5. By inference only, increasing complication of stomach with ruminating

function superadded. Modification of placenta from simple diffused to cotyledonary form. [Illustration: FIG. 1.--Bones of Right Fore Feet of existing Artiodactyla. A, Pig (_Sus scrofa_). l, Lunar. B, Red deer (_Cervus elaphus_). s, Scaphoid. C, Camel (_Camelus bactrianus_). u, Unciform. U, Ulna. m, Magnum. R, Radius. td, Trapezoid.] c, Cuneiform. In the Sheep and the Camel the long compound bone, supporting the two main (or only) toes is the cannon-bone. The primitive Artiodactyla thus probably had the typical number (44) of incisor, canine and molar teeth, brachyodont molars, conical odontoid process, four distinct toes on each foot, with metacarpal, metatarsal and all the tarsal bones distinct, and no frontal appendages. Pecora. As regards classification, the first group is that of the Pecora, or Cotylophora, in which the cheek-teeth are selenodont, but there are no upper incisors or canine-like premolars, while upper canines are generally absent, though sometimes largely developed. Inferior incisors, three on each side with an incisiform canine in contact with them. Cheek-teeth consisting of p.3/3, m.3/3, in continuous series. Auditory bulla simple and hollow within. Odontoid process of second vertebra in the form of a crescent, hollow above. Lower extremity of the fibula represented by a distinct malleolar bone articulating with the outer surface of the lower end of the tibia. Third and fourth metacarpals and metatarsals confluent into cannon-bones (fig. 1 B), and the toes enclosed in hoofs. Outer toes small and rudimentary, or in some cases entirely suppressed; their metacarpal or metatarsal bones never complete. Navicular and cuboid bones of tarsus united. The skull generally lacks a sagittal crest; and the condyle of the lower jaw is transversely elongated. Horns or antlers usually present, at least in the male sex. Left brachial artery arising from a common innominate trunk, instead of coming off separately from the aortic arch. Stomach with four complete cavities. Placenta cotyledonous. Teats 2 or 4. The group at the present day is divided into _Giraffidae_ (giraffe and okapi), _Cervidae_ (deer), _Antilocapridae_ (prongbuck), and _Bovidae_ (oxen, sheep, goats, antelopes, &c.). (See PECORA.) Tylopoda. The second group is represented at the present day by the camels (_Camelus_) of the Old, and the llamas (_Lama_) of the New World, collectively constituting the family _Camelidae_. They derive their name of Tylopoda ("boss-footed") from the circumstance that the feet form large cushion-like pads, supporting the weight of the body, while the toes have broad nails on their upper surface only, instead of being encased in hoofs. The cheek-teeth are selenodont, and one pair of upper incisors is retained, while some of the anterior premolars assume a canine-like shape, and are separated from the rest of the cheek-series. Auditory bulla filled with honeycombed bony tissue. Odontoid process of second vertebra semi-cylindrical; skull with a sagittal crest; and the condyle of the lower jaw rounded. Third and fourth metacarpals and metatarsals (which are alone present) fused into cannon-bones for the greater part of their length, but diverging inferiorly (fig. 1, C) and with their articular surfaces for the toes smooth, instead of ridged as in the Pecora. Navicular and cuboid bones of tarsus distinct. No horns or antlers. Stomach, although complex, differing essentially from that of the Pecora. Placenta diffuse, without cotyledons. Teats few. (See TYLOPODA.) In the same sectional group is included the North American family of oreodonts (_Oreodontidae_), which are much more primitive ruminants, with shorter necks and limbs, the full series of 44 teeth, all in apposition, and the metacarpal and metatarsal bones separate, and the toes generally of more normal type, although sometimes claw-like. (See OREODON.) The Eocene American genus _Homacodon_ is regarded as representing a third family group, the _Homacodontidae (= Pantolestidae_), in which the molars were of a bunodont type, and approximate to those of the Condylarthra from which this family appears to have sprung, and to have given origin on the one hand to the _Oreodontidae_, and on the other to the _Camelidae_. The family is represented in the Lower, or Wasatch, Eocene by _Trigonolestes_, in the Middle (Bridger) Eocene by _Homacodon_ (Pantolestes), and in the Upper (Uinta) Eocene by _Bunomeryx_. Tragulina. The third group is that represented by the chevrotains or mouse-deer, forming the family _Tragulidae_, with _Tragulus_ in south-eastern Asia and _Dorcatherium_ (or _Hyomoschus_) in equatorial Africa. The cheek-teeth are selenodont, as in the two preceding groups; there are no upper incisors, but there are long, narrow and pointed upper canines, which attain a large size in the males; the lower canines are incisor-like, as in the Pecora, and there are no caniniform premolars in either jaw. Cheek-teeth in a continuous series consisting of p. 3/3, m. 3/3. Odontoid process of axis conical. Fibula complete. Four complete toes on each foot. The middle metacarpals and metatarsals generally confluent, the outer ones (second and fifth) slender but complete, i.e. extending from the carpus or tarsus to the digit. Navicular, cuboid and ectocuneiform bones of tarsus united. Auditory bulla of skull filled with cancellar tissue. No frontal appendages. Ruminating, but the stomach with only three distinct compartments, the maniplies or third cavity of the stomach of the Pecora being rudimentary. Placenta diffused. (See CHEVROTAIN.) Anoplotherina. In this place must be mentioned the extinct Oligocene European group typified by the well-known genus _Anoplotherium_ of the Paris gypsum-quarries, and hence termed Anoplotherina, although the alternative title Dichobunoidea has been suggested. It includes the two families _Anoplotheriidae_ and _Dichobunidae_, of which the first died out with the Oligocene, while the second may have given origin to the Tragulina and perhaps the Pecora. There is the full series of 44 teeth, generally without any gaps, and most of the bones of the skeleton are separate and complete; while, in many instances at any rate, the tail was much longer than in any existing ungulates, and the whole bodily form approximated to that of a carnivore. The upper molars, which may be either selenodont or buno-selenodont, carry five cusps each, instead of the four characteristic of all the preceding groups; and they are all very low-crowned, so as to expose the whole of the valleys between the cusps. In _Anoplotherium_, some of the species of which were larger than tapirs, there were either two or three toes, the latter number being almost unique among the Artiodactyla. Allied genera are _Diplobune_ and _Dacrytherium_. The _Dichobunidae_ include the genus _Dichobune_, of which the species were small animals with buno-selenodont molars. _Xiphodon_ and _Dichodon_ represent another type with cutting premolars and selenodont molars; while _Caenotherium_ and _Plesiomeryx_ form yet another branch, with resemblances to the ruminants. The most interesting genera are however, the Upper Oligocene and Lower Miocene _Gelocus_ and _Prodremotherium_, which have perfectly selenodont teeth, and the third and fourth metacarpal and metatarsal bones respectively fused into an imperfect cannon-bone, with the reduction of the lateral metacarpals and metatarsals to mere remnants of their upper and lower extremities. While _Gelocus_ exhibits a marked approximation to the _Tragulidae, Prodremotherium_ comes nearer to the _Cervidae_, of which it not improbably indicates the ancestral type. The _Dichobunidae_ may be regarded as occupying a position analogous to that of the _Homacodontidae_ in the Tylopoda, and like the latter, are probably the direct descendants of Condylarthra. [Illustration: FIG 2.--Restoration of _Anoplotherium commune._] Suina. The last section of the Artiodactyla is that of the Suina, represented at the present day by the pigs (_Suidae_), and the hippopotamuses (_Hippopotamidae_), and in past times by the _Anthracotheriidae_, in which may probably be included the _Elotheriidae._ In the existing members of the group the cheek-teeth approximate to the bunodont type, although showing signs of being degenerate modifications of the selenodont modification. There is at least one pair of upper incisors, while the full series of 44 teeth may be present. The metacarpals and metatarsals are generally distinct (fig. 1 A), and never fuse into a complete cannon-bone; and the navicular and cuboid bones of the tarsus are separate. The odontoid process of the second vertebra is pig-like: and the tibia and fibula and radius and ulna are severally distinct. The stomach is simple or somewhat complex, and the placenta diffused. The _Suidae_ include the Old World pigs (_Suinae_) and the American peccaries (_Dicotylinae_), and are characterized by the snout terminating in a fleshy disk-like expansion, in the midst of which are perforated the nostrils; while the toes are enclosed in sharp hoofs, of which the lateral ones do not touch the ground. There is a caecum. The _Dicotylinae_ differ from the _Suinae_ in that the upper canines are directed downwards (instead of curving upwards) and have sharp cutting-edges, while the toes are four in front and three behind (instead of four on each foot), and the stomach is complex instead of simple. In the Old World a large number of fossil forms are known, of which the earliest is the Egyptian Eocene _Geniohyus._ Originally the family was an Old World type, but in the Miocene it gained access into North America, where the earliest form is _Bothriolabis_, an ancestral peccary showing signs of affinity with the European Miocene genus _Palaeochoerus._ (See SWINE and PECCARY.) The _Hippopotamidae_ are an exclusively Old World group, in which the muzzle is broad and rounded and quite unlike that of the _Suidae_, while the crowns of the cheek-teeth form a distinctly trefoil pattern, when partially worn, which is only foreshadowed in those of the latter. The short and broad teeth terminate in four subequal toes, protected by short rounded hoofs, and all reaching the ground. The hinder end of the lower jaw is provided with a deep descending flange. Both incisors and canines are devoid of roots and grow throughout life, the canines, and in the typical species one pair of lower incisors, growing to an immense size. The stomach is complex; but there is no caecum. Although now exclusively African, the family (of which all the representatives may be included in the single genus _Hippopotamus_, with several subgeneric groups) is represented in the Pliocene of Europe and the Lower Pliocene of northern India. Its place of origin cannot yet be determined. The extinct _Anthracotheriidae_ were evidently nearly allied to the _Hippopotamidae_, of which they are in all probability the ancestral stock. They agree, for instance, with that family in the presence of a descending flange at the hinder end of each side of the lower jaw; but their dentition is of a more generalized type, comprising the full series of 44 teeth, among which the incisors and canines are of normal form, but specially enlarged, and developing roots in the usual manner. The molars are partially selenodont in the typical genus _Anthracotherium_, with five cusps, or columns, on the crowns of those of the upper jaw, which are nearly square. The genus has a very wide distribution, extending from Europe through Asia to North America, and occurring in strata which are of Oligocene and Miocene age. In _Ancodon_ (_Hyopotamus_) the cusps on the molars are taller, so that the dentition is more decidedly selenodont; the distribution of this genus includes not only Europe, Asia and North Africa, but also Egypt where it occurs in Upper Eocene beds in company with the European genus _Rhagatherium_, which is nearer _Anthracotherium._ On the other hand, in _Merycopotamus_, of the Lower Pliocene of India and Burma, the upper molars have lost the fifth intermediate cusp of _Ancodon_; and thus, although highly selenodont, might be easily modified, by a kind of retrograde development, into the trefoil-columned molars of _Hippopotamus._ In the above genera, so far as is known, the feet were four-toed, although with the lateral digits relatively small; but in _Elotherium_ (or _Entelodon_), from the Lower Miocene of Europe and the Oligocene of North America, the two lateral digits in each foot had disappeared. This is the more remarkable seeing that _Elotherium_ may be regarded as a kind of bunodont _Anthracotherium._ It shows the characteristic hippopotamus-flange to the lower jaw, but has also a large descending process from the jugal bone of the zygomatic arch of the skull. Finally, we have in the Pliocene of India the genus _Tetraconodon_, remarkable for the enormous size attained by the bluntly conical premolars; as the molars are purely bunodont, this genus seems to be a late and specialized survivor of a primitive type. (R. L.*) ARTISAN, or ARTIZAN, a mechanic; a handicraftsman in distinction to an artist. The English word (from Late Lat. _artitianus_, instructed in arts) at one time meant "artist," but has been restricted to signify the operative workman only. ARTOIS, an ancient province of the north of France, corresponding to the present department of Pas de Calais, with the exclusion of the arrondissements of Boulogne and Montreuil, which belonged to Picardy. It is a rich and well-watered country, producing abundance of grain and hops, and yielding excellent pasture for cattle. The capital of the province was Arras, and the other important places were Saint-Omer, Bethune, Aire, Hesdin, Bapaume, Lens, Lillers, Saint-Pol and Saint-Venant. The name Artois (still more corrupted in "Arras") is derived from the Atrebates, who possessed the district in the time of Caesar. From the 9th to the 12th century Artois belonged to the counts of Flanders. It was bestowed in 1180 on Philip Augustus of France by Philip of Alsace, as the dowry of his niece Isabella of Hainaut. At her death in 1190, Baldwin IX., count of Flanders (d. 1206), and then his son-in-law, Ferrand (Ferdinand) of Portugal, count of Flanders, disputed the possession of the country with the king of France, Ferrand being in the coalition which was overthrown by Philip Augustus at Bouvines (1214). In 1237 Artois, which was raised to a countship the following year, was conferred as an appanage by Saint Louis on his brother Robert, who died on crusade in 1250. His son, Robert II., took part in the wars in Navarre, Sicily, Guienne and Flanders, and was killed at the battle of Courtrai in 1302. After his death, his son Philip having predeceased him (1298), Artois was adjudged to his daughter Mahaut, or Matilda, as against her nephew Robert, son of Philip, who attempted to support his claim to the countship by forged titles. Banished from France for this crime (1322), Robert of Artois took refuge in England, where he became earl of Richmond, and incited Edward III. to make war upon Philip of Valois. His descendants, the counts of Eu (q.v.), continued to style themselves counts of Artois. By the marriage of Mahaut (d. 1329) with Otto IV., Artois passed to the house of Burgundy, in whose possession it remained till the marriage of Mary, the daughter of Charles the Bold, to the archduke Maximilian brought it to the house of Austria. Louis XI., however, occupied portions of Artois, and the claims of Austria were contested by France until the treaty of Senlis (1493). The emperor Charles V. established the council of Artois, with sovereign authority. At the end of the Thirty Years' War Artois was again conquered by the French, and the conquest was ratified in the treaty of the Pyrenees (1659) by Spain, to whom the province had fallen in 1634. During the war between France and Holland (1672-77) and that of the Spanish Succession. Artois was invaded again, but the treaties of Nijmwegen (1678) and of Utrecht (1713) confirmed the sovereignty of France. The title of count of Artois was borne by Charles X. of France before his accession to the throne. This new creation became extinct on the death of the comte de Chambord in 1883. ART SALES. The practice of selling objects of art by auction in England dates from the latter part of the 17th century, when in most cases the names of the auctioneers were suppressed. Evelyn (under date June 21, 1693) mentions a "great auction of pictures (_Lord Melford's_) in the Banquetting House, Whitehall," and the practice is frequently referred to by other contemporary and later writers. Before the introduction of regular auctions the practice was, as in the case of the famous collection formed by Charles I., to price each object and invite purchasers, just as in other departments of commerce. But this was a slow process, especially in the case of pictures, and lacked the incentive of excitement. The first really important art collection to come under the hammer was that of Edward, earl of Oxford, dispersed by Cock, under the Piazza, Covent Garden, on 8th March 1741/2 and the five following days, six more days being required by the coins. Nearly all the leading men of the day, including Horace Walpole, attended or were represented at this sale, and the prices varied from five shillings for an anonymous bishop's "head" to 165 guineas for Vandyck's group of "Sir Kenelm Digby, lady, and son." The next great dispersal was Dr Richard Mead's extensive collection, of which the pictures, coins and gems, &c., were sold by Langford in February and March 1754, the sale realizing the total, unprecedented up to that time, of L16,069. The thirty-eight days' sale (1786) of the Duchess of Portland's collection is very noteworthy, from the fact that it included the celebrated Portland vase, now in the British Museum. Many other interesting and important 18th-century sales might be mentioned. High prices did not become general until the Calonne, Trumbull (both 1795) and Bryan (1798) sales. As to the quality of the pictures which had been sold by auction up to the latter part of the 18th century, it may be assumed that this was not high. The importation of pictures and other objects of art had assumed extensive proportions by the end of the 18th century, but the genuine examples of the Old Masters probably fell far short of 1%. England was felt to be the only safe asylum for valuable articles, but the home which was intended to be temporary often became permanent. Had it not been for the political convulsions on the continent, England, instead of being one of the richest countries in the world in art treasures, would have been one of the poorest. This fortuitous circumstance had, moreover, another effect, in that it greatly raised the critical knowledge of pictures. Genuine works realized high prices, as, for example, at Sir William Hamilton's sale (1801), when Beckford paid 1300 guineas for the little picture of "A Laughing Boy" by Leonardo da Vinci; and when at the Lafontaine sales (1807 and 1811) two Rembrandts each realized 5000 guineas, "The Woman taken in Adultery," now in the National Gallery, and "The Master Shipbuilder," now at Buckingham Palace. The Beckford sale of 1823 (41 days, L43,869) was the forerunner of the great art dispersal of the 19th century; Horace Walpole's accumulation at Strawberry Hill, 1842 (24 days, L33,450), and the Stowe collection, 1848 (41 days, L75,562), were also celebrated. They comprised every phase of art work, and in all the quality was of a very high order. They acted as a most healthy stimulus to art collecting, a stimulus which was further nourished by the sales of the superb collection of Ralph Bernal in 1855 (32 days, L62,690), and of the almost equally fine but not so comprehensive collection of Samuel Rogers, 1856 (18 days, L42,367). Three years later came the dispersal of the 1500 pictures which formed Lord Northwick's gallery at Cheltenham (pictures and works of art, 18 days, L94,722). Towards the latter part of the first half of the 19th century an entirely new race of collectors gradually came into existence; they were for the most part men who had made, or were making, large fortunes in the various industries of the midlands and north of England and other centres. They were untrammelled by "collecting" traditions, and their patronage was almost exclusively extended to the artists of the day. The dispersals of these collections began in 1863 with the Bicknell Gallery, and continued at irregular intervals for many years, e.g. Gillott (1872), Mendel (1875), Wynn Ellis and Albert Levy (1876), Albert Grant (1877) and Munro of Novar (1878). These patrons purchased at munificent prices either direct from the easel or from the exhibitions not only pictures in oils but also water-colour drawings. As a matter of investment their purchases frequently realized far more than the original outlay; sometimes, however, the reverse happened, as, for instance, in the case of Landseer's "Otter Hunt," for which Baron Grant is said to have paid L10,000 and which realized shortly afterwards only 5650 guineas. One of the features of the sales of the 'seventies was the high appreciation of water-colour drawings. At the Gillott sale (1872) 160 examples realized L27,423, Turner's "Bamborough Castle" fetching 3150 gns.; at the Quilter sale (1875) David Cox's "Hayfield," for which a dealer paid him 50 gns. in 1850, brought 2810 gns. The following are the most remarkable prices of later years. In 1895 Cox's "Welsh Funeral" (which cost about L20) sold for 2400 gns., and Burne-Jones's "Hesperides" for 2460 gns. In 1908, 13 Turner drawings fetched L12,415 (Acland-Hood sale) and 7 brought L11,077 (Holland sale), the "Heidelberg" reaching 4200 gns. For Fred Walker's "Harbour of Refuge" 2580 gns. were paid (Tatham sale) and 2700 gns. for his "Marlow Ferry" (Holland). The demand for pictures by modern artists, whose works sold at almost fabulous prices in the 'seventies, has somewhat declined; but during all its _furore_ there was still a small band of collectors to whom the works of the Old Masters more especially appealed. The dispersal of such collections as the Bredel (1875), Watts Russell (1875), Foster of Clewer Manor (1876), the Hamilton Palace (17 days, L397,562)--the greatest art sale in the annals of Great Britain--Bale (1882), Leigh Court (1884), and Dudley (1892) resulted, as did the sale of many minor collections each season, in many very fine works of the Old Masters finding eager purchasers at high prices. A striking example of the high prices given was the L24,250 realized by the pair of Vandyck portraits of a Genoese senator and his wife in the Peel sale, 1900. Since the last quarter of the 19th century the chief feature in art sales has been the demand for works, particularly female portraits, by Reynolds, his contemporaries and successors. This may be traced to the South Kensington Exhibitions of 1867 and 1868 and the annual winter exhibitions at Burlington House, which revealed an unsuspected wealth and charm in the works of many English artists who had almost fallen into oblivion. A few of the most remarkable prices for such pictures may be quoted: Reynolds's "Lady Betty Delme" (1894), 11,000 gns.; Romney's "The Ladies Spencer" (1896), 10,500 gns.; Gainsborough's "Duchess of Devonshire" (1876), 10,100 gns. (for the history of its disappearance see GAINSBOROUGH, THOMAS), "Maria Walpole," 12,100 gns. (Duke of Cambridge's sale, 1904); Constable's "Stratford Mill" (1895), 8500 gns.; Hoppner's "Lady Waldegrave" (1906), 6000 gns.; Lawrence's "Childhood's Innocence" (1907), 8000 gns.; Raeburn's "Lady Raeburn" (1905), 8500 gns. Here may also be mentioned the 12,600 gns. paid for Turner's "Mortlake Terrace" in 1908 (Holland sale). The "appreciation" of the modern continental schools, particularly the French, has been marked since 1880; of high prices paid may be mentioned Corot's "Danse des Amours" (1898), L7200; Rosa Bonheur's "Denizens of the Highlands" (1888), 5550 gns.; Jules Breton's "First Communion," L9100 in New York (1886); Meissonier's "Napoleon I. in the Campaign of Paris," 12-1/4 in. by 9-1/4 in. (1882), 5800 gns., and "The Sign Painter" (1891), 6450 gns. High prices are also fetched by pictures of Daubigny, Fortuny, Gallait, Gerome, Troyon and Israels. The most marked feature of late has been the demand for the 18th-century painters Watteau, Boucher, Fragonard, Pater and Lancret; thus "La Ronde Champetre" of the last named brought L11,200 at the Say Sale in 1908, and Fragonard's "Le Reveil de Venus" L5520 at the Sedelmeyer sale, 1907. "Specialism" is the one important development in art collecting which has manifested itself since the middle of the 19th century. This accounts for and explains the high average quality of the Wellesley (1866), the Buccleuch (1888) and the Holford (1893) collections of drawings by the Old Masters; for the Sibson Wedgwood (1877), the Duc de Forli Dresden (1877), the Shuldham blue and white porcelain (1880), the Benson collection of antique coins (1909), and for the objects of art at the Massey-Mainwaring and Lewis-Hill sales of 1907. Very many other illustrations in nearly every department of art collecting might be quoted--the superb series of Marlborough gems (1875 and 1899) might be included in this category but for the fact that it was formed chiefly in the 18th century. The appreciation--commercially at all events--of mezzotint portraits and of portraits printed in colours, after masters of the early English school, was one of the most remarkable features in art sales during the last years of the 19th century. The shillings of fifty years before were then represented by pounds. The Fraser collection (December 4 to 6, 1900) realized about ten times the original outlay, the mezzotint of the "Sisters Frankland," after Hoppner, by W. Ward, selling for 290 guineas as against 10 guineas paid for it about thirty years previously. The H.A. Blyth sale (March 11 to 13, 1901, 346 lots, L21,717: 10s.) of mezzotint portraits was even more remarkable, and as a collection it was the choicest sold within recent times, the engravings being mostly in the first state. The record prices were numerous, and, in many cases, far surpassed the prices which Sir Joshua Reynolds received for the original pictures; e.g. the exceptionally fine example of the first state of the "Duchess of Rutland," after Reynolds, by V. Green, realized 1000 guineas, whereas the artist received only L150 for the painting itself. Even this unprecedented price for a mezzotint portrait was exceeded on the 30th of April 1901, when an example of the first published state of "Mrs Carnac," after Reynolds, by J.R. Smith, sold for 1160 guineas. At the Louis Huth sale (1905) 83 lots brought nearly L10,000, Reynolds's "Lady Bampfylde" by T. Watson, first state before letters, unpublished, fetching 1200 guineas. Such prices as these and many others which might be quoted are exceptional, but they were paid for objects of exceptional rarity or quality. It is not necessary to pursue the chronicle of recent sales, which have become a feature of every season. It is worth mentioning, however, that the Holland sale, in June 1908, realized L138,118 (432 lots), a "record" sum for a collection of pictures mainly by modern artists; and that for the Rodolphe Kann collection (Paris) of pictures and objects of art, including 11 magnificent Rembrandts, Messrs Duveen paid L1,000,000 in