseph's Academy (Roman Catholic) for girls; and 1 m. north of the city is the State Industrial Home for Girls (1879), for the reformation of juvenile offenders between the ages of ten and seventeen. Adrian has a public library. The city is situated in a rich farming region; is an important shipping point for livestock, grain and other farm products; and is especially known as a centre for the manufacture of wire-fences. Among the other manufactories are flouring and grist mills, planing mills, foundries, and factories for making agricultural implements, United States mail boxes, furniture, pianos, organs, automobiles, toys and electrical supplies. The value of the city's factory products increased from $2,124,923 in 1900 to $4,897,426 in 1904, or 130.5%; of the total value in 1904, $2,849,648 was the value of wire-work. The place was laid out as a town in 1828, and according to tradition was named in honour of the Roman emperor Hadrian. It was incorporated as a village in 1836, was made the county-seat in 1838 and was chartered as a city in 1853.