woman's festival, and seems to have been celebrated chiefly by courtesans and others associated in the worship of Aphrodite. It is obviously the worship of a spirit of vegetation, who is believed to have a short life, die, and then rise again to renewed life for a season. Similar rites were widely spread, and in Phœnicia were associated with Thammuz. The theory that the name and worship of Adonis are Semitic is not proved, though there can be no doubt that the form of the earlier Greek cult was powerfully influenced by the ecstatic and orgiastic rites of the eastern Mediterranean peoples.
ADONIS. A genus of plants of the natural order Ranunculaceæ. The species are all herbaceous — some of them annual and some perennial. Several are natives of Europe, but only one, Adonis autumnalis, sometimes called Pheasant's Eye, is a doubtful native of Great Britain, where it occurs as a weed in wheat fields. It has become sparingly naturalized in several places in the United States. Its bright scarlet petals have obtained for it the name of Flos Adonis, their color having been fancifully ascribed to their being stained with the blood of Adonis. It is a well-known ornament of our gardens, in which also Adonis æstivalis frequently appears, and Adonis vernalis, a perennial species common upon the lower hills of the middle and south of Germany, with early and beautiful flowers.
ADO′NI-ZE′DEK (Heb., Zedek is lord). A king of Jerusalem who opposed resistance to the invasion of southern Palestine by tribes afterward forming a part of the kingdom of Judah about the beginning of the twelfth century B.C. Zedek was a god worshiped in Syria and southern Arabia. The account in Judges i. is more credible than that in Joshua x. Adoni-bezek is probably a scribal error for Adoni-zedek. No place called Bezek has been found, and "Lord of Bezek" would not be a natural name. No god by the name of Bezek is known. On the other hand, Adoni-zedek reminds one strongly of Melchizedek, "Zedek is king," another ruler of Jerusalem (Genesis xiv).
ADOP′TIAN CON′TROVERSY, The. An echo of the Arian controversy. It originated toward the end of the eighth century in Spain. the country in which the doctrine of Arius had longest held out. Elipandus, Archbishop of Toledo, and Felix, the learned bishop of Urgel, advanced the opinion that Christ, in respect of
his divine nature, was doubtless by nature and generation the Son of God; but that as to his human nature, he must be considered as only declared and "adopted" through the divine grace to be the first-born son of God (Romans viii: 29), just as all holy men are to be adopted as sons of God, although in a less lofty sense. The flame of controversy thus kindled spread into the Frankish Empire, the special domain of "Catholic" Christianity, and gave occasion to two synods, one held at Ratisbon (702), and another at Frankfort (794), in which Charlemagne took part in person, and which condemned Adoptianism as heresy. The Catholic doctrine of the unity of the two natures of Christ in one divine person and the consequent impossibility of there being a twofold Son — an original and an adopted — was upheld by Alcuin and the other learned men of Charlemagne's court. At the synod of Aix-la-Chapelle (799). Felix, yielding to compulsion, recanted his opinions, without, as it would seem, being convinced. Elipandus adhered fanatically to his views, which were in after times defended by Folmar (1160), Durandus (died 1334). and the Protestant divine Calixtus (died 1656). Adoptianism has been erroneously attributed to Duns Scotus.
ADOP′TION (Lat. adoptio, a taking or receiving of one in place of a child, from ad, to + optare, to choose, select). A legal institution of much importance in early society, because of the importance attached to the perpetuation of household worship (particularly the worship of deceased ancestors); also because before the introduction of testaments an heir could be created only by adoption. In Roman law there were two forms of adoption: viz., adrogation and adoption in the strict sense. Adrogation was the earlier form. It was possible only where the person to be adopted was an independent person (sui juris), i.e., was not under the authority of a father or grandfather. It took place originally in the patrician assembly (comitia curiata) with the coöperation of the pontifices. Under the emperors it was effected by an imperial rescript. Adoption in the strict sense was the transfer of a person from the authority of his father or grandfather into the paternal authority of the adoptive father. It was accomplished by formal acts in the presence of a magistrate. It was usually requisite, alike in adrogation and adoption, that the adoptive father should have no children at the time, and no reasonable prospect of having any. He was also required to be eighteen years older than the person adopted. Females could not be adrogated, nor, until the third century, could they adrogate. They could be adopted, but they could not adopt. The effect of adrogation was to place the adopted person in the same legal position for nearly all purposes as a child born in wedlock. The same results originally attached to adoption, but Justinian introduced important restrictions. Adoption was unknown to the law of the Teutonic nations; and though most of the States of the Continent have borrowed it, with some modifications, from the Roman law, it has never existed as an institution in England or Scotland, either at common law or by statute.
As English common law made no provision for the adoption of children, the subject is regulated by statute in many States of the United States. While State legislation upon this topic differs in detail, its characteristic features are as follows: Any inhabitant of the State, of legal age, and competent to contract, may adopt a child, provided that the spouse of a married adopter, the living parents of the adopted, and the child, also, if above a certain age (usually twelve or fourteen years), consent in writing to the adoption. In some States the transaction is consummated by an order of court, in others by a deed duly acknowledged and recorded. As the claims of an adopted child are in derogation of the common law rights of the heirs and next of kin of the adopter, our courts are disposed to put a strict construction on these statutes, and to treat as invalid an adoption which has not been made in a manner which conforms to every statutory requirement. As a rule, the legal relation between adopting parents and adopted children is that of natural parent and child, including the powers of parental control, the duties of filial obedience, and reciprocal property rights by
