ZAANDAM, Zaanredam, or Saardam, a village of Holland, in the province of North Holland, 5 miles by rail to the north-west of Amsterdam, at the confluence of the Zaan with the Y. The houses are mostly of wood, painted white or green, and the place shares with the other villages of North Holland a high reputation for neatness and cleanliness. In the immediate neighbourhood are a very large number of windmills, including corn, paper, saw, coffee, snuff, and other mills. Peter the Great of Russia wrought at Zaandam as a ship-carpenter for a short time in 1697, and the hut in which he is said to have lived is still shown and much visited. Some shipbuilding is still carried on. The population in 1887 was 14,351.
[129 words — estimated reading time: 1 minute]
or ZABÆANS, or ZABIANS, or SABIANS. The Sabians mentioned in Scripture were evidently a nation, or perhaps a wandering horde, such as fell upon Job’s cattle, Job i, 15; men of stature, Isa. xiv, 14; a people afar off, Joel iii, 8. But we speak here of the Zabians as a sect, probably the first corrupters of the patriarchal religion; and so called, as is believed, from _tsabiim_, the “hosts,” that is, of heaven; namely, the sun, moon, and stars, to whom they rendered worship; first immediately, and afterward through the medium of images; this particularly distinguished them from the magi, whose idolatry was confined to the solar orb, and its earthly representative, the fire. If the above derivation be right, the Zabians were originally Chaldeans, though afterward the same sect arose in Arabia. Their study of the heavenly bodies led them, not only to astronomy, but to astrology, its degenerate daughter, which was for many ages the favourite pursuit of the oriental nations. The following account is abridged from Dr. Townley’s “Essays;”--The Zabii, or Zabians, were a sect of idolaters who flourished in the early ages of the world, considerable in their numbers, and extensive in their influence. The denomination of Zabii, given to these idolaters, appears to have been derived from the Hebrew צבא, a _host_; with reference to the צכא השמים or, _host of heaven_, which they worshipped; though others have derived it from the Arabic _tsaba_ “to apostatize,” “to turn from one religion to another;” or from צביים, or the Arabic _Tsabin_, “Chaldeans,” or “inhabitants of the east.” Lactantius considers Ham, the son of Noah, as the first seceder from the true religion after the flood; and supposes Egypt, which was peopled by his descendants, ...to have been the country in which Zabaism, or the worship of the stars, first prevailed. That the worship of the heavenly bodies prevailed in the east at a very early period, is certain from the words of Job, who thus exculpates himself from the charge of idolatry: “If I beheld the sun when it shined, or the moon walking in brightness, and my heart hath been secretly enticed, or my mouth hath kissed my hand; this also were an iniquity to be punished by the judge: for I should have denied the God that is above,” Job xxii, 26–28. It would appear that the idolatrous opinions of the Zabii originated with the posterity of Ham, at a very early period after the flood, in Egypt or Chaldea; but spread so rapidly and extensively, that in a very short time nearly the whole of the descendants of Noah were infected with their pestiferous sentiments and practices. Maimonides says, “This people,” that is, the Zabii, “had filled the whole world.” Their first and principal adoration was directed to the host of heaven, or the stars. They were _ignicolæ_, or “worshippers of fire.” The city of Ur, in Chaldea, seems to have had its name from the inhabitants being devoted to the worship of fire. They dedicated images to the sun and the other celestial orbs, supposing that, by a formal consecration of them to those luminaries, a divine virtue was infused into them, by which they acquired the faculty of understanding, and the power of conferring prophecy and other gifts upon their worshippers. These images were formed of various metals, according to the particular star to which any of them was dedicated. They also regarded certain trees as being appropriated to particular stars, and, when idolatrously dedicated, as being possessed of very singular virtues. From these opinions sprang the adoption of astrology by them, in all its various forms. They maintained the doctrine of the eternity of the world. “All the Zabii,” says Maimonides, “believe in the eternity of the world; for, according to them, the heavens are God.” Holding the eternity of the world, they easily became Pre-Adamites, affirming that Adam was not the first man. They also fabled concerning him, that he was the apostle of the moon, and the author of several works on husbandry. Of Noah, they taught, that he was a husbandman, and was imprisoned for dissenting from their opinions. They add, that Seth was another of those who forsook the worship of the moon. They held agriculture in the highest estimation, regarding it as intimately connected with the worship of the heavenly bodies. On this account, it was deemed criminal, by the major part of them, to slay or feed upon cattle. Goats were also reputed to be sacred animals, because the demons whom they worshipped were said to appear in the woods and deserts in the forms of goats or of satyrs. Of their superstitious practices, some were dangerous, as the sacrifices of lions, tigers, and other wild beasts. Certain of their rites were cruel, as the passing of their children through the fire, and branding themselves also with fire. Some of their practices were loathsome and disgustful; such as eating blood, believing it to be the food of demons, &c. Others were frivolous and tedious; as offering bats and mice to the sun, various and frequent ablutions, lustrations, &c. Some of them were obscene and beastly, as the rites practised on engrafting a tree, or to obtain rain. Many of the rites were magical. These Maimonides divides into three kinds:--“The first is that which respects plants, animals, and metals. The second consists in the limitation and determination of the times in which certain works ought to be performed. The third consists in human gestures and actions, as leaping, clapping the hands, shouting, laughing, lying down, or stretching at full length upon the ground, burning particular things, raising a smoke, and, lastly, repeating certain intelligible or unintelligible words. Some things cannot be completed without the use of all these rites.” It is generally acknowledged that some traces of Zabianism are still to be found both among the Hindoos and Chinese in the east, and the Mexicans and other nations in the south. The Guebres, or Parsees, who inhabit Persia, and are scattered through various parts of Hindostan, are the acknowledged worshippers of fire, or the supreme Deity under that symbol. “That the Persians,” says Hyde, “were formerly Sabians or Zabii, is rendered probable by Ibn Phacreddin Angjou, a Persian, who, in his book ‘_Pharhangh Gjihanghiri_,’ treating of the Persians descended from Shem, says in the preface, ‘Their religion, at that time, was Zabianism; but at length they became magi, and built fire temples.’ And the author of the book ‘_Mu’gjizat Pharsi_,’ adopts the same opinion: ‘In ancient times, the Persians were of the Zabian religion, worshipping the stars, until the time of Gushtasp, son of Lohrasp.’ For then Zoroaster reformed their religion.” The modern Sabians, who inhabit the country round about Mount Libanus, believe the unity of God, but pay an adoration to the stars, or the angels and intelligences which they suppose reside in them, and govern the world under the supreme Deity. They are obliged to pray three times a day, and they fast three times a year. They offer many sacrifices, but eat no part of them; and abstain from beans, garlic, and some other pulse and vegetables. They greatly respect the temple of Mecca and the pyramids of Egypt, fancying these last to be the sepulchres of Seth, and of Enoch and Sabi, his two sons, whom they look on as the first propagators of their religion. At these structures, they sacrifice a cock and a black calf, and offer up incense. Their principal pilgrimage, however, is to Haran, the supposed birth place of Abraham. Such is the account of this sect given by Sale, D’Herbelot, and Hyde.
[1,277 words — estimated reading time: 8 minutes]
ZACATECAS, a city of Mexico, capital of the state of the same name, lies 340 miles by rail north-west of Mexico, in 22° 46' N. lat. and 102° W. long. Zacatecas, which had a population of 46,000 in 1886, is the centre of one of the oldest and most productive silver-mining districts in the republic, and the town itself stands on the rich vein discovered here by Juan de Tolosa in 1546. It lies on the great Mexican tableland, 7976 feet above the sea, in a narrow ravine surrounded by rolling hills, all containing almost inexhaustible deposits of the precious metal. Within half an hour’s walk of the centre of the town are situated twelve mines, some of which have been worked with little interruption for over three hundred years. Owing to the irregular nature of the ground and the great value of the land, the city is laid out in narrow tortuous streets, which, unlike most other Mexican towns, are lined by high houses of three and four stories. Noteworthy amongst the public buildings are the cathedral, with a finely sculptured façade, the Government palace, the city hall, the theatre, and the mint; this last, during the period from 1772 to 1865, issued silver money to the value of £41,000,000, besides £110,000 in gold. The streets, although narrow, are well paved and partly lit by electricity. Since the completion of the Central Mexican Railway to this place in 1884 it has increased in population and prosperity. From the Bufa Hill, 500 feet high, lying to the north of the city, an extensive view is commanded of the surrounding district, which is of an extremely rugged character and almost destitute of vegetation. In the neighbourhood are nine small lakes, yielding an abundance of salt and carbonate of soda. Zacatecas, which received the title of city from Philip II. in ...1585, is supplied with water by a large, well-constructed aqueduct.
The state of Zacatecas lies between Coahuila and Jalisco north and south respectively, and is elsewhere conterminous with Guanajuato, Durango, and San Luis Potosi. It has an area of 25,227 square miles and a population (1882) of 422,506, of whom a preponderating proportion are Indians or mestizos. It stands at a mean altitude of over 7000 feet above sea-level, and is traversed by the Mazapil, Norillos, Guadaloupe, and other metalliferous ranges, this state ranking among the first in the republic for mineral wealth. Next to the Veta Madre of Guanajuato and the famous Comstock lode, Nevada, the Veta Grande of Zacatecas is held to be the most remarkable silver vein in North America. The chief mining districts are Zacatecas, Espiritu Santo, Chapala, Los Arcos, Norias, Ipala, Santa Lucia, Naranjal, and Santo Martino; and in 1886 about 324 mines were open (21 gold, 67 gold and silver, 167 silver alone, 15 copper, 37 lead, and 16 quicksilver). Besides its minerals the state possesses considerable agricultural resources, the southeastern parts especially being very fertile and well watered by the rivers Tlaltenango and Juchipila. Maize, wheat, fruits—such as peaches, apricots, grapes,—and all kinds of vegetables are extensively cultivated, the annual maize crop being valued at over £1,000,000, wheat at about £250,000, and the remaining crops at about £600,000. Even in the bleak and arid northern districts there are some extensive grazing-grounds, where cattle, horses, mules, sheep, and goats thrive well. Some of the slopes are well timbered, the chief species being the mountain cedar, oak, elm, ash, and cotton-wood. Besides the capital, the chief mining towns are Fresnillo (pop. 15,000), Garcia (8000), Villanueva (7000), Linos (7000), Sombrerete (6000), and Nieves (3000).
[618 words — estimated reading time: 4 minutes]
chief of the publicans; that is, farmer general of the revenues, Luke xix, 1, &c. This is all that is known concerning this person. See PUBLICANS and SYCAMORE.
[28 words — estimated reading time: 1 minute]
ZACH, Franz Xaver, Baron von (1754-1832), astronomer, was born at Pesth in June 1754. He served for some time in the Austrian army, and afterwards lived in London from 1783 to 1786 as tutor in the house of the Saxon minister, Count Brühl. In 1786 he was appointed by Ernest II. of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha director of the new observatory on the Seeberg at Gotha, which was finished in 1791. From 1806 Zach accompanied the duke’s widow on her travels in the south of Europe. He died in Paris on 2d September 1832.
Zach published Tables of the Sun (Gotha, 1792; new and improved edition, ibid., 1804), and numerous papers on geographical subjects, particularly on the geographical positions of many towns and places, which he determined on his travels with a sextant. His principal importance is, however, as editor of three scientific journals of great value,— Allgemeine Geographische Ephemeriden (4 vols., Gotha, 1798-99), Monatliche Correspondenz zur Beförderung der Erd-und Himmels-Kunde (28 vols., Gotha, 1800-13, from 1807 edited by Lindenau), and Correspondance Astronomique, Géographique, Hydrographique, et Statistique (Genoa, 1818-26, 14 vols., and one number of the 15th suppressed at the instigation of the Jesuits).
[203 words — estimated reading time: 2 minutes]
ZACHARIAE VON LINGENTHAL, Karl Salomo (1769-1843), German jurist, was born on 14th September 1769 at Meissen in Saxony. His family came from Austria. His father was a lawyer; his mother, a Hessian, was the daughter of a pastor. Of feeble health and long the only child of his parents, Karl did not go to school until the age of fifteen. He afterwards studied philosophy, history, mathematics, and philology at the university of Leipsic. In 1792 he went to Wittenberg as tutor to Count zur Lippe, and whilst there he began to study law. There he came greatly under the influence of Kant, traces of whose teaching remain even in his latest writings. In 1794 Zachariae became a privat-docent, lecturing on canon law, in 1798 extraordinary professor, and in 1802 ordinary professor of feudal law. From that time to his death in 1843, with the exception of a short period in which public affairs occupied him, he poured out a succession of works covering the whole field of jurisprudence and extending into other adjoining regions. He was also indefatigable in the labour of his chair, and he was the editor of, or a copious contributor to, more than one periodical. In 1807 he went to Heidelberg, then beginning its period of splendour as a school of law. There, resisting many calls to Göttingen, Berlin, and other universities, he remained until his death. In 1811 he married under romantic circumstances. His wife died in four years....
In 1820 he was elected representative of the university in the first Baden chamber, and four years later was made a member of the second. From 1825 to 1829 he devoted much time to political affairs and to the preparation of a code. He was a constitutional reformer, averse to great or violent changes. He loved to cite the saying of the Roman emperor to his adopted son,—“Imperaturus es hominibus qui nec totam servitutem pati possent nec totam libertatem,”—“a truth,” he observes in one of his many brochures (Die Souverainetätsrechte der Krone Würtemberg, Ac.), “which no Government and no people should ever forget.” In 1842 he was ennobled with the title of Von Lingenthal. To the last days of his life he toiled with the ardour of a young student. His fame extended beyond Germany. The German universities then enjoyed by tacit consent a jurisdiction in regard to legal questions of international importance which had come down from the Middle Ages; and Zachariae was often consulted as to questions arising in Germany, France, and England. Elaborate “opinions,” some of them forming veritable treatises,— e.g., on Sir Augustus d’Este’s claim to the dukedom of Sussex, Baron de Bode’s claim as an English subject to a share in the French indemnity, the famous dispute as to the debts due to the elector of Hesse-Cassel, confiscated by Napoleon, and the constitutional position of the Mecklenburg landowners,—were composed by Zachariae. He died on 27th March 1843, leaving a son who has worthily continued his father’s labours in jurisprudence.
Zachariae’s true history is in his writings, which are extremely numerous and multifarious. They deal with almost every branch of jurisprudence; they are philosophical, historical, and practical; they relate to Boman, canon, German, and French law; and his curiosity extended to the writings of his contemporaries, Bentham and Austin. A work on Sulla, in whom he sees another Napoleon, and an unpublished translation of his favourite Tacitus were some of the fruits of his restless activity. The first book of much consequence whieh he published was Die Einheit des Staats und der Kirche mit Rücksicht auf die Deutsche Reichsverfassung (1797), one of the most original of his works, displaying the writer’s power of analysis, his skill in making a complicated set of facts appear to be deductions from a few principles,—a study even now well worth reading. His theme is the relation of religion to the state. Zachariae undertakes to show that with Christianity three systems only are possible, — (1) what he calls the system of hierarchy, according to which the state is under the power of the church, the object of the former being subordinated to that of the latter; (2) the territorial system, according to which the church is subject to the power of the state; and (3) what he terms the collegiate system, according to which neither of the two societies is subject to the other, and both have different objects in view. The consequence of the adoption of these various systems—the principles of law which must be accepted according as one or the other of them is supreme—he deduces with much acumen. While much of his work has lost its interest, it remains a luminous example of the application of the deductive process to historical investigation, a proof that legal conceptions may often serve to give unity to the complex facts of history. In 1805 appeared Versuch einer allgemeinen Hermeneutik des Rechts. Neither in English nor in Scotch legal literature is there any book, so far as known to the present writer, covering the field to which it relates. It is an attempt to found on the rules of grammar and logic a system of interpretation applicable to all systems of law. The weak part of the book is that, like so many of Zachariae’s works, it stops short at the point where the inquiry would be most fruitful. Illustrations are taken from Roman law; we miss any adequate treatment of the problems which the forms of modern legislation raise. In 1806 appeared Die Wissenschaft der Gesetzgebung, a fragment, which is a curious outcome of the French Revolution. Impressed by the overthrow or decay of the forces which had hitherto held society together, he looked about for a better substitute for them than politique de circonstance offered. Many of Zachariae’s maxims seem fanciful; there are divisions which do not elucidate, and distinctions made apparently for their own sake. But the work is interesting; it shows that the author was groping after the principle of utility as the guide of the legislator; the study of very different facts had brought him independently to much the same conclusion as Bentham had reached. Zachariae’s last work of importance was Vierzig Bucher vom Staate, published in 1839-42, with the motto non omnis moriar. This was his favourite work, and is the one to which his admirers point as his enduring monument. Undoubtedly it contains much erudition and, what is rarer, many original ideas as to the future of the state and of law. It has been compared to L'Esprit des Lois, and Zachariae, in spite of his pedantry, has some tincture of the discursive brilliancy of Montesquieu. It covers no small part of the field of Buckle’s first volume of the History of Civilisation. The reader will, however, seek in vain for any order or system in some of the chapters of Vierzig Bücher vom Staate. He was recasting many of his ideas as he wrote, and the book ends before the process is completed. Among the most esteemed of the works of Zachariae is that on Staatsrecht, of the originality of which he was proud, and his treatise on the Code Napoléon, a marvellous work, considering it was composed by a German professor who did not much concern himself with this subject till somewhat late in life. There are no fewer than three French editions of his book, and it has been translated into Italian. Zachariae edited with Mittermaier the Kritische Zeitschrift für Rechtswissenschaft und Gesetzgebung des Auslandes, and the introduction which he wrote illustrates his wide reading and his constant desire for new light upon old problems.
Zachariae exhibits the best and the worst sides of German jurisprudence: there is the desire not to base generalizations or conclusions on the peculiarities of any one system, but to master the whole facts. He does not assume a distinction or classification of Roman law to be necessarily scientific. He seeks real reasons; he avoids the English lawyer’s favourite fallacy of proving idem per idem, of seeking to show the reasonableness of anything by saying the same thing again in different language. Though a scholar, Zachariae has not the weakness of exaggerating the importance of whatever is rare or unpublished, and he has no delight in barren erudition. Himself a learned pandectist, he had cast aside his countrymen’s proneness to find all things in the Corpus Juris. His books, however, have the failings of so many German works on law. They want actuality; they have little relation to the facts of life. They are leavened by metaphysics—often very bad metaphysics, and not always by the same system. Nor is he a clear thinker. We are never sure what is his notion of the province of jurisprudence; his favourite idea appears to be that law creates among men an order similar to that which exists in the physical world, and that it is a security for the freedom of man’s will. The influence of Kant is observable in all his works. In his later that of Hegel also appears; and his mental changes do not end there. He does not indeed say, “Back to Montesquieu; study facts, the simplest and primitive facts above all; adopt his method, and improve upon it;” but that is the wise spirit of some of his later works. Unfortunately he <lid not fulfil the promise which they contain. He had not learned to distinguish sharply between the science and the practical art of jurisprudence, and we are never certain in what capacity he speaks. He had not conceived clearly the truth that society forms one whole, that the phenomena of law at any given time or place are not accidents but the outcome of a long train of events, that, so regarded, they are as much susceptible of scientific treatment as the facts of language, and that a treatise on botany or, still more, one on comparative philology is a better guide to what jurisprudence may yet be than a volume of Hugo or even Austin. It was made a reproach to Zachariae that he changed his opinions. He did so; it was a sign of his single-mindedness and restless curiosity. It is also one of the reasons why his works are now little read. They opened paths, and they were superseded by others which could not have existed without them.
There is no adequate account of Zachariae and his works; the best are Robert von Mohl’s Geschichte u. Literatur der Staatswissenschaften (1855-58) and Charles Brocher’s K. S. Zachariae, sa Vie et ses Oeuvres (1870). (J. M†.)
[1,795 words — estimated reading time: 11 minutes]
ZACHARIAS, St, pope from 741 to 752, was a Greek by birth, and appears to have been on intimate terms with Gregory III., whom he succeeded (November 741). Contemporary history dwells chiefly on his great personal influence with the Lombard king Luitprand, and with his successor Rachis; it was largely through his tact in dealing with these princes in a variety of emergencies that the exarchate of Ravenna was rescued from becoming part of the Lombard kingdom. A correspondence, of considerable extent and of great interest, between Zacharias and St Boniface, the apostle of Germany, is still extant, and shows how great was the influence of this pope on events then passing in France and Germany: he encouraged the deposition of Childeric, and it was with his sanction that Boniface crowned Pippin as king of the Franks at Soissons in 752. Zacharias is stated to have remonstrated with the emperor Constantine Copronymus on the part he had taken in the iconoclastic controversy. He died 14th March 752, and was succeeded by Stephen II.
[173 words — estimated reading time: 1 minute]
son of Ahitub, high priest of the Jews, of the race of Eleazar. At the death of Ahimelech, or Abiathar, he came to the pontificate, A. M. 2944. For some time there were two high priests in Israel, 2 Sam. viii, 17; xv, 24, &c; xix, 11, 12; 1 Kings i, 8, &c. After the death of David, 1 Kings ii, 35, Solomon excluded Abiathar from the high priesthood, because he espoused the party of Adonijah, and made Zadok high priest alone.
[82 words — estimated reading time: 1 minute]