« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »
error. This seems the most correct definition, but the word is used loosely. Its general signification, viz. a specious proposition, is perhaps nearest the mark. Truly considered, most errors are sophisms, for errors are not direct contradictions to the truth, but simply the leaving out of view one or more elements of the truth, and seizing on only one or two elements, and declaring them to constitute the whole truth. Victor Cousin defines error to be 'One element of thought considered exclusively, and taken for the complete thought itself. Error is nothing but an incomplete truth converted into an absolute truth." (Introduction à l'Hist. de Philosophie, Leçon 7.) Spinoza had before defined 'falsity to be that privation of truth which arises from inadequate ideas.' (Ethica, b. ii., prop. xxxv.) A selection of some of the celebrated sophisms of antient philosophers will best illustrate the meaning of the definition. The lying' sophism was this: if, when you speak the truth, you say you lie, you lie; but you say you lie, when you speak the truth, therefore in speaking the truth you lie. The 'occult' sophism: Do you know your father? Yes. Do you know this man who is veiled? No. Then you do not know your father, for it is your father who is veiled. The 'sorites:' Is one grain a heap? No. Two grains? No. Three grains? No. Go on adding one by one, and if one grain be not a heap, it will be impossible to say what number of grains make a heap. (Enfield, Hist of Philos., i., p. 200.) In all of these we see that important omission, or confusion of ideas or names, constitutes the apparent contradiction. In the common example of-Bread being better than paradise; because bread is better than nothing, and nothing is better than paradise -the confusion arises from both the 'nothings' being used substantively; whereas it is only the first that is so used; the second is affirmative, and expresses there is nothing better.' A sophism is therefore the use of some word in a different sense in the premises from that in the conclusion, and this is the definition of Aristotle (Top., viii. 11): When the discourse is a demonstration of anything, if it contains anything which has no relation to the conclusion, there will be no syllogism; and if there appears to be one, it will be a sophism, and not a demonstration.'
This confusion of words and ideas, though carried to a ridiculous excess in the above examples, is the origin of all errors and sophisms; but though errors and sophisms are logically constituted alike, yet the instinctive sense of mankind marks the difference between incomplete views (error) and wilful perversion (sophism). In all cases a sophism is supposed to be recognised as such by the sophist. It is an endeavour on his part to make the worse appear the better reason.' It is the consciousness then of the sophist which distinguishes and renders odious his error as a sophism.
SOPHIST (Zopiorns). It is well known,' says Dr. Wiggers, that the word coptorns at first had an honourable meaning, and was synonymous with oopós, a sage, a scholar in its widest sense, for even artists were comprehended in it. Protagoras was the first who adopted the name of ooporns, to distinguish more decidedly one who makes others wise, especially one who taught eloquence, the art of governing, politics, or, in short, any kind of practical knowledge. From that time the word sophist acquired that odious meaning which it retains at the present day. Afterwards, in the time of the Roman emperors, the name of sophist again became an honourable appellation, and was applied to the rhetoricians.' (Life of Socrates, p. xiii., trans.)
The race of Sophists, whose enmity to Socrates, their great opponent, has perhaps been the principal cause of their celebrity, was not without influence on the philosophy and literature of Greece. They were a class of men who went about Greece discoursing and debating, and sometimes educating the youthful sons of rich and noble families. The cause of their success lay in the very nature and habits of the Greek people, who were so much addicted to talk and so little to study-who were so passionately fond of and so easily led by rhetoric. And the easy triumph which a fluent talker can always attain by a rapid and artful confusion of words and ideas, must also have operated in their favour. The period at which the Sophists flourished was one of obsolete creeds-one lifeless from the want of some vivifying faith. Religion was attacked by open scepticism; the whole sect of the Eleatæ, with the exception of Empedocles, appear to have handled the history of the gods with arbitrary and allegoris ng boldness. Even the pious Pythagorean adopted the old religion merely in a peculiar sense of his own; Heraclitus argued against its probability; AnaxaP. C., No. 1391.
goras understood it allegorically; and lastly, Hippo was regarded as an open and avowed atheist. Euripides, Protagoras, Diogenes, Prodicus, and Critias, all denied the existence of the gods. (Ritter, Geschichte der Philosophie, vol. .) Everything human and divine had lost its earnest na ture, and came to be regarded as an art-an exercise of ingenuity. The art of the Sophists was oratory. Assuming that there was nothing right in its nature, but only by position (rò dikalov Kai rò aioxpòv où þúσεi, áλλà vóμy. Plato, Gorg., p. 482), it was their boast that they could make the worse appear the better cause. (Aristotle, Rhet., ii. 24.) Their doctrines closely resemble those of the Sceptics, since they equally denied the possibility of truth, and even interdicted inquiry into it; but the distinction between these sects consists in the Sophists' not masking their arrogance under doubt, but boldly and distinctly averring that there was no truth at all, and seeking to communicate this wisdom to others, to save them the trouble of investigation.
The doctrine of Protagoras tends to deny the possibility of anything objective being represented by thought, and by making human thought the standard of all truth (rávτwv Xonμáтwv μéтρov äveрonos, Plato, Craty., 385), and affirming that each manner of viewing things has its contrary, so that there is as mucn truth on one side as on the other, it is deduced as a consequence that the end of philosophy is persuasion; and oratory being the art of persuasion, it was to that which they directed their greatest attention. (Plato, Thetetus.) Ritter however observes that Plato, it is certain, attributed much to Protagoras that did not actually belong to him.' (Geschichte der Phil., vol. i.)
But Protagoras, however sophistical his doctrines, appears to have been in earnest, and to have deduced them rigorously from his premises. Among his followers, as always happens, this earnestness was wanting, and accordingly we find Gorgias (as sketched by Plato) without a single claim to respect; and Euthydemus a despicable babbler. With these latter men it was truly sophistryquackery; and answered their purposes, for they amassed considerable wealth thereby. (Ritter, vol. i.)
Gorgias wrote a work on nature, or non-being, fragments of which are preserved in Aristotle and Sextus Empiricus, in which he endeavoured to prove that nothing is; that if anything is, it cannot be an object of knowledge; and finally, that if even anything is, and can be known, it cannot be imparted to others. (Ritter; Tennemann, Manuel, p. 123.) He reasons thus: if anything is, it must be either being or non-being, or even at one and the same time both being and non-being. (Sextus Emp. adv. Math., vii. 66.) All these cases are impossible; for a non-being cannot be, because it is the opposite of being; and therefore, if the latter is, the former cannot be; because if it were, it must be at the same time being and non-being. Aristotle, according to Ritter, gives the reasoning and proofs differently, but his text is so corrupt as to prevent any confidence being placed in it. Nor is being possible: for it cannot be either produced or unproduced, neither one, nor many, nor yet both at once. Nor can it be at once being and non-being; for if there is both that which is and that which is not, then must they, in reference to being, be one and the same. But if they are the same, then that which is is also that which is not; the non-being however is not, and consequently the being cannot be. (Sext. Emp. adv. Muth., vii. 75; Ritter.) As consequences of this arid sophistry, he deduces that if we suppose being to be an object of thought, it must be similar to being; or in other words, that it must be being itself, for otherwise being cannot be an object of thought. Now if thought is being, then every thought must be true, and non-being is inconceivable. In vain do we object that only those thoughts are true which are confirmed by perception; for as the object of sight is true, though it be not heard, so a thought may be true, though it cannot be perceived. (Sextus Emp., ib., 77, et seq.) A notable instance of the sophistical argument which assumes an analogy as a proof, taking care the analogy itself shall be false.
It is curious to contemplate a highly intellectual nation delighting in such barren quibbles as these, and the fact of the prevalence of sophistry indicates an important phasis in Greek history. We have a parallel in our schoolmen of the middle ages, who were quite as sophistical and as trifling. But it is also important to notice the influence which such a sect had on philosophy and literature. It was the prac tical demonstration of the incompetence of all previous phiVOL. XXII-2 L
losophy, by carrying out their principles to the ludicrous from Anaea in Caria (whence the Greek biographer calls it extreme (as Hume's doctrines were but the consummation the war of Anaea), and endeavoured to induce the Samians of all the materialism of Hobbes and Locke), and thereby to revolt against Athens. In this campaign Sophocles was necessitating an entire reformation and rebuiiding of prin- the colleague of Pericles. No military feat is recorded of ciples. In the person of Socrates, philosophy again recom- him, and it is only stated that he availed himself of the uppormenced its attempts to solve its own mysteries. We must tunity to enrich himself. In Samos he is said to have made also add what Ritter says with regard to the effects on lan- the acquaintance of Herodotus, for whom he wrote a poem. guage. It is not to be denied, he thinks, that the Sophists (Plut., An Se sit gerenda resp., 3.) Whether Sophocles, contriouted greatly to the perfection of prose ; which was in after this expedition, which ended in 439 B.C., took any itself a great benefit to philosophy. The Sophists applied further part in public affairs, is not certain. His life seems themselves to manifold arts of persuasion, and in their to have passed in the glorious career of a successful dramaattacks upon each other, labouring to expose and lay bare tist, and has left no traces in history; we only hear that the delusions of appearance, they acquired great nicety in several kings invited him to their courts, but that he prethe distinction of terms. Prodicus was celebrated for his ferred staying at home. He was married twice. His first skill in the distinctions of synonymous terms (as we learn wife was Nicostrate of Athens, by whom he had a son, from Plato, who ridicules him for it (Protag., p. 337; Crat., lophon; his second wife was Theoris of Sicyon, by whom p. 384); but Prodicus is_honourably mentioned by him he had a son called Ariston. Ariston again had a son (Euthyd., p. 277-305). The sophisms turning upon the called Sophocles, who is generally distinguished from his words' 10 learn,''to understand,' to know,' also contributed grandfather by the epithet the Younger. Sophocles was to the more accurate knowledge of these terms. The very very partial to this grandson, and it was believed that circumstance that their rules were intended to be subser- during his lifetime he intended to transfer to him a corvient to the ends of fallacy and deception, must have afforded siderable part of his property. Iophon, fearing lest his ina stronger motive to the philosophical spirit to bring under heritance should be diminished, brought a charge of mental investigation the true forms of thought and expression incapacity against his father before the members of his phrawhich had been neglected by earlier philosophers; and tria, and proposed ibat he should not be allowed to have the accordingly we find that they occupied much of the atten- control over his property. Sophocles is said to have made tion of Socrates. (See Ritter’s Remarks on the Sophists, no reply to this charge, but with a strong conviction of the Geschichte der Philosophie, vol. i.)
excellence of the Edipus in Colonus,' which he had just SOʻPHOCLES, son of Sophilus, was born in the Attic composed, to have only read to his phratores, who had to demus or village of Colonus, and, according to the most examine him, the parodos of this play. The consequence authentic accounts, in the year B.C. 495, fifteen years before was that he was allowed to retain the management of his the battle of Salamis, when Æschylus was thirty years old. property. He appears to have received as good an education as could Sophocles died in the year 406 B.C., at the very advanced be had at the time. In music he was instructed by Lam- i age of ninety. The accounts of the cause of his death are prus, and in this art, as well as in gymnastic exercises, he not consistent. Some state that he was choked by a grape, gained laurels even when a youth. At the age of fifteen, which stuck in his throat; others, that in the loud reading when the Greeks had defeated the Persians in the battle of of the Antigone' he exerted himself so much, that at last his Salamis (480 B.C.), Sophocles, on account of his beauty, was voice failed him and he expired; and others again, that he selected by those who had the management of the solemni- died of joy at the announcement of a victory gained by one ties which followed the victory, as leader of the chorus which of his dramas. He was buried in the tomb of his fathers danced around the trophies in Salamis and sang the hymn near Decelea. of victory. (Athen., i., p. 20.) The anonymous Greek As regards the private life of Sophocles we know nothing, biographer of Sophocles states that Æschylus was his master except ihat he was addicted to sexual pleasures (Athen., in tragedy, but such a relation between the two poets is xii., p. 510); but the anecdotes in Athenæus (xiii., p. 603, improbable, and is contradicted by a passage in Athenæus &c.) seem to belong to that sort of scandal from which to (i., p. 22), where Sophou les says of Æschylus, that he fol- great man can escape. lowed the rules of his art without knowing them. It is a Sophocles_ is said to have written 130 dramas, but Aris. favourite practice with antient historians and grammarians tophanes of Byzantium declared seventeen of them spurious, to describe the relation of two persons who lived at the same which would leave 113 genuine dramas, which number intime and practised the same art, as that of master and cludes his satyric dramas. At the age of forty-five he had pupil, when there is no evidence of such fact, except that written 32 dramas, so that more than two-thirds of his ihe one was younger than the other. The first time that works were composed during the latter half of his life. The Sophocles produced a tragedy on the Attic stage was in the Edipus in Colonus,' his last production, was written a year B.c. 468, and the piece was probably the ‘Triptolemus,' short time before his death, but was not brought out till which is now los: (Euseb., Chron., p. 167; Plin., Hist. Nat., the year B.c. 401. With these plays he disputed the prize xviii. 12.) Æschylus was at this time the great dramatist with the greatest dramatists of the day, Aschylus, Ėure of the Attic stage, but his young rival, who ventured to con- pides, Chærilus, Aristias, lophon, and others; and gaine:) tend with him for the prize, won the victory, which was twenty times the first prize, several times the second, but attended by the following memorable circumstance. On never the third. Of all his plays there only remain sere: ; the day when the drama was acted, Cimon had just returned of others we only possess some fragments, and sometimes from the island of Scyrus, bringing with him the remains of no more than the titles. The earliest of the extant pieces is Theseus, who was believed to have been murdered and the · Antigone,' and the probable chronological order in buried in that island. When Cimon, with his nine col- which the others followed is this: * Electra," • Trachiniæ,' leagues, entered the theatre to offer the customary liba-King Edipus,' • Ajax,' 'Philoctetes' (first acted in B.c. tions to Dionysus, he was detained by the chief archon | 409), and the (Edipus in Colonus,' which was first acted in Aphepsion, whose duty it was to preside at the dramatic per- B.C. 401. formances and to nominate the judges. Aphepsion ap. The antients themselves regarded Sophocles as the most pointed no judges, but called upon Cimon and his colleagues perfect of all dramatic poets; thev called him the tragic to determine the prize. Cimon, recognising the great genius Homer, and the Attic bee, to express the unrivalled beauty that the tragedy displayed, gave the prize to Sophocles. and sweetness of his productions. Their admiration was well(Plut., Cim., 8.)
founded, for the tragedies of Sophocles, as far as we can From this time twenty-eight years of his life passed with judge, excel everything of the kind that appeared in Greece out any memorable event being recorded, though Sophocles either before or after him. Sophocles abandoned the pomp, must have been extremely active in the exercise of his art, grandiloquence, and harshness of Æschylus, for which he for during this period he is said to have composed thirty-one substituted the noble simplicity and tenderness which the dramas, not including the • Triptolemus.” (Aristoph. Byz., antients admired: bis heroes are not beings of a superior Argum. ad Antig.)
nature, his men are not the sport of an inscrutable destiny: In the year B.c. 440 he brought out the Antigone,' his the world which he represents is peopled by men, agitated thirty-second drama; and he gained the prize. The Athe- indeed by sufferings and passions, but the good and the nians, who perceived in this play the wisdom of a statesman beautiful do not appear under the iron rule of destiny, and general, appointed him one of the commanders to conduct all his characters are men in the truest sense of the word. the war against the aristocrats of Samos, who, after being beings with whom we can sympathise. Hence his dramas expelled from the island by the Athenians, had returned are of an ethical and practical character, while those of
Æschylus are more calculated to inspire religious awe. I leading idea of each play, as far as this can be made out Sophocles knew the laws of his art and what it required, as from the fragments. appears from an expression ascribed to him by Plutarch The translations of Sophocles are very numerous. The (De Prof. Virt., Sent. 7). During his whole career he best German is that by Solger, the last edition of which appears to have been striving to realize the idea which he appeared at Berlin, 1824, 2 vols. 8vo. There are numerous had formed of tragedy. In the three earliest of the extant English translations: in prose, by George Adams, London, plays there appear occasionally traces of an artificial style 1729, 2 vols., and others subsequently; in verse, by Franklin, and studied obscurity, but the remaining four are entirely London, 1758-9, 2 vols. 4to., and 1766 and 1788, 8vo.; by free of this fault. But even the ‘Antigone' is so different Robert Potter, London, 1788; and by Thomas Dale, 1824. from any play of Æschylus in design and execution, that SOPHONISBE. [Numidia.] he must have long before been aware of the necessity of the SOPHORA, a genus of plants of the natural family of changes which he introduced. The more particular changes Leguminosæ, said to be so named from an Arabic name to which we here allude are as follows. Each drama of (Sophera) of one of the species. These are ornamental Sophocles turns upon one great action, the ‘Antigone' shrubs and trees, found in central and tropical Asia, also in perhaps excepted; and one idea, which is the leading idea the warm parts of North America and the equinoctial and of the drama, is perfectly developed in one play; while with subtropical parts of South America. The genus is characterAschylus the three plays of a trilogy are like so many acts ised by having a 5-toothed campanulate calyx; corol papiliof one drama. Although therefore Sophocles may usually onaceous; petals of the keel usually united together at their have ought out three tragedies at once, each of them was apex; stamens 10, distinct; legume moniliform, without complete in itself. The lyric part, or the chorus, in Sopho- joints or wings, and containing several seeds; the leaves cles has no longer that prominent place which it has in are impari-pinnate, usually exstipulate and terminal; ine Æschylus, nor does it take part in the action in the same inflorescence is in racemes or panicles of yellow, wlnie, or degree ; it no longer expresses the feelings supposed to be blue flowers. The species best known in England are S. called forth in the audience; but the tragic development of japonica and S. chinensis, which, being from ihe northern the characters of the drama, or, in other words, the action, latitudes of the countries from which they are named, are is the most prominent part of the drama. The chorus is hardy enough to withstand the climate of England; and it subordinate, and it would seem that Sophocles used it as a has been proposed to engraft the Nepaul S. velutina on the means to let the spectator see what was going on in the S. japonica. Being handsome trees, with both leaves and minds of the actors rather than in that of the spectators. trees differing much from European trees, they are well As the action was thus extended, Sophocles also introduced adapted for standing singly in lawns. They are raised from a third actor, or the tritagonistes, so that now three actors layers, but also from seeds, and uire a little protection might appear upon the stage at once, whereas before his when young. time there had not been more than two at a time, which SO'PHRON, son of Agathocles, a native of Syracuse, rendered the action, as well as the dialogue, monotonous. was born about the year B.C. 420. He is believed to have Lastly Sophocles introduced several improvements in been the inventor of a peculiar kind of poetry called mimes. scene-painting and in other mechanical parts of stage per- [MIMES.! He wrote his works in the vulgar dialect of the formance. At first he is said, like Æschylus, to have Doric Greek as spoken in Sicily, and in a kind of rythmical acted in his own dramas, but as his roice was too weak, he prose. Plato, who had become acquainted with the progave it up.
ductions of Sophron through Dion of Syracuse, valued them Besides his dramas, Sophocles also wrote an elegy, very highly, and is said to have made the Athenians acseveral paeans, and other minor poems, and also a prose quainted with this species of poetry. (Quinctil., i. 10, 17.) work on the chorus, which was directed against Thespis and Besides the few fragments of the mimes of Sophron which Choerilus. Several antient grammarians, such as Didymus, yet remain, we only know the titles of some others of his Horapollon, Aristophanes of Byzantium, Androtion, Praxi- poems, so that we are scarcely able to form an exact idea of phanes, and others, wrote commentaries upon the dramas of ihis species of poetry. The circumstance that Sophron Sophocles.
wrote in a popular dialect full of peculiarities and solecisms, Respecting the life and works of Sophocles, see the Life, was probably the reason why his works were studied by the by an anonymous Greek writer, which is prefixed to several grammarians. Apollodorus of Athens wrote a commentary editions of his works; Suidas, s. v Popoxins; the masterly upon them. treatise of Lessing, Leben des Sophocles,' which has un- The fragments are collected by C. J. Blomfield, in the fortunately been left a fragment by, the author; Ferd. Classical Journal,' vol. iv., p. 380, &c., to which a suppleSchultz, De Vita Sophoclis Puetæ,' Bonn, 1836, 8vo.; ment and some corrections were added by the same scholar Adolph Schöll, “Sophocles, sein Wirken und Leben,' Frank in the Museum Criticum,' No. VII., p. 640, &c. Compare furt, 8vo.; Müller, Hist. of the Lit. of Antient Greece,' | Grysar, ' De Sophrone Mimographo,' Coloniæ, 1838. i., p. 337-356; A. W. v. Schlegel, •Lectures on Dramatic SOPORIFICS. (ANODYNES; Narcotics.] Literature,' vol. i., lect. 4.
SOPRA'NO (Italian), the highest of the various voices; The works of Sophocles were first printed by Aldus, the Treble. (Voice.] Venice, 1502, 8vo. The best of the subsequent editions are SORA. [LAVORO, TERRA D1.] those of H. Stephens, Paris, 1568, 4to., with valuable notes, SORA'NUS (£wpavós), an eminent antient physician, and that of Brunck, Strassburg, 1786, 2 vols. 8vo., with a the son of Menander, was born at Ephesus, probably about Latin translation and notes. In the same year Brunck the end of the first century after Christ, and raised ihe sect published his great edition in 2 vols. 4to., or 4 vols. 8vo. It of the Methodici to its highest degree of reputation. He was reprinted in London, 1823, in 3 vols. 8vo., with some had been brought up at Alexandria, but under the reign additions by Burney. The text of Brunck has served as the of Trajan and Hadrian he came to Rome, where he taught basis for all subsequent editions. The best among them are and practised medicine with great success. (Pseudo-Gal., that of Musgrave, Oxford, 1800, &c., 2 vols. 8vo. ; of F.H. Introduct., cap. 4, p. 184, tom. xiv., ed. Kühn; Suidas.) Bothe, Leipzig, 1806, 2 vols. 8vo., the last edition of which He passed some time also in Aquitania, and very successfully appeared in 1827 and 1828; of Erfurt, Leipzig, 1802, &c., treated the leprous diseases which prevailed there. (Marcell. 7 rols. 8vo.; of Elmsley; 1826, reprinted at Leipzig in 8 Emp., De Medicam., cap. 19, p. 321, ed. H. Steph.) In his vols. 8vo.; of Erfurt and G. Hermann, Leipzig, 1823-25, time the leprosy, which had been brought from the East into 7 vols. 12mo. An edition by G. Hermann including the Italy and Gaul, was making there the greatest ravages; and notes of Erfurdt has been published in parts. The plays the physicians, who were not yet well acquainted with this that were published last are: Antigone' (1830), King disease, were anxious to recommend certain preparations Edipus' (1833), and Philoctetes’ (1839), forming vols. 1, 2, against each of its particular symptoms. Some of those and 6; vols. 3, 4, 5, and 7 having appeared before, at employed by Soranus have been preserved to us by Galen. Leipzig, 1822-1825. The most useful edition of Sophocles (Gal., De Compos. Medicam., sec. Loca, lib. i., cap. 2, 8, p. for students is that by E. Wunder, Gotha and Erfurt, 1831-414 et sq., 493 et sq., tom. xii.) Their object was in a great 1841. The editions of single plays and dissertations upon measure to effect a metasyncrisis, or the re-establishment of them are alm innumerable. The titles and remains of the pores in their natural state. To him we are indebted the lost pieces of Sophocles have been collected by Welcker, for the first observations (Paul. Ægin., De Re Med., lib. in his “Die Griechischen Tragödien,' p. 59, &c. He has iv., cap. 59, p. 73, ed. Ald.) upon the species of worm called classed them according to the legendary cycles to which by the Greeks opakóvrlov, by the Latins Gordius, Filariu, they belong, and also given the probable contents or the or Vena Medinensis; for an account of which see a disser
(which is of little or no authority) is prefixed to several editions of his works, and is also inserted by Fabricius in his Biblioth. Græca, vol. xii., p. 675, ed. Vet, and by Ideler in his collection above mentioned. A work which exists only in Latin, and which bears the title In Artem Medendi Isagoge, is undoubtedly the production of a later writer, as Galen is mentioned in it by name (cap. 13). It is in the collection edited by Torinus, Basil., 1528, fol., and in that published apud Aldi Filios,' Venet., 1547, fol.
SORBONNE, a celebrated College which existed in France for several centuries. Its founder was Robert de Sorbonne, an ecclesiastic of the thirteenth century, born (A.D. 1201) at the village of Sorbon, in the territory of Rethel, now in the department of Ardennes, of poor and obscure parents. His talents and acquirements introduced him to the notice of Louis IX. (St. Louis), king of France, who retained him at his court as his confessor and chaplain, and showed him great favour. In 1251 he was made a canon of Cambray, and, mindful of the difficulties which he had experienced in early life, he formed the plan of an institution for the assistance of poor students His intention was to establish a society of secular priests, for whom a maintenance in common should be provided, and who should devote themselves wholly and gratuitously to the work of instruction in theology. A society on this plan was founded by him with the aid of his friends, all of them ecclesiastics, A.D. 1252 or 1253; and was encouraged by the liberal patronage of the king. Robert de Sorbonne was the first head of the establishment, directeur; and it was not until after eighteen years' oflicial experience that he settled the constitution and regulations of the establishment, which were not in any respect changed until the suppression of the college at the Revolution. Robert established another college, for the study of the humanities and philosophy, that of Calvi, sometimes called the little Sorbonne,' near his principal foundation, to which it seems to have been preparatory. This minor establishment was destroyed in order to erect the church when Richelieu rebuilt the college premises. In A.D. 1258 Robert was made canon of the cathedral at Paris, and died in 1274, bequeathing all his property to the college which he had founded.
The members of the college were all either doctors or bachelors of theology. There has been some difference of opinion as to their number in the first instance. Du Boulay, in his Historia Universitatis Parisiensis (History of the University of Paris), gives it as sixteen; but Ladvocat, himself a professor of the Sorbonne, contends strenuously that the number was larger. The original regulations indicate that the members were more than thirty; but these were not finally settled till the college had been established eighteen years. The members of the college consisted of two classes, socii et hospites,' or fellows and commoners,' and persons of any nation or country were eligible. The socii, if not the hospites, were in holy orders. The hospites were bachelors of the faculty of theology at Paris, and were elected by a majority of the socii, after a triple scrutiny, having previously maintained a thesis called Robertine, after the name of the founder. The hospites were boarded and maintained in the college, and were allowed to study in the library, but they had no voice in the assemblies of its members, and they were obliged to quit it upon taking a doctor's degree. The socii were either bachelors or doctors, were obliged to pass through the same ordeal as the hospites, besides having to deliver gratuitously a course of lectures on philosophy, and then to be elected by the fellows after two additional scrutinies. A bursary of trifling value was granted from the revenue of the college to those fellows whose yearly revenue, whether arising from private property or from an ecclesiastical benefice, was under forty livres of Paris (the livre of Paris was equal to twenty-five sous, or rather more than a shilling): these bursaries were granted for a limited term, ten years, not for life; and ceased immediately upon the bursar acquiring a private income of forty livres a year: after the decree of the Council of Trent, which required a certain income as a title to priests' orders, they sunk into disuse. At the end of seven years the bursars were strictly examined, and those who were found incapable of serving the public usefully as teachers or preachers, or in some other way were deprived of their bursaries. The fellows who were not bursars (socii non bur sales) paid to the college a sum equal to that which, as bursars, they would have received. Every fellow bore the title of doctor or bachelor of the House and Society of the Sor
tation by Justus Weihe, entitled De Filaria Medinenst Gmel. |
for the group, were it not highly expedient to preserve a uniformity of nomenclature throughout the animal kingdom; and he acts upon the rule of naming every family from the typical genus by which it is represented.
bonne; the commoners were doctors or bachelors of the House of the Sorbonne. The whole management of the society, and, so far as appears, its property, were vested in the fellows, among whom there was no gradation of authority; all were equal; there was neither 'Superior' nor Principal;' some distinctions of office and precedence there appear to have been, but no power of one over another; and so strictly was this equality observed, that no regular ecclesiastic could be a fellow, because he was subject to his 'principal' or 'superior; and a fellow entering into any religious order, forfeited his fellowship thereby. The fellowships appear to have been appointments for life. The officers appear to have been elected by the fellows from among themselves; they were the superintendant (proviseur), who was always a man of eminence; the prior, who presided at their assemblies, examinations, &c., and was always chosen from among the bachelor-fellows; the elder (senieur); the professors, the librarian, the conscripteur, the procureurs, &c. There were apartments in the college for thirty-six persons, and latterly thirty-seven. The doctors and bachelors were from the first allowed to receive poor scholars as pupils They taught theology gratuitously, and from 1253 to the suppression of the college there were at least six professors who gave gratuitous instruction in the different branches of theology.
Mr. Swainson enters among these carnivorous mice, as he terms them, by the genus GYMNURA, which bears the closest affinity to Cladobates [TUPAIA], and also bears a strong resemblance to Didelphys. Cuvier, he remarks, was of the same opinion, and adverted to the affinity of Gymnura with the shrews, as seen in its pointed snout and scaly tail, &c., although he omitted to remark that the stiff setæ, or bristles, interspersed among the woolly hairs of the body, point out another and a very important link of connection, namely, to the Hedgehogs, close to which however he admits that Cuvier arranged that interesting genus.
The college was from time to time enriched by legacies and denations. Robert de Sorbonne took great pains in the establishment of a library, which became one of the most valuable in France: in 1289-90, when a catalogue was made, it consisted of above a thousand volumes, worth more than 30,000 livres, or 15007., a large sum in those days, and so far increased in 1292, that it became necessary to make out a new catalogue. The accessions between this year and 1338 amounted in value to 3812 livres, or 1907. All the more valuable books were antiently chained to little desks or stands (tablettes), and were arranged according to their subjects. Antient catalogues of the dates of 1289-90 and 1338 were in existence when Ladvocat wrote (A.D. 1760).
The buildings of the college, which are in the south of Paris, near the palace of the Luxembourg, having become much dilapidated, were rebuilt by Cardinal Richelieu, who demolished the college of Calvi in order to build the church. He had engaged to restore this smaller college, but died before he could effect his purpose, and it was never restored. The church itself, after the suppression of the college, was appropriated to other purposes, but has since been restored to its original use as a place of public worship. The other buildings of the college are occupied by the three faculties of theology, science, and literature of the Académie Universitaire of Paris.
The college of the Sorbonne was one of the four constituent parts of the faculty of theology in the university of Paris; and though the least numerous part, yet from the number of eminent men belonging to it, this college frequently gave name to the whole faculty; and graduates of the university of Paris, though not connected with this college, frequently styled themselves doctors or bachelors of the Sorbonne. The high reputation of the college caused it to be continually appealed to for the judgment of its members on questions of theology or morals. One question referred to their decision, illustrative of the character of the age, was the validity of the gift made by Philippe le Bel, king of France, of the heart of his father (Philippe le Hardi) to one of the churches of the Dominicans; and which heart the monks of St. Denis claimed to have interred in their abbey. It was more to the honour of the doctors of the Sorbonne that the first printing-presses in Paris were established in their house. They supported the faction of the Guises in the religious wars of the sixteenth century.
(Ladvocat, Dictionnaire Historique; Duvernet, Histoire de la Sorbonne; Biographie Universelle; Dulaure, Histoire de Paris.)
SORBUS, the Linnæan name of a genus of plants, comprising the mountain-ash, rowan-tree, and service-tree. It is now made a subgenus of Pyrus. [PYRUS; ROWANTREE.] SORE'CIDÆ, or, more accurately, Soricidæ, Mr. Swainson's name for the family of Shrews or Shrew-mice, genus Sorex of Linnæus.
Mr. Swainson observes, that the Shrew-mice stand at the head of the Sorecida, the second aberrant family of the order Fera, according to his views, and which, he states, corresponds, without any variation, to the INSECTIVORA of Cavier a name which he says that he would have retained
The Sorecida,' says Mr. Swainson, in continuation, and following Cuvier, like the bats, have the grinders furnished with conical points; but they are destitute of wings or lateral membranes, and they possess clavicles: they have no cacum, and they all press the entire sole of the foot on the ground in walking. In their economy they are nocturnal, leading for the most part a subterraneous life, and deriving their principal support from insects: those that are natives of cold countries pass the winter in a lethargic state: their feet are short, and their motions, when on the surface of the earth, slow and feeble.' Mr. Swainson, then, after some remarks tending to show that Cuvier's views indirectly favour the natural analogy which Mr. Swainson holds to exist between the Sorecida, Tarsius, the Glires, and the Vespertilionidæ, each of which, in Mr. Swainson's opinion, truly represents the other in their respective circles, observes, that in the moles there are four large canine teeth, separated from each other, between which are small incisors; an arrangement, he remarks, more in unison with the general dentition of the Quadrumana and the Carnivora.
Mr. Swainson then proceeds to notice the group more particularly, observing, that the genus Gymnura will probably connect the hedgehogs, so well known by their prickly spines, and their remarkable property of rolling themselves up into a ball when disturbed, either with Cladobates, or that the latter may come in between the shrews and the hedgehogs, the former being much the most numerous. These, with but two exceptions, he remarks, one of which is the Sorex Indicus, are peculiar to the European continent. They are remarkable, he observes, for having on each flank, under the ordinary skin, a little band of stiff and close hairs, from which an odoriferous humour can be distilled. They dig holes in the earth, which they seldom quit until the evening, when they search for insects and worms. He then notices the Desmans (Mygale) as being also European animals, and much resembling the shrews, from which they chiefly differ in their teeth. Scalops, in his opinion, seems to represent either these animals, or the moles in the New World. Lastly, he observes, we find in the African CHRYSOCHLORIS a representation of this little group. Macroscelides does not appear to have been known to Mr. Swainson, though the genus was described in the fourth volume of the Zoological Journal,' in 1829; neither does he seem to have been aware of Brandt's description of SOLENODON (1832).
The second division of the family, according to the same author, is composed of mole-like animals, apparently connected to the shrews by the American Scalops, and the African Crysochloris, and includes three genera, the Tenrecs (Centetes, Ill., Centenes, Desm.) [TENREC], TALPA, and CONDILURA. At the end of the volume, the Family Sorecida is made to contain the Shrews, Moles, and Hedgehogs, with the following character:
Muzzle lengthened, pointed; legs short, feeble; feet pentadactylous; lower incisors generally very long, pointing forwards; no lateral membranes; mammæ ventral. The family thus characterized includes the genera Erinaceus, L.; Sorex, L.; Mygale, Geoff.; Scalops, Cuv.; Chrysochloris, Cuv.; Talpa, L.; Centenes, Cuv.; and Condylura, Desm.
The Insectivora of Cuvier consist of the Hedgehogs (Erinaceus); the Tenrecs (Centenes); the Shrews (Sorex and Scalops); the Desmans (Mygale); Chrysochloris; Talpa; and Condilura.
The genus Sorex of Linnæus is placed between Talpa and Erinaceus; and this article will be confined to the true