gifts marked him out for the highest posts. He was soon nominated provincial of Naples and then of Rome; and during this office he offered to join the Jesuit mission to England that set out under Robert Parsons (q.v.) in the spring of 1580. The following year, being then only thirty-seven years old, he was elected, by a large majority, general of the society in succession to Mercurian, to the great surprise of Gregory XIII.; but the extraordinary political ability he displayed, and the vast increase that came to the Society during his long generalate, abundantly justified the votes of the electors. He, together with Lainez, may be regarded as the real founder of the Society as it is known to history. A born ruler, he secured all authority in his own hands, and insisted that those who prided themselves on their obedience should act up to the profession. In his first letter “On the happy increase of the Society” (25th of July 1581), he treats of the necessary qualifications for superiors, and points out that government should be directed not by the maxims of human wisdom but by those of supernatural prudence. He successfully quelled a revolt among the Spanish Jesuits, which was supported by Philip II., and he made use in this matter of Parsons. A more difficult task was the management of Sixtus V., who was hostile to the Society. By consummate tact and boldness Aquaviva succeeded in playing the king against the pope, and Sixtus against Philip. For prudential reasons, he silenced Mariana, whose doctrine on tyrannicide had produced deep indignation in France; and he also appears to have discountenanced the action of the French Jesuits in favour of the League, and was thus able to secure solid advantages when Henry IV. overcame the confederacy. To him is due the Jesuit system of education in the book Ratio atque institutio studiorum (Rome, 1586). But the Dominicans denounced it to the Inquisition, and it was condemned both in Spain and in Rome, on account of some opinions concerning the Thomist doctrines of the divine physical premotion in secondary causes and predestination. The incriminated chapters were withdrawn in the edition of 1591. In the fierce disputes that arose between the Jesuit theologians and the Dominicans on the subject of grace, Aquaviva managed, under Clement VIII. and Paul V., to save his party from a condemnation that at one time seemed probable. He died at Rome on the 31st of January 1615, leaving the Society numbering 13,000 members in 550 houses and 15 provinces. The subsequent influence exercised by the Jesuits, in their golden age, was largely due to the far-seeing policy of Aquaviva, who is undoubtedly the greatest general that has governed the Society. (E. Tn.)
AQUEDUCT (Lat. aqua, water, and ducere, to lead; Gr. ὑδραγωγεῖον, ὑδραγώγιον, ὑπόνομος), a term properly including artificial works of every kind by means of which water is conveyed from one place to another, but generally used in a more limited sense. It is, in fact, rarely employed except in cases where the work is of considerable magnitude and importance, and where the water flows naturally by gravitation. The most important purpose for which aqueducts are constructed is that of conveying pure water, from sources more or less distant, to large masses of population. Aqueducts are either below ground, on the surface, or raised on walls either solid or pierced with arches; to the last the term is often confined in popular language. The choice of method naturally depends on the contour of the country.
I. Ancient Aqueducts.—In Egypt, Babylonia and Assyria—flat countries traversed by big rivers and subject to floods—water was supplied by means of open canals with large basins. In Persia devices of all kinds were adopted according to the nature of the country. In relation to the Phoenician.achievements of Greece and Rome, the Phoenicians are the most important among pre-classical engineers. In Cyprus water was supplied to temples by rock-cut subterranean conduits carried across intervening valleys in siphons. Such conduits have been found near Citium, Amathus, &c. (Cesnola, Cyprus, pp. 187, 341). In Syria the most striking of Phoenician waterworks is the well of Ras-el-Ain near Tyre, which consisted of four strong octagonal towers through which rises to a height of 18 to 20 ft. the water from four deep artesian wells. The water thus accumulated was carried off in conduits to reservoirs near the shore, and thence in vessels or skins to the island. The aqueduct across to the island is, of course, of Roman work.
It is not possible in all cases to find a satisfactory date for the numerous conduits which have supplied Jerusalem; some probably go back to the times of the kings of Judah. The principal reservoir consists of the three Pools of Solomon which supplied the old aqueduct; the highest is Jerusalem.about 20 ft. above the middle one and 40 above the lowest. These pools collected the water from Ain Saleh and other springs, and sent it to the city by two conduits. The higher of these—probably the older—was partly a rock-cut canal, partly carried on masonry; the siphon-pipe system was adopted across the lower ground near Rachel’s Tomb, where the pipe (15 in. wide) is formed of large pierced stones embedded in rubble masonry. The lower conduit is still complete; it winds so much as to be altogether some 20 m. long. Near the Birket-es-Sultan it passes over the valley of Hinnom on nine low arches and reaches the city on the hill above the Tyropeon valley. It enters the Haram enclosure at the Gate of the Chain (Bāb es-Silsila), outside which is a basin 84 ft. by 42 by 24 deep. It is interesting to note in the case of the underground tunnel which brought water from the Virgin’s Fountain to the pool of Siloam, that the two boring parties had no certain means of keeping the line; there is evidence that they had to make shafts to discover their position, and that ultimately the parties almost passed one another. Though the direct distance is 1100 ft., the length of the conduit is over 1700 ft. Perrot and Chipiez incline to attribute the Pools of Solomon to the Asmonaeans, followed by Roman governors, whereas the earlier tunnels of the Kedron and Tyropeon valley may be Punic-Jewish (see also Palest. Explor. Fund Mem., “Jerusalem,” pp. 346-365). Besides these conduits excavation has discovered traces of many other cisterns, tunnels and conduits of various kinds. Many of them point to periods of great prosperity and engineering enterprise which gave to the city a water-supply far superior to that which exists at present.
See the publications of the Palestine Exploration Fund; A. S. Murray’s Handbook to Syria and Palestine (1903), pp. 63-67; Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art in Sardinia, Judaea, &c. (Eng. trans., 1890), pp. 321 ff.; other authorities quoted under Jerusalem.
The earliest attempts in Europe to solve the problems of water-supply were made by the Greeks, who perhaps derived their ideas from the Phoenicians. It has generally been held, partly on the strength of a passage in Strabo (v. 3. 8, p. 235), and partly owing to the comparative unimportance Greek.of the remains discovered, that the Greek works were altogether inferior to the Roman. Research in the Greek towns of Asia Minor, together with a juster appreciation of the remains as a whole, must be held to modify this view. Among the earliest examples of Greek work are the tunnels or emissaria which drained Lake Copais in Boeotia; these, though not strictly aqueducts, were undoubtedly the precursors of such works, consisting as they did of subterranean tunnels (ὑπόνομοι) with vertical shafts (φρεατίαι), sixteen of which are still recognizable, the deepest being about 150 ft. They may be compared with that described by Polybius as conveying water from Taurus to Hecatompylos, and with numerous other remains in Asia Minor, Syria, Phoenicia and Palmyra. Popular legend ascribed them to Cadmus, just as Argos referred the irrigation of its lands to Danaüs. They are undoubtedly of great antiquity.
The insufficiency of water, supplied by natural springs and cisterns hewn in the rock, which in an early age had satisfied the small communities of Greece, had become a pressing public question by the time of the Tyrants, of whom Polycrates of Samos and Peisistratus of Athens were distinguished for their wisdom and enterprise in this respect. The former obtained the services of Eupalinus, an engineer celebrated for the skill with which he had carried out the works for the water-supply of Megara (see Athen. Mittheil. xxv., 1900, 23) under the direction of the Tyrant Theagenes (c. 625 B.C.). At Samos the difficulty lay in a hill which rose between the town and the water source. Through this hill Eupalinus cut a tunnel 8 ft. broad, 8 ft. high
