among those creatures which belong to the same great group. We find that Distinctions in the group "four-footed animals" smaller groups. contains some which suckle their young, and others which do not. Among the former, a grouping according to the possession of claws or of hoofs is early learnt. Frequently we find that animals which have hoofs also possess horns. So again we learn to distinguish between birds of different colours, and with varying forms of beak and wing; and we get a practical appreciation-though it may be a very hazy one-of what constitutes the same kind of animal in nature.

We read in books of travel or of natural history about animals with different names,

and contrasting in appearance Differences of with those we see about us. In foreign animals. menageries some of these are brought in captivity to astonish and interest us, and while we perceive resemblances between some of them and those which are more familiar to us, we find that there are others very distinct from any that live in our neighbourhood. And as we learn the countries or districts from which the strangers are brought, we have it impressed upon us that animals are not similarly distributed over the surface of the globe; and that while man himself, the highest animal, is different in nature and appearance according to the part of the world he comes from, there are much more surprising changes in the forms of animals to be met with in our travels. We hear of a continent like Australia, in which there are no native cows or cats, and where some animals having four legs sit upright upon two of them, supported by a long and strong tail. We are told of the existence of birds taller than ourselves, of butterflies and birds of more gorgeous colours than any we are familiar with. Parrots, monkeys, whales, rattlesnakes, turtles, alligators-such are some of the most diverse groups of whose existence we are informed through the skins of captured animals, by seeing the creatures themselves in captivity, and by the descriptions of naturalists and travellers.

HISTORY OF MODERN TIMES

XXVII.

THE EMPEROR CHARLES V.'s SUCCESSORS AND THE THIRTY YEARS' WAR.

THE second half of the sixteenth century, a time of warfare and strife in western Europe Germany under generally, was a period of exthe successors of ceptional prosperity for the Charles V.: German empire. Ferdinand I., Ferdinand I., the brother and successor of 1556-1564. Charles V. in Germany, was a mild and judicious ruler, anxious to mete out equal justice to all his subjects; and during his reign Protestantism spread exceedingly; so that even in the hereditary

3

dominions of Austria the number of adherents of the Reformed Church greatly increased. The commercial prosperity of the land also advanced rapidly. The great cities, such as Nuremberg, Augsburg, Frankfort-on-the-Main, and the trading communities generally, advanced in wealth and importance. The successor of Ferdinand, his son Maximilian II., a just and far-seeing prince, pursued a policy of complete toleration with regard to his Protestant subjects; so careful, indeed, was he of their privileges, that he incurred the hatred and malevolence of bigots and zealots, who declared that he himself was a concealed Protestant. Under these favourable auspices, the Reformation gained many followers in Hungary, Siebenbürgen, Steyermark, and Carinthia. In Bohemia also, the country where a century and a half before the followers of Huss, the Utraquists and Calixtines, had contended for the administration of the cup to the laity, the reformed doctrines also took deep root, and spread widely throughout the land. Maximilian gave complete freedom of conscience to all his Prosperity and subjects; and Protestant churches were built throughout his dominions. Prosperous and strong, the empire was not only able under his rule to put a speedy end to the internal quarrels among the princes, but also to maintain itself against the Turks, who, after the death of Solyman the Magnificent, were long unable to renew their attacks. the fair prospects of the Reformation were clouded, and its development was checked, and its influence weakened, by quarrels among the Protestants themselves.

progress.

But

Melanchthon, always anxious to promote peace, had softened various doctrines of the Lutheran faith, in the hope of including the various branches of the Protestant Church in a general union. The result was a division of the Lutherans into two sections:

the orthodox party, who strictly Religious followed Luther, and whose

discussion.

tower of strength was the university of Jena; and the Philipists or Crypto-Calvinists, the followers of Melanchthon, who maintained their position at Wittenberg, the birthplace of the Reformation. After Melanchthon's death, when this great peacemaker's voice was withdrawn, the strife between the sects raged fiercely. The Protestant house was thoroughly divided against itself; and the frank fearless spirit of the Reformation was lost in the jangling strife of angry theologians. Political jealousies among the Protestant princes, the revival of the old quarrel between the Albertine and Ernestine lines in Saxony, and the envy with which the Saxon elector Augustus looked on the increasing influence of the Count Palatine Frederick, who had been converted to Protestantism, embittered the division between the strict Lutherans and the Adiaphorists, who looked upon many ceremonies and outward forms as non-essential. The Lutherans also, while they quarrelled with the Philipists, utterly repudiated all association with the Calvinists. While the Protestant Church was thus split up into factions, the Jesuits made

the most of the opportunity afforded by their opponents' disunion. They reInfluence of the presented Protestantism as an Jesuits. accursed thing, the herald of confusion and rebellion; and standing firmly together, under excellent discipline, they brought back many waverers into the Catholic

camp. Maximilian II. was himself Maximilian II., partly inclined to the reformed 1564-1576. faith; but alarmed at the quarrels of the Protestants, he hesitated to fulfil the expectations entertained by the Lutherans that he would openly join their party. Ambitious hopes, moreover, concurred to keep him in the Catholic communion. The death of Don Carlos, the unhappy son of Philip II., opened to Maximilian the tempting prospect of the succession to the crown of Spain; and that a Protestant prince should sit on the Spanish throne he saw was impossible. To the ambition for extended rule which for centuries formed the leading characteristic of the princes of the Hapsburg line, he sacrificed the unity of the

demands on the part of Catholics for the restitution of secularized Church property. Rudolf, occupied with alchymy, astrology, and the management of his stables in Prague, remained unconcerned and indifferent while the storm gathered around him. His provinces revolted, and his brother Matthias, assisted by various members of his house, forced the weak emperor to yield up successively the Austrian duchy Hungary and Moravia. Rudolf granted to Bohemia a charter or Letter of Majesty, giving extended rights of self-government to his The "Letter of Majesty." Bohemian subjects, who were

Bohemia:

nearly all Protestants. But this did not prevent the loss of that kingdom; and at length Rudolf was as powerless as any sluggard king among the Merovingians of old. And now the reaction assumed a bolder front. Gebhard, archbishop of Cologne, was driven from his territories for adopting the Protestant faith; and the Catholic Bavarian Ernest was installed in his stead. The Lutherans foolishly refused

German empire and the prospects of national and religious progress. He adopted the policy of Charles V., who always subordinated the interests of the empire to the increase of his own hereditary power.

1576-1612.

Under the successor of Maximilian, the weak and slothful Rudolf II., the reaction against the Reformation attained far Rudolf II., wider proportions. The Jesuits were more active than ever in fanning the flame of religious strife. They gained a great point when they contrived to unite against German Protestantism the two branches of the Hapsburg family, long at enmity with each other. They had two useful disciples and tools in the Archduke Ferdinand of Steyermark, a grandson of Ferdinand I., and the Duke Maximilian of Bavaria. Both these princes looked upon Protestantism as a heresy to be rooted out by any and every means. Soon the empire was filled with complaints of arbitrary disregard of the religious peace, and of unjust

Grätz. His intolerance.

assistance to Gebhard, on account of his Calvinistic tendencies; and soon after Bonn, Neuss, and various other Protestant towns, were forced to submit to the Counter-reformation. Donauwörth, an imperial city, was deprived by Maximilian of religious freedom for having interrupted a procession. Ferdinand, the arch- Ferdinand of duke, introduced compulsory uniformity of faith and worship into his territories, burnt the Bibles and pulled down the churches and schoolhouses of Protestant communities, and expelled from the country all who refused to attend mass. Bonn, after the besieged town had submitted to the Bavarians, the chief clergyman of the Reformed Church was bound hand and foot and cast into the Rhine. From Aix-laChapelle the Protestant magistrate and the evangelical clergy were forcibly expelled. Throughout the length and breadth of Germany the Counter-reformation was in full activity. At length the oppressed Protestants found a

At

champion in the Elector Palatine Frederick IV., who, in conjunction with Christian of Anhalt, succeeded in forming various Calvinistic and Lutheran states,

The Elect

and the Pro

Palatine IV. and fifteen imperial cities, into testant Union. a Protestant Union, for the joint defence of religious rights and privileges. This step was met by the formation of the Catholic League by Maximilian of Bavaria, who allied himself with the Catholic bishops of Treves, Mayence, and Cologne, and with those of Salzburg, Ratisbon, Augsburg, etc., in opposition to the confederated Protestants. The death of Henry IV. of France, upon whose aid the Protestant Union reckoned in a projected war, deferred the outbreak of hostilities for some years. It is curious that,

FRENCH GRAMMAR.0

XXI.

5

THE ADJECTIVE (continued).-THEORY. 1. SOME HINTS ON THE USE OF THE DEGREES OF SIGNIFICATION IN ADJECTIVES.

a. When the first of a series of adjectives is compared, the others are likewise compared, be they used as comparatives or superlatives: Julia is taller and handsomer than Mary, and Mary is more contented and happy than

as in the war of the Smalcaldic League the Protestant and Catholic factions had been led by the rival princes of the Saxon house, so now the Union and the League were respectively organized under the leadership of two branches of the house of Wittelsbach.

Of Henry IV. of France and of his death by the hands of the fanatic Ravaillac, we have already spoken (see vol. i. p. 695). His life had been attempted no fewer than nineteen times previously, and most of these attempts had been traced to the agency of the papal and imperial courts. The murderer, we have good evidence for believing, was a mere tool in the hands of the Jesuites, Henry's implacable foes, notwithstanding the many concessions which he made to their order.

=

c. The preposition which introduces the adverbial phrase modifying the adjective compared is de, in French, whatever the corresponding preposition may be in English, the best tailor in London = le meilleur tailleur DE Londres; the best cobbler in the village le meilleur savetier DU (for de le) village; the worst thing in the world la pire chose DU monde; Calypso was taller than her nymphs by a whole head Calypso était plus grande que ses nymphes DE toute la tête. An inversion in the construction would leave the rule unaltered; l'invention du monde la plus heureuse (Voltaire); par le caprice du monde le plus bizarre (Boileau). If we say, there is no better woman in the world, in the world no longer modifies the adjective, and the translation would be il n'y a meilleure femme au monde (or dans le monde); the phrase is elliptical, standing for il n'y a pas au monde de femme qui soit meilleure.

d. As better, worse, and less (likewise best, worst and least) form severally the comparatives and superlatives of both an adjective and adverb, it will prove useful to study the following scheme well :

e. It was stated in last lesson (see vol. i. p. 765) that plus petit, le plus petit may be used instead of moindre, le moindre, for the degrees of signification of petit, but these forms cannot be used indiscriminately. Whereas plus petit and le plus petit refer to volume and extent only, moindre, le moindre refer to volume, extent, quantity, and quality: Comme c'est dans les plus petits vases que l'on enferme les essences les plus exquises, il semble que la nature se plaise à mettre dans les plus petits corps les âmes les plus précieuses (Voltaire). Compare with this the following: Cette colonne est moindre (or plus petite) que l'autre en grosseur (volume); La distance est moindre (or plus petite) que je ne croyais (extent); Ma douleur n'est pas moindre que la vôtre (quantity); il tient un moindre rang que vous (quality). Instead of pire, le pire, pis, le pis, the forms plus mauvais, plus mal, etc., are met with; but this only occurs rarely. However, it must be observed that the prevailing custom is-with the exception of être and the phrase pis aller-to employ plus mal to modify verbs that obtain no objects: il a agi plus mal que vous. In old French il a agi pis que tous would not have been reckoned as faulty.

2. PRELIMINARY NOTIONS CONCERNING THE VERB (continued).-Construction of the Interrogative phrase.

a. There are two ways of asking a question in French. The first, and by far the more popular, is formed by the phrase est-ce que (or est-ce qu' before a vowel or mute h), which means is it that, is it indeed a fact that....? [It has lost its original emphasis, and is preferred to any other form by the less educated, because it admits, in spite of appearances, of a simpler construction; after est-ce que the proposition always presenting itself in what is called the natural order: viz., 1, subject or nominative, 2, copula or verb, 3, predicate.] Examples:

Est-ce que le fils reviendra? Will the son return? (Subject, a noun.)

Est-ce qu'il reviendra demain? Will he return tomorrow? (Bubject, a personal pronoun.) Est-ce que le mien reviendra? Will mine return also ? (Subject, a possessive pronoun.)

Est-ce que celui-ci reviendra tout seul? Will this one return quite alone? (Subject, a demonstrative pronoun.)

Est-ce que quelques-uns reviendront de la guerre? Will some (of them) return from the war? (Subject, an indefinite pronoun.)

b. The other way consists in placing the subject, but only in the case of its being a personal pronoun, after the verb, and joining it to the verb by a hyphen reviendra-t-il? will he return? est-il revenu? has he returned? Should the 1st person sing. be a monosyllable, the first form of asking would alone be admissible; it would, for instance, be a fault to say prenisie? do I take? pends-je? do I. hang est-ce que je prends? est-ce que je pends? alone can be used. Usage has, however, sanctioned ai-je ? have I dis-je ? do I say? dois-je ? must I? fais-je? do I make? puis-je? can I? sais-je ? do I know? suis-je ? am I? vais-je? do I go? cois-je? do I see? When the 1st person sing. ends with an e mute, this is changed into a close e by the acute accent being placed over it aimé-je? do I love? If this were omitted, there would appear in aime-je two successive mute syllables, as e in je becomes mute when that pronoun is carried after the verb: aim'-j' or cherch'-j' (do I seek ?) would present a very harsh sound, which is avoided in aimé-j', cherché-j'. The student's ear will soon guide him to avoid even cherché-j' and substitute estce que je cherche for it. The simpler interrogative construction would likewise be avoided in the 1st person when the last syllable is nasal one does not say réponds-je ?-do I answer? but est-ce que je réponds? In poetry est-ce que, owing to its clumsiness, is avoided as much as possible.

c. When the subject is a noun, or a possessive, demonstrative, or indefinite pronoun, the form est-ce que not being desired, the noun is placed before the verb, and a personal pronoun, referring back to the subject, is placed after the verb and joined to it by a hyphen. Examples:

La fille reviendra-t-elle? will the daughter return?
La mienne reviendra-t-elle? will mine return?
Celle-ci reviendra-t-elle? will this one return?
Quelques-unes reviendront-elles? will some (of them)

return.

*.* The use and origin of the euphonic t have been already explained (see vol. i., page 75 a).

un effet

effect

bills

PERFECT DEFINITE.
je finis
tu finis

il finIT
nou's finÎMES
vous finÎTES
ils finIRENT

I finished, etc.

I shall finish,

etc.

FUTURE ABSOLUTE. je finIRAI

tu finIRAS

il finIRA

nous finIRONS vous finIREZ ils finIRONT

(3) The personal pronouns used as direct objects (accusatives) to a verb are me, me; te, thee; le, him or it; la, her or it; nous, us; vous, you; les, them for both genders. They are all placed before the verb, whether the proposition is affirmative, negative, or interrogative je LE finis-I finish it; nous ne LES finissons pas we do not finish them; LES aplatissez-vous do you flatten them? When the verb before which me, te, le, and la are to be placed begins with a vowel or h mute, these pronouns suffer elision: je l'aplatis = I flatten it; il m'aime he loves me, etc.

(4) Verbs conjugated like Finir: bannir, to banish brandir, to brandish: éblouir, to dazzle franchir, to cross: gémir, to groan : grossir, to enlarge: guérir, to cure: périr, to perish punir, to punish: réussir, to succeed: saisir, to seize: ternir, to tarnish: trahir, to betray: unir, to unite.

EXERCISE XXXIIL

1. She will finish; she finished; she was finishing; do we finish? 2. I punish you; you will punish me; thou wast punishing them ; didst (hast) thou punish(ed) him? 3. He seizes a weapon and crosses the trench; does he seize a weapon and cross (does he cross) the trench? 4. You dazzle me with your coat of arms and (your) motto (devise), 5. The light dazzles them; does the light dazzle them? 6. Literature and knowledge will perish; will literature and knowledge perish? 7. Our descendants will groan; why (pourquoi) will they groan? 8. His two nephews have perished in (à la) China. 9. My telescope enlarges objects very much (beaucoup les objets); does your telescope enlarge objects very much? 10. You tarnish my spectacles; you do not tarnish them; do you tarnish them? 11. They groan in (dans les) fetters. 12. He was brandishing his sword ; you were brandishing them. 13. They seized him on (a) the eve of the holidays. 14. Frankness does not banish good-breeding (le savoirvivre). 15. Does Prospero punish Caliban ? was he punishing him? 16. My poor boy, the eldest daughter will have dazzled thee by her knowledge, and the youngest one by her charms (ses charmes). 17. They will not succeed in preserving their (à préserver leurs) immunities. 18. Pomp and dignities have succeeded in (à requires the infinitive) curing him. 19. His younger brother betrayed his country (sa patrie) and perished on the scaffold (sur l'échafaud). 20. Do I unite? was I uniting? shall I unite? did I unite (have I united)?