Michael I. (Rhangabé) was an obscure nobleman who had married Procopia, the daughter of Nicephorus I., and been made master of the palace; his elevation to the throne was due to a revolutionary movement against his brother-in-law Stauracius, who reigned only two months after the death of Nicephorus on the battlefield (812). Elected as the tool of the bigoted orthodox party in the church, Michael diligently persecuted the Iconoclasts on the northern and eastern frontiers of the empire, but meanwhile allowed the Bulgarians to ravage a great part of Macedonia and Thrace; having at last taken the field in the spring of 813, he was defeated near Bersinikia, and Leo the Armenian was saluted emperor in his stead in the following summer. Michael, after having been compelled to become a monk, was permitted thenceforward to live unmolested in the island of Prote, where he died in 845.

Michael II. (The Stammerer), a native of Amorium in Phrygia, was of humble origin, and began life as a private soldier, but rose by his talents and assiduity to the rank of general. He was one of those who had favoured the election to the throne of his old companion in arms Leo the Armenian in 813, but, detected in a conspiracy against the government of that emperor, had been sentenced to death in December 820; his partisans, however, succeeded in assassinating Leo on the morning of Christmas Day, and called Michael from the prison to the throne. The principal features of his reign (820-829) were a protracted struggle (of nearly three years) against his brother general, Thomas, who aimed at the throne, the conquest of Crete by the Saracens in 823, and the beginning of their attacks upon Sicily (827). Conciliatory on the whole in his policy towards the image worshippers (his own sympathies were iconoclastic), he incurred the wrath of the monks by entering into a second marriage with Euphrosyne, daughter of Constantine VI., who had previously taken the veil. He died in October 829, and was succeeded by Theophilus his son.

Michael III. (The Drunkard) was the grandson of Michael the Stammerer, and succeeded his father Theophilus when only three years of age (842). Until his majority at the age of eighteen the affairs of the empire were managed by the empress-regent his mother Theodora; his education was shamefully neglected, and it was during this period that Michael formed the disgraceful personal habits which are indicated by his surname. In 861 Michael, together with his uncle Bardas, undertook an expedition against the Bulgarians, which resulted in the conversion of the Bulgarian king, who thenceforth bore the Christian name of Michael. The emperor had been less successful in the campaign which he led in person against Omar of Melitene in 860, but in 863 his uncle Petronas gained an important victory over the Saracens in Asia Minor. The year 865 was marked by the first appearance of the Russians in the Bosphorus. Michael was assassinated in his palace in 867 by Basilius the Macedonian, whom he had associated with himself in the empire in the previous year.

Michael IV. (The Paphlagonian) owed his elevation to Zoe, daughter of Constantine IX., the last of the Macedonian dynasty; this princess was married to Romanus HL, but becoming enamoured of Michael, her chamberlain, she poisoned her husband and married her attendant (1034). Michael, however, being of a weak character and subject to epileptic fits, possessed the supreme power only in name, and was a mere instrument in the hands of his brother, John the Eunuch, who had been first minister both of Constantine and Romanus. John’s diplomacy was successful in keeping the Arabs in the archipelago and Egypt quiet for some time, and he was at last able to secure a victory for the imperial arms at Edessa in 1037. The attempt to recover Sicily in the following year with the help of the Normans was less prosperous, and in 1040 the island wholly ceased to be a Byzantine province. About the same time, the Bulgarians having overrun Macedonia and Thrace, and threatening Constantinople, the indolent and infirm emperor, to the surprise alike of friends and foes, put himself at the head of the army, and not only drove the enemy beyond the frontier, but followed them into their own territory. He died, shortly after his triumph, on December 10, 1041.

Michael V. (Calaphates or The Caulker), nephew and successor of the preceding, derived his surname from his father Stephen, who had originally followed the occupation of a caulker of ships. He owed his elevation (December 1041) to his uncle John, whom along with Zoe he almost immediately banished; this led to a popular tumult and his dethronement after a brief reign of four months (April 1042). He lived for many years afterwards in the quiet obscurity of a monastery.

Michael VI. (The Warlike) was already an old man when chosen by the empress Theodora as her successor shortly before her death in 1056. His government was feeble in the extreme, and he was at last compelled to abdicate by Isaac Comnenus, who had defeated his army in Phrygia (August 1057). He also spent the rest of his life in a monastery.

Michael VII. (Ducas or Parapinaces) was the eldest son of Constantine XI. Ducas, by whom along with his brothers Andronicus I. and Constantine XII. he was invested with the title of Augustus; this joint succession took place in 1067, but in 1071 it suited the policy of the uncle Joannes Caesar to make Michael sole emperor. For this position Michael, whose “character was degraded, rather than ennobled, by the virtues of a monk and the learning of a sophist,” was by no means fitted, and at length two generals of the name of Nicephorus, surnamed Bryennius and Botaniates, simultaneously rebelled against him in 1078; with hardly a struggle he resigned the purple and retired into a monastery, where he afterwards received the title of archbishop of Ephesus.

Michael VIII. (Palaeologus), born in 1234, was the son of Andronicus Palaeologus Comnenus and Irene Angela the granddaughter of Alexius Angelus, emperor of Constantinople. At an early age he rose to distinction, and ultimately became commander of the French mercenaries in the employment of the emperors of Nicaea. A few days after the death of Theodore Lascaris II. in 1259, Michael, by the assassination of Muzalon (which he is believed but not proved to have encouraged), succeeded to the guardianship, shared with the patriarch Arsenius, of the young emperor John Lascaris, then a lad of only eight years. Afterwards invested with the title of “despot,” he was finally proclaimed joint-emperor, and crowned alone at Nicaea on January 1, 1260. In the following year (July 1261) Constantinople fell into the hands of the Caesar Alexius Strategopulus, and Michael, having got himself crowned anew in the church of St Sophia, caused his boy colleague to be blinded and sent into banishment. For this last act he was excommunicated by Arsenius, and the ban was not removed until six years afterwards (1268), on the accession of a new patriarch. In 1263 and 1264 respectively Michael, with the help of Urban IV., concluded peace with Villehardouin, prince of Achaia, and Michael, despot of Epirus, who had previously been incited by the pope to attack him; the friendly intervention had been secured by a promise on the emperor’s part to help forward the reunion of the Eastern and Western churches. In 1269 Charles of Sicily, aided by John of Thessaly, again made war with the alleged purpose of restoring Baldwin to the throne of Constantinople, and pressed Michael so hard that ultimately, yielding to the importunities of Gregory X., he caused the deputies of the Eastern church to attend the council of Lyons (1274) and there accept the “filioque” and papal supremacy. The union thus brought about between the two churches was, however, extremely distasteful to the Greeks, and the persecution of his “schismatic” subjects to which the emperor was compelled to resort weakened his power so much that Martin IV. was tempted to enter into alliance with Charles of Anjou and the Venetians for the purpose of reconquering Constantinople. The invasion, however, failed, and Michael so far had his revenge in the “Sicilian Vespers,” which he helped to bring about. He died in Thrace in December 1282, and was succeeded by his son Andronicus II.

Michael IX. (Palaeologus) was the son of Andronicus II., and was associated with him on the throne from 1295, but predeceased him (1320).

The personal character of Michaelis can be read between the lines of his autobiography with the aid of the other materials collected by the editor Hassencamp («Λ. D. Michaelis Lebensbeschreibung, &c., 1793). To understand the secret of his enormous influence, it is not enough to read his books, now for the most part dull enough to us; we must see the upright vivacious laborious man, with a good deal of worldly prudence and a good deal of temper, much absorbed in his manifold academic activities in the university and Royal Society of Göttingen, yet ever full of interest in the larger world, and of shrewd judgmentsand lively talk, with a strong sense of his rights and dignity, yet with a good and warm heart; shining especially in the lecture-room, where he dealt forth knowledge with discursive hand from a full store, displaying the methods as well as the results of his all-sided research, not without a touch of the vanity of the polyhistor, and loving to leave the chair under a storm of applause at a parting bon-mot which he acknowledged at the door in a backward glance of triumph. The same volume contains a full list of his works. Besides those already mentioned it is sufficient to refer to his New Testament Introduction (the first edition, 1750, preceded the full development of his powers, and is a very different book from the later editions), bis reprint of Lowth’s Praelectiones with important additions (1758-62), his German translation of the Bible with notes (1773-92), his Orientalische und Exegetische Bibliothek (1775-85), and Neue 0. and E. Bib. (1786-91), his Mosaisches Recht (1770—71), and his edition of Castle’s Lexicon Syriacum (1787-88). His Litterarischer Briefwechsel (1794-96) contains much that is interesting for the history of learning in his time.

MICHAUX, François André (1770-1855), son of the preceding, was, like his father, employed by the French Government to explore the forests of North America with a view to the introduction into France of trees valuable for their wood or other products. He was very successful in carrying out this object. He published in 1810-13 a Histoire des Arbres forestières de Γ Amérique Septentrionale, in 3 vols., with 156 plates, a work full of information on the characters, uses, distribution, and other points of interest in the various species. In 1817-19 a translation of it appeared under the title North American Sylva. He also wrote a Voyage a l’ouest des Monts Alléghanys, 1804, besides articles in scientific magazines.

Though Michelangelo’s earliest studies were directed towards painting, he was by nature and predilection much more inclined to sculpture. In that art he presently received encouragement and training under the eye of an illustrious patron, Lorenzo dei Medici. On the recommendation, it is said, of Ghirlandaio, he was transferred, before the term of his apprenticeship as a painter had expired, to the school of sculpture established by Lorenzo in the Medici gardens. Here he could learn to match himself against his great predecessor, Donatello, one of whose pupils was the director of the school, and to compare the works of that master and his Tuscan contemporaries with the antiques collected for the instruction of the scholars. Here, too, he could listen to discourses on Platonism, and steep himself in the doctrines of an enthusiastic philosophy which sought to reconcile with Christian faith the lore and the doctrines of the Academy. Michelangelo remained a Christian Platonist to the end of his days; he was also from his youth up a devoted student of Dante. His powers of mind and hand soon attracted attention, and secured him the regard and favour of his patrons in spite of his rugged, unsociable exterior, and of a temper which at best was but a half-smothered volcano.

Michelangelo had been attached to the school and household of the Medici for barely three years when, in 1492, his great patron Lorenzo died. Lorenzo’s son Piero dei Medici inherited the position, but not the qualities, of his father; Florence soon chafed under his authority; and towards the autumn of 1494 it became apparent that disaster was impending over him and his adherents. Michelangelo was constitutionally subject to dark and sudden presentiments: one such seized him now, and, without awaiting the popular outbreak which soon followed, he took horse with two companions and fled to Bologna. There, being now in his twentieth year, he was received with kindness by a member of the Aldovrandi family, and on his commission executed two figures of saints, and one of an angel, for the shrine of St Dominic in the church of St Petronius. After about a year, work at Bologna failing, and his name having been included in his absence on the list of artists appointed to provide a new hall of assembly for the Great Council of Florence, Michelangelo returned home. The strange theocracy established by Savonarola was now in force, and the whole character of civic life at Florence was for the time being changed. But Michelangelo was not left without employment. He found a friend in another Lorenzo, the son of Pierfrancesco dei Medici, for whom he at this time executed a statue of the boy St John. Having also carved a recumbent Cupid in imitation of the antique, it was suggested to him by the same patron that it should be so tinted and treated as to look like a real antique, and sold accordingly. Without increasing the price he put upon the work, Michelangelo for amusement lent himself to the counterfeit, and the piece was then actually sold for a large sum to a Roman collector, the cardinal San Giorgio, as a genuine work of antiquity,—the dealer appropriating the profits. When presently the cardinal discovered the fraud, he caused the dealer to refund; but as to Michelangelo himself, it was represented to the young sculptor that if he went to Rome, the amateur who had just involuntarily paid so high a tribute to his skill would certainly befriend him. He set forth accordingly, and arrived at Rome for the first time at the end of June 1496. Such hopes as he may have entertained of countenance from the cardinal San Giorgio were quickly dispelled. Neither did the banished Piero dei Medici, who also was now living at Rome, do anything to help him. On the other hand Michelangelo won the favour of a Roman nobleman, Jacopo Galli, and through him of the French cardinal Jean de Villiers de la Grolaie, abbot of St Denis. From the former he received a commission for a Cupid and a Bacchus, from the latter for a Pietà, or Mary lamenting over the body of Christ,—works of which probably all three, the last two certainly, are preserved.

Michelangelo’s stay in Rome at this time lasted five years, from the summer of 1496 till that of 1501. The interval had been one of extreme political distraction at Florence. The excitement of the French invasion, the mystic and ascetic regimen of Savonarola, the reaction which led to his overthrow’, and finally the external wars and internal dissidences which preceded a new^ettlement, had all created an atmosphere most unfavourable to art Nevertheless Ludovico Buonarroti, who in the troubles of 1494 had lost a small permanent appointment he held in the customs, and had come to regard his son Michelangelo as the mainstay of his house, had been repeatedly urging him to come home.

A spirit of family duty and family pride was the ruling principle in all Michelangelo’s conduct. During the best years of his life he submitted himself sternly and without a murmur to pinching hardship and almost superhuman labour for the sake of his father and brothers, who were ever selfishly ready to be fed and helped by him. Having now, after an illness, come home in 1501, Michelangelo received the request from the cardinal Francesco Piccolomini to adorn with a number of sculptured figures a shrine already begun in the cathedral of Siena in honour of the most distinguished member of his house, Pope Pius II. Four only of these figures were ever executed, and those not apparently, or only in small part, by the master’s hand. A work of greater interest in Florence itself had diverted him from his engagement to his Sienese patron. This was the execution of the famous colossal statue of David, popularly known as the Giant. It was carved out of a huge block of marble on which another sculptor, Agostino d’Antonio, had begun unsuccessfully to work forty years before, and which had been lying idle ever since. Michelangelo had here a difficult problem before him. Without much regard to tradition or the historical character of his hero, he carved out of the vast but cramped mass of material a youthful, frowning colossus, which amazed every beholder by its freedom and science of execution, and its victorious energy of expression. All the best artists of Florence were called in council to determine on what site it should be set up, and after much debate the terrace of the Palace of the Signory was chosen, in preference to the neighbouring Loggia dei Lanzi. Here accordingly the colossal David of Michelangelo took, in the month of May 1504, the place which it continued to hold ever afterwards, until ten years ago, in 1873, it was removed for the sake of protection to a hall in the Academy of Fine Arts. Other works of sculpture by the same indomitable hand also belong to this period: among these another David, in bronze, and on a smaller scale; a great rough-hewn St Matthew begun but never completed for the cathedral of Florence; a Μ adonna and Child executed on the commission of a merchant of Bruges; and two unfinished bas-reliefs of the same subject.

Neither was Michelangelo idle at the same time as a painter. Leaving -disputed works for the moment out of sight, he in these days at any rate painted for his and Raphael’s common patron, Angelo Doni, the Holy Family now in the Uffizi at Florence. And in the autumn of 1504, the year of the completion of the David, he received from the Florentine state a commission for a work of monumental painting on an heroic scale. Leonardo da Vinci had been for some months engaged on his great cartoon of the Battle of Anghiari, to be painted on the wall of the great hall of the municipal council. The gonfaloniere Soderini now procured for Michelangelo the commission to design a companion work. Michelangelo chose an incident of the Pisan war, when the Florentine soldiery had been surprised by the enemy in the act of bathing: he dashed at the task with his accustomed fiery energy, and had carried a great part of the cartoon to completion when, in the early spring of 1505, he broke off the work in order to obey a call to Rome which reached him from Pope Julius II. His unfinished cartoon showed how greatly Michelangelo had profited by the example of his elder rival, Leonardo, little as, personally, he yielded to his charm or could bring himself to respond to his courtesy. The work of Michelangelo’s youth is for the most part comparatively tranquil in character. His early sculpture, showing a degree of science and perfection unequalled since the antique, has also something of the antique serenity. It bears strongly the stamp of intellectual research, but not by any means that of storm or strain. In the cartoon of the Bathers, he on the other hand appropriated and carried further the mastery, which Leonardo had first asserted, over every variety of violent action and every extreme of energetic movement. In it the qualities afterwards proverbially associated with Michelangelo—his furia, his terribilità, the tempest and hurricane of the spirit which accompanied his unequalled technical mastery and knowledge—first found expression.

With Michelangelo’s departure to Rome early in 1505 the first part of his artistic career may be said to end. It will be convenient here to recapitulate its principal results in sculpture and painting, both those preserved, and those recorded but lost.

Sculpture. —Florence, 1489-94. Head of a Faun, National Museum, Florence (?). Condivi describes Michelangelo’s first essay in sculpture as a head of an aged faun with a front tooth knocked out, this latter point having been an afterthought suggested by Lorenzo dei Medici. The head is commonly identified with one in the National Museum at Florence, which, however, bears no marks of Michelangelo’s style, and is in all probability spurious. Madonna Seated on a Step, Casa Buonarroti, Florence. This bas-relief is a genuine example of Michelangelo’s early work in the Medicean school under Bertoldo. It is executed in low relief in imitation of the technical style of Donatello; but the attitudes and characters of the figures, and the long-drawn, somewhat tormented folds of drapery, recall rather the manner of Jacopo della Quercia. Centauromachia, Casa Buonarroti. A fine and unquestionably genuine work in full relief, of probably somewhat later date than the last-mentioned; Michelangelo has followed the antique in his conception and treatment of the nude, but not at all in the arrangement of the subject, which occurs frequently in works of ancient art.

Bologna, 1494-95. Kneeling Angel, supporting the shrine of St Dominic. This is the figure, with crisp hair, short resolute features, and drapery clinging to show the limbs, on the righthand side of the spectator as he fronts the altar. The prettier and more engaging figure at the opposite end was long taken to be Michelangelo’s work, but is really that of Niecolo dell’ Area. Michelangelo also finished the figure of St Petronius on the cornice of the same altar, begun by the same Niccolo, and executed one of St Proculus which has perished.

Florence, 1495-96. St John in the Wilderness, Berlin Museum. During the year between Michelangelo’s return from Bologna and his first departure to Rome he executed, as has been narrated above, a statue of S. Giovannino for Lorenzo di Pierfrancesco dei Medici. This had for centuries been supposed lost, when in 1874 it was declared to have been found in the possession of Count Gualandi-Rossalmini at Pisa. Vehement and prolonged discussions arose as to the authenticity of the work, and at last it was bought for the Berlin Museum, where its genuineness is with apparently good reason maintained. The stripling saint stands naked but for a skin about his loins, holding a honeycomb in his left hand and lifting to his mouth a goat’s horn full of honey with his right. Restoration of an antique group of Bacchus and Ampelus, Uffizi Gallery, Florence. This interesting restoration of an antique torso, by the addition of a head, the lower part of the legs, and the accessory figure of an attendant genius, a plinth, and mask, is not one of the works traditionally ascribed to Michelangelo; but has lately, and as it seems rightly, been claimed for him on internal evidence. Recumbent Cupid, bought by the cardinal San Giorgio as an antique. This work, which played an important part in Michelangelo’s history, is unfortunately lost.

Rome, 1495-1501. Kneeling Cupid, South Kensington Museum, London. This beautiful statue of an athletic youth kneeling on the right knee, looking over his right shoulder, with the right hand lowered and the left raised, and having a quiver on the ground beside him, is acknowledged on internal grounds as an early work of Michelangelo. There is some ambiguity about the character and action of the personage; but the work is usually identified with the Cupid which Michelangelo is recorded to have executed at this time for Jacopo Galli. Bacchus and Young Faun, National Museum, Florence. This is unquestionably the “Bacchus” commissioned by the same patron. The finely-framed but soft-limbed youthful god, his weight supported somewhat staggeringly on the left leg, holds up a wine cup in his right hand, and with his loosely-hanging left hand holds a cluster of grapes, at which a child-faun standing a little behind him grasps ami nibbles. The surface highly finished and polished, as in the Berlin St John. Virgin Lamenting the Dead Christ, St Peter’s, Rome. This group, executed for the French abbot of St Denis, is the finest of all Michelangelo’s early sculptures, and one of the finest of his life. It still recalls the ideals of some of the earlier Tuscan masters, especially Jacopo da Quercia; but the execution is of a mastery and nobility unprecedented in Italian art. The Virgin, in drapery of magnificent design, with her left knee somewhat raised and her right hand slightly extended, sits holding on her lap the dead Christ,—a figure of splendid frame and modelling as well as of admirable pathos and dignity in expression.

Florence, 1501-6. Four Sainis decorating the Shrine of Pius II., in the cathedral of Siena. These figures represent the only part which Michelangelo ever completed of his contract with the cardinal Piccolomini and his heirs. They are evidently carried out by the hand of pupils only. Virgin and Child, Liebfrauenkirche, Bruges. This pleasing group has been since the days of Albert Diirer attributed to Michelangelo, and bears the manifest stamp of his design, though its execution may be partly by inferior hands. It is placed close to the tombstone of a member of the Moscheroni (or Moskeron) family. We know that Michelangelo executed at this time, for one of this very family, a work which the ancient biographers describe as having been in bronze,—a medallion in that metal, says explicitly Vasari; but it is probably really the marble group in question. Virgin and Child, Royal Academy, London. This beautiful unfinished circular relief is identified with one recorded to have been executed by the master for Taddeo Gaddi. Virgin and Child, National Museum, Florence,—a similar relief, also unfinished, originally ordered by Bartolommeo Pitti. Youthful David, Academy of Arts, Florence. Of this colossal work, which in spite of its scale and subject has still, in grace of pose and style, a considerable artistic affinity with the earlier Bacchus and St John, enough has been said. Figure of David, a small statue in bronze. Several extant works have been pointed out as probably identical with this lost statue; but the claims of none have been generally acknowledged.

Painting.— Holy Family, Uffizi, Florence. This circular picture, painted for Angelo Doni, and mentioned by the earliest biographers, is the only perfectly well-attested panel-painting of Michelangelo which exists. His love of restless and somewhat strained actions is illustrated by the action of the Madonna, who kneels on the ground holding up the child on her right shoulder; his love of the nude by the introduction (wherein he follows Luca Signorelli) of some otherwise purposeless undraped figures in the background. Virgin and Child with Four Angels, National Gallery, London. This unfinished painting, marked by great grace as well as severity of feeling and design, was formerly attributed to Domenico Ghirlandaio, but is now commonly held to be the earliest extant picture by Michelangelo. Of his manner, especially in the design and treatment of the drapery, it bears evident marks; but the execution seems like that of some weaker pupil or companion, perhaps Ridolfo Ghirlandaio or Granacci. Entombment of Christ, National Gallery, London. This picture, also unfinished, has in like manner been much contested. Its composition is unfortunate; weaker hands have disfigured some portions of the work; but the extraordinary excellence of other portions, and the grandeur of some of the actions, render it probable that the work is one begun and afterwards abandoned by Michelangelo himself. Cartoon of the Battle of Anghiari. Of this famous lost work (begun, though apparently not completed, in the period now engaging us) the only authentic record is contained in two early engravings, one by Marcantonio and the other by Agostino Veneziano. An elaborate drawing of many figures at Hoikham Hall, well known and often engraved, seems to be a later cento destitute of real authority.

Michelangelo had not been long in Rome before Pope Julius devised fit employment for him. That capacious and headstrong spirit, on fire with great enterprises, had conceived the idea of a sepulchral monument to commemorate his glory when he should be dead, and to be executed according to his own plans while he was still living. He entrusted this congenial task to Michelangelo. The design being approved, the artist spent the winter of 1505-6 at the quarries of Carrara, superintending the excavation and shipment of the necessary marbles. In the spring he returned to Rome, and when the marbles arrived fell to with all his energy at the preparations for the work. For a while the pope followed their progress eagerly, and was all kindness to the young sculptor. But presently his disposition changed. In Michelangelo’s absence an artist who was no friend of his, Bramante of Urbino, had been selected by Julius to carry out a new architectural scheme, commensurate with the usual vastness of his conceptions, namely the rebuilding of St Peter’s church. To the influence and the malice of Bramante Michelangelo attributed the unwelcome invitation he now received to interrupt the great work of sculpture which he had just begun, in order to decorate the Sixtine chapel with frescos. Soon, however, schemes of war and conquest interposed to divert the thoughts of Julius, not from the progress of his own monument merely, but from artistic enterprises altogether. One day Michelangelo heard him say at table to his jeweller that he meant to spend no more money on pebbles...

This remarkable series, every volume of which was at once a work of imagination and of research, was not even yet finished, but the later volumes exhibit a certain falling off. The ambitious Bible de l , Humanite (1864), an historical sketch of religions, has but little merit. In La Montagne (1868), the last of the natural history series, the tricks of staccato style are pushed even farther than by Victor Hugo in his less inspired moments, though—as is inevitable in the hands of such a master of language as Michelet—the effect is frequently grandiose if not grand. Nos Fils (1869), the last of the string of smaller books published during the author’s life, is a tractate on education, written with ample knowledge of the facts and with all Michelet’s usual sweep and range of view, but with visibly declining powers of expression. But in a book published posthumously, Le Banquet, these powers reappear at their fullest. The picture of the industrious and famishing populations of the Riviera is (whether true to fact or not) one of the best things that Michelet has done. To complete the list of his miscellaneous works, two collections of pieces, written and partly published at different times, may be mentioned. These are Les Soldats de la Révolution and Légendes Démocratiques du Nord.

The publication of this series of books, and the completion of his history, occupied Michelet during both decades of the empire. He lived partly in France, partly in Italy, and was accustomed to spend the winter on the Riviera, chiefly at Hyères. At last, in 1867, the great work of his life was finished. As it is now published it fills nineteen volumes. The first of these deals with the early history up to the death of Charlemagne, the second with the flourishing time of feudal France, the third with the 13th century, the fourth, fifth, and sixth with the Hundred Years’ War, the seventh and eighth with the establishment of the royal power under Charles VII. and Louis XI. The 16 th and 17th centuries have four volumes apiece, much of which is very distantly connected with French history proper, especially in the two volumes entitled Renaissance and Réforme. The last three volumes carry on the history of the 18th century to the ..outbreak of the Revolution. The characteristics which this remarkable history shares with Michelet’s other works will be noted presently. At present it may be remarked that, as the mere division of subjects and space would imply, it is planned on very original principles. Michelet was perhaps the first historian to devote himself to anything like a picturesque history of the Middle Ages, and his account is still the most vivid though far from the most trustworthy that exists. His inquiry into manuscript and printed authorities was most laborious, but his lively imagination, and his strong religious and political prejudices, made him regard all things from a singularly personal point of view. Circumstances which strike his fancy, or furnish convenient texts for his polemic, are handled at inordinate length, while others are rapidly dismissed or passed over altogether. Yet the book is undoubtedly the only history of France which bears the imprint of genius, and in this respect it is not soon likely to meet a rival.

Uncompromisingly hostile as Michelet was to the empire, its downfall and the accompanying disasters of the country once more stimulated him to activity. Not only did he write letters and pamphlets during the struggle, but when it was over he set himself to complete the vast task which his two great histories had almost covered by a History of the Nineteenth Century. He did not, however, live to carry it further than Waterloo, and the best criticism of it is perhaps contained in the opening words of the introduction to the last volume—“l’âge me presse.” The new republic was not altogether a restoration for Michelet, and his professorship at the Collège de France, of which he contended that he had never been properly deprived, was not given back to him. He died at Hyères on the 9th of February 1874, and an unseemly legal strife between his representatives took place as to his funeral.

The literary characteristics of Michelet are among the most clearly marked and also among the most peculiar in French literature. A certain resemblance to Lamennais has been already noted, and to this may be added an occasional reminiscence of the manner of Bossuet. But in the main Michelet, even in the minor details of style, is quite original and individual. His sentences and paragraphs are as different as possible in construction and rhythm from the orderly architecture of French classical prose. A very frequent device of his (somewhat abused latterly) is the omission of the verb, which gives the sentence the air of a continued interjection. Elsewhere he breaks his phrase, not finishing the regular clause at all. In these points and many others the resemblance to bis contemporary Carlyle is very striking; and, different as were their points of view, their manners of seeing were by no means unlike. History to Michelet is always picturesque; it is a series of tableaux. Allusion has been already made to the singular perspective iu which these tableaux are drawn, a perspective so strange that a reader unacquainted with the actual size and relation of the objects represented is certain to be deceived. Nothing indeed is further from Michelet’s purpose than deceit. Although a strong republican, an ardent auti-sacerdotalist, and a patriot of fanatical enthusiasm, he is always scrupulously fair as far as he understands what he is doing. For instance, his hatred for England and Englishmen is one of the most comically intense passions in literature. He is never tired of exclaiming against their diabolical pride, their odious jealousy of France, their calculating covetousness, and so forth. In his excited imagination the long drama of European history is a kind of conflict of Ormuzd and Ahriman, in which France, it is needless to say, plays the first part and England the second. Yet he is never unfair to English fortitude and coolness, never (after the childish fashion of some of his countrymen) slurs over English victories, and often expresses genuine admiration (mixed, it is true, with a shudder or tλvo of aversion) for the masterful Λvays and constantly advancing prosperity of the English people. So, with all his dislike to the priesthood, he never is chary of praise to pope or monk whenever it can fairly be given, and, with all his republicanism, he is never weary of worshipping the heroism of a great king. But his poetical fashion of dealing with events, his exaggeration of trivial incidents into great facts of history, his fixed ideas, especially in reference to the intellectual and social condition of mediaeval times, the evils of which he enormously exaggerates, and his abiding prejudices of a general kind combine to distort his accounts in the strangest fashion. A laborious person might pick out of contemporary authors a notable collection of erroneous views of which Michelet is not so much the author as the suggester, for it is when his brilliant exaggerations are torn from their context and set down in some quito other context as sober gospel that they are most misleading to those who do not know the facts, and most grotesque to those who do. This is especially the case in regard to literature. Michelet began his great work too early to enjoy the benefit of the resurrection of old French literature which has since taken place; and though his view of that literature partakes of the amorous enthusiasm which colours his view of everything French, it is astoundingly incorrect in detail. The most remarkable passage of all perhaps is the passage in his Renaissance relating to Rabelais, Ronsard, and Du Bellay, a passage so widely inconsistent not only with sound criticism but with historic fact that the author (a very rare thing with him) makes a kind of half apology for it elsewhere. Of the work of the age of chivalry proper, the chansons de gestes, the Arthurian romances, the early lyrics and dramas, he evidently knew but little, and chose to subordinate what he did know to his general theories of the time. Even much later his praise and blame, though transparently honest, are quite haphazard. Unless, therefore, the reader be gifted with a very rare faculty of applying the “grain of salt” to what he reads, or unless he be well acquainted with the actual facts before coming to Michelet’s version of them, he will almost certainly be misled. But despite this grave drawback (which attends all picturesque history) the value of Michelet merely as an historian is immense. Not only are his separate tableaux, the wonderful geographical sketch of France in the beginning of the book, the sections devoted to the Templars, to Joan of Arc, to the Renaissance, to the Camisards, almost unequalled, but the inspiriting and stimulating effect of his work is not to be surpassed. If his reconstruction is often hazardous and conjectural, sometimes definitely and demonstrably mistaken, and nearly always difficult to adjust entirely to the ascertained facts, it is always possible in itself, always instinct with genius, and always life-like. There are no dead bones in Michelet; they are if anything only too stirring and lively. These criticisms apply equally to the minor books, though these are necessarily fuller of the author’s somewhat wearisome propaganda, and less full of brilliantly painted facts. The great fault of Michelet as of not a few other modern authors is the comparatively improvised and ephemeral character of too much of his work. His immense volume is, much of it, mere brilliant pamphleteering, much more mere description equally brilliant but equally liable to pass. Nevertheless he is (especially in French, the language γar excellence of measured and academic perfection) so characteristic and singular a figure in his turbid eloquence and fitful flashing insight that he is never likely to lose a place, and a notable one, in literary history.

Almost all Michelet’s works, the exceptions being his translations, compilations, &c., are published in uniform size and in about fifty volumes, partly by Marpon and Flammarion, partly by Calmann Lévy.

Michell’s other contributions to science are—“Conjectures concerning the Cause and Observations upon the Phenomena of Earthquakes,” Phil. Trans., 1760; “Observations on the Comet of January 1760 at Cambridge,” lb., 1760; “A Recommendation of Hadley’s Quadrant for Surveying,” Ib., 1765; “Proposal of a Method for measuring Degrees of Longitude upon Parallels of the Equator,” Ib., 1766; “An Inquiry into the Probable Parallax and Magnitude of the Fixed Stars,” lb., 1767; “On the Twinkling of the Fixed Stars,” lb., 1767; “On the Means of Discovering the Distance, Magnitude, kc., of the Fixed Stars,” lb., 1784.

Geological Formation.— The Lower Peninsula occupies the central part of a great basin, the borders of which extend to the east as far as London, Ontario, and to the west as far as Madison, Wisconsin. Within these limits the traveller starting in any direction from the centre of the State encounters successively the outcropping edges of older and older strata. The whole series has been likened to a nest of wooden dishes; it embraces not only the Laurentian and Huronian systems but also the numerous groups that go to make up the Silurian, the Devonian, the Carboniferous, and the Quaternary systems. These several formations are covered almost universally with a drift of finely comminuted and triturated rock, borne thither by moving glaciers and floating icebergs, or washed to its present position by currents of water, while the surface was still submerged. This loose material varies in thickness, sometimes extending to a depth of 200 or 300 feet. While the lower formations contain almost inexhaustible deposits of copper, iron, gypsum, and salt, the surface soil is pre-eminently fertile, uniting all the mineral constituents necessary for the most luxuriant growth of plants. There are limited areas of light and somewhat sterile drift soil; but even these have shown themselves under proper treatment to be capable of yielding a rich vegetation. For the most part the drift soil is composed of a mixture of clay with sand and gravel. It is easily cultivated, is retentive of moisture, and is sufficiently porous to prevent the injury of crops by excessive rains.

Climate and Natural Products.— The mean temperature of Lansing, the capital of the State, as determined by observations extending through eighteen years, is 46 0- 71 Fahr., or about the same as that of Berlin. During the summer months the mean temperature is nearly the same as that of Vienna; in the winter it is nearly that of Stockholm. The annual rainfall during the eighteen years previous to 1882 was about 31 inches. This is very evenly distributed throughout the year, though a little more than half the amount falls in the five months from May to October. The average snowfall in the centre of the State is about 4 feet, though it is seldom that more than 12 inches lie on the ground at any oné time. The winter temperature is much modified by the open water of the adjacent lakes. The severe winds are commonly from the west and north-west; but in sweeping across the open waters of Lake Michigan they are so far softened as to make the climate much milder than that found in the same latitude on the western side of the lake. This peculiarity is specially favourable to the growth of fruits. Peaches are grown successfully along the 45th parallel, and figs thrive in the open air in lat. 42∣ 0 . The modifying influence of the lake winds also gives great variety to the flora. The predominant woods are oak, maple, beech, elm, ash, cherry, hickory, walnut, basswood, and pine. All these grow luxuriantly in the vast forests of the State, and afford an abundant supply of the best timber. There are 165 species of trees and shrubs indigenous to Michigan; and the entire flora of the State makes a list of 1634 species.

Cereals and Fruits.— The most important crop of Michigan is wheat, and the average yield per acre, as shown by the latest census, is greater than that of any other State in the Union. The acres sown in 1879 were reported as 1,822,749, and the amount produced as 35,532,543 bushels. These figures show that Michigan is fourth in rank of the wheatproducing States, the number of bushels grown being exceeded by the crops of Illinois, Ohio, and Indiana. In 1879 the yield in bushels of the other principal cereals is shown by the following figures :—Indian corn, 32,461,452; oats, 18,190,793; barley, 1,204,316; rye, 294,918; buckwheat, 413,062; clover seed, 313,063; pease, 538,332. The crop of potatoes in the same year was 8,025,475 bushels, and the hay amounted to 1,051,115 tons. Of the fruits grown in the State apples are the most important, and these are believed to be unsurpassed in excellence in any country in the world. The sales in 1880 were 4,834,936 bushels, a considerable quantity going to the markets of Europe. Next in importance is the peach crop, annually gathered from more than fifty of the counties of the State. In 1880 the peach orchards were reported as covering 12,908 acres, and the fruit sold as amounting to 413,418 bushels. The long coast-line of Lake Michigan affords easy access to market even for the most perishable fruits. Besides the facilities thus afforded, the railroads that now thread the State, with an aggregate length in March 1882 of 4332 miles, afford abundant means of rapid transportation. As the fruit belt extends from north to south more than 200 miles, the danger of disastrous competition in the markets is obviated by prolongation of the season of ripening. At the meeting of the State Horticultural Society held in 1881 it was . reported that the average value of the peach crop per acre was above $125. The ten volumes of the Transactions of the State Horticultural Society published since its organization in 1870 show that the development of fruit culture within the last decade has been much more rapid than in any other State.

Lumber.— The timber produce in Michigan is of superior quality, and the amount is so great that about two-thirds of the best lumber sold in New York, Philadelphia, and Boston go out from its mills. The logs are borne along the lakes, rivers, and small watercourses to the booms of mills situated at convenient points, where the lumber is sawed and shipped for the different markets of the world. Of these manufacturing districts those known as the Saginaw, the Grand River, and the Muskegon valleys are the most important. The Saginaw receives the waters of the Tittabawasse, the Cass, the Flint, the Shiawasse, the Bad, the Pine, the Chippewa, the Tobacco, and their numerous tributaries, draining a vast region that still yields an undiminished supply of pine. The forests of the western parts of the State are easily accessible by the Grand River and its tributaries, while those still farther north find a natural outlet through the numerous streams that flow into Lake Michigan. On the banks of these watercourses are some of the largest and finest mills of the world. In 1854, when the first effort was made to collect statistics of this industry, it was found that there were only sixty-one mills in operation, and that the entire annual product was only 108,000,000 feet. Eighteen years later, in 1872, it was estimated that the annual product was not less than 2,560,000 feet of oak, 12,700,000 of staves, 300,000,000 lath, 400,000,000 shingles, and 2,500,000,000 of sawed pine. The number of saw-mills had already reached about 1500, the number of persons employed 20,000, and the capital represented $25,000,000. In 1881 the manufacture of pine lumber amounted to 3,919,500,000 feet, the value of which exceeded $60,000,000. The aggregate value of the forest products of the State was estimated in 1881 to have reached more than $1,000,000,000. Forestry Bulletin, No. 6, issued December 1, 1881, estimated the amount of standing white pine of merchantable quality at 35,000,000,000 feet, and the amount of standing hard wood at 700,000,000 cords. Besides these amounts, the same authority estimates the amount of hemlock at 7,000,000,000 feet, with 7,000,000 cords of bark, and an aggregate of 70,000,000 of cedar and tamarack. It is probable that before many years the hard wood produced by the State will approach in value the figures representing the value of the pine now sent to the markets of the world. It is probable that Michigan for many years to come will maintain its precedence as a lumber-producing State.

Mineral Resources.— Of the mineral products of Michigan the most important is iron. As early as 1842 the report of the first State geologist, Dr Douglas Houghton, called attention to the presence of haematite ore, though for a considerable time after this it was not found in such quantities as to make it certain that mining could be made profitable. Before 1860, however, it became known that iron in the Upper Peninsula not only existed in vast quantities, but also that it was of superior quality. From that time iron-mines were rapidly developed, until in 1881 they had come to exceed in value, though not in amount, even the products of Pennsylvania. In 1880 the product was 1,834,712 tons, with a value at the mines of $6,034,648, as against the yield in Pennsylvania of 2,185,675 tons, with a value of $5,517,079. The product of Michigan in 1882 was 2,948,307 tons of ore, with a market value of about $25,000,000. The Michigan minerals are of extraordinary richness,—62 - 9 per cent, being the average of the first-class ores, while the furnace books often show a much higher yield.

Next in importance to the iron-mines are those of copper. These are also situated in the Northern Peninsula, in the mountain range of trappean rocks which crown the point of land extending northwards into Lake Superior. This secondary peninsula or cape, known as Keweenaw Point, rises to an average height of about 600 feet above the lake, the highest pinnacles reaching nearly double that altitude. This point contains what are believed to be the richest copper-mines ever discovered; the metal is not found as an ore, but as virgin copper almost chemically pure. It has only to be separated from its rocky matrix, when it is ready for the market. The largest of the copper-mines, that at Calumet, has built up an industry which employs 2000 men, and its total product of refined copper in 1882 was no less than 50,770,719 lb, or one-eighth of the annual production of copper in the world. In quality the copper of the Lake Superior district is such that it commands the highest price at home and abroad. Its tenacity is remarkable, and therefore it is eagerly sought after for cartridges by all the great military powers. In 1882 the copper-mines paid dividends amounting to $2,900,000,— making an aggregate of $28,248,000 since they were opened.

Within a few years the salt-works of Michigan have also come to exceed those of any other State in the Union. The first well was sunk in 1859-60, but in 1882 the production was found to have exceeded that of the famous works in New York, and to have amounted in that year to no less than 3,204,921 barrels. The extraordinary development of this industry is due to several causes. A careful system of inspection by State authority has kept its salt unsurpassed in purity. The salt basin is not only accessible by navigable waters, so as to have the advantage of cheap transportation, but the wells are situated in the great lumber-producing districts, and the manufacture is thus carried on at very small expense, in connexion with the saw-mills. The power is furnished by the same engines, the exhausted steam is used for the evaporation of brine during the day, and during the night evaporation is still carried on by means of refuse wood and sawdust, while the staves for barrels are made from rejected timber. By this system the best quality of salt is obtained at a minimum expense. The chief reservoir of salt is the series of sandstones and shales constituting the Waverly group. This salt-producing rock covers no less than about 8000 square miles, and it is safe to presume that the supply is inexhaustible. The average depth of the wells is about 800 feet, but in some localities wells sunk to nearly 2000 feet have been remunerative. Important salt-works have recently been developed in the western part of the State.

There are also certain other minerals of considerable importance. Deposits of gypsum, easily accessible, practically inexhaustible in quantity, and superior in quality, are found in several localities both in the eastern and in the western parts of the Lower Peninsula. In the outskirts of Grand Rapids the deposit crops out at the surface, and at an average depth of from 40 to 70 feet extends over an area of 10 or 12 square miles. The rock is easily quarried, and is either ground for use as a fertilizer or calcined into plaster of Paris. The deposits of coal are supposed to cover about 8000 square miles, but as yet the product at any one point has not been very considerable. In quality the coal is highly bituminous, and is not sufficiently pure to be useful for smelting or for the manufacture of gas. For these reasons the stock of coal in the State is practically untouched. If future explorations and experiments should make these deposits available, a new era in the manufacture of iron will be the result. At present the coal for smelting the Lake Superior ores is brought chiefly from Ohio and Pennsylvania. Quarries of limestone and of sandstone have been opened in various parts of the State. The brown stone of the Upper Peninsula is of excellent quality, and is capable of receiving a high finish. The supply is inexhaustible, and the accessibility of the quarries by water gives promise of a thriving industry. The grindstones taken from the Huron county quarries are of superior quality, and the slates found in unlimited quantities on the shores of the Huron Bay are unsurpassed in point of durability and colour. Clays and sands of commercial value are found in great abundance. Though the manufacture of glass is yet in its infancy, sands in large quantities have been discovered in Monroe county suitable for the manufacture of plate glass of excellent quality. Brick and tile clays are found in all parts of the State. Though native silver has been found in small quantities in the Upper Peninsula, the systematic mining of this metal has not yet been carried on with successful results. The Report of the commissioner of mineral statistics for 1882 shows that, except as to coal, Michigan is the foremost of all the States in mineral wealth.

Fisheries.— The geographical position of Michigan explains the fact that its fresh-water fisheries are the most productive in the United States. The most important varieties of fish aι∙ lake-trout, sturgeon, bass, pickerel, herring, brook-trout, grayling, and whitefish. General laws for the protection of fish have been passed; and a fish commission has been maintained for some years for the purpose of propagating the best varieties and planting them in waters adapted to their natural development. Up to the close of 1880 the commissioners had planted about 80,000,000 young whitefish, 1,000,000 silver eels, 1,000,000 lake-trout, ‘2,000,000 salmon, and 500,000 brook-trout, besides smaller numbers of shad, grayling, pike, and bass. Excellent results have followed, especially in the multiplication of white-fish, salmon, and eels. In 1879 the total “take” was 24,013,100 ft, of which 12,902,250 ft were white-fish, the most valuable lake-fish known to epicures and to commerce. During winter large quantities preserved by freezing are taken to Eastern markets, where they are readily sold at a high price.

Educational Institutions.— As early as 1785 the law of congress which provided for the sale of lands north of the Ohio river reserved for the support of public schools “section 16” of each township. This fundamental law devoted to educational purposes one-thirtysixth of all the lands of that vast domain known as the northwestern territory. The “ordinance of 1787,” by which this territory was organized, further provided that “schools and the means of education shall for ever be encouraged.” In 1826 this congressional action was supplemented by a grant to Michigan of two townships of land for the founding and support of a university. When Michigan became a State in 1837, its educational policy took definite form. The constitution provided, not only that the grant of “section 16” should be devoted exclusively to the support of schools of the primary grade, but also that the State and not each township should be the custodian of the lands so appropriated. The constitution expressly provided that the proceeds from the sale of “school lands” should be held by the State as a perpetual fund, the interest of which should be annually applied to the support of primary schools. The lands devoted to school purposes in Michigan under these provisions amounted to 1,077,209 acres, of which, in September 1881, 675,000 acres had been sold. On the sum realized by these sales, $3,095,679, the State pays interest at 7 per cent., and the resulting income, amounting to $216,645, is annually distributed to the schools. This source is supplemented from local taxes, so that in 1881 the total sum realized from all sources for the primary schools was $3,644,778.

The schools organized under State law are known as graded and ungraded. In the small districts where the schools are under the charge of but one or two teachers, grading is impracticable. Of ungraded districts there were in 1881 6120, attended by 219,570 children, while the graded schools were 404 in number, with an attendance of 152,043. The school census includes all children between the ages of five and twenty, amounting in 1881 to 518,317, of whom there was an average attendance of 391,401. To all children of school age the public schools are free, though a fee may be required for advanced studies in the high schools. The immediate administration of the schools is entrusted to school officers elected annually by the tax-payers of the individual districts. The State constitution requires that a free school shall be in session at least three months of every year in each district. In districts of more than 30 and less than 800 children, the law requires at least five months of school; while in districts of more than 800 children, the session must be not less than nine months in length. In the graded schools the division is into primary schools, grammarschools, and high schools, each of these divisions retaining the scholar ordinarily four years. At the end of the course the student is ready for the university, to which, under certain restrictions provided by the university itself, he is admitted on diploma from the high school. The university of Michigan, situated at Ann Arbor, was first opened for instruction in 1841. It now (1883) consists of the department of literature, science, and the arts, the department of medicine, the department of law, the college of homoeopathic medicine, the school of pharmacy, the college of dental surgery, and the school of political science. Connected with the medical departments are the State hospitals. In 1881-82 there were 86 officers of instruction and 1534 students. The total income for the year 1879-80 from Federal grant, State grants, and fees was $231,339. The general control of the university is placed in the hands of eight regents elected by popular suffrage at the biennial spring elections, two regents being chosen at each election. The...

The historical interest of Michmash is connected with the strategical importance of the position, commanding the north side of the Pass of Michmash, which made it the headquarters of the Philistines and the centre of their forays in their attempt to quell the first rising under Saul, as it was also at a later date the headquarters of Jonathan the Hasmonaean (1 Mac. ix. 73). From Jerusalem to Mount Ephraim there are two main routes. The present caravan road keeps the high ground to the west near the watershed, and avoids the Pass of Michmash altogether. But another route, the importance of which in antiquity may be judged of from Isa. X. 28s5 ’., led southwards from Ai over an undulating plateau to Michmash. Thus far the road is easy, but at Michmash it descends into a very steep and rough valley, which has to be crossed before reascending to Geba. At the bottom of the valley is the Pass of Michmash, a noble gorge with precipitous craggy sides. On the north the crag is crowned by a sort of plateau sloping backwards into a round-topped hill. This little plateau, about a mile east of the present village of Makhmâs, seems to have been the post of the Philistines, lying close to the centre of the insurrection, yet possessing unusually good communication with their establishments on Mount Ephraim by way of Ai and Bethel, and at the same time commanding the routes leading down to the Jordan from Ai and from Michmash itself.