Chapter IX: Front Matter (9)

In the Santa Cruz beds of Patagonia the family is represented by the generalized genus _Oxyodontotherium_ (in which _Theosodon_ may apparently be included). It comprises animals ranging up to the size of a tapir, in which the nostrils were more or less in the normal anterior position, and the cheek-teeth short-crowned, with the inner cones of the upper molars well developed and separated by a notch, and the pits of moderate depth. The last upper premolar is simpler than the molars, and the canine, which may be double-rooted, is like the earlier premolars. The radius and ulna, like the tibia and fibula, are distinct, and the metapodials rudimentary. On the other hand, in _Macrauchenia_, which was a much larger llama-like animal, the skull is elongated and narrow, with rudimentary nasals, and the aperture of the nose placed nearly on the line of the eyes and directed upwards, the muzzle not improbably terminating in a short trunk. Deep pits on the forehead probably served for the attachment of special muscles connected with the latter. Very curious is the structure of the cheek-teeth, which are high-crowned, with the two inner cones reduced to mere points, and the pits on the crown-surface large and funnel-shaped. In fact, the perissodactyle type is almost lost. The cervical vertebrae and limb-bones are very long, the radius and ulna being completely, and the tibia and fibula partially, united. The typical _M. patagonica_ is a Pleistocene form as large as a camel, ranging from Patagonia to Brazil, but remains of smaller species have been found in the Pliocene (?) of Bolivia and Argentina.

The imperfectly known _Scalabrinia_ of the Argentine Pliocene appears to occupy a position intermediate between _Oxyodontotherium_ and _Macrauchenia_, having the nasal aperture situated in the middle of the length of the skull, and the crowns of the cheek-teeth nearly as tall as in the latter, but the lower molars furnished with a projecting process in the hinder valley, similar to one occurring in those of the former.

In this place may be mentioned another strange ungulate from the Santa Cruz beds of Patagonia, namely, _Astrapotherium_, sometimes regarded as typifying a suborder by itself. This huge ungulate had cheek-teeth singularly like those of a rhinoceros, and an enormous pair of tusk-like upper incisors, recalling the upper canines of _Machaerodus_ on an enlarged scale. In the lower jaw are two large tusk-like canines between which are three pairs of curiously-formed spatulate incisors, and in both jaws there is a long diastema. The dental formula appears to be i.(1/3), c.(0/1), p.(2/1), m.(3/3).

Next _Astrapotherium_ may be provisionally placed the genus
_Homalodontotherium_, of which the teeth have much lower crowns, and
are of a less decidedly rhinocerotic type than in _Astrapotherium_,
and the whole dentition forms an even and unbroken series. The bodies
of the cervical vertebrae are short, with flattened articular
surfaces, the humerus has an enormous deltoid crest, suggestive of
fossorial powers, and the femur is flattened, with a third trochanter.
According to the Argentine palaeontologists, the carpus is of the
alternating type, and the terminal phalanges of the pentedactyle feet
are bifid, and very like those of Edentata. Indeed, this type of foot
shows many edentate resemblances. The astragalus is square and
flattened, articulating directly with the navicular, although not with
the cuboid, and having a slightly convex facet for the tibia. From the
structure of the above-mentioned type of foot, which is stated to have
been found in association with the skull, it has been suggested that
_Homalodontotherium_ should be placed in the _Ancylopoda_ (q.v.), but,
to say nothing of the different form of the cheek-teeth, all the other
South American Santa Cruz ungulates are so distinct from those of
other countries that this seems unlikely. It may be suggested that we
have rather to deal with an instance of parallelism--a view supported
by the parallelism to the _Equidae_ presented by certain members of
the _Proterotheriidae_. (R. L.*)

LITOTES (Gr. [Greek: litotês], plainness, [Greek: litos], plain, simple, smooth), a rhetorical figure in which emphasis is secured for a statement by turning it into a denial of the contrary, e.g. "a citizen of no mean city," i.e. a citizen of a famous city, "A. is not a man to be neglected." Litotes is sometimes used for what should be more strictly called "meiosis" (Gr. [Greek: meiôsis], lessening, diminution, [Greek: meiôn], lesser), where the expressions used apparently are weak or understated, but the effect is to intensify.

LITTER (through O. Fr. _litere_ or _litiere_, mod. _litière_ from Med. Lat. _lectaria_, classical _lectica_, _lectus_, bed, couch), a word used of a portable couch, shut in by curtains and borne on poles by bearers, and of a bed of straw or other suitable substance for animals; hence applied to the number of young produced by an animal at one birth, and also to any disordered heap of waste material, rubbish, &c. In ancient Greece, prior to the influence of Asiatic luxury after the Macedonian conquest, the litter ([Greek: phoreion]) was only used by invalids or by women. The Romans, when the _lectica_ was introduced, probably about the latter half of the 2nd century B.C. (Gellius x. 3), used it only for travelling purposes. Like the Greek or Asiatic litter, it had a roof of skin (_pellis_) and side curtains (_vela_, _plagae_). Juvenal (iv. 20) speaks of transparent sides (_latis specularibus_). The slaves who bore the litter on their shoulders (_succollare_) were termed _lecticarii_, and it was a sign of luxury and wealth to employ six or even eight bearers. Under the Empire the litter began to be used in the streets of Rome, and its use was restricted and granted as a privilege (Suet. _Claudius_). The travelling _lectica_ must be distinguished from the much earlier _lectica funebris_ or _feretrum_, the funeral bier on which the dead were carried to their burial-place.

LITTLE FALLS, a city and the county-seat of Morrison county, Minnesota, U.S.A., on both banks of the Mississippi river, about 88 m. N.W. of Minneapolis. Pop. (1890) 2354; (1900) 5774, of whom 1559 were foreign-born, chiefly Germans and Swedes; (1905) 5856; (1910) 6078. It is served by the Northern Pacific railway. The city is situated in a prosperous farming region, and has excellent water-power and various manufactures. Little Falls was settled about 1850, was chartered as a city in 1889 and adopted a new charter in 1902. Here was buried the Chippewa chief, Hole-in-the-Day (_c._ 1827-1868), or Bagwunagijik, who succeeded his father, also named Hole-in-the-Day, as head chief of the Chippewas in 1846. Like his father, the younger Hole-in-the-Day led his tribe against the Sioux, and he is said to have prevented the Chippewas from joining the Sioux rising in 1862. His body was subsequently removed by his relatives.

LITTLE FALLS, a city of Herkimer county, New York, U.S.A., on the Mohawk river, 21 m. E.S.E. of Utica. Pop. (1890) 8783; (1900) 10,381, of whom 1915 were foreign-born; (1910 census) 12,273. It is served by the New York Central & Hudson River, the West Shore, the Utica & Mohawk Valley (electric), and the Little Falls & Dolgeville railways (the last named being 13 m. long and running only to Salisbury Center and by the Erie canal). The Mohawk river falls here by a series of rapids 45 ft. in less than a mile, furnishing water power. Among the manufactures are cotton yarn, hosiery and knit goods, leather, &c. In 1905 the city's factory products were valued at $4,471,080. The city has one of the largest cheese-markets in the United States. The manufacture of flour and grist-mill products was formerly an important industry; a mill burned in 1782 by Tories and Indians had supplied almost the entire Mohawk Valley, and particularly Forts Herkimer and Dayton. Near the city is the grave of General Nicholas Herkimer, to whom a monument was erected in 1896. Little Falls was settled by Germans in 1782, and was almost immediately destroyed by Indians and Tories. It was resettled in 1790, and was incorporated as a village in 1811 and as a city in 1895.

See George A. Hardin, _History of Herkimer County_ (Syracuse, 1893).

LITTLEHAMPTON, a seaport and watering-place in the Chichester parliamentary division of Sussex, England, at the mouth of the Arun, 62 m. S. by W. from London by the London, Brighton & South Coast railway. Pop. of urban district (1901) 7363. There is a beach of firm sand. The harbour is easily accessible in all weathers, and has a small general trade.

LITTLE ROCK, the capital of Arkansas, U.S.A., and the county-seat of Pulaski county, situated near the centre of the state and on the S. bank of the Arkansas river, at the E. edge of the Ozark foothills. Pop. (1890) 25,874; (1900) 38,307, of whom 14,694 were of negro blood, and 2099 were foreign-born; (1910 census) 45,941. Little Rock is served by the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific, the St Louis South Western, and the St Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern railways and by river boats. It occupies a comparatively level site of 11 sq. m. at an altitude of 250 to 400 ft. above sea-level and 50 ft. or more above the river, which is crossed here by three railway bridges and by a county bridge. The city derived its name (originally "le Petit Roche" and "The Little Rock") from a rocky peninsula in the Arkansas, distinguished from the "Big Rock" (the site of the army post, Fort Logan H. Roots), 1 m. W. of the city, across the river. The Big Rock is said to have been first discovered and named "Le Rocher Français" in 1722 by Sieur Bernard de la Harpe, who was in search of an emerald mountain; the Little Rock is now used as an abutment for a railway bridge. The state capitol, the state insane asylum, the state deaf mute institute, the state school for the blind, a state reform school, the penitentiary, the state library and the medical and law departments of the state university are at Little Rock; and the city is also the seat of the United States court for the eastern district of Arkansas, of a United States land office, of Little Rock College, of the St Mary's Academy, of a Roman Catholic orphanage and a Roman Catholic convent, and of two schools for negroes--the Philander Smith College (Methodist Episcopal, 1877), co-educational, and the Arkansas Baptist College. The city is the seat of Protestant Episcopal and Roman Catholic bishops. Little Rock has a Carnegie library (1908), an old ladies' home, a Florence Crittenton rescue home, a children's home, St Vincent's infirmary, a city hospital, a Catholic hospital, a physicians' and surgeons' hospital and the Arkansas hospital for nervous diseases. A municipal park system includes City, Forest, Wonderland and West End parks. Immigration from the northern states has been encouraged, and northern men control much of the business of the city. In 1905 the value of factory products was $4,689,787, being 38.8% greater than the value in 1900. Cotton and lumber industries are the leading interests; the value of cotton-seed oil and cake manufactured in 1905 was $967,043, of planing mill products $835,049, and of lumber and timber products $342,134. Printing and publishing and the manufacture of foundry and machine shop products and of furniture are other important industries. Valuable deposits of bauxite are found in Pulaski county, and the mines are the most important in the United States.

Originally the site of the city was occupied by the Quapaw Indians. The earliest permanent settlement by the whites was about 1813-1814; the county was organized in 1818 while still a part of Missouri Territory; Little Rock was surveyed in 1821, was incorporated as a town and became the capital of Arkansas in 1821, and was chartered as a city in 1836. In 1850 its population was only 2167, and in 1860 3727; but in 1870 it was 12,380. Little Rock was enthusiastically anti-Union at the outbreak of the Civil War. In February 1861, the United States Arsenal was seized by the state authorities. In September 1863 the Federal generals William Steele (1819-1885) and John W. Davidson (1824-1881), operating against General Sterling Price, captured the city, and it remained throughout the rest of the war under Federal control. Constitutional conventions met at Little Rock in 1836, 1864, 1868 and 1874, and also the Secession Convention of 1861. The _Arkansas Gazette_, established at Arkansas Post in 1819 and soon afterwards removed to the new capital, was the first newspaper published in Arkansas and one of the first published west of the Mississippi.

LITTLETON (or LYTTELTON), EDWARD, BARON (1589-1645), son of Sir Edward Littleton (d. 1621) chief-justice of North Wales, was born at Munslow in Shropshire; he was educated at Oxford and became a lawyer, succeeding his father as chief-justice of North Wales. In 1625 he became a member of parliament and acted in 1628 as chairman of the committee of grievances upon whose report the Petition of Right was based. As a member of the party opposed to the arbitrary measures of Charles I. Littleton had shown more moderation than some of his colleagues, and in 1634, three years after he had been chosen recorder of London, the king attached him to his own side by appointing him solicitor-general. In the famous case about ship-money Sir Edward argued against Hampden. In 1640 he was made chief-justice of the common pleas and in 1641 lord keeper of the great seal, being created a peer as Baron Lyttelton. About this time, the lord keeper began to display a certain amount of indifference to the royal cause. In January 1642 he refused to put the great seal to the proclamation for the arrest of the five members and he also incurred the displeasure of Charles by voting for the militia ordinance. However, he assured his friend Edward Hyde, afterwards earl of Clarendon, that he had only taken this step to allay the suspicions of the parliamentary party who contemplated depriving him of the seal, and he undertook to send this to the king. He fulfilled his promise, and in May 1642 he himself joined Charles at York, but it was some time before he regained the favour of the king and the custody of the seal. Littleton died at Oxford on the 27th of August 1645; he left no sons and his barony became extinct. His only daughter, Anne, married her cousin Sir Thomas Littleton, Bart. (d. 1681), and their son Sir Thomas Littleton (_c._ 1647-1710), was speaker of the House of Commons from 1698 to 1700, and treasurer of the navy from 1700 to 1710. Macaulay thus sums up the character of Speaker Littleton and his relations to the Whigs: "He was one of their ablest, most zealous and most steadfast friends; and had been, both in the House of Commons and at the board of treasury, an invaluable second to Montague" (the earl of Halifax).

LITTLETON, SIR THOMAS DE (_c._ 1407-1481), English judge and legal author, was born, it is supposed, at Frankley Manor House, Worcestershire, about 1407. Littleton's surname was that of his mother, who was the sole daughter and heiress of Thomas de Littleton, lord of Frankley. She married one Thomas Westcote. Thomas was the eldest of four sons of the marriage, and took the name of Littleton, or, as it seems to have been more commonly spelt, Luttelton. The date of his birth is uncertain; a MS. pedigree gives 1422, but it was probably earlier than this. If, as is generally accepted, he was born at Frankley Manor, it could not have been before 1407, in which year Littleton's grandfather recovered the manor from a distant branch of the family. He is said by Sir E. Coke to have "attended one of the universities," but there is no corroboration of this statement. He was probably a member of the Inner Temple, and lectured there on the statute of Westminster II., _De Donis Conditionalibus_. His name occurs in the Paston Letters (ed. J. Gairdner, i. 60) about 1445 as that of a well-known counsel and in 1481/2 he received a grant of the manor of Sheriff Hales, Shropshire, from a Sir William Trussel as a reward for his services as counsel. He appears to have been recorder of Coventry in 1450; he was made escheator of Worcestershire, and in 1447/8 was under-sheriff of the same county; he became serjeant-at-law in 1453 and was afterwards a justice of assize on the northern circuit. In 1466 he was made a judge of the common pleas, and in 1475 a knight of the Bath. He died, according to the inscription on his tomb in Worcester cathedral, on the 23rd of August 1481. He married, about 1444, Joan, widow of Sir Philip Chetwind of Ingestrie in Staffordshire, and by her had three sons, through whom he became ancestor of the families holding the peerages of Cobham (formerly Lyttelton, q.v.) and Hatherton.

His _Treatise on Tenures_ was probably written after he had been appointed to the bench. It is addressed to his second son Richard, who went to the bar, and whose name occurs in the year books of the reign of Henry VII. The book, both historically and from its intrinsic merit, may be characterized as the first text-book upon the English law of property. The law of property in Littleton's time was mainly concerned with rights over land, and it was the law relating to this class of rights which Littleton set himself to digest and classify. The time was ripe for the task. Ever since the Conquest regular courts of justice had been at work administering a law which had grown out of an admixture of Teutonic custom and of Norman feudalism. Under Henry II. the courts had been organized, and the practice of keeping regular records of the proceedings had been carefully observed. The centralizing influence of the royal courts and of the justices of assize, working steadily through three centuries, had made the rules governing the law of property uniform throughout the land; local customs were confined within certain prescribed limits, and were only recognized as giving rise to certain well-defined classes of rights, such, for instance, as the security of tenure acquired by villeins by virtue of the custom of the manor, and the rights of freeholders, in some towns, to dispose of their land by will. Thus, by the time of Littleton (Henry VI. and Edward IV.), an immense mass of material had been acquired and preserved in the rolls of the various courts. Reports of important cases were published in the "year books." A glance at Statham's _Abridgment_, the earliest digest of decided cases, published nearly at the same time as Littleton's _Tenures_, is sufficient to show the enormous bulk which reported cases had already attained as materials for the knowledge of English law.

Littleton's treatise was written in that peculiar dialect compounded of Norman-French and English phrases called law French. Although it had been provided by a statute of 36 Edward III. that _viva voce_ proceedings in court should no longer be conducted in the French tongue, "which was much unknown in the realm," the practice of reporting proceedings in that language, and of using it in legal treatises, lingered till a much later period, and was at length prohibited by a statute passed in the time of the Commonwealth in 1650. Unlike the preceding writers on English law, Glanville, Bracton and the authors of the treatises known by the names of Britton and Fleta, Littleton borrows nothing from the sources of Roman law or the commentators. He deals exclusively with English law.

The book is written on a definite system, and is the first attempt at a scientific classification of rights over land. Littleton's method is to begin with a definition, usually clearly and briefly expressed, of the class of rights with which he is dealing. He then proceeds to illustrate the various characteristics and incidents of the class by stating particular instances, some of which refer to decisions which had actually occurred, but more commonly they are hypothetical cases put by way of illustration of his principles. He occasionally refers to reported cases. His book is thus much more than a mere digest of judicial decisions; to some extent he pursues the method which gave to Roman law its breadth and consistency of principle. In Roman law this result was attained through the practice of putting to jurisconsults hypothetical cases to be solved by them. Littleton, in like manner, is constantly stating and solving by reference to principles of law cases which may or may not have occurred in actual practice.

In dealing with freehold estates Littleton adopts a classification
which has been followed by all writers who have attempted to
systematize the English law of land, especially Sir M. Hale and Sir
William Blackstone. It is indeed the only possible approach to a
scientific arrangement of the intricate "estates in land" known to
English law. He classifies estates in land by reference to their
duration, or in other words by reference to the differences between
the persons who are entitled to succeed upon the death of the person
in possession or "tenant." First of all, he describes the
characteristics of tenancy in fee simple. This is still as it was in
Littleton's time the largest interest in land known to the law. Next
in order comes tenancy in fee tail, the various classes of which are
sketched by Littleton with brevity and accuracy, but he is silent as
to the important practice, which first received judicial recognition
shortly before his death, of "suffering a recovery," whereby through a
series of judicial fictions a tenant in tail was enabled to convert
his estate tail into a fee simple, thus acquiring full power of
alienation. After discussing in their logical order other freehold
interests in land, he passes to interests in land called by later
writers interests less than freehold, namely, tenancies for terms of
years and tenancies at will. With the exception of tenancy from year
to year, now so familiar to us, but which was a judicial creation of a
date later than the time of Littleton, the first book is a complete
statement of the principles of the common law, as they for the most
part still exist, governing and regulating interests in lands. The
first book concludes with a very interesting chapter on copyhold
tenures, which marks the exact point at which the tenant by copy of
court roll, the successor of the villein, who in his turn represented
the freeman reduced to villenage by the growth of the manorial system,
acquired security of tenure.

The second book relates to the reciprocal rights and duties of lord
and tenant, and is mainly of historical interest to the modern lawyer.
It contains a complete statement of the law as it stood in Littleton's
time relating to homage, fealty and escuage, the money compensation to
be paid to the lord in lieu of military service to be rendered to the
king, a peculiar characteristic of English as distinguished from
Continental feudalism.

Littleton then proceeds to notice the important features of tenure by
knight's service with its distinguishing incidents of the right of
wardship of the lands and person of the infant heir or heiress, and
the right of disposing of the ward in marriage. The non-military
freehold tenures are next dealt with; we have an account of "socage
tenure," into which all military tenures were subsequently commuted by
a now unrecognized act of the Long Parliament in 1650, afterwards
re-enacted by the well-known statute of Charles II. (1660), and of
"frankalmoign," or the spiritual tenure by which churchmen held. In
the description of burgage tenure and tenure in villenage, the life of
which consists in the validity of ancient customs recognized by law,
we recognize survivals of a time before the iron rule of feudalism had
moulded the law of land in the interests of the king and the great
lords. Finally he deals with the law of rents, discussing the various
kinds of rents which may be reserved to the grantor upon a grant of
lands and the remedies for recovery of rent, especially the remedy by
distress.[1]

The third and concluding book of Littleton's treatise deals mainly
with the various ways in which rights over land can be acquired and
terminated in the case of a single possessor or several possessors.
This leads him to discuss the various modes in which several persons
may simultaneously have rights over the same land, as
parceners:--daughters who are co-heiresses, or sons in gavelkind;
joint tenants and tenants in common. Next follows an elaborate
discussion upon what are called estates upon condition--a class of
interests which occupied a large space in the early common law, giving
rise on one side to estates tail, on another to mortgages. In
Littleton's time a mortgage, which he carefully describes, was merely
a conveyance of land by the tenant to the mortgagee, with a condition
that, if the tenant paid to the mortgagee a certain sum on a certain
day, he might re-enter and have the land again. If the condition was
not fulfilled, the interest of the mortgagee became absolute, and
Littleton gives no indication of any modification of this strict rule,
such as was introduced by courts of equity, permitting the debtor to
redeem his land by payment of all that was due to the mortgagee
although the day of payment had passed, and his interest had become at
law indefeasible. The remainder of the work is occupied with an
exposition of a miscellaneous class of modes of acquiring rights of
property, the analysis of which would occupy too large a space.

The work is thus a complete summary of the common law as it stood at
the time. It is nearly silent as to the remarkable class of rights
which had already assumed vast practical importance--equitable
interests in lands. These are only noticed incidentally in the chapter
on "Releases." But it was already clear in Littleton's time that this
class of rights would become the most important of all. Littleton's
own will, which has been preserved, may be adduced in proof of this
assertion. Although nothing was more opposed to the spirit of Norman
feudalism than that a tenant of lands should dispose of them by will,
we find Littleton directing by his will the feoffees of certain
manors to make estates to the persons named in his will. In other
words, in order to acquire over lands powers unknown to the common
law, the lands had been conveyed to "feoffees" who had full right over
them according to the common law, but who were under a conscientious
obligation to exercise those rights at the direction and for the
exclusive benefit of the person to whose "use" the lands were held.
This conscientious obligation was recognized and enforced by the
chancellor, and thus arose the class of equitable interests in lands.
Littleton is the first writer on English law after these rights had
risen into a prominent position, and it is curious to find to what
extent they are ignored by him.

BIBLIOGRAPHY.--The work of Littleton occupies a place in the history
of typography as well as of law. The earliest printed edition seems to
be that by John Lettou and William de Machlinia, two printers who
probably came from the Continent, and carried on their business in
partnership, as their note to the edition of Littleton states, "in
civitate Londoniarum, juxta ecclesiam omnium sanctorum." The date of
this edition is uncertain, but the most probable conjecture, based on
typographical grounds, places it about the latter part of 1481. The
next edition is one by Machlinia alone, probably about two or three
years later than the former. Machlinia was then in business alone
"juxta pontem quae vulgo dicitur Fleta brigge." Next came the Rohan or
Rouen edition, erroneously stated by Sir E. Coke to be the earliest,
and to have been printed about 1533. It was, however, of a much
earlier date. Tomlins, the latest editor of Littleton, gives reasons
for thinking that it cannot have been later than 1490. It is stated in
a note to have been printed at Rouen by William le Tailleur "ad
instantiam Richardi Pynson." Copies of all these editions are in the
British Museum. In all these editions the work is styled _Tenores
Novelli_, probably to distinguish it from the "Old Tenures."

There are three early MSS. of Littleton in the University Library at
Cambridge. One of these formerly contained a note on its first page to
the effect that it was bought in St Paul's Churchyard on July 20,
1480. It was therefore in circulation in Littleton's lifetime. The
other two MSS. are of a somewhat later date; but one of them contains
what seems to be the earliest English translation of the _Tenures_,
and is probably not later than 1500.

In the 16th century editions of Littleton followed in rapid succession
from the presses of Pynson, Redmayne, Berthelet, Tottyl and others.
The practice of annotating the text caused several additions to be
introduced, which, however, are easily detected by comparison of the
earlier copies. In 1581 West divided the text into 746 sections, which
have ever since been preserved. Many of these editions were printed
with large margins for purposes of annotation, specimens of which may
be seen in Lincoln's Inn Library.

The practice of annotating Littleton was very general, and was adopted
by many eminent lawyers besides Sir E. Coke, amongst others by Sir M.
Hale. One commentary of this kind, by an unknown hand of earlier date
than Sir E. Coke's, was edited by Cary in 1829. Following the general
practice of dealing with Littleton as the great authority on the law
of England, "the most perfect and absolute work that ever was written
in any human science," Sir E. Coke made it in 1628 the text of that
portion of his work which he calls the first part of the institutes of
the law of England, in other words, the law of property.

The first printed English translation of Littleton was by Rastell, who
seems to have combined the professions of author, printer and
serjeant-at-law, between 1514 and 1533. Many English editions by
various editors followed, the best of which is Tottyl's in 1556. Sir
E. Coke adopted some translation earlier than this, which has since
gone by the name of Sir E. Coke's translation. He, however, throughout
comments not on the translation but on the French text; and the
reputation of the commentary has to some extent obscured the intrinsic
merit of the original.

See E. Wambaugh, _Littleton's Tenures in English_ (Washington, D.C.,
1903).

FOOTNOTE:

[1] These two books are stated, in a note to the table at the
conclusion of the work, to have been made for the better
understanding of certain chapters of the _Antient Book of Tenures_.
This refers to a tract called _The Old Tenures_, said to have been
written in the reign of Edward III. By way of distinguishing it from
this work, Littleton's book is called in all the early editions
"Tenores Novelli."

LITTRÉ, MAXIMILIEN PAUL ÉMILE (1801-1881), French lexicographer and philosopher, was born in Paris on the 1st of February 1801. His father had been a gunner, and afterwards sergeant-major of marine artillery, in the French navy, and was deeply imbued with the revolutionary ideas of the day. Settling down as a collector of taxes, he married Sophie Johannot, a free-thinker like himself, and devoted himself to the education of his son Émile. The boy was sent to the Lycée Louis-le-Grand, where he had for friends Hachette and Eugène Burnouf. After he had completed his course at school, he hesitated for a time as to what profession he should adopt, and meanwhile made himself master, not only of the English and German languages, but of the classical and Sanskrit literature and philology. At last he determined to study medicine, and in 1822 entered his name as a student of medicine. He passed all his examinations in due course, and had only his thesis to prepare in order to obtain his degree as doctor when in 1827 his father died, leaving his mother absolutely without resources. He at once renounced his degree, and, while attending the lectures of P. F. O. Rayer and taking a keen interest in medicine, began teaching Latin and Greek for a livelihood. He carried a musket on the popular side in the revolution of February 1830, and was one of the national guards who followed Charles X. to Rambouillet. In 1831 he obtained an introduction to Armand Carrel, the editor of the _National_, who gave him the task of reading the English and German papers for excerpts. Carrel by chance, in 1835, discovered the ability of his reader, who from that time became a constant contributor, and eventually director of the paper. In 1836 Littré began to contribute articles on all sorts of subjects to the _Revue des deux mondes_; in 1837 he married; and in 1839 appeared the first volume of his edition of the works of Hippocrates. The value of this work was recognized by his election the same year into the Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres. At this epoch he came across the works of Auguste Comte, the reading of which formed, as he himself said, "the cardinal point of his life," and from this time onward appears the influence of positivism on his own life, and, what is of more importance, his influence on positivism, for he gave as much to positivism as he received from it. He soon became a friend of Comte, and popularized his ideas in numerous works on the positivist philosophy. At the same time he continued his edition of Hippocrates, which was not completed till 1862, published a similar edition of Pliny's _Natural History_, and after 1844 took Fauriel's place on the committee engaged on the _Histoire littéraire de la France_, where his knowledge of the early French language and literature was invaluable.

It was about 1844 that he started working on his great _Dictionnaire de la langue française_, which was, however, not to be completed till thirty years after. In the revolution of July 1848 he took part in the repression of the extreme republican party in June 1849. His essays, contributed during this period to the _National_, were collected together and published under the title of _Conservation, révolution et positivisme_ in 1852, and show a thorough acceptance of all the doctrines propounded by Comte. However, during the later years of his master's life, he began to perceive that he could not wholly accept all the dogmas or the more mystic ideas of his friend and master, but he concealed his differences of opinion, and Comte failed to perceive that his pupil had outgrown him, as he himself had outgrown his master Saint-Simon. Comte's death in 1858 freed Littré from any fear of embittering his master's later years, and he published his own ideas in his _Paroles de la philosophie positive_ in 1850, and at still greater length in his work in _Auguste Comte et la philosophie positive_ in 1863. In this book he traces the origin of Comte's ideas through Turgot, Kant and Saint-Simon, then eulogizes Comte's own life, his method of philosophy, his great services to the cause and the effect of his works, and finally proceeds to show where he himself differs from him. He approved wholly of Comte's philosophy, his great laws of society and his philosophical method, which indeed he defended warmly against J. S. Mill, but declared that, while he believed in a positivist philosophy, he did not believe in a religion of humanity. About 1863, after completing his Hippocrates and his Pliny, he set to work in earnest on his French dictionary. In the same year he was proposed for the Académie Française, but rejected, owing to the opposition of Mgr. Dupanloup, bishop of Orleans, who denounced him in his _Avertissement aux pères de famille_ as the chief of the French materialists. He also at this time started with G. Wyrouboff the _Philosophie Positive_, a review which was to embody the views of modern positivists. His life was thus absorbed in literary work till the overthrow of the empire called on him to take a part in politics. He felt himself too old to undergo the privations of the siege of Paris, and retired with his family to Britanny, whence he was summoned by M. Gambetta to Bordeaux, to lecture on history, and thence to Versailles to take his seat in the senate to which he had been chosen by the department of the Seine. In December 1871 he was elected a member of the Académie Française in spite of the renewed opposition of Mgr. Dupanloup, who resigned his seat rather than receive him. Littré's _Dictionary_ was completed in 1873. An authoritative interpretation is given of the use of each word, based on the various meanings it had held in the past. In 1875 Littré was elected a life senator. The most notable of his productions in these years were his political papers attacking and unveiling the confederacy of the Orleanists and legitimists, and in favour of the republic, his republication of many of his old articles and books, among others the _Conservation, révolution et positivisme_ of 1852 (which he reprinted word for word, appending a formal, categorical renunciation of many of the Comtist doctrines therein contained), and a little tract _Pour la dernière fois_, in which he maintained his unalterable belief in materialism. When it became obvious that the old man could not live much longer, his wife and daughter, who had always been fervent Catholics, strove to convert him to their religion. He had long interviews with Père Millériot, a celebrated controversialist, and was much grieved at his death; but it is hardly probable he would have ever been really converted. Nevertheless, when on the point of death, his wife had him baptized, and his funeral was conducted with the rites of the Catholic Church. He died on the 2nd of June 1881.

The following are his most important works: his editions of
Hippocrates (1839-1861), and of Pliny's _Natural History_ (1848-1850);
his translation of Strauss's _Vie de Jésus_ (1839-1840), and Müller's
_Manuel de physiologie_ (1851); his edition of the works of Armand
Carrel, with notes (1854-1858); the _Histoire de la langue française_,
a collection of magazine articles (1862); and his _Dictionnaire de la
langue française_ (1863-1872). In the domain of science must be noted
his edition, with Charles Robin, of Nysten's _Dictionnaire de
médicine, de chirurgie_, &c. (1855); in that of philosophy, his
_Analyse raisonnée du cours de philosophie positive de M. A. Comte_
(1845); _Application de la philosophie positive au gouvernement_
(1849); _Conservation, révolution et positivisme_ (1852, 2nd ed., with
supplement, 1879); _Paroles de la philosophie positive_ (1859);
_Auguste Comte et la philosophie positive_ (1863); _La Science au
point de vue philosophique_ (1873); _Fragments de philosophie et de
sociologie contemporaine_ (1876); and his most interesting
miscellaneous works, his _Études et glanures_ (1880); _La Verité sur
la mort d'Alexandre le grand_ (1865); _Études sur les barbares et le
moyen âge_ (1867); _Médecine et médecins_ (1871); _Littérature et
histoire_ (1875); and _Discours de réception à l'Académie française_
(1873).

For his life consult C. A. Sainte-Beuve, _Notice sur M. Littré, sa vie
et ses travaux_ (1863); and _Nouveaux Lundis_, vol. v.; also the
notice by M. Durand-Gréville in the _Nouvelle Revue_ of August 1881;
E. Caro, _Littré et le positivisme_ (1883); Pasteur, _Discours de
réception_ at the Academy, where he succeeded Littré, and a reply by
E. Renan. (H. M. S.)

LITURGY (Low Lat. _liturgia_; Gr. [Greek: leitos], public, and [Greek: ergon], work; [Greek: leitourgos], a public servant), in the technical language of the Christian Church, the order for the celebration and administration of the Eucharist. In Eastern Christendom the Greek word [Greek: leitourgia] is used in this sense exclusively. But in English-speaking countries the word "liturgy" has come to be used in a more popular sense to denote any or all of the various services of the Church, whether contained in separate volumes or bound up together in the form of a Book of Common Prayer. In this article the liturgy is treated in the former and stricter sense. (For the ancient Athenian [Greek: leitourgiai], as forms of taxation, see FINANCE.)

In order to understand terms and references it will be convenient to give the tabular form the chief component parts of a liturgy, selecting the Liturgy of Rome as characteristic of Western, and that of Constantinople as characteristic of Eastern, Christendom; at the same time appending an explanation of some of the technical words which must be employed in enumerating those parts.

ORDER OF THE ROMAN LITURGY

_Ordinary of the Mass_.

1. Introit, or as it is always called in the Sarum rite, "Office," a
Psalm or part of a Psalm sung at the entry of the priest, or clergy
and choir.

2. Kyrie eleison, ninefold, and sometimes lengthily farsed
representing an older, now obsolete, litany.

3. Collect, _i.e_. the collect for the day.

4. Prophetic lection, now obsolete, except on the Wednesday and
Saturday Ember Days, Good Friday and Easter Even, and Wednesday after
fourth and sixth Sundays in Lent.

5. Epistle.

6. Gradual. A few verses from the Psalms, the shrunken remainder of a
whole Psalm.

7. Sequence. A hymn now obsolete except on Feast of the Seven Dolours,
Easter, Pentecost, Corpus Christi and at Masses for the dead.

8. Gospel.

9. Creed.

10. Collect, now obsolete, though the unanswered invitation, "Let us
pray," still survives.

11. Offertory. A verse or verses from the Psalms sung at the offering
of the elements.

12. Secret. A prayer or prayers said at the conclusion of the
Offertory.

13. Sursum Corda. "Lift up your hearts," with following versicles.

14. Preface. There are now ten proper or special prefaces and one
common preface. In older missals they were extremely numerous, almost
every Sunday and Holy-day having one assigned to it. Many of them were
very beautiful. In older missals, Nos. 13, 14 and 15 were sometimes
arranged not as the concluding part of the Ordinary, but as the
opening part of the Canon of the mass.

15. Sanctus, or Tersanctus, or Triumphal Hymn, "Holy, Holy, Holy,"
&c., ending with the Benedictus, "Blessed is he that cometh," &c.

_Canon of the Mass._

1. Introductory prayer for acceptance. Te igitur, &c.

2. Intercession for the living. Memento, Domine famulorum, &c.

3. Commemoration of apostles and martyrs. Communicantes et memoriam,
&c.

4. Prayer for acceptance and consecration of offering. Hanc igitur
oblationem, &c.

5. Recital of words of institution. Qui pridie quam pateretur, &c.

6. Oblation. Unde et memores, &c.

7. Invocation. A passage difficult of interpretation, but apparently
meant to be equivalent to the Eastern Epiklesis or invocation of the
Holy Ghost. Supplices te rogamus, &c.

8. Intercession for the dead. Memento etiam, Domine, famulorum, &c.

9. Lord's Prayer, with a short introduction and the expansion of the
last petition into a prayer known as the "Embolismus."

10. Fraction, i.e. breaking of the host into three parts, to symbolize
the death and passion of Christ.

11. Commixture, i.e. placing a small portion of the consecrated bread
into the chalice symbolizing the reunion of Christ's body and soul at
the resurrection.

12. Agnus Dei, i.e. a three-fold petition to the Lamb of God.

13. Pax, i.e. the kiss of peace. The ancient ritual of the Pax has
become almost obsolete.

14. Three prayers, accompanying the Pax and preliminary to communion.

15. Communion of priest and people (if any), a short anthem called
"Communio" being sung meanwhile.

16. Ablution of paten and chalice.

17. Post-communion, i.e. a concluding prayer.

18. Dismissal.

The Canon of the Mass strictly ends with No. 9; Nos. 10-18 being an
appendix to it.

LITURGY OF CONSTANTINOPLE

_Mass of the Catechumens. After preparation and vesting._

1. The Deacon's Litany.

2. Three Anthems with accompanying prayers.

3. Little Entrance, i.e. ceremonial bringing in of the Book of the
Gospels.

4. The Trisagion, i.e. an anthem with an accompanying prayer different
from the Latin Sanctus or Tersanctus.

5. Epistle.

6. Gospel with a prayer preceding it.

7. Bidding prayer.

8. Prayer for catechumens.

9. Dismissal of catechumens.

10. Spreading of the corporal.

_Mass of the Faithful._

11. Prayers of the faithful.

12. Cherubic Hymn, "Let us who mystically represent the Cherubim, &c."
not represented in the Latin liturgy.

13. Great Entrance, i.e. of the unconsecrated elements with incense
and singing and intercessions.

14. Kiss of Peace.

15. Creed.

16. The Benediction, i.e. 2 Cor. xiii. 14.

17. Sursum corda.

18. Preface.

19. Sanctus, or Tersanctus, or "Triumphal Hymn."

20. Recital of Words of Institution, prefaced by recital of the
Redemption.

21. The oblation.

22. The invocation or Epiklesis.

23. Intercession for the dead.

24. Intercession for the living.

25. The Lord's Prayer.

26. Prayer of humble access (a) for people (b) for priest.

27. Elevation with the invitation "Holy things to holy people."

28. Fraction.

29. Commixture.

30. Thanksgiving.

31. Benediction.

In both these lists many interesting features of ceremonial, the use
of incense, the infusion of warm water (Byzantine only), &c., have not
been referred to. The lists must be regarded as skeletons only.

There are six main families or groups of liturgies, four of them being of Eastern and two of them of Western origin and use. They are known either by the names of the apostles with whom they are traditionally connected, or by the names of the countries or cities in which they have been or are still in use.

Group I. _The Syrian Rite_ (St James).--The principal liturgies to be enumerated under this group are the Clementine liturgy, so called from being found in the eighth book of the Apostolic Constitutions, which claim in their title, though erroneously, to have been compiled by St Clement, the 1st-century bishop of Rome; the Greek liturgy of St James; the Syriac liturgy of St James. Sixty-four more liturgies of this group have existed, the majority being still in existence. Their titles are given in F. E. Brightman's _Liturgies, Eastern and Western_ (1896), pp. lviii.-lxi.

Group II. _The Egyptian Rite_ (St Mark).--This group includes the Greek liturgies of St Mark, St Basil and St Gregory, and the Coptic liturgies of St Basil, St Gregory, St Cyril or St Mark; together with certain less known liturgies the titles of which are enumerated by Brightman (_op. cit._ pp. lxxiii. lxxiv.). The liturgy of the Ethiopian church ordinances and the liturgy of the Abyssinian Jacobites, known as that of the Apostles, fall under this group.

Group III. _The Persian Rite_ (SS. Adaeus and Maris).--This Nestorian rite is represented by the liturgy which bears the names of SS. Adaeus and Maris together with two others named after Theodore of Mopsuestia and Nestorius. This group has sometimes been called "East-Syrian." The titles of three more of its now lost liturgies have been preserved, namely those of Narses, Barsumas and Diodorus of Tarsus. The liturgy of the Christians of St Thomas, on the Malabar coast of India, formerly belonged to this group, but it was almost completely assimilated to the Roman liturgy by Portuguese Jesuits at the synod of Diamper in 1599.

Group IV. _The Byzantine Rite._--The Greek liturgies of St Chrysostom, St Basil and St Gregory Dialogus, or The Presanctified, also extant in other languages, are the living representatives of this rite. The Greek liturgy of St Peter is classified under this group, but it is merely the Roman canon of the Mass &c., inserted in a Byzantine framework, and seems to have been used at one time by some Greek communities in Italy. To this group also belongs the Armenian liturgy, of which ten different forms have existed in addition to the liturgy now in general use named after St Athanasius.

We now come to the two western groups of liturgies, which more nearly concern the Latin-speaking nations of Europe, and which, therefore, must be treated of more fully.

Group V. _The Hispano-Gallican Rite_ (St John).--This group of Latin liturgies, which once prevailed very widely in Western Europe, has been almost universally superseded by the liturgy of the Church of Rome. Where it survives, it has been more or less assimilated to the Roman pattern. It prevailed once throughout Spain, France, northern Italy, Great Britain and Ireland. The term "Ephesine" has been applied to this group or family of liturgies, chiefly by English liturgiologists, and the names of St John and of Ephesus, his place of residence, have been pressed into service in support of a theory of Ephesine origin, which, however, lacks proof and may now be regarded as a discarded hypothesis. Other theories represent the Gallican to be a survival of the original Roman liturgy, or as an importation into Western Europe from the east through a Milanese channel. The latter is Duchesne's theory (_Christian Worship_, London, 1904, 2nd ed., p. 94).

We must be content with mentioning these theories without attempting
to discuss them.

The chief traces of oriental influence and affinity lie in the
following points:--(1) various proclamations made by the deacon,
including that of "Silentium facite" before the epistle (Migne, _Pat.
Lat._ tom. lxxxv. col. 534); (2) the presence of a third lesson
preceding the epistle, taken from the Old Testament; (3) the
occasional presence of "preces" a series of short intercessions
resembling the Greek "Ektené" or deacon's litany; (4) the position of
the kiss of peace at an early point in the service, before the canon,
instead of the Roman position after consecration; (5) the exclamation
"Sancta sanctis" occurring in the Mozarabic rite, being the
counterpart of the Eastern "[Greek: Ta hagia tois hagiois]," that is
"holy things to holy people"; (6) traces of the presence of the
"Epiklesis," that is to say, the invocation of the Holy Spirit, in its
Eastern position after the words of institution, as in the prayer
styled the Post-pridie in the Mozarabic service for the second Sunday
after the octave of the Epiphany: "We beseech thee that thou wouldest
sanctify this oblation with the permixture of thy Spirit, and conform
it with full transformation into the body and blood of our Lord Jesus
Christ." (Migne, _Pat. Lat._ tom. lxxxv. col. 250). On the other hand
the great variableness of its parts, and the immense number of its
proper prefaces, ally it to the Western family of liturgies.

We proceed now to give a more detailed account of the chief liturgies of this group.

1. _The Mozarabic Liturgy.--_This was the national liturgy of the Spanish church till the close of the 11th century, when the Roman liturgy was forced upon it. Its use, however, lingered on, till in the 16th century Cardinal Jimenes, anxious to prevent its becoming quite obsolete, had its books restored and printed, and founded a college of priests at Toledo to perpetuate its use. It survives now only in several churches in Toledo and in a chapel at Salamanca, and even there not without certain Roman modifications of its original text and ritual.

Its date and origin, like the date and origin of all existing
liturgies, are uncertain, and enveloped in the mists of antiquity. It
is not derived from the present Roman liturgy. Its whole structure, as
well as separate details disprove such a parentage, and therefore it
is strange to find St Isidore of Seville (_Lib. de Eccles. Offic_. i.
15) attributing it to St Peter. No proof is adduced, and the only
value which can be placed upon such an unsupported assertion is that
it shows that a very high and even apostolic antiquity was claimed for
it. A theory, originating with Pinius, that it may have been brought
by the Goths from Constantinople when they invaded Spain, is as
improbable as it is unproven. It may have been derived from Gaul. The
Gallican sister stood to it in the relation of twin-sister, if it
could not claim that of mother. The resemblance was so great that when
Charles the Bald (843-877) wished to get some idea of the character of
the already obsolete Gallican rite, he sent to Toledo for some Spanish
priests to perform Mass according to the Mozarabic rite in his
presence. But there is no record of the conversion of Spain by
Gallican missionaries. Christianity existed in Spain from the earliest
times. Probably St Paul travelled there (Rom. xv. 24). It may be at
least conjectured that its liturgy was Pauline rather than Petrine or
Johannine.

2. _Gallican Liturgy._--This was the ancient and national liturgy of the church in France till the commencement of the 9th century, when it was suppressed by order of Charlemagne, who directed the Roman missal to be everywhere substituted in its place. All traces of it seemed for some time to have been lost until three Gallican sacramentaries were discovered and published by Thomasius in 1680 under the titles of _Missale Gothicum_, _Missale Gallicum_ and _Missale Francorum_, and a fourth was discovered and published by Mabillon in 1687 under the title of _Missale Gallicanum_. Fragmentary discoveries have been made since. Mone discovered fragments of eleven Gallican masses and published them at Carlsruhe in 1850. Other fragments from the library at St Gall have been published by Bunsen (_Analecta Ante-Nicaena_, iii. 263-266), and from the Ambrosian library at Milan by Cardinal Mai (_Scriptt. Vet. Vat. Coll._ iii. 2. 247). A single page was discovered in Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge, published in _Zeitschrift für Kath. Theologie_, vi. 370.