DEVELOPMENT. See EMBRYOLOGY and EVOLUTION. DEVENTER, or, by corruption, DEMTER, a town of Holland, in the province of Overyssel, about 25 miles north of Arnheim, on the right bank of the Yssel, which there receives the waters of, the Schipbeek, and is crossed by a bridge of boats. It is a clean, prosperous place, and at the same time preserves a large number of ancient buildings as well as its fortifications. Of special interest are the Protestant church of St Leivin, which dates from 1334, occupies the site of an older structure of the 11th century, and possesses some fine stained glass; the Roman Catholic Broerekerk, with three ancient gospels; the Bergkerk, which belonged to the Premonstratensians; the town-ball, built in 1693, containing a remarkable painting by Terburg, who was for some time burgomaster of the town; and the weigh-house, which dates from 1528. There are also cavalry-barracks. an arsenal, a court-house, a hospital, and a lunatic asylum; while among the scientific and educational institutions, an observatory, a gymnasium, and a high school may be mentioned. The last, known as the " Athenæum" down to 1864, dates from 1830, and has a library of 6000 volumes, inclusive of a number of Oriental MSS., several incunabula, and a 13th century copy of Reynard the Fox. The archives of the town are of considerable value from the fact that it was the chief town of a province. Besides a good agricultural trade, the inhabitants carry on the weaving of carpets, woollens, and silks, cotton-printing, and iron-founding; and their honey-cakes are exported in large quantities to all parts of the Netherlands. Population in 1869, 17,983.

Deventer is mentioned in 778 in connection with a Saxon inroad, but its importance only dates from the 11th century. In 1123 it was relieved by the emperor Henry V. from an investment by the duke of Saxony and the bishop of Munster. To Queen Eleanor of England it was indebted for the monastery of the Récollets, and in 1356 she breathed her last within its walls. During the War of Independence it was treacherously surrendered to the Spaniards by Edward Stanley, an Englishman, but was recaptured in 1591 by Prince Maurice of Orange. Its bishopric, which had been established only in 1559, was then abolished; and in the following year it was found necessary to destroy its wooden bridge over the Yssel. In 1813 it was invested by the Allies; and in 1814 the French withdrew in terms of the peace.

DEVEREUX. See ESSEX, EARLS OF.

DE VIGNY, ALFRED VICTOR, COUNT (1797-1863), a distinguished French poet and novelist, was born at Loches, in Touraine, March 27, 1797 (or 1799). His father, a man of noble descent, was a cavalry officer, who

mother was the daughter of an admiral. Tales of military achievements and traditions of the ancien régime were familiar to him in his childhood, and furnished the most powerful influences towards the formation of his character and the direction of his early ambition. He received his education at Paris, at the school of M. Hix; but, his royalist sympathies being threatened by the prevailing admiration for the empire, he was removed and placed under a private tutor. After the first restoration of the Bourbons he was admitted, at the age of sixteen, into the he accompanied the royal family to Ghent in 1815. In musqueteers of the royal household, and in this capacity the following year, on the suppression of the musqueteers, he passed into the royal guard. He remained in the army about thirteen years, and attained the rank of captain, but without seeing active service; and, wearied with the dulness of the life which he had desired, resigned his commission in 1827. He had not long before married a rich English lady. The leisure of his soldier-life had not been wasted. Not only was he gaining knowledge by observation of men and experience of life, but he meditated much, and, as he says, had all his works in his head,—" ils marchaient avec moi... et quand on m'arrétait, j'écrivais." His first publication was a volume of poems, which appeared in 1822. Some of these had already been published in periodicals; and he was therefore starting on his poetical career about the same time that Victor Hugo was writing his earliest Odes and Lamartine his earliest Méditations. Two years later (1824) he published the poem of Eloa, & graceful embodiment of a delicate fancy. It is the story of a bright creature, "sister of the angels," born of a tear of the Saviour, and whose tender pity for the evil spirit becomes the occasion of her own fall. This was followed by several other poems, Le Déluge, Moise, Dolorida, &c. In these later pieces De Vigny shows himself to have been under the powerful influence of Victor Hugo. Hitherto, however, notwithstanding the evident tokens of his genuine inspiration as a poet, he had not attained general recognition. This 'he first secured, won it even by storm, by the publication, in 1826, of his historical romance, Cinq-Mars, the story of a conspiracy under Louis XIII. This work appeared one year before Manzoni's famous novel, I Promessi Sposi; and both works were among the most noteworthy productions of the school of Walter Scott, whose Continental reputation was then at its height. The book had an immense run, and passed through many editions. In its pages the author shows himself qualified to present in a masterly and truthful way the character of an age, to draw vigorous portraits of great historical figures, and to depict feeling with delicacy and simplicity. It was about this time that De Vigny's friendship with Lamartine began. He was now one of the recognized chieft of the new school, the Romantic, and one of the editors of the Muse française. In 1829 he produced a translation of Othello, which was acted at the Théâtre Français, but was not very warmly received. His next dramatic attempt was La Maréchale d'Ancre, performed at the Odéon in 1831. It is characterized as a learned study of the period, wanting the breath of life and the fire of poetic passion. These qualities were present in superabundance in his next and last dramatic work, Chatterton, produced in 1835. Although faulty in construction, and better fitted for the closet than for the stage, this powerful play has kept its place in the theatrical repertory. De Vigny's remarkable prose work, entitled Stello, ou les Diables bleus, appeared in 1832. It consists of three biographical studies, the subjects of which are three unfortunate poets, Gilbert, Chatterton, and André Chénier, whose fate is narrated to Stello, an invalid poet, by a philosophical physician, le

docteur noir. True in spirit while inaccurate in detail, these stories, exquisitely told, are intended to teach poets the lesson of self-renunication. Stello was followed, in 1835, by another prose work of equal, perhaps superior, literary merit, entitled Servitude et grandeur militaire. This too, like Stello, is composed of three stories; and in these is depicted the soldier's life, his sufferings, his duty, and his true reward. "The poem of human life," says J. S. Mill, in his review of De Vigny's works (Dissertations, vol. i.), "is opened before us, and M. de Vigny does but chant from it, in a voice of subdued sadness, a few strains telling of obscure wisdom and unrewarded virtue,-of those antique characters which, without self-glorification or hope of being appreciated, carry out, as he expresses it, the sentiment of duty to its extremest consequences.' De Vigny's latest gift to the world was his Poëmes philosophiques, or Les Destinées, part of which appeared in his life-time in the Revue des Deux Mondes; the rest, with these, were published after his death by his literary executor. These poems are mainly utterances of unbelief and despondency, intermixed with exhortations to a stoical resignation and self-reliance. De Vigny was received at the French Academy in January 1846; but, in consequence of the coldness of the reception and the offensive speech of M. Molé on the occasion, he refused to be presented to the king. He died at Paris, after severe and prolonged sufferings bravely borne, September 17, 1863. (W.L. R.C.)

DEVIL is the name which has been given in the New Testament and in Christian theology to a supreme evil personality supposed to rule over a kingdom of evil spirits, of whom he is the chief, and to be the restless and unfailing adversary of God and man. The Hebrew term dencting “adversary," or Satan, is also applied to this supreme evil spirit, or prince of the kingdom of evil. There can be no question that such an evil spirit is frequently spoken of in the New Testament. He is designated by various names in addition to these mentioned, such as "the Tempter," "Beelzebub," "the Prince. of Devils," "the Strong One," "the Wicked One," "the Enemy," or "the Hostile One." Throughout the Gospels these terms are used interchangeably, and in all cases seem to denote the same active power or personality of evil outside man and exercising influence over him. It may be a question how far Jesus Christ himself acknowledges the existence of such an evil power, but there can be no question that such a being was recognized in the current belief of the Jews in His time.

But it is also certain that this belief amongst the Jews was one of gradual growth, and is not to be traced in the Old Testament in any such definite form as we meet with it in the New. The expression "Satan" is indeed found in the Old Testament, but only five times, if so frequently, as a proper name,-thrice in the book of Job (i. 6, 12; ii. 1), once in the opening of the 21st chap. of 1 Chronicles (although here the allusion to a distinct personality may be held doubtful), and in Zechariah (iii. 1). In all other places where the word occurs, "Satan" is used in its common sense of "adversary," a sense in which it also occurs in the Gospels, in the well-known passage (Matt. xvi. 23) where our Lord addresses St Peter, "Get thee behind me, Satan," or "adversary." The books of Chronicles and Zechariah are indisputably amongst the latest writings of the Old Testament; and, although the date of Job is unsettled, it may also be presumed to belong to a late period in the history of revelation. In the earlier prophetic literature of the Hebrews there is no recognition of any spirit of evil at war with Jehovah. All power and dominion are, on the contrary, clearly ascribed to Jehovah himself, who is supreme in heaven, on earth, and under

the earth. The connection of Satan with the serpent in the garden of Eden in Genesis (iii. 1-7) is an inference of later dogmatic opinion, arising probably out of the use of the expression "Old Serpent" applied to Satan in Rev. (xx. 2), but receives no countenance from the scriptural narrative itself, which speaks of the serpent purely as an animal, and pronounces a curse against him with reference to his animal nature solely. The idea of a distinct personality of evil, therefore, is not to be found in the earlier Hebrew Scriptures, and is, in fact, inconsistent with the cardinal principle of the older Hebrew theology that Jehovah was the sole source of all power, the author both of good and evil, who hardened Pharaoh's heart (Exod. x, 27), and sent a lying spirit among the prophets of Ahab (1 Kings xxii. 20-3). Even in the later Scriptures in which "Satan" is spoken of as a distinct person, there is little or no analogy betwixt what is said of such a person in these Scriptures and what is said of him in the New Testament. The "Satan" of the book of Job is described as coming among the "sons of God" to present himself before the Lord. He is the image of malice, restlessness, and envy— the willing messenger of evil to Job; but he is not represented as the impersonation of evil, or as a spiritual assailant of the patriarch. He is really a delegated agent in the hands of Jehovah to execute His will, and the evils with which he assails Job are outward evils. The picture is quite different from that of the “ Archangel ruined," or the devil, or Satan, of later theology.

The question then arises as to the special source of the conception of the devil as a fallen and evil spirit. The explanation commonly given of this conception by our modern critical schools is that it sprang out of the intercourse of the Jews with the Persians during their period of exile. In the Persian, or Iranian, mythology it is well known that a personal power of evil was conspicuously recognized. The Iranian religion divided the world betwixt two opposing self-existent deities, the one good and the other evil, but both alike having a share in creation and in man. Ormuzd, or Ahuramazda, was holy and true, and to be honoured and worshipped. But Ahriman, or Anramainyu, the evil-minded, the spirit of darkness, was no less powerful, and claimed an equal share of man's homage. These were the good and the evil in thought, word, and deed. Man has to choose betwixt the two. He cannot serve both. With this dualistic system the Jews came in contact during their captivity at Babylon, and are supposed to have retained permanent traces of it in their subsequent theology. The conception of the devil, and of a lower kingdom of demons, or devils, is the evident illustration of this. The case is put in this way by a Christian writer of moderation and knowledge :-"That the Hebrew prophets had reiterated their belief in one God with the most profound conviction is not to be questioned; but as little can it be doubted that, as a people, the Jews had exhibited little impulse towards monotheism, and that from this time (the period of their captivity) we discern a readiness to adopt the Zoroastrian demonology " (Cox's Aryan Mytho logy, ii. 356). The conception of Satan in the later canonical books of Chronicles and Zechariah is even attributed to this source. "Thus far Satan had appeared, as in the book of Job, among the ministers of God; but in later books we have a closer approximation to the Iranian creed. In Zechariah and the first book of Chronicles, Satan assumes the character of Ahriman, and appears as the author of evil. Still later he becomes the prince of devils, the source of wicked thoughts, the enemy of the Word and Son of God". (Ibid., p. 351).

The process by which the Jewish mind worked out this conception and the whole scheme of demonology found in the New Testament was of course gradual. The Book of

Wisdom, a product of Alexandrian-Jewish thought in the 2d century before Christ, which speaks of the devil having "through envy introduced evil into the world" (ii. 24), is supposed to represent a stage in this development; and the apocryphal books of Enoch and Esdras (IV.), the former of which is pre-Christian, indicate further stages. Another stage is supposed to be marked by the recognition of a "devil," or evil spirit, under the name of Asmodeus, in the book of Tobit (150 B.C.) There is certainly a remarkable analogy betwixt parts of the eschatological teaching of the book of Enoch and other apocryphal books and that of the gospels. But the development of Jewish theology as a whole, in the ages immediately antecedent to Christianity, is still involved in considerable obscurity; and it is difficult to say how much of the eschatology and demonology of the New Testament is to be regarded as original, and how much as derived or inherited from prior modes of thought.

It must also be conceded that, even should we accept the modern critical theory of the rise of the New Testament conception of the devil and of demons, there is much in it that must be pronounced very different from the Zoroastrian or Iranian conception. The devil of the gospels is in some respects very unlike the Ahriman of Zoroastrianism. He is in no sense a twin-creator of man. He has no original share in him, and no right to his homage. In the Persian system the warfare of good or evil is a warfare of balanced forces. But the evil personality of the New Testament, powerful as he is, and always the enemy of the divine, is yet a subordinated and inferior being. He is the tempter of the Son of God and the enemy of man. He has power on earth, and even a certain, power over the Son of man; and yet the Son can restrain and bid him get behind Him. The subordinated forces of evil-the demons-are all subject to Christ. They hear His word and obey it. In short, the devil of the New Testament is, in comparison with the source of evil recognized by Zoroastrianism, a limited power. He is a subordinate although insurrectionary spirit, working by spiritual means upon the heart of man, and in no sense a native power having an original or creative hold of him. This sets the evangelical conception on a higher level than the Persian, and proves that the Jewish mind, supposing that it did borrow certain impulses from the Iranian dualism with which it came in contact in the period of exile, yet wrought out the conception in the depth of its own religious and moral consciousness within the sphere of revealed truth which was its great educational medium.

The idea of an evil personality was therefore so far a native growth of the Jewish mind, working upon hints contained, although not developed, in the earlier Hebrew Scriptures. It is evident from various passages, both of the Pentateuch (Lev. xvii. 17; Deut. xxxii. 17) and of the prophetic Scriptures and the Psalms (Isa. xiii. 21, xxxiv. 14; Jer. xv. 36; Ps. cvi. 37), that the Hebrews were cognizant of evil beings supposed to dwell in darkness and waste places. The names applied to those beings in the passages referred to are various, sometimes seirim-lit. goats (Lev. xvii. 7; Isa. xiii. 21), and sometimes shedim (Deut. xxxii. 17), probably a name for demigods, both phrases being translated “devils" in our authorized version of the Pentateuch. This translation suggests later associations; but such expressions plainly denote a belief in evil beings, the survival, probably, in the Hebrew consciousness of fragments of an older native faith which deified the powers of evil as well as of good. Some have traced a similar survival in the name Azazel, translated in our version scape-goat (Levit. xvi. 8, 10, 26), and which has been supposed to represent an evil being haunting the desert, to which was devoted the goat sent away on the great day of

atonement. This opinion is disputed by others on grounds both philological and theological. But it may be almost certainly assumed that, with all the jealous monotheism of the Jews, there was an undergrowth of darker conceptions, pointing to evil existences opposed to the divine, and that to some extent the later idea of the devil sprang out of this natural growth in the Hebrew mind of an evil side to nature and to life. This process of growth may have been greatly aided by contact with the Persian dualism, and especially the idea of a kingdom and hierarchy of evil powers seems to have been indebted to this source. But it was also largely original, and at the end, as at the beginning, the Jewish and Christian conceptions of the devil and his angels were very distinct from those of the Persian faith. They belong to a higher level of thought, and are the product of a more advanced stage of moral and spiritual feeling.

The idea of the devil so clearly expressed in the New Testament passed as a dominant factor into the early Christian theology, acquiring for many centuries an always deeper hold on the popular religious imagination. In the writings of the fathers of the 2d and 3d centuries the devil plays an important part. The whole of the Roman imperial system, and all that opposed the progress of the gospel, was identified with his kingdom. Satan was the "prince of this world," he was the rival and caricature of the divine. "Satan," said Tertullian, " is God's ape;" and the saying passed into a proverb. He fell by pride and arrogance and envy of the divine creation (Iren., Adv. Hær., iv. 40). He was, according to Cyprian (De Unitate Eccl.), the author of all heresies and delusions; he held man by reason of his sin in rightful possession, and man could only be rescued from his power by the ransom of Christ's blood. This extraordinary idea of a payment or satisfaction to the devil being made by Christ as the price of man's salvation is found both in Irenæus (Adv. Hær., v. 1. 1.) and in Origen, and may be said to have held its sway in the church for nearly a thousand years. And yet Origen is credited with the opinion that, bad as the devil was, he was not altogether beyond hope of pardon. In this as in other respects the early Alexandrian school showed a milder and broader type of thought than the prevailing theology of the church. Occasionally in later times the milder opinion was expressed, as by Gregory of Nyssa in the 4th century; but gradually it vanished, and the devil was drawn by the theological pencil in darker and more terrible colours. Augustine greatly helped to strengthen and confirm the darker view, and to give in this as in other things a gloomier tinge to religious thought. During the Middle Ages the belief in the devil was absorbing-saints conceived themselves and others to be in constant conflict with him. It is hardly possible for us now, as M. Reville says in his short treatise on the subject, "to imagine to what a degree this belief controlled men's whole lives. It was the one fixed idea with every one, particularly from the 13th to the 15th century-the period at which we may consider this superstition to have reached its climax." The superstition showed certainly but slight signs of yielding in the 15th, or even in the 16th or 17th centuries. Luther lived in a constant consciousness of contact and opposition with the evil one. At his study, in bed, or in his cell, the devil was incessantly interfering with his work or rest. As he was going to begin his studies he heard a noise which he immediately interpreted as proceeding from his enemy. "As I found he was about to begin again, I gathered together my books and got into bed. Another time in the night I heard him above my cell walking in the cloister; but as I knew it was the devil I paid no attention to him and went to sleep." Again he says: "Early this morning, when I awoke the fiend came and began disputing with VII. 18

me.

This realism of belief in an evil power near to man, and constantly assailing him, continued more or less all through the 17th century, and was especially strong, as Mr Buckle has shown in his well-known volumes, in Scotland. He has somewhat overcharged his picture; but he presents at the same time indisputable facts which leave no doubt that the clergy and people alike imagined that "the devil was always and literally at hand-that he was haunting them, speaking to them, and tempting them. Go where they would he was there." With. the rise of a rationalistic temper throughout Europe, in the 18th century, this belief in the pervading influence of diabolic agency began to disappear. The sense of the supernatural decayed in all directions, and especially the old belief in the arbitrary control exercised by an evil power over human destiny. And while the religious impulse has gained greatly since then, and shown renewed vigour both in an evangelical and catholic direction, it cannot be said that the earlier faith in the operations of a personal devil has acquired reascendency. It may be still the prevailing opinion of Christendom that there is an evil power working in the world opposed to the divine; but whether this power is personal, or how far it touches the human will, or again, whether there is a subterranean kingdom of demons with a prince of demons or devil at their head, and how far such a kingdom has any relation to human destiny, are all questions that must be held to be very unsettled, or maintained with very doubtful confidence in any section. of the Christian church. It is our business simply to note such a change in the attitude of Christian belief, and not to express any opinion as to its advantage or otherwise. It is too much to speak with M. Reville of Satan as a "fallen majesty," but the idea of the devil certainly no longer bulks in Christian thought as it once did, nor is his reign the recognized influence that it once was over human life and experience. (J. T.) DEVIL FISH, or SEA DEVIL (Żophius piscatorius), an Acanthopterygian fish belonging to the family Pediculati, so named from its hideous aspect, produced mainly by the enormous size of its head in proportion to the rest of its body. The latter tapers off rapidly towards the tail, and gives the creature the appearance of a gigantic tadpole-a resemblance to which it owes the name of frog-fish, applied to it from the earliest times. The cleft of the mouth is also exceedingly wide, measuring 14 inches in a specimen 4 feet long; and when the mouth is open the lower jaw protrudes beyond the upper, while both jaws are armed with several rows of formidable teeth. The pectoral fins are broad, and are rendered conspicuous by the prolongation of the carpal bones to which they are attached; the ventral fins are palmate, and are placed far forward on the body. The sea devil is a sluggish fish, and, being at the same time exceedingly voracious, is said to have recourse to stratagem in order to satisfy its inordinate appetite. Three anterior dorsal spines, isolated from the others, and attached to the head in front of the eyes, are so modified as to form long filiform appendages, two of these being artieulated to the skull by means of a bony ring, and thus capable of being moved in all directions by appropriate muscles, while the end of the front tentacle is broad and flattened, and of a shining, silvery aspect. Concealing itself in the mud of the sea-bottom, it waves these tentacles aloft, and the silvery extremity of the front filament acts as a bait in tempting the smaller fishes to approach near enough to be seized by the capacious jaws beneath. On this account the creature has received the name of. angler, or fishing frog. The lobes, which form a fringe around the anterior part of the body, probably perform, although in a minor degree, the same function as the angling apparatus

DEVISE. See WILL.

DEVIZES, a municipal and parliamentary borough and market town of England, in North Wilts, situated on the Kennet and Avon canal, 86 miles west of London by rail. It stands on a plateau in the centre of the county, near the northern limit of Salisbury Plain. The town, which is of considerable antiquity, consists of a market-place with streets diverging therefrom. Some of the houses retain their antique timber construction. In the middle of the market-place there stands a large cross erected by Lord Sidmouth in 1815. The principal public buildings are the town hall, the corn exchange (a spacious and handsome building), the county jail, the Bear Club charity school, and the churches. St John's Church dates from the reign of Henry I., but has received numerous additions and repairs, and was restored in 1863; it belongs to the Norman Perpendicular style of architecture. The building is complete, with nave, transept, chancel, and chantry chapels. St Mary's is also of ancient origin, but was mostly rebuilt in the 15th century. Besides these there are chapels belonging to the various nonconformist bodies. Devizes at one time was famous for its woollen manufactures, but these have, long been discontinued, and the only articles now manufactured are silk and snuff. Ale is also brewed. There is, however, a large trade in grain carried on; and the Devizes corn-market is one of the most important in the west of England. The town is said to have taken its rise after the erection of the formidable castle which once stood there, but has now entirely disappeared. This fortress was built about the year 1132 by Bishop Roger of Salisbury, in the reign of Henry I. In 1138 it was seized by Stephen in his campaign against the bishops, and three years thereafter was taken and held by Robert Fitz Herbert on behalf of Queen Maud. He did not, however, retain possession of it for any length of time. It was eventually dismantled in 1376. During the wars of the commonwealth Devizes was unsuccessfully besieged by Waller in 1643, but was taken by Fairfax and Cromwell two years later. It received its borough charter from Maud under the name of De Vies; and it is governed by a mayor, 6 aldermen, and 18 councillors. From the time of Edward III. it was represented in Parliament by two members, but the Reform Act of 1868 reduced its representation to one member. The borough, which has an area of 907 acres, is divided into two wards-north and south. Population in 1851, 6554; and in 1871, 6839.

DEVONPORT, a municipal and parliamentary borough of England, in the county of Devon, contiguous to the towns of East Stonehouse and Plymouth, the seat of one of the royal dockyards, and an important naval and military station. It is situated immediately above Plymouth Sound, occupying a triangular peninstila formed by Stonehouse Pool on the east and the Hamoaze on the west. The town proper is inclosed by a line of ramparts 12 feet