Chapter D: Modern Logic (3)

[120] The insight, for instance, of F. H. Bradley's criticism,
_Principles of Logic_, II. ii. 3, is somewhat dimmed by a lack of
sympathy due to extreme difference in the point of view adopted.

[121] Bacon, _Novum organum_, i. 100.

[122] Russell's _Philosophy of Leibnitz_, capp. 1-5.

[123] See especially remarks on the letter of M. Arnauld (Gerhardt's
edition of the philosophical works, ii. 37 sqq.).

[124] Gerhardt, vi. 612, quoted by Russell, _loc. cit._, p. 19.

[125] Ibid., ii. 62, Russell, p. 33.

[126] Spinoza, ed. van Vloten and Land, i. 46 (_Ethica_, i. 11).

[127] _Nouveaux essais_, iv. 2 § 9, 17 § 4 (Gerhardt v. 351, 460).

[128] _Critique of Judgment_, Introd. § 2, _ad. fin._ (_Werke_,
Berlin Academy edition, vol. v. p. 176, l. 10).

[129] _Kant's Introduction to Logic and his Essay on the Mistaken
Subtlety of the Four Figures_, trans. T. K. Abbott (1885).

[130] _Loc. cit._, p. 11.

[131] Or antitheses. Kant follows, for example, a different line of
cleavage between form and content from that developed between thought
and the "given." And these are not his only unresolved dualities,
even in the _Critique of Pure Reason_. For the logical inquiry,
however, it is permissible to ignore or reduce these differences.

The determination too of the sense in which Kant's theory of
knowledge involves an unresolved antithesis is for the logical
purpose necessary so far only as it throws light upon his logic and
his influence upon logical developments. Historically the question of
the extent to which writers adopted the dualistic interpretation or
one that had the like consequences is of greater importance.

It may be said summarily that Kant holds the antithesis between
thought and "the given" to be unresolved and within the limits of
theory of knowledge irreducible. The dove of thought falls lifeless
if the resistant atmosphere of "the given" be withdrawn (_Critique of
Pure Reason_, ed. 2 Introd. Kant's _Werke_, ed. of the Prussian
Academy, vol. iii. p. 32, ll. 10 sqq.). Nevertheless the
thing-in-itself is a problematic conception and of a limiting or
negative use merely. He "had woven," according to an often quoted
phrase of Goethe, "a certain sly element of irony into his method;
... he pointed as it were with a side gesture beyond the limits which
he himself had drawn." Thus (_loc. cit._ p. 46, ll. 8, 9) he declares
that "there are two lineages united in human knowledge, which perhaps
spring from a common stock, though to us unknown--namely sense and
understanding." Some indication of the way in which he would
hypothetically and speculatively mitigate the antithesis is perhaps
afforded by the reflection that the distinction of the mental and
what appears as material is an external distinction in which the one
appears outside to the other. "Yet what as thing-in-itself lies back
of the phenomenon may perhaps not be so wholly disparate after all"
(ib. p. 278, ll. 26 sqq.).

[132] _Critique of Judgment_, Introd. § 2 (_Werke_, v., 276 ll. 9
sqq.); cf. Bernard's "Prolegomena" to his translation of this, (pp.
xxxviii. sqq.).

[133] _Die Logik, insbesondere die Analytik_ (Schleswig, 1825).
August Detlev Christian Twesten (1789-1876), a Protestant theologian,
succeeded Schleiermacher as professor in Berlin in 1835.

[134] See _Sir William Hamilton: The Philosophy of Perception_, by J.
Hutchison Stirling.

[135] _Hauptpunkte der Logik_, 1808 (_Werke_, ed. Hartenstein, i. 465
sqq.), and specially _Lehrbuch der Einleitung in die Philosophie_
(1813), and subsequently §§ 34 sqq. (_Werke_, i. 77 sqq.).

[136] See Ueberweg, _System of Logic and History of Logical
Doctrines_, § 34.

[137] _Drei Bücher der Logik_, 1874 (E.T., 1884). The Book on Pure
Logic follows in essentials the line of thought of an earlier work
(1843).

[138] _Logic_, Eng. trans. 35 _ad. fin._

[139] _Logic_, Introd. § ix.

[140] For whom see Höffding, _History of Modern Philosophy_, Eng.
trans., vol. ii. pp. 122 sqq.; invaluable for the logical methods of
modern philosophers.

[141] _Wissenschaft der Logik_ (1812-1816), in course of revision at
Hegel's death in 1831 (_Werke_, vols. iii.-v.), and _Encyklopädie der
philosophischen Wissenschaften_, i.; _Die Logik_ (1817; 3rd ed.,
1830); _Werke_, vol. vi., Eng. trans., Wallace (2nd ed., 1892).

[142] _The Principles of Logic_ (1883).

[143] _Logic, or The Morphology of Thought_ (2 vols., 1888).

[144] _Logic_, Pref. pp. 6 seq.

[145] _Id._ vol. ii. p. 4.

[146] _Logik_ (1873, 1889), Eng. trans. ii. 17.

[147] _Op. cit._ ii. 289.

[148] _Introd. to Logic._, trans. Abbott, p. 10.

[149] _Ueber Annahmen_ (1902, &c.)

[150] _Logik_ (1880, and in later editions).

[151] Yet see _Studies in Logic_, by John Dewey and others (1903).

LOGOCYCLIC CURVE, STROPHOID or FOLIATE, a cubic curve generated by increasing or diminishing the radius vector of a variable point Q on a straight line AB by the distance QC of the point from the foot of the perpendicular drawn from the origin to the fixed line. The polar equation is r cos[theta] = a(1 ± sin[theta]), the upper sign referring to the case when the vector is increased, the lower when it is diminished. Both branches are included in the Cartesian equation (x² + y²)(2a - x) = a²x, where a is the distance of the line from the origin. If we take for axes the fixed line and the perpendicular through the initial point, the equation takes the form y [root](a - x) = x [root](a + x). The curve resembles the folium of Descartes, and has a node between x = 0, x = a, and two branches asymptotic to the line x = 2a.

LOGOGRAPHI ([Greek: logos], [Greek: graphô], writers of prose histories or tales), the name given by modern scholars to the Greek historiographers before Herodotus.[1] Thucydides, however, applies the term to all his own predecessors, and it is therefore usual to make a distinction between the older and the younger logographers. Their representatives, with one exception, came from Ionia and its islands, which from their position were most favourably situated for the acquisition of knowledge concerning the distant countries of East and West. They wrote in the Ionic dialect, in what was called the unperiodic style, and preserved the poetic character of their epic model. Their criticism amounts to nothing more than a crude attempt to rationalize the current legends and traditions connected with the founding of cities, the genealogies of ruling families, and the manners and customs of individual peoples. Of scientific criticism there is no trace whatever. The first of these historians was probably Cadmus of Miletus (who lived, if at all, in the early part of the 6th century), the earliest writer of prose, author of a work on the founding of his native city and the colonization of Ionia (so Suïdas); Pherecydes of Leros, who died about 400, is generally considered the last. Mention may also be made of the following: Hecataeus of Miletus (550-476); Acusilaus of Argos,[2] who paraphrased in prose (correcting the tradition where it seemed necessary) the genealogical works of Hesiod in the Ionic dialect; he confined his attention to the prehistoric period, and made no attempt at a real history; Charon of Lampsacus (c. 450), author of histories of Persia, Libya, and Ethiopia, of annals ([Greek: hôroi]) of his native town with lists of the prytaneis and archons, and of the chronicles of Lacedaemonian kings; Xanthus of Sardis in Lydia (c. 450), author of a history of Lydia, one of the chief authorities used by Nicolaus of Damascus (_fl._ during the time of Augustus); Hellanicus of Mytilene; Stesimbrotus of Thasos, opponent of Pericles and reputed author of a political pamphlet on Themistocles, Thucydides and Pericles; Hippys and Glaucus, both of Rhegium, the first the author of histories of Italy and Sicily, the second of a treatise on ancient poets and musicians, used by Harpocration and Plutarch; Damastes of Sigeum, pupil of Hellanicus, author of genealogies of the combatants before Troy (an ethnographic and statistical list), of short treatises on poets, sophists, and geographical subjects.

On the early Greek historians, see G. Busolt, _Griechische Geschichte_
(1893), i. 147-153; C. Wachsmuth, _Einleitung in das Studium der alten
Geschichte_ (1895); A. Schäfer, _Abriss der Quellenkunde der
griechischen und römischen Geschichte_ (ed. H. Nissen, 1889); J. B.
Bury, _Ancient Greek Historians_ (1909), lecture i.; histories of
Greek literature by Müller-Donaldson (ch. 18) and W. Mure (bk. iv. ch.
3), where the little that is known concerning the life and writings of
the logographers is exhaustively discussed. The fragments will be
found, with Latin notes, translation, prolegomena, and copious
indexes, in C. W. Müller's _Fragmenta historicorum Graecorum_
(1841-1870).

See also GREECE: _History, Ancient_ (section, "Authorities").

FOOTNOTES:

[1] The word is also used of the writers of speeches for the use of
the contending parties in the law courts, who were forbidden to
employ advocates.

[2] There is some doubt as to whether this Acusilaus was of
Peloponnesian or Boeotian Argos. Possibly there were two of the name.
For an example of the method of Acusilaus see Bury, _op. cit._ p. 19.

LOGOS [Greek: logos], a common term in ancient philosophy and theology. It expresses the idea of an immanent reason in the world, and, under various modifications, is met with in Indian, Egyptian and Persian systems of thought. But the idea was developed mainly in Hellenic and Hebrew philosophy, and we may distinguish the following stages:

1. _The Hellenic Logos._--To the Greek mind, which saw in the world a [Greek: kosmos] (ordered whole), it was natural to regard the world as the product of reason, and reason as the ruling principle in the world. So we find a Logos doctrine more or less prominent from the dawn of Hellenic thought to its eclipse. It rises in the realm of physical speculation, passes over into the territory of ethics and theology, and makes its way through at least three well-defined stages. These are marked off by the names of Heraclitus of Ephesus, the Stoics and Philo.

It acquires its first importance in the theories of Heraclitus (6th century B.C.), who, trying to account for the aesthetic order of the visible universe, broke away to some extent from the purely physical conceptions of his predecessors and discerned at work in the cosmic process a [Greek: logos] analogous to the reasoning power in man. On the one hand the Logos is identified with [Greek: gnômê] and connected with [Greek: dikê], which latter seems to have the function of correcting deviations from the eternal law that rules in things. On the other hand it is not positively distinguished either from the ethereal fire, or from the [Greek: heimarmenê] and the [Greek: anankê] according to which all things occur. Heraclitus holds that nothing material can be thought of without this Logos, but he does not conceive the Logos itself to be immaterial. Whether it is regarded as in any sense possessed of intelligence and consciousness is a question variously answered. But there is most to say for the negative. This Logos is not one above the world or prior to it, but in the world and inseparable from it. Man's soul is a part of it. It is _relation_, therefore, as Schleiermacher expresses it, or reason, not speech or word. And it is objective, not subjective, reason. Like a law of nature, objective in the world, it gives order and regularity to the movement of things, and makes the system rational.[1]

The failure of Heraclitus to free himself entirely from the physical hypotheses of earlier times prevented his speculation from influencing his successors. With Anaxagoras a conception entered which gradually triumphed over that of Heraclitus, namely, the conception of a supreme, intellectual principle, not identified with the world but independent of it. This, however, was [Greek: nous], not Logos. In the Platonic and Aristotelian systems, too, the theory of ideas involved an absolute separation between the material world and the world of higher reality, and though the term Logos is found the conception is vague and undeveloped. With Plato the term selected for the expression of the principle to which the order visible in the universe is due is [Greek: nous] or [Greek: sophia], not [Greek: logos]. It is in the pseudo-Platonic _Epinomis_ that [Greek: logos] appears as a synonym for [Greek: nous]. In Aristotle, again, the principle which sets all nature under the rule of thought, and directs it towards a rational end, is [Greek: nous], or the divine spirit itself; while [Greek: logos] is a term with many senses, used as more or less identical with a number of phrases, [Greek: ou heneka], [Greek: energeia], [Greek: entelecheia], [Greek: ousia], [Greek: eidos], [Greek: morphê], &c.

In the reaction from Platonic dualism, however, the Logos doctrine reappears in great breadth. It is a capital element in the system of the Stoics. With their teleological views of the world they naturally predicated an active principle pervading it and determining it. This operative principle is called both Logos and God. It is conceived of as material, and is described in terms used equally of nature and of God. There is at the same time the special doctrine of the [Greek: logos spermatikos], the seminal Logos, or the law of generation in the world, the principle of the active reason working in dead matter. This parts into [Greek: logoi spermatikoi], which are akin, not to the Platonic ideas, but rather to the [Greek: logoi enuloi] of Aristotle. In man, too, there is a Logos which is his characteristic possession, and which is [Greek: endiathetos], as long as it is a thought resident within his breast, but [Greek: prophorikos] when it is expressed as a word. This distinction between Logos as ratio and Logos as _oratio_, so much used subsequently by Philo and the Christian fathers, had been so far anticipated by Aristotle's distinction between the [Greek: exô logos] and the [Greek: logos en tê psychê]. It forms the point of attachment by which the Logos doctrine connected itself with Christianity. The Logos of the Stoics (q.v.) is a reason in the world gifted with intelligence, and analogous to the reason in man.

2. _The Hebrew Logos._--In the later Judaism the earlier anthropomorphic conception of God and with it the sense of the divine nearness had been succeeded by a belief which placed God at a remote distance, severed from man and the world by a deep chasm. The old familiar name Yahweh became a secret; its place was taken by such general expressions as the Holy, the Almighty, the Majesty on High, the King of Kings, and also by the simple word "Heaven." Instead of the once powerful confidence in the immediate presence of God there grew up a mass of speculation regarding on the one hand the distant future, on the other the distant past. Various attempts were made to bridge the gulf between God and man, including the angels, and a number of other hybrid forms of which it is hard to say whether they are personal beings or abstractions. The wisdom, the Shekinah or Glory, and the Spirit of God are intermediate beings of this kind, and even the Law came to be regarded as an independent spiritual entity. Among these conceptions that of the word of God had an important place, especially the creative word of Genesis i. Here as in the other cases we cannot always say whether the Word is regarded as a mere attribute or activity of God, or an independent being, though there is a clear tendency towards the latter. The ambiguity lies in the twofold purpose of these activities: (1) to establish communication with God; (2) to prevent direct connexion between God and the world. The word of the God of revelation is represented as the creative principle (e.g. Gen. i. 3; Psalm xxxiii. 6), as the executor of the divine judgments (Hosea vi. 5), as healing (Psalm cvii. 20), as possessed of almost personal qualities (Isaiah lv. 11; Psalm cxlvii. 15). Along with this comes the doctrine of the angel of Yahweh, the angel of the covenant, the angel of the presence, in whom God manifests Himself, and who is sometimes identified with Yahweh or Elohim (Gen. xvi. 11, 13; xxxii. 29-31; Exod. iii. 2; xiii. 21), sometimes distinguished from Him (Gen. xxii. 15, &c.; xxiv. 7; xxviii. 12, &c.), and sometimes presented in both aspects (Judges ii., vi.; Zech. i.). To this must be added the doctrine of Wisdom, given in the books of Job and Proverbs. At one time it is exhibited as an attribute of God (Prov. iii. 19). At another it is strongly personified, so as to become rather the creative thought of God than a quality (Prov. viii. 22). Again it is described as proceeding from God as the principle of creation and objective to Him. In these and kindred passages (Job xv. 7, &c.) it is on the way to become hypostatized.

The Hebrew conception is partially associated with the Greek in the
case of Aristobulus, the predecessor of Philo, and, according to the
fathers, the founder of the Alexandrian school. He speaks of Wisdom in
a way reminding us of the book of Proverbs. The pseudo-Solomonic _Book
of Wisdom_ (generally supposed to be the work of an Alexandrian
flourishing somewhere between Aristobulus and Philo) deals both with
the Wisdom and with the Logos. It fails to hypostatize either. But it
represents the former as the framer of the world, as the power or
spirit of God, active alike in the physical, the intellectual, and the
ethical domain, and apparently objective to God. In the Targums, on
the other hand, the three doctrines of the word, the angel, and the
wisdom of God converge in a very definite conception. In the Jewish
theology God is represented as purely transcendent, having no likeness
of nature with man, and making no personal entrance into history.
Instead of the immediate relation of God to the world the Targums
introduce the ideas of the _Memra_ (word) and the _Shechina_ (real
presence). This Memra (= Ma'amar) or, as it is also designated,
_Dibbura_, is a hypostasis that takes the place of God when direct
intercourse with man is in view. In all those passages of the Old
Testament where anthropomorphic terms are used of God, the Memra is
substituted for God. The Memra proceeds from God, and retains the
creaturely relation to God. It does not seem to have been identified
with the Messiah.[2]

3. _Philo._--In the Alexandrian philosophy, as represented by the Hellenized Jew Philo, the Logos doctrine assumes a leading place and shapes a new career for itself. Philo's doctrine is moulded by three forces--Platonism, Stoicism and Hebraism. He detaches the Logos idea from its connexion with Stoic materialism and attaches it to a thoroughgoing Platonism. It is Plato's idea of the Good regarded as creatively active. Hence, instead of being merely immanent in the Cosmos, it has an independent existence. Platonic too is the doctrine of the divine architect who seeks to realize in the visible universe the archetypes already formed in his mind. Philo was thus able to make the Logos theory a bridge between Judaism and Greek philosophy. It preserved the monotheistic idea yet afforded a description of the Divine activity in terms of Hellenic thought; the word of the Old Testament is one with the [Greek: logos] of the Stoics. And thus in Philo's conception the Logos is much more than "the principle of reason, informing the infinite variety of things, and so creating the World-Order"; it is also the divine dynamic, the energy and self-revelation of God. The Stoics indeed sought, more or less consciously, by their doctrine of the Logos as the Infinite Reason to escape from the belief in a divine Creator, but Philo, Jew to the core, starts from the Jewish belief in a supreme, self-existing God, to whom the reason of the world must be subordinated though related. The conflict of the two conceptions (the Greek and the Hebrew) led him into some difficulty; sometimes he represents the Logos as an independent and even personal being, a "second God," sometimes as merely an aspect of the divine activity. And though passages of the first class must no doubt be explained figuratively--for Philo would not assert the existence of two Divine agents--it remains true that the two conceptions cannot be fused. The Alexandrian philosopher wavers between the two theories and has to accord to the Logos of Hellas a semi-independent position beside the supreme God of Judaea. He speaks of the Logos (1) as the agency by which God reveals Himself, in some measure to all men, in greater degree to chosen souls. The appearances recorded in the Old Testament are manifestations of the Logos, and the knowledge of God possessed by the great leaders and teachers of Israel is due to the same source; (2) as the agency whereby man, enmeshed by illusion, lays hold of the higher spiritual life and rising above his partial point of view participates in the universal reason. The Logos is thus the means of redemption; those who realize its activity being emancipated from the tyranny of circumstance into the freedom of the eternal.

4. _The Fourth Gospel._--Among the influences that shaped the Fourth Gospel that of the Alexandrian philosophy must be assigned a distinct, though not an exaggerated importance. There are other books in the New Testament that bear the same impress, the epistles to the Ephesians and the Colossians, and to a much greater degree the epistle to the Hebrews. The development that had thus begun in the time of Paul reaches maturity in the Fourth Gospel, whose dependence on Philo appears (1) in the use of the allegorical method, (2) in many coincident passages, (3) in the dominant conception of the Logos. The writer narrates the life of Christ from the point of view furnished him by Philo's theory. True, the Logos doctrine is only mentioned in the prologue to the Gospel, but it is presupposed throughout the whole book. The author's task indeed was somewhat akin to that of Philo, "to transplant into the world of Hellenic culture a revelation originally given through Judaism." This is not to say that he holds the Logos doctrine in exactly the same form as Philo. On the contrary, the fact that he starts from an actual knowledge of the earthly life of Jesus, while Philo, even when ascribing a real personality to the Logos, keeps within the bounds of abstract speculation, leads him seriously to modify the Philonic doctrine. Though the Alexandrian idea largely determines the evangelist's treatment of the history, the history similarly reacts on the idea. The prologue is an organic portion of the Gospel and not a preface written to conciliate a philosophic public. It assumes that the Logos idea is familiar in Christian theology, and vividly summarizes the main features of the Philonic conception--the eternal existence of the Logos, its relation to God ([Greek: pros ton theon], yet distinct), its creative, illuminative and redemptive activity. But the adaptation of the idea to John's account of a historical person involved at least three profound modifications:--(1) the Logos, instead of the abstraction or semi-personification of Philo, becomes fully personified. The word that became flesh subsisted from all eternity as a distinct personality within the divine nature. (2) Much greater stress is laid upon the redemptive than upon the creative function. The latter indeed is glanced at ("All things were made by him"), merely to provide a link with earlier speculation, but what the writer is concerned about is not the mode in which the world came into being but the spiritual life which resides in the Logos and is communicated by him to men. (3) The idea of [Greek: logos] as Reason becomes subordinated to the idea of [Greek: logos] as Word, the expression of God's will and power, the outgoing of the divine energy, life, love and light. Thus in its fundamental thought the prologue of the Fourth Gospel comes nearer to the Old Testament (and especially to Gen. i.) than to Philo. As speech goes out from a man and reveals his character and thought, so Christ is "sent out from the Father," and as the divine word is also, in accordance with the Hebrew idea, the medium of God's quickening power.

What John thus does is to take the Logos idea of Philo and use it for a practical purpose--to make more intelligible to himself and his readers the divine nature of Jesus Christ. That this endeavour to work into the historical tradition of the life and teaching of Jesus--a hypothesis which had a distinctly foreign origin--led him into serious difficulties is a consideration that must be discussed elsewhere.

5. _The Early Church._--In many of the early Christian writers, as
well as in the heterodox schools, the Logos doctrine is influenced by
the Greek idea. The Syrian Gnostic Basilides held (according to
Irenaeus i. 24) that the Logos or Word emanated from the [Greek:
nous], or personified reason, as this latter emanated from the
unbegotten Father. The completest type of Gnosticism, the Valentinian,
regarded Wisdom as the last of the series of aeons that emanated from
the original Being or Father, and the Logos as an emanation from the
first two principles that issued from God, Reason ([Greek: nous]) and
Truth. Justin Martyr, the first of the sub-apostolic fathers, taught
that God produced of His own nature a rational power([Greek: dynamin
tina logikên]), His agent in creation, who now became man in Jesus
(_Dial. c. Tryph._ chap. 48, 60). He affirmed also the action of the
[Greek: logos spermatikos], (_Apol._ i. 46; ii. 13, &c.). With Tatian
(_Cohort. ad. Gr._ chap. 5, &c.) the Logos is the beginning of the
world, the reason that comes into being as the sharer of God's
rational power. With Athenagoras (_Suppl._ chap. 9, 10) He is the
prototype of the world and the energizing principle ([Greek: idea kai
energeia]) of things. Theophilus (Ad _Autolyc._ ii. 10, 24) taught
that the Logos was in eternity with God as the [Greek: logos
endiathetos], the counsellor of God, and that when the world was to be
created God sent forth this counsellor ([Greek: symboulos]) from
Himself as the [Greek: logos prophorikos], yet so that the begotten
Logos did not cease to be a part of Himself. With Hippolytus (_Refut._
x. 32, &c.) the Logos, produced of God's own substance, is both the
divine intelligence that appears in the world as the Son of God, and
the idea of the universe immanent in God. The early Sabellians (comp.
Eusebius, _Hist. Eccl._ vi. 33; Athanasius, _Contra Arian._ iv.) held
that the Logos was a faculty of God, the divine reason, immanent in
God eternally, but not in distinct personality prior to the historical
manifestation in Christ. Origen, referring the act of creation to
eternity instead of to time, affirmed the eternal personal existence
of the Logos. In relation to God this Logos or Son was a copy of the
original, and as such inferior to that. In relation to the world he
was its prototype, the [Greek: idea ideôn] and its redeeming power
(_Contra Cels._ v. 608; _Frag. de princip._ i. 4; _De princip._ i.
109, 324).

In the later developments of Hellenic speculation nothing essential
was added to the doctrine of the Logos. Philo's distinction between
God and His rational power or Logos in contact with the world was
generally maintained by the eclectic Platonists and Neo-Platonists. By
some of these this distinction was carried out to the extent of
predicating (as was done by Numenius of Apamea) three Gods:--the
supreme God; the second God, or Demiurge or Logos; and the third God,
or the world. Plotinus explained the logoi as constructive forces,
proceeding from the ideas and giving form to the dead matter of
sensible things (_Enneads_, v. 1. 8 and Richter's _Neu-Plat.
Studien_).

See the histories of philosophy and theology, and works quoted under
HERACLITUS, STOICS, PHILO, JOHN, THE GOSPEL OF, &c., and for a general
summary of the growth of the Logos doctrine, E. Caird, _Evolution of
Theology in the Greek Philosophers_ (1904), vol. ii.; A. Harnack,
_History of Dogma_; E. F. Scott, _The Fourth Gospel_, ch. v. (1906);
J. M. Heinze, _Die Lehre vom Logos in der griech. Philosophie_ (1872);
J. Réville, _La Doctrine du Logos_ (1881); Aal, _Gesch. d. Logos-Idee_
(1899); and the _Histories of Dogma_, by A. Harnack, F. Loofs, R.
Seeberg. (S. D. F. S.; A. J. G.)

FOOTNOTES:

[1] Cf. Schleiermacher's _Herakleitos der Dunkle_; art. HERACLITUS
and authorities there quoted.

[2] Cf. the Targum of Onkelos on the Pentateuch under Gen. vii. 16,
xvii. 2, xxi. 20; Exod. xix. 16, etc.; the Jerusalem Targum on Numb.
vii. 89, &c. For further information regarding the Hebrew _Logos_
see, beside Dr Kaufmann Kohler, s.v. "Memra," _Jewish Encyc._ viii.
464-465, Bousset, _Die Religion des Judenthums_ (1903), p. 341, and
Weber, _Jüdische Theologie_ (1897), pp. 180-184. The hypostatizing of
the Divine word in the doctrine of the Memra was probably later than
the time of Philo, but it was the outcome of a mode of thinking
already common in Jewish theology. The same tendency is of course
expressed in the "Logos" of the Fourth Gospel.

LOGOTHETE (Med. Lat. _logotheta_, Gr. [Greek: logothetês], from [Greek: logos], word, account, calculation, and [Greek: tithenai], to set, i.e. "one who accounts, calculates or ratiocinates"), originally the title of a variety of administrative officials in the Byzantine Empire, e.g. the [Greek: logothetês tou dromou], who was practically the equivalent of the modern postmaster-general; and the [Greek: logothetês tou stratiôtikou], the logothete of the military chest. Gibbon defines the great Logothete as "the supreme guardian of the laws and revenues," who "is compared with the chancellor of the Latin monarchies." From the Eastern Empire the title was borrowed by the west, though it only became firmly established in Sicily, where the _logotheta_ occupied the position of chancellor elsewhere, his office being equal if not superior to that of the _magnus cancellarius_. Thus the title was borne by Pietro della Vigna, the all-powerful minister of the emperor Frederick II., king of Sicily.

See DU CANGE, _Glossarium_, s.v. _Logotheta_.

LOGROÑO, an inland province of northern Spain, the smallest of the eight provinces formed in 1833 out of Old Castile; bounded N. by Burgos, Álava and Navarre, W. by Burgos, S. by Soria and E. by Navarre and Saragossa. Pop. (1900) 189,376; area, 1946 sq. m. Logroño belongs entirely to the basin of the river Ebro, which forms its northern boundary except for a short distance near San Vicente; it is drained chiefly by the rivers Tiron, Oja, Najerilla, Iregua, Leza, Cidacos and Alhama, all flowing in a north-easterly direction. The portion skirting the Ebro forms a spacious and for the most part fertile undulating plain, called La Rioja, but in the south Logroño is considerably broken up by offshoots from the sierras which separate that river from the Douro. In the west the Cerro de San Lorenzo, the culminating point of the Sierra de la Demanda, rises 7562 ft., and in the south the Pico de Urbion reaches 7388 ft. The products of the province are chiefly cereals, good oil and wine (especially in the Rioja), fruit, silk, flax and honey. Wine is the principal export, although after 1892 this industry suffered greatly from the protective duties imposed by France. Great efforts have been made to keep a hold upon French and English markets with light red and white Rioja wines. No less than 128,000 acres are covered with vines, and 21,000 with olive groves. Iron and argentiferous lead are mined in small quantities and other ores have been discovered. The manufacturing industries are insignificant. A railway along the right bank of the Ebro connects the province with Saragossa, and from Miranda there is railway communication with Madrid, Bilbao and France; but there is no railway in the southern districts, where trade is much retarded by the lack even of good roads. The town of Logroño (pop. 1900, 19,237) and the city of Calahorra (9475) are separately described. The only other towns with upwards of 5000 inhabitants are Haro (7914), Alfaro (5938) and Cervera del Río Alhama (5930).

LOGROÑO, the capital of the Spanish province of Logroño, on the right bank of the river Ebro and on the Saragossa-Miranda de Ebro railway. Pop. (1900) 19,237. Logroño is an ancient walled town, finely situated on a hill 1204 ft. high. Its bridge of twelve arches across the Ebro was built in 1138, but has frequently been restored after partial destruction by floods. The main street, arcaded on both sides, and the crooked but highly picturesque alleys of the older quarters are in striking contrast with the broad, tree-shaded avenues and squares laid out in modern times. The chief buildings are a bull-ring which accommodates 11,000 spectators, and a church, Santa Maria de Palacio, called "the imperial," from the tradition that its founder was Constantine the Great (274-337). As the commercial centre of the fertile and well-cultivated plain of the Rioja, Logroño has an important trade in wine.

The district of Logroño was in ancient times inhabited by the _Berones_ or _Verones_ of Strabo and Pliny, and their _Varia_ is to be identified with the modern suburb of the city of Logroño now known as Varea of Barea. Logroño was named by the Romans _Juliobriga_ and afterwards _Lucronius_. It fell into the hands of the Moors in the 8th century, but was speedily retaken by the Christians, and under the name of Lucronius appears with frequency in medieval history. It was unsuccessfully besieged by the French in 1521, and occupied by them from 1808 to 1813. It was the birthplace of the dumb painter Juan Fernandez Navarrete (1526-1579).

LOGROSCINO (or LO GROSCINO), NICOLA (1700?-1763?), Italian musical composer, was born at Naples and was a pupil of Durante. In 1738 he collaborated with Leo and others in the hasty production of _Demetrio_; in the autumn of the same year he produced a comic opera _L'inganno per inganno_, the first of a long series of comic operas, the success of which won him the name of "il Dio dell' opera buffa." He went to Palermo, probably in 1747, as a teacher of counterpoint; as an opera composer he is last heard of in 1760, and is supposed to have died about 1763. Logroscino has been credited with the invention of the concerted operatic finale, but as far as can be seen from the score of _Il Governatore_ and the few remaining fragments of other operas, his finales show no advance upon those of Leo. As a musical humorist, however, he deserves remembrance, and may justly be classed alongside of Rossini.

LOGWOOD (so called from the form in which it is imported), the heart-wood of a leguminous tree, _Haematoxylon campechianum_, native of Central America, and grown also in the West Indian Islands. The tree attains a height not exceeding 40 ft., and is said to be ready for felling when about ten years old. The wood, deprived of its bark and the sap-wood, is sent into the market in the form of large blocks and billets. It is very hard and dense, and externally has a dark brownish-red colour; but it is less deeply coloured within. The best qualities come from Campeachy, but it is obtained there only in small quantity.

Logwood is used in dyeing (q.v.), in microscopy, in the preparation of ink, and to a small extent in medicine on account of the tannic acid it contains, though it has no special medicinal value, being much inferior to kino and catechu. The wood was introduced into Europe as a dyeing substance soon after the discovery of America, but from 1581 to 1662 its use in England was prohibited by legislative enactment on account of the inferior dyes which at first were produced by its employment.

The colouring principle of logwood exists in the timber in the form of
a glucoside, from which it is liberated as haematoxylin by
fermentation. Haematoxylin, C16H14O6, was isolated by M. E. Chevreul
in 1810. It forms a crystalline hydrate, C16H14O6 + 3H2O, which is a
colourless body very sparingly soluble in cold water, but dissolving
freely in hot water and in alcohol. By exposure to the air, especially
in alkaline solutions, haematoxylin is rapidly oxidized into
haematein, C16H12O6, with the development of a fine purple colour.
This reaction of haematoxylin is exceedingly rapid and delicate,
rendering that body a laboratory test for alkalis. By the action of
hydrogen and sulphurous acid, haematein is easily reduced to
haematoxylin. It is chemically related to brazilin, found in
brazil-wood. Haematoxylin and brazilin, and also their oxidation
products, haematin and brazilin, have been elucidated by W. H. Perkin
and his pupils (see _Jour. Chem. Soc._, 1908, 1909).

LOHARU, a native state of India, in the south-east corner of the Punjab, between Hissar district and Rajputana. Area, 222 sq. m.; pop. (1901) 15,229; estimated gross revenue, £4800. The chief, whose title is nawab, is a Mahommedan, of Afghan descent. The nawab Sir Amir-ud-din-Ahmad Khan, K.C.I.E., who is a member of the viceroy's legislative council, was until 1905 administrator and adviser of the state of Maler Kotla. The town of Loharu had a population in 1901 of 2175.

LÖHE, JOHANN KONRAD WILHELM ( 1808-1872), German divine and philanthropist, was born on the 21st of February 1808 in Fürth near Nuremberg, and was educated at the universities of Erlangen and Berlin. In 1831 he was appointed vicar at Kirchenlamitz, where his fervent evangelical preaching attracted large congregations and puzzled the ecclesiastical authorities. A similar experience ensued at Nuremberg, where he was assistant pastor of St Egidia. In 1837 he became pastor in Neuendettelsau, a small and unattractive place, where his life's work was done, and which he transformed into a busy and influential community. He was interested in the spiritual condition of Germans who had emigrated to the United States, and built two training homes for missionaries to them. In 1849 he founded the Lutheran Society of Home Missions and in 1853 an institution of deaconesses. Other institutions were added to these, including a lunatic asylum, a Magdalen refuge, and hospitals for men and women. In theology Löhe was a strict Lutheran, but his piety was of a most attractive kind. Originality of conception, vividness of presentation, fertility of imagination, wide knowledge of Scripture and a happy faculty of applying it, intense spiritual fervour, a striking physique and a powerful voice made him a great pulpit force. He wrote a good deal, amongst his books being _Drei Bücher von der Kirche_ (1845), _Samenkörner des Gebetes_ (over 30 editions) and several volumes of sermons. He died on the 2nd of January 1872.

See his _Life_, by J. Deinzer (3 vols., Gütersloh, 1873, 3rd ed.,
1901).

LOHENGRIN, the hero of the German version of the legend of the knight of the swan. The story of Lohengrin as we know it is based on two principal motives common enough in folklore: the metamorphosis of human beings into swans, and the curious wife whose question brings disaster. Lohengrin's guide (the swan) was originally the little brother who, in one version of "the Seven Swans," was compelled through the destruction of his golden chain to remain in swan form and attached himself to the fortunes of one of his brothers. The swan played a part in classical mythology as the bird of Apollo, and in Scandinavian lore the swan maidens, who have the gift of prophecy and are sometimes confused with the Valkyries, reappear again and again. The wife's desire to know her husband's origin is a parallel of the myth of Cupid and Psyche, and bore in medieval times a similar mystical interpretation. The Lohengrin legend is localized on the Lower Rhine, and its incidents take place at Antwerp, Nijmwegen, Cologne and Mainz. In its application it falls into sharp division in the hands of German and French poets. By the Germans it was turned to mystical use by being attached loosely to the Grail legend (see GRAIL and PERCEVAL); in France it was adapted to glorify the family of Godfrey de Bouillon.

The German story makes its appearance in the last stanzas of Wolfram von Eschenbach's _Parzival_, where it is related how Parzival's son, Loherangrîn,[1] was sent from the castle of the Grail to the help of the young duchess of Brabant. Guided by the swan he reached Antwerp, and married the lady on condition that she should not ask his origin. On the breach of this condition years afterwards Loherangrîn departed, leaving sword, horn and ring behind him. Between 1283 and 1290, a Bavarian disciple of Wolfram's[2] adopted the story and developed it into an epic poem of nearly 8000 lines, incorporating episodes of Lohengrin's prowess in tournament, his wars with Henry I. against the heathen Hungarians and the Saracens,[3] and incidentally providing a detailed picture of the everyday life of people of high condition. The epic of Lohengrin is put by the anonymous writer into the mouth of Wolfram, who is made to relate it during the Contest of the Singers at the Wartburg in proof of his superiority in knowledge of sacred things over Klingsor the magician, and the poem is thus linked on to German tradition. Its connexion with Parzival implies a mystic application. The consecrated wafer shared by Lohengrin and the swan on their voyage is one of the more obvious means taken by the poet to give the tale the character of an allegory of the relations between Christ, the Church and the human soul. The story was followed closely in its main outlines by Richard Wagner in his opera _Lohengrin_.

The French legend of the knight of the swan is attached to the house of Bouillon, and although William of Tyre refers to it about 1170 as fable, it was incorporated without question by later annalists. It forms part of the cycle of the _chansons de geste_ dealing with the Crusade, and relates how Helyas, knight of the swan, is guided by the swan to the help of the duchess of Bouillon and marries her daughter Ida or Beatrix in circumstances exactly parallel to the adventures of Lohengrin and Elsa of Brabant, and with the like result. Their daughter marries Eustache, count of Boulogne, and had three sons, the eldest of whom, Godefroid (Godfrey), is the future king of Jerusalem. But in French story Helyas is not the son of Parzival, but of the king and queen of Lillefort, and the story of his birth, of himself, his five brothers and one sister is, with variations, that of "the seven swans" persecuted by the wicked grandmother, which figures in the pages of Grimm and Hans Andersen. The house of Bouillon was not alone in claiming the knight of the swan as an ancestor, and the tradition probably originally belonged to the house of Cleves.

_German Versions._--See _Lohengrin_, ed. Rückert (Quedlinburg and
Leipzig, 1858); another version of the tale, _Lorengel_, is edited in
the _Zeitschr. für deutsches Altertum_ (vol. 15); modern German
translation of _Lohengrin_, by H. A. Junghaus (Leipzig, 1878); Conrad
von Würzburg's fragmentary _Schwanritter_, ed. F. Roth (Frankfurt,
1861). Cf. Elster, _Beiträge zur Kritik des Lohengrin_ (Halle, 1884),
and R. Heinrichs, _Die Lohengrindichtung und ihre Deutung_ (Hamm i.
West., 1905).

_French Versions._--Baron de Reiffenberg, _Le Chevalier au cygne et
Godfrey de Bouillon_ (Brussels, 2 vols., 1846-1848), in _Mon. pour
servir à l'hist. de la province de Namur_; C. Hippeau, _La Chanson du
chevalier au cygne_ (1874); H. A. Todd, _La Naissance du chevalier au
cygne, an inedited French poem of the 12th cent._ (Mod. Lang. Assoc.,
Baltimore, 1889); cf. the Latin tale by Jean de Haute Seille (Johannes
de Alta Silva) in his _Dolopathos_ (ed. Oesterley, Strassburg, 1873).

_English Versions._--In England the story first appears in a short
poem preserved among the Cotton MSS. of the British Museum and
entitled _Chevelere assigne_. This was edited by G. E. V. Utterson in
1820 for the Roxburghe Club, and again by H. H. Gibbs in 1868 for the
Early English Text Society. The E.E.T.S. edition is accompanied by a
set of photographs of a 14th-century ivory casket, on which the story
is depicted in 36 compartments. An English prose romance, _Helyas
Knight of the Swan_, translated by Robert Copland, and printed by W.
Copland about 1550, is founded on a French romance _La Génealogie ...
de Godeffroy de Boulin_ (printed 1504) and is reprinted by W. J. Thoms
in _Early Prose Romances_, vol. iii. It was also printed by Wynkyn de
Worde in 1512. A modern edition was issued in 1901 from the Grolier
Club, New York.

FOOTNOTES:

[1] i.e. Garin le Loherin (q.v.), or Garin of Lorraine.

[2] Elster (_Beiträge_) says that the poem is the work of two poets:
the first part by a Thuringian wandering minstrel, the second--which
differs in style and dialect--by a Bavarian official.

[3] Based on material borrowed from the _Sächsische Weltchronik_
(formerly called _Repgowische Chronik_ from its dubious assignment to
Eime von Repgow), the oldest prose chronicle of the world in German
(c. 1248 or 1260).

LOIN (through O. Fr. _loigne_ or _logne_, mod. _longe_, from Lat. _lumbus_), that part of the body in an animal which lies between the upper part of the hip-bone and the last of the false ribs on either side of the back-bone, hence in the plural the general term for the lower part of the human body at the junction with the legs, covered by the loin-cloth, the almost universal garment among primitive peoples. There are also figurative uses of the word, chiefly biblical, due to the loins being the supposed seat of male vigour and power of generation. Apart from these uses the word is a butcher's term for a joint of meat cut from this part of the body. The upper part of a loin of beef is known as the "surloin" (Fr. _surlonge_, i.e. upper loin). This has been commonly corrupted into "sirloin," and a legend invented, to account for the name, of a king, James I. or Charles II., knighting a prime joint of beef "Sir Loin" in pleasure at its excellence. A double surloin, undivided at the back-bone, is known as a "baron of beef," probably from an expansion of the legend of the "Sir Loin."

LOIRE, the longest river of France, rising in the Gerbier de Jonc in the department of Ardèche, at a height of 4500 ft. and flowing north and west to the Atlantic. After a course of 18 m. in Ardèche it enters Haute-Loire, in which it follows a picturesque channel along the foot of basaltic rocks, through narrow gorges and small plains. At Vorey, where it is joined by the Arzon, it becomes navigable for rafts. Four miles below its entrance into the department of Loire, at La Noirie, river navigation is officially reckoned to begin, and breaking through the gorges of Saint Victor, the Loire enters the wide and swampy plain of Forez, after which it again penetrates the hills and flows out into the plain of Roanne. As in Haute-Loire, it is joined by a large number of streams, the most important being the Coise on the right and the Lignon du Nord or du Forez and the Aix on the left. Below Roanne the Loire is accompanied on its left bank by a canal to Digoin (35 m.) in Saône-et-Loire, thence by the so-called "lateral canal of the Loire" to Briare in Loiret (122 m.). Owing to the extreme irregularity of the river in different seasons these canals form the only certain navigable way. At Digoin the Loire receives the Arroux, and gives off the canal du Centre (which utilizes the valley of the Bourbince) to Chalon-sur-Saône. At this point its northerly course begins to be interrupted by the mountains of Morvan, and flowing north-west it enters the department of Nièvre. Just beyond Nevers it is joined by the Allier; this river rises 30 m. S.W. of the Loire in the department of Lozère, and following an almost parallel course has at the confluence a volume equal to two-thirds of that of the main stream. Above Nevers the Loire is joined by the Aron, along which the canal du Nivernais proceeds northward, and the Nièvre, and below the confluence of the Allier gives off the canal du Berry to Bourges and the navigable part of the Cher. About this point the valley becomes more ample and at Briare (in Loiret) the river leaves the highlands and flows between the plateaus of Gatinais and the Beauce on the right and the Sologne on the left. In Loiret it gives off the canal de Briare northward to the Seine and itself bends north-west to Orléans, whence the canal d'Orléans, following the little river Cens, communicates with the Briare canal. At Orléans the river changes its north-westerly for a south-westerly course. A striking peculiarity of the affluents of the Loire in Loiret and the three subsequent departments is that they frequently flow in a parallel channel to the main stream and in the same valley. Passing Blois in Loir-et-Cher, the Loire enters Indre-et-Loire and receives on the right the Cisse, and, after passing Tours, the three important left-hand tributaries of the Cher, Indre and the Vienne. At the confluence of the Vienne the Loire enters Maine-et-Loire, in its course through which department it is frequently divided by long sandy islands fringed with osiers and willows; while upon arriving at Les Ponts-de-Cé it is split into several distinct branches. The principal tributaries are: left, the Thouet at Saumur, the Layon and the Evre; right: the Authion, and, most important tributary of all, the Maine, formed by the junction of the rivers Mayenne, Sarthe and Loir. Through Loire-Inférieure the river is studded with islands until below Nantes, where the largest of them, called Belle-Ile, is found. It receives the Erdre on the right at Nantes and on the opposite shore the Sèvre-Nantaise, and farther on the canalized Achenau on the left and the navigable Etier de Méan on the right near Saint Nazaire. Below Nantes, between which point and La Martinière (below Pellerin) the channel is embanked, the river is known as the Loire Maritime and widens out between marshy shores, passing Paimboeuf on the left and finally Saint-Nazaire, where it is 1½ m. broad. The length of the channel of the Loire is about 625 m.; its drainage area is 46,700 sq. m. A lateral canal (built in 1881-1892 at a cost of about £1,000,000) known as the Maritime Canal of the Loire between Le Carnet and La Martinière enables large ships to ascend to Nantes. It is 9½ m. long, and 19½ (capable of being increased to 24) ft. deep. At each end is a lock 405 ft. long by 59 ft. wide. The canal de Nantes à Brest connects this city with Brest.

The Loire is navigable only in a very limited sense. During the
drought of summer thin and feeble streams thread their way between the
sandbanks of the channel; while at other times a stupendous flood
submerges wide reaches of land. In the middle part of its course the
Loire traverses the western portion of the undulating Paris basin,
with its Tertiary marls, sands and clays, and the alluvium carried
off from these renders its lower channel inconstant; the rest of the
drainage area is occupied by crystalline rocks, over the hard surface
of which the water, undiminished by absorption, flows rapidly into the
streams. When the flood waters of two or more tributaries arrive at
the same time serious inundations result. Attempts to control the
river must have begun at a very early date, and by the close of the
middle ages the bed between Orléans and Angers was enclosed by dykes
10 to 13 ft. high. In 1783 a double line of dykes or _turcies_ 23 ft.
high was completed from Bec d'Allier downwards. The channel was,
however, so much narrowed that the embankments are almost certain to
give way as soon as the water rises 16 ft. (the average rise is about
14, and in 1846 and 1856 it was more than 22). In modern times
embankments, aided by dredging operations extending over a large
number of years, have ensured a depth of 18 ft. in the channel between
La Martinière and Nantes. Several towns have constructed special works
to defend themselves against the floods; Tours, the most exposed of
all, is surrounded by a circular dyke.

Various schemes for the systematic regulation of the Loire have been
discussed. It has been proposed to construct in the upper valleys of
the several affluents a number of gigantic dams or reservoirs from
which the water, stored during flood, could be let off into the river
as required. A dam of this kind (built in 1711) at the village of
Pinay, about 18 m. above Roanne, and capable of retaining from 350 to
450 million cub. ft. of water, has greatly diminished the force of the
floods at Roanne, and maintained the comparative equilibrium of the
current during the dry season. Three other dams of modern construction
are also in existence, one near Firminy, the other two near St
Étienne.