Volume 2, Part 1 Part 6 (2/2)

ANGLESITE, a mineral consisting of lead sulphate, PbSO_{4}, crystallizing in the orthorhombic system, and isomorphous with barytes and celest.i.te. It was first recognized as a mineral species by Dr. Withering in 1783, who discovered it in the Parys copper-mine in Anglesey; the name anglesite, from this locality, was given by F.S.

Beudant in 1832. The crystals from Anglesey, which were formerly found abundantly on a matrix of dull limonite, are small in size and simple in form, being usually bounded by four faces of a prism and four faces of a dome; they are brownish-yellow in colour owing to a stain of limonite. Crystals from some other localities, notably from Monteponi in Sardinia, are transparent and colourless, possessed of a brilliant adamantine l.u.s.tre, and usually modified by numerous bright faces. The variety of combinations and habits presented by the crystals is very extensive, nearly two hundred distinct forms being figured by V.

von Lang in his monograph of the species; without measurement of the angles the crystals are frequently difficult to decipher. The hardness is 3 and the specific gravity 6.3. There are distinct cleavages parallel to the faces of the prism (110) and the basal plane (001), but these are not so well developed as in the isomorphous minerals barytes and celest.i.te.

[Ill.u.s.tration: Anglesite specimen.]

Anglesite is a mineral of secondary origin, having been formed by the oxidation of galena in the upper parts of mineral lodes where these have been affected by weathering processes. At Monteponi the crystals encrust cavities in glistening granular galena; and from Leadhills, in Scotland, pseudomorphs of anglesite after galena are known. At most localities it is found as isolated crystals in the lead-bearing lodes, but at some places, in Australia and Mexico, it occurs as large ma.s.ses, and is then mined as an ore of lead, of which the pure mineral contains 68%.

ANGLI, ANGLII or ANGLES, a Teutonic people mentioned by Tacitus in his _Germania_ (cap. 40) at the end of the 1st century. He gives no precise indication of their geographical position, but states that, together with six other tribes, including the Varini (the Warni of later times), they wors.h.i.+pped a G.o.ddess named Nerthus, whose sanctuary was situated on ”an island in the Ocean.” Ptolemy in his _Geography_ (ii. 11. -- 15), half a century later, locates them with more precision between the Rhine, or rather perhaps the Ems, and the Elbe, and speaks of them as one of the chief tribes of the interior. Unfortunately, however, it is clear from a comparison of his map with the evidence furnished by Tacitus and other Roman writers that the indications which he gives cannot be correct. Owing to the uncertainty of these pa.s.sages there has been much speculation regarding the original home of the Angli. One theory, which however has little to recommend it, is that they dwelt in the basin of the Saale (in the neighbourhood of the canton Engilin), from which region the _Lex Angliorum et Werinorum hoc est Thuringorum_ is believed by many to have come. At the present time the majority of scholars believe that the Angli had lived from the beginning on the coasts of the Baltic, probably in the southern part of the Jutish peninsula. The evidence for this view is derived partly from English and Danish traditions dealing with persons and events of the 4th century (see below), and partly from the fact that striking affinities to the cult of Nerthus as described by Tacitus are to be found in Scandinavian, especially Swedish and Danish, religion.

Investigations in this subject have rendered it very probable that the island of Nerthus was Sjaelland (Zealand), and it is further to be observed that the kings of Wess.e.x traced their ancestry ultimately to a certain Scyld, who is clearly to be identified with Skioldr, the mythical founder of the Danish royal family (Skioldungar). In English tradition this person is connected with ”Scedeland” (pl.), a name which may have been applied to Sjaelland as well as Skne, while in Scandinavian tradition he is specially a.s.sociated with the ancient royal residence at Leire in Sjaelland.

Bede states that the Angli before they came to Britain dwelt in a land called Angulus, and similar evidence is given by the _Historia Brittonum_. King Alfred and the chronicler aethelweard identified this place with the district which is now called Angel in the province of Schleswig (Slesvig), though it may then have been of greater extent, and this identification agrees very well with the indications given by Bede. Full confirmation is afforded by English and Danish traditions relating to two kings named Wermund (_q.v._) and Offa (_q.v._), from whom the Mercian royal family were descended, and whose exploits are connected with Angel, Schleswig and Rendsburg. Danish tradition has preserved record of two governors of Schleswig, father and son, in their service, Frowinus (Freawine) and Wigo (Wig), from whom the royal family of Wess.e.x claimed descent. During the 5th century the Angli invaded this country (see BRITAIN, _Anglo-Saxon_), after which time their name does not recur on the continent except in the t.i.tle of the code mentioned above.

The province of Schleswig has proved exceptionally rich in prehistoric antiquities which date apparently from the 4th and 5th centuries.

Among the places where these have been found, special mention should be made of the large cremation cemetery at Borgstedterfeld, between Rendsburg and Eckernforde, which has yielded many urns and brooches closely resembling those found in heathen graves in England. Of still greater importance are the great deposits at Thorsbjaerg (in Angel) and Nydam, which contained large quant.i.ties of arms, ornaments, articles of clothing, agricultural implements, &c., and in the latter case even s.h.i.+ps. By the help of these discoveries we are able to reconstruct a fairly detailed picture of English civilization in the age preceding the invasion of Britain.

AUTHORITIES.--Bede, _Hist. Ecc._ i. 15: King Alfred's version of _Orosius_, i. 1. ---- 12, 19; aethelweard's _Chronicle_, lib. i. For traditions concerning the kings of Angel, see under OFFA (1). L.

Weiland, _Die Angeln_ (1889); A. Erdmann, _uber die Heimat und den Namen der Angeln_ (Upsala, 1890--cf. H. Moller in the _Anzeiger fur deutsches Altertum und deutsche Litteratur_, xxii. 129 ff.); A. k.o.c.k in the _Historisk Tidskrift_ (Stockholm), 1895, xv. p. 163 ff.; G.

Schutte, _Var Anglerne Tyskere?_ (Flensborg, 1900); R. Munro Chadwick, _The Origin of the English Nation_ (Cambridge, 1907); C. Engelhardt, _Denmark in the Early Iron Age_ (London, 1866); J. Mestorf, _Urnenfriedhofe in Schleswig-Holstein_ (Hamburg, 1886); S. Muller, _Nordische Altertumskunde_ (Ger. trans., Stra.s.sburg, 1898), ii. p. 122 ff.; see further ANGLO-SAXONS and BRITAIN, _Anglo-Saxon_.

(H.M.C.)

[v.02 p.0019]

ANGLICAN COMMUNION, the name used to denote that great branch of the Christian Church consisting of the various churches in communion with the Church of England. The necessity for such a phrase as ”Anglican Communion,” first used in the 19th century, marked at once the immense development of the Anglican Church in modern times and the change which has taken place in the traditional conceptions of its character and sphere. The Church of England itself is the subject of a separate article (see ENGLAND, CHURCH OF); and it is not without significance that for more than two centuries after the Reformation the history of Anglicanism is practically confined to its developments within the limits of the British Isles. Even in Ireland, where it was for over three centuries the established religion, and in Scotland, where it early gave way to the dominant Presbyterianism, its religious was long overshadowed by its political significance. The Church, in fact, while still claiming to be Catholic in its creeds and in its religious practice, had ceased to be Catholic in its inst.i.tutional conception, which was now bound up with a particular state and also with a particular conception of that state. To the native Irishman and the Scotsman, as indeed to most Englishmen, the Anglican Church was one of the main b.u.t.tresses of the supremacy of the English crown and nation.

This conception of the relations of church and state was hardly favourable to missionary zeal; and in the age succeeding the Reformation there was no disposition on the part of the English Church to emulate the wonderful activity of the Jesuits, which, in the 16th and 17th centuries, brought to the Church of Rome in countries beyond the ocean compensation for what she had lost in Europe through the Protestant reformation. Even when English churchmen pa.s.sed beyond the seas, they carried with them their creed, but not their ecclesiastical organization. Prejudice and real or imaginary legal obstacles stood in the way of the erection of episcopal sees in the colonies; and though in the 17th century Archbishop Laud had attempted to obtain a bishop for Virginia, up to the time of the American revolution the churchmen of the colonies had to make the best of the legal fiction that their spiritual needs were looked after by the bishop of London, who occasionally sent commissaries to visit them and ordained candidates for the ministry sent to England for the purpose.

The change which has made it possible for Anglican churchmen to claim that their communion ranks with those of Rome and the Orthodox East as one of the three great historical divisions of the Catholic Church, was due, in the first instance, to the American revolution. The severance of the colonies from their allegiance to the crown brought the English bishops for the first time face to face with the idea of an Anglican Church which should have nothing to do either with the royal supremacy or with British nationality. When, on the conclusion of peace, the church-people of Connecticut sent Dr. Samuel Seabury to England, with a request to the archbishop of Canterbury to consecrate him, it is not surprising that Archbishop Moore refused. In the opinion of prelates and lawyers alike, an act of parliament was necessary before a bishop could be consecrated for a see abroad; to consecrate one for a foreign country seemed impossible, since, though the bestowal of the _potestas ordinis_ would be valid, the crown, which, according to the law, was the source of the episcopal _jurisdiction_, could hardly issue the necessary mandate for the consecration of a bishop to a see outside the realm (see BISHOP).

The Scottish bishops, however, being hampered by no such legal restrictions, were more amenable; and on the 11th of November 1784 Seabury was consecrated by them to the see of Connecticut. In 1786, on the initiative of the archbishop, the legal difficulties in England were removed by the act for the consecration of bishops abroad; and, on being satisfied as to the orthodoxy of the church in America and the nature of certain liturgical changes in contemplation, the two English archbishops proceeded, on the 14th of February 1787, to consecrate William White and Samuel Prevoost to the sees of Pennsylvania and New York (see PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CHURCH).

This act had a significance beyond the fact that it established in the United States of America a flouris.h.i.+ng church, which, while completely loyal to its own country, is bound by special ties to the religious life of England. It marked the emergence of the Church of England from that insularity to which what may be called the territorial principles of the Reformation had condemned her. The change was slow, and it is not yet by any means complete.

Since the Church of England, whatever her att.i.tude towards the traditional Catholic doctrines, never disputed the validity of Catholic orders whether Roman or Orthodox, nor the jurisdiction of Catholic bishops in foreign countries, the expansion of the Anglican Church has been in no sense conceived as a Protestant aggressive movement against Rome. Occasional exceptions, such as the consecration by Archbishop Plunket of Dublin of a bishop for the reformed church in Spain, raised so strong a protest as to prove the rule. In the main, then, the expansion of the Anglican Church has followed that of the British empire, or, as in America, of its daughter states; its claim, so far as rights of jurisdiction are concerned, is to be the Church of England and the English race, while recognizing its special duties towards the non-Christian populations subject to the empire or brought within the reach of its influence. As against the Church of Rome, with its system of rigid centralization, the Anglican Church represents the principle of local autonomy, which it holds to be once more primitive and more catholic. In this respect the Anglican communion has developed on the lines defined in her articles at the Reformation; but, though in principle there is no great difference between a church defined by national, and a church defined by racial boundaries, there is an immense difference in effect, especially when the race--as in the case of the English--is itself ec.u.menical.

The realization of what may be called this catholic mission of the English church, in the extension of its organization to the colonies, was but a slow process.

_The Church in the Colonies._

On the 12th of August 1787 Dr. Charles Inglis was consecrated bishop of Nova Scotia, with jurisdiction over all the British possessions in North America. In 1793 the see of the Quebec was founded; Jamaica and Barbados followed in 1824, and Toronto and Newfoundland in 1839.

Meanwhile the needs of India has been tardily met, on the urgent representations in parliament of William Wilberforce and others, by the consecration of Dr. T.F. Middleton as bishop of Calcutta, with three archdeacons to a.s.sist him. In 1817 Ceylon was added to his charge; in 1823 all British subjects in the East Indies and the islands of the Indian Ocean; and in 1824 ”New South Wales and its dependencies”! Some five years later, on the nomination of the duke of Wellington, William Broughton was sent out to work in this enormous jurisdiction as archdeacon of Australia. Soon afterwards, in 1835 and 1837, the sees of Madras and Bombay were founded; whilst in 1836 Broughton himself was consecrated as first bishop of Australia. Thus down to 1840 there were but ten colonial bishops; and of these several were so hampered by civil regulations that they were little more than government chaplains in episcopal orders. In April of that year, however, Bishop Blomfield of London published his famous letter to the archbishop of Canterbury, declaring that ”an episcopal church without a bishop is a contradiction in terms,” and strenuously advocating a great effort for the extension of the episcopate. It was not in vain.

<script>