Page:EB1911 - Volume 05.djvu/824

 a gentleman of an ancient and wealthy family, and a zealous Catholic. Under the tuition of Laurence Vaux, a priest, he became an able scholar. In 1564 he entered Christ’s College, Cambridge, where, after a short time, he formally adopted the reformed doctrines and was in consequence disinherited by his father. In 1567 he was elected a fellow of his college, and subsequently was chosen lecturer of St Clement’s church, Cambridge, where he preached to admiring audiences for many years. He was a man of moderate views, though numbering among his friends extremists like Cartwright and Perkins. So great was his reputation that when Sir Walter Mildmay founded Emmanuel College in 1584 he chose Chaderton for the first master, and on his expressing some reluctance, declared that if he would not accept the office the foundation should not go on. In 1604 Chaderton was appointed one of the four divines for managing the cause of the Puritans at the Hampton Court conference; and he was also one of the translators of the Bible. In 1578 he had taken the degree of B.D., and in 1613 he was created D.D. At this period he made provision for twelve fellows and above forty scholars in Emmanuel College. Fearing that he might have a successor who held Arminian doctrines, he resigned the mastership in favour of John Preston, but survived him, and lived also to see the college presided over successively by William Sancroft (or Sandcroft) and Richard Holdsworth. He died on the 13th of November 1640 at the age of about 103, preserving his bodily and mental faculties to the end.

 CHADWICK, SIR EDWIN (1800–1890), English sanitary reformer, was born at Longsight, near Manchester, on the 24th of January 1800. Called to the bar without any independent means, he sought to support himself by literary work, and his essays in the Westminster Review (mainly on different methods of applying scientific knowledge to the business of government) introduced him to the notice of Jeremy Bentham, who engaged him as a literary assistant and left him a handsome legacy. In 1832 he was employed by the royal commission appointed to inquire into the operation of the poor laws, and in 1833 he was made a full member of that body. In conjunction with Nassau W. Senior he drafted the celebrated report of 1834 which procured the reform of the old poor law. His special contribution was the institution of the union as the area of administration. He favoured, however, a much more centralized system of administration than was adopted, and he never ceased to complain that the reform of 1834 was fatally marred by the rejection of his views, which contemplated the management of poor-law relief by salaried officers controlled from a central board, the boards of guardians acting merely as inspectors. In 1834 he was appointed secretary to the poor law commissioners. Finding himself unable to administer in accordance with his own views an act of which he was largely the author, his relations with his official chiefs became much strained, and the disagreement led, among other causes, to the dissolution of the poor law commission in 1846. Chadwick’s chief contribution to political controversy was his constant advocacy of entrusting certain departments of local affairs to trained and selected experts, instead of to representatives elected on the principle of local self-government. While still officially connected with the poor law he had taken up the question of sanitation in conjunction with Dr Southwood Smith, and their joint labours produced a most salutary improvement in the public health. His report on “The Sanitary Condition of the Labouring Population” (1842) is a valuable historical document. He was a commissioner of the Board of Health from its establishment in 1848 to its abolition in 1854, when he retired upon a pension, and occupied the remainder of his life in voluntary contributions to sanitary and economical questions. He died at East Sheen, Surrey, on the 6th of July 1890. He had been made K.C.B. in 1889.

 CHAEREMON, Athenian dramatist of the first half of the 4th century He is generally considered a tragic poet. Aristotle (Rhetoric, iii. 12) says his works were intended for reading, not for representation. According to Suidas, he was also a comic poet, and the title of at least one of his plays (Achilles Slayer of Thersites) seems to indicate that it was a satyric drama. His Centaurus is described by Aristotle (Poet. i. 12) as a rhapsody in all kinds of metres. The fragments of Chaeremon are distinguished by correctness of form and facility of rhythm, but marred by a florid and affected style reminiscent of Agathon. He especially excelled in descriptions (irrelevantly introduced) dealing with such subjects as flowers and female beauty. It is not agreed whether he is the author of three epigrams in the Greek Anthology (Palatine vii. 469, 720, 721) which bear his name.

 CHAEREMON, of Alexandria (1st century ), Stoic philosopher and grammarian. He was superintendent of the portion of the Alexandrian library that was kept in the temple of Serapis, and as custodian and expounder of the sacred books ( sacred scribe) belonged to the higher ranks of the priesthood. In 49 he was summoned to Rome, with Alexander of Aegae, to become tutor to the youthful Nero. He was the author of a History of Egypt; of works on Comets, Egyptian Astrology, and Hieroglyphics; and of a grammatical treatise on Expletive Conjunctions ( ). Chaeremon was the chief of the party which explained the Egyptian religious system as a mere allegory of the worship of nature. His books were not intended to represent the ideas of his Egyptian contemporaries; their chief object was to give a description of the sanctity and symbolical secrets of ancient Egypt. He can hardly be identical with the Chaeremon who accompanied (c. 26 ; Strabo xvii. p. 806) Aelius Gallus, praefect of Egypt, on a journey into the interior of the country.

 CHAERONEIA, or, an ancient town of , said by some to be the Homeric Arne, situated about 7 m. W. of Orchomenus. Until the 4th century it was a dependency of Orchomenus, and at all times it played but a subordinate part in Boeotian politics. Its importance lay in its strategic position near the head of the defile which presents the last serious obstacle to an invader in central Greece. Two great battles were fought on this site in antiquity. In 338 Philip II. and Alexander of Macedon were confronted by a confederate host from central Greece and Peloponnese under the leadership of Thebes and Athens, which here made the last stand on behalf of Greek liberty. A hard-fought conflict, in which the Greek infantry displayed admirable firmness, was decided in favour of Philip through the superior organization of his army. In 86 the Roman general L. Cornelius Sulla defeated the army of Mithradates VI., king of Pontus, near Chaeroneia. The latter’s enormous numerical superiority was neutralized by Sulla’s judicious choice of ground and the steadiness of his legionaries; the Asiatics after the failure of their attack were worn down and almost annihilated. Chaeroneia is also notable as the birthplace of Plutarch, who returned to his native town in old age, and was held in honour by its citizens for many successive generations. Pausanias (ix. 40) mentions the divine honours accorded at Chaeroneia to the sceptre of Agamemnon, the work of Hephaestus (cf. Iliad, ii. 101). The site of the town is partly occupied by the village of Kapraena; the ancient citadel was known as the Petrachus, and there is a theatre cut in the rock. A colossal seated lion a little to the S.E. of the site marks the grave of the Boeotians who fell fighting against Philip; this lion was found broken to pieces; the tradition that it was blown up by Odysseus Androutsos is incorrect (see Murray, Handbook for Greece, ed. 5, 1884, p. 409). It has now been restored and re-erected (1905). 