Page:EB1911 - Volume 22.djvu/521

Rh imperialist invasions of 1706 and 1746, and the great plague of 1720. Towards the end of the ancien régime the movement which resulted in the revolution of 1789 made itself felt in Provence, and was most apparent in the double election at Aixand at Marseilles of Mirabeau as deputy for the states-general.

Provence, with its own special language and its law so closely related to Roman law, has always been quite separate from the other French provinces. Theoretically it retained its provincial estates, the origin of which has been traced to the assemblages of the 12th century. They met annually, and included representatives of three orders: for the clergy, the archbishop of Aix, president ex officio of the estates, the other bishops of Provence, the abbots of St Victor at Marseilles, of Montmajour and of Thoronet; for the nobility, all the men of noble birth (gentilhommes) until 1623, when this privilege was restricted to actual holders of fiefs; for the third, the members of the twenty-two chief towns of the vigueries and fifteen other privileged places, among which were Arles and Marseilles. There were theoretically no taxes, but only supplies given freely by the estates and assessed by them. However, this assembly did not meet after 1639. The administrative divisions of Provence were constantly changing. In 1307 Charles II. divided it into two sénéchaussées, Aix and Forcalquier, comprising twenty-two vigueries. At the end of the ancien régime the government (gouvernement) of Provence, which corresponded to the généralité of Aix, was made up of eight sénéchaussées, those of Lower Provence—Aix, Arles, Marseilles, Brignoles, Hyères, Grasse, Draguignan, Toulon; and four of Upper Provence—Digne, Sisteron, Forcalquier, Castellane. From a judicial point of view the parlement of Aix had replaced the former conseil eminent or cour souveraine. There was a chambre des comptes at Aix, and also a cour des aides. A decree, dated the 22nd of December 1789, divided Provence into the three departments of Bouche du Rhône, Basses-Alpes and Var, and in 1793 Vaucluse, the former county (comtat) of Venaissin, which belonged to the pope, was added to these. The boundaries of the department of Var were modified in 1860 after the annexation, when the department of the Alpes Maritimes was formed.

PROVERB (Lat. proverbium, from pro, forth, publicly, verbum, word; the Greek equivalent is παροιμίαι, from παρά, alongside, and ομἶος, way, road, i.e. a wayside saying; Ger. Sprichwort), a form of folk-literature, or its later imitation, expressing, in the form of a simple, homely sentence, a pungent criticism of life. Many definitions have been attempted of a “ proverb,” of which none has met with universal acceptance. J. Howell's (d. 1666) three essentials, “ shortness, sense and salt,” omit the chief characteristic, popularity or general acceptance, and the definition of Erasmus—Celebre dictum scita quapiam novitate insigne—suits a good proverb rather than proverbs in general. Lord Russell's “ The wisdom of many and the wit of one ” is familiar.

For a general survey of the subject of proverbs, Archbishop Trench's Proverbs and their Lessons (new ed., 1905, by A. Smythe-Palmer, with additions and notes) is useful; it contains a fairly comprehensive bibliography, ancient and modern. Bohn's Handbook of Proverbs, and Polyglot of Foreign Proverbs (1857), based on the collections of John Ray (1670) and David Ferguson (1641), are very full. V. Stuckey Lean's Collectanea (5 vols.) 1902 is a storehouse of English proverbs, classified in various ways; Notes and Queries, 9th series (1898), vol. ii., contains a bibliography of English works. The principal foreign works are G. Stratforello, La Sapienza del mondo (3 vols., 1883) and Reinsberg and Düringsfeld, Die Sprichwörter der germanischen und romanischen Sprachen (2 vols., 1872–1875). There are many popular handbooks giving full collections of proverbs, English and foreign.

PROVERBS, BOOK OF (Heb. Mishlē Shelomoh, “ Proverbs of Solomon,” abridged by the later Jews to Mishlē; Septuagint, παροιμίαι Π. Σαλ.; Lat. Vulg. Parabolae sal. and Liber proverbiorum), one of the Wisdom books of the Old Testament (see ) and the principal representative in the Old Testament of gnomic thought. This sort of thought, which appears very early in Egypt (2000 B.C. or earlier), and relatively early among the Greeks (in the sayings of Thales and Solon as reported by Diogenes Laertius), was of late growth among the Hebrews. Doubtless they, like other peoples, had their simple proverbs, embodying their general observations of life; a couple of these have been preserved in the Old Testament: “ Is Saul also among the Prophets? ” (1 Sam. x. I2); “The fathers eat sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge ” (Jer. xxxi. 29; Ezek. xviii. 2). It is possible that Solomon uttered or collected a number of such sayings, based in part on observation of the habits of beasts and plants (1 Kings iv. 32 seq. [Heb.v. I2 seq.]; cf. Jotham's apologue, Judg. ix. 8 sqq., and Samson's riddle, Judg. xiv. 14). The Hebrew word mashal, commonly rendered “ proverb,” is a general term for didactic and elegiac poetry (as distinguished from the descriptive and the liturgical), its form being that of the couplet with parallelism of clauses; in the Old Testament it signifies a folk-saying (Ezek. xii. 22, xviii. 2), an allegory (Ezek. xvii. 2), an enigmatical saying (Ezek. xxi. 5), a byword (Jer. xxiv. 9; Deut. xxviii. 37), taunting speech (Isa. xiv. 4; Hab. ii. 6), a lament (Mic. ii. 4), a visional or apocalyptic discourse (Num. xxiii. 7; xxiv. 15), a didactic discourse (Ps. xlix,, lxxviii.), an argument or plea (Job xxix. 1). In the book of Proverbs it is either an aphorism (x.-xxii.) or a discourse (i.-ix., xxiii. 29-35, xxvii. 32-27).

The uses of the term being so various, its special signification in any case must be determined by the character of the passage in which it occurs; and an examination of the contents of Proverbs shows that the thought of the book differs widely from that of the literature prior to the 5th century B.C. The book appears on its face to be a compilation, various authors being mentioned in the titles: Solomon in x. 1 and xxv. 1; the “ sages ” in xxii. 17 and xxiv. 23; Agur in xxx. 2; the mother of King Lemuel in xxxi. 2; xxxi. 10-31 and, probably, xxx. 5-33 are anonymous; the ascription in i. 1 to Solomon may refer to i.-ix or to the whole book. Apart from the titles (which are not authoritative) the difference of style in the various sections indicates difference of authorship. There is, indeed, a certain unity of thought in the book; throughout it inculcates cardinal social virtues, such as industry, thrift, discretion, truthfulness, honesty, chastity, and in general it assumes wisdom to be the guiding principle of life. But the sections differ in form and tone. While chs. x.-xxix. and part of xxx. consist of aphorisms chs. i.-ix., xxxi. are composed of more or less elaborate discourses. In the aphoristic sections also there is variety; there are couplets (x. i.-xxii. 16; xxv.~xxix.), quatrains (xxii.-xxiv.) and tetrads and other numerical arrangements (xxx. 7-33). Compilatory character is indicated by repetitions; there are identical lines (x. 1 and xxix. 3; xi. 14 and xxiv. 6; xiii. 9 and xxiv. 20; xiv. 1 and xxiv. 3; xv. 18 and xxix. 22; xvii. 3 and xxvii. 21;xix. 13 and xxvii. 15; xx. 22 and xxiv. 29; xxiv. 23 and xxviii. 21) and identical couplets (xviii. 8 and xxvi. 22; xix. 1 and xxvii. 6; xix. 24 and xxvi. 15; xx. 16 and xxvii. 13; xxi. 9 and xxv. 34; xxii. 3 and xxvii. 12).

The dates of the various parts of the book must be determined by the character of the contents, there being no decisive external data. The fact that it stands in the third division of the Hebrew Canon, the Writings or Hagiographa, along with such late works as Job, Psalms, Chronicles, Daniel, Ecclesiastes and