Chapter XXII: Part I: £402,216,795 (16)

JACOBI, FRIEDRICH HEINRICH (1743-1819), German philosopher, was born at Düsseldorf on the 25th of January 1743. The second son of a wealthy sugar merchant near Düsseldorf, he was educated for a commercial career. Of a retiring, meditative disposition, Jacobi associated himself at Geneva mainly with the literary and scientific circle of which the most prominent member was Lesage. He studied closely the works of Charles Bonnet, and the political ideas of Rousseau and Voltaire. In 1763 he was called back to Düsseldorf, and in the following year he married and took over the management of his father's business. After a short period he gave up his commercial career, and in 1770 became a member of the council for the duchies of Jülich and Berg, in which capacity he distinguished himself by his ability in financial affairs, and his zeal in social reform. Jacobi kept up his interest in literary and philosophic matters by an extensive correspondence, and his mansion at Pempelfort, near Düsseldorf, was the centre of a distinguished literary circle. With C. M. Wieland he helped to found a new literary journal. _Der Teutsche Mercur_, in which some of his earliest writings, mainly on practical or economic subjects, were published. Here too appeared in part the first of his philosophic works, _Edward Allwills Briefsammlung_ (1776), a combination of romance and speculation. This was followed in 1779 by _Woldemar_, a philosophic novel, of very imperfect structure, but full of genial ideas, and giving the most complete picture of Jacobi's method of philosophizing. In 1779 he visited Munich as member of the privy council, but after a short stay there differences with his colleagues and with the authorities of Bavaria drove him back to Pempelfort. A few unimportant tracts on questions of theoretical politics were followed in 1785 by the work which first brought Jacobi into prominence as a philosopher. A conversation which he had held with Lessing in 1780, in which Lessing avowed that he knew no philosophy, in the true sense of that word, save Spinozism, led him to a protracted study of Spinoza's works. The _Briefe über die Lehre Spinozas_ (1785; 2nd ed., much enlarged and with important _Appendices_, 1789) expressed sharply and clearly Jacobi's strenuous objection to a dogmatic system in philosophy, and drew upon him the vigorous enmity of the Berlin clique, led by Moses Mendelssohn. Jacobi was ridiculed as endeavouring to re-introduce into philosophy the antiquated notion of unreasoning belief, was denounced as an enemy of reason, as a pietist, and as in all probability a Jesuit in disguise, and was especially attacked for his use of the ambiguous term "belief." Jacobi's next important work, _David Hume über den Glauben, oder Idealismus und Realismus_ (1787), was an attempt to show not only that the term _Glaube_ had been used by the most eminent writers to denote what he had employed it for in the _Letters on Spinoza_, but that the nature of the cognition of facts as opposed to the construction of inferences could not be otherwise expressed. In this writing, and especially in the _Appendix_, Jacobi came into contact with the critical philosophy, and subjected the Kantian view of knowledge to searching examination.

The outbreak of the war with the French republic induced Jacobi in 1793 to leave his home near Düsseldorf, and for nearly ten years he resided in Holstein. While there he became intimately acquainted with Reinhold (in whose _Beiträge_, pt. iii., 1801, his important work _Über das Unternehmen des Kriticismus, die Vernunft zu Verstande zu bringen_ was first published), and with Matthias Claudius, the editor of the _Wandsbecker Bote_. During the same period the excitement caused by the accusation of atheism brought against Fichte at Jena led to the publication of Jacobi's _Letter to Fichte_ (1799), in which he made more precise the relation of his own philosophic principles to theology. Soon after his return to Germany, Jacobi received a call to Munich in connexion with the new academy of sciences just founded there. The loss of a considerable portion of his fortune induced him to accept this offer; he settled in Munich in 1804, and in 1807 became president of the academy. In 1811 appeared his last philosophic work, directed against Schelling specially (_Von den göttlichen Dingen und ihrer Offenbarung_), the first part of which, a review of the _Wandsbecker Bote_, had been written in 1798. A bitter reply from Schelling was left without answer by Jacobi, but gave rise to an animated controversy in which Fries and Baader took prominent part. In 1812 Jacobi retired from the office of president, and began to prepare a collected edition of his works. He died before this was completed, on the 10th of March 1819. The edition of his writings was continued by his friend F. Köppen, and was completed in 1825. The works fill six volumes, of which the fourth is in three parts. To the second is prefixed an introduction by Jacobi, which is at the same time an introduction to his philosophy. The fourth volume has also an important preface.

The philosophy of Jacobi is essentially unsystematic. A certain
fundamental view which underlies all his thinking is brought to bear
in succession upon those systematic doctrines which appear to stand
most sharply in contradiction to it, and any positive philosophic
results are given only occasionally. The leading idea of the whole is
that of the complete separation between understanding and apprehension
of real fact. For Jacobi understanding, or the logical faculty, is
purely formal or elaborative, and its results never transcend the
given material supplied to it. From the basis of immediate experience
or perception thought proceeds by comparison and abstraction,
establishing connexions among facts, but remaining in its nature
mediate and finite. The principle of reason and consequent, the
necessity of thinking each given fact of perception as conditioned,
impels understanding towards an endless series of identical
propositions, the records of successive comparisons and abstractions.
The province of the understanding is therefore strictly the region of
the conditioned; to it the world must present itself as a mechanism.
If, then, there is objective truth at all, the existence of real facts
must be made known to us otherwise than through the logical faculty of
thought; and, as the regress from conclusion to premises must depend
upon something not itself capable of logical grounding, mediate
thought implies the consciousness of immediate truth. Philosophy
therefore must resign the hopeless ideal of a systematic (i.e.
intelligible) explanation of things, and must content itself with the
examination of the facts of consciousness. It is a mere prejudice of
philosophic thinkers, a prejudice which has descended from Aristotle,
that mediate or demonstrated cognition is superior in cogency and
value to the immediate perception of truths or facts.

As Jacobi starts with the doctrine that thought is partial and
limited, applicable only to connect facts, but incapable of explaining
their existence, it is evident that for him any demonstrative system
of metaphysic which should attempt to subject all existence to the
principle of logical ground must be repulsive. Now in modern
philosophy the first and greatest demonstrative system of metaphysic
is that of Spinoza, and it lay in the nature of things that upon
Spinoza's system Jacobi should first direct his criticism. A summary
of the results of his examination is thus presented (_Werke_, i.
216-223): (1) Spinozism is atheism; (2) the Kabbalistic philosophy, in
so far as it is philosophy, is nothing but undeveloped or confused
Spinozism; (3) the philosophy of Leibnitz and Wolff is not less
fatalistic than that of Spinoza, and carries a resolute thinker to the
very principles of Spinoza; (4) every demonstrative method ends in
fatalism; (5) we can demonstrate only similarities (agreements, truths
conditionally necessary), proceeding always in identical propositions;
every proof presupposes something already proved, the principle of
which is immediately given (_Offenbarung_, revelation, is the term
here employed by Jacobi, as by many later writers, e.g. Lotze, to
denote the peculiar character of an immediate, unproved truth); (6)
the keystone (_Element_) of all human knowledge and activity is belief
(_Glaube_). Of these propositions only the first and fourth require
further notice. Jacobi, accepting the law of reason and consequent as
the fundamental rule of demonstrative reasoning, and as the rule
explicitly followed by Spinoza, points out that, if we proceed by
applying this principle so as to recede from particular and qualified
facts to the more general and abstract conditions, we land ourselves,
not in the notion of an active, intelligent creator of the system of
things, but in the notion of an all-comprehensive, indeterminate
_Nature_, devoid of will or intelligence. Our unconditioned is either
a pure _abstraction_, or else the impossible notion of a completed
system of conditions. In either case the result is atheism, and this
result is necessary if the demonstrative method, the method of
understanding, is regarded as the only possible means of knowledge.
Moreover, the same method inevitably lands in fatalism. For, if the
action of the human will is to be made intelligible to understanding,
it must be thought as a conditioned phenomenon, having its sufficient
ground in preceding circumstances, and, in ultimate abstraction, as
the outflow from nature which is the sum of conditions. But this is
the fatalist conception, and any philosophy which accepts the law of
reason and consequent as the essence of understanding is fatalistic.
Thus for the scientific understanding there can be no God and no
liberty. It is impossible that there should be a God, for if so he
would of necessity be finite. But a finite God, a God that is _known_,
is no God. It is impossible that there should be liberty, for if so
the mechanical order of phenomena, by means of which they are
comprehensible, would be disturbed, and we should have an
unintelligible world, coupled with the requirement that it shall be
understood. Cognition, then, in the strict sense, occupies the middle
place between sense perception, which is belief in matters of sense,
and reason, which is belief in supersensuous fact.

The best introduction to Jacobi's philosophy is the preface to the
second volume of the _Works_, and Appendix 7 to the _Letters on
Spinoza's Theory_. See also J. Kuhn, _Jacobi und die Philosophie
seiner Zeit_ (1834); F. Deycks, _F. H. Jacobi im Verhältnis zu seinen
Zeitgenossen_ (1848); H. Düntzer, _Freundesbilder aus Goethes Leben_
(1853); E. Zirngiebl, _F. H. Jacobis Leben, Dichten, und Denken_,
1867; F. Harms, _Über die Lehre von F. H. Jacobi_ (1876). Jacobi's
_Auserlesener Briefwechsel_ has been edited by F. Roth in 2 vols.
(1825-1827).

JACOBI, JOHANN GEORG (1740-1814), German poet, elder brother of the philosopher, F. H. Jacobi (1743-1819), was born at Düsseldorf on the 2nd of September 1740. He studied theology at Göttingen and jurisprudence at Helmstedt, and was appointed, in 1766, professor of philosophy in Halle. In this year he made the acquaintance of J. W. L. ("Vater") Gleim, who, attracted by the young poet's _Poetische Versuche_ (1764), became his warm friend, and a lively literary correspondence ensued between Gleim in Halberstadt and Jacobi in Halle. In order to have Jacobi near him, Gleim succeeded in procuring for him a prebendal stall at the cathedral of Halberstadt in 1769, and here Jacobi issued a number of anacreontic lyrics and sonnets. He tired, however, of the lighter muse, and in 1774, to Gleim's grief, left Halberstadt, and for two years (1774-1776) edited at Düsseldorf the _Iris_, a quarterly for women readers. Meanwhile, he wrote many charming lyrics, distinguished by exquisite taste and true poetical feeling. In 1784 he became professor of literature at the university of Freiburg im Breisgau, a post which he held until his death there on the 4th of January 1814. In addition to the earlier _Iris_, to which Goethe, his brother F. H. Jacobi, Gleim and other poets contributed, he published, from 1803-1813, another periodical, also called _Iris_, in which Klopstock, Herder, Jean Paul, Voss and the brothers Stollberg also collaborated.

Jacobi's _Sämmtliche Werke_ were published in 1774 (Halberstadt, 3
vols.). Other editions appeared at Zürich in 1807-1813 and 1825. See
_Ungedruckte Briefe von und an Johann Georg Jacobi_ (Strassburg,
1874); biographical notice by Daniel Jacoby in _Allg. Deutsche
Biographie_; Longo, _Laurence Sterne und Johann Georg Jacobi_ (Vienna,
1898); and _Leben J. G. Jacobis, von einem seiner Freunde_ (1822).

JACOBI, KARL GUSTAV JACOB (1804-1851), German mathematician, was born at Potsdam, of Jewish parentage, on the 10th of December 1804. He studied at Berlin University, where he obtained the degree of doctor of philosophy in 1825, his thesis being an analytical discussion of the theory of fractions. In 1827 he became extraordinary and in 1829 ordinary professor of mathematics at Königsberg, and this chair he filled till 1842, when he visited Italy for a few months to recruit his health. On his return he removed to Berlin, where he lived as a royal pensioner till his death, which occurred on the 18th of February 1851.

His investigations in elliptic functions, the theory of which he
established upon quite a new basis, and more particularly his
development of the theta-function, as given in his great treatise
_Fundamenta nova theoriae functionum ellipticarum_ (Königsberg, 1829),
and in later papers in _Crelle's Journal_, constitute his grandest
analytical discoveries. Second in importance only to these are his
researches in differential equations, notably the theory of the last
multiplier, which is fully treated in his _Vorlesungen über Dynamik_,
edited by R. F. A. Clebsch (Berlin, 1866). It was in analytical
development that Jacobi's peculiar power mainly lay, and he made many
important contributions of this kind to other departments of
mathematics, as a glance at the long list of papers that were
published by him in _Crelle's Journal_ and elsewhere from 1826 onwards
will sufficiently indicate. He was one of the early founders of the
theory of determinants; in particular, he invented the functional
determinant formed of the n² differential coefficients of n given
functions of n independent variables, which now bears his name
(Jacobian), and which has played an important part in many analytical
investigations (see ALGEBRAIC FORMS). Valuable also are his papers on
Abelian transcendents, and his investigations in the theory of
numbers, in which latter department he mainly supplements the labours
of K. F. Gauss. The planetary theory and other particular dynamical
problems likewise occupied his attention from time to time. He left a
vast store of manuscript, portions of which have been published at
intervals in _Crelle's Journal_. His other works include _Commentatio
de transformatione integralis duplicis indefiniti in formam
simpliciorem_ (1832), _Canon arithmeticus_ (1839), and _Opuscula
mathematica_ (1846-1857). His _Gesammelte Werke_ (1881-1891) were
published by the Berlin Academy.

See Lejeune-Dirichlet, "Gedächtnisrede auf Jacobi" in the
_Abhandlungen der Berliner Akademie_ (1852).

JACOBINS, THE, the most famous of the political clubs of the French Revolution. It had its origin in the Club Breton, which was established at Versailles shortly after the opening of the States General in 1789. It was at first composed exclusively of deputies from Brittany, but was soon joined by others from various parts of France, and counted among its early members Mirabeau, Sieyès, Barnave, Pétion, the Abbé Grégoire, Charles and Alexandre Lameth, Robespierre, the duc d'Aiguillon, and La Revellière-Lépeaux. At this time its meetings were secret and little is known of what took place at them. After the émeute of the 5th and 6th of October the club, still entirely composed of deputies, followed the National Assembly to Paris, where it rented the refectory of the monastery of the Jacobins in the Rue St Honoré, near the seat of the Assembly. The name "Jacobins," given in France to the Dominicans, because their first house in Paris was in the Rue St Jacques, was first applied to the club in ridicule by its enemies. The title assumed by the club itself, after the promulgation of the constitution of 1791, was _Société des amis de la constitution séants aux Jacobins à Paris_, which was changed on the 21st of September 1792, after the fall of the monarchy, to _Société des Jacobins, amis de la liberté et de l'égalité_. It occupied successively the refectory, the library, and the chapel of the monastery.

Once transferred to Paris, the club underwent rapid modifications. The first step was its expansion by the admission as members or associates of others besides deputies; Arthur Young was so admitted on the 18th of January 1790. On the 8th of February the society was formally constituted on this broader basis by the adoption of the rules drawn up by Barnave, which were issued with the signature of the duc d'Aiguillon, the president. The objects of the club were defined as (1) to discuss in advance questions to be decided by the National Assembly; (2) to work for the establishment and strengthening of the constitution in accordance with the spirit of the preamble (i.e. of respect for legally constituted authority and the rights of man); (3) to correspond with other societies of the same kind which should be formed in the realm. At the same time the rules of order and forms of election were settled, and the constitution of the club determined. There were to be a president, elected every month, four secretaries, a treasurer, and committees elected to superintend elections and presentations, the correspondence, and the administration of the club. Any member who by word or action showed that his principles were contrary to the constitution and the rights of man was to be expelled, a rule which later on facilitated the "purification" of the society by the expulsion of its more moderate elements. By the 7th article the club decided to admit as associates similar societies in other parts of France and to maintain with them a regular correspondence.

This last provision was of far-reaching importance. By the 10th of August 1790 there were already one hundred and fifty-two affiliated clubs; the attempts at counter-revolution led to a great increase of their number in the spring of 1791, and by the close of the year the Jacobins had a network of branches all over France. It was this widespread yet highly centralized organization that gave to the Jacobin Club its formidable power.

At the outset the Jacobin Club was not distinguished by extreme political views. The somewhat high subscription confined its membership to men of substance, and to the last it was--so far as the central society in Paris was concerned--composed almost entirely of professional men, such as Robespierre, or well-to-do _bourgeois_, like Santerre. From the first, however, other elements were present. Besides Louis Philippe, duc de Chartres (afterwards king of the French), liberal aristocrats of the type of the duc d'Aiguillon, the prince de Broglie, or the vicomte de Noailles, and the _bourgeois_ who formed the mass of the members, the club contained such figures as "Père" Michel Gérard, a peasant proprietor from Tuel-en-Montgermont, in Brittany, whose rough common sense was admired as the oracle of popular wisdom, and whose countryman's waistcoat and plaited hair were later on to become the model for the Jacobin fashion.[1] The provincial branches were from the first far more democratic, though in these too the leadership was usually in the hands of members of the educated or propertied classes. Up to the very eve of the republic, the club ostensibly supported the monarchy; it took no part in the petition of the 17th of July 1790 for the king's dethronement; nor had it any official share even in the insurrections of the 20th of June and the 10th of August 1792; it only formally recognized the republic on the 21st of September. But the character and extent of the club's influence cannot be gauged by its official acts alone, and long before it emerged as the principal focus of the Terror, its character had been profoundly changed by the secession of its more moderate elements, some to found the Club of 1789, some in 1791--among them Barnave, the Lameths, Duport and Bailly--to found the club of the Feuillants scoffed at by their former friends as the _club monarchique_. The main cause of this change was the admission of the public to the sittings of the club, which began on the 14th of October 1791. The result is described in a report of the Department of Paris on "the state of the empire," presented on the 12th of June 1792, at the request of Roland, the minister of the interior, and signed by the duc de La Rochefoucauld, which ascribes to the Jacobins all the woes of the state. "There exists," it runs, "in the midst of the capital committed to our care a public pulpit of defamation, where citizens of every age and both sexes are admitted day by day to listen to a criminal propaganda.... This establishment, situated in the former house of the Jacobins, calls itself a society; but it has less the aspect of a private society than that of a public spectacle: vast tribunes are thrown open for the audience; all the sittings are advertised to the public for fixed days and hours, and the speeches made are printed in a special journal and lavishly distributed."[2] In this society--the report continues--murder is counselled or applauded, all authorities are calumniated and all the organs of the law bespattered with abuse; as to its power, it exercises "by its influence, its affiliations and its correspondence a veritable ministerial authority, without title and without responsibility, while leaving to the legal and responsible authorities only the shadow of power" (Schmidt, _Tableaux_ i. 78, &c.).

The constituency to which the club was henceforth responsible, and from which it derived its power, was in fact the _peuple bête_ of Paris; the _sans-culottes_--decayed lackeys, cosmopolitan ne'er-do-wells, and starving workpeople--who crowded its tribunes. To this audience, and not primarily to the members of the club, the speeches of the orators were addressed and by its verdict they were judged. In the earlier stages of the Revolution the mob had been satisfied with the fine platitudes of the _philosophes_ and the vague promise of a political millennium; but as the chaos in the body politic grew, and with it the appalling material misery, it began to clamour for the blood of the "traitors" in office by whose corrupt machinations the millennium was delayed, and only those orators were listened to who pandered to its suspicions. Hence the elimination of the moderate elements from the club; hence the ascendancy of Marat, and finally of Robespierre, the secret of whose power was that they really shared the suspicions of the populace, to which they gave a voice and which they did not shrink from translating into action. After the fall of the monarchy Robespierre was in effect the Jacobin Club; for to the tribunes he was the oracle of political wisdom, and by his standard all others were judged.[3] With his fall the Jacobins too came to an end.

Not the least singular thing about the Jacobins is the very slender material basis on which their overwhelming power rested. France groaned under their tyranny, which was compared to that of the Inquisition, with its system of espionage and denunciations which no one was too illustrious or too humble to escape. Yet it was reckoned by competent observers that, at the height of the Terror, the Jacobins could not command a force of more than 3000 men in Paris. But the secret of their strength was that, in the midst of the general disorganization, they alone were organized. The police agent Dutard, in a report to the minister Garat (April 30, 1793), describing an episode in the Palais Égalité (Royal), adds: "Why did a dozen Jacobins strike terror into two or three hundred aristocrats? It is that the former have a rallying-point and that the latter have none." When the _jeunesse dorée_ did at last organize themselves, they had little difficulty in flogging the Jacobins out of the cafés into comparative silence. Long before this the Girondin government had been urged to meet organization by organization, force by force; and it is clear from the daily reports of the police agents that even a moderate display of energy would have saved the National Convention from the humiliation of being dominated by a club, and the French Revolution from the blot of the Terror. But though the Girondins were fully conscious of the evil, they were too timid, or too convinced of the ultimate triumph of their own persuasive eloquence, to act. In the session of the 30th of April 1793 a proposal was made to move the Convention to Versailles out of reach of the Jacobins, and Buzot declared that it was "impossible to remain in Paris" so long as "this abominable haunt" should exist; but the motion was not carried, and the Girondins remained to become the victims of the Jacobins.

Meanwhile other political clubs could only survive so long as they were content to be the shadows of the powerful organization of the Rue St Honoré. The Feuillants had been suppressed on the 18th of August 1792. The turn of the Cordeliers came so soon as its leaders showed signs of revolting against Jacobin supremacy, and no more startling proof of this ascendancy could be found than the ease with which Hébert and his fellows were condemned and the readiness with which the Cordeliers, after a feeble attempt at protest, acquiesced in the verdict. It is idle to speculate on what might have happened had this ascendancy been overthrown by the action of a strong government. No strong government existed, nor, in the actual conditions of the country, could exist on the lines laid down by the constitution. France was menaced by civil war within, and by a coalition of hostile powers without; the discipline of the Terror was perhaps necessary if she was to be welded into a united force capable of resisting this double peril; and the revolutionary leaders saw in the Jacobin organization the only instrument by which this discipline could be made effective. This is the apology usually put forward for the Jacobins by republican writers of later times; they were, it is said (and of some of them it is certainly true), no mere doctrinaires and visionary sectaries, but practical and far-seeing politicians, who realized that "desperate ills need desperate remedies," and, by having the courage of their convictions, saved the gains of the Revolution for France.

The Jacobin Club was closed after the fall of Robespierre on the 9th of Thermidor of the year III., and some of its members were executed. An attempt was made to re-open the club, which was joined by many of the enemies of the Thermidorians, but on the 21st of Brumaire, year III. (Nov. 11, 1794), it was definitively closed. Its members and their sympathizers were scattered among the cafés, where a ruthless war of sticks and chairs was waged against them by the young "aristocrats" known as the _jeunesse dorée_. Nevertheless the "Jacobins" survived, in a somewhat subterranean fashion, emerging again in the club of the Panthéon, founded on the 25th of November 1795, and suppressed in the following February (see BABEUF; FRANÇOIS NOEl). The last attempt to reorganize them was the foundation of the _Réunion d'amis de l'égalité et de la liberté_, in July 1799, which had its headquarters in the _Salle du Manège_ of the Tuileries, and was thus known as the _Club du Manège_. It was patronized by Barras, and some two hundred and fifty members of the two councils of the legislature were enrolled as members, including many notable ex-Jacobins. It published a newspaper called the _Journal des Libres_, proclaimed the apotheosis of Robespierre and Babeuf, and attacked the Directory as a _royauté pentarchique_. But public opinion was now preponderatingly moderate or royalist, and the club was violently attacked in the press and in the streets, the suspicions of the government were aroused; it had to change its meeting-place from the Tuileries to the church of the Jacobins (Temple of Peace) in the Rue du Bac, and in August it was suppressed, after barely a month's existence. Its members revenged themselves on the Directory by supporting Napoleon Bonaparte.

Long before the suppression of the Jacobin Club the name of "Jacobins" had been popularly applied to all promulgators of extreme revolutionary opinions. In this sense the word passed beyond the borders of France and long survived the Revolution. Canning's paper, _The Anti-Jacobin_, directed against the English Radicals, consecrated its use in England; and in the correspondence of Metternich and other leaders of the repressive policy which followed the second fall of Napoleon, "Jacobin" is the term commonly applied to anyone with Liberal tendencies, even to so august a personage as the emperor Alexander I. of Russia.

The most important source of information for the history of the
Jacobins is F. A. Aulard's _La société des Jacobins, Recueil de
documents_ (6 vols., Paris, 1889, &c.), where a critical bibliography
will be found. This collection does not contain all the printed
sources--notably the official Journal of the Club is omitted--but
these sources, when not included, are indicated. The documents
published are furnished with valuable explanatory notes. See also W.
A. Schmidt, _Tableaux de la révolution française_ (3 vols., Leipzig,
1867-1870), notably for the reports of the secret police, which throw
much light on the actual working of the Jacobin propaganda.
(W. A. P.)

FOOTNOTES:

[1] "When I first sat among you I heard so many beautiful speeches
that I might have believed myself in heaven, had there not been so
many lawyers present." Instead of practical questions "we have become
involved in a _galimatias_ of Rights of Man of which I understand
mighty little but that it is worth nothing." _Motion du Père Gérard_
in the Jacobins of the 27th of April 1790 (Aulard i. 63).

[2] i.e. _Journal des débats et de la correspondance de la Société_,
&c. For the various newspapers published under the auspices of the
Jacobins see Aulard i. p. cx., &c.

[3] In the published reports only the speeches of members are given,
not the interruptions from the tribunes. But see the report (May 18,
1793) of Dutard to Garat on a meeting of the Jacobins (Schmidt,
_Tableaux_ ii. 242).

JACOBITE CHURCH. The name of "Jacobites" is first found in a synodal decree of Nicaea A.D. 787, and was invented by hostile Greeks for the Syrian Monophysite Church as founded, or rather restored, by Jacob or James Baradaeus, who was ordained its bishop A.D. 541 or 543. The Monophysites, who like the Greeks knew themselves simply as the Orthodox, were grievously persecuted by the emperor Justinian and the graecizing patriarchs of Antioch, because they rejected the decrees of the council of Chalcedon, in which they--not without good reason--saw nothing but a thinly veiled relapse into those opinions of Nestorius which the previous council of Ephesus had condemned. James was born a little before A.D. 500 at Tella or Tela, 55 m. east of Edessa, of a priestly family, and entered the convent of Phesilta on Mount Isla. About 528 he went with a fellow-monk Sergius to Constantinople to plead the cause of his co-religionists with the empress Theodora, and lived there fifteen years. Justinian during those years imprisoned, deprived or exiled most of the recalcitrant clergy of Syria, Mesopotamia, Cilicia, Cappadocia, and the adjacent regions. Once ordained bishop of Edessa, with the connivance of Theodora, James, disguised as a ragged beggar (whence his name Baradaeus, Syriac _Burdeana_, Arabic _al-Baradia_), traversed these regions preaching, teaching and ordaining new clergy to the number, it is said, of 80,000. His later years were embittered by squabbles with his own clergy, and he died in 578. His work, however, endured, and in the middle ages the Jacobite hierarchy numbered 150 archbishops and bishops under a patriarch and his _maphrian_. About the year 728 six Jacobite bishops present at the council of Manazgert established communion with the Armenians, who equally rejected Chalcedon; they were sent by the patriarch of Antioch, and among them were the metropolitan of Urha (Edessa) and the bishops of Qarhan, Gardman, Nferkert and Amasia. How long this union lasted is not known. In 1842, when the Rev. G. P. Badger visited the chief Jacobite centres, their numbers in all Turkey had dwindled to about 100,000 souls, owing to vast secessions to Rome. At Aleppo at that date only ten families out of several hundred remained true to their old faith, and something like the same proportion at Damascus and Bagdad. Badger testifies that the Syrian proselytes to Rome were superior to their Jacobite brethren, having established schools, rebuilt their churches, increased their clergy, and, above all, having learned to live with each other on terms of peace and charity. As late as 1850 there were 150 villages of them in the Jebel Toor to the north-east of Mardin, 50 in the district of Urfah and Gawar, and a few in the neighbourhoods of Diarbekr, Mosul and Damascus. From about 1860, the seceders to Rome were able, thanks to French consular protection, to seize the majority of the Jacobite churches in Turkey; and this injustice has contributed much to the present degradation and impoverishment of the Jacobites.

They used leavened bread in the Eucharist mixed with salt and oil, and like other Monophysites add to the _Trisagion_ the words "Who wast crucified for our sake." They venerate pictures or images, and make the sign of the cross with one finger to show that Christ had but one nature. Deacons, as in Armenia, marry before taking priests' orders. Their patriarch is styled of Antioch, but seldom comes west of Mardin. His _maphrian_ (fertilizer) since 1089 has lived at Mosul and ordains the bishops. Monkery is common among them, but there are no nuns. Next to the Roman Uniats (whom they term _Rassen_ or Venal) they most hate the Nestorian Syrians of Persia. In 1882, at the instance of the British government, the Turks began to recognize them as a separate organization.

See M. Klein, _Jacobus Baradaeus_ (Leiden, 1882); Assemani, _Bibl.
Or._ ii. 62-69, 326 and 331; G. P. Badger, _The Nestorians_ (London,
1852); Rubens Duval, _La litérature syriaque_ (Paris, 1899); G.
Krüger, _Monophysitische Streitigkeiten_ (Jena, 1884); Silbernagel,
_Verfassung der Kirchen des Orients_ (Landshut, 1865); and G. Wright,
_History of Syriac Literature_ (London, 1894). (F. C. C.)