Chapter VII: Front Matter (7)

_Silas Marner_ shows a reversion to her early manner--the manner of _Scenes of Clerical Life_. _Romola_, which is what is called an historical novel, owes its vitality not to the portraits of Savonarola or of the heroine, or to its vigorous pictures of Florentine life in the 15th century, but to its superb presentment of the treacherous, handsome Tito Melema, who belongs not to any one period but to every generation. _Felix Holt_, a novel dealing with political questions, is strained by a painfulness too severe for any reader's pleasure. Where other eminent authors have produced mechanical books, or books which were mere repetitions of their most popular effort, she erred only on the side of the ponderous and the distressing. _Felix Holt_ is both, and it is the only one of her novels which lacks an unforgettable human note. _The Spanish Gypsy_ (1868), a drama in blank verse, received more public response than most compositions of the kind executed by those connected with the drama or with poetry only; and she published in 1874 another volume of verses, _The Legend of Jubal and other Poems_.

Any depression which the author may have felt with regard to the faults found with some of the last-named books was completely cured by the praise bestowed on _Middlemarch_ (1872). This profound study of certain types of English character was supreme at the time of its writing, and it remains supreme, of its school, in European literature. Thackeray is brilliant; Tolstoi is vivid to a point where life-likeness overwhelms any consideration of art; Balzac created a whole world; George Eliot did not create, but her exposition of the upper and middle class minds of her day is a masterpiece of scientific psychology. _Daniel Deronda_ (1876), a production on the same lines, was less satisfactory. It exhibited the same human insight, the passionate earnestness, the insinuated special pleading for hard cases, the same intellectual strength, but the subject was unwieldy, almost forbidding, and, as a result, the novel, in spite of its distinction, has never been thoroughly liked. The death of Mr Lewes in 1878 was also the death-blow to her artistic vitality. She corrected the proofs of _Theophrastus Such_ (a collection of essays), but she wrote no more. About two years later, however, she married Mr J.W. Cross, a gentleman whose friendship was especially congenial to a temperament so abnormally dependent on affectionate understanding as George Eliot's. But she never really recovered from her shock at the loss of George Lewes, and died at 4 Cheyne Walk, Chelsea, on the 22nd of December 1880.

No right estimate of her, whether as a woman, an artist or a philosopher, can be formed without a steady recollection of her infinite capacity for mental suffering, and her need of human support. The statement that there is no sex in genius, is on the face of it, absurd. George Sand, certainly the most independent and dazzling of all women authors, neither felt, nor wrote, nor thought as a man. Saint Teresa, another great writer on a totally different plane, was pre-eminently feminine in every word and idea. George Eliot, less reckless, less romantic than the Frenchwoman, less spiritual than the Spanish saint, was more masculine in style than either; but her outlook was not, for a moment, the man's outlook; her sincerity, with its odd reserves, was not quite the same as a man's sincerity, nor was her humour that genial, broad, unequivocal humour which is peculiarly virile. Hers approximated, curiously enough, to the satire of Jane Austen, both for its irony and its application to little everyday affairs. Men's humour, in its classic manifestations, is on the heroic rather than on the average scale: it is for the uncommon situations, not for the daily tea-table.

Her method of attacking a subject shows the influence of Jane Austen, especially in parts of _Middlemarch_; one can detect also the stronger influence of Mrs Gaskell, of Charlotte Bronte, and of Miss Edgeworth. It was, however, but an influence, and no more than a man writer, anxious to acquire a knowledge of the feminine point of view, might have absorbed from a study of these women novelists. One often hears that she is not artistic; that her characterization is less distinct than Jane Austen's; that she tells more than should be known of her heroes and heroines. But it should be remembered that Jane Austen dealt with familiar domestic types, whereas George Eliot excelled in the presentation of extraordinary souls. One woman drew members of polite society with correct notions, while the other woman depicted social rebels with ideas and ideals. In every one of George Eliot's books, the protagonists, tortured by dreams of perfection, are in revolt against the prudent compromises of the worldly. All through her stories, one hears the clash of "the heroic for earth too high," and the desperate philosophy, disguised it is true, of Omar Khayyam. In her day, Epicureanism had not reached the life of the people, nor passed into the education of the mob. Few dared to confess that the pursuit of pleasure, whether real or imagined, was the aim of mankind. The charm of Jane Austen is the charm of the untroubled and well-to-do materialist, who sees in a rich marriage, a comfortable house, carriages and an assured income the best to strive for; and in a fickle lover of either sex or the loss of money the severest calamities which can befall the human spirit. Jane Austen despised the greater number of her characters: George Eliot suffered with each of hers. Here, perhaps, we find the reason why she is accused of being inartistic. She could not be impersonal.

Again, George Eliot was a little scornful to those of both sexes who had neither special missions nor the consciousness of this deprivation. Men are seldom in favour of missions in any field. She demanded, too strenuously from the very beginning, an aim, more or less altruistic, from every individual; and as she advanced in life this claim became the more imperative, till at last it overpowered her art, and transformed a great delineator of humanity into an eloquent observer with far too many personal prejudices. But she was altogether free from cynicism, bitterness, or the least tendency to pride of intellect. She suffered from bodily weakness the greater part of her life, and, but for an extraordinary mental health--inherited from the fine yeoman stock from which she sprang--it is impossible that she could have retained, at all times, so sane a view of human conduct, or been the least sentimental among women writers of the first rank--the one wholly without morbidity in any disguise. The accumulation of mere book knowledge, as opposed to the friction of a life spent among all sorts and conditions of men, drove George Eliot at last to write as a specialist for specialists: joy was lost in the consuming desire for strict accuracy: her genius became more and more speculative, less and less emotional. The highly trained brain suppressed the impulsive heart,--the heart described with such candour and pathos as Maggie Tulliver's in _The Mill on the Floss_. For this reason--chiefly because philosophy is popularly associated with inactive depression, whereas human nature is held to be eternally exhilarating--her later works have not received so much praise as her earlier productions. But one has only to compare _Romola_ or _Daniel Deronda_ with the compositions of any author except herself to realize the greatness of her designs, and the astonishing gifts brought to their final accomplishment.

See also the _Life of George Eliot_, edited by J.W. Cross (3 vols.,
1885-1887); _George Eliot_, by Sir Leslie Stephen, in the "English Men
of Letters" series (1902); by Oscar Browning, "Great Writers" series
(1890), with a bibliography by J.P. Anderson; by Mathilde Blind,
"Eminent Women" series, a new edition of which also contains a
bibliography (Boston, Mass., 1904). (P. M. T. C.)

ELIOT, SIR JOHN (1592-1632), English statesman, son of Richard Eliot, a member of an old Devonshire family lately settled in Cornwall, was born at his father's seat at Port Eliot in Cornwall in 1592. He matriculated at Exeter College, Oxford, on the 4th of December 1607, and leaving the university after a residence of three years he studied law at one of the inns of court. He also spent some months travelling in France, Spain and Italy, in company, for part of the time, with young George Villiers, afterwards duke of Buckingham. He was only twenty-two when he began his parliamentary career as member for St Germans in the "addled parliament" of 1614. In 1618 he was knighted, and next year through the patronage of Buckingham he obtained the appointment of vice-admiral of Devon, with large powers for the defence and control of the commerce of the county. It was not long before the characteristic energy with which he performed the duties in his office involved him in difficulties. After many attempts, in 1623 he succeeded by a clever but dangerous manoeuvre in entrapping the famous pirate John Nutt, who had for years infested the southern coast, inflicting immense damage upon English commerce. The issue is noteworthy. The pirate, having a powerful protector at court in Sir George Calvert, the secretary of state, was pardoned; while the vice-admiral, upon charges which could not be substantiated, was flung into the Marshalsea, and detained there nearly four months.

A few weeks after his release Eliot was elected member of parliament for Newport (February 1624). On the 27th of February he delivered his first speech, in which he at once revealed his great powers as an orator, demanding boldly that the liberties and privileges of parliament, repudiated by James I. in the former parliament, should be secured. In the first parliament of Charles I., in 1625, he urged the enforcement of the laws against the Roman Catholics. Meanwhile he had continued the friend and supporter of Buckingham and greatly approved of the war with Spain. Buckingham's incompetence, however, and the bad faith with which both he and the king continued to treat the parliament, alienated Eliot completely from the administration. Distrust of his former friend quickly grew in Eliot's excitable mind to a certainty of his criminal ambition and treason to his country. Returned to the parliament of 1626 as member for St Germans, he found himself, in the absence of other chiefs of the opposition whom the king had secured by nominating them sheriffs, the leader of the House. He immediately demanded an inquiry into the recent disaster at Cadiz. On the 27th of March he made an open and daring attack upon Buckingham and his evil administration. He was not intimidated by the king's threatening intervention on the 29th, and persuaded the House to defer the actual grant of the subsidies and to present a remonstrance to the king, declaring its right to examine the conduct of ministers. On the 8th of May he was one of the managers who carried Buckingham's impeachment to the Lords, and on the 10th he delivered the charges against him, comparing him in the course of his speech to Sejanus. Next day Eliot was sent to the Tower. On the Commons declining to proceed with business as long as Eliot and Sir Dudley Digges (who had been imprisoned with him) were in confinement, they were released, and parliament was dissolved on the 15th of June. Eliot was immediately dismissed from his office of vice-admiral of Devon, and in 1627 he was again imprisoned for refusing to pay a forced loan, but liberated shortly before the assembling of the parliament of 1628, to which he was returned as member for Cornwall. He joined in the resistance now organized to arbitrary taxation, was foremost in the promotion of the Petition of Right, continued his outspoken censure of Buckingham, and after the latter's assassination in August, led the attack in the session of 1629 on the ritualists and Arminians.

In February the great question of the right of the king to levy tonnage and poundage came up for discussion; and on the king ordering an adjournment of parliament, the speaker, Sir John Finch, was held down in the chair while Eliot's resolutions against illegal taxation and innovations in religion were read to the House by Holles (q.v.). In consequence, Eliot, with eight other members, was imprisoned on the 4th of March in the Tower. He refused to answer in his examination, relying on his privilege of parliament, and on the 29th of October was removed to the Marshalsea. On the 26th of January he appeared at the bar of the king's bench, with Holles and Valentine, to answer a charge of conspiracy to resist the king's order, and refusing to acknowledge the jurisdiction of the court he was fined L2000 and ordered to be imprisoned during the king's pleasure and till he had made submission. This he steadfastly refused. While some of the prisoners appear to have had certain liberty allowed to them, Eliot's confinement in the Tower was made exceptionally severe. Charles's anger had been from the first directed chiefly against him, not only as his own political antagonist but as the prosecutor and bitter enemy of Buckingham; "an outlawed man," he described him, "desperate in mind and fortune."

Eliot languished in prison for some time, during which he wrote several works, his _Negotium posterorum_, an account of the parliament in 1625; _The Monarchie of Man_, a political treatise; _De jure majestatis, a Political Treatise of Government_; and _An Apology for Socrates_, his own defence. In the spring of 1632 he fell into a decline. In October he petitioned Charles for permission to go into the country, but leave could only be obtained at the price of submission, and was finally refused. He died on the 27th of November 1632. When his son requested permission to move the body to Port Eliot, Charles, whose resentment still survived, returned the curt refusal: "Let Sir John Eliot be buried in the church of that parish where he died." The manner of Eliot's death, not without suspicion of foul play, and as the result of the king's implacability and the severe treatment to which he had been subjected, had more effect, probably, than any other single incident in embittering and precipitating the dispute between king and parliament; and the tragic sacrifice of a man so gifted and patriotic, and actuated originally by no antagonistic feeling against the monarchy or the church, is the surest condemnation of the king's policy and administration. Eliot was essentially a great orator, inspired by enthusiasm and high ideals, which he was able to communicate to his hearers by his eloquence, but, like Chatham afterwards, he had not only the gifts but the failings of the orator, was incapable of well-reasoned and balanced judgment, and, though one of the greatest personalities of the time, was inferior to Pym both as a party leader and as a statesman.

Eliot married Rhadagund, daughter of Richard Gedie of Trebursye in Cornwall, by whom he had five sons, from the youngest of whom Nicholas the present earl of St Germans is descended, and four daughters.

The _Life of Sir J. Eliot_, by J. Forster (1864), is supplemented and
corrected by Gardiner's _History of England_, vols. v.-vii., and the
article in the _Dict. of Nat. Biog._, by the same author. Eliot's
writings, together with his Letter-Book, have been edited by Dr
Grosart.

ELIOT, JOHN (1604-1690), American colonial clergyman, known as the "Apostle to the Indians," was born probably at Widford, Hertfordshire, England, where he was baptized on the 5th of August 1604. He was the son of Bennett Eliot, a middle-class farmer. Little is known of his boyhood and early manhood except that he took his degree of B.A. at Jesus College, Cambridge, in 1622. It seems probable that he entered the ministry of the Established Church, but there is nothing definitely known of him until 1629-1630, when he became an usher or assistant at the school of the Rev. Thomas Hooker, at Little Baddow, near Chelmsford. The influence of Hooker apparently determined him to become a Puritan, but his connexion with the school ceased in 1630, when Laud's persecutions drove Hooker into exile. The realization of the difficulties in the way of a non-conforming clergyman in England undoubtedly determined Eliot to emigrate to America in the autumn of 1631, where he settled first at Boston, assisting for a time at the First Church. In November 1632 he became "teacher" to the church at Roxbury, with which his connexion lasted until his death. There he married Hannah Mulford, who had been betrothed to him in England, and who became his constant helper. In the care of the Roxbury church he was associated with Thomas Welde from 1632 to 1641, with Samuel Danforth (1626-1674) from 1649 to 1674, and with Nehemiah Walter (1663-1750) from 1688 to 1690.

Inspired with the idea of converting the Indians, his first step was to perfect himself in their dialects, which he did by the assistance of a young Indian whom he received into his home. With his aid he translated the Ten Commandments and the Lord's Prayer. He first successfully preached to the Indians in their own tongue at Nonantum (Newton) in October 1646. At the third meeting several Indians declared themselves converted, and were soon followed by many others. Eliot induced the Massachusetts General Court to set aside land for their residence, the same body also voting him L10 to prosecute the work, and directing that two clergymen be annually elected by the clergy as preachers to the Indians. As soon as the success of Eliot's endeavours became known, the necessary funds flowed in upon him from private sources in both Old and New England. In July 1649 parliament incorporated the "Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in New England," which henceforth supported and directed the work inaugurated by Eliot. The first appeal for aid brought contributions of L11,000. In 1651 the Christian Indian town founded by Eliot was removed from Nonantum to Natick, where residences, a meeting-house, and a school-house were erected, and where Eliot preached, when able, once in every two weeks as long as he lived. To this community Eliot applied a plan of government by means of tens, fifties and hundreds, which he subsequently advocated as suitable for all England. Eliot's missionary labours encouraged others to follow in his footsteps. A second town under his direction was established at Ponkapog (Stoughton) in 1654, in which he had the assistance of Daniel Gookin (c. 1612-1687). His success was duplicated in Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket by the Mayhews, and by 1674 the unofficial census of the "praying Indians" numbered 4000. King Philip's War (1675-76) was a staggering blow to all missionary enterprise; and although few of the converted Indians proved disloyal, it was some years before adequate support could again be enlisted. Yet at Eliot's death, which occurred at Roxbury on the 21st of May 1690, the missions were at the height of their prosperity, and that the results of his labours were not permanent was due only to the racial traits of the New England tribes.

Of wider influence and more lasting value than his personal labours as a missionary was Eliot's work as a translator of the Bible and various religious works into the Massachusetts dialect of the Algonquian language. The first work completed was the _Catechism_, published in 1653 at Cambridge, Massachusetts, the first book to be printed in the Indian tongue. Several years elapsed before Eliot completed his task of translating the Bible. The New Testament was at last issued in 1661, and the Old Testament followed two years later. The New Testament was bound with it, and thus the whole Bible was completed. To it were added a Catechism and a metrical version of the Psalms. The title of this Bible, now a great rarity, is _Mamussee Wunneetupanatamwe Up-Biblum God naneeswe Nukkone Testament kah wonk Wusku Testament-Ne quoshkinnumuk nashpe Wuttinneumoh Christ noh assoowesit John Eliot_; literally translated, "The Whole Holy His-Bible God, both Old Testament and also New Testament. This turned by the-servant-of-Christ, who is called John Eliot."

This book was printed in 1663 at Cambridge, Mass., by Samuel Green and
Marmaduke Johnson, and was the first Bible printed in America. In 1685
appeared a second edition, in the preparation of which Eliot was
assisted by the Rev. John Cotton (1640-1699), the younger, of
Plymouth, who also had a wide knowledge of the Indian tongue.

Besides his Bible, Eliot published at Cambridge in 1664 a translation of Baxter's _Call to the Unconverted_, and in 1665 an abridged translation of Bishop Bayly's _Practice of Piety_. With the assistance of his sons he completed (1664) his well-known Indian Grammar Begun, printed at Cambridge, Massachusetts, in 1666. It was reprinted in vol. ix. of the _Collections of the Massachusetts Historical Society_. _The Indian Primer_, comprising an exposition of the Lord's Prayer and a translation of the Larger Catechism, was published at Cambridge in 1669, and was reprinted under the editorial superintendence of Mr John Small of the university of Edinburgh in 1877. In 1671 Eliot printed in English a little volume entitled _Indian Dialogues_, followed in 1672 by his _Logick Primer_, both of which were intended for the instruction of the Indians in English. His last translation was Thomas Shepard's _Sincere Convert_, completed and published by Grindal Rawson in 1689. Eliot's literary activity, however, extended into other fields than that of Indian instruction. He was, with Richard Mather, one of the editors of the _Bay Psalm Book_ (1640). Several tracts written wholly or in part by him in the nature of reports to the society which supported his missions were published at various times in England. In 1660 he published a curious treatise on government entitled _The Christian Commonwealth_, in which he found the ideal of government in the ancient Jewish state, and proposed the reorganization of the English government on the basis of a numerical subdivision of the inhabitants. His _Harmony of the Gospels_ (1678) was a life of Jesus Christ.

BIBLIOGRAPHY.--An account of Eliot's life and work is contained in
Williston Walker's _Ten New England Leaders_ (New York, 1901). There
is a "Life of John Eliot," by Convers Francis, in _Sparks' American
Biography_, vol. v. (New York, 1853); another by N. Adams (Boston,
1847); and a sketch in Cotton Mather's _Magnalia_ (London, 1702). For
a good account of his publications in the Indian language see the
chapter on "The Indian Tongue and its Literature," by J.H. Trumbull,
in vol. i. of the _Memorial History of Boston_ (1882). (W. Wr.)

ELIS, or ELEIA, an ancient district of southern Greece, bounded on the N. by Achaea, E. by Arcadia, S. by Messenia, and W. by the Ionian Sea. The local form of the name was Valis, or Valeia, and its meaning, in all probability, "the lowland." In its physical constitution Elis is practically one with Achaea and Arcadia; its mountains are mere offshoots of the Arcadian highlands, and its principal rivers are fed by Arcadian springs. From Erymanthus in the north, Skollis (now known as Mavri and Santameri in different parts of its length) stretches toward the west, and Pholoe along the eastern frontier; in the south a prolongation of Mount Lycaeon bore in ancient times the names of Minthe and Lapithus, which have given place respectively to Alvena and to Kaiapha and Smerna. These mountains are well clothed with vegetation, and present a soft and pleasing appearance in contrast to the picturesque wildness of the parent ranges. They gradually sink towards the west and die off into what was one of the richest alluvial tracts in the Peloponnesus. Except where it is broken by the rocky promontories of Chelonatas (now Chlemutzi) and Ichthys (now Katakolo), the coast lies low, with stretches of sand in the north and lagoons and marshes towards the south. During the summer months communication with the sea being established by means of canals, these lagoons yield a rich harvest of fish to the inhabitants, who at the same time, however, are almost driven from the coast by the swarms of gnats. The district for administrative purposes forms part of the nome of Elis and Achaea (see GREECE).

Elis was divided into three districts--Hollow or Lowland Elis ([Greek: he kohile Elis]), Pisatis, or the territory of Pisa, and Triphylia, or the country of the three tribes. (1) _Hollow Elis_, the largest and most northern of the three, was watered by the Peneus and its tributary the Ladon, whose united stream forms the modern Gastouni. It included not only the champaign country originally designated by its name, but also the mountainous region of Acrorea, occupied by the offshoots of Erymanthus. Besides the capital city of Elis, it contained Cyllene, an Arcadian settlement on the sea-coast, whose inhabitants worshipped Hermes under the phallic symbol; Pylus, at the junction of the Peneus and the Ladon, which, like so many other places of the same name, claimed to be the city of Nestor, and the fortified frontier town of Lasion, the ruins of which are still visible at Kuti, near the village of Kumani. The district was famous in antiquity for its cattle and horses; and its byssus, supposed to have been introduced by the Phoenicians, was inferior only to that of Palestine. (2) _Pisatis_ extended south from Hollow Elis to the right bank of the Alpheus, and was divided into eight departments called after as many towns. Of these Salmone, Heraclea, Cicysion, Dyspontium and Harpina are known--the last being the reputed burial-place of Marmax, the suitor of Hippodamia. From the time of the early investigators it has been disputed whether Pisa, which gave its name to the district, has ever been a city, or was only a fountain or a hill. By far the most important spot in Pisatis was the scene of the great Olympic games, on the northern bank of the Alpheus (see OLYMPIA). (3) _Triphylia_ stretches south from the Alpheus to the Neda, which forms the boundary towards Messenia. Of the nine towns mentioned by Polybius, only two attained to any considerable influence--Lepreum and Macistus, which gave the names of Lepreatis and Macistia to the southern and northern halves of Triphylia. The former was the seat of a strongly independent population, and continued to take every opportunity of resisting the supremacy of the Eleans. In the time of Pausanias it was in a very decadent condition, and possessed only a poor brick-built temple of Demeter; but considerable remains of its outer walls are still in existence near the village of Strovitzi, on a part of the Minthe range.

The original inhabitants of Elis were called Caucones and Paroreatae. They are mentioned for the first time in Greek history under the title of Epeians, as setting out for the Trojan War, and they are described by Homer as living in a state of constant hostility with their neighbours the Pylians. At the close of the 11th century B.C. the Dorians invaded the Peloponnesus, and Elis fell to the share of Oxylus and the Aetolians. These people, amalgamating with the Epeians, formed a powerful kingdom in the north of Elis. After this many changes took place in the political distribution of the country, till at length it came to acknowledge only three tribes, each independent of the others. These tribes were the Epeians, Minyae and Eleans. Before the end of the 8th century B.C., however, the Eleans had vanquished both their rivals, and established their supremacy over the whole country. Among the other advantages which they thus gained was the right of celebrating the Olympic games, which had formerly been the prerogative of the Pisatans. The attempts which this people made to recover their lost privilege, during a period of nearly two hundred years, ended at length in the total destruction of their city by the Eleans. From the time of this event (572 B.C.) till the Peloponnesian War, the peace of Elis remained undisturbed. In that great contest Elis sided at first with Sparta; but that power, jealous of the increasing prosperity of its ally, availed itself of the first pretext to pick a quarrel. At the battle of Mantinea (418 B.C.) the Eleans fought against the Spartans, who, as soon as the war came to a close, took vengeance upon them by depriving them of Triphylia and the towns of the Acrorea. The Eleans made no attempt to re-establish their authority over these places, till the star of Thebes rose in the ascendant after the battle of Leuctra (371 B.C.). It is not unlikely that they would have effected their purpose had not the Arcadian confederacy come to the assistance of the Triphylians. In 366 B.C. hostilities broke out between them, and though the Eleans were at first successful, they were soon overpowered, and their capital very nearly fell into the hands of the enemy. Unable to make head against their opponents, they applied for assistance to the Spartans, who invaded Arcadia, and forced the Arcadians to recall their troops from Elis. The general result of this war was the restoration of their territory to the Eleans, who were also again invested with the right of holding the Olympic games. During the Macedonian supremacy in Greece they sided with the victors, but refused to fight against their countrymen. After the death of Alexander they renounced the Macedonian alliance. At a subsequent period they joined the Aetolian League, but persistently refused to identify themselves with the Achaeans. When the whole of Greece fell under the Roman yoke, the sanctity of Olympia secured for the Eleans a certain amount of indulgence. The games still continued to attract to the country large numbers of strangers, until they were finally put down by Theodosius in 394, two years previous to the utter destruction of the country by the Gothic invasion under Alaric. In later times Elis fell successively into the hands of the Franks and the Venetians, under whose rule it recovered to some extent its ancient prosperity. By the latter people the province of Belvedere on the Peneus was called, in consequence of its fertility, "the milch cow of the Morea."

ELIS, the chief city of the ancient Greek district of Elis, was situated on the river Peneus, just where it passes from the mountainous district of Acrorea into the champaign below. According to native tradition, it was originally founded by Oxylus, the leader of the Aetolians, whose statue stood in the market-place. In 471 B.C. it received a great extension by the incorporation (synoecism) of various small hamlets, whose inhabitants took up their abode in the city. Up to this date it only occupied the ridge of the hill now called Kalaskopi, to the south of the Peneus, but afterwards it spread out in several suburbs, and even to the other side of the stream. As all the athletes who intended to take part in the Olympic games were obliged to undergo a month's training in the city, its gymnasiums were among its principal institutions. They were three in number--the "Xystos," with its avenues of plane-trees, its plethrion or wrestling-place, its altars to Heracles, to Eros and Anteros, to Demeter and Kore (Cora), and its cenotaph of Achilles; the "Tetragonon," appropriated to boxing exercises; and the "Maltho," in the interior of which was a hall or council chamber called Lalichmion after its founder. The market-place was of the old-fashioned type, with porticoes at intervals and paths leading between them. It was called the Hippodrome because it was commonly used for exercising horses. Among the other objects of interest were the temple of Artemis Philomirax; the Hellanodicaeon, or office of the Hellanodicae; the Corcyrean Hall, a building in the Dorian style with two facades, built of spoils from Corcyra; a temple of Apollo Acesius; a temple of Silenus; an ancient structure supported on oaken pillars and reputed to be the burial-place of Oxylus; the building where the sixteen women of Elis were wont to weave a robe for the statue of Hera at Olympia; the temple of Aphrodite, with a statue of the goddess by Pheidias as Urania with a tortoise beneath her foot, and by Scopas as Pandemos, riding on a goat; and the shrine of Dionysus, whose festival, the Thyia, was yearly celebrated in the neighbourhood. On the acropolis was a temple of Athena, with a gold and ivory statue by Pheidias. The history of the town is closely identified with that of the country. In 399 B.C. it was occupied by Agis, king of Sparta. The acropolis was fortified in 312 by Telesphorus, the admiral of Antigonus, but it was shortly afterwards dismantled by Philemon, another of his generals. A view of the site is given by Stanhope. It is now called Palaeopolis. No traces of any buildings can be identified, the only remains visible dating from Roman times.

See Pausanias vi. 23-26; J. Spencer Stanhope, _Olympia and Elis_
(1824), folio; W.M. Leake, _Morea_ (1830); E. Curtius, _Peloponnesus_
(1851-1852); Schiller, _Stamme und Staaten Griechenlands_; C. Bursian,
_Geographie von Griechenland_ (1868-1872); P. Gardner, "The Coins of
Elis," in _Num. Chr._ (1879). (E. Gr.)

ELIS, PHILOSOPHICAL SCHOOL OF. This school was founded by Phaedo, a pupil of Socrates. It existed for a very short time and was then transferred by Menedemus to Eretria, where it became known as the Eretrian school. Its chief members, beside Phaedo, were Anchipylus, Moschus and Pleistanus (see PHAEDO and MENEDEMUS).

ELISAVETGRAD, a fortress and town of Russia, in the government of Kherson, 296 m. by rail N.E. of Odessa on the Balta-Kremenchug railway, and on the Ingul river, in 48 deg. 31' N. and 32 deg. 10' E. The population increased from 23,725 in 1860 to 66,182 in 1900. The town is regularly built, with wide streets, some of them lined with trees, and is a wealthy town, which has become an industrial centre for the region especially on account of its steam flour-mills, in which it is second only to Odessa, its distilleries, mechanical workshops, tobacco and tallow factories and brickworks. It is an important centre for trade in cereals and flour for export, and in sheep, cattle, wool, leather and timber. Five fairs are held annually. It has a military school, a first-class meteorological station and a botanical garden. The town was founded in 1754 and named after the empress Elizabeth. The fortifications are now decayed.

ELISAVETPOL, a government of Russia, Transcaucasia, having the governments of Tiflis and Daghestan on the N., Baku on the E., and Erivan and Tiflis on the W. and Persia on the S. Area, 16,721 sq. m. It includes: (a) the southern slope of the main Caucasus range in the north-east, where Bazardyuzi (14,770 ft.) and other peaks rise above the snow-line; (b) the arid and unproductive steppes beside the Kura, reaching 1000 ft. of altitude in the west and sinking to 100-200 ft. in the east, where irrigation is necessary; and (c) the northern slopes of the Transcaucasian escarpment and portions of the Armenian plateau, which is intersected towards its western boundary, near Lake Gok-cha, by chains of mountains consisting of trachytes and various crystalline rocks, and reaching 12,845 ft. in Mount Kapujikh. Elsewhere the country has the character of a plateau, 7000 to 8000 ft. high, deeply trenched by tributaries of the Aras. All varieties of climate are found from that of the snowclad peaks, Alpine meadows, and stony deserts of the high levels, to that of the hill slopes, clothed with gardens and vineyards, and of the arid Caspian steppes. Thus, at Shusha, on the plateau, at an altitude of 3680 ft., the average temperatures are: year 48 deg., January 26 deg., July 66 deg.; annual rainfall, 26.4; while at Elisavetpol, in the valley of the Kura, they are: year 55 deg., January 32 deg. 2, July 77 deg. and rainfall only 10.3 in. Nearly one-fifth of the surface is under forests.

The population which was 885,379 in 1897 (only 392,124 women; 84,130 urban), and was estimated at 953,300 in 1906, consists chiefly of Tatars (56%) and Armenians (33%). The remainder are Kurds (4.7%), Russians and a few Germans, Jews, Kurins, Udins and Tates. Peasants form the great bulk of the population. Some of the Tatars and the Kurds are nomadic. Wheat, maize, barley, oats and rye are grown, also rice. Cultivation of cotton has begun, but the rearing of silkworms is of old standing, especially at Nukha (1650 tons of cocoons on the average are obtained every year). Nearly 8000 acres are under vines, the yield of wine averaging 82-1/2 million gallons annually. Gardening reaches a high standard of perfection. Liquorice root is obtained to the extent of about 35,000 tons annually. The rearing of live-stock is largely carried on on the steppes. Copper, magnetic iron ore, cobalt and a small quantity of naphtha are extracted, and nearly 10,000 persons are employed in manufacturing industry--copper works and silk-mills. Carpet-weaving is widely spread. Owing to the Transcaucasian railway, which crosses the government, trade, both in the interior and with Persia, is very brisk. The government is divided into eight districts, Elisavetpol, Aresh, Jebrail, Jevanshir, Kazakh, Nukha, Shusha and Zangezur. The only towns, besides the capital, are Nukha (24,811 inhabitants in 1897) and Shusha (25,656).

ELISAVETPOL (formerly _Ganja_, alternative names being KENJEH and KANGA), a town of Russia, capital of the government of the same name, 118 m. by rail S.E. of Tiflis and 3-1/2 m. from the railway, at an altitude of 1446 ft. Pop. (1873) 15,439; (1897) 33,090. It is a very old town, which changed hands between Persians, Khazars and Arabs even in the 7th century, and later fell into the possession of Mongols, Georgians, Persians and Turks successively, until the Russians took it in 1804, when the change of name was made. It is a badly built place, with narrow streets and low-roofed, windowless houses, and is situated in a very unhealthy locality, but has been much improved, a new European quarter having been built on the site of the old fortress (erected by the Turks in 1712-1724). The inhabitants are chiefly Tatars and Armenians, famed for their excellent gardening, and also for silkworm breeding. It has a beautiful mosque, built by Shah Abbas of Persia in 1620; and a renowned "Green Mosque" amidst the ruins of old Ganja, 4 m. distant. The Persian poet, Shah Nizam (Nizam-ed-Din), was born here in 1141, and is said to have been buried (1203) close to the town. The Persians were defeated by the Russians under Paskevich outside this town in 1826.

ELISHA (a Hebrew name meaning "God is deliverance"), in the Bible, the disciple and successor of Elijah, was the son of Shaphat of Abel-meholah in the valley of the Jordan. He was symbolically elected to the prophetic office by Elijah some time during the reign of Ahab (1 Kings xix. 19-21), and he survived until the reign of Joash. His career thus appears to have extended over a period of nearly sixty years. The relation between Elijah and Elisha was of a particularly close kind, but the difference between them is much more striking than the resemblance. Elijah is the prophet of the wilderness, wandering, rugged and austere; Elisha is the prophet of civilized life, of the city and the court, with the dress, manners and appearance of ordinary "grave citizens." Elijah is the messenger of vengeance--sudden, fierce and overwhelming; Elisha is the messenger of mercy and restoration. Elijah's miracles, with few exceptions, are works of wrath and destruction; Elisha's miracles, with but one notable exception, are works of beneficence and healing. Elijah is the "prophet as fire" (Ecclus, xlviii. 1), an abnormal agent working for exceptional ends; Elisha is the "holy man of God which passeth by us continually" (2 Kings iv. 9), mixing in the common life of the people.

It is impossible to draw up a detailed chronology of his life. In most of the events narrated no further indication of time is given than by the words "the king of Israel," the name not being specified. There are some instances in which the order of time is obviously the reverse of the order of narrative, and there are other grounds for concluding that the narrative as we now have it is confused and incomplete. This may serve not only to explain the chronological difficulties, but also to throw some light on the altogether exceptional character of the miraculous element in Elisha's history. On the literary questions, see further KINGS.

Not only are Elisha's miracles very numerous, even more so than those of Elijah, but they stand in a peculiar relation to the man and his work. With all the other prophets the primary function is spiritual teaching; miracles, even though numerous and many of them symbolical like Elisha's, are only accessory. With Elisha, on the other hand, miracles seem the principal function, and the teaching is altogether subsidiary. An explanation of the superabundance of miracles in Elisha's life is suggested by the fact that several of them were merely repetitions or doubles of those of his predecessor. Such were: his first miracle, when, returning across the Jordan, he made a dry path for himself in the same manner as Elijah (2 Kings ii. 14); the increase of the widow's pot of oil (iv. 1-7); and the restoration of the son of the woman of Shunem to life (iv. 18-37). The theory that stories from the earlier life have been imported by mistake into the later, even if tenable, applies only to three of the miracles, and leaves unexplained a much larger number which are not only not repetitions of those of Elijah, but have an entirely opposite character. The healing of the water of Jericho by putting salt in it (ii. 19-22), the provision of water for the army of Jehoshaphat in the arid desert (iii. 6-20), the neutralizing by meal of the poison in the pottage of the famine-stricken sons of the prophets at Jericho (iv. 38-41), the healing of Naaman the Syrian (v. 1-19), and the recovery of the iron axehead that had sunk in the water (vi. 1-7), are all instances of the beneficence which was the general characteristic of Elisha's wonder-working activity in contrast to that of Elijah. Another miracle of the same class, the feeding of a hundred men with twenty loaves so that something was left over (iv. 42-44), deserves mention as the most striking though not the only instance of a resemblance between the work of Elisha and that of Jesus (Matt. xiv. 13-21). The one distinct exception to the general beneficence of Elisha's activity--the destruction of the forty-two children who mocked him as he was going up to Bethel (2 Kings ii. 23-25)--presents an ethical difficulty which is scarcely removed by the suggestion that the narrative has lost some particulars which would have shown the real enormity of the children's offence. We may prefer to imagine that among the homely stories told of him was one which had for its main object the inculcation of respect for one's elders.[1] The leprosy brought upon Gehazi (v. 20-27), though a miracle of judgment, scarcely belongs to the same class as the other; and it will be observed that Gehazi's subsequent relations with the court (viii. 1-6) ignore the disease, a fatal hindrance to intercourse. Further, the healing of Naaman (alluded to in Luke iv. 27) presupposes peaceful relations between Israel and the Syrians, with which, however, contrast ch. vi. The wonder-working power of Elisha is represented as continuing even after his death. As the feeding of the hundred men and the cure of leprosy connect his work with that of Jesus, so the story that a dead man who was cast into his sepulchre was brought to life by the mere contact with his bones (2 Kings xiii. 21, cf. Ecclus. xlviii. 12-14) is the most striking instance of an analogy between his miracles and those recorded of medieval saints. Stanley (_Jewish Church_, 4th ed., ii. 276) in reference to this has remarked that in the life of Elisha alone "in the sacred history the gulf between biblical and ecclesiastical miracles almost disappears."

The place which Elisha filled in contemporary history was one of great influence and importance, and several narratives testify to his great reputation in Israel. On one occasion, when he delivered the army that had been brought out against Moab from a threatened dearth of water (2 Kings iii.),[2] he plainly intimates that, but for his regard to Jehoshaphat, the king of Judah, who was in alliance with Israel, he would not have interfered. Whether he was with the army or was supposed to be living in the desert is left obscure. An interesting touch is the influence of music upon the prophetic mind (_v._ 15). His next signal interference was during the incursions of the Syrians, when he disclosed the plans of the invaders to the "king of Israel" with such effect that they were again and again baffled. When the "king of Syria" was informed that "Elisha, the prophet that is in Israel, telleth the king of Israel the words that thou speakest in thy bed-chamber," he at once sent an army to take him captive in Dothan. At Elisha's prayer his terrified servant beheld an army of horses and chariots of fire surrounding the prophet. At a second prayer the invaders were struck blind, and in this state they were led by Elisha to Samaria, where their sight was restored. Their lives were spared at the command of the prophet, and they returned home so impressed that their incursions thenceforward ceased (vi. 8-23). This is immediately followed by the siege of Samaria by Benhadad which caused a famine of the severest kind. The calamity was imputed by the "king of Israel" to the influence of Elisha, and he ordered the prophet to be immediately put to death. Forewarned of the danger, Elisha ordered the messenger who had been sent to slay him to be detained at the door, and, when, immediately afterwards, the king himself came ("messenger" in vi. 33 should rather be _king_), predicted a great plenty within twenty-four hours. This was fulfilled by the flight of the Syrian army under the circumstances stated in ch. vii. After the episode with regard to the woman of Shunem (viii. 1-6), which is out of its chronological order, Elisha is represented as at Damascus (viii. 7-15). The reverence with which the foreign monarch Benhadad addressed Elisha deserves to be noted as showing the extent of the prophet's influence. In sending to know the issue of his illness, the king caused himself to be styled "_thy son_ Benhadad." Equally remarkable is the very ambiguous nature of Elisha's reply (viii. 10).[3] The most important interference of Elisha in the history of his country constituted the fulfilment of the third of the commands laid upon Elijah. The work of anointing Jehu to be king over Israel was performed by deputy (ix. 1-3). During the forty-five years which the chronological scheme allows for the reigns of Jehu and Jehoahaz the narratives contain no notice of Elisha, but from the circumstances of his death (xiii. 14-21) it is clear that he had continued to enjoy the esteem of the dynasty which he had helped to found. Joash, the grandson of Jehu, waited on him on his death-bed, and addressed him in the words which he himself had used to Elijah: "My father, my father, the chariot of Israel and the horsemen thereof" (cf. ii. 12). By the result of a symbolic discharge of arrows he informed the king of his coming success against Syria, and immediately thereafter he died. The explicit statement that he was buried completes the contrast between him and his greater predecessor.

On the narratives, see KINGS. In general those where "the prophet
appears as on friendly terms with the king, and possessed of influence
at court (e.g. 2 Kings iv. 13, vi. 9, vi. 21, compared with xiii. 14),
plainly belong to the time of Jehu's dynasty, though they are related
before the fall of the house of Omri. We can distinguish portions of
an historical narrative which speaks of Elisha in connexion with
events of public interest, without making him the central figure, and
a series of anecdotes of properly biographical character.... In the
latter we may distinguish one circle connected with Gilgal, Jericho
and the Jordan valley to which Abel-Meholah belongs (iv. 1-7? 38-44,
v.? vi. 1-7). Here Elisha appears as the head of the prophetic gilds,
having his fixed residence at Gilgal.[4] Another circle, which
presupposes the accession of the house of Jehu, places him at Dothan
or Carmel, and represents him as a personage of almost superhuman
dignity. Here there is an obvious parallelism with the history of
Elijah, especially with his ascension (cf. 2 Kings vi. 17 with ii. 11;
xiii. 14 with ii. 12); and it is to this group of narratives that the
ascension of Elijah forms the introduction" (Robertson Smith, _Ency.
Brit._, 9th ed., art. KINGS, vol. xiv. p. 186). This twofold
representation finds a parallel in the narratives of Samuel, whose
history and the conditions reflected therein are analogous to the life
and times of Elisha.

Elisha is canonized in the Orthodox Eastern Church, his festival being
on the 14th of June, under which date his life is entered in the _Acta
sanctorum_.

See especially, W.R. Smith, _Prophets of Israel_ (Index, s.v.), and
the literature to ELIJAH; KINGS, BOOKS OF; PROPHET.
(W. R. S.; S. A. C.)

FOOTNOTES:

[1] Similarly Elijah enforces respect for the prophetic office in i.
9 sqq. Prof. Kennett points out to the present writer that the
epithet "bald-head" may refer to the sign of mourning for Elisha's
lost master (cf. Ez. vii. 18, Deut. xiv. 1); "Go up" is perhaps to be
taken literally (in reference to Elijah's translation).

[2] The method of obtaining water (_v._ 16 sq.) is that which still
gives its name to the Wadi el-Ahsa ("valley of water pits") at the
southern end of the Dead Sea (_Old Test. Jew. Church_, 2nd ed., 147).
On the other hand, see Burney, _Heb. Text of Kings_, p. 270.

[3] R. V. marg. is an alteration to remove from Elisha the suggestion
of an untruth.

[4] The Gilgal of Elisha is near the Jordan--comp. vi. 1 with iv. 38,
[Hebrew: shavim lefanaiv],--and cannot be other than the great
sanctuary 2 m. from Jericho, the local holiness of which is still
attested in the _Onomastica_. It is true that in 2 Kings ii. 1 Bethel
seems to lie between Gilgal and Jericho; but v. 25 shows that Gilgal
was not originally represented as Elisha's residence in this
narrative, which belongs to the Carmel-Dothan series. On the other
hand, for the identification with the Gilgal (Jiljilia) S.W. of
Shiloh, see G.A. Smith, _Ency. Bib._ (s.v. Gilgal); Burney, _op.
cit._, p. 264; Skinner, _Century Bible_: _Kings_, p. 278.

ELISHA BEN ABUYAH (c. A.D. 100), a unique figure among the Palestinian Jews of the first Christian century. He was born before the destruction of the Temple (which occurred in A.D. 70) and survived into the 2nd century. It is not easy to decide as to his exact attitude towards Judaism. That he refused to accept the current rabbinical views is certain, though the Talmud cites his legal decisions. Most authorities believe that he was a Gnostic; but while it is certain that he was not a Christian, it is possible that he was simply a Sadducee, and thus an opponent not of Judaism but of Pharisaism. His disciple, the famous Pharisee Meir, remained his steadfast friend, and his efforts to reclaim his former master are among the most pathetic incidents in the Talmud. In later ages Elisha (_aher_ "the other," as he was named) was regarded as the type of a heretic whose pride of intellect betrayed him into infidelity to law and morals. Without much appropriateness Elisha has been sometimes described as the "Faust of the Talmud." (I. A.)

ELIXIR (from the Arabic _al-iksir_, probably an adaptation of the Gr. [Greek: xerion], a powder used for drying wounds, from [Greek: xeros], dry), in alchemy, the medium which would effect the transmutation of base metals into gold; it probably included all such substances--vapours, liquids, &c.--and had a wider meaning than "philosopher's stone." The same term, more fully _elixir_ _vitae_, elixir of life, was given to the substance which would indefinitely prolong life; it was considered to be closely related to, or even identical with, the substance for transmuting metals. In pharmacy the word was formerly given to a strong extract or tincture, but it is only used now for an aromatic sweet preparation, containing one or more drugs, and in such expressions as "elixir of vitriol," a mixture of sulphuric acid, cinnamon, ginger and alcohol.