Other houses of the Brothers of Common Life, otherwise called the “Modern Devotion,” were in rapid succession established in the chief cities of the Low Countries and north and central Germany, so that there were in all upwards of forty houses of men; while those of women doubled that figure, the first having been founded by Groot himself at Deventer.
The ground-idea was to reproduce the life of the first Christians as described in Acts iv. The members took no vows and were free to leave when they chose; but so long as they remained they were bound to observe chastity, to practise personal poverty, putting all their money and earnings into the common fund, to obey the rules of the house and the commands of the rector, and to exercise themselves in self-denial, humility and piety. The rector was chosen by the community and was not necessarily a priest, though in each house there were a few priests and clerics. The majority, however, were laymen, of all kinds and degrees—nobles, artisans, scholars, students, labouring men. The clerics preached and instructed the people, working chiefly among the poor; they also devoted themselves to the copying of manuscripts, in order thereby to earn something for the common fund; and some of them taught in the schools. Of the laymen, the educated copied manuscripts, the others worked at various handicrafts or at agriculture. After the religious services of the morning the Brothers scattered for the day’s work, the artisans going to the workshops in the city,—for the idea was to live and work in the world, and not separated from it, like the monks. Their rule was that they had to earn their livelihood, and must not beg. This feature seemed a reflection on the mendicant orders, and the idea of a community life without vows and not in isolation from everyday life, was looked upon as something new and strange, and even as bearing affinities to the Beghards and other sects, at that time causing trouble to both Church and state. And so opposition arose to the Modern Devotion, and the controversy was carried to the legal faculty at Cologne University, which gave a judgment strongly in their favour. The question, for all that, was not finally settled until the council of Constance (1414), when their cause was triumphantly defended by Pierre d’Ailly and Gerson. For a century after this the Modern Devotion flourished exceedingly, and its influence on the revival of religion in the Netherlands and north Germany in the 15th century was wide and deep. It has been the fashion to treat Groot and the Brothers of Common Life as “Reformers before the Reformation”; but Schulze, in the Protestant Realencyklopädie, is surely right in pronouncing this view quite unhistorical—except on the theory that all interior spiritual religion is Protestant: he shows that at the Reformation hardly any of the Brothers embraced Lutheranism, only a single community going over as a body to the new religion. During the second half of the 16th century the institute gradually declined, and by the middle of the 17th all its houses had ceased to exist.
Authorities.—The chief authorities are Thomas à Kempis, Lives of Groot and his Disciples and Chronicle of Mount St Agnes (both works translated by J. P. Arthur, the former under the title Founders of the New Devotion, 1905); Busch, Chronicle of Windesheim (ed. Grube, 1887). Much has been written on the subject in Dutch and German; in English, S. Kettlewell, Thomas à Kempis and the Brothers of Common Life (1882) (but see Arthur in the Prefaces to above-named books); for a shorter sketch, F. R. Cruise, Thomas à Kempis (1887). An excellent article in Herzog-Hauck, Realencyklopädie (3rd ed.), “Brüder des gemeinsamen Lebens,” supplies copious information with references to all the literature; see also Max Heimbucher, Orden und Kongregationen (1897), ii. § 123. The part played by the Brothers of Common Life in the religious and educational movements of the time may be studied in Ludwig Pastor’s History of the Popes from the close of the Middle Ages, or J. Janssen’s History of the German People. (E. C. B.)
BROUGH, ROBERT (1872–1905), British painter, was born at Invergordon, Ross-shire. He was educated at Aberdeen, and, whilst apprenticed for over six years as lithographer to Messrs Gibb & Co., attended the night classes at the local art school. He then entered the Royal Scottish Academy, and in the first year took the Stuart prize for figure painting, the Chalmers painting bursary, and the Maclaine-Walters medal for composition. After two years in Paris under J.P. Laurens and Benjamin-Constant at Julian’s atelier, he settled in Aberdeen in 1894 as a portrait painter and political cartoonist. A portrait of Mr W. D. Ross first drew attention to his talent in 1896, and in the following year he scored a marked success at the Royal Academy with his “Fantaisie en Folie,” now at the National Gallery of British Art (Tate Gallery). Two of his paintings, “'Twixt Sun and Moon” and “Childhood of St Anne of Brittany,” are at the Venice municipal gallery. Brough’s art is influenced by Raeburn and by modern French training, but it strikes a very personal note. Robert Brough met his death from injuries received in a railway disaster in 1905, his early death being a notable loss to British art.
BROUGHAM, JOHN (1814–1880), British actor, was born at Dublin on the 9th of May 1814, and was educated for a surgeon. Owing to family misfortunes he was thrown upon his own resources and made his first appearance on the London stage in 1830, at the Tottenham Street theatre in Tom and Jerry, in which he played six characters. In 1831 he was a member of Madame Vestris’s company, and wrote his first play, a burlesque. He remained with Madame Vestris as long as she and Charles Mathews retained Covent Garden, and he collaborated with Dion Boucicault in writing London Assurance, Dazzle being one of his best parts. In 1840 he managed the Lyceum theatre, for which he wrote several light burlesques, but in 1842 he moved to the United States, where he became a member of W. E. Burton’s company, for which he wrote several comedies. Later he was the manager of Niblo’s Garden, and in 1850 opened Brougham’s Lyceum, which, like his next speculation, the lease of the Bowery theatre, was not financially a success. He was later connected with Wallack’s and Daly’s theatres, and wrote plays for both. In 1860 he returned to London, where he adapted or wrote several plays, including The Duke’s Motto for Fechter. After the Civil War he returned to New York. Brougham’s theatre was opened in 1869 with his comedy Better Late than Never, but this managerial experience was also unfortunate, and he took to playing with various stock companies. His last appearance was in 1879 as O’Reilly, the detective, in Boucicault’s Rescued, and he died in New York on the 7th of June 1880. Brougham was the author of nearly 100 plays, most of them now forgotten. He was the founder of the Lotus Club in New York, and for a time its president. He also edited there in 1852 a comic paper called The Lantern, and published two collections of miscellaneous writings, A Basket of Chips and The Bunsby Papers. Brougham is said to have been the original of Harry Lorrequer in Charles Lever’s novel. He was twice married, in 1838 to Emma Williams (d. 1865), and in 1844 to Mrs Annette Hawley (d. 1870), both actresses.
BROUGHAM, a four-wheeled closed carriage, seating two or more persons, and drawn by a single horse or pair, or propelled by motor. The modern “brougham” has developed and taken its name from the “odd little kind of garden-chair” described by Thomas Moore, which the first Lord Brougham had made by a coachmaker to his own design.
BROUGHAM and VAUX, HENRY PETER BROUGHAM, 1st Baron (1778–1868), lord chancellor of England, was born at Edinburgh on the 19th of September 1778. He was the eldest son of Henry Brougham and Eleanora, daughter of the Rev. James Syme. In his later years he was wont to trace his paternal descent to Uduardus de Broham, in the reign of Henry II., but no real connexion has been established between the ancient lords of Brougham castle, whose inheritance passed by marriage from the Viponts into the family of the De Cliffords, and the Broughams of Scales Hall, from whom the chancellor was really descended. Entering the high school of Edinburgh when barely seven, he left, having risen to be head of the school, in 1791. He entered the university of Edinburgh in 1792, and devoted himself chiefly to the study of natural science and mathematics, contributing in 1795 a paper to the Royal Society on some new phenomenon of light and colours, which was printed in the Transactions of that body. A paper on porisms was published in the same manner in 1798, and in 1803 his scientific
