Chapter II: MODERN CONFESSIONS OF FAITH.--The second great creed-making epoch of (13)

It may be laid down as the definition of criticism in its pure sense, that it should consist in the application, in the most competent form, of the principles of literary composition. Those principles are the general aesthetics upon which taste is founded; they take the character of rules of writing. From the days of Aristotle the existence of such rules has not been doubted, but different orders of mind in various ages have given them diverse application, and upon this diversity the fluctuations of taste are founded. It is now generally admitted that in past ages critics have too often succumbed to the temptation to regulate taste rigidly, and to lay down rules that shall match every case with a formula. Over-legislation has been the bane of official criticism, and originality, especially in works of creative imagination, has been condemned because it did not conform to existing rules. Such instances of want of contemporary appreciation as the reception given to William Blake or Keats, or even Milton, are quoted to prove the futility of criticism. As a matter of fact they do nothing of the kind. They merely prove the immutable principles which underlie all judgment of artistic products to have been misunderstood or imperfectly obeyed during the life-times of those illustrious men. False critics have built domes of glass, as Voltaire put it, between the heavens and themselves, domes which genius has to shatter in pieces before it can make itself comprehended. In critical application formulas are often useful, but they should be held lightly; when the formula becomes the tyrant where it should be the servant of thought, fatal error is imminent. What is required above all else by a critic is knowledge, tempered with good sense, and combined with an exquisite delicacy of taste. He who possesses these qualities may go wrong in certain instances, but his error cannot become radical, and he is always open to correction. It is not his business crudely to pronounce a composition "good" or "bad"; he must be able to show why it is "good" and wherein it is "bad"; he must admire with independence and blame with careful candour. He must above all be assiduous to escape from pompous generalizations, which conceal lack of thought under a flow of words. The finest criticism should take every circumstance of the case into consideration, and hold it necessary, if possible, to know the author as well as the book. A large part of the reason why the criticism of productions of the past is so much more fruitful than mere contemporary reviewing, is that by remoteness from the scene of action the critic is able to make himself familiar with all the elements of age, place and medium which affected the writer at the moment of his composition. In short, knowledge and even taste are not sufficient for perfect criticism without the infusion of a still rarer quality, breadth of sympathy.

Criticism has been one of the latest branches of literature to reach maturity, but from very early times the instinct which induces mankind to review what it has produced led to the composition of imperfect but often extremely valuable bodies of opinion. What makes these early criticisms tantalizing is that the moral or political aspects of literature had not disengaged themselves from the purely intellectual or aesthetic.

To pass to an historical examination of the subject, we find that in antiquity Aristotle was regarded as the father and almost as the founder of literary criticism. Yet before his day, three Greek writers of eminence had examined, in more or less fulness, the principles of composition; these were Plato, Isocrates and Aristophanes. The comedy of _The Frogs_, by the latter, is the earliest specimen we possess of hostile literary criticism, being devoted to ridicule of the plays of Euripides. In the cases of Plato and Isocrates, criticism takes the form mainly of an examination of the rules of rhetoric. We reach, however, much firmer ground when we arrive at Aristotle, whose _Poetics_ and _Rhetoric_ are among the most valuable treatises which antiquity has handed down to us. Of what existed in the literature of his age, extremely rich in some branches, entirely empty in others, Aristotle speaks with extraordinary authority; but Mr G. Saintsbury has justly remarked that as his criticism of poetry was injuriously affected by the non-existence of the novelist, so his criticism of prose was injuriously affected by the omnipresence of the orator. This continues true of all ancient criticism. A work by Aristotle on the problems raised by a study of Homer is lost, and there may have been others of a similar nature; in the two famous treatises which remain we have nothing less important than the foundation on which all subsequent European criticism has been raised. It does not appear that any of the numerous disciples of Aristotle understood his attitude to literature, nor do the later philosophical schools offer much of interest. The Neoplatonists, however, were occupied with analysis of the Beautiful, on which both Proclus and Plotinus expatiated; still more purely literary were some of the treatises of Porphyry. There seems to be no doubt that Alexandria possessed, in the third century, a vivid school of critic-grammarians; the names of Zenodotus, of Crates and of Aristarchus were eminent in this connexion, but of their writings nothing substantial has survived. They were followed by the scholiasts, and they by the mere rhetoricians of the last Greek schools, such as Hermogenes and Aphthonius. In the 2nd century of our era, Dio Chrysostom, Aristides of Smyrna, and Maximus of Tyre were the main representatives of criticism, and they were succeeded by Philostratus and Libanius. The most modern of post-Christian Greek critics, however, is unquestionably Dionysius of Halicarnassus, who leads up to Lucian and Cassius Longinus. The last-mentioned name calls for special notice; in "the lovely and magnificent personality of Longinus" we find the most intelligent judge of literature who wrote between Aristotle and the moderns. His book _On the Sublime_ ([Greek: _Peri hupsous_]), probably written about A.D. 260, and first printed in 1554, is of extreme importance, while his intuitions and the splendour of his style combine to lift Longinus to the highest rank among the critics of the world.

In Roman literature criticism never took a very prominent position. In early days the rhetorical works of Cicero and the famous _Art of Poetry_ of Horace exhaust the category. During the later Augustan period the only literary critic of importance was the elder Seneca. Passing over the valuable allusions to the art of writing in the poets, especially in Juvenal and Martial, we reach, in the Silver Age, Quintilian, the most accomplished of all the Roman critics. His _Institutes of Oratory_ has been described as the fullest and most intelligent application of criticism to literature which the Latin world produced, and one which places the name of Quintilian not far below those of Aristotle and Longinus. He was followed by Aulus Gellius, by Macrobius (whose reputation was great in the middle ages), by Servius (the great commentator on Virgil), and, after a long interval, by Martianus Capella. Latin criticism sank into mere pedantry about rhetoric and grammar. This continued throughout the Dark Ages, until the 13th century, when rhythmical treatises, of which the _Labyrinthus_ of Eberhard (1212?) and the _Ars rhythmica_ of John of Garlandia (John Garland) are the most famous, came into fashion. These writings testified to a growing revival of a taste for poetry.

It is, however, in the masterly technical treatise _De vulgari eloquio_, generally attributed to Dante, the first printed (in Italian) in 1529, that modern poetical criticism takes its first step. The example of this admirable book was not adequately followed; throughout the 14th and 15th centuries, criticism is mainly indirect and accidental. Boccaccio, indeed, is the only figure worthy of mention, between Dante and Erasmus. With the Renaissance came a blossoming of Humanist criticism in Italy, producing such excellent specimens as the _Sylvae_ of Poliziano, the _Poetics_ (1527) of Vida, and the _Poetica_ of Trissino, the best of a whole crop of critical works produced, often by famous names, between 1525 and 1560. These were followed by sounder scholars and acuter theorists: by Scaliger with his epoch-making _Poetices_ (1561); by L. Castelvetro, whose _Poetica_ (1570) started the modern cultivation of the Unities and asserted the value of the Epic; by Tasso with his _Discorsi_ (1587); and by Francesco Patrizzi in his _Poetica_ (1586).

In France, the earliest and for a long time the most important specimen of literary criticism was the _Defense et illustration de la langue francaise_, published in 1549 by Joachim du Bellay. Ronsard, also, wrote frequently and ably on the art of poetry. The theories of the Pleiade were summed up in the _Art poetique_ of Vauquelin de la Fresnaye, which belongs to 1574 (though not printed until 1605).

In England, the earliest literary critic of importance was Thomas Wilson, whose _Art of Rhetoric_ was printed in 1553, and the earliest student of poetry, George Gascoigne, whose _Instruction_ appeared in 1575. Gascoigne is the first writer who deals intelligently with the subject of English prosody. He was followed by Thomas Drant, Harvey, Gosson, Lodge and Sidney, whose controversial pamphlets belong to the period between 1575 and 1580. Among Elizabethan "arts" or "defences" of English poetry are to be mentioned those of William Webbe (1586), George Puttenham (1589), Thomas Campion (1602), and Samuel Daniel (1603). With the tractates of Ben Jonson, several of them lost, the criticism of the Renaissance may be said to close.

A new era began throughout Europe when Malherbe started, about 1600, a taste for the neo-classic or anti-romantic school of poetry, taking up the line which had been foreshadowed by Castelvetro. _Enfin Malherbe vint_, and he was supported in his revolution by Regnier, Vaugelas, Balzac, and finally by Corneille himself, in his famous prefatory discourses. It was Boileau, however, who more than any other man stood out at the close of the 17th century as the law-giver of Parnassus. The rules of the neo-classics were drawn together and arranged in a system by Rene Rapin, whose authoritative treatises mainly appeared between 1668 and 1674. It is in writings of this man, and of the Jesuits, Le Bossu and Bouhours, that the preposterous rigidity of the formal classic criticism is most plainly seen. The influence of these three critics was, however, very great throughout Europe, and we trace it in the writings of Dryden, Addison and Rymer. In the course of the 18th century, when the neoclassic creed was universally accepted, Pope, Blair, Kames, Harris, Goldsmith and Samuel Johnson were its most distinguished exponents in England, while Voltaire, Buffon (to whom we owe the phrase "the style is the man"), Marmontel, La Harpe and Suard were the types of academic opinion in France.

Modern, or more properly Romantic, criticism came in when the neo-classic tradition became bankrupt throughout Europe at the very close of the 18th century. It has been heralded in Germany by the writings of Lessing, and in France by those of Diderot. Of the reconstruction of critical opinion in the 19th century it is impossible to speak here with any fulness, it is contained in the record of the recent literature of each European language. It is noticeable, in England, that the predominant place in it was occupied, in violent contrast with Disraeli's dictum, by those who had obviously _not_ failed in imaginative composition, by Wordsworth, by Shelley, by Keats, by Landor, and pre-eminently by S. T. Coleridge, who was one of the most penetrative, original and imaginative critics who have ever lived. In France, the importance of Sainte-Beuve is not to be ignored or even qualified; after manifold changes of taste, he remains as much a master as he was a precursor. He was followed by Theophile Gautier, Saint-Marc, Girardin, Paul de Saint Victor, and a crowd of others, down to Taine and the latest school of individualistic critics, comparable with Matthew Arnold, Pater, and their followers in England.

See G. Saintsbury, _A History of Criticism_ (3 vols., 1902-1904); J.
E. Spingarn, _A History of Literary Criticism in the Renaissance_ (2nd
ed. 1908); Thery, _Histoire des opinions litteraires_ (1849); J. A.
Symonds, _The Revival of Learning_ (1877); Matthew Arnold, _Essays in
Criticism_, i. (1865), ii. (1868); Bourgoin, _Les Maitres de la
critique au XVII^e siecle_ (1889); Paul Hamelius, _Die Kritik in der
englischen Literatur_ (1897); S. H. Butcher, _The Poetics of
Aristotle_ (1898); H. L. Havell and Andrew Lang, _Longinus on the
Sublime_ (1890). See also the writings of Sainte-Beuve, Matthew
Arnold, F. Brunetiere, Anatole France, Walter Pater, _passim_.
(E. G.)

FOOTNOTE:

[1] It is in this general sense that the subject is considered in
this article. The term is, however, used in more restricted senses,
generally with some word of qualification, e.g. "textual criticism"
or "higher criticism"; see the article TEXTUAL CRITICISM and the
article BIBLE for an outstanding example of both "textual" and
"higher."

CRITIUS and NESIOTES, two Greek sculptors of uncertain school, of the time of the Persian Wars. When Xerxes carried away to Persia the statues of Harmodius and Aristogiton made by Antenor, Critius and Nesiotes were commissioned to replace them. By the help of coins and reliefs, two statues at Naples, wrongly restored as gladiators, have been identified as copies of the tyrannicides of Critius; and to them well apply the words in which Lucian (_Rhetor. praecepta_, 9) describes the works of Critius and Nesiotes, "closely knit and sinewy, and hard and severe in outline." Critius also made a statue of the armed runner Epicharinus.

CRITOLAUS, Greek philosopher, was born at Phaselis in the 2nd century B.C. He lived to the age of eighty-two and died probably before 111 B.C. He studied philosophy under Aristo of Ceos and became one of the leaders of the Peripatetic school by his eminence as an orator, a scholar and a moralist. There has been considerable discussion as to whether he was the immediate successor of Aristo, but the evidence is confused and unprofitable. In general he was a loyal adherent to the Peripatetic succession (cf. Cicero, _De fin._ v. 5 "C. imitari antiquos voluit"), though in some respects he went beyond his predecessors. For example, he held that pleasure is an evil (Gellius, _Noctes Atticae_, ix. 5. 6), and definitely maintained that the soul consists of aether. The end of existence was to him the general perfection of the natural life, including the goods of the soul and the body, and also external goods. Cicero says in the _Tusculans_ that the goods of the soul entirely outweighed for him the other goods ("tantum propendere illam bonorum animi lancem"). Further, he defended against the Stoics the Peripatetic doctrine of the eternity of the world and the indestructibility of the human race. There is no observed change in the natural order of things; mankind re-creates itself in the same manner according to the capacity given by Nature, and the various ills to which it is heir, though fatal to individuals, do not avail to modify the whole. Just as it is absurd to suppose that man is merely earth-born, so the possibility of his ultimate destruction is inconceivable. The world, as the manifestation of eternal order, must itself be immortal. The life of Critolaus is not recorded. One incident alone is preserved. From Cicero (_Acad._ ii. 45) it appears that he was sent with Carneades and Diogenes to Rome in 156-155 B.C. to protest against the fine of 500 talents imposed on Athens in punishment for the sack of Oropus. The three ambassadors lectured on philosophy in Rome with so much success that Cato was alarmed and had them dismissed the city. Gellius describes his arguments as _scita et teretia_.

Consult the article PERIPATETICS, and histories of ancient philosophy,
e.g. Zeller.

CRITTENDEN, JOHN JORDAN (1787-1863), American statesman, was born in Versailles, Kentucky, on the 10th of September 1787. After graduating at the College of William and Mary in 1807, he began the practice of law in his native state. He served for three months, in 1810, as attorney-general of Illinois Territory, but soon returned to Kentucky, and during the War of 1812 he was for a time on the staff of General Isaac Shelby. In 1811-1817 he served in the state House of Representatives, being speaker in 1815-1816, and in 1817-1819 was a United States senator. Settling in Frankfort, he soon took high rank as a criminal lawyer, was in the Kentucky House of Representatives in 1825 and 1829-1832, acting as speaker in the latter period, and from 1827 to 1829 was United States district-attorney. He was removed by President Jackson, to whom he was radically opposed. In 1835, as a Whig, he was again elected to the United States Senate, and was re-elected in 1841, but resigned to enter the cabinet of President W. H. Harrison as attorney-general, continuing after President Tyler's accession and serving from March until September. He was again a member of the United States Senate from 1842 to 1848, and in 1848-1850 was governor of Kentucky. He was an ardent and outspoken supporter of Clay's compromise measures, and in 1850 he entered President Fillmore's cabinet as attorney-general, serving throughout the administration. From 1855 to 1861 he was once more a member of the United States Senate. During these years he was perhaps the foremost champion of Union in the South, and strenuously opposed the Kansas-Nebraska Bill, which he declared prophetically would unite the various elements of opposition in the North, and render the breach between the sections irreparable. Nevertheless he laboured unceasingly in the cause of compromise, gave his strong support to the Bell and Everett ticket in 1860, and in 1860-1861 proposed and vainly contended for the adoption by congress of the compromise measures which bear his name. When war became inevitable he threw himself zealously into the Union cause, and lent his great influence to keep Kentucky in the Union. In 1861-1863 he was a member of the national House of Representatives, where, while advocating the prosecution of the war, he opposed such radical measures as the division of Virginia, the enlistment of slaves and the Conscription Acts. He died at Frankfort, Kentucky, on the 26th of July 1863.

See the _Life of J. J. Crittenden_, by his daughter Mrs Chapman
Coleman (2 vols., Philadelphia, 1871).

His son, GEORGE BIBB CRITTENDEN (1812-1880), soldier, was born in Russellville, Kentucky, on the 20th of March 1812, and graduated at West Point in 1832, but resigned his commission in 1833. He re-entered the army as a captain of mounted rifles in the Mexican War, served with distinction, and was breveted major for bravery at Contreras and Churubusco. After the war he remained in the army, and in 1856 attained the rank of lieutenant-colonel. In June 1861 he resigned, and entered the service of the Confederacy. He was commissioned major-general and given a command in south-east Kentucky and Tennessee, but after the defeat of his forces by General George H. Thomas at Mill Springs (January 9, 1862), he was censured and gave up his command. He served subsequently as a volunteer aide on the staff of Gen. John S. Williams. From 1867 to 1871 he was state librarian of Kentucky. He died at Danville, Kentucky, on the 27th of November 1880.

Another son, THOMAS LEONIDAS CRITTENDEN (1815-1893), soldier, was also born at Russellville, Kentucky. He studied law, and practised with his father, and in 1842 became commonwealth's attorney. He served in the Mexican War as a lieutenant-colonel of Kentucky volunteers, and was an aide on Gen. Zachary Taylor's staff at the battle of Buena Vista. From 1849 to 1853 he was United States consul at Liverpool, England. Like his father, he was a strong Union man, and in September 1861 he was commissioned by President Lincoln a brigadier-general of volunteers. He commanded a division at Shiloh, for gallantry in which battle he was promoted major-general in July 1862. He was in command of a corps in the army of the Ohio under Gen. D. C. Buell, and took part in the battles of Stone River and Chickamauga. Subsequently he served in the Virginia campaign of 1864. He resigned his commission in December 1864, but in July 1866 entered the regular army with the rank of colonel of infantry, receiving the brevet of brigadier-general in 1867, served on the frontier and in several Indian wars, and retired in 1881. He died on the 23rd of October 1893.

CRIVELLI, CARLO, Venetian painter, was born in the earlier part of the 15th century. The only dates that can with certainty be given are 1468 and 1493; these are respectively the earliest and the latest years signed on his pictures--the former on an altar-piece in the church of San Silvestro at Massa near Fermo, and the latter on a picture in the Oggioni collection in Milan. Though born in Venice, Crivelli seems to have worked chiefly in the March of Ancona, and especially in and near Ascoli; there are only two pictures of his proper to a Venetian building, both of these being in the church of San Sebastiano. He is said to have studied under Jacobello del Fiore, who was painting as late at any rate as 1436; at that time Crivelli was probably only a boy. The latter always signed as "Carolus Crivellus Venetus"; from 1490 he added "Miles," having been then knighted ("Cavaliere") by Ferdinand II. of Naples. He painted in tempera only, and is seen to most advantage in subject pictures of moderate size. He introduced agreeable landscape backgrounds; and was particularly partial to giving fruits and flowers (the peach is one of his favourite fruits) as accessories, often in pendent festoons. The National Gallery in London is well supplied with examples of Crivelli; the "Annunciation," and the "Beato Ferretti" (of the same family as Pope Pius IX.) in religious ecstasy, may be specified. Another of his principal pictures is in San Francesco di Matelica; in Berlin is a "Madonna and Saints" (1491); in the Vatican Gallery a "Dead Christ," and in the Brera of Milan the painter's own portrait, with other examples. Crivelli is a painter of marked individuality,--hard in form, crudely definite in contour; stern, forced, energetic, almost grotesque and repellent, in feature and expression, and yet well capable of a prim sort of prettiness; simply vigorous in his effect of detachment and relief, and sometimes admitting into his pictures objects actually raised in surface; distinct and warm in colour, with an effect at once harsh and harmonious. His pictures gain by being seen in half-light, and at some little distance; under favouring conditions they grip the spectator with uncommon power. Few artists seem to have worked with more uniformity of purpose, or more forthright command of his materials, so far as they go. It is surmised that Carlo was of the same family as the painters Donato Crivelli (who was working in 1459, and was also a scholar of Jacobello) and Vittorio Crivelli. Pietro Alamanni was his pupil.

See, along with Crowe and Cavalcaselle, Berenson, _Venetian Painters
of the Renaissance_ (1899); Morelli, _Italian Painters_ (1892-1893);
Rushforth, _Carlo Crivelli_ (1900). (W. M. R.)

CROATIA-SLAVONIA (Serbo-Croatian _Hrvatska i Slavonija_; Hung. _Horvat-Szlavonorszag_; Ger. _Kroatien und Slawonien_), a kingdom of the Hungarian monarchy; bounded on the N. by Carniola, Styria and Hungary proper; E. by Hungary and Servia; S. by Servia, Bosnia and Dalmatia; and W. by the Adriatic Sea, Istria and Carniola. Until 1881 Croatia, in the N.W. of this region, was divided from Slavonia, in the N.E., by a section of the Austrian Military Frontier. This section is now the county of Bjelovar, and forms part of the united kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia. The river Kulpa, which bisects the county of Agram, is usually regarded as the north-eastern limit of the Balkan Peninsula; and thus the greater part of Croatia, lying south of this river, falls within the peninsular boundary, while the remainder, with all Slavonia, belongs to the continental mainland. According to the official survey of 1900, the total area of the country is 16,423 sq. m. The Croatian littoral extends for about 90 m. from Fiume to the Dalmatian frontier. A narrow strait, the Canale della Morlacca (or della Montagna), separates it from Veglia, Arbe, Pago and other Istrian or Dalmatian islands. The city and territories of Fiume, the sole important harbour on this coast, are included in Hungary proper, and controlled by the Budapest government. Westward from Warasdin, and along the borders of Styria, Carniola, Istria, Dalmatia and north-western Bosnia, the frontier is generally mountainous and follows an irregular course. The central and eastern region, situated between the Drave and Danube on the north, and the Save on the south, forms one long wedge, with its point at Semlin.

_Physical Features_.--Croatia-Slavonia is naturally divided into two great sections, the highlands of the west and the lowlands of the east.

The plateau of the Istrian Karst is prolonged in several of the bare and desolate mountain chains between the Save and the Adriatic, notably the Great and Little Kapella (or Kapela), which link together the Karst and the Dinaric Alps, culminating in Biela Lazica (5029 ft.); the Pljecevica or Plicevica Planina (5410 ft.), overlooking the valley of the river Una; and the Velebit Planina, which follows the westward curve of the coast, and rises above the sea in an abrupt wall, unbroken by any considerable bay or inlet. As it skirts the Dalmatian border, this range attains its greatest altitude in the adjacent peaks of Sveto Brdo (5751 ft.), and Vakanski Vrh (5768 ft.). Large tracts of the Croatian highlands are well-nigh waterless, and it is only in the more sheltered hollows that sufficient soil collects for large trees to flourish. In northern Croatia and Slavonia the mountains are far more fertile, being often densely wooded with oaks, beeches and pines. They comprise the Uskoken Gebirge, or Uskoks Mountains, named after the piratical Uskoks (q.v.) of Zengg, who were deported hither after the fall of their stronghold in 1617; the Warasdin Mountains, with the peak of Ivanscica (3478 ft.); the Agram Mountains, culminating in Sljeme or Slema (3396 ft.), and including the beautiful stretches of Alpine pasture known as the Zagorje, or "land beyond the hills"; the Bilo Gebirge, or White Mountains, a low range of chalk, and, farther to the south, several groups of mountains, among which Psunj (3228 ft.), Papuk (3217 ft.) Crni Vrh (2833 ft.), and the Ravna Gora (2808 ft.) are the chief summits. All these ranges, except the Uskoken Gebirge, constitute the central watershed of the kingdom, between the Drave and Save. In the east Slavonian county of Syrmia[1] the Frucka Gora or Vrdnik Mountains rise to a height of 1768 ft. along the southern bank of the Danube, their picturesque vineyards and pine or oak woods contrasting strongly with the plains that surround them.

The lowlands, in the valleys of the Drave, Danube, Save and Kulpa, belong partly to the great Hungarian Plains, or Alfold. Besides the sterile and monotonous steppes, valuable only as pasture, and so sparsely populated that it is possible to travel for many hours without encountering any sign of human life except a primitive artesian well or a shepherd's hut, there are wide expanses of fen-country, regularly flooded in spring and autumn. The marshes which line the Save below Sissek are often impassable except at Brod and Mitrovica, and the river is constantly scooping out fresh channels in the soft soil, only to abandon each in turn. The total area liable to yearly inundation exceeds 200 sq. m. But along the Drave and Danube the plains are sometimes strikingly fertile, and yield an abundance of grain, fruit and wine.

The main rivers of Croatia-Slavonia, the Danube, Drave and Save, are fully described under separate headings. After reaching Croatian territory 13 m. N.W. of Warasdin, the Drave flows along the northern frontier for 155 m., receiving the Bednja and Karasnica on the right, and falling, near Esseg, into the Danube, which serves as the Hungaro-Slavonian boundary for an additional 116 m. The Save enters the country 16 m. W. of Agram, and, after winding for 106 m. S.E. to Jasenovac, constitutes the southern frontier for 253 m., and meets the Danube at Belgrade. It is joined by the Sotla, Krapina, Lonja, Ilova, Pakra and Oljana, which drain the central watershed; but its only large tributaries are the Una, a Bosnian stream, which springs in the Dinaric Alps, and skirts the Croatian border for 40 m. before entering the Save at Jasenovac; and the Kulpa, which follows a tortuous course of 60 m. from its headwaters north of Fiume, to its confluence with the Save at Sissek. The Mreznica, Dobra, Glina and Korana are right-hand tributaries of the Kulpa. In the Croatian Karst the seven streams of the Lika unite and plunge into a rocky chasm near Gospic, and the few small brooks of this region usually vanish underground in a similar manner. Near Fiume, the Recina, Rjeka or Fiumara falls into the Adriatic after a brief course. There is no large lake in Croatia-Slavonia, but the upland pools and waterfalls of Plitvica, near Ogulin, are celebrated for their beauty. After a thaw or heavy rain, the subterranean rivers flood the mountain hollows of the Karst; and a lake thus formed by the river Gajka, near Otocac, has occasionally filled its basin to a depth of 160 ft.

_Minerals_.--The mineral resources of the kingdom, though capable of
further development, are not rich. They are chiefly confined to the
mountains, where iron, coal, copper, lead, zinc, silver and sulphur
are mined in small quantities. Warm mineral springs rise at Krapina,
at Toplice near Warasdin, at Stubica near Agram, and elsewhere.

_Climate_.--The climate of Croatia-Slavonia varies greatly in
different regions. In the Karst it is liable to sudden and violent
changes, and especially to the _bora_, a fierce N.N.E. wind, which
renders navigation perilous among the islands off the coast, and, in
winter, blocks the roads and railway-cuttings with deep snowdrifts.
The sheltered bays near Fiume enjoy an equable climate; but in all
other districts the temperature in mid-winter falls regularly below
zero, and the summer heats are excessive. Earthquakes are common among
the mountains, and the eastern lowlands are exposed to the great winds
and sandstorms which sweep down the Alfold. At Agram, during the years
1896-1900, the mean annual temperature was 52 deg. F., with 34.6 in.
of rain and snow; at Fiume, the figures for the same period were 57
deg. and 71 in.

_Agriculture_.--The agricultural inquiry of 1895 showed that 94.5% of
the country consisted of arable land, gardens, vineyards, meadows,
pastures and forests; but much of this area must be set down as
mountainous and swampy pasture of poor quality. The richest land
occurs in the Zagorje and its neighbourhood, in the hills near
Warasdin and in the northern half of Syrmia. The Karst and the fens
are of least agricultural value. Indian corn heads the list of
cereals, but wheat, oats, rye and barley are also cultivated, besides
hemp, flax, tobacco and large quantities of potatoes. The extensive
vineyards were much injured by _phylloxera_ towards the close of the
19th century. The Slavonian plum orchards furnish dried prunes,
besides a kind of brandy largely exported under the name of
_sliwowitz_ or _shlivovitsa_. Near Fiume the orange, lemon,
pomegranate, fig and olive bear well; mulberries are planted on many
estates for silkworms; and the heather-clad uplands of the central
region favour the keeping of bees. Large herds of swine fatten in the
oak and beech forests; and dairy-farming is a thriving industry in the
highlands between Agram and Warasdin, where, during the last years of
the 19th century, systematic attempts were made to replace the
mountain pastures by clover and sown grass. The proportion of sheep to
other live-stock is lower than in most of the South Slavonic lands,
and the scarcity of goats is also noteworthy. Horsebreeding is a
favourite pursuit in Slavonia; and between 1900 and 1902 many
thousands of remounts were shipped to the British army in South
Africa. The local administration endeavours to better the quality of
live-stock by importing purer breeds, distributing prizes, and other
measures; but the native farmers are slow to accept improvements.

_Forests_.--Forests, principally of oak, pine and beech, covered
3,734,000 acres in 1895, about one-fifth being state property.
Especially valuable are the Croatian oak-forests, near Agram and
Sissek. Timber is exported from Fiume and down the Danube.

_Industries_.--Apart from the distilleries and breweries scattered
throughout the country, the rude flour-mills which lie moored in the
rivers, and a few glass-works, saw-mills, silk-mills and tobacco
factories, the chief industrial establishments of Croatia-Slavonia are
at Agram, Fiume, Semlin, Buccari and Porto Re. Only 8.3 of the
population was, in 1900, engaged in industries other than farming,
which occupied 85.2%. The exports mainly consist of foodstuffs,
especially grain, of live-stock, especially pigs and horses, and of
timber. The imports include textiles, iron, coal, wine and colonial
products; with machinery and other finished articles. Goods in transit
to and from Hungary figure largely in the official returns for
Fiume[2] and Semlin, which are the centres of the foreign trade. In
1900 Croatia-Slavonia possessed 253 banking establishments.

_Communications_.--The commerce of the country is furthered by upwards
of 2000 m. of carriage-roads, the most remarkable of these being the
Maria Louisa, which connects Karlstadt with Fiume, and the Josephina,
which passes inland from Zengg. Many excellent highways were built for
strategic purposes before the abolition of the Military Frontier in
1881. The railways, which are all owned and managed by the Hungarian
state, intersect most parts of the country except the mountains south
of Ogulin, where there is, nevertheless, a considerable traffic over
the passes into Dalmatia and Bosnia. Agram is the principal railway
centre, from which lines radiate S. W. to Fiume, W. into Austria,
N.N.E. to Warasdin and into Hungary, and S.E. into Bosnia by way of
Kostajnica. The main line eastward from Agram passes through Brod,
where it meets the Bosnian system, and on to Belgrade; throwing out
two branch lines to Brcka and Samac in Bosnia, and several
branches on the north, which traverse the central watershed, and cross
the Hungarian frontier at Zakany, Barcs, Esseg, Erdar and
Peterwardein. Above Agram the Save is used chiefly for floating rafts
of timber; east of Sissek it is navigable by small steamboats, but,
despite its great volume, the multitude of its perpetually shifting
sandbanks interferes greatly with traffic. Steamers also ply on the
Una, the Drave below Barcs, and the Danube. The marshes of Syrmia are
partially drained by the so-called "Canal of Probus," the one large
artificial waterway in the country, said to have been cut by the
Romans in the 3rd century.

_Chief Towns_,--The principal towns are Agram, the capital, with
61,002 inhabitants in 1900; Esseg, the capital of Slavonia (24,930);
Semlin (15,079); Mitrovica (11,518); Warasdin (12,930); Karlstadt
(7396); Brod (7310); Sissek (7047); Djakovo (6824); Karlowitz (5643);
Peterwardein (5019); Zengg (3182); and Buccari (1870). These are
described in separate articles. The centre of the coasting trade is
Novi, and other small seaports are San Giorgio (_Sveto Juraj_), Porto
Re (_Kraljevica_) and Carlopago. Agram, Gospic (10,799), Ogulin
(8699), Warasdin and Bjelovar (6056) are respectively the capitals of
the five counties which belong to Croatia proper,--Agram (Hung.
_Zagrab_), Modruc-Fiume, Lika-Krbava, Warasdin (_Varasd_) and
Bjelovar (_Belovar-Koros_); while the capitals of the three Slavonian
counties, Virovitica (_Verocze_), Pozega (_Pozsega_) and Syrmia
(_Szerem_), are Esseg, Pozega (5000) and Semlin.

_Population and National Characteristics_.--The population rose from 1,892,499 in 1881 to 2,416,304 in 1900, an increase of little less than one-third, resulting from a uniformly low death rate, with a high marriage and birth rate, and characterized by that preponderance of male over female children which is common to all the South Slavonic lands. More than 75% of the inhabitants are Croats, the bulk of the remainder being Serbs, who predominate in eastern Slavonia. Outside Croatia-Slavonia, the Croats occupy the greater part of Dalmatia and northern Bosnia. There are large Croatian settlements in the south of Hungary, and smaller colonies in Austria. The numbers of the whole nation may be estimated at 3,500,000 or 4,000,000. The distinction between Croats and Serbs is religious, and, to a less extent, linguistic. Croats and Serbs together constitute a single branch of the Slavonic race, frequently called the Serbo-Croatian branch. The literary language of the two nations is identical, but the Croats use the Latin alphabet,[3] while the Serbs prefer a modified form of the Cyrillic. The two nations have also been politically separated since the 7th century, if not for a longer period; but this division has produced little difference of character or physical type. Even the costume of the Croatian peasantry, to whom brilliant colours and intricate embroideries are always dear, proclaims their racial identity with the Serbs; their songs, dances and musical instruments, the chief part of their customs and folk-lore, their whole manner of life, so little changed by its closer contact with Western civilization, may be studied in Servia (q.v.) itself. In both countries rural society was based on the old-fashioned household community, or _zadruga_, which still survives in the territories that formed the Military Frontier, though everywhere tending to disappear and be replaced by individual ownership. The Croatian peasantry are least prosperous in the riverside districts, where marsh-fevers prevail, and especially beside the Save. Even in many of the towns the houses are mere cabins of wood and thatch. As in Servia, there is practically no middle class between the peasants and the educated minority; and the commercial element consists to a great extent of foreigners, especially Germans, Hungarians, Italians and Jews. Numerically this alien population is insignificant. The Italians are chiefly confined to the coast; the Germans congregate at Semlin and Warasdin; the Slovenes are settled along the north-western frontier, where they have introduced their language, and so greatly modified the local dialect; the gipsies wander from city to city, as horse-dealers, metal workers or musicians; there are numerous Moravian and Bohemian settlements; and near Mitrovica there is a colony of Albanians. It is impossible to give accurate statistics of the alien population; for, in the compilation of the official figures, language is taken as a test of nationality, an utterly untrustworthy method in a country where every educated person speaks two or three languages. Croatian nationalists also maintain that official figures are systematically altered in the Hungarian interest.

_Constitution and Government_.--By the fundamental law of the 21st of December 1867 Austria-Hungary was divided, for purposes of internal government, into Cisleithania, or the Austrian empire, and Transleithania, or the kingdoms of Hungary and Croatia-Slavonia. In theory the viceroy, or _ban_ of Croatia-Slavonia is nominated by the crown, and enjoys almost unlimited authority over local affairs; in practice the consent of the crown is purely formal, and the _ban_ is appointed by the Hungarian premier, who can dismiss him at any moment. The provincial government is subject to the _ban_, and comprises three ministries--the interior, justice, and religion and education,--for whose working the _ban_ is responsible to the Hungarian premier, and to the national assembly of Croatia-Slavonia (_Narodna Skupctina_). This body consists of a single chamber, composed partly of elected deputies, partly of privileged members, whose numbers cannot exceed half those of the deputies. There are 69 constituencies, besides the 21 royal free cities which also return deputies. Electors must belong to certain professions or pay a small tax. The privileged members are the heads of the nobility, with the highest ecclesiastics and officials. As a rule, they represent the "Magyarist" section of society, which sympathizes with Hungarian policy. The chamber deals with religion, education, justice and certain strictly provincial affairs, but even within this limited sphere all its important enactments must be countersigned by the minister for Croatia-Slavonia, a member, without portfolio, of the Hungarian cabinet. At the polls, all votes are given orally, a system which facilitates corruption; the officials who control the elections depend for their livelihood on the _ban_, usually a Magyarist; and thus, even apart from the privileged members, a majority favourable to Hungary can usually be secured. The constitutional relations between Hungary and Croatia-Slavonia are regulated by the agreement, or _nagoda_, of 1868. This instrument determines the functions of the _ban_; the control of common interests, such as railways, posts, telegraphs, telephones, commerce, industry, agriculture or forests; and the choice of delegates by the chamber, to sit in the Hungarian parliament. See also below, under _History_.

Local administration.

For administrative purposes Croatia-Slavonia is divided into 8 rural
counties, already enumerated; besides the 4 urban counties, or
municipalities of Agram, Semlin, Warasdin and Esseg. These are
subdivided into rural and urban communes, each with its representative
council. The affairs of each rural county are managed by an assembly
chosen for 6 years, which comprises not only elected members, but
delegates from all the cities except Agram and Esseg, with certain
high ecclesiastics and officials.

Justice.

The highest judicial authority is the supreme court or Septemviral
Table, which sits at Agram, and ranks above the royal courts of
appeal, the county courts of first instance, and the district courts
or magistracies.

Religion.

Fully four-fifths of the population belong to the Roman Catholic
Church, which has an archbishop at Agram and bishops at Zengg and
Djakovo. There are about 12,000 Greek Catholics, with a bishop at
Kreuz (_Krizevac_). The Serb congregations, who had previously been
classed as Orthodox Greek, were officially recognized as members of
the Orthodox Church of Servia after 1883. Their episcopal sees of
Karlowitz and Pakrac depend upon the metropolitanate of Belgrade; but
from 1830 to 1838 Karlowitz was itself the headquarters of the Servian
Church.

Education.

During the 19th century strenuous efforts to better the state of
education were made by Bishop Strossmayer (1815-1905) and other
reformers; but, although some success was achieved, only one-third of
the population could read and write in 1900. Foremost among the
educational institutions is the South Slavonic Academy of Sciences and
Arts (_Jugoslavenska Akademija Znanosti i Umjetnosti_), founded by
Strossmayer and others in 1867, as an improvement on a learned society
which had existed since 1836. The academy is the headquarters of the
nationalist propaganda. Its numerous publications, though sometimes
biased by political passion, throw much light on Serbo-Croatian
history, law, philology and kindred topics. Agram University, founded
in 1874, possesses three faculties--theology, philosophy and law; but,
unlike other Hungarian universities, it lacks a faculty of medicine.
Its average number of students varies from 300 to 350. In 1900 there
were also 19 _real-gymnasia_, teaching science, art and modern
languages, as well as classics and mathematics; 1400 elementary
schools; and a few special institutions, such as the naval and
military academies of Fiume, ecclesiastical seminaries and commercial
colleges. In almost every case the language of instruction is
Serbo-Croatian. The development of higher education, without a
corresponding advance of technical education, has created an
intellectual class, comprising many men of letters, and several
painters, musicians and sculptors, though none of great eminence; it
also tends to produce many aspirants to official or professional
careers, who find employment difficult to obtain. The want of a strong
native middle class may partly be traced to this tendency.

_History._

Medieval historians did not use the terms Croatia and Slavonia in their present sense. The Croatia of the middle ages comprised north-western Bosnia, Turkish Croatia, and the region now known as Upper Croatia. The whole country between the Drave and Save, thus including a large part of modern Croatia, was called in Latin _Slavonia_, in German _Windisches Land_, and in Hungarian _Totorszag_, to distinguish it from the territories in which the Croats were racially supreme (_Horvatorszag_). At the time of their conquest by the Romans (35 B.C.) both these divisions were occupied by the Pannonians, who in Slavonia had displaced an older population, the Scordisci; and both were included in the Roman province of Pannonia Inferior, although Slavonia had the distinctive name of Pannonia Savia (see PANNONIA). When the Roman dominions were broken up in A.D. 395, Croatia-Slavonia remained part of the Western empire. The Ostrogoths overran it in 489; in 535 it was annexed by Justinian; in 568 it was conquered by the Avars. These were in turn expelled from Croatia by the Croats, a Slavonic people from the western Carpathians, who, according to some authorities, had occupied the territories of the Marcomanni in Bohemia, and been driven thence in the 6th century by the Czechs. The main body of the Croats, whose tribal and racial names respectively are perpetuated in the names of Croatia and Slavonia, entered Croatia between 634 and 638, and were encouraged by the emperor Heraclius to attack the Avars. Smaller bodies had led the way southwards since 548. The Croats formed the western division of the great migratory horde of Serbo-Croats which colonized the lands between Bulgaria and the Adriatic. Contemporary chroniclers called them _Chrobati_, _Belochrobati_ ("White Croats"), _Chrovati_, _Horvati_, or by some similar Latin or Byzantine variant of the Slavonic _Khrvaty_. The Croats occupied most of the region now known as Croatia-Slavonia, Dalmatia, and north-western Bosnia, displacing or absorbing the earlier inhabitants everywhere except along the Dalmatian littoral, where the Italian city-states usually maintained their independence, and in certain districts of Slavonia, where, out of a mixed population of Slavonic immigrants, Avars and Pannonians, the Slavs, and especially the Serbo-Croats, gradually became predominant. The Croats brought with them their primitive tribal institutions, organized on a basis partly military, partly patriarchal, and identical with the Zhupanates of the Serbs (see SERVIA); agriculture, war and hunting were their chief pursuits. Although they at first acknowledged no alien sovereign, they passed gradually under Italian influence in the extreme west, and under Byzantine influence in the south and south-east. In 806 the northern and north-eastern districts were added to the empire of the Franks, and thus won for the Western Church. Frankish predominance was long commemorated by the name Francochorion, given by the Byzantines to Syrmia; it is still commemorated by the name Frucka Gora, "Mountains of the Franks," in that province.

_The Croatian Kingdom: c. 910-1091._--In 877 the Croats were temporarily subdued by the Byzantine emperor, but after successive insurrections which tended to centralize their loosely knit tribal organization, and to place all power in the hands of a military chief, they regained their independence and founded a national kingdom about 910. It is probable that Tomislav or Timislav, who had led their armies to victory, assumed the title of king in that year. Some authorities, however, state that Tomislav only bore the title of _veliki zupan_ or "paramount chief," and was only one in a long line of princes which can be traced without interruption back to 818. On this view, Drzislav (c. 978-1000) was the first king properly so called. But Tomislav, whatever his official style, was certainly the first of a series of independent national rulers which lasted for nearly two centuries. The records of this period, regarded by many Croats as the golden age of their country, are often scanty, and its chronology is still unsettled. Little is known of Trpimir, who preceded Drzislav, or of Stephen I. (1035-1058), but a few of the kings gained a more lasting fame by their success in war and diplomacy. Among these were Krecimir I. (c. 940--946), his successor Miroslav, and especially Krecimir II., surnamed the Great (c. 1000-1035), who harried the Bulgarians, at that time a powerful nation, and conquered a large part of Dalmatia, including some of the Italian cities. Already, under his predecessors, the Croats had built a fleet, which they used first for piracy and afterwards for trade. Their skill in maritime affairs, exemplified first in the 9th century by the pagan corsairs of the Narenta (see DALMATIA: _History_), and later by the numerous Dalmatian and Croatian sailors who served in the navies of Venice and Austria, is remarkable in a Slavonic people, and one which had so recently migrated from central Europe. At the end of the 10th century they even for a short period exacted tribute from Venice, but their power was temporarily destroyed in 1000, when the Venetians captured and sacked Biograd or Belgrade, the Italian Zaravecchia. This Dalmatian port was not only the Croatian arsenal, but the seat of the kings, who here sought to enhance their dignity by borrowing the grandiose titles and elaborate procedure of the Byzantine court. Krecimir II. and Krecimir Peter (c. 1058-1073), the hero of many national legends and lays, restored the naval power of the Croats. After the death of Krecimir Peter, Slavic or Slaviza reigned until 1076, when he was succeeded by Zvonimir (Svinimir or Zvoinimir) Demetrius. Zvonimir was crowned by the legate of Pope Gregory VII, and appears to have been regarded as a vassal of the papacy. Both he and Stephen II., a nephew of Krecimir II., died in 1089.

_Hungarian Supremacy: 1091-c. 1526._--Amid the strife of rival claimants to the throne, Helena, the widow of Stephen, appealed for aid to her brother Ladislaus I., king of Hungary. Ladislaus took possession of the country in 1091. He founded the bishopric of Agram and introduced Hungarian law. His death in 1095 was the signal for a nationalist insurrection, but after two years the rebels were crushed by his successor Coloman. This monarch reorganized the administration on a system which has been maintained, with modifications in detail, by almost all subsequent rulers. He respected the existing institutions of the conquered territory so far as to leave its autonomy in domestic affairs intact; but delegated his own sovereignty, and especially the control of foreign affairs and war, to a governor known as the ban (q.v.). This office was sometimes held by princes of the royal house, often by Croatian nobles. Coloman also extended his authority over Dalmatia and the islands of the Quarnero, but the best modern authorities reject the tradition that in 1102 he was crowned king of Croatia, Slavonia and Dalmatia. In 1127 Syrmia, which had been annexed to Bulgaria from about 700 to 1018, and to the Eastern empire from 1019, was united to Slavonia. The Hungarian government left much liberty to the Croatian nobles, a turbulent and fanatical class, ever ready for civil war, rebellion or a campaign against the Bosnian heretics. Their most powerful leaders were the counts of Zrin and Bribir (or Brebir), whose surname was Subic. This family played an important part in local politics from the 13th century to 1670, when Peter Subic was its last member to hold the office of ban. Paul Subic (d. 1312) and Mladen Subic (d. 1322) even for a short period united Croatia, Slavonia, Bosnia and part of Dalmatia under their own rule. From 1322 to 1326 the Croatian nobles successfully withstood the armies of Hungary and Bosnia; from 1337 to 1340, instigated by the Vatican, they carried on a crusade against the Bosnian Bogomils; and in the Krajina (Turkish Croatia) hostilities were resumed at intervals until the Turkish conquest.

_The Turkish Occupation: c. 1526-1718._--Here, as elsewhere, the Ottoman invasion was facilitated by the feuds of the Christian sects. When King Matthias Corvinus undertook to defend Slavonia in 1490 it was too late; Matthias lost Syrmia and died in the same year. His successor Ladislaus of Poland (1490-1516) added Slavonia to the kingdoms named in the royal title, which now included the words "King of Dalmatia and Croatia and Slavonia" (_Rex Dalmatiae et Croatiae et Slavoniae_). But he failed to repel the Turks, who in 1526 destroyed the power of Hungary at the battle of Mohacs. In 1527 the Croats were compelled to swear allegiance to Ferdinand I. of Austria, who had been elected king of Hungary. Ferdinand founded the generalcy of Karlstadt and thus laid the foundation of the military frontier. The provinces of Agram, Warasdin and Kreutz, previously included in Slavonia, were added to Croatia, to counterbalance the loss of territory in the Krajina. Throughout the century the Turks continued to extend their conquests until, in 1606, the emperor retained only western Croatia, with the cities of Agram, Karlstadt, Warasdin and Zengg. During the same period the doctrines of the Reformation had spread among the Croats; but they were forcibly suppressed in 1607-1610. The military occupation by the Turks left little permanent impression; colonization was never attempted; and the continuous wars by which the victors strove to secure or enlarge their dominions north of the Save left no time for the introduction of Moslem religion or civilization among the vanquished. Thus in the reconquest of Croatia-Slavonia there was none of the local opposition which afterwards hindered the Austrian occupation of Bosnia. The successes of Prince Eugene in 1697 led two years later to the peace of Carlowitz, by which the Turks ceded the greater part of Slavonia and Hungary to Austria; and the remainder was surrendered in 1718 by the treaty of Passarowitz. Only Turkish Croatia henceforth remained part of the Ottoman empire.