In the same year the English and Flemish suffered a defeat at St. Omer, and when King Edward showed a desire to make peace with France, Arteveld coolly told him that he would not allow him to make peace without the consent of the Flemings, and that they would hold him to his oath. Edward nevertheless concluded a truce with the French, which was broken soon afterwards by the French; and a second, to which the Flemings were a party, but which was also broken by the French. The war was now renewed, and the union between Edward and Arteveld led to the project of making the king's son, Edward, the Black Prince, Count of Flanders. The king went once more to Sluys, accompanied by his son, but their hopes were destroyed by a revolt against Arteveld, whose government was too arbitrary for a people like the Flemings. Ghent had just been disturbed by a civil contest between the corporation of the fullers, led by their dean, John Baka, and the corporation of the weavers, headed by their dean, Gherard Dionys, or Denis. The affair was so serious that Arteveld did not venture to declare himself for either of the factions, but remained neutral in the expectation that his authority would increase in proportion as the factions should weaken each other by hostilities. The animosity between the fullers and weavers increased daily, and at last terminated in a bloody engagement in a market-place in Ghent, called " Vrydaegsmert." It was on a Monday, the 2nd of May, 1344, and the affray lasted the whole day. The priests approached in procession, showing the eucharist to the infuriated citizens, and imploring them by the holy body of the Saviour to stop the massacre. But the fight went on till five hundred, or, according to Oudegherst, fifteen hundred bodies, chiefly fullers, covered the place, and the day ended in the complete defeat of the fullers. After their victory, the weavers abolished the corporation of the fullers, that is, excluded them from participation in the government of the town, and Gherard Dionys became, next to Arteveld, the first man in Ghent. When Gherard was informed of the plan concerted between Arteveld and King Edward to make the king's son Count of Flanders, he opposed it vigorously, and was assisted by numbers of Flemings, especially Ghenters, who preferred the shadow of a master, as Count Louis was, to a son of the King of England, who was sure of the assistance of his father in any dispute with his subjects. Arteveld, alarmed by this opposition, resolved on the ruin of Gherard, and for that purpose secretly introduced a body of five hundred English into the town, whom he hid in his house and on his premises, thinking with their aid to surprise and kill his rival. But Gherard, who was informed of his design, assembled his weavers, and as many citizens of rank and

property as he could persuade at the moment, and suddenly rushed upon the house of Arteveld. Arteveld, seeing the armed crowd, stood at a window, and tried to soothe them by gentle words and promises, but in vain. His house was stormed, the English were killed, and Arteveld fell by the hand of his rival Gherard. According to some writers he tried to escape, but was discovered in his stables by a shoemaker, whose father had formerly been killed by order of Arteveld. The shoemaker immediately rushed upon Arteveld, felled him to the ground, and cut off his head, which he presented to the victorious weavers. This happened in 1345. Arteveld left a son, Philip van Arteveld, whose name became likewise conspicuous in the history of Flanders. After the fall of Arteveld, King Edward returned to England, but without breaking off his alliance with the Flemings. Count Louis returned to Flanders: he fell in 1346, in the battle of Cressy. (Froissart, i. P. i. 64, &c. ed. Buchon, Paris, 1837; Meyer, Annales Rerum Flandricarum, ed. 1561, fol. 136 verso, &c.; Oudegherst, Les Chroniques et Annales de Flandres, c. 156, &c.) W. P.

ARTEVELD, PHILIP VAN, the son of Jacob van Arteveld, was born at Ghent, about 1340, and was called Philip, in honour of Philippa, Queen of England, the wife of King Edward III., who was his godmother. His earlier life is unknown. Being a child when his father was murdered, he escaped the popular fury; he was allowed to enjoy the rich inheritance of his father, married a wife, and lived quietly and unobserved during all the popular troubles which disturbed the domestic peace of Flanders during the middle of the fourteenth century. But urged by ambition he suddenly left his peaceful occupations, and became a demagogue, no less powerful than his father, under the following circumstances.

Louis III., surnamed "de Male," who succeeded his father, Count Louis II., in 1346, was addicted to luxury, and treated his quarrelsome subjects with great indulgence. He seldom interfered in the civil differences between one town and another, or between the powerful corporations, and he thus became so popular that the Flemings thrice paid his debts. Being again pressed by his creditors, he abused the good will of his subjects by asking them once more for pecuniary assistance. The inhabitants of Bruges, whom the count allowed to make a canal, by which their ships could enter the Scheld without passing by Ghent, promised to pay part of his debts, but the Ghenters refused it, on the ground that the income of their city would be diminished if the ships of Bruges ceased to pass through Ghent. John Hyons, a burgher of Ghent, and the count's favourite, promised his master to persuade the Ghenters to imitate the example of Bruges. He did not succeed, but Mat

thew Ghisbert, an old rival of Hyons, was more fortunate, and the Ghenters paid their part of the count's debts. Louis withdrew his favours from Hyons, and bestowed them upon Ghisbert, between whom and Hyons a deadly enmity arose. Hyons resolved to take revenge on both. He excited the lower classes of Ghent against the count, and was soon at the head of a strong band of ruffians, called the "White Caps." At this time the count's bailiff had a Ghenter citizen arrested, a proceeding which was against the franchises of the Ghenters, who had their own jurisdiction, and he refused to restore him to liberty, in spite of the threats of the captive's countrymen. The riot became general, and the count having made an attempt to seize Hyons in the midst of his White Caps, they killed the count's officers, and plundered the houses of several rich citizens whom they suspected of being adherents of the count. After this affront to the count's dignity Hyons led his men to Andeghem, the favourite seat of the count, which had been lately built, and, after having plundered the costly furniture of this splendid castle, they set fire to it. An open war between Count Louis and the Ghenters was the consequence. This was what Hyons wished and expected, but he died suddenly, under suspicious circumstances (1379). John Prunaux succeeded him as popular leader, and took the field with sixty thousand men. He was not, however, able to prevent the count from laying siege to Ghent, in consequence of which he was superseded by Piet van den Bosch, the Pierre Dubois of the French, and the Petrus Boscanus of the Latin chroniclers, a man of low origin, and a bold intriguer, but not fit for military command. In 1381 the town of Ghent was so closely blockaded by the count, that the inhabitants suffered from famine, and although the mob held the government, they were poor, and could only satisfy their appetites by plundering the rich. The protracted siege became thus doubly dangerous to the authority of Van den Bosch. The Ghenters showed their exasperation, and many of them said that if Jacob van Arteveld were alive, they would not have been brought into such a position. These words struck Van den Bosch, who was prudent enough to prevent his ruin by giving up the first place, and contenting himself with the second. He remembered that although Jacob van Arteveld was dead, his son Philip was alive, and he resolved to offer him the supreme authority in Ghent.

Van den Bosch immediately called upon Arteveld, and said to him, "Philip, if you will, you may be captain of the Ghenters this very day; but you must be bold and cruel, and not mind a man's life more than a lark." Arteveld accepted the proposal without hesitation; and no sooner had the Ghenters heard that the son of their former leader

was going to be proposed to them as their captain, than all, poor and rich, democrats and aristocrats, united to choose him their captain. Hitherto Arteveld had taken no part in the civil troubles; he had spent his time in managing his extensive business, and enjoying the wealth accumulated by his father and himself. But all at once he stepped forward on the scene of public life with the assurance and energy of one who had been a tribune of the people from his years of manhood. Arteveld began his career by putting the dean of the weavers to death. In a sally of the Ghenters, Messire Walter d'Enghien, the favourite of Count Louis, was killed, and Arteveld demanded and received from the count one hundred thousand francs, as a ransom for the body of the knight. Ghysbrecht Grutte and Simon Bete, two burghers of Ghent, having proposed in the common council to make peace with Count Louis, were interrupted by Arteveld, who stabbed one of them, and by Van den Bosch, who despatched the other. The siege was now changed into a blockade; and in the spring of 1380 Count Louis held his court at Bruges, whence the Ghenters formerly received great quantities of provisions. But all intercourse between the two towns was now stopped, and as the richer among the burghers of Bruges attached themselves to the Count because of his favour with regard to the new canal, the Ghenters were filled with jealousy and hatred of their brethren of Bruges. Arteveld profited by the hostile disposition to persuade them to make a sally, and to attack Bruges, pointing out the opportunity which they had of forcing the town to make common cause with them, and perhaps to seize Count Louis, and to dictate to him terms of peace. On the 2nd of May, 1382, the Ghenters marched out, six thousand in number, with three hundred (?) pieces of ordnance, and under the command of Arteveld. They reached the neighbourhood of Bruges before their approach was known, and when at last the news reached the town, Count Louis with his knights and gens d'armes went out to the encounter as to a certain victory, upon which he had the more ground to reckon as he was supported by the militia of Bruges, forty thousand men, well armed and accustomed to fight, but who on this occasion proved great cowards, because they reckoned upon a short and easy struggle, and met with a terrible resistance. The position of the Ghenters was so well protected by marshes and ditches that the count was advised to postpone the attack till the next day, especially as it was evening; but neither knights nor burghers listened to the advice, and the battle began. It resulted in the total defeat of the count's army; a great number of his men, thrown into confusion by the artillery of the Ghenters, were drowned in the marshes or smothered in the throng; and the rest fled

in such disorder that the vanquished and victors together entered the town of Bruges. The Ghenters having been joined by the petty corporations, and generally by the lower people of Bruges, soon made themselves masters of the town. They plundered the houses of the rich, many of which were destroyed, as well as great quantities of goods; so that the trade of the town did not recover for a long time. Arteveld's chief object was the capture of Count Louis, who however escaped with the aid of a woman, who hid him in her own bed, and he finally fled to Lille. The government of Bruges was seized by the petty corporations, under the dictatorship of Arteveld; and the other towns of Flanders has tened to avoid the fate of Bruges by submitting to Ghent. Arteveld assumed the title of regent, and lived with the splendour of a prince. His authority was chiefly derived from the consent of the petty corporations, which had always taken a limited share in the government of the Flemish towns; and from the voluntary support of numerous workmen of every description who were not embodied into corporations, nor under the patronage of such, but who were very useful to Arteveld on account of their readiness to sacrifice their lives whenever they had any opportunity of plundering or destroying. Popular troubles of this description were not confined to Flanders: democratic revolts, signalized by a peculiar hatred against the nobles, disturbed the peace of Paris, Rouen, Orléans, Blois, and many other towns of France; and similar riots occurred in England. When Arteveld was told that Count Louis had found assistance at the court of King Charles VI. of France, he cried out that Charles was a child, and that the Flemings need not dread a boy of fourteen. He, nevertheless, sent ambassadors to England, who were to negociate an alliance with King Richard II., but, as they were also charged to demand the payment of one hundred thousand florins which the Ghenters had lent King Edward III., and which were not repaid, they were not even allowed an audience, and returned without having effected their purpose. During this time Arteveld kept up an active correspondence with the King of France and his ministers, but so little was he inclined to make peace with the count on reasonable terms, and he treated the king so disrespectfully, that Charles assembled his estates at Arras, and declared war against the Flemings in the month of October, 1382. After many fruitless attempts the French connétable, Messire de Clisson, effected the passage of the Lys near Commines, and defeated Van den Bosch, who defended it with the Flemish vanguard. A general engagement took place a few days later, on the 29th of November (Froissart put it erroneously on the 27th), between Kortryk and Rosebeck, or Rosebecque, which is generally called after

this latter place. The Flemings were commanded by Arteveld, and the French by Clisson, under whom the young king commanded the centre. The first assault of the Flemings was irresistible, and the French centre, against which it was directed, was almost broken; but the king was relieved in time, and the Flemings were driven back. In this attack Arteveld fell, either crushed to death in the heavy press, or, more probably, killed by the lance of a French knight. Upon this the Flemings were driven into a confined position, where thousands of them perished in the throng, and the rest were routed with great slaughter. The whole affair lasted only an hour and a half, yet nine thousand Flemings covered the field, and twenty-six thousand, or more perhaps, were killed in the pursuit. King Charles having expressed his desire to see Arteveld either alive or dead, ten francs were offered as reward to those who should find him; and the body was finally discovered under a heap of slain, on the spot where the first attack took place, and, as Froissart says, without any wound, from which he concludes that Arteveld had been suffocated by the throng. The same author states, that after the king had looked for some time at the body, it was hung by the neck on a tree. The account of the monk of St. Denis, cited by Buchon, the editor of Froissart, is different. Those, says he, who went out in search of the body found a Flemish warrior exhausted by his wounds, by whose direction they discovered the body, at the sight of which the Fleming shed a torrent of tears. Having been brought before the king, he declared once more that this was the body of Philip Arteveld, who had promised him the night before to make him a knight. The king offered him his pardon and royal favours if he would enter the French service; but the dying man, with a fainting voice, answered, "I have lived a Fleming, I will die a Fleming; and I feel with joy that life is going to leave my body." The same author neither pretends that Arteveld had been suffocated in the throng, nor does he say that his body was hung up. The French king followed up his victory, and the remnants of the Flemish army were cut to pieces at Kortryk. Near this town Robert of Artois, with a splendid French army, had been cut to pieces by the Flemings in 1302, who gathered so many golden spurs on the field, that the battle was called the battle of the golden spurs; the remembrance of this circumstance annoyed King Charles so much that he ordered the town to be burnt. After these victories the Ghenters capitulated, and the whole country returned under the government of Count Louis, who died in 1384. (Froissart, ii. 101, &c., ed. Buchon, Paris, fol. 1837 ; Oudegherst, Les Chroniques et Annales de Flandres, c. 178, &c.; Meyer, Annales Rerum Flandricarum, p. 174, &c.)

W. P.

ARTHMANN,

a violin-maker at Wechmar, in Gotha, in 1796. His instruments are noted for their sweet and full tone, and for their resemblance to the Cremona violins. E. T. ARTHMANN, JEROM, one of the best of the Bohemian organ-builders, was born at Prague in the first half of the 17th century. He built, in 1654, the celebrated organ in the college of the Premonstrantes, in Prague. (Fétis, Biographie Universelle des Musiciens.) E. T.

ARTHUR, a British chieftain at the time of the Saxon invasion in the fifth and sixth centuries. Arthur was the most celebrated personage of that dark and semi-fabulous period which intervened between the departure of the Romans from Britain and the establishment of what is commonly termed the Saxon Heptarchy. His fame was diffused on the Continent as well as in the British islands, and was embodied in popular traditions and in early romances. Various localities have been called after him, or associated with some of his reputed exploits. Yet amidst this widelyspread renown the authentic memorials of his history are so scanty, that serious doubts have been entertained even of his existence; and any account of him must be, to a considerable extent, conjectural.

In the writings of Gildas and Bede, and in the "Saxon Chronicle," which constitute our most trustworthy materials for the history of his age, the name of Arthur does not occur. We have some scanty notices of him in the poems of Taliesin, Merddin, and Llywarch Hên, in the historical Triads, and in the history of Caradoc of Llancarvan; a more detailed account in the corrupted pages of Nennius; and an extensive, but for the most part absurdly fabulous history in Geoffrey of Monmouth, professedly translated from a very ancient work in the British tongue. The English historians of the middle ages follow Nennius or Geoffrey, with here and there a slight addition from other sources.

Welsh records notice that Meirig or Mouric, son of Tewdrig, a chieftain of Glamorganshire and the adjoining parts of South Wales, had a son Arthur, who is supposed to be the Arthur of history and romance. According to Nennius, Arthur was called from his cruelty" Mab-uter" ("dreadful son"); and perhaps this title may have given rise to the story of his being the son of Uthyr or Uter Pendragon, the reputed brother and successor of Ambrosius Aurelianus in the sovereignty of Britain. Geoffrey of Monmouth makes him to be the son of Uthyr by Igerna, wife of Gorlois Duke of Cornwall, a lady whose favours Uthyr enjoyed by personating her husband with the aid of the prophet or enchanter Merlin. Possibly some suspicion may have been early cast on Arthur's legitimacy: Fordun has distinctly affirmed that

VOL. III.

he was an illegitimate son of Uthyr, whose succession properly belonged to Anna, Arthur's sister, and to her sons Galwan or Walgan or Gawain, and Medrawd or Medrod or Modred. Geoffrey makes Tintagell in Cornwall to have been Arthur's birth-place.

William of Malmesbury speaks of Ambrosius Aurelianus as availing himself of "the valuable aid of the warlike Arthur in repressing the power of the Saxons ;" and it is not unlikely that this was the case: for Bede seems to ascribe to Ambrosius the victory of Mount Badon, which is commonly ascribed to Arthur. In tradition the glory of the victory appears to have been ascribed to the popular hero, whose prowess was displayed in it; while Bede commemorates the leader of the whole war.

Geoffrey makes Arthur to have been elected sovereign of Britain at the age of fifteen; and to have performed all his exploits during his sovereignty. Whether Arthur ever attained to the sovereignty of the Britons admits of serious doubt; that he should have been appointed at the early age mentioned by Geoffrey is utterly improbable. He appears to have been placed, occasionally at least, at the head of a confederacy of the Western Britons.

66

His first and principal warfare was against the Saxons; and in the story of Geoffrey two dukes named Cheldricus or Cheldric, whom we may identify with Cerdic, founder of the West Saxon kingdom, are among the most conspicuous personages. As in the history given by Geoffrey, the first Cheldric had been defeated and slain by Arthur and his officers, it was needful to raise up a second personage of the same name in order to make the history consistent with those traditionary or other statements which connected Cerdic with the closing scene of Arthur's life. It is impossible to unravel the confusion in which the history of Arthur's warfare is involved. Llywarch Hên has commemorated a battle at Llongborth," the haven of ships, in which Arthur commanded; and if Mr. Turner (in his "History of the Anglo-Saxons") is correct in identifying this with the battle fought when the Saxon Porta landed at Portsmouth, the date of the transaction is fixed by the "Saxon Chronicle" in A.D. 501. Llywarch has noticed another battle on the Llawen, which is perhaps the same as that placed by Nennius on the Glen. Nennius has recorded the localities of twelve battles, in all which Arthur commanded, and in all was victorious. The localities cannot now be certainly identified, especially as the text is very corrupt. Most of them are supposed to have been in the north of England. The fact, however, of such a succession of victories is, to say the least, very doubtful; and the credit of Nennius is further shaken by the marvels which he has embodied in his narrative. In the battle of Mount Badon, which most writers

2 Z