History for ready reference, Volume 1, A-Elba

by J. N. Larned

sessions, is incompatible with those of a Senator or Deputy.
The law will specify the remunerations that the members of the
national Legislature shall receive for their services. And
whenever an increase of said remunerations is decreed, the law
that sanctions it will not begin to be in force until the
following period when the Chambers that sanctioned it shall
have been renewed in their entirety.
Article 38.
The Senators and Deputies shall enjoy immunity from the 20th
day of January of each year until thirty days after the close
of the sessions and this consists in the suspension of all
civil or criminal proceeding, whatever may be its origin or
nature; when anyone shall perpetrate an act that merits
corporal punishment the investigation shall continue until the
end of the summing up and shall remain in this state while the
term of immunity continues.
Article 39.
The Congress will be presided over by the President of the
Senate and the presiding officer of the Chamber of Deputies
will act as Vice-President.
{606}
Article 40.
The members of the Chambers are not responsible for the
opinions they express or the discourses they pronounce in
session.
Article 41.
Senators and deputies that accept office or commission from
the National Executive thereby leave vacant the posts of
legislators in the Chambers to which they were elected.
Article 42.
Nor can senators and deputies make contracts with the general
Government or conduct the prosecution of claims of others
against it.
Article 43.
The National Legislature has the following prerogatives:
(1) to dissolve the controversies that may arise between two
or more States;
(2) to locate the Federal District in an unpopulated territory
not exceeding three miles square, where will be constructed
the capital city of the Republic. This district will be
neutral territory, and no other elections will be there held
than those that the law determines for the locality, The
district will be provisionally that which the constituent
assembly designated or that which the National Legislature may
designate;
(3) to organize everything relating to the custom-houses,
whose income will constitute the treasure of the Union until
these incomes are supplied from other sources;
(4) to dispose in everything relating to the habitation and
security of ports and seacoasts;
(5) to create and organize the postal service and to fix the
charges for transportation of correspondence;
(6) to form the National Codes in accordance with paragraph
19, article 13 of this Constitution;
(7) to fix the value, type law, weight, and coinage of
national money, and to regulate the admission and circulation
of foreign money;
(8) to designate the coat-of-arms and the national flag which
will be the same for all the States;
(9) to create, abolish, and fix salaries for national offices;
(10) to determine everything in relation to the national debt;
(11) to contract loans upon the credit of the nation;
(12) to dictate necessary measures to perfect the census of
the current population and the national statistics;
(13) to annually fix the armed forces by sea and land and to
dictate the army regulations;
(14) to decree rules for the formation and substitution of the
forces referred to in the preceding clause;
(15) to declare war and to require the National Executive to
negotiate peace;
(16) to ratify or reject the contracts for national public
works made by the President with the approval of the Federal
Council, without which requisite they will not be carried into
effect;
[Transcriber's note: (17) is missing.]
(18) to annually fix the estimates for public expenses;
(19) to promote whatever conduces to the prosperity of the
country and to its advancement in the general knowledge of the
arts and sciences;
(20) to fix and regulate the national weights and measures;
(21) to grant amnesties;
(22) to establish, under the names of territories, special
regulations for the government of regions inhabited by
unconquered and uncivilized Indians. Such territories will be
under the immediate supervision of the Executive of the Union;
(23) to establish the modes of procedure and to designate the
penalties to be imposed by the Senate in the trials originated
in the Chamber of Deputies;
(24) to increase the basis of population for the election of
deputies;
(25) to permit or refuse the admission of foreigners into the
service of the Republic;
(26) to make laws in respect to retirements from the military
service and army pensions;
(27) to dictate the law of responsibility on the part of all
national employés and those of the States for infraction of
the constitution and the general laws of the Union;
(28) to determine the mode of conceding military rank or
promotion;
(29) to elect the Federal Council provided for in this
constitution and to convoke the alternates of the senators and
deputies who may have been chosen for it.
Article 44.
Besides the preceding enumeration the National Legislature may
pass such laws of general character as may be necessary, but
in no case can they be promulgated, much less executed, if
they conflict with this constitution, which defines the
prerogatives of the public powers in Venezuela.
Article 45.
The laws and decrees of the National Legislature may be
proposed by the members of either chamber, provided that the
respective projects are conformed to the rules established for
the Parliament of Venezuela.
Article 46.
After a project may have been presented, it will be read and
considered in order to be admitted; and if it is, it must
undergo three discussions, with an interval of at least one
day between each, observing the rules established for debate.
Article 47.
The projects approved in the chamber in which they were
originated will be passed to the other for the purposes
indicated in the preceding article, and if they are not
rejected they will be returned to the chamber whence they
originated, with the amendments they may have undergone.
Article 48.
If the chamber of their origin does not agree to the
amendments, it may insist and send its written reasons to the
other. They may also assemble together in Congress and
deliberate, in general commission, over the mode of agreement,
but if this can not be reached, the project will be of no
effect after the chamber of its origin separately decides upon
the ratification of its insistence.
Article 49.
Upon the passing of the projects from one to the other
chamber, the days on which they have been discussed will be
stated.
Article 50.
The law reforming another law must be fully engrossed and the
former law, in all its parts, will be annulled.
Article 51.
In the laws this form will be used: "The Congress of the
United States of Venezuela decrees."
Article 52.
The projects defeated in one legislature cannot be
reintroduced except in another.
Article 53.
The projects pending in a chamber at the close of the sessions
must undergo the same three discussions in succeeding
legislatures.
Article 54.
Laws are annulled with the same formalities established for
their sanction.
Article 55.
When the ministers of Cabinet may have sustained, in a
chamber, the unconstitutionality of a project by word or in
writing, and, notwithstanding this, it may have been
sanctioned as law, the National Executive, with the
affirmative vote of the Federal Council, will suspend its
execution and apply to the legislatures of the States, asking
their vote in the matter.
Article 56.
In case of the foregoing article, each State will represent
one vote expressed by the majority of the members of the
legislature present, and the result will be sent to the High
Federal Court in this form: "I confirm" or "I reject."
{607}
Article 57.
If a majority of the legislatures of the States agree with the
Federal Executive, the High Federal Court will confirm the
suspension, and the Federal Executive himself will render an
account to the next Congress relative to all that has been
done in the matter.
Article 58.
The laws will not be observed until after being published in
the solemn form established.
Article 59.
The faculty conceded to sanction a law is not to be delegated.
Article 60.
No legislative disposition will have a retroactive effect,
except in matters of judicial procedure and that which imposes
a lighter penalty.
Article 61.
There will be a Federal Council composed of one senator and
one deputy for each State and of one more deputy for the
Federal District, who will be elected by the Congress each two
years from among the respective representations of the States
composing the Federation and from that of the Federal
District. This election will take place in the first fifteen
days of the meeting of Congress, in the first and third year
of the constitutional period.
Article 62.
The Federal Council elects from its members the President of
the United States of Venezuela, and in the same manner the
person who shall act in his stead in case of his temporal or
permanent disability during his term. The election of a person
to be President of the United States of Venezuela who is not a
member of the Federal Council, as well as of those who may
have to act in his stead in case of his temporal or permanent
disability, is null of right and void of efficacy.
Article 63.
The members of the Federal Council hold office for two years,
the same as the President of the United States of Venezuela,
whose term is of equal duration; and neither he nor they can
be reëlected for the term immediately succeeding, although
they may return to occupy` their posts as legislators in the
chambers to which they belong.
Article 64.
The Federal Council resides in the district and exercises the
functions prescribed in this constitution. It cannot
deliberate with less than an absolute majority of all its
members; it dictates the interior regulations to be observed
in its deliberations, and annually appoints the person who
shall preside over its sessions.
Article 65.
The prerogatives of the President of Venezuela are:
(1) To appoint and remove the cabinet ministers;
(2) to preside over the cabinet, in whose discussions he will
have a vote, and to inform the Council of all the matters that
refer to the General Administration;
(3) to receive and welcome public ministers;
(4) to sign the official letters to the Sovereigns or
Presidents of other countries;
(5) to order the execution of the laws and decrees of the
National Legislature, and to take care that they are complied
with and executed;
(6) to promulgate the resolutions and decrees that may have
been proposed and received the approbation of the Federal
Council, in conformity with article 66 of this constitution;
(7) to organize the Federal District and to act therein as the
chief civil and political authority established by this
constitution;
(8) to issue registers of navigation to national vessels;
(9) to render an account to Congress, within the first eight
days of its annual session, of the cases in which, with the
approval of the Federal Council, he may have exercised all or
any of the faculties accorded to him in article 66 of this
compact;
(10) to discharge the other functions that the national laws
entrust to him.
Article 66.
Besides the foregoing prerogatives, that are personal to the
president of the United States of Venezuela, he can, with the
deliberate vote of the Federal Council, exercise the
following:
(1) To protect the Nation from all exterior attack;
(2) to administer the public lands, mines, and salt mines of
the States as their delegate;
(3) to convoke the National Legislature in its regular
sessions, and in extraordinary session when the gravity of any
subject demands it;
(4) to nominate persons for diplomatic positions,
consuls-general, and consuls; those named for the first and
second positions must be Venezuelans by birth;
(5) to direct negotiations and celebrate all kinds of treaties
with other nations, submitting these to the National
Legislature;
(6) to celebrate contracts of national interest in accordance
with the laws and to submit them the legislatures for their
approval;
(7) to nominate the employés of hacienda, which nominations
are not to be made by any other authority. It is required that
these employés shall be Venezuelan by birth;
(8) to remove and suspend employés of his own free motion,
ordering them to be tried if there should be cause for it;
(9) to declare war in the name of the Republic when Congress
shall have decreed it;
(10) in the case of foreign war he can,
first, demand from the States the assistance necessary for
the national defense;
second, require, in anticipation, the contributions and
negotiate the loans decreed by the National Legislature;
third, arrest or expel persons who pertain to the nation
with which war is carried on and who may be opposed to the
defense of the country;
fourth, to suspend the guaranties that may be incompatible
with the defense of the country, except that of life;
fifth, to select the place to which the General Power of
the Federation may be provisionally translated when there
may be grave reasons for it;
sixth, to bring to trial for treason to the country those
Venezuelans who may be, in any manner, hostile to the
national defense;
seventh, to issue registers to corsairs and privateers and
to prescribe the laws that they must observe in cases of
capture;
(11) to employ the public force and the powers contained in
numbers 1, 2, and 5 of the preceding clause with the object of
reëstablishing constitutional order in case of armed
insurrection against the institutions of the Nation;
(12) to dispose of the public force for the purpose of
quelling every armed collision between two or more States,
requiring them to lay down their arms and submit their
controversies to the arbitration to which they are pledged by
number 30, article 14 of this constitution;
(13) to direct the war and to appoint the person who shall
command the army;
(14) to organize the national force in time of peace;
(15) to concede general or particular exemptions;
(16) to defend the territory designated for the Federal
District when there may be reasons to apprehend that it will
be invaded by hostile forces.
Article 67.
The President of the United States of Venezuela shall have the
ministers for his cabinet that the law designates. It will
determine their functions and duties and will organize their
bureaus.
Article 68.
To be a minister of the cabinet it is required that the person
shall be twenty-five years of age, a Venezuelan by birth or
five years of naturalization.
{608}
Article 69.
The ministers are the natural and proper organs of the
President of the United States of Venezuela. All his acts must
be subscribed by them and without such requisite they will not
be complied with nor executed by the authorities, employees,
or private persons.
Article 70.
All the acts of the ministers must be conformed to this
Constitution and the laws; their personal responsibility is
not saved, although they may have the written order of the
President.
Article 71.
The settlement of all business, except the fiscal affairs of
the bureaus, will be determined in the council of ministers,
and their responsibility is collective and consolidated.
Article 72.
The ministers, within the five first sessions of each year,
will render an account to the Chambers of what they may have
done or propose to do in their respective branches. They will
also render written or verbal reports that may be requested of
them, reserving only that which, in diplomatic affairs, it may
not be convenient to publish.
Article 73.
Within the same period, they will present to the National
Legislature the estimates of public expenditures and the
general account of the past year.
Article 74.
The ministers have the right to be heard in the Chambers, and
are obliged to attend when they may be called upon for
information.
Article 75.
The ministers are responsible:
(1) for treason to the country;
(2) for infraction of this Constitution or the laws;
(3) for malversation of the public funds;
(4) for exceeding the estimates in their expenditures;
(5) for subornation or bribery in the affairs under their
charge or in the nominations for public employees;
(6) for failure in compliance with the decisions of the
Federal Council.
Article 76.
The High Federal Court will be composed of as many judges as
there may be States of the Federation and with the following
qualities:
(1) A judge must be a Venezuelan by birth;
(2) he must be thirty years of age.
Article 77.
For the nomination of judges of the High Federal Court the
Congress will convene on the fifteenth day of its regular
sessions and will proceed to group together the representation
of each State from which to form a list of as many candidates
for principal judges and an equal number of alternates as
there may be States of the Federation. The Congress, in the
same or following session, will elect one principal and one
alternate for each State, selecting them from the respective
lists.
Article 78. The law will determine the different functions of the
judges and other officers of the High Federal Court.
Article 79.
The judges and their respective alternates will hold office
for four years. The principals and their alternates in office
can not accept during this period any office in the gift of
the executive without previous resignation and lawful
acceptance. The infraction of this disposition will be
punished with four years of disability to hold public office
in Venezuela.
Article 80.
The matters within the competence of the High Federal Court
are:
(1) to take cognizance of civil or criminal causes that may be
instituted against diplomatic officers in those cases
permitted by the law of nations;
(2) to take cognizance of causes ordered by the President to
be instituted against cabinet ministers when they may be
accused according to the cases provided for in this
Constitution. In the matter of the necessity of suspension
from office, they will request the President to that effect
and he will comply;
[Transcriber's note: (3) is absent.]
(4) to have jurisdiction of the causes of responsibility
instituted against diplomatic agents accredited to another
nation for the wrong discharge of their functions;
(5) to have jurisdiction in civil trials when the nation is
defendant and the law sanctions it;
(6) to dissipate the controversies that may arise between the
officials of different States in political order in the matter
of jurisdiction or competence;
(7) to take cognizance of all matters of political nature that
the States desire to submit for their consideration;
(8) to declare which may be the law in force when the national
and State laws may be found to conflict with each other;
(9) to have jurisdiction in the controversies that may result
from contracts or negotiations celebrated by the president of
the federation;
(10) to have jurisdiction in causes of imprisonment;
(11) to exercise other prerogatives provided for by law.
Article 81.
The Court of Appeals referred to in paragraph 20, article 13
of this Constitution, is the tribunal of the states; it will
be composed of as many judges as there are states of the
federation, and their terms of office will last for four
years.
Article 82.
A judge of the Court of Appeals must have the following
qualifications:
(1) he must be an attorney at law in the exercise of his
profession, and must have had at least six years practice;
(2) he must be a Venezuelan, thirty years of age.
Article 83.
Every four years the legislature of each State will form a
list of as many attorneys, with the qualifications expressed
in the preceding article, as there are States, and will remit
it, duly certified, to the Federal Council in order that this
body, from the respective lists, may select a judge for each
State in the organization of this high tribunal.
Article 84.
After the Federal Council may have received the lists from all
the States, it will proceed, in public session, to verify the
election; forming thereafter a list of the attorneys not
elected, in order that from this general list, which will be
published in the official paper, the permanent vacancies that
may occur in the Court of Appeals may be filled by lot. The
temporary vacancies will be filled according to law.
Article 85.
The Court of Appeals will have the following prerogatives:
(1) to take cognizance of criminal causes or those of
responsibility that may be instituted against the high
functionaries of the different States, applying the laws of
the States themselves in matters of responsibility, and in
case of omission of the promulgation of a law of
constitutional precept, it will apply to the cause in question
the general laws of the land;
(2) to take cognizance and to decide in cases of appeal in the
form and terms directed by law;
(3) to annually report to the National Legislature the
difficulties that stand in the way of uniformity in the matter
of civil or criminal legislation;
(4) to dispose of the rivalries that may arise between the
officers or functionaries of judicial order in the different
States of the federation and amongst those of a single State,
provided that the authority to settle them does not exist in
the State.
{609}
Article 86.
The National Executive is exercised by the Federal Council,
the President of the United States of Venezuela, or the person
who fills his vacancies, in union with the cabinet ministers
who are his organs. The President of Venezuela must be a
Venezuelan by birth.
Article 87.
The functions of National Executive can not be exercised
outside of the federal district except in the case provided
for in number 5, paragraph 10, article 66 of the Constitution.
When the President, with the approval of the Council, shall
take command of the army or absent himself from the district
on account of matters of public interest that demand it, he
can not exercise any functions and will be replaced by the
Federal Council in accordance with article 62 of this
Constitution.
Article 88.
Everything that may not be expressly assigned to the general
administration of the nation in this Constitution is reserved
to the States.
Article 89.
The tribunals of justice in the States are independent; the
causes originated in them will be concluded in the same States
without any other review than that of the Court of Appeals in
the cases provided for by law.
Article 90.
Every act of Congress and of the National Executive that
violates the rights guaranteed to the States in this
Constitution, or that attacks their independence, must be
declared of no effect by the High Court, provided that a
majority of the legislatures demands it.
Article 91.
The public national force is divided into naval and land
troops, and will be composed of the citizen militia that the
States may organize according to law.
Article 92.
The force at the disposal of the federation will be organized
from citizens of a contingent furnished by each State in
proportion to its population, calling to service those
citizens that should render it according to their internal
laws.
Article 93.
In case of war the contingent can be augmented by bodies of
citizen militia up to the number of men necessary to fill the
draft of the National Government.
Article 94.
The National Government may change the commanders of the
public force supplied by the States in the cases and with the
formalities provided for in the national military law and then
their successors will be called for from the States.
Article 95.
The military and civil authority can never be exercised by the
same person or corporation.
Article 96.
The nation, being in possession of the right of ecclesiastical
patronage, will exercise it as the law upon the subject may
direct.
Article 97.
The Government of the Federation will have no other resident
employees with jurisdiction or authority in the States than
those of the States themselves. The officers of hacienda,
those of the forces that garrison national fortresses,
arsenals created by law, navy-yards, and habilitated ports,
that only have jurisdiction in matters peculiar to their
respective offices and within the limits of the forts and
quarters that they command, are excepted; but even these must
be subject to the general laws of the State in which they
reside. All the elements of war now existing belong to the
National Government; nevertheless it is not to be understood
that the States are prohibited from acquiring those that they
may need for domestic defense.
Article 98.
The National Government can not station troops nor military
officers with command in a State, although they may be from
that or another State, without permission of the government of
the State in which the force is to be stationed.
Article 99.
Neither the National Executive nor those of the States can
resort to armed intervention in the domestic contentions of a
State; it is only permitted to them to tender their good
offices to bring about a pacific solution in the case.
Article 100.
In case of a permanent or temporary vacancy in the office of
President of the United States of Venezuela, the States will
be immediately informed as to who has supplied the vacancy.
Article 101.
Exportation in Venezuela is free and no duty can be placed
upon it.
Article 102.
All usurped authority is without effect and its acts are null.
Every order granted for a requisition, direct or indirect, by
armed force or by an assemblage of people in subversive
attitude is null of right and void of efficacy.
Article 103.
The exercise of any function not conferred by the constitution
or laws is prohibited to every corporation or authority.
Article 104.
Any citizen may accuse the employees of the nation or the
States before the chamber of deputies, before their respective
superiors in office, or before the authorities designated by
law.
Article 105.
No payment shall be made from the National Treasury for which
Congress has not expressly provided in the annual estimate,
and those that may infringe this rule will be civilly
responsible to the National Treasury for the sums they have
paid out. In every payment from the public Treasury the
ordinary expenses will be preferred to the extraordinary
charges.
Article 106.
The offices of collection and disbursement of the national
taxes shall be always separate, and the officers of collection
may disburse only the salaries of their respective employees.
Article 107.
When, for any reason, the estimate of appropriations for a
fiscal period have not been made, that of the immediately
preceding period will continue in force.
Article 108.
In time of elections, the public national force or that of the
States themselves will remain closely quartered during the
holding of popular elections.
Article 109.
In international treaties of commerce and friendship this
clause will be inserted, to wit: "all the disagreements
between the contracting parties must be decided without an
appeal to war, by the decision of a power or friendly powers."
Article 110.
No individual can hold more than one office within the gift of
Congress and the National Executive. The acceptance of any
other is equivalent to resignation of the first. Officials
that are removable will cease to hold office upon accepting
the charge of a Senator or Deputy when they are dependents of
the National Executive.
Article 111.
The law will create and designate other national tribunals
that may be necessary.
Article 112.
National officers can not accept gifts, commissions, honors,
or emoluments from a foreign nation without permission from
the National Legislature.
Article 113.
Armed force can not deliberate; it is passive and obedient. No
armed body can make requisitions nor demand assistance of any
kind, but from the civil authorities, and in the mode and form
prescribed by law.
{610}
Article 114.
The Nation and the States will promote foreign immigration and
colonization in accordance with their respective laws.
Article 115.
A law will regulate the manner in which national officers,
upon taking charge of their posts, shall take the oath to
comply with their duties.
Article 116.
The National Executive will negotiate with the Governments of
America over treaties of alliance or confederation.
Article 117.
The law of Nations forms a part of the National Legislation;
its dispositions will be specially in force in cases of civil
war, which can be terminated by treaties between the
belligerents who will have to respect the humanitarian customs
of Christians and civilized nations, the guarantee of life being,
in every case, inviolable.
Article 118.
This constitution can be reformed by the National Legislature
if the legislatures of the States desire it, but there shall
never be any reform except in the parts upon which the
majority of the States coincide; also a reform can be made
upon one or more points when two-thirds of the members of the
National Legislature, deliberating separately and by the
proceedings established to sanction the laws, shall accord it;
but, in this second case, the amendment voted shall be
submitted to the legislatures of the States, and it will stand
sanctioned in the point or points that may have been ratified
by them.
Article 119.
This constitution will take effect from the day of its
official promulgation in each State, and in all public acts
and official documents there will be cited the date of the
Federation to begin with February 20, 1859, and the date of
the law to begin with March 28, 1864.
Article 120.
The constitutional period for the offices of the General
Administration of the Republic will continue to be computed
from February 20, 1882, the date on which the reformed
constitution took effect.
Article 121.
For every act of civil and political life of the States of the
Federation, its basis of population is that which is
determined in the last census approved by the National
Legislature.
Article 122.
The Federal Constitution of April 27, 1881, is repealed. Done
in Caracas, in the Palace of the Federal Legislative Corps,
and sealed with the seal of Congress on the 9th day of April,
1891. The 28th year of the Law and the 33rd year of the
Federation.
(Here follow the signatures of the Presidents,
Vice-Presidents, and Second Vice-Presidents of the Senate and
Chamber of Deputies, together with those of the Senators and
Deputies of the various States, followed by those of the
President and the ministers of his cabinet.)
See VENEZUELA: A. D. 1869-1892.
----------CONSTITUTION OF VENEZUELA: End----------
CONSTITUTION OF THE WATAUGA ASSOCIATION
(the first Western American Commonwealth).
See TENNESSEE: A. D. 1769-1772.
CONSTITUTIONS OF CLARENDON.
The "Constitutions of Clarendon" were a series of declarations
drawn up by a council which King Henry II. of England convened
at Clarendon, near Winchester, in 1164, and which were
intended to determine the law on various points in dispute
between the Crown and the laity, on one side, and the Church
on the other. The issues in question were those which brought
Henry into collision with Thomas Becket, Archbishop of
Canterbury. The general provisions embodied in the
Constitutions of Clarendon "would now be scarcely challenged
in the most Catholic country in the world.
1. During the vacancy of any archbishopric, bishopric, abbey,
or priory of royal foundation, the estates were to be in the
custody of the Crown. Elections to these preferments were to
be held in the royal chapel, with the assent of the king and
council.
2. In every suit to which a clerk was a party, proceedings
were to commence before the king's justices, and these
justices were to decide whether the case was to be tried
before a spiritual or a civil court. If it was referred to a
spiritual court, a civil officer was to attend to watch the
trial, and if a clerk was found guilty of felony the Church
was to cease to protect him.
3. No tenant-in-chief of the king, or officer of his
household, was to be excommunicated, or his lands laid under
an interdict, until application had been first made to the
king, or, in his absence, to the chief justice.
4. Laymen were not to be indicted in a bishop's court, either
for perjury or other similar offence, except in the bishop's
presence by a lawful prosecutor and with lawful witnesses. If
the accused was of so high rank that no prosecutor would
appear, the bishop might require the sheriff to call a jury to
inquire into the case.
5. Archbishops, bishops, and other great persons were
forbidden to leave the realm without the king's permission.
6. Appeals were to be from the archdeacon to the bishop, from
the bishop to the archbishop, from the archbishop to the king,
and no further; that, by the king's mandate, the case might be
ended in the archbishop's court.
The last article the king afterwards explained away. It was
one of the most essential, but he was unable to maintain it;
and he was rash, or he was ill-advised, in raising a second
question, on which the pope would naturally be sensitive,
before he had disposed of the first."
J. A. Froude, Life and Times of Becket, pages 31-32.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1162-1170.
CONSTITUTIONS, Roman Imperial.
See CORPUS JURIS CIVILIS.
CONSTITUTIONAL UNION PARTY, The.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1860 (APRIL-NOVEMBER).
CONSUL, Roman.
When the Romans had rid themselves of their kings and
established a republic, or, rather, an aristocratic
government, "the civil duties of the king were given to two
magistrates, chosen for a year, who were at first called
'prætores' or generals, 'judices' or judges, or consules (cf.
con 'together' and salio 'to leap') or 'colleagues.' In the
matter of their power, no violent departure was made from the
imperium of the king. The greatest limitation on the consuls
was the short period for which they were at the head of the
state; but even here they were thought of, by a fiction, as
voluntarily abdicating at the expiration of their term, and as
nominating their successors, although they were required to
nominate the men who had already been selected in the 'comitia
centuriata.' Another limitation was the result of the dual
character of the magistracy. The imperium was not divided
between the consuls, but each possessed it in full, as the
king had before. When, therefore, they did not agree, the veto
of the one prevailed over the proposal of the other, and there
was no action."
A. Tighe, Development of the Roman Constitution, chapter 4.
{611}
"As judges, the consuls occupied altogether the place of the
kings. They decided the legal disputes of the citizens either
personally or by deputy. Their criminal jurisdiction was
probably limited to the most important cases. ... In the
warlike state of the Romans the military character of the
consuls was no doubt most prominent and most important. When
the consul led the army into the field he possessed the
unlimited military power of the kings (the imperium). He was
entrusted with the direction of the war, the distribution of
the booty, and the first disposal of the conquered land. ...
The oldest designation for the consuls, therefore, was derived
from their military quality, for they were called prætors,
that is, commanders. It was, however, precisely in war that
the division of power among two colleagues must often have
proved prejudicial ... and the necessity of unity in the
direction of affairs was felt to be indispensable. The
dictatorship served this purpose. By decree of the senate one
of the consuls could be charged with naming a dictator for six
months, and in this officer the full power of the king was
revived for a limited period. The dictatorship was a formal
suspension of the constitution of the republic. ... Military
was substituted for common law, and Rome, during the time of
the dictatorship, was in a state of siege."
W. Ihne, History of Rome, book 2, chapter 1,
and book 6, chapter 3-5.
In the later years of the Roman empire, "two consuls were
created by the sovereigns of Rome and Constantinople for the
sole purpose of giving al date to the year and a festival to
the people. But the expenses of this festival, in which the
wealthy and the vain aspired to surpass their predecessors,
insensibly arose to the enormous sum of four score thousand
pounds; the wisest senators declined a useless honour which
involved the certain ruin of their families, and to this
reluctance I should impute the frequent chasms in the last age
of the consular Fasti. ... The succession of consuls finally
ceased in the thirteenth year of Justinian [A. D. 541] whose
despotic temper might be gratified by the final extinction of
a title which admonished the Romans of their ancient freedom.
Yet the annual consulship still lived in the minds of the
people; they fondly expected its speedy restoration ... and
three centuries elapsed after the death of Justinian before
that obsolete dignity, which had been suppressed by custom,
could be abolished by law. The imperfect mode of
distinguishing each year by the name of a magistrate was
usefully supplied by the date of a permanent era."
E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 40.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
"There were no consuls in 531 and 532. The Emperor held the
office alone in 533, and with a colleague in 534. Belisarius
was sole consul in 535. The two following years, having no
consuls of their own, were styled the First and Second after
the Consulship of Belisarius. John of Cappadocia gave his name
to the year 538, and the years 539 and 540 had again consuls,
though one only for each year. In 541 Albinus Basilius sat in
the curule chair, and he was practically the last of the long
list of warriors, orators, demagogues, courtiers, which began
(in the year 500 B. C.) with the names of Lucius Junius Brutus
and Lucius Tarquinius Collatinus. All the rest of the years of
Justinian, twenty-four in number, were reckoned as Post
Consulatum Basilii."
T. Hodgkin, Italy and Her Invaders.
book 5, chapter 14.
See, also, ROME B. C. 500.
CONSULAR TRIBUNES, Roman.
The plebeians of Rome having demanded admission for their
order to the consulship, a compromise was arranged, B. C. 444,
which settled that, thereafter, "the people should be free to
elect either consuls--that is, patricians according to the old
law--or in their place other officers under the title of
'military tribunes with consular power,' consisting of
patricians and plebeians. ... It is not reported in what
respect the official competency of the consular tribunes was
to differ from that of the consuls. Still, so much is plain,
that the difference consisted not alone in name. The number of
the consular tribunes was in the beginning fixed at three."
W. Ihne, History of Rome, book 2, chapter 11.
CONSULATE GOVERNMENT OF FRANCE, The.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1799 (NOVEMBER-DECEMBER).
CONTINENTAL ARMY.
"The Continentals" of the American Revolution.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1775 (MAY-AUGUST).
CONTINENTAL CURRENCY, The.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1780 (JANUARY-APRIL).
CONTINENTAL SYSTEM OF NAPOLEON, The.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1801-1802, and 1806-1810.
CONTIONES, OR CONCIONES.
The contiones, or conciones, at Rome, were assemblies of the
people, "less formal than the comitia," held for the mere
purpose of discussing public questions, and incapable of
passing any binding resolution. "They could not be called
together by anybody except the magistrates, neither had every
man the liberty of speaking in them, of making proposals or of
declaring his opinion; ... but even in this limited manner
public questions could be discussed and the people could be
enlightened. ... The custom of discussing public questions in
the contiones became general after the comitia of the tribes
had obtained full legislative competency."
W. Ihne, History of Rome, book 6, chapter 1.
See, also, COMITIA CURIATA.
CONTRABANDS.
In the early part of the American civil war of 1861-65, the
escaped slaves of the Confederates, who came within the Union
lines, were called contrabands, General Butler having supplied
the term by declaring them to be "contraband of war."
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1861 (MAY).
CONTRERAS, Battle of.
See MEXICO: A. D. 1847 (MARCH-SEPTEMBER).
CONVENT,
See MONASTERY.
CONVENTICLE ACT, The.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1662-1665.
CONVENTION,
The French National, of the great Revolution.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1792 (AUGUST),
and 1792 (SEPTEMBER-NOVEMBER), to 1705 (OCTOBER-DECEMBER).
CONVOCATION.
The assemblies of the clergy in the two ecclesiastical
provinces of England are called the Convocation of Canterbury
and the Convocation of York. The former, which is the superior
body, frequently receives the name of Convocation, simply. It
is constituted upon the model of Parliament, and is, in fact,
the Parliament of the Church of England. It has two Houses:
the upper one consisting of the Archbishop and his Bishops;
the lower one composed of deans, archdeacons and proctors,
representing the inferior clergy. The Convocation of York has
but one House. Since 1716 Convocation has possessed slight
powers.
{612}
CONWAY CABAL, The.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1777-1778.
COOMASSIE, Burning of.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1873-1880.
COPAIC REEDS.
See BŒOTIA.
COPAN, Ruins of.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: MAYAS;
and MEXICO, ANCIENT.
COPEHAN FAMILY, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: COPEHAN FAMILY.
COPENHAGEN: A. D. 1362.
Taken and pillaged by the Hanseatic League.
See SCANDINAVIAN STATES: A. D. 1018-1397.
COPENHAGEN: A. D. 1658-1660.
Sieges by Charles X. of Sweden.
See SCANDINAVIAN STATES (SWEDEN): A. D. 1644-1697.
COPENHAGEN: A. D. 1700.
Surrender to Charles XII. of Sweden.
See SCANDINAVIAN STATES (SWEDEN): A. D. 1697-1700.
COPENHAGEN: A. D. 1801.
Bombardment by the English fleet.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1801-1802.
COPENHAGEN: A. D. 1807.
Bombardment of the city by the English.
Seizure of the fleet.
See SCANDINAVIAN STATES: A. D. 1807-1810.
----------COPENHAGEN: End----------
COPPERHEADS.
During the American Civil War, the Democratic Party in the
Northern States "comprised two well-recognized classes: The
Anti-War (or Peace) Democrats, commonly called 'Copperheads,'
who sympathized with the Rebellion, and opposed the War for
the Union; and the War (or Union) Democrats, who favored a
vigorous prosecution of the War for the preservation of the
Union."
J. A. Logan, The Great Conspiracy, page 574, foot-note.
See, also, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1864 (OCTOBER).
COPREDY BRIDGE, Battle of.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1644 (JANUARY-JULY).
COPTS, The.
The descendants of the ancient Egyptian race, who form to this
day the larger part of the population of Egypt.
See EGYPT: ORIGIN OF THE ANCIENT PEOPLE.
COPTOS.
Destroyed by Diocletian.
See ALEXANDRIA: A. D. 296.
COR, The.
See EPHAH.
CORBIE,
Spanish capture of (1636).
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1635-1638.
CORCYRA.
See KORKYRA.
CORDAY, Charlotte, and the assassination of Marat.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1793 (JULY).
CORDELIERS.
See MENDICANT ORDERS.
CORDELIERS, Club of the.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1790.
CORDOVA (Spain): A. D. 711.
Surrender to the Arab-Moors.
See SPAIN: A. D. 711-713.
CORDOVA: A. D. 756-1031.
The Caliphate at.
See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST AND EMPIRE: A. D. 756-1031.
CORDOVA: A. D. 1235.
Capture by the King of Castile.
See SPAIN: A. D. 1212-1238.
----------CORDOVA: End----------
CORDOVA (Mexico), Treaty of.
See MEXICO: A. D. 1820-1826.
CORDYENE.
See GORDYENE.
COREA.
See COREA in Supplement (volume 5).
COREISH, KOREISH.
See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST AND EMPIRE: A.. D. 609-632.
COREY, Martha and Giles,
The execution for witchcraft of.
See MASSACHUSETTS: A. D. 1692.
CORFINIUM, Cæsar's Capture of.
See ROME: B. C. 50-49.
CORFU, Ancient.
See KORKYRA.
CORFU: A. D. 1216-1880.
Since the fall of the Greek Empire.
Corfu was won by the Venetians in the early years of the Latin
conquest of the Greek empire (1216), but was presently lost,
to come back again into the possession of the republic 170
years later. "No part of Greece has been so often cutoff from
the Greek body. Under Pyrrhos and Agathoklês, no less than
under Michael Angelos and Roger, it obeyed an Epeirot or
Sicilian master. ... At last, after yet another turn of
Sicilian rule, it passed for 400 years [1386-. 1797] to the
great commonwealth [of Venice]. In our own day Corfu was not
added to free Greece till long after the deliverance of Attica
and Peloponnesos. But, under so many changes of foreign
masters, the island has always remained part of Europe and of
Christendom. Alone among the Greek lands, Corfu has never

passed under barbarian rule. It has seen the Turk only, for
one moment, as an invader [see TURKS: A. D. 1714-1718], for
another moment as a nominal overlord."
E. A. Freeman, Historical Geography of Europe, page 408.
See IONIAN ISLANDS: To 1814.
----------CORFU: End----------
CORINIUM.
A Roman city in Britain, on the site of which is the modern
city of Cirencester. Some of the richest mosaic pavements
found in England have been uncovered there.
T. Wright. Celt, Roman and Saxon, chapter 5.
CORINTH.
Corinth, the chief city and state, in ancient times, of the
narrow isthmus which connects Peloponnesus with northern
Greece, "owed everything to her situation. The double sea by
the isthmus, the confluence of the high road of the whole of
Hellas, the rocky citadel towering aloft over land and sea,
through which rushed--or around which flowed--an abundance of
springs; all these formed so extraordinary a commixture of
advantages, that, if the intercourse with other countries
remained undisturbed, they could not but call forth an
important city. As in Argolis, so on the isthmus also, other
besides Dorian families had in the days of the migration
helped to found the new state. ... By the side of the Dorian,
five non-Dorian tribes existed in Corinth, attesting the
multitude and variety of population, which were kept together
as one state by the royal power of the Heraclidæ, supported by
the armed force of the Dorians. In the ninth century [B. C.]
the royal power passed into the hands of a branch of the
Heraclidæ deriving its descent from Bacchis [one of the
earliest of the kings]; and it was in the extraordinary genius
of this royal line that the greatness of the city originated.
The Bacchiadæ opened the city to the immigration of the
industrious settlers who hoped to make their fortunes more
speedily than elsewhere at this meeting point of all Greek
high-roads of commerce. They cherished and advanced every
invention of importance. ... They took commerce into their own
hands, and established the tramway on the isthmus, along which
ships were, on rollers, transported from one gulf to the
other. ... They converted the gulf which had hitherto taken
its name from Crisa into the Corinthian, and secured its
narrow inlet by means of the fortified place of Molycria. ...
They continued their advance along the coast and occupied the
most important points on the Achelous."
E. Curtius, History of Greece, book 2, chapter 1.
{613}
CORINTH: B. C. 745-725.
Constitutional Revolution.
End of Monarchy.
The prytanes.
Commercial progress.
A violent contention which arose between two branches of the
Bacchiadæ "no doubt gave the nobles of Corinth power and
opportunity to end the struggle by a change in the
constitution, and by the discontinuance of the monarchy; this
occurred in the year 745 B. C., after eight generations of
kings. ... Yet the place at the head of the commonwealth was
not to be entirely taken away from the ancient royal house. A
presiding chief (a prytanis), newly elected each year by the
whole nobility from the members of the royal race, was
henceforward to conduct the government [see PRYTANIS]. It was
a peculiar arrangement which this change introduced into
Corinth. We may assume that the sovereignty was transferred to
the nobles collectively, or to their representative. This
representation seems to have been so regulated that each of
the eight tribes sent an equal number of members to the
Gerousia, i. e. the council of elders. ... But the first of
these eight tribes, to which belonged the royal family, was
privileged. From it was chosen the head of the state, an
office for which only a Bacchiad was eligible--that is, only a
member of the old royal house, which took the foremost place
in the first tribe. This clan of the Bacchiadæ is said to have
contained 200 men. 'They were numerous and wealthy,' says
Strabo. Accordingly the royal house did not exclusively retain
the first rank in the state, but only in conjunction with the
families connected with it by kindred and race. ... The new
constitution of Corinth, the government by nobles, under the
dynastic presidency of one family, became a type for other
cantons. It was a Corinthian of the Bacchiadæ who, twenty or
thirty years after the introduction of the prytanes, regulated
the oligarchy of the Thebans and gave them laws (about 725 B.
C.) ... The fall of the monarchy in Corinth at first brought
with it disastrous consequences for the power and prestige of
the commonwealth. The communities of the Megarians--either
because the new government made increased demands upon them,
or because they considered their allegiance had ceased with
the cessation of monarchy, and thought the moment was
favourable--deserted Corinth and asserted their freedom. The
five communities on the isthmus united together around the
territory of Megara, lying in the plain by the Saronic Gulf,
where the majority of the Doric tribes had settled; the city
of Megara, in the vicinity of two ancient fortresses ...
became the chief centre of the communities, now associated in
one commonwealth. ... The important progress of Corinth under
the prytany of the Bacchiadæ was not due to successes upon the
mainland, but in another sphere. For navigation and commerce
no canton in Hellas was more favourably situated. Lying on the
neck of the isthmus, it extended from sea to sea, an
advantageous position which had indeed first attracted the
Phœnicians thither in ancient times. ... Corinth, says
Thucydides, was always from the first a centre of commerce,
and abounded in wealth; for the population within and without
the Peloponnesus communicated with each other more in ancient
times by land across the isthmus than by sea. But when the
Hellenes became more practised in navigation, the Corinthians
with their ships put down piracy and established marts on both
sides; and through this influx of riches their city became
very powerful."
M. Duncker, History of Greece, book 3, chapter 3 (volume 2).
CORINTH: B. C. 509-506.
Opposition to the desire of Sparta to restore tyranny at
Athens.
See ATHENS: B. C. 509-506.
CORINTH: B. C. 481-479.
Congress and organized Hellenic union against Persia.
See GREECE: B. C.481-479.
CORINTH: B. C. 458-456.
Alliance with Ægina in unsuccessful war with Athens and Megara.
See GREECE: B. C. 458-456.
CORINTH: B. C. 440.
Opposition to Spartan interference with Athens in Samos.
See ATHENS: B. C. 440-437.
CORINTH: B. C. 435-432.
Quarrel with Korkyra.
Interference of Athens.
Events leading to the Peloponnesian War.
See GREECE: B. C. 435-432.
CORINTH: B. C. 432.
Great sea-fight with the Korkyrians and Athenians.
See GREECE: B. C. 432.
CORINTH: B. C. 429-427.
The Peloponnesian War: sea-fights and defeats.
Fruitless aid to the Mitylenæans.
See GREECE: B. C. 429-427.
CORINTH: B. C. 421.
Opposition to the Peace of Nicias.
See GREECE: B. C. 421-418.
CORINTH: B. C. 415-413.
Help to Syracuse against the Athenians.
See SYRACUSE: B. C. 415-413.
CORINTH: B. C. 395-387.
Confederacy against Sparta.
The Corinthian War.
Battle on the Nemea.
The Peace of Antalcidas.
See GREECE: B. C. 399-387.
CORINTH: B. C. 368-365.
Attempt of Epaminondas to surprise the city.
Attempt of the Athenians.
See GREECE: B. C. 371-362.
CORINTH: B. C. 337.
Congress of Greek states to acknowledge the hegemony of Philip
of Macedon.
See GREECE: B. C. 357-336.
CORINTH: B. C. 244.
Capture by Antigonus Gonatus, king of Macedon.
See MACEDONIA, &c.: B. C. 277-244.
CORINTH: B. C. 243-146.
In the Achaian League.
See GREECE: B. C. 280-146.
CORINTH: B. C. 146.
Sack by the Romans.
See GREECE: B. C. 280-146.
CORINTH: B. C. 44.
Restoration by Cæsar.
"In the desolate land of Greece, Cæsar, besides other plans,
... busied himself above all with the restoration of Corinth.
Not only was a considerable burgess-colony conducted thither,
but a plan was projected for cutting through the isthmus, so
as to avoid the dangerous circumnavigation of the Peloponnesus
and to make the whole traffic between Italy and Asia pass
through the Corintho-Saronic gulf."
T. Mommsen, History of Rome, book 5, chapter 11.
"Cæsar sent to Corinth a large number of freedmen, and other
settlers were afterwards sent by Augustus; but it is certain
that many Greeks came to live in the new Corinth, for it
became a Greek town. Corinth was a mass of ruins when the new
settlers came, and while they were removing the rubbish, they
grubbed up the burial places, where they found a great number
of earthen figures and bronze urns, which they sold at a high
price and filled Rome with them."
G. Long, Decline of the Roman Republic, volume 5, chapter 32.
{614}
"Corinth rapidly rose under these auspices, became a centre of
commerce and art, and took the lead among the cities of
European Hellas. Here was established the seat of the Roman
government of Achaia, and its population, though the
representations we have received of it are extravagant,
undoubtedly exceeded that of any Grecian rival."
C. Merivale, History of the Romans, chapter 40.
CORINTH: A. D. 267.
Ravaged by the Goths.
See GOTHS: A. D. 258-267.
CORINTH: A. D. 395.
Plundered by the Goths.
See GOTHS: A. D. 395.
CORINTH: A. D. 1146.
Sacked by the Normans of Sicily.
Abduction of silk weavers.
See BYZANTINE EMPIRE: A. D. 1146.
CORINTH: A. D. 1445.
Destruction by the Turks.
The fortifications of the isthmus of Corinth were stormed and
the Peloponnesus invaded by Amurath II. in 1445. "Corinth
itself, a city sanctified by its antiquity, by its gods, by
its arts, by the beauty of its women, by its fountains, its
cypresses, its very ruins themselves, whence its unrivalled
situation had always restored it, fell anew, buried in its
flames, by the hands of Tourakhan, that ancient and ambitious
vizier of Amurath. Its flames were seen from Athens, from
Ægina, from Lepanto, from Cytheron, from Pindus. The
inhabitants, as also those of Patras, were led into slavery in
Asia, to the number of 60,000."
A. Lamartine, History of Turkey, book 11, section 10.
CORINTH: A. D. 1463-1464.
Unsuccessful siege by the Venetians.
Fortification of the Isthmus.
See GREECE: A. D. 1454-1479.
CORINTH: A. D. 1687.
Taken by the Venetians.
See TURKS: A. D. 1684-1696.
CORINTH: A. D. 1822.
Revolt, siege and capture by the Turks.
See GREECE: A. D. 1821-1829.
----------CORINTH: End----------
CORINTH, Mississippi, Siege and Battle.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1862 (APRIL-MAY: TENNESSEE--MISSISSIPPI),
and (SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER: MISSISSIPPI).
CORINTH CANAL, The.
"On Sunday [August 6, 1893] the canal across the Isthmus of
Corinth--[projected by Cæsar--see ROME: B. C. 45-44] begun by
Nero, and completed, nearly 2,000 years later, by a Greek
engineer, M. Matsas--was opened by the King of Greece, who
steamed through the canal in his yacht, accompanied by a
procession consisting of four Greek torpedo-boats and other
vessels, including three English men-of-war and an English
despatch-boat. The canal ... will be practicable for all but
the largest vessels."
The Spectator, Aug. 12, 1893.
[Transcriber's note: "It was planned by the Hungarian
architects István Türr and Béla Gerster... Its
construction was started by a French company, which ceased
works only after the two ends had been dug, due to
financial difficulties. A Greek company took over, the main
contractor being Antonis Matsas, and continued (and
completed) the project."
http://wiki.phantis.com]
CORINTHIAN TALENT.
See TALENT.
CORINTHIAN WAR, The.
See GREECE: B. C. 399-387.
CORIONDI, The.
See IRELAND, TRIBES OF ANCIENT.
CORITANI, OR CORITAVI.
A British tribe which occupied the lower valley of the Trent
and its vicinity.
See BRITAIN, CELTIC TRIBES.
CORN LAWS (English) and their repeal.
See TARIFF LEGISLATION (ENGLAND):
A. D. 1815-1828; 1836-1839; 1842; and 1845-1846.
CORNABII, OR CORNAVII, The.
An ancient British tribe which dwelt near the mouths of the
Dee and the Mersey.
See BRITAIN, CELTIC TRIBES.
CORNWALL, Duchy of.
In the division of the spoils of his conquest of England,
William the Conqueror gave to his brother Robert almost the
whole shire of Cornwall, besides other vast estates. "Out of
those possessions," says Mr. Freeman, "arose that great
Earldom, and afterwards Duchy, of Cornwall, which was deemed
too powerful to be trusted in the hands of any but men closely
akin to the royal house, and the remains of which have for
ages formed the appanage of the heir-apparent to the Crown."
See, also, WALES, PRINCE OF.
CORNWALLIS, Charles, Lord.
In the War of the American Revolution.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1776 (AUGUST), (SEPTEMBER-NOVEMBER);
1780 (FEBRUARY-AUGUST); 1780-1781;
1781 (JANUARY-MAY); 1781 (MAY-OCTOBER).
Indian administration.
See INDIA: A. D. 1785-1793.
Irish administration.
See IRELAND: A. D. 1798-1800.
CORON, Battle of (B. C. 281).
See MACEDONIA, &c.: B. C. 297-280.
CORONADO, Expedition of.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: PUEBLOS.
CORONATION.
"The royal consecration in its most perfect form included both
coronation and unction. The wearing of a crown was a most
ancient sign of royalty, into the origin of which it is
useless now to inquire; but the solemn rite of crowning was
borrowed from the Old Testament by the Byzantine Cæsars; the
second Theodosius was the first emperor crowned with religious
ceremonies in Christian times. The introduction of the rite of
anointing is less certainly ascertained. It did not always
accompany coronation, and, although usual with the later
emperors is not recorded in the case of the earlier ones."
William Stubbs, Constitutional History of England,
chapter 6, section 60.
CORONATION STONE.
See SCOTLAND: 8TH-9TH CENTURIES;
also, LIA FAIL.
CORONEIA, Battles of (B. C. 447 and B. C. 394).
See GREECE: B. C. 449-445; and B. C. 399-387.
CORPS DE BELGIQUE.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1864 (OCTOBER).
CORPUS JURIS CIVILIS, The.
"The Corpus Juris Civilis represents the Roman law in the form
which it assumed at the close of the ancient period (a
thousand years after the decemviral legislation of the Twelve
Tables), and through which mainly it has acted upon modern
times. It was compiled in the Eastern Roman Empire (the
Western ceased in 476 A. D.) under the Emperor Justinian, ...
who reigned 527-565 A. D. The plan of the work, as laid out
by [his great law-minister] Tribonian, included two principal
parts, to be made from the constitutions of the Roman
emperors, and from the treatises of the Roman lawyers. The
constitutiones' (law-utterances) of the emperors consisted
of--
1. 'Orationes,' proposals of law, submitted to and adopted by
the Senate;
2. 'Edicta,' laws issued directly by the emperor as head of
the state;
3. 'Mandata,' instructions addressed by the emperor to high
officers of law and justice;
4. 'Decreta,' decisions given by the emperor in cases brought
before him by appeal or otherwise;
5. 'Rescripta,' answers returned by the emperor when consulted
on questions of law by parties in a suit or by magistrates.
{615}
... Three or four collections had
already been made, in which the most important constitutions
were selected from the mass, presented in a condensed form,
and arranged according to their subjects. The last and most
elaborate of these collections was the Theodosian Code,
compiled about a century before the accession of Justinian; it
is still in great part extant. ... The new Codex
Constitutionem, prepared in little more than a year, was
published in April, 529. The next work was to digest the
treatises of the most eminent law writers. Thirty-nine were
selected, nearly all of whom lived between 100 B. C. and 250
A. D. Their books (2,000 in number) were divided among a body
of collaborators (sixteen besides Tribonian), each of whom
from the books assigned to him extracted what he thought
proper. ... and putting the extracts (9,000 in all) under an
arranged series of heads. ... The Digest--or Pandects
(all-receiving), as it is also called from the multiplicity of
its sources--was issued with authority of law, in December,
533. ... While the Digest or Pandects forms much the largest
fraction of the Corpus Juris, its relative value and
importance are far more than proportionate to its extent. The
Digest is, in fact, the soul of the Corpus. ... To bring the
Codex Constitutionem into better conformity with the Digest,
it was revised in 534 and issued as we now have it in November
of that year. ... The Corpus Juris includes also an elementary
text-book, the Institutiones (founded on the 'institutiones' of
Gaius, who flourished about 150). ... The Institutes, Digest
and Codex were given, as a complete body of law, to the
law-schools at Constantinople, Rome, Berytus, Alexandria,
Cæsarea, to be studied in their five years' curriculum. In the
courts it was to supersede all earlier authorities. ... Later
statutes of Justinian, arranged in order of time, form the
Novels ('novellae constitutione,' most of them in Greek), the
last component of the Corpus Juris."
J. Hadley, Introduction to Roman Law, lecture 1.
ALSO IN: J. E. Goudsmit, The Pandects.
CORREGIDOR.
See ALCALDE.
CORSICA: Early history.
"The original inhabitants of Corsica are supposed to have been
Ligurians, but at a very early period the people had
commercial intercourse with Spain, Ionia and Tuscany. The
island was subsequently occupied by the Carthaginians, who,
however, were expelled by the Romans during the first Punic
war. A few years later Corsica came under the dominion of
Rome, and that sway was nominally maintained until the
downfall of the Empire. It then fell under the dominion of the
Vandals, and after their expulsion owned successively the rule
of the Goths, the Saracens and the Pisans, and finally of the
Genoese. It came into the possession of the latter people in
the year 1120. Pisa subsequently made several attempts to
drive out her rivals, but they were in the end void of
results. But in 1448, Genoa, having sustained great losses in
the constant wars in which she was engaged, was induced to
surrender the administration of Corsica and of her colonies in
the Levant to a corporation known as the Bank of St George.
From that time the island was administered by governors
appointed by the Bank of St George, almost precisely in the
manner in which, in England, up to 1859, the East Indies were
administered by an 'imperium in imperio.'"
G. B. Malleson, Studies from Genoese History, chapter 3.
CORSICA: A. D, 1558-1559.
Revolt against the Genoese rule, and re-subjection.
See GENOA: A. D. 1528-1559;
and FRANCE: A. D. 1547-1559.
CORSICA: A. D. 1729-1769.
The Struggle for independence.
Romance of King Theodore.
The Paolis.
Cession to France.
The revolt of 1558 was renewetl in 1564, but ended in 1567,
upon the death of its leader, Sampiero. For the next century
and a half, Corsica remained inactive; "depressed and
miserable under renewed Genoese exactions and tyrannies, but
too exhausted to resume hostilities. In 1729, however,
fighting again broke out, suddenly roused by one of the many
private wrongs then pressing upon the lower orders, and the
rebellion soon spread over the whole island. It was well
organized under two leaders of energy and ability, and was
more determined in its measures than ever. ... Genoa had
recourse to the emperor of Germany, from whom she bought
several thousand mercenaries, who were sent across the sea to
try their skill upon these unconquerable islanders. ... The
courage and chivalry of his insular foes ... won for them the
regard of the opposing General Wachtendonk; and, chiefly
through his mediation, a treaty, supposed to be favourable to
the islanders, was concluded between Genoa and the Corte
legislative assembly in 1732. Wachtendonk remained in the
island another year to see the treaty carried out, and in
June, 1734, the German general returned to his own country.
... But he had scarcely retired before the treaty was broken.
Genoa began anew her system of illegal arrests and attempted
assassinations; and, once more, the people arose under
Hyacinth Paoli, an obscure native of the little village of
Morosaglia, but a man of spirit and talent, and a scholar.
Under the direction of this man, and of Giafferi, his
colleague, a democratic constitution, in the highest degree
prudent and practical, was framed for the Corsican people. ...
Early in the next year occurred a strange and romantic
adventure in this adventureful country. A man, handsome and
well-dressed, surrounded by obsequious courtiers, and attended
by every luxury, landed in the island from a vessel
well-furnished with gold, ammunition, and arms. This man was a
German adventurer, Baron Theodore von Neuhoff, who, after a
romantic youth, had suddenly conceived a desire to become king
of Corsica. He was a man of great talent and personal
fascination, of good judgment, and enthusiastic disposition.
He had fallen in love with the bravery and determination of
the Corsicans, and longed to head such a nation. He had put
himself into communication with the leading islanders; and,
having really some little influence at the continental courts,
persuaded them that he had much more. He offered to obtain
such assistance from foreign potentates, by his persuasions,
as should effectually oust the Genoese; and, in return,
requested the crown of Corsica. His genius and his enthusiasm
were so great, and his promises so dazzling, that, after some
hesitation, the poor Corsicans, in their despair, seized upon
this last straw; and in March, 1736, Theodore was crowned
king. His exertions for the good of this country were
untiring. He established manufactures and promoted with all
his power art and commerce, at the same time that, with all
the force of his genius, he endeavoured to persuade foreign
powers to lend their assistance to his new subjects in the
field.
{616}
His style of living meanwhile was regal and sumptuous. ...
Towards the conclusion of his first year of sovereignty,
Theodore left Corsica on a continental tour, with the avowed
object of hastening the promised succour. In two years he
returned, bringing with him three large and several smaller
war vessels, handsomely laden with ammunition, which had
actually been raised by means of his talents and persuasive
faculties, chiefly amongst the Dutch. But, meanwhile, the
Corsicans had had other affairs to which to attend. France had
interfered at the request of Genoa; and negotiations were
actively going on, which the arrival of the pseudo-king could
only interrupt. Theodore, although now so well attended, found
himself unheeded and disregarded; and after a few months was
forced to leave his new kingdom to its fate, and to return to
the continent. Five years later, in 1743, he again returned,
again well equipped, this time with English vessels, but with
the same ill success. Convinced now that his chance was over
and his dream of royalty destroyed, Theodore returned to
England with a sore heart, spending his remaining years in
this asylum for dethroned kings and ruined adventurers. His
tomb may be seen in Westminster Abbey. For the next five and
twenty years the war continued between Corsica and Genoa,
still fought out on the blood-deluged plains of the unhappy
little island. But the republic of Genoa was now long past her
prime, and her energies were fading into senility; and, had it
not been for the ever-increasing assistance of France, her
intrepid foes would long ere this have got the better of her.
In May, 1768, a treaty was signed between Genoa and France, by
which the republic ceded her now enfeebled claims on Corsica
to her ally, and left her long-oppressed victim to fight the
contest out with the French troops. During this time, first
Gaffori, then Pasquale Paoli, were the leaders of the people.
Gaffori, a man of refinement, and a hero of skill and
intrepidity, was murdered in a vendetta in 1753, and in 1755
Pasquale, youngest son of the old patriot Hyacinth Paoli, left
his position as officer in the Neapolitan service, and landed,
by the general desire of his own people, at Aleria, to
undertake the command of the Corsican army. ... From 1764 to
1768 a truce was concluded between the foes. ... In August,
1768, the truce was to expire; but, before the appointed day
had arrived, an army of 20,000 French suddenly swooped down
upon the luckless island. ... It was a hopeless struggle for
Corsica; but the heroism of the undaunted people moved all
Europe to sympathy. ... The Corsicans at first got the better
of their formidable foe, at the Bridge of Golo, in the taking
of Borgo, and in other lesser actions. ... Meanwhile, the
country was being destroyed, and the troops becoming
exhausted. ... The battle of Ponte Nuovo, on the 9th of May,
1769, at once and forever annihilated the Corsican cause. ...
After this victory, the French rapidly gained possession of
the whole island, and shortly afterwards the struggle was
abandoned. ... In the same year, 1769, Napoleon Buonaparte was
born in the house out of the Place du Marché at Ajaccio. 'I
was born,' he said himself in a letter to Paoli, 'the year my
country died.'"
G. Forde, A Lady's Tour in Corsica, volume 2, chapter 18.
ALSO IN:
P. Fitzgerald, Kings and Queens of an Hour, chapter 1.
J. Boswell, Journal of a Tour to Corsica.
Corsica: A. D. 1794.
Conquest by the English.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1794 (MARCH-JULY).
Corsica: A. D. 1796.
Evacuated by the English.
Reoccupied by the French.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1796 (SEPTEMBER).
----------Corsica: End----------
CORTENUOVA, Battle of (1236).
See ITALY: A. D. 1183-1250.
CORTES, HERNANDO,
Conquest of Mexico by.
See MEXICO: A. D. 1519 to 1521-1524.
CORTES, The early Spanish.
The old monarchical constitutions of Castile and Aragon.
"The earliest instance on record of popular representation in
Castile occurred at Burgos, in 1169; nearly a century
antecedent to the celebrated Leicester parliament. Each city
had but one vote, whatever might be the number of its
representatives. A much greater irregularity, in regard to the
number of cities required to send deputies to cortes [the name
signifying 'court'] on different occasions, prevailed in
Castile, than had ever existed in England; though, previously
to the 15th century, this does not seem to have proceeded from
any design of infringing on the liberties of the people. The
nomination of these was originally vested in the householders
at large, but was afterwards confined to the
municipalities,--a most mischievous alteration, which
subjected their election eventually to the corrupt influence
of the crown. They assembled in the same chamber with the
higher orders of the nobility and clergy, but on questions of
moment, retired to deliberate by themselves. After the
transaction of other business, their own petitions were
presented to the sovereign, and his assent gave them the
validity of laws. The Castilian commons, by neglecting to make
their money grants depend on corresponding concessions from
the crown, relinquished that powerful check on its operations
so beneficially exerted in the British parliament, but in vain
contended for even there till a much later period than that
now under consideration. Whatever may have been the right of
the nobility and clergy to attend in cortes, their sanction
was not deemed essential to the validity of legislative acts;
for their presence was not even required in many assemblies of
the nation which occurred in the 14th and 15th centuries. The
extraordinary power thus committed to the commons was, on the
whole, unfavorable to their liberties. It deprived them of the
sympathy and cooperation of the great orders of the state,
whose authority alone could have enabled them to withstand the
encroachments of arbitrary power, and who, in fact, did
eventually desert them in their utmost need. ... The Aragonese
cortes was composed of four branches, or arms; the ricos
hombres, or great barons; the lesser nobles, comprehending the
knights; the clergy; and the commons. The nobility of every
denomination were entitled to a seat in the legislature. The
ricos hombres were allowed to appear by proxy, and a similar
privilege was enjoyed by baronial heiresses. The number of
this body was very limited, twelve of them constituting a quorum.
{617}
The arm of the ecclesiastics embraced an ample delegation from
the inferior as well as higher clergy. It is affirmed not to
have been a component of the national legislature until more
than a century and a half after the admission of the commons.
Indeed, the influence of the church was much less sensible in
Aragon than in the other kingdoms of the Peninsula. ... The
commons enjoyed higher consideration and civil privileges. For
this they were perhaps somewhat indebted to the example of
their Catalan neighbors, the influence of whose democratic
institutions naturally extended to other parts of the
Aragonese monarchy. The charters of certain cities accorded to
the inhabitants privileges of nobility, particularly that of
immunity from taxation; while the magistrates of others were
permitted to take their seats in the order of hidalgos. From a
very early period we find them employed in offices of public
trust, and on important missions. The epoch of their admission
into the national assembly is traced as far back as 1133,
several years earlier than the commencement of popular
representation in Castile. Each city had the right of sending
two or more deputies selected from persons eligible to its
magistracy; but with the privilege of only one vote, whatever
might be the number of its deputies. Any place which had been
once represented in cortes might always claim to be so. By a
statute of 1307, the convocation of the states, which had been
annual, was declared biennial. The kings, however, paid little
regard to this provision, rarely summoning them except for
some specific necessity. The great officers of the crown,
whatever might be their personal rank, were jealously excluded
from their deliberations. ... It was in the power of any
member to defeat the passage of a bill, by opposing to it his
veto or dissent, formally registered to that effect. He might
even interpose his negative on the proceedings of the house,
and thus put a stop to the prosecution of all further business
during the session. This anomalous privilege, transcending
even that claimed in the Polish diet, must have been too
invidious in its exercise, and too pernicious in its
consequences, to have been often resorted to. This may be
inferred from the fact that it was not formally repealed until
the reign of Philip II., in 1502. ... The cortes exercised the
highest functions, whether of a deliberative, legislative, or
judicial nature. It had a right to be consulted on all matters
of importance, especially on those of peace and war. No law
was valid, no tax could be imposed, without its consent; and
it carefully provided for the application of the revenue to
its destined uses. It determined the succession to the crown,
removed obnoxious ministers, reformed the household and
domestic expenditure of the monarch, and exercised the power,
in the most unreserved manner, of withholding supplies, as
well as of resisting what it regarded as an encroachment on
the liberties of the nation. ... The statute-book affords the
most unequivocal evidence of the fidelity with which the
guardians of the realm discharged the high trust reposed in
them, in the numerous enactments it exhibits for the security
both of person and property. Almost the first page which meets
the eye in this venerable record contains the General
Privilege, the Magna Charta, as it has been well denominated,
of Aragon. It was granted by Peter the Great to the cortes at
Saragossa, in 1283. It embraces a variety of provisions for
the fair and open administration of justice; for ascertaining
the legitimate powers intrusted to the cortes; for the
security of property against exactions of the crown; and for
the conservation of their legal immunities to the municipal
corporations and the different orders of nobility. ... The
Aragonese, who rightly regarded the General Privilege as the
broadest basis of their liberties, repeatedly procured its
confirmation by succeeding sovereigns. ... The judicial
functions of the cortes have not been sufficiently noticed by
writers. They were extensive in their operation, and gave it
the name of the General Court."
W. H. Prescott, History of the Reign of Ferdinand and
Isabella, introduction, section 1-2.
"Castile bore a closer analogy to England in its form of civil
polity than France or even Aragon. But the frequent disorders
of its government and a barbarous state of manners rendered
violations of law much more continual and flagrant than they
were in England under the Plantagenet dynasty. And besides
these practical mischiefs, there were two essential defects in
the constitution of Castile, through which perhaps it was
ultimately subverted. It wanted those two brilliants in the
coronet of British liberty, the representation of freeholders
among the commons, and trial by jury. The cortes of Castile
became a congress of deputies from a few cities, public
spirited, indeed, and intrepid, as we find them in bad times,
to an eminent degree, but too much limited in number, and too
unconnected with the territorial aristocracy, to maintain a
just balance against the crown. ... Perhaps in no European
monarchy except our own was the form of government more
interesting than in Aragon, as a fortunate temperament of law
and justice with the royal authority. ... Blancas quotes a
noble passage from the acts of cortes in 1451. 'We have always
heard of old time, and it is found by experience, that seeing
the great barrenness of this land, and the poverty of the
realm, if it were not for the liberties thereof, the folk
would go hence to live and abide in other realms and lands
more fruitful.' This high spirit of freedom had long animated
the Aragonese. After several contests with the crown in the
reign of James I., not to go back to earlier times, they
compelled Peter III. in 1283 to grant a law called the General
Privilege, the Magna Charta of Aragon, and perhaps a more full
and satisfactory basis of civil liberty than our own." They
further "established a positive right of maintaining their
liberties by arms. This was contained in the Privilege of
Union granted by Alfonso III. in 1287, after a violent
conflict with his subjects; but which was afterwards so
completely abolished, and even eradicated from the records of
the kingdom, that its precise words have never been recovered.
... That watchfulness over public liberty which originally
belonged to the aristocracy of ricos hombres ... and which was
afterwards maintained by the dangerous Privilege of Union,
became the duty of a civil magistrate whose office and
functions are the most pleasing feature in the constitutional
history of Aragon. The Justiza or Justiciary of Aragon has
been treated by some writers as a sort of anomalous
magistrate. ... But I do not perceive that his functions were,
in any essential respect, different from those of the chief
justice of England, divided, from the time of Edward I., among
the judges of the King's Bench. ...
{618}
All the royal as well as territorial judges were
bound to apply for his opinion in case of legal difficulties
arising in their courts, which he was to certify within eight
days. By subsequent statutes of the same reign it was made
penal for anyone to obtain letters from the king, impeding the
execution of the Justiza's process, and they were declared
null. Inferior courts were forbidden to proceed in any
business after his prohibition. ... There are two parts of his
remedial jurisdiction which deserve special notice. These are
the processes of juris firma, or firma del derechio, and of
manifestation. The former bears some analogy to the writs of
'pone' and 'certiorari' in England, through which the Court of
King's Bench exercises its right of withdrawing a suit from
the jurisdiction of inferior tribunals. But the Aragonese
juris firma was of more extensive operation. ... The process
termed manifestation afforded as ample security for personal
liberty as that of juris firma did for property."
H. Hallam, The Middle Age, chapter 4 (volume 2).
For some account of the loss of the old constitutional
liberties of Castile and Aragon, under Charles V.,
See SPAIN: A. D. 1518-1522.
"The councils or meetings of the bishops after the reconquest,
like the later Councils of Toledo, were always 'jussu regis,'
and were attended by counts and magnates 'ad videndum sine ad
audiendum verbum Domini.' But when the ecclesiastical business
was ended, it was natural that the lay part of the assembly
should discuss the affairs of the kingdom and of the people;
and insensibly this after-part of the proceedings grew as the
first part diminished in importance. The exact date when the
Council merged into the Curia or Cortes is difficult to
determine; Señor Colmeiro takes the so-named Council of Leon
in 1020 as the true starting-point of the latter. The early
monarchy of Spain was elective, and the acclamation of the
assembled people (plebs) was at least theoretically necessary
to render the king's election valid. The presence of the
citizens at the Cortes or Zamora, though stated by Sandoval
and Morales, is impugned by Señor Colmeiro; but at the Council
of Oviedo in 1115 were present bishops of Spain and Portugal
'cum principibus et plebe praedictae regionis,' and these
latter also subscribed the Acts. Still, though present and
making their influence more and more felt, there is no record
of a true representation of cities until Alfonso IX. convoked
the Cortes of Leon in 1188, 'cum archiepiscopo, et episcopis,
et magnatibus regni mei et cum electis civibus ex singulis
civitatibus'; from this time the three estates--clergy,
nobles, citizens--were always represented in the Cortes of
Leon. Unfortunately, the political development of Castille did
not synchronise with that of Leon. In general, that of
Castille was fully half a century later. We pass by as more
than doubtful the alleged presence of citizens at Burgos in
1169; the 'majores civitatum et villarum' at the Cortes of
Carrion in 1188 were not deputies, but the judges or governors
of twenty-eight cities. It is not till the united Cortes of
both kingdoms met at Seville in 1250, that we find true
representation in Castille. Castille was always more feudal
than Leon. It is in this want of simultaneous development, and
in the presence of privileged classes, that we find the germ
of the evils which eventually destroyed the liberties of
Spain. Neither the number of deputies nor of the cities
represented was ever fixed; at Burgos, in 1315, we find 200
deputies (procuradores) from 100 cities; gradually the number
sank till seventeen, and finally twenty-two, cities alone were
represented. The deputies were chosen from the municipality
either by lot, by rotation, or by election; they were the mere
spokesmen of the city councils, whose mandate was imperative.
Their payment was at first by the cities, but, after 1422, by
the king; and there are constant complaints that the salary
was insufficient. The reign of Juan II. (1406-54) was fatal to
the liberties of Castille; the answers to the demands and
petitions of the deputies were deferred; and, in fact, if not
in form, the law that no tax should be levied without consent
of the Cortes was constantly violated. Still, but for the
death of Prince Juan, in 1497, and the advent of the Austrian
dynasty with the possession of the Low Countries, the old
liberties might yet have been recovered. ... With the Cortes
of Toledo, in 1538, ended the meeting of the three estates.
The nobility first, then the clergy, were eliminated from the
Cortes, leaving only the proctors of the cities to become
servile instruments for the purposes of taxation."
W. Webster, Review of Colmeiro's
"Cortes de los Antiguos Reinos de Leon y de Castilla"
(Academy, Aug. 16, 1884).
CORUNNA, Battle of (1809).
See SPAIN: A. D. 1808-1809 (AUGUST-JANUARY).
CORUPEDION, Battle of.
A battle fought in western Phrygia, B. C. 281, in which
Lysimmachus, one of the disputants for Alexander's empire, was
defeated by Seleucus, and slain.
C. Thirlwall, History of Greece, chapter 60.
CORVÉE.
One of the feudal rights possessed in France (under the old
regime, before the Revolution) "by the lord of the manor over
his subjects, by means of which he could employ for his own
profit a certain number of their days of labour, or of their
oxen and horses. The 'Corvée à volonté,' that is to say, at
the arbitrary will of the Seigneur, had been completely
abolished [before the Revolution]: forced labour had been for
some time past confined to a certain number of days a year."
A. de Tocqueville, On the State of Society in France
before 1789, note 4 E. (p. 499).
CORVUS, The Roman.
See PUNIC WAR, THE FIRST.
COS, OR KOS.
One of the islands in the Ægean called the Sporades, near the
Carian coast of Asia Minor. The island was sacred to
Asclepius, or Æsculapeus, and was the birthplace of the
celebrated physician Hippocrates, as well as of the painter
Apelles. It was an Æolian colony, but joined the Dorian
confederacy.
COSIMO DE' MEDICI,
The ascendancy at Florence of.
See FLORENCE: A. D. 1433-1464.
COSMOS, COSMIOS, COSMOPOLIS.
See DEMIURGI.
{619}
COSSACKS, The.
"The origin of the Cossack tribes is lost in the obscurity of
ages; and many celebrated historians are still divided in
opinion as to whence the term Cossack, or rather Kosaque, is
properly to be derived. This word, indeed, is susceptible of
so many etymological explanations, as scarcely to offer for
anyone of them decided grounds of preference. Everything,
however, would seem to favour the belief that the word
Cossack, or Kosaque, was in much earlier use in the vicinity
of the Caucasus than in the Ukraine. ... Sherer, in his
'Annals of Russia Minor,' (La Petite Russie,) traces back the
origin of the Cossacks to the ninth century; but he does not
support his assertion by any facts clothed with the dignity of
historical truth. It appears certain, however, that the vast
pasture lands between the Don and the Dnieper, the country
lying on the south of Kïow, and traversed by the Dnieper up to
the Black Sea, was the principal birthplace of the Cossacks.
When, in 1242, Batukhan came with 500,000 men to take
possession of the empire which fell to his share of the vast
inheritance left by Tchingis Khan [see MONGOLS: A. D.
1229-1294], he extirpated many nations and displaced many
others. One portion of the Komans flying from the horrors of
this terrific storm, and arriving on the borders of the
Caspian Sea, on the banks of the Iaïk, (now Ouralsek,) turned
to the left, and took refuge between the embouchures of that
river, where they dwelt in small numbers, apart from their
brethren, in a less fertile climate. These were,
incontestably, the progenitors of the Cossacks of the Iaïk,
who are, historically, scarcely important enough for notice.
... At the approach of this formidable invasion towards the
Don, that portion of the Komans located on the left bank took
refuge in the marshes, and in the numerous islands formed by
that river near its embouchure. Here they found a secure
retreat; and from thence, having, from their new position,
acquired maritime habits and seafaring experience, they not
only, themselves, resorted to piracy as a means of existence,
but likewise enlisted in a formidable confederacy, for
purposes of rapine and pillage, all the roving and
discontented tribes in their surrounding neighbourhood. These
latter were very numerous. The Tartars, ever but indifferent
seamen, had not the courage to join them in these piratical
expeditions. This division of the Komans is indubitably the
parent stock of the modern Cossacks of the Don, by far the
most numerous of the Cossack tribes: by amalgamation; however,
with whole hosts of Tartar and Calmuck hordes, lawless,
desperate, and nomadic as themselves, they lost, in some
degree, the primitive and deeply marked distinctive character
of their race. The Komans of the Dnieper offered no more
energetic resistance to the invading hordes of Batukhan than
had been shown by their brethren of the Don: they dispersed in
various directions, and from this people, flying at the
advance of the ferocious Tartars, descended a variety of
hordes, who occasionally figure in history as distinct and
independent nations. ... [They] ultimately found a permanent
resting-place in the wild islets of the Dnieper, below the
cataracts, where dwelt already a small number of their ancient
compatriots, who had escaped the general destruction of their
nation. This spot became the cradle of the Cossacks of the
Ukraine, or of the tribes known in after times as the Polish
Cossacks. When Guedynum, Grand Duke of Lithuania, after having
defeated twelve Russian princes on the banks of the Piërna,
conquered Kïow with its dependencies in 1320, the wandering
tribes scattered over the steppes of the Ukraine owned his
allegiance. After the victories of Olgierd, of Vitold, and of
Ladislas Iagellon, over the Tartars and the Russians, large
bodies of Scythian militia, known subsequently by the
comprehensive denomination of Cossacks, or Kosaques, served
under these conquerors: and after the union of the Grand Duchy
of Lithuania with Poland, in 1386, they continued under the
dominion of the grand dukes of Lithuania, forming, apparently,
an intermediate tribe or caste, superior to the peasantry and
inferior to the nobles. At a later period, when the Ukraine
was annexed to the Polish crown, they passed under the
protection of the kings of Poland. ... Although there may,
doubtless, exist several species or castes of Cossacks, and to
whom Russia in order to impose on Europe, is pleased to give
as many different names, yet there never have been, nor will
there ever be, properly speaking, more than two principal
tribes of the Cossack nation, namely the Cossacks of the Don,
or Don-Cossacks, and the Cossacks of the Black Sea, known in
ancient times as the Polish Cossacks, or Zaporowscy Kozacy.
... The Cossacks [of the Don] ... have rendered signal service
to Russia, which, ever since the year 1549, has taken them
under her protection, without, however, the existence of any
official act, treaty, or stipulation, confirming their
submission to that power. ... The Don-Cossacks enjoy a certain
kind of liberty and independence; they have a hetman, attaman,
or chief, nominated by the Emperor of Russia; and to this
chief they yield an obedience more or less willing and
implicit; in general, they are commanded only by Cossack
officers, who take equal rank in the Russian army. They have a
separate war administration of their own; although they are
compelled to furnish a stated number of recruits who serve in
a manner for life, inasmuch as they are rarely discharged
before attaining sixty years of age: on the whole, their
condition is happier than that of the rest of the Russian
population. They belong to the Greek-Russian church. The
existence of this small republic of the Don, in the very heart
of the most despotic and most extensive empire in the world,
appears to constitute a problem, the solution of which is not
as yet definitely known, and the ultimate solution of which
yet remains to be ascertained."
H. Krasinski, The Cossacks of the Ukraine, chapter 1.
The Cossacks of the Ukraine transferred their allegiance from
the King of Poland to the Czar of Russia in 1654, after a
revolt led by their hetman, Bogdan Khmelnitski, in which they
were assisted by the neighboring Tartars, and which was
accompanied by terrible scenes of slaughter and destruction.
See POLAND: A. D. 1648-1654.
COSSÆANS, The.
See KOSSÆANS.
COSTA RICA: A. D. 1502.
Discovery by Columbus.
See AMERICA: A. D. 1498-1505.
COSTA RICA: A. D. 1813-1871.
Independence of Spain.
Brief annexation to Mexico.
The failures of federation, the wars and revolutions of
Central America.
See CENTRAL AMERICA: A. D. 1821-1871.
COSTA RICA: A. D. 1850.
The Clayton Bulwer Treaty and the projected Nicaragua Canal.
See NICARAGUA: A. D. 1850.
----------COSTA RICA: End----------
COSTANOAN FAMILY, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: COSTANOAN FAMILY.
COSTER, Laurent, and the invention of printing.
See PRINTING: A. D. 1430-1456.
COTARII.
See SLAVERY, MEDIÆVAL AND MODERN: ENGLAND.
620
COTHON OF CARTHAGE, The.
"There were two land-locked docks or harbours, opening the one
into the other, and both, it would seem, the work of human
hands. ... The outer harbour was rectangular, about 1,400 feet
long and 1,100 broad, and was appropriated to merchant
vessels; the inner was circular like a drinking cup, whence it
was called the Cothon, and was reserved for ships of war. It
could not be approached except through the merchant harbour,
and the entrance to this last was only 70 feet wide, and could
be closed at any time by chains. The war harbour was entirely
surrounded by quays, containing separate docks for 220 ships.
In front of each dock were two Ionic pillars of marble, so
that the whole must have presented the appearance of a
splendid circular colonnade. Right in the centre of the
harbour was an island, the headquarters of the admiral."
R. B. Smith, Carthage and the Carthaginians, chapter 20.
COTSETI.
See SLAVERY, MEDIÆVAL AND MODERN: ENGLAND.
COTTON, Reverend John and the colony of Massachusetts Bay.

See MASSACHUSETTS: A. D. 1631-1636.
COTTON FAMINE, The.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1861-1865.
COTTON-GIN:
Eli Whitney's invention and its effects.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1818-1821.
COTTON MANUFACTURE:
The great inventions in spinning and weaving.
"Cotton had been used in the extreme East and in the extreme
West from the earliest periods of which we have any record.
The Spaniards, on their discovery of America, found the
Mexicans clothed in cotton. ... But though the use of cotton
had been known from the earliest ages, both in India and
America, no cotton goods were imported into Europe; and in the
ancient world both rich and poor were clothed in silk, linen,
and wool. The industrious Moors introduced cotton into Spain.
Many centuries afterwards cotton was imported into Italy,
Saxony and the Low Countries. Isolated from the rest of
Europe, with little wealth, little industry, and no roads;
rent by civil commotions; the English were the last people in
Europe to introduce the manufacture of cotton goods into their
own homes. Towards the close of the 16th century, indeed,
cotton goods were occasionally mentioned in the Statute Book,
and the manufacture of the cottons of Manchester was regulated
by Acts passed in the reigns of Henry VIII., Edward VI., and
Elizabeth. But there seem to be good reasons for concluding
that Manchester cottons, in the time of the Tudors, were
woollen goods, and did not consist of cotton at all. More than
a century elapsed before any considerable trade in cotton
attracted the attention of the legislature. The woollen
manufacturers complained that people were dressing their
children in printed cottons; and Parliament was actually
persuaded to prohibit the introduction of Indian printed
calicoes. Even an Act of Parliament, however, was unable to
extinguish the growing taste for Indian cottons. ... The taste
for cotton led to the introduction of calico-printing in
London; Parliament in order to encourage the new trade, was
induced to sanction the importation of plain cotton cloths
from India under a duty. The demand, which was thus created
for calicoes, probably promoted their manufacture at home. ...
Up to the middle of the last century cotton goods were really
never made at all. The so-called cotton manufactures were a
combination of wool or linen and cotton. No Englishman had
been able to produce a cotton thread strong enough for the
warp; ... The superior skill of the Indian manufacturers
enabled them to use cotton for a warp; while clumsy
workmanship made the use of cotton as a warp unattainable at
home. In the middle of the 18th century, then, a piece of
cotton cloth in the true sense of the term, had never been
made in England. The so-called cotton goods were all made in
the cottages of the weavers. The yarn was carded by hand; it
was spun by hand; it was worked into cloth by a hand loom. ...
The operation of weaving was, however, much more rapid than
that of spinning. The weaver consumed more weft than his own
family could supply him with; and the weavers generally
experienced the greatest difficulty in obtaining sufficient
yarn. About the middle of the 18th century the ingenuity of
two persons, a father and a son, made this difference more
apparent. The shuttle had originally been thrown by the hand
from one end of the loom to the other. John Kay, a native of
Bury, by his invention of the fly-shuttle [patented in 1733],
saved the weaver from this labour. ... Robert Kay, John Kay's
son, added the drop-box, by means of which the weaver was able
'to use any one of three shuttles, each containing a different
coloured weft, without the trouble of taking them from and
replacing them in the lathe.' By means of these inventions the
productive power of each weaver was doubled. ... Carding and
roving were both slowly performed. ... The trade was in this
humble and primitive state when a series of extraordinary and
unparalleled inventions revolutionised the conditions on which
cotton had been hitherto prepared. A little more than a
century ago John Hargreaves, a poor weaver in the
neighbourhood of Blackburn, was returning home from a long
walk, in which he had been purchasing a further supply of yarn
for his loom. As he entered his cottage, his wife Jenny
accidentally upset the spindle which she was using. Hargreaves
noticed that the spindles which were now thrown into an
upright position, continued to revolve, and that the thread
was still spinning in his wife's hand. The idea immediately
occurred to him that it would be possible to connect a
considerable number of upright spindles with one wheel, and
thus multiply the productive power of each spinster. ...
Hargreaves succeeded in keeping his admirable invention secret
for a time; but the powers of his machine soon became known.
His ignorant neighbours hastily concluded that a machine,
which enabled one spinster to do the work of eight, would
throw multitudes of persons out of employment. A mob broke
into his house and destroyed his machine. Hargreaves himself
had to retire to Nottingham, where, with the friendly
assistance of another person, he was able to take out a patent
[1770] for the spinning-jenny, as the machine, in compliment
to his industrious wife, was called. The invention of the
spinning-jenny gave a new impulse to the cotton manufacture.
But the ... yarn spun by the jenny, like that which had
previously been spun by hand, was neither fine enough nor hard
enough to be employed as warp, and linen or woollen threads
had consequently to be used for this purpose.
{621}
In the very year, however, in which Hargreaves moved from
Blackburn to Nottingham, Richard Arkwright [who began life as
a barber's assistant] took out a patent [1769] for his still
more celebrated machine. ... 'After many years intense and
painful application,' he invented his memorable machine for
spinning by rollers; and laid the foundations of the gigantic
industry which has done more than any other trade to
concentrate in this country the wealth of the world. ... He
passed the thread over two pairs of rollers, one of which was
made to revolve much more rapidly than the other. The thread,
after passing the pair revolving slowly, was drawn into the
requisite tenuity by the rollers revolving at a higher
rapidity. By this simple but memorable invention Arkwright
succeeded in producing thread capable of employment as warp.
From the circumstance that the mill at which his machinery was
first erected was driven by water power, the machine received
the somewhat inappropriate name of the water frame; the thread
spun by it was usually called the water twist. Invention of
the spinning-jenny and the water frame would have been useless
if the old system of hand-carding had not been superseded by a
more efficient and more rapid process. Just as Arkwright
applied rotatory motion to spinning, so Lewis Paul introduced
revolving cylinders for carding cotton. ... This extraordinary
series of inventions placed an almost unlimited supply of yarn
at the disposal of the weaver. But the machinery, which had
thus been introduced, was still incapable of providing yarn
fit for the finer qualities of cotton cloth. ... This defect,
however, was removed by the ingenuity of Samuel Crompton, a
young weaver residing near Bolton. Crompton succeeded in
combining in one machine the various excellences 'of
Arkwright's water frame and Hargreaves' jenny.' Like the
former, his machine, which from its nature is happily called
the mule, 'has a system of rollers to reduce the roving; and
like the latter it has spindles without bobbins to give the
twist. ... The effects of Crompton's great invention may be
stated epigrammatically. ... The natives of India could spin a
pound of cotton into a thread 119 miles long.' The English
succeed in spinning the same thread to a length of 160 miles.
Yarn of the finest quality was at once at the disposal of the
weaver. ... The ingenuity of Hargreaves, Arkwright and
Crompton had been exercised to provide the weaver with yarn.
... The spinster had beaten the weaver. ... Edmund Cartwright,
a clergyman residing in Kent, happened to be staying at
Matlock in the summer of 1784, and to be thrown into the
company of some Manchester gentlemen. The conversation turned
on Arkwright's machinery, and 'one of the company observed
that, as soon as Arkwright's patent expired, so many mills
would be erected and so much cotton spun that hands would
never be found to weave it.' Cartwright replied 'that
Arkwright must then set his wits to work to invent a weaving
mill.' ... Within three years he had himself proved that the
invention was practicable by producing the power-loom.
Subsequent inventors improved the idea which Cartwright had
originated, and within fifty years from the date of his
memorable visit to Matlock there were not less than 100,000
power-looms at work in Great Britain alone. ... Other
inventions, less generally remembered, were hardly less
wonderful or less beneficial than these. ... Scheele, the
Swedish philosopher, discovered in 1774 the bleaching
properties of chlorine, or oxymuriatic acid. Berthollet, the
French chemist, conceived the idea of applying the acid to
bleaching cloth. ... In the same year in which Watt and Henry
were introducing the new acid to the bleacher, Bell, a
Scotchman, was laying the foundations of a trade in printed
calicoes. 'The old method of printing was by blocks of
sycamore.' ... This clumsy process was superseded by cylinder
printing. ... Such are the leading inventions, which made
Great Britain in less than a century the wealthiest country in
the world."
S. Walpole, History of England from 1815, volume 1, chapter 1.
ALSO IN:
R. W. C. Taylor, Introduction to a History
of the Factory System, chapter 10.
E. Baines, History of the Cotton Manufacture in Great Britain.
A. Ure, The Cotton Manufacture of Great Britain.
COULMIERS, Battle of (1870).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1870-1871.
COUNCIL BLUFFS, The Mormons at.
See MORMONISM: A. D. 1846-1848.
COUNCIL FOR NEW ENGLAND.
See NEW ENGLAND: A. D. 1620-1623; 1621-1631; and 1635.
COUNCIL OF BLOOD, The.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1567.
COUNCIL OF FIVE HUNDRED, The Athenian.
See ATHENS: B. C. 510-507.
The French.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1795 (JUNE-SEPTEMBER).
COUNCIL OF TEN, The.
See VENICE: A. D. 1032-1319.
COUNCIL OF THE ANCIENTS, The.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1795 (JUNE-SEPTEMBER).
COUNCIL, THE PRIVY.
See PRIVY COUNCIL.
COUNCILS OF THE CHURCH, General or Ecumenical.
There are seven councils admitted by both the Greek and Latin
churches as œcumenical (or ecumenical)--that is general, or
universal. The Roman Catholics recognize thirteen more, making
twenty in all--as follows:
1. The synod of apostles in Jerusalem.
2. The first Council of Nice, A. D. 325
(see NICÆA, THE FIRST COUNCIL).
3. The first Council of Constantinople, A. D. 381.
4. The first Council of Ephesus, A. D. 431.
5. The Council of Chalcedon, A. D. 451.
6. The second Council of Constantinople, A. D. 553.
7. The third Council of Constantinople, A. D. 681.
8. The second Council of Nice, A. D. 787.
9. The fourth Council of Constantinople, A. D. 869.
10. The first Lateran Council, A. D. 1123.
11. The second Lateran Council, A. D. 1139.
12. The third Lateran Council, A. D. 1179.
13. The fourth Lateran Council, A. D. 1215.
14. The first œcumenical synod of Lyon, A. D. 1245.
15. The second œcumenical synod of Lyon, A. D. 1274.
16. The Synod of Vienne in Gaul, A. D. 1311.
17. The Council of Constance,
A. D. 1414 (see PAPACY: A. D. 1414-1418).
18. The Council of Basel, A. D. 1431
(see PAPACY: A. D. 1431-1448).
19. The Council of Trent, A. D. 1545
(see PAPACY: A. D. 1537-1563).
20. The Council of the Vatican, A. D. 1869
(see PAPACY: A. D. 1869-1870).
{622}
COUNT AND DUKE, Roman.
Origin of the titles.
"The defence of the Roman empire was at length committed
[under Constantine and his successors] to eight
masters-general of the cavalry and infantry. Under their
orders thirty-five military commanders were stationed in the
provinces--three in Britain, six in Gaul, one in Spain, one in
Italy, five on the Upper and four on the Lower Danube, in Asia
eight, three in Egypt, and four in Africa. The titles of
Counts and Dukes, by which they were properly distinguished,
have obtained in modern languages so very different a sense
that the use of them may occasion some surprise. But it should
be recollected that the second of those appellations is only a
corruption of the Latin word which was indiscriminately
applied to any military chief. All these provincial generals
were therefore dukes; but no more than ten among them were
dignified with the rank of counts or companions, a title of
honour, or rather of favour, which had been recently invented
in the court of Constantine. A gold belt was the ensign which
distinguished the office of the counts and dukes."
E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 17.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
"The Duke and the Count of modern Europe--what are they but
the Generals and Companions (Duces and Comites) of a Roman
province? Why or when they changed places, the Duke climbing
up into such unquestioned pre-eminence over his former
superior the Count, I know not, nor yet by what process it was
discovered that the latter was the precise equivalent of the
Scandinavian Jarl."
T. Hodgkin, Italy and Her Invaders, book 1, chapter 3.
COUNT OF THE DOMESTICS.
In the organization of the Imperial Household, during the
later period of the Roman empire, the officers called Counts
of the Domestics "commanded the various divisions of the
household troops, known by the names of Domestici and
Protectores, and thus together replaced the Prætorian Prefect
of the earlier days of the Empire. ... Theoretically, their
duties would not greatly differ from those of a Colonel in the
Guards."
T. Hodgkin, Italy and Her Invaders, book 1, chapter 3.
COUNT OF THE SACRED LARGESSES.
In the later Roman empire, "the Count who had charge of the
Sacred (i. e. Imperial) Bounty, should have been by his title
simply the Grand Almoner of the Empire. ... In practice,
however, the minister who took charge of the Imperial
Largesses had to find ways and means for every other form of
Imperial expenditure. ... The Count of the Sacred Largesses
was therefore in fact the Chancellor of the Exchequer of the
Empire."
T. Hodgkin, Italy and Her Invaders, book 1, chapter 3.
COUNT OF THE SAXON SHORE.
See SAXON SHORE.
COUNT PALATINE.
See PALATINE, COUNTS.
COUNTER-REFORMATION, The.
See PAPACY: A. D. 1534-1540; 1537-1563; 1555-1603.
COUNTRY PARTY, The.
See ENGLAND; A. D. 1672-1673.
COUP D' ETAT OF LOUIS NAPOLEON, The.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1851; and 1851-1852.
COUREURS DE BOIS.
"Out of the beaver trade [in the 17th century] rose a huge
evil, baneful to the growth and the morals of Canada. All that
was most active and vigorous in the colony took to the woods,
and escaped from the control of intendants, councils and
priests, to the savage freedom of the wilderness. Not only
were the possible profits great, but, in the pursuit of them,
there was a fascinating element of adventure and danger. The
bush rangers, or coureurs de bois, were to the king an object
of horror. They defeated his plans for the increase of the
population, and shocked his native instinct of discipline and
order. Edict after edict was directed against them; and more
than once the colony presented the extraordinary spectacle of
the greater part of its young men turned into forest outlaws.
... We hear of seigniories abandoned; farms turning again into
forests; wives and children left in destitution. The exodus of
the coureurs de bois would take at times the character of an
organized movement. The famous Du Lhut is said to have made a
general combination of the young men of Canada to follow him
into the woods. Their plan was to be absent four years, in
order that the edicts against them might have time to relent.
The intendant Duchesneau reported that 800 men out of a
population of less than 10,000 souls had vanished from sight
in the immensity of a boundless wilderness. Whereupon the king
ordered that any person going into the woods without a license
should be whipped and branded for the first offence, and sent
for life to the galleys for the second. ... Under such leaders
as Du Lhut, the coureurs de bois built forts of palisades at
various points throughout the West and Northwest. They had a
post of this sort at Detroit some time before its permanent
settlement, as well as others on Lake Superior and in the
Valley of the Mississippi. They occupied them as long as it
suited their purposes, and then abandoned them to the next
comer. Michillimackinac was, however, their chief resort."
F. Parkman, The Old Regime in Canada, chapter 17.
COURLAND, Christian conquest of.
See. LIVONIA: 12TH-13TH CENTURIES.
COURT BARON.
See MANORS.
COURT CUSTOMARY.
See MANORS.
COURT-LEET.
See MANORS,
and SAC AND SOC.
COURT OF CHANCERY.
See CHANCELLOR.
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.
See CURIA REGIS.
COURT OF HIGH COMMISSION.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1559;
and A. D. 1686.
COURT OF KING'S BENCH.
See CURIA REGIS.
COURT, SUPREME, of the United States.
See SUPREME COURT.
COURTRAI: A. D. 1382.
Pillaged and burned by the French.
See FLANDERS: A. D. 1382.
COURTRAI: A. D. 1646.
Siege and capture by the French.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1645-1646.
COURTRAI: A. D. 1648.
Taken by the Spaniards.
See NETHERLANDS (SPANISH PROVINCES): A. D. 1647-1648.
COURTRAI: A. D. 1667.
Taken by the French.
See NETHERLANDS (THE SPANISH PROVINCES): A. D. 1667.
COURTRAI: A. D. 1668.
Ceded to France.
See NETHERLANDS (HOLLAND); A. D. 1668.
COURTRAI: A. D. 1679.
Restored to Spain.
See NIMEGUEN, THE PEACE OF.
----------COURTRAI: End----------
{623}
COURTRAI, The Battle of.
The battle of Courtrai (July 11, A. D. 1302), in which the
barons and knights of France were fearfully slaughtered by the
sturdy burghers of Flanders, was sometimes called the Day of
the Spurs, on account of the great number of gilt spurs which
was taken from the bodies of the dead and hung up by the
victors in Courtrai cathedral.
G. W. Kitchen, History of France,
book 3, chapter 10, section 2.
See FLANDERS: A. D. 1299-1304.
COURTS OF LOVE.
See PROVENCE: A.D. 1179-1207.
COUTHON,
and the French Revolutionary Committee of Public Safety.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1793 (JUNE-OCTOBER), to 1794 (JULY).
COUTRAS, Battle of (1587).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1584-1589.
COVADONGA, Cave of.
See SPAIN: A. D. 713-737.
COVENANT, The Halfway.
See BOSTON: A. D. 1657-1669.
COVENANT, The Solemn League and.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1643 (JULY-SEPTEMBER).
COVENANTERS.
The name given to the signers and supporters of the Scottish
National Covenant (see SCOTLAND: A. D. 1557, 1581 and 1638)
and afterwards to all who adhered to the Kirk of Scotland. The
war of Montrose with the Covenanters will be found narrated
under SCOTLAND: A. D. 1644-1645. For the story of the
persecution which they suffered under the restored Stuarts,
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1660-1666; 1669-1679; 1679; and 1681-1689.
COVENANTS, The Scottish.
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1557-1581; and 1638.
COWBOYS.
During the War of the American Revolution, "there was a venal
and bloody set which hung on the skirts of the British army,
well known as Cow-boys. They were plunderers and ruffians by
profession, and came to have their name from their
cattle-stealing. Some of the most cruel and disgraceful
murders and barbarities of the war were perpetrated by them.
Whenever they were caught they were hung up at once."
C. W. Elliott, The New England History, volume 2, page 372.
See, also, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1780
(AUGUST-SEPTEMBER).
COWPENS, Battle of the (1781).
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1780-1781.
CRACOW: A. D. 1702.
Taken by Charles XII. of Sweden.
See SCANDINAVIAN STATES (SWEDEN): A. D. 1701-1707.
CRACOW: A. D. 1793-1794.
Occupied by the Russians.
Rising of the citizens.
Surrender and cession to Austria.
See POLAND: A. D. 1793-1796.
CRACOW: A. D. 1815.
Creation of the Republic.
See VIENNA, THE CONGRESS OF.
CRACOW: A. D. 1831-1846.
Occupation by the Austrians, Russians and Prussians.
Extinction of the Republic.
Annexation to Austria.
See AUSTRIA: A. D. 1815-1846.
----------CRACOW: End----------
CRADLE OF LIBERTY.
See FANEUIL HALL.
CRAFT-GUILDS.
See GUILDS, MEDIÆVAL.
CRAGIE TRACT, The.
See NEW YORK: A. D. 1786-1799.
CRAL.-KRALE.
"The princes of Servia (Ducange, Famil, Dalmaticæ, &c., c.
2-4, 9) were styled 'despots' in Greek, and Cral in their
native idiom (Ducange, Gloss. Græc., page 751). That title, the
equivalent of king, appears to be of Sclavonic origin, from
whence it has been borrowed by the Hungarians, the modern
Greeks, and even by the Turks (Leunclavius, Pandect. Turc., p.
422), who reserve the name of Padishah for the Emperor."
E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,
chapter 63, note.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
See, also,
BALKAN AND DANUBIAN STATES: A. D. 1341-1356 (SERVIA).
CRANNOGES.
See LAKE DWELLINGS.
CRANNON (KRANNON), Battle of (B. C. 322).
See GREECE: B. C. 323-322.
CRAONNE, Battle of.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1814 (JANUARY-MARCH).
CRASSUS AND THE FIRST TRIUMVIRATE.
See ROME: B. C. 78-68, to 57-52.
CRATER, Battle of the Petersburg.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1864 (JULY: VIRGINIA).
CRATERUS, AND THE WARS OF THE DIADOCHI.
See MACEDONIA: B. C. 323-316.
CRANGALLIDÆ, The.
See HIERODULI.
CRAYFORD, Battle of (A. D. 457).
The second battle fought between the Britons and the invading
Jutes, under Hengest, for the possession of southeastern
Britain.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 449-473.
CRÉCY, Battle of (1346).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1337-1360.
CREDIT MOBILIER SCANDAL.
On the meeting of the Congress of the United States in
December, 1872, attention was called by the Speaker to charges
made in the preceding canvass "that the Vice-President, the
Vice-President elect, the Secretary of the Treasury, several
Senators, the Speaker of the House, and a large number of
Representatives had been bribed, during the years 1867 and
1868, by presents of stock in a corporation known as the
Credit Mobilier [organized to contract for building the Union
Pacific Railroad] to vote and act for the benefit of the Union
Pacific Railroad Company. On his motion, an investigating
committee was appointed, L. P. Poland, of Vermont, being
chairman. The Poland Committee reported February 18th, 1873,
recommending the expulsion of Oakes Ames, of Massachusetts,
for selling to members of Congress shares of the stock of the
Credit Mobilier below their real value, with intent thereby to
influence the votes of such members,' and of James Brooks, of
New York, for receiving such stock. The House modified the
proposed expulsion into an 'absolute condemnation' of the
conduct of both members."
A. Johnston, History of American Politics, pages 210-220.
Report of Select Committee
(42d Congress, 3d session, H. R. report no. 77).
ALSO IN:
J. B. Crawford, The Credit Mobilier of America.
CREEKS.
Creek Wars.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: MUSKHOGEAN FAMILY;
also UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1813-1814 (AUGUST-APRIL),
and FLORIDA: A. D. 1816-1818.
CREES, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
CREFELD, Battle of.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1758.
CREMA, Siege of (1159-1160).
See ITALY: A. D. 1154-1162.
CREMONA: The Roman Colony.
Siege by the Gauls.
See ROME: B. C. 295-191.
CREMONA: A. D. 69.
Destruction by the Flavians.
See ROME: A, D. 69.
CREMONA: A. D. 1702.
Defeat of the French.
See ITALY (SAVOY AND PIEDMONT): A. D. 1701-1713.
{624}
CREOLE.
"In Europe it is very common to attach to the term Creole the
idea of a particular complexion. This is a mistake. The
designation Creole [in Spanish American regions] properly
belongs to all the natives of America born of parents who have
emigrated from the Old World, be those parents Europeans or
Africans. There are, therefore, white as well as black
Creoles. ... The term Creole is a corruption of the Spanish
word 'criollo,' which is derived from 'criar,' to create or to
foster. The Spaniards apply the term 'criollo' not merely to
the human race, but also to animals propagated in the
colonies, but of pure European blood: thus they have creole
horses, bullocks, poultry, &c."
J. J. Von Tschudi, Travels in Peru,
chapter 5, and foot-note.
"The term Creole is commonly applied in books to the native of
a Spanish colony descended from European ancestors, while
often the popular acceptation conveys the idea of an origin
partly African. In fact, its meaning varies in different times
and regions, and in Louisiana alone has, and has had, its
broad and its close, its earlier and its later, significance.
For instance, it did not here first belong to the descendants
of Spanish, but of French settlers. But such a meaning implied
a certain excellence of origin, and so came early to include
any native of French or Spanish descent by either parent,
whose pure non-mixture with the slave race entitled him to
social rank. Much later the term was adopted by, not conceded
to, the natives of European-African, or Creole-African blood,
and is still so used among themselves. At length the spirit of
commerce availed itself of the money value of so honored a
title, and broadened its meaning to take in any creature or
thing of variety or manufacture peculiar to Louisiana, that
might become an object of sale, as Creole ponies, chickens,
cows, shoes, eggs, wagons, baskets, cabbages, etc. ... There
are no English, Scotch, Irish, Western, or Yankee Creoles,
these all being included under the distinctive term
'Americans.' ... There seems to be no more serviceable
definition of the Creoles of Louisiana or of New Orleans than
to say they are the French-speaking, native, ruling class."
G. E. Waring, Jr., and G. W Cable,
History and Present Condition of New Orleans
(Tenth Census of the U. S., volume 19, page 218).
CREONES, The.
See BRITAIN, CELTIC TRIBES.
CRESCENT, The Order of the.
A Turkish Order instituted in 1799 by the reforming sultan,
Selim III. Lord Nelson, after the victory of Aboukir, was the
first to receive this decoration.
CRESPY IN VALOIS, Treaty of (1544).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1532-1547.
CRETAN LABYRINTH,
See LABYRINTHS.
CRETE.
"The institutions of the Cretan state show in many points so
great a similarity to those of Sparta, that it is not
surprising if it seemed to the ancients as though either Crete
were a copy of Sparta, or Sparta of Crete. Meanwhile this
similarity may be explained, apart from intentional imitation,
by the community of nationality, which, under like conditions,
must produce like institutions. For in Crete, as in Laconia,
Dorians were the ruling people, who had subdued the old
inhabitants of the island and placed them in a position of
subordination. ... It is, however, beyond doubt that
settlements were made in Crete by the Phoenicians, and that a
large portion of the island was subject to them. In the
historical period, it is true, we no longer find them here; we
find, on the contrary, only a number of Greek states, all
moreover Dorian. Each of these consisted of a city with its
surrounding district, in which no doubt also smaller cities in
their turn were found standing in a relation of subordination
to the principal city. For that each city of the
'ninety-citied' or 'hundred-citied' isle, as Homer calls it,
formed also an independent state, will probably not be
supposed. As independent states our authorities give us reason
to recognize about seventeen. The most important of these were
in earlier times Cnossus, Gortyn and Cydonia."-
G. Schömann, Antiquities of Greece: The State,
part 3, chapter 2.
See ASIA MINOR: THE GREEK COLONIES.
CRETE: B. C. 68-66.
The Roman Conquest.
The Romans came into collision with the Cretans during their
conflict with the Cilician pirates. The Cretans, degenerate
and half piratical themselves, had formed an alliance with the
professional buccaneers, and defeated, off Cydonia, a Roman
fleet that had been sent against the latter, B. C. 71. They
soon repented of the provocation they had offered and sent
envoys to Rome to buy peace by heavy bribes; but neither the
penitence nor the bribes prevailed. Three years passed,
however, before the proconsul, Quintus Metellus, appeared in
Crete (B. C. 68) to exact satisfaction, and two years more
were spent in overcoming the stubborn resistance of the
islanders. The taking of Cydonia cost Metellus a bloody battle
and a prolonged siege. Cnossus and other towns held out with
equal courage. In the end, however, Crete was added to the
conquered dominions of Rome. At the last of the struggle there
occurred a conflict of jurisdiction between Metellus and
Pompey, and their respective forces fought with one another on
the Cretan soil.
T. Mommsen, History of Rome, book 5, chapter 4.
CRETE: A. D. 823.
Conquest by the Saracens.
"The reign of Al Hakem, the Ommiade Caliph of Spain, was
disturbed by continual troubles; and some theological disputes
having created a violent insurrection in the suburbs of
Cordova, about 15,000 Spanish Arabs were compelled to emigrate
in the year 815. The greater part of these desperadoes
established themselves at Alexandria, where they soon took an
active part in the civil wars of Egypt. The rebellion of
Thomas [an officer who disputed the Byzantine throne with
Michael II.], and the absence of the naval forces of the
Byzantine Empire from the Archipelago, left the island of
Crete unprotected. The Andalusian Arabs of Alexandria availed
themselves of this circumstance to invade the island, and
establish a settlement on it, in the year 823. Michael was
unable to take any measures for expelling the invaders, and an
event soon happened in Egypt which added greatly to the
strength of this Saracen colony. The victories of the
lieutenants of the Caliph Almamum compelled the remainder of
the Andalusian Arabs to quit Alexandria; so that Abou Hafs,
called by the Greeks Apochaps, joined his countrymen in Crete
with forty ships, determined to make the new settlement their
permanent home. It is said by the Byzantine writers that they
commenced their conquest of the island by destroying their
fleet, and constructing a strong fortified camp, surrounded by
an immense ditch, from which it received the name of Chandak,
now corrupted by the western nations into Candia. ... The
Saracens retained possession of Crete for 135 years."
G. Finlay, History of the Byzantine Empire,
from 716 to 1057, book 1. chapter 3.
{625}
During the stay of these piratical Andalusian Arabs at
Alexandria, "they cut in pieces both friends and foes,
pillaged the churches and mosques, sold above 6,000 Christian
captives, and maintained their station in the capital of Egypt
till they were oppressed by the forces and presence of Almamon
himself."
E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 52.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
ALSO IN:
S. A. Dunham, History of Spain and Portugal,
book 3, chapter 1.
CRETE: A. D. 961-963.
Recovery from the Saracens.
"In the subordinate station of great domestic, or general of
the East, he [Nicephorus Phocas, afterwards emperor, on the
Byzantine throne], reduced the island of Crete, and extirpated
the nest of pirates who had so long defied, with impunity, the
majesty of the Empire. ... Seven months were consumed in the
siege of Candia; the despair of the native Cretans was
stimulated by the frequent aid of their brethren of Africa and
Spain; and, after the massy wall and double ditch had been
stormed by the Greeks, a hopeless conflict was still
maintained in the streets and houses of the city. The whole
island was subdued in the capital, and a submissive people
accepted, without resistance, the baptism of the conqueror."
E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 52.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
CRETE: A. D. 1204-1205.
Acquired by the Venetians.
See BYZANTINE EMPIRE: A. D.1204-1205.
CRETE: A. D. 1645-1669.
The long siege of Candia.
Surrender to the Turks.
See TURKS: A. D. 1645-1669.
CRETE: A. D. 1715.
Complete Expulsion of the Venetians by the Turks.
See TURKS: A. D. 1714-1718.
CRETE: A. D. 1866-1868.
Unsuccessful revolt.
Struggle for independence.
Turkish concession of the Organic Regulation.
See GREECE: A. D. 1862-1881.
----------CRETE: End----------
CRETE, Party of the.--Crêtois.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1795 (APRIL).
CRIMEA, OR CRIM TARTARY:
Early history.
See TAURICA;
also BOSPORUS, CITY AND KINGDOM.
CRIMEA: 7th Century.
Conquest and occupation by the Khazars.
See KHAZARS.
CRIMEA: 12th-13th Centuries.
Genoese commercial colonies.
See GENOA: A. D. 1261-1299.
CRIMEA: 13th-14th Centuries.
The khanate to Krim.
See MONGOLS: A. D. 1238-1391.
CRIMEA: A. D. 1475.
Conquest by the Ottoman Turks.
See TURKS (THE OTTOMANS): A. D. 1451-1481.
CRIMEA: A. D. 1571.
Expedition of the Khan to Moscow.
The city stormed and sacked.
See RUSSIA: A. D. 1569-1571.
CRIMEA: A. D. 1735-1738.
Russian invasions and fruitless conquests.
See RUSSIA: A. D. 1725-1739.
CRIMEA: A. D. 1774.
The khanate declared independent of the Porte.
See TURKS: A. D. 1768-1774.
CRIMEA: A. D. 1776-1784.
The process of acquisition by Russia.
Final recognition of Russian sovereignty by the Sultan.
See TURKS: A. D. 1776-1792.
CRIMEA: A. D. 1853-1855.
War of Russia with Turkey and her allies.
Siege of Sebastopol.
See RUSSIA: A. D. 1853-1854, to 1854-1856.
----------CRIMEA: End----------
CRISIS OF 1837, The.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1835-1837.
CRISIS OF 1857.
See TARIFF LEGISLATION
(UNITED STATES): A. D. 1846-1861.
CRISSA.
Crissæan or Sacred War.
See DELPHI.
CRITTENDEN COMPROMISE, The.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1860 (DECEMBER).
CROATANS, The.
See AMERICA: A. D. 1587-1590.
CROATIA: 7th Century.
Sclavonic occupation and settlement.
See BALKAN AND DANUBIAN STATES,
7TH CENTURY (SERVIA, CROATIA, BOSNIA, ETC.)
CROATIA: A. D. 1102.
Subjection and annexation to Hungary.
See HUNGARY: A. D. 972-1114.
CROATIA: A. D. 1576.
Transferred to the Duke of Styria.
Military colonization.
See HUNGARY: A. D. 1567-1604.
----------CROATIA: End----------
CROIA, Turkish massacre at.
See GREECE: A. D. 1454-1479.
CROMLECHS.
Rude stone monuments found in many parts of the British
Islands, France, and elsewhere, usually formed by three or
more huge, rough, upright stones, with a still larger stone
lying flatly upon them. In France these are called Dolmens.
They were formerly thought to be "Druids altars," to which
notion they owe the name Cromlechs; but it is now very
generally concluded by archæologists that they were
constructed for burial chambers, and that originally, in most
cases, they were covered with mounds of earth, forming the
well known barrows, or grave mounds, or tumuli.
L. Jewett, Grave Mounds.
ALSO IN:
T. Wright, The Celt, the Roman and the Saxon.
Sir J. Lubbock, Prehistoric Times, chapter 5.
See, also, AMORITES.
CROMPTON'S MULE, The invention of.
See COTTON MANUFACTURES.
CROMWELL, Oliver.
Campaigns and Protectorate.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1644 to 1658-1660;
and IRELAND: A. D. 1649-1650.
CROMWELL, Thomas,
The suppression of the Monasteries.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1535-1539.
CROMWELLIAN SETTLEMENT OF IRELAND.
See IRELAND: A. D. 1653.
CROMWELL'S IRONSIDES.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1643 (MAY).
CROSS, The "True."
Its capture by the Persians and recovery by Heraclius.
See ROME: A. D. 565-628;
And JERUSALEM: A. D. 615.
CROSS KEYS, Battle of.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1862 (MAY-JUNE: VIRGINIA).
CROTON.--KROTON.
See SYBARIS.
CROTONA, Battle of (A. D. 983).
See ITALY (SOUTHERN): A. D. 800-1016.
CROWN, The iron.
See LOMBARDY, THE IRON CROWN OF.
CROWN OF INDIA, The Order of the.
An order, for women, instituted by Queen Victoria in 1878.
{626}
CROWN POINT: A. D. 1727.
Fort built by the French.
See CANADA (NEW FRANCE): A. D. 1700-1735.
CROWN POINT: A. D. 1755.
English Expedition against.
See CANADA (NEW FRANCE): A. D. 1755 (SEPTEMBER).
CROWN POINT: A. D: 1759.
Abandoned to the English by the French.
See CANADA (NEW FRANCE): A. D. 1759 (JULY-AUGUST).
CROWN POINT: A. D. 1775.
Surprise and capture by the Americans.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1775 MAY.
----------CROWN POINT: End----------
CROWS, OR UPSAROKAS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: SIOUAN FAMILY.
CRUITHNIGH.-CRUITHNIANS.
The Irish name of the Picts and Scots of ancient Ireland and
Scotland.
See SCOTLAND: THE PICTS AND SCOTS.
CRUSADES:
Causes and introductory events.
"Like all the great movements of mankind, the Crusades must be
traced to the coincidence of many causes which influenced men
of various nations and discordant feelings, at the same period
of time, to pursue one common end with their whole heart.
Religious zeal, the fashion of pilgrimages, the spirit of
social development, the energies that lead to colonisation or
conquest, and commercial relations, only lately extended so
widely as to influence public opinion, all suddenly received a
deep wound. Every class of society felt injured and insulted,
and unity of action was created as if by a divine impulse. The
movement was facilitated by the circumstance that Europe began
to adopt habits of order just at the time when Asia was thrown
into a state of anarchy by the invasions of the Seljouk Turks.
Great numbers of pilgrims had always passed through the
Byzantine empire to visit the holy places in Palestine. We
still possess an itinerary of the road from Bordeaux to
Jerusalem, by the way of Constantinople, written in the fourth
century for the use of pilgrims. Though the disturbed and
impoverished state of Europe, after the fall of the Western
Empire, diminished the number of pilgrims, still, even in
times of the greatest anarchy, many passed annually through
the Eastern Empire to Palestine. The improvement which dawned
on the western nations during the eleventh century, and the
augmented commerce of the Italians, gave additional importance
to the pilgrimage to the East. About the year 1064, during the
reign of Constantine X., an army or caravan of seven thousand
pilgrims passed through Constantinople, led by the Archbishop
of Mentz and four bishops. They made their way through Asia
Minor, which was then under the Byzantine government; but in
the neighbourhood of Jerusalem they were attacked by the
Bedouins, and only saved from destruction by the Saracen emir
of Ramla, who hastened to their assistance. These pilgrims are
reported to have lost 3,000 of their number, without being
able to visit either the Jordan or the Dead Sea. The invasions
of the Seljouks [see TURKS (THE SELJUKS): A. D. 1073-1092]
increased the disorders in Palestine. ... In the year 1076 the
Seljouk Turks took possession of Jerusalem, and immediately
commenced harassing the pilgrims with unheard-of exactions.
The Saracens had in general viewed the pilgrims with favour,
as men engaged in fulfilling a pious duty, or pursuing lawful
gain with praiseworthy industry, and they had levied only a
reasonable toll on the pilgrims, and a moderate duty on their
merchandise; while in consideration of these imposts, they had
established guards to protect them on the roads by which they
approached the holy places. The Turks, on the contrary, acting
like mere nomads, uncertain of retaining possession of the
city, thought only of gratifying their avarice. They plundered
the rich pilgrims, and insulted the poor. The religious
feelings of the Christians were irritated, and their commerce
ruined; a cry for vengeance arose throughout all Europe, and
men's minds were fully prepared for an attempt to conquer
Palestine, when Peter the Hermit began to preach that it was a
sacred duty to deliver the tomb of Christ from the hands of
the Infidels."
G. Finlay, History of the Byzantine and Greek
Empires, book 3, chapter 2, section 1.
CRUSADES: A. D. 1091.
The Council of Clermont.
Pope Urban II., one of two rival pontiffs then contending for
recognition by the Church, entered with great eagerness into
the movement stirred by Peter the Hermit, and gave it a
powerful impulse through his support, while obtaining for
himself, at the same time, a decisive advantage over his
competitor, by the popularity of the agitation. A great
Council was convened at Piacenza, A. D. 1094, and a second at
Clermont, in the autumn of the same year, to deliberate upon
the action to be taken. The city of Clermont could not contain
the vast multitude of bishops, clergy and laity which
assembled, and an army of many thousands was tented in the
surrounding country. To that excited congregation, at a
meeting in the great square of Clermont, Pope Urban addressed
a speech which is one of the notable utterances of History.
"He began by detailing the miseries endured by their brethren
in the Holy Land; how the plains of Palestine were desolated
by the outrageous heathen, who with the sword and the
firebrand carried wailing into the dwellings and flames into
the possessions of the faithful; how Christian wives and
daughters were defiled by pagan lust; how the altars of the
true God were desecrated, and the relics of the saints trodden
under foot. 'You,' continued the eloquent pontiff (and Urban
II. was one of the most eloquent men of the day), 'you, who
hear me, and who have received the true faith, and been
endowed by God with power, and strength, and greatness of
soul,--whose ancestors have been the prop of Christendom, and
whose kings have put a barrier against the progress of the
infidel,--I call upon you to wipe off these impurities from
the face of the earth, and lift your oppressed
fellow-Christians from the depths into which they have been
trampled.' ... The warmth of the pontiff communicated itself
to the crowd, and the enthusiasm of the people broke out
several times ere he concluded his address. He went on to
portray, not only the spiritual but the temporal advantages
that would accrue to those who took up arms in the service of
the cross. Palestine was, he said, a land flowing with milk
and honey, and precious in the sight of God, as the scene of
the grand events which had saved mankind. That land, he
promised, should be divided among them. Moreover, they should
have full pardon for all their offences, either against God or
man. 'Go, then,' he added, 'in expiation of your sins; and
go assured, that after this world shall have passed away,
imperishable glory shall be yours in the world which is to
come.' The enthusiasm was no longer to be restrained, and loud
shouts interrupted the speaker; the people exclaiming as if
with one voice, 'Dieu le veult! Dieu le veult!' ... The news
of this council spread to the remotest parts of Europe in an
incredibly short space of time. Long before the fleetest
horseman could have brought the intelligence, it was known by
the people in distant provinces; a fact which was considered
as nothing less than supernatural. But the subject was in
everybody's mouth, and the minds of men were prepared for the
result. The enthusiastic merely asserted what they wished, and
the event tallied with their prediction."
C. Mackay, Memoirs of Extraordinary Popular
Delusions: The Crusades, (volume 2).
ALSO IN:
H. H. Milman, History of Latin Christianity,
book 7, chapter 6.
{627}
CRUSADES: A. D. 1094-1095,
Peter the Hermit and his appeal.
"About twenty years after the conquest of Jerusalem by the
Turks, the holy sepulchre was visited by an hermit of the name
of Peter, a native of Amiens, in the province of Picardy in
France. His resentment and sympathy were excited by his own
injuries, and the oppression of the Christian name; he mingled
his tears with those of the patriarch, and earnestly inquired,
if no hopes of relief could be entertained from the Greek
emperors of the East. The patriarch exposed the vices and
weakness of the successors of Constantine. 'I will rouse,'
exclaimed the hermit, 'the martial nations of Europe in your
cause;' and Europe was obedient to the call of the hermit. The
astonished patriarch dismissed him with epistles of credit and
complaint, and no sooner did he land at Bari, than Peter
hastened to kiss the feet of the Roman pontiff. His stature
was small, his appearance contemptible; but his eye was keen
and lively, and he possessed that vehemence of speech which
seldom fails to impart the persuasion of the soul. He was born
of a gentleman's family (for we must now adopt a modern
idiom), and his military service was under the neighbouring
counts of Boulogne, the heroes of the first crusade.
Invigorated by the approbation of the pontiff, this zealous
missionary traversed, with speed and success, the provinces of
Italy and France. His diet was abstemious, his prayers long
and fervent, and the alms which he received with one hand, he

distributed with the other; his head was bare, his feet naked,
his meagre body was wrapt in a coarse garment; he bore and
displayed a weighty crucifix; and the ass on which he rode was
sanctified in the public eye by the service of the man of God.
He preached to innumerable crowds in the churches, the
streets, and the highways. ... When he painted the sufferings
of the natives and pilgrims of Palestine, every heart was
melted to compassion; every breast glowed with indignation,
when he challenged the warriors of the age to defend their
brethren and rescue their Saviour: his ignorance of art and
language was compensated by sighs and tears, and ejaculations;
and Peter supplied the deficiency of reason by loud and
frequent appeals to Christ and his Mother, to the saints and
angels of paradise, with whom he had personally conversed. The
most perfect orator of Athens might have envied the success of
his eloquence; the rustic enthusiast inspired the passions
which he felt, and Christendom expected with impatience the
counsels and decrees of the supreme pontiff."
E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 58.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
ALSO IN:
J. C. Robertson, History of the Christian
Church, book 6, chapter 4 (volume 4).
CRUSADES: A. D. 1096-1099.
The First Great Movement.
The first army of Crusaders to set out on the long march to
Jerusalem was a mob of men, women and children which had not
patience to wait for the organized movement of the military
leaders. They gathered in vast numbers on the banks of the
Moselle and the Meuse, in the spring of 1096, with Peter the
Hermit for their chosen chief. There were nine knights, only,
in the swarm, and but few who had horses to ride, or efficient
arms to bear, or provisions to feed upon. Knowing nothing, and
therefore fearing nothing, they marched away, through France,
Germany, Hungary and beyond, begging food where they could and
subsisting by pillage when it needed. A knight called Walter
the Penniless led the van, and Peter followed, with his second
division, by a somewhat different route. Walter escaped
serious trouble until he reached the country of the savage
Bulgarians. Peter's senseless mob provoked the just wrath of
the Hungarians by storming the small city of Semlin and
slaying 4,000 of its inhabitants. The route of both was lined
with the bones of thousands who perished of hunger, of
exposure, of disease, and by the swords of Hungarians and
Bulgarians. A third and a fourth host of like kind followed in
their wake, led by a monk, Gotschalk, a priest named Volkmar,
and a Count Emicon. These terrorized even more all the
countries through which they passed,--especially where Jews
were to be hunted and killed,--and were destroyed in Hungary
to almost the last man. Peter and Walter reached
Constantinople with 100,000 followers, it is said, even yet,
after all who had fallen by the way. Still refusing to wait
for the better appointed expeditions that were in progress,
and still appalling eastern Christendom by their lawless
barbarities, they passed into Asia Minor, and their miserable
career soon came to an end. Attacking the Turks in the city of
Nicæa,--which had become the capital of the Seljouk sultan of
Roum,--they were beaten, routed, scattered, slaughtered, until
barely 3,000 of the great host escaped. "Of the first
Crusaders," says Gibbon, "300,000 had already perished before
a single city was rescued from the infidels,--before their
graver and more noble brethren had completed the preparations
of their enterprise." Meantime the knights and princes of the
crusade had gathered their armies and were now (in the summer
of 1096) beginning to move eastward, by different routes. Not
one of the greater sovereigns of Europe had enlisted in the
undertaking. The chiefs of one armament were Godfrey de
Bouillon, duke of the Lower Lorraine, or Brabant; his
brothers, Eustace, count of Boulogne, and Baldwin; his cousin,
Baldwin de Bourg, with Baldwin, count of Hainaut, Dudon de
Contz, and other knights celebrated in the "Jerusalem
Delivered" of Tasso. This expedition followed nearly the route
of Peter the Hermit, through Hungary and Bulgaria, giving
hostages for its orderly conduct and winning the good-will of
those countries, even maddened as they were by the foregoing mobs.
{628}
Another larger following from France was led by Hugh, count of
Vermandois, brother of the king of France; Robert, duke of
Normandy, eldest son of William the Conqueror; Stephen, count
of Blois, the Conqueror's son-in-law, and Robert, count of
Flanders. These took the road into Italy, and to Bari, whence,
after spending the winter, waiting for favorable weather, they
were transported by ships to Greece, and pursued their march
to Constantinople. They were followed by a contingent from
southern Italy, under Bohemond, the Norman prince of Tarentum,
son of Robert Guiscard, and his knightly cousin, Tancred. A
fourth army, gathered in southern France by count Raymond of
Toulouse and Bishop Adhemer, the appointed legate and
representative of the pope, chose still another route, through
Lombardy, Dalmatia and Macedonia, into Thrace. On passing
through the territories of the Byzantine emperor (Alexius I.),
all the crusaders experienced his distrust, his duplicity, and
his cautious ill-will--which, under the circumstances were
natural enough. Alexius managed so well that he extorted from
each of the princes an acknowledgment of his rights of
sovereignty over the region of their expected conquests, with
an oath of fealty and homage, and he pushed them across the
Bosphorus so adroitly that no two had the opportunity to unite
their forces under the walls of Constantinople. Their first
undertaking in Asia [May and June, A. D. 1097] was the siege
of Nicæa, and they beleaguered it with an army which Gibbon
believes to have been never exceeded within the compass of a
single camp. Here, again, they were mastered by the cunning
diplomacy of the Greek emperor. When the sultan of Roum
yielded his capital, he was persuaded to surrender it to
Alexius, and the imperial banner protected it from the rage of
the discomfited crusaders. But they revenged themselves on the
Turk at Dorylæum, where he attacked them during their
subsequent march, and where he suffered a defeat which ended
all fighting in Asia Minor. Baldwin, brother of Godfrey, now
improved his opportunities by stealing away from the army,
with a few hundred knights and men, to make conquests on his
own account; with such success that he won the city of Edessa,
with a sweep of country around it, and founded a principality
which subsisted for half a century. The rest fared on, meeting
no opposition from infidel swords, but sickening and dying by
thousands, from heat and from want of water and food, until
they came to Antioch. There, the Turkish emir in command, with
a stout garrison of horse and foot, had prepared for a
stubborn defence, and he held the besiegers at bay for seven
months, while they starved in their ill-supplied camps. The
city was delivered to them by a traitor, at length, but prince
Bohemond, the crafty Norman, secured the benefit of the
treason to himself, and forced his compatriots to concede to
him the sovereignty of Antioch. The sufferings of the
crusaders did not end with the taking of the city. They
brought famine and pestilence upon themselves anew by their
greedy and sensual indulgence, and they were soon under siege
in their own turn, by a great army which the Turks had brought
against them. Death and desertion were in rivalry to thin
their wasted ranks. The survivors were in gloom and despair,
when an opportune miracle occurred to excite them afresh. A
lance, which visions and apparitions certified to be the very
spear that pierced the Redeemer's side, was found buried in a
church at Antioch. Under the stimulus of this amazing
discovery they sallied from the town and dispersed the great
army of the Turks in utter rout. Still the quarrels of the
leaders went on, and ten months more were consumed before the
remains of the Latin army advanced to Jerusalem. It was June,
A. D. 1099, when they saw the Holy City and assailed its
formidable walls. Their number was now reduced to 40,000, but
their devotion and their ardor rose to frenzy, and after a
siege of little more than a month they forced an entrance by
storm. Then they spared neither age nor sex until they had
killed all who denied the Savior of mankind--the Prince of
Peace.
E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 58.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
ALSO IN:
J. F. Michaud, History of the Crusades, book 1.
W. Besant and E. H. Palmer, Jerusalem, chapter 6.
C. Mills, History of the Crusades, chapter 2-6.
See also, JERUSALEM: A. D. 1099.
CRUSADES: A. D. 1099-1144.
The Latin conquests in the east.
The Kingdom of Jerusalem.
See JERUSALEM: A. D. 1099-1144.
CRUSADES: A. D. 1101-1102.
The after-wave of the first movement.
"The tales of victory brought home by the pilgrims excited the
most extravagant expectations in the minds of their auditors,
and nothing was deemed capable of resisting European valour.
The pope called upon all who had taken the cross to perform
their vow, the emperor Henry IV. had the crusade preached, in
order to gain favour with the clergy and laity. Many princes
now resolved to visit in person the new empire founded in the
East. Three great armies assembled: the first in Italy under
the archbishop of Milan, and the two counts of Blandrate; the
second in France under Hugh the Great and Stephen of Blois
[who had deserted their comrades of the first expedition at
Antioch, and] whom shame and remorse urged to perform their
vow, William, duke of Guienne and count of Poitou, who
mortgaged his territory to William Rufus of England to procure
funds, the count of Nevers, the duke of Burgundy, the bishops
of Laon and Soissons; the third in Germany, under the bishop
of Saltzburg, the aged duke Welf of Bavaria, Conrad the master
of the horse to the emperor, and many other knights and
nobles. Ida also, the margravine of Austria, declared her
resolution to share the toils and dangers of the way, and pay
her vows at the tomb of Christ. Vast numbers of women of all
ranks accompanied all these armies,--nay, in that of the duke
of Guienne, who was inferior to none in valour, but united to
it the qualities of a troubadour and glee-man, there appeared
whole troops of young women. The Italian pilgrims were the
first to arrive at Constantinople. They set out early in the
spring, and took their way through Carinthia, Hungary, and
Bulgaria. Though the excesses committed by them were great,
the emperor gave them a kind reception, and the most prudent
and friendly advice respecting their future progress. While
they abode at Constantinople, Conrad and the count of Blois,
and the duke of Burgundy, arrived, and at Whitsuntide they all
passed over, and encamped at Nicomedia."
{629}
With ignorant fatuity, and against all experienced advice, the
new Crusaders resolved to direct their march to Bag-dad and to
overthrow the caliphate. The first body which advanced was cut
to pieces by the Turks on the banks of the Halys, and only a
few thousands, out of more than one hundred thousand, are said
to have made their escape by desperate flight. The second and
third armies were met successively by the victorious Moslems,
before they had advanced so far, and were even more completely
annihilated. The latter body contained, according to the
chroniclers of the time, 150,000 pilgrims, of whom scarcely
one thousand were saved from slavery or death. The men fell
under the swords of the Turks; the women and girls, in great
numbers, finished out their days in the harems of the East.
Out of the wreck of the three vast armaments a slender column
of 10,000 men was got together after some weeks at Antioch and
led to Jerusalem (A. D. 1102). Most of these perished in
subsequent battles, and very few ever saw Europe again. "Such
was the fruitless termination of this second great movement of
the West, in which perhaps a third of a million of pilgrims
left their homes, never to revisit them."
T. Keightley, The Crusaders, chapter 2.
ALSO IN:
J. F. Michaud, History of the Crusades, book 4.
Crusades: A. D. 1104-1111.
Conquest of maritime cities of Syria and Palestine.
Destruction of the Library of Tripoli.
"The prosperity and the safety of Jerusalem appeared closely
connected with the conquest of the maritime cities of Syria
and Palestine; it being by them alone that it could receive
succour, or establish prompt and easy communications with the
West. The maritime nations of Europe were interested in
seconding, in this instance, the enterprises of the king of
Jerusalem. ... From the period of the first crusades, the
Pisans and the Genoese had constantly sent vessels to the seas
of the East; and their fleets had aided the Christians in
several expeditions against the Mussulmans. A Genoese fleet
had just arrived in the seas of Syria when Baldwin undertook
the siege of Ptolemaïs [Acre]. The Genoese were invited to
assist in this conquest; but as religion was not the principle
to bring them into action, they required, in return for their
assistance and their labour, that they should have a third of
the booty; they likewise stipulated to have a separate church
for themselves, and a national factory and tribunal in the
conquered city. Ptolemaïs was besieged by land and sea, and
after a bloody resistance of twenty days, the inhabitants and
the garrison proposed to surrender, and implored the clemency
of the conquerors. The city opened its gates to the
Christians, and the inhabitants prepared to depart, taking
with them whatever they deemed most valuable; but the Genoese,
at the sight of such rich booty, paid no respect to the
capitulation, and massacred without pity a disarmed and
defenceless people. ... In consequence of this victory,
several places which the Egyptians still held on the coasts of
Syria fell into the hands of the Christians." Among those was
the city of Tripoli. "Raymond, Count de St. Gilles and of
Thoulouse, one of the companions of Godfrey, after having
wandered for a long time about Asia, had died before this
place, of which he had commenced the siege. In memory of his
exploits in the first crusade, the rich territory of Tripoli
was created a county, and became the inheritance of his
family. This territory was celebrated for its productions. ...
A library established in this city, and celebrated through all
the East, contained the monuments of the ancient literature of
the Persians, the Arabians, the Egyptians, and the Greeks. A
hundred copyists were there constantly employed in
transcribing manuscripts. ... After the taking of the city, a
priest attached to Count Bernard de St. Gilles, entered the
room in which were collected a vast number of copies of the
Koran, and as he declared the library of Tripoli contained
only the impious books of Mahomet, it was given up to the
flames. ... Bibles, situated on the smiling and fertile shores
of Phoenicia, Sarepta, where St. Jerome saw still in his day
the tower of Isaiah; and Berytus, famous in the early days of
the church for its school of eloquence, shared the fate of
Tripoli, and became baronies bestowed upon Christian knights.
After these conquests, the Pisans, the Genoese, and several
warriors who had followed Baldwin in his expeditions, returned
into Europe; and the king of Jerusalem, abandoned by these
useful allies, was obliged to employ the forces which remained
in repulsing the invasions of the Saracens."
J. F. Michaud, History of the Crusades, volume 1, book 5.
CRUSADES: A. D. 1147-1149.
The Second Great Movement.
During the reign of Fulk, the fourth king of Jerusalem, the
Latin power in Palestine and its neighboring territories began
to be seriously shaken by a vigorous Turkish prince named
Zenghi, on whom the sultan Mahmoud had conferred the
government of all the country west of the Tigris. It was the
first time since the coming of the Christians of the West that
the whole strength of Islam in that region had been so nearly
gathered into one strong hand, to be used against them, and
they felt the effect speedily, being themselves weakened by
many quarrels. In 1143 King Fulk died, leaving the crown to a
young son, Baldwin III.,--a boy of thirteen, whose mother
governed in his name. The next year Zenghi captured the
important city of Edessa, and consternation was produced by
his successes. Europe was then appealed to for help against
the advancing Turk, and the call from Jerusalem was taken up
by St. Bernard of Clairvaux, the irresistible enthusiast,
whose influence accomplished, in his time, whatever he willed
to have done. Just half a century after Peter the Hermit, St.
Bernard preached a Second Crusade, and with almost equal
effect, notwithstanding the better knowledge now possessed of
all the hardships and perils of the expedition. This time,
royalty took the lead. King Conrad of Germany commanded a
great army from that country, and another host followed King
Louis VII. from France. "Both armies marched down the Danube,
to Constantinople, in the summer of 1147. At the same moment
King Roger [of Naples], with his fleet, attacked, not the
Turks, but the Greek seaport towns of the Morea. Manuel [the
Byzantine emperor] thereupon, convinced that the large armies
were designed for the destruction of his empire in the first
place, with the greatest exertions, got together troops from
all his provinces, and entered into a half-alliance with the
Turks of Asia Minor. The mischief and ill-feeling was
increased by the lawless conduct of the German hordes; the
Greek troops attacked them more than once; whereupon numerous
voices were raised in Louis's headquarters to demand open war
against the faithless Greeks.
{630}
The kings were fully agreed not to permit this, but on
arriving in Constantinople they completely fell out, for,
while Louis made no secret of his warm friendship for Roger,
Conrad promised the Emperor of Constantinople to attack the
Normans as soon as the Crusade should be ended. This was a bad
beginning for a united campaign in the East, and moreover, at
every step eastward, new difficulties arose. The German army,
broken up into several detachments, and led without ability or
prudence, was attacked in Asia Minor by the Emir of Iconium,
and cut to pieces, all but a few hundred men. The French,
though better appointed, also suffered severe losses in that
country, but contrived nevertheless, to reach Antioch with a
very considerable force, and from thence might have carried
the project which the second Baldwin had conceived in vain,
namely, the defence of the northeastern frontier, upon which,
especially since Zenki [Zenghi] had made his appearance, the
life or death of the Christian states depended. But in vain
did Prince Raymond of Antioch try to prevail upon King Louis
to take this view, and to attack without delay the most
formidable of all their adversaries, Noureddin [son of Zenghi,
now dead]. Louis would not hear or do anything till he had
seen Jerusalem and prayed at the Holy Sepulchre. ... In
Jerusalem he [King Louis] was welcomed by Queen Melisende (now
regent, during her son's minority, after Fulco's death), with
praise and gratitude, because he had not taken part in the
distant wars of the Prince of Antioch, but had reserved his
forces for the defence of the holy city of Jerusalem. It was
now resolved to lead the army against Damascus, the only
Turkish town whose Emir had always refused to submit to either
Zenki or Noureddin. Nevertheless Noureddin instantly collected
all his available forces, to succour the besieged town." But
he was spared further exertion by the jealous disagreement of
the Christians, who began to take thought as to what should be
done with Damascus when they took it. The Syrian barons
concluded that they would prefer to leave the city in Turkish
hands, and by treacherous manœuvres they forced king Louis to
raise the siege. "The German king, long since tired of his
powerless position, returned home in the autumn of 1148, and
Louis, after much pressing, stayed a few months longer, and
reached Europe in the following spring. The whole expedition
... had been wrecked, without honour and without result, by
the most wretched personal passions, and the most narrow and
selfish policy."
H. Von Sybel, History and Literature of the Crusades,
chapter 3.
"So ended in utter shame and ignominy the Second Crusade. The
event seemed to give the lie to the glowing promises and
prophecies of St. Bernard. So vast had been the drain of
population to feed this holy war that, in the phrase of an
eye-witness, the cities and castles were empty, and scarcely
one man was left to seven women; and now it was known that the
fathers, the husbands, the sons, or the brothers of these
miserable women would see their earthly homes no more. The cry
of anguish charged Bernard with the crime of sending them
forth on an errand in which they had done absolutely nothing
and had reaped only wretchedness and disgrace. For a time
Bernard himself was struck dumb: but he soon remembered that
he had spoken with the authority of God and his vicegerent,
and that the guilt or failure must lie at the door of the
pilgrims."
G. W. Cox, The Crusades, chapter 5.
CRUSADES: A. D. 1187.
The loss of Jerusalem.
See JERUSALEM: A. D. 1149-1187.
CRUSADES: A. D. 1188-1192.
The Third Great Movement.
When the news reached Europe that Saladin, the redoubtable new
champion of Islam had expelled the Christians and the Cross
from Jerusalem, polluting once more the precincts of the Holy
Sepulchre, the effect produced was something not easily
understood at the present day. If we may believe historians of
the time, the pope (Urban III.) died of grief; "Christians
forgot all the ills of their own country to weep over
Jerusalem. ... Luxury was banished from cities; injuries were
forgotten and alms were given abundantly, Christians slept
upon ashes, clothed themselves in haircloth, and expiated
their disorderly lives by fasting and mortification. The
clergy set the example; the morals of the cloister were
reformed, and cardinals, condemning themselves to poverty,
promised to repair to the Holy Land, supported on charity by
the way. These pious reformations did not last long; but men's
minds were not the less prepared for a new crusade by them,
and all Europe was soon roused by the voice of Gregory VIII.,
who exhorted the faithful to assume the cross and take up
arms."
J. F. Michaud, History of the Crusades, book 7.
"The emperor Frederic Barbarossa and the kings of France and
England assumed the cross; and the tardy magnitude of their
armaments was anticipated by the maritime states of the
Mediterranean and the ocean. The skilful and provident
Italians first embarked in the ships of Genoa, Pisa, and
Venice. They were speedily followed by the most eager pilgrims
of France, Normandy and the Western Isles. The powerful
succour of Flanders, Frise, and Denmark filled near a hundred
vessels; and the northern warriors were distinguished in the
field by a lofty stature and a ponderous battle-axe. Their
increasing multitudes could no longer be confined within the
walls of Tyre [which the Latins still held], or remain
obedient to the voice of Conrad [Marquis of Montferrat, who
had taken command of the place and repelled the attacks of
Saladin]. They pitied the misfortunes and revered the dignity
of Lusignan [the nominal king of Jerusalem, lately captive in
Saladin's hands], who was released from prison, perhaps to
divide the army of the Franks. He proposed the recovery of
Ptolemais, or Acre, thirty miles to the south of Tyre; and the
place was first invested [July, 1189] by 2,000 horse and
30,000 foot under his nominal command. I shall not expatiate
on the story of this memorable siege, which lasted near two
years, and consumed, in a narrow space, the forces of Europe
and Asia. ... At the sound of the holy trumpet the Moslems of
Egypt, Syria, Arabia, and the Oriental provinces assembled
under the servant of the prophet: his camp was pitched and
removed within a few miles of Acre; and he laboured, night and
day, for the relief of his brethren and the annoyance of the
Franks. ... In the spring of the second year, the royal fleets
of France and England cast anchor in the bay of Acre, and the
siege was more vigorously prosecuted by the youthful emulation
of the two kings, Philip Augustus and Richard Plantagenet.
{631}
After every resource had been tried, and every hope was
exhausted, the defenders of Acre submitted to their fate. ...
By the conquest of Acre the Latin powers acquired a strong
town and a convenient harbour; but the advantage was most
dearly purchased. The minister and historian of Saladin
computes, from the report of the enemy, that their numbers, at
different periods, amounted to 500,000 or 600,000; that more
than 100, 000 Christians were slain; that a far greater number
was lost by disease or shipwreck." On the reduction of Acre,
king Philip Augustus returned to France, leaving only 500
knights and 10,000 men behind him. Meantime, the old emperor,
Frederick Barbarossa, coming by the landward route, through
the country of the Greeks and Asia Minor, with a well-trained
army of 20,000 knights and 50,000 men on foot, had perished by
the way, drowned in a little Cilician torrent, and only 5,000
of his troops had reached the camp at Acre. Old as he was, (he
was seventy when he took the cross) Barbarossa might have
changed the event of the Crusade if he had reached the scene
of conflict; for he had brains with his valor and character
with his ferocity, which Richard Cœur de Lion had not. The
latter remained another year in the Holy Land; recovered
Cæsarea and Jaffa; threatened Saladin in Jerusalem seriously,
but to no avail; and stirred up more and fiercer quarrels
among the Christians than had been customary, even on the soil
which was sacred to them. In the end, a treaty was arranged
which displeased the more devout on both sides. "It was
stipulated that Jerusalem and the holy sepulchre should be
open, without tribute or vexation, to the pilgrimage of the
Latin Christians; that, after the demolition of Ascalon, they
should inclusively possess the sea-coast from Jaffa to Tyre;
that the count of Tripoli and the prince of Antioch should be
comprised in the truce; and that, during three years and three
months, all hostilities should cease. ... Richard embarked for
Europe, to seek a long captivity and a premature grave; and
the space of a few months concluded the life and glories of
Saladin."
E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 59.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
"A halo of false glory surrounds the Third Crusade from the
associations which connect it with the lion-hearted king of
England. The exploits of Richard I. have stirred to enthusiasm
the dullest of chroniclers, have furnished themes for jubilant
eulogies, and have shed over his life that glamour which
cheats even sober-minded men when they read the story of his
prototype Achilleus in the tale of Troy. ... When we turn from
the picture to the reality, we shall see in this Third Crusade
an enterprise in which the fiery zeal which does something
towards redeeming the savage brutalities of Godfrey and the
first crusaders is displaced by base and sordid greed, by
intrigues utterly of the earthy, by wanton crimes from which
we might well suppose that the sun would hide away its face;
and in the leaders of this enterprise we shall see men in whom
morally there is scarcely a single quality to relieve the
monotonous blackness of their infamy; in whom, strategically,
a very little generalship comes to the aid of a blind brute
force."
G. W. Cox, The Crusades, chapter 7.
ALSO IN:
Mrs. W. Busk, Mediaeval Popes, Emperors, Kings
and Crusaders, book 2, chapter 12, and book 3, chapter 1-2.
CRUSADES: A. D. 1196-1197.
The Fourth Expedition.
A crusading expedition of German barons and their followers,
which went to the Holy Land, by way of Italy, in 1196, is
generally counted as the Fourth Crusade, though some writers
look upon it as a movement supplementary to the Third Crusade.
The Germans, who numbered some 40,000, do not seem to have
been welcomed by the Christians of Palestine. The latter
preferred to maintain the state of peace then prevailing; but
the new crusaders forced hostilities at once. Saladin was
dead; his brother Saphadin accepted the challenge to war with
prompt vigor and struck the first hard blow, taking Jaffa,
with great slaughter, and demolishing its fortifications. But
Saphadin was presently defeated in a battle fought between
Tyre and Sidon, and Jaffa was recovered, together with other
towns and most of the coast. But, a little later, the Germans
suffered, in their turn, a most demoralizing reverse at the
castle of Thoron, which they besieged, and were further
disturbed, in the midst of their depression, by news of the
death of their emperor, Henry VI. A great part of them,
thereupon, returned home. Those who remained, or many of them,
occupied Jaffa, where they were attacked, a few months later,
and cut to pieces.
G. W. Cox, The Crusades, chapter 8.
CRUSADES: A. D. 1201-1203.
The Fifth Movement.-
Treachery of the Venetians.
Conquest of Constantinople.
"Every traveller returning from Syria brought a prayer for
immediate help from the survivors of the Third Crusade. It was
necessary to act at once if any portion even of the wreck of
the kingdom of Jerusalem were to be saved. Innocent the Third,
and some, at least, of the statesmen of the West were fully
alive to the progress which Islam had made since the departure
of the Western kings. In 1197, however, after five years of
weary waiting, the time seemed opportune for striking a new
blow for Christendom. Saladin, the great Sultan, had died in
1193, and his two sons were already quarreling about the
partition of his empire. The contending divisions of the Arab
Moslems were at this moment each bidding for the support of
the Christians of Syria. The other great race of Mahometans
which had threatened Europe, the Seljukian Turks, had made a
halt in their progress through Asia Minor. ... Other special
circumstances which rendered the moment favourable for a new
crusade, combined with the profound conviction of the
statesmen of the West of the danger to Christendom from the
progress of Islam, urged Western Europe to take part in the
new enterprise. The reigning Pope, Innocent III., was the
great moving spirit of the Fourth Crusade." The popular
preacher of the Crusade was found in an ignorant priest named
Fulk, of Neuilly, whose success in kindling public enthusiasm
was almost equal to that of Peter the Hermit. Vast numbers
took the cross, with Theobald, count of Champagne, Louis,
count of Blois and Chartres, Simon de Montfort, Walter of
Brienne, Baldwin, count of Flanders, Hugh of St. Pol, Geoffrey
de Villehardouin, marshal of Champagne and future historian of
the Crusade, and many other prominent knights and princes
among the leaders. The young count of Champagne was the chosen
chief; but he sickened and died and his place was taken by
Boniface, marquis of Montferrat.
{632}
It was the decision of the leaders that the expedition should
be directed in the first instance against the Moslem power in
Egypt, and that it should be conveyed to the attack of Egypt
by sea. Venice, alone, seemed to be able to furnish ships,
sailors and supplies for so great a movement, and a contract
with Venice for the service was concluded in the spring of
120l. But Venice was mercenary, unscrupulous and treacherous,
caring for nothing but commercial gains. Before the crusaders
could gather at her port for embarkation, she had betrayed
them to the Moslems. By a secret treaty with the sultan of
Egypt, the fact of which is coming more and more conclusively
to light, she had undertaken to frustrate the Crusade, and to
receive important commercial privileges at Alexandria as
compensation for her treachery. When, therefore, in the early
summer of 1202, the army of the Crusade was collected at
Venice to take ship, it encountered difficulties,
discouragements and ill-treatments which thickened daily. The
number assembled was not equal to expectation. Some had gone
by sea from Flanders; some by other routes. But Venice had
provided transport for the whole, and inflexibly demanded pay
for the whole. The money in hand was not equal to this claim.
The summer was lost in disputes and attempted compromises.
Many of the crusaders withdrew in disgust and went home. At
length, in defiance of the censures of the pope and of the
bitter opposition of many leaders and followers of the
expedition, there was a bargain struck, by the terms of which
the crusaders were to assist the Venetians in taking and
plundering the Christian city of Zara, a dreaded commercial
rival on the Dalmatian coast of the Adriatic, belonging to the
king of Hungary, himself one of the promoters of the very
crusade which was now to be turned against him. The infamous
compact was carried out. Zara was taken, and in the end it was
totally destroyed by the Venetians. In the meantime, the
doomed city was occupied by the crusading army through the
winter, while a still more perfidious plot was being formed.
Old Dandolo, the blind doge of Venice, was the master spirit
of it. He was helped by the influence of Philip, one of the
two rivals then fighting for the imperial crown in Germany and
Italy. Philip had married a daughter of Isaac II. (Angelos),
made emperor at Constantinople on the fall of the dynasty of
Comnenus, and that feeble prince had lately been dethroned by
his brother. The son and heir of Isaac, named Alexius, had
escaped from Constantinople and had made his way to Philip
imploring help. Either Philip conceived the idea, or it was
suggested to him, that the armament of the Crusade might be
employed to place the young Alexius on the throne of his
father. To the Venetians the scheme was more than acceptable.
It would frustrate the Crusade, which they had pledged
themselves to the sultan of Egypt to accomplish; it would
satisfy their ill-will towards the Byzantines, and, more
important than all else, it would give them an opportunity to
secure immeasurable advantages over their rivals in the great
trade which Constantinople held at command. The marquis of
Montferrat, commander of the Crusade, had some grievances of
his own and some ambitions of his own, which made him
favorable to the new project, and he was easily won to it. The
three influences thus combined--those of Philip, of Dandolo,
and of Montferrat--overcame all opposition. Some who opposed
were bribed, some were intimidated, some were deluded by
promises, some deserted the ranks. Pope Innocent remonstrated,
appealed and threatened in vain. The pilgrim host, "changed
from a crusading army into a filibustering expedition," set
sail from Zara in the spring of the year 1203, and was landed,
the following June, not on the shores of Egypt or Syria, but
under the walls of Constantinople. Its conquest, pillage and
brutally destructive treatment of the great city are described
in another place.
E. Pears, The Fall of Constantinople, chapter 8-13.
ALSO IN:
G. Finlay, History of the Byzantine and
Greek Empires, 716-1453, book 3, chapter 3.
E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 59.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
See, also,
BYZANTINE EMPIRE: A. D. 1203-1204
CRUSADES: A. D. 1201-1283.
Against the heathen Sclavonians on the Baltic.
See LIVONIA: 12TH-13TH CENTURIES;
and PRUSSIA: 13TH CENTURY.
CRUSADES: A. D. 1209-1242.
Against the Albigenses.
See ALBIGENSES.
CRUSADES: A. D, 1212.
The Children's Crusade.
"The religious wars fostered and promoted vice; and the
failure of army after army was looked on as a clear
manifestation of God's wrath against the sins of the camp.
This feeling was roused to its highest pitch when, in the year
1212, certain priests--Nicolas was the name of one of these
mischievous madmen--went about France and Germany calling on
the children to perform what the fathers, through their
wickedness, had been unable to effect, promising that the sea
should be dry to enable them to march across; that the
Saracens would be miraculously stricken with a panic at the
sight of them; that God would, through the hands of children
only, whose lives were yet pure, work the recovery of the
Cross and the Sepulchre. Thousands--it is said fifty
thousand--children of both sexes responded to the call. They
listened to the impassioned preaching of the monks, believed
their lying miracles, their visions, their portents, their
references to the Scriptures, and, in spite of all that their
parents could do, rushed to take the Cross, boys and girls
together, and streamed along the roads which led to Marseilles
and Genoa, singing hymns, waving branches, replying to those
who asked whither they were going, 'We go to Jerusalem to
deliver the Holy Sepulchre,' and shouting their rallying cry,
'Lord Jesus, give us back thy Holy Cross.' They admitted
whoever came, provided he took the Cross; the infection
spread, and the children could not be restrained from joining
them in the towns and villages along their route. Their
miserable parents put them in prison; they escaped; they
forbade them to go; the children went in spite of prohibition.
They had no money, no provisions, no leaders; but the charity
of the towns they passed through supported them. At their rear
streamed the usual tail of camp followers. ... There were two
main bodies. One of these directed its way through Germany,
across the Alps, to Genoa. On the road they were robbed of all
the gifts which had been presented them; they were exposed to
heat and want, and very many either died on the march or
wandered away from the road and so became lost to sight; when
they reached Italy they dispersed about the country, seeking
food, were stripped by the villagers, and in some cases were
reduced to slavery.
{633}
Only seven thousand out of their number arrived at Genoa. Here
they stayed for some days. They looked down upon the
Mediterranean, hoping that its bright waves would divide to
let them pass. But they did not; there was no miracle wrought
in their favour; a few of noble birth were received among the
Genoese families, and have given rise to distinguished houses
of Genoa; among them is the house of Vivaldi. The rest,
disappointed and disheartened, made their way back again, and
got home at length, the girls with the loss of their virtue,
the boys with the loss of their belief, all barefooted and in
rags, laughed at by the towns they went through, and wondering
why they had ever gone at all. This was the end of the German
army. That of the French was not so fortunate, for none of
them ever got back again at all. When they arrived at
Marseilles, thinned probably by the same causes as those which
had dispersed the Germans, they found, like their brethren,
that the sea did not open a path for them, as had been
promised. Perhaps some were disheartened and went home again.
But fortune appeared to favour them. There were two worthy
merchants at Marseilles, named Hugh Ferrens, and William
Porcus, Iron Hugh and Pig William, who traded with the East,
and had in port seven ships, in which they proposed to convey
the children to Palestine. With a noble generosity they
offered to take them for nothing, all for love of religion,
and out of the pure kindness of their hearts. Of course this
offer was accepted with joy, and the seven vessels laden with
the happy little Crusaders, singing their hymns and flying
their banners, sailed out from Marseilles, bound for the East,
accompanied by William the Good and Hugh the Pious. It was not
known to the children, of course, that the chief trade of
these merchants was the lucrative business of kidnapping
Christian children for the Alexandrian market. It was so,
however, and these respectable tradesmen had never before made
so splendid a coup. Unfortunately, off the Island of St.
Peter, they encountered bad weather, and two ships went down
with all on board. What must have been the feelings of the
philanthropists, Pig William and Iron Hugh, at this
misfortune? They got, however, five ships safely to
Alexandria, and sold all their cargo, the Sultan of Cairo
buying forty of the boys, whom he brought up carefully and
apart, intending them, doubtless, for his best soldiers. A
dozen refusing to change their faith were martyred. None of
the rest ever came back. Nobody in Europe seems to have taken
much notice of this extraordinary episode."
W. Besant and E. H. Palmer, Jerusalem, chapter 18.
ALSO IN:
J. H. Michaud, History of the Crusades,
appendix number 28.
G. Z. Gray, The Children's Crusade.
CRUSADE: A. D. 1212.
Against the Moors in Spain.
See SPAIN: A. D. 1146-1232.
CRUSADE: A. D. 1216-1229.
The Sixth Movement.
Frederic II. in Jerusalem.
For six years after the betrayal of the vows of the crusaders
of 1202-1204--who sacked Constantinople instead of rescuing
Jerusalem--the Christians of Palestine were protected by a
truce with Saphadin, the brother of Saladin, who had succeeded
the latter in power. Hostilities were then rashly provoked by
the always foolish Latins, and they soon found themselves
reduced to sore straits, calling upon Europe for fresh help.
Pope Innocent III. did not scruple to second their appeal. A
new crusade was preached with great earnestness, and a general
Council of the Church--the Fourth of Lateran--was convened for
the stimulation of it. "The Fifth Crusade [or the Sixth, as
more commonly numbered], the result of this resolution, was
divided in the sequel into three maritime expeditions: the
first [A. D. 1216] consisting principally of Hungarians under
their king, Andrew; the second [A. D. 1218] composed of
Germans, Italians, French and English nobles and their
followers; and the third [A. D. 1228] led by the Emperor
Frederic II. in person. ... Though the King of Hungary was
attended by the flower of a nation which, before its
conversion to Christianity, had been the scourge and terror of
Western Europe, the arms of that monarch, even aided by the
junction of numerous German crusaders under the dukes of
Austria and Bavaria, performed nothing worthy of notice: and
after a single campaign in Palestine, in which the Mussulman
territories were ineffectually ravaged, the fickle Andrew
deserted the cause and returned with his forces to Europe. His
defection did not prevent the duke of Austria, with the German
crusaders, from remaining, in concert with the King of
Jerusalem, his barons, and the knights of the three religious
orders, for the defence of Palestine; and, in the following
year, the constancy of these faithful champions of the Cross
was rewarded by the arrival of numerous reinforcements from
Germany. ... It was resolved to change the scene of warfare
from the narrow limits of the Syrian shore to the coast of
Egypt, ... and the situation of Damietta, at the mouth of the
Nile, pointed out that city as the first object of attack."
After a siege of seventeen months, during which both the
besieged and the besiegers suffered horribly, from famine and
from pestilence, Damietta was taken (A. D. 1219), Nine-tenths
of its population of 80,000 had perished. "Both during the
siege and after the capture of Damietta, the invasion of Egypt
had filled the infidels with consternation; and the alarm
which was betrayed in their counsels proved that the
crusaders, in choosing that country for the theatre of
operations, had assailed the Mussulman power in its most vital
and vulnerable point. Of the two sons of Saphadin, Coradinus
and Camel, who were now uneasily seated on the thrones of
Damascus and Cairo, the former, in despair of preserving
Jerusalem, had already demolished its fortifications; and the
brothers agreed in repeatedly offering the cession of the holy
city and of all Palestine to the Christians, upon the single
condition of their evacuating Egypt. Every object which had
been ineffectually proposed in repeated Crusades, since the
fatal battle of Tiberias, might now have been gloriously
obtained by the acceptance of these terms, and the King of
Jerusalem, the French and English leaders, and the Teutonic
knights, all eagerly desired to embrace the offer of the
Sultans. But the obstinate ambition and cupidity of the
surviving papal legate, Cardinal Pelagius, of the Italian
chieftains, and of the knights of the other two religious
orders, by holding out the rich prospect of the conquest and
plunder of Egypt, overruled every wise and temperate argument
in the Christian councils, and produced a rejection of all
compromise with the infidels.
{634}
After a winter of luxurious inaction, the legate led the
crusading host from Damietta toward Cairo (A. D. 1220)." The
expedition was as disastrous in its result as it was imbecile
in its leadership. The whole army, caught by the rising of the
Nile, was placed in so helpless a situation that it was glad
to purchase escape by the surrender of Damietta and the
evacuation of Egypt. The retreat of the greater part of these
crusaders did not end until they had reached home. Pope
Honorius III. (who had succeeded Innocent III. in 1216) strove
to shift responsibility for the failure from his wretched
legate to the Emperor Frederic II., who had thus far evaded
the fulfilment of his crusading promises and vows, being
occupied in struggles with the papacy. At length, in 1228,
Frederic embarked for Palestine with a small force, pursued by
the maledictions of the pope, who denounced him for daring to
assume the Cross while under the ban of the church, as much as
he had denounced him before for neglecting it. But the
free-thinking Hohenstauffen cared little, apparently, and went
his way, shunned scrupulously by all pious souls, including
the knights of Palestine, except those of the Teutonic order.
With the help of the latter he occupied and refortified Jaffa
and succeeded in concluding a treaty with the Sultan which
restored Jerusalem to the Christians, reserving certain rights
to the Mahometans; giving up likewise Bethlehem, Nazareth
and some other places to the Christians, and securing peace
for ten years. Frederic had married, a few years before, for
his second empress, Iolante, daughter and heiress of the
titular king of Jerusalem, John de Brienne. With the hand of
this princess, he received from her father a solemn transfer
of all his rights to that shadowy throne. He now claimed those
rights, and, entering Jerusalem, with the Teutonic knights (A.
D. 1229), he crowned himself its king. The patriarch, the
Templars and the Hospitallers refused to take part in the
ceremony; the pope denounced Frederic's advantageous treaty as
soon as he had news of it, and all that it gained for the
Christians of Palestine was thrown away by them as speedily as
possible.
Major Procter, History of the Crusades,
chapter 5, section 2.
"No Crusader, since Godfrey de Bouillon, had effected so much
as Frederick the Second. What would he not have obtained, had
the Pope, the Patriarch and the Orders given him their hearty
cooperation?"
T. L. Kington, History of Frederick II., chapter 8.
CRUSADES: A. D. 1238-1280.
Against the Bogomiles.
See BALKAN AND DANUBIAN STATES:
9TH-16TH CENTURIES (BOSNIA, ETC.)
CRUSADES: A. D. 1242.
The Invasion of Palestine by the Carismians.
See JERUSALEM: A. D. 1242.
CRUSADES: A. D. 1248-1254.
The Seventh Movement.
Expedition of Saint Louis to Egypt.
The Seventh Crusade was undertaken, with little aid from other
countries, by the devout and wonderfully Christian-like young
king of France, Louis IX., afterwards canonized, and known in
history as St. Louis. "He carried it out with a picked army,
furnished by the feudal chivalry and by the religious and
military orders dedicated to the service of the Holy Land. The
Isle of Cyprus was the trysting-place appointed for all the
forces of the expedition. Louis arrived there on the 12th of
September, 1248, and reckoned upon remaining there only a few
days; for it was Egypt that he was in a hurry to reach. The
Christian world was at that time of opinion that, to deliver
the Holy Land, it was necessary first of all to strike a blow
at Islamism in Egypt, wherein its chief strength resided. But
scarcely had the crusaders formed a junction in Cyprus, when
the vices of the expedition and the weaknesses of its chief
began to be manifest. Louis, unshakable in his religious zeal,
was wanting in clear ideas and fixed resolves as to the
carrying out of his design. ... He did not succeed in winning
a majority in the council of chiefs over to his opinion as to
the necessity for a speedy departure for Egypt; it was decided
to pass the winter in Cyprus. ... At last a start was made
from Cyprus in May, 1249, and, in spite of violent gales of
wind which dispersed a large number of vessels, they arrived
on the 4th of June before Damietta. ... Having become masters
of Damietta, St. Louis and the crusaders committed the same
fault there as in the Isle of Cyprus: they halted there for an
indefinite time. They were expecting fresh crusaders; and they
spent the time of expectation in quarreling over the partition
of the booty taken in the city. They made away with it, they
wasted it blindly. ... Louis saw and deplored these
irregularities, without being in a condition to stop them. At
length, on the 20th of November, 1249, after more than five
months' inactivity at Damietta, the crusaders put themselves
once more in motion, with the determination of marching upon
Babylon, that outskirt of Cairo, now called Old Cairo, which
the greater part of them, in their ignorance, mistook for the
real Babylon, and where they flattered themselves they would
find immense riches, and avenge the olden sufferings of the
Hebrew captives. The Mussulmans had found time to recover from
their first fright, and to organize, at all points, a vigorous
resistance. On the 8th of February, 1250, a battle took place
twenty leagues from Damietta, at Mansourah ('the city of
victory'), on the right bank of the Nile. ... The battle-field
was left that day to the crusaders; but they were not allowed
to occupy it as conquerors, for, three days afterwards, on the
11th of February, 1250, the camp of St. Louis was assailed by
clouds of Saracens, horse and foot, Mamelukes and Bedouins.
All surprise had vanished, the Mussulmans measured at a glance
the numbers of the Christians, and attacked them in full
assurance of success, whatever heroism they might display; and
the crusaders themselves indulged in no more self·illusion,
and thought only of defending themselves. Lack of provisions
and sickness soon rendered defence almost as impossible as
attack; every day saw the Christian camp more and more
encumbered with the famine-stricken, the dying, and the dead;
and the necessity for retreating became evident." An attempt
to negotiate with the enemy failed, because they insisted on
the surrender of the king as hostage,--which none would
concede. "On the 5th of April, 1250, the crusaders decided
upon retreating. This was the most deplorable scene of a
deplorable drama; and at the same time it was, for the king,
an occasion for displaying, in their most sublime and
attractive traits, all the virtues of the Christian. Whilst
sickness and famine were devastating the camp, Louis made
himself visitor, physician and comforter; and his presence and
his words exercised upon the worst cases a searching influence. ...
{635}
When the 5th of April, the day fixed for the retreat, had
come, Louis himself was ill and much enfeebled. He was urged
to go aboard one of the vessels which were to descend the
Nile, carrying the wounded and the most suffering; but he
refused absolutely, saying, 'I don't separate from my people
in the hour of danger.' He remained on land, and when he had
to move forward he fainted away. When he came to himself, he
was amongst the last to leave the camp. ... At four leagues
distance from the camp it had just left, the rear-guard of the
crusaders, harassed by clouds of Saracens, was obliged to
halt. Louis could no longer keep on his horse. 'He was put up
at a house,' says Joinville, 'and laid, almost dead, upon the
lap of a tradeswoman from Paris; and it was believed that he
would not last till evening.'" The king, in this condition,
with the whole wreck of his army,--only 10,000 in number
remaining to him,--were taken prisoners. Their release from
captivity was purchased a month later by the surrender of
Damietta and a ransom-payment of 500,000 livres. They made
their way to St. Jean d' Acre, in Palestine, whence many of
them returned home. But King Louis, with some of his knights
and men-at-arms--how many is not known--stayed yet in the Holy
Land for four years, striving and hoping against hope to
accomplish something for the deliverance of Jerusalem, and
expending "in small works of piety, sympathy, protection, and
care for the future of the Christian population in Asia, his
time, his strength, his pecuniary resources, and the ardor of
a soul which could not remain idly abandoned to sorrowing over
great desires unsatisfied." The good and pious but ill-guided
king returned to France in the summer of 1254, and was
received with great joy.
F. P. Guizot, Popular History of France, chapter 17;
www.gutenberg.org/files/11952
ALSO IN:
Sire De Joinville, Memoirs of Saint Louis, part 2.
J. F. Michaud, History of the Crusades, books 13-14.
Crusades: A. D. 1252.
The movement of "the Pastors."
On the arrival in France of the news of the disastrous failure
of Saint Louis's expedition to Egypt, there occurred an
outbreak of fanaticism as insensate as that of the children's
crusade of forty years before. It was said to have originated
with a Hungarian named Jacob, who began to proclaim that
Christ rejected the great ones of the earth from His service,
and that the deliverance of the Holy City must be accomplished
by the poor and humble. "Shepherds left their flocks, labourers
laid down the plough, to follow his footsteps. ... The name of
Pastors was given to these village crusaders. ... At length,

assembled to the number of more than 100,000, these
redoubtable pilgrims left Paris and divided themselves into
several troops, to repair to the coast, whence they were to
embark for the East. The city of Orleans, which happened to be
in their passage, became the theatre of frightful disorders.
The progress of their enormities at length created serious
alarm in the government and the magistracy; orders were sent
to the provinces to pursue and disperse these turbulent and
seditious bands. The most numerous assemblage of the Pastors
was fixed to take place at Bourges, where the 'master of
Hungary' [Jacob] was to perform miracles and communicate the
will of Heaven. Their arrival in that city was the signal for
murder, fire and pillage. The irritated people took up arms
and marched against these disturbers of the public peace; they
overtook them between Mortemer and Villeneuve-sur-le-Cher,
where, in spite of their numbers, they were routed, and
received the punishment due to their brigandages. Jacob had
his head cut off by the blow of an axe; many of his companions
and disciples met with death on the field of battle, or were
consigned to punishment; the remainder took to flight."
J. F. Michaud, History of the Crusades, book 14.
Crusades: A. D. 1256-1259.
Against Eccelino di Romano.
See VERONA: A. D. 1236-1259.
Crusades: A. D. 1270-1271.
The last undertakings.
Saint Louis at Tunis.
Prince Edward in Palestine.
"For seven years after his return to France, from 1254 to
1261, Louis seemed to think no more about them [the crusades],
and there is nothing to show that he spoke of them even to his
most intimate confidants; but, in spite of his apparent
calmness, he was living, so far as they were concerned, in a
continual ferment of imagination and internal fever, even
flattering himself that some favorable circumstance would call
him back to his interrupted work. ... In 1261, Louis held, at
Paris, a Parliament, at which, without any talk of a new
crusade, measures were taken which revealed an idea of it. ...
In 1263 the crusade was openly preached. ... All objections,
all warnings, all anxieties came to nothing in the face of
Louis's fixed idea and pious passion. He started from Paris on
the 16th of March, 1270, a sick man almost already, but with
soul content, and probably the only one without misgiving in
the midst of all his comrades. It was once more at
Aigues-Mortes that he went to embark. All was as yet dark and
undecided as to the plan of the expedition. ... Steps were
taken at hap-hazard with full trust in Providence and utter
forgetfulness that Providence does not absolve men from
foresight. ... It was only in Sardinia, after four days' halt
at Cagliari, that Louis announced to the chiefs of the
crusade, assembled aboard his ship, the 'Mountjoy,' that he
was making for Tunis, and that their Christian work would
commence there. The king of Tunis (as he was then called),
Mohammed Mostanser, had for some time been talking of his
desire to become a Christian, if he could be efficiently
protected against the seditions of his subjects. Louis
welcomed with transport the prospect of Mussulman conversions.
... But on the 17th of July, when the fleet arrived before
Tunis, the admiral, Florent de Varennes, probably without the
king's orders, and with that want of reflection which was
conspicuous at each step of the enterprise, immediately took
possession of the harbor and of some Tunisian vessels as
prize, and sent word to the king 'that he had only to support
him and that the disembarkation of the troops might be
effected with perfect safety.' Thus war was commenced at the
very first moment against the Mussulman prince whom there had
been promise of seeing before long a Christian. At the end of
a fortnight, after some fight between the Tunisians and the
crusaders, so much political and military blindness produced
its natural consequences. The re-enforcements promised to
Louis by his brother Charles of Anjou, king of Sicily, had not
arrived; provisions were falling short; and the heats of an
African summer were working havoc amongst the army with such
rapidity that before long there was no time to bury the dead;
but they were cast pell-mell into the ditch which surrounded
the camp, and the air was tainted thereby.
{636}
On the 3d of August Louis was attacked by the epidemic fever."
On the 25th of August he died. His son and successor, Philip
III., held his ground before Tunis until November, when he
gladly accepted a payment of money from the Tunisian prince
for withdrawing his army. Disaster followed him. A storm
destroyed part of his fleet, with 4,000 or 5,000 men, and sunk
all the treasure he had received from the Moslems. On the
journey home through Italy his wife met with an accident which
ended her life and that of her prematurely born child. The
young king arrived at Paris, May, 1271, bringing the remains
of five of his family for burial at St. Denis: his wife, his
son, his father, his brother, and his brother-in-law,--all
victims of the fatal crusade. While France was thus burying
the last of her crusaders, Prince Edward (afterwards King
Edward I.) of England, landed in Syria at the head of a few
hundred knights and men at arms. Joined by the Templars and
Hospitallers, he had an army of 6,000 or 7,000 men, with which
he took Nazareth and made there a bloody sacrifice to the
memory of the gentle Nazarene. He did nothing more. Being
wounded by an assassin, he arranged a truce with the Sultan of
Egypt and returned home. His expedition was the last from
Europe which strove with the Moslems for the Holy Land. The
Christians of Palestine, who still held Acre and Tyre, Sidon
and a few other coast cities, were soon afterwards
overwhelmed, and the dominion of the Crescent in Syria was
undisputed any more by force of arms, though many voices cried
vainly against it. The spirit of the Crusades had expired.
F. P. Guizot, Popular History of France, chapter 17.
www.gutenberg.org/files/11952
ALSO IN:
J. F. Michaud, History of the Crusades, book 15.
CRUSADES: A. D. 1291.
The end of the Christian Kingdom of Jerusalem.
See JERUSALEM: A. D. 1291.
CRUSADES: A. D. 1299.
The last campaign of the Templars.
"After the fall of Acre [A. D. 1291] the headquarters of the
Templars were established at Limisso in the island of Cyprus,
and urgent letters were sent to Europe for succour." In 1295,
James de Molay, the head of the English province, became Grand
Master, and soon after his arrival in Palestine he entered
into an alliance with Ghazan Khan, the Mongol ruler of Persia,
who had married a Christian princess of Armenia and was not
unfriendly to the Christians, as against the Mamelukes of
Egypt, with whom he was at war. The Mongol Khan invited the
Templars to join him in an expedition against the Sultan of
Egypt, and they did so in the spring of 1299, at Antioch. "An
army of 30,000 men was placed by the Mogul emperor under the
command of the Grand Master, and the combined forces moved up
the valley of the Orontes towards Damascus. In a great battle
fought at Hems, the troops of the sultans of Damascus and
Egypt were entirely defeated and pursued with great slaughter
until nightfall. Aleppo, Hems, Damascus, and all the principal
cities, surrendered to the victorious arms of the Moguls, and
the Templars once again entered Jerusalem in triumph, visited
the Holy Sepulchre and celebrated Easter on Mount Zion." The
khan sent ambassadors to Europe, offering the possession of
Palestine to the Christian powers if they would give him their
alliance and support, but none responded to the call. Ghazan
Khan fell ill and withdrew from Syria; the Templars retreated
to Cyprus once more and their military career, as the
champions of the Cross, was at an end.
C. G. Addison, The Knights Templars, chapter 6.
ALSO IN:
H. H. Howarth, History of the Mongols, part 3, chapter 8.
CRUSADES:
Effects and consequences of the Crusades, in Europe.
"The principle of the crusades was a savage fanaticism; and
the most important effects were analogous to the cause. Each
pilgrim was ambitious to return with his sacred spoils, the
relics of Greece and Palestine; and each relic was preceded
and followed by a train of miracles and visions. The belief of
the Catholics was corrupted by new legends, their practice by
new superstitions; and the establishment of the inquisition,
the mendicant orders of monks and friars, the last abuse of
indulgences, and the final progress of idolatry, flowed from
the baleful fountain of the holy war. The active spirit of the
Latins preyed on the vitals of their reason and religion; and
if the ninth and tenth centuries were the times of darkness,
the thirteenth and fourteenth were the age of absurdity and
fable. ... Some philosophers have applauded the propitious
influence of these holy wars, which appear to me to have
checked rather than forwarded the maturity of Europe."
E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 61.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
"The crusades may be considered as material pilgrimages on an
enormous scale, and their influence upon general morality
seems to have been altogether pernicious. Those who served
under the cross would not indeed have lived very virtuously at
home; but the confidence in their own merits which the
principle of such expeditions inspired must have aggravated
the ferocity and dissoluteness of their ancient habits.
Several historians attest the depravation of morals which
existed, both among the crusaders and in the states formed out
of their conquests."
H. Hallam, The Middle Ages, chapter 9. part 1.
"It was not possible for the crusaders to travel through so
many countries, and to behold their various customs and
institutions, without acquiring information and improvement.
Their views enlarged; their prejudices wore off; new ideas
crowded into their minds; and they must have been sensible, on
many occasions, of the rusticity of their own manners when
compared with those of a more polished people. ...
Accordingly, we discover, soon after the commencement of the
crusades, greater splendour in the courts of princes, greater
pomp in public ceremonies, a more refined taste in pleasure
and amusements, together with a more romantic spirit of
enterprise spreading gradually over Europe; and to these wild
expeditions, the effect of superstition and folly, we owe the
first gleams of light which tended to dispel barbarism and
ignorance. But the beneficial consequences of the crusades
took place slowly; their influence upon the state of property,
and, consequently, of power, in the different kingdoms of
Europe, was more immediate as well as discernible."
W. Robertson, View of the Progress of Society
in Europe, section 1.
{637}
"The crusades are not, in my mind, either the popular
delusions that our cheap literature has determined them to be,
nor papal conspiracies against kings and peoples, as they
appear to the Protestant controversialist; nor the savage
outbreaks of expiring barbarism, thirsting for blood and
plunder, nor volcanic explosions of religious intolerance. I
believe them to have been, in their deep sources, and in the
minds of their best champions, and in the main tendency of
their results, capable of ample justification. They were the
first great effort of mediæval life to go beyond the pursuit
of selfish and isolated ambitions; they were the trial-feat of
the young world, essaying to use, to the glory of God and the
benefit of man, the arms of its new knighthood. ... That in
the end they were a benefit to the world no one who reads can
doubt; and that in their course they brought out a love for
all that is heroic in human nature, the love of freedom, the
honour of prowess, sympathy with sorrow, perseverance to the
last and patient endurance without hope, the chronicles of the
age abundantly prove; proving, moreover, that it was by the
experience of those times that the forms of those virtues were
realized and presented to posterity."
William Stubbs, Seventeen Lectures on the Study of Mediæval
and Modern History, lecture 8.
"Though begun under the name and influence of religious
belief, the crusades deprived religious ideas, I shall not say
of their legitimate share of influence, but of their exclusive
and despotic possession of the human mind. This result, though
undoubtedly unforeseen, arose from various causes. The first
was evidently the novelty, extent, and variety of the scene
which displayed itself to the crusaders; what generally
happens to travellers happened to them. It is mere
common-place to say, that travelling gives freedom to the
mind; that the habit of observing different nations, different
manners and different opinions, enlarges the ideas, and
disengages the judgment from old prejudices. The same thing
happened to those nations of travellers who have been called
the crusaders; their minds were opened and raised by having
seen a multitude of different things, of having become
acquainted with other manners than their own. They found
themselves also placed in connexion with two states of
civilization, not only different from their own, but more
advanced--the Greek state of society on the one hand, and the
Mussulman on the other. ... It is curious to observe in the
chronicles the impression made by the crusaders on the
Mussulmans, who regarded them at first as the most brutal,
ferocious, and stupid barbarians they had ever seen. The
crusaders, on their part, were struck with the riches and
elegance of manners which they observed among the Mussulmans.
These first impressions were succeeded by frequent relations
between the Mussulmans and Christians. These became more
extensive and important than is commonly believed. ... There
is another circumstance which is worthy of notice. Down to the
time of the crusades, the court of Rome, the centre of the
Church, had been very little in communication with the laity,
unless through the medium of ecclesiastics; either legates
sent by the court of Rome, or the whole body of the bishops
and clergy. There were always some laymen in direct relation
with Rome; but upon the whole, it was by means of churchmen
that Rome had any communication with the people of different
countries. During the crusades, on the contrary, Rome became a
halting-place for a great portion of the crusaders, either in
going or returning. A multitude of laymen were spectators of
its policy and its manners, and were able to discover the
share which personal interest had in religious disputes. There
is no doubt that this newly-acquired knowledge inspired many
minds with a boldness hitherto unknown. When we consider the
state of the general mind at the termination of the crusades,
especially in regard to ecclesiastical matters, we cannot fail
to be struck with a singular fact: religious notions underwent
no change, and were not replaced by contrary or even different
opinions. Thought, notwithstanding, had become more free;
religious creeds were not the only subject on which the human
mind exercised its faculties; without abandoning them, it
began occasionally to wander from them, and to take other
directions. ... The social state of society had undergone an
analogous change. ... Without entering into the details ... we
may collect into a few general facts the influence of the
crusades on the social state of Europe. They greatly
diminished the number of petty fiefs, petty domains, and petty
proprietors; they concentrated property and power in a smaller
number of hands. It is from the time of the crusades that we
may observe the formation and growth of great fiefs--the
existence of feudal power on a large scale. ... This was one
of the most important results of the crusades. Even in those
cases where small proprietors preserved their fiefs, they did
not live upon them in such an insulated state as formerly. The
possessors of great fiefs became so many centres around which
the smaller ones were gathered, and near which they came to
live. During the crusades, small proprietors found it
necessary to place themselves in the train of some rich and
powerful chief, from whom they received assistance and
support. They lived with him, shared his fortune, and passed
through the same adventures that he did. When the crusaders
returned home, this social spirit, this habit of living in
intercourse with superiors continued to subsist, and had its
influence on the manners of the age. ... The extension of the
great fiefs, and the creation of a number of central points in
society, in place of the general dispersion which previously
existed, were the two principal effects of the crusades,
considered with respect to their influence upon feudalism. As
to the inhabitants of the towns, a result of the same nature
may easily be perceived. The crusades created great civic
communities. Petty commerce and petty industry were not
sufficient to give rise to communities such as the great
cities of Italy and Flanders. It was commerce on a great
scale--maritime commerce, and, especially, the commerce of the
East and West, which gave them birth; now it was the crusades
which gave to the maritime commerce the greatest impulse it
had yet received. On the whole, when we survey the state of
society at the end of the crusades, we find that the movement
tending to dissolution and dispersion, the movement of
universal localization (if I may be allowed such an
expression), had ceased, and had been succeeded by a movement
in the contrary direction, a movement of centralization. All
things tended to mutual approximation; small things were
absorbed in great ones, or gathered round them. Such was the
direction then taken by the progress of society."
F. Guizot, History of Civilization, lecture 8 (volume 1).
www.gutenberg.org/files/61572/61572-h/61572-h.htm#Page_151
{638}
CRUSADES: A. D. 1383.
The Bishop of Norwich's Crusade in Flanders.
See FLANDERS: A. D. 1383.
CRUSADES: A. D. 1420-1431.
Crusade against the Hussites.
See BOHEMIA: A. D. 1419-1434.
CRUSADES: A. D. 1442-1444.
Christian Europe against the Turks.
See TURKS (THE OTTOMANS): A. D. 1402-1451.
CRUSADES: A. D. 1467-1471.
Crusade Instigated by the Pope against George Podiebrad, king
of Bohemia.
See BOHEMIA: A. D. 1458-1471..
----------CRUSADES: End----------
CRYPTEIA, The.
See KRYPTEIA.
CTESIPHON.
"The Parthian monarchs, like the Mogul sovereigns of
Hindostan, delighted in the pastoral life of their Scythian
ancestors, and the imperial camp was frequently pitched in the
plain of Ctesiphon, on the eastern banks of the Tigris, at the
distance of only three miles from Seleucia. The innumerable
attendants on luxury and despotism resorted to the court, and
the little village of Ctesiphon insensibly swelled into a
great city. Under the reign of Marcus, the Roman generals
penetrated as far as Ctesiphon and Seleucia. They were
received as friends by the Greek colony; they attacked as
enemies the seat of the Parthian kings; yet both cities
experienced the same treatment. The sack and conflagration of
Seleucia, with the massacre of 300,000 of the inhabitants,
tarnished the glory of the Roman triumph, Seleucia, already
exhausted by the neighborhood of a too powerful rival, sunk
under the fatal blow; but Ctesiphon, in about thirty-three
years, had sufficiently recovered its strength to maintain an
obstinate siege against the emperor Severus. The city was,
however, taken by assault; the king, who defended it in
person, escaped with precipitation; 100,000 captives and a
rich booty rewarded the fatigues of the Roman soldiers.
Notwithstanding these misfortunes, Ctesiphon succeeded to
Babylon and to Seleucia as one of the great capitals of the
East."
E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 8.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
In 637 A. D. Ctesiphon passed into the possession of the
Saracens.
See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST AND EMPIRE: A. D. 632-651.
ALSO IN:
G. Rawlinson, Sixth Great Oriental Monarchy, chapter 6.
See, also, MEDAIN.
CUATOS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: PAMPAS TRIBES.
CUBA: A. D. 1492-1493.
Discovery by Columbus.
See AMERICA: A. D. 1492; and 1493-1496.
CUBA: A. D. 1511.
Spanish conquest and occupation of the island.
"Of the islands, Cuba was the second discovered; but no
attempt had been made to plant a colony there during the
lifetime of Columbus; who, indeed, after skirting the whole
extent of its southern coast, died in the conviction that it
was part of the continent. At length, in 1511, Diego, the son
and successor of the 'admiral,' who still maintained the seat
of government in Hispaniola, finding the mines much exhausted
there, proposed to occupy the neighbouring island of Cuba, or
Fernandina, as it is called, in compliment to the Spanish
monarch. He prepared a small force for the conquest, which he
placed under the command of Don Diego Velasquez. ...
Velasquez, or rather his lieutenant Narvaez, who took the
office on himself of scouring the country, met with no serious
opposition from the inhabitants, who were of the same family
with the effeminate natives of Hispaniola." After the
conquest, Velasquez was appointed governor, and established
his seat of government at St. Jago, on the southeast corner of
the island.
W. H. Prescott, Conquest of Mexico, book 2, chapter 1.
ALSO IN:
Sir A. Helps, Spanish Conquest in America, book 7.
CUBA: A. D. 1514-1851.
Slow development of the island.
Capture of Havana by the English.
Discontent with Spanish rule.
Conspiracies of revolution.
"Velasquez founded many of the towns of the island, the first
of which was Baracoa, then Bayamo, and in 1514 Trinidad, Santo
Espiritu, Puerto Principe; next, in 1515, Santiago de Cuba, as
also, in the same year, the town of Habana. ... This period
(1511-1607) is particularly interesting to the general reader
from the fact that in it the explorations of Hernandez de
Cadoba and Grijalva to Darien, Yucatan, etc., were
inaugurated,--events which had so much to do with the spread
of Spanish rule and discovery, paving the way as they did for
the exploration of Mexico under Hernando Cortes, who, in the
early history of Cuba, figures largely as the lieutenant of
the Governor Velasquez. ... In 1524, Diego Velasquez died,
--his death hastened, it is said, by the troubles brought upon
him by his disputes with his insubordinate lieutenant, Cortes.
... In the history of the improvement of the island, his
government will bear favorable comparison with many of the
later governments; and while that great evil, slavery, was
introduced into the island in his time, so also was the sugar
cane. ... Up to 1538, there seems to be nothing specially
striking in the general history of the island, if we except
the constant attacks with fire and sword of the
'filibusteros,' or pirates of all nations, from which most all
the sea-coast towns suffered more or less; but in that year
there arrived at Santiago de Cuba a man destined to play an
important part in the history and discovery of the new world,
and named as Provincial Governor of Florida as well as of
Cuba,--I allude to Hernando de Soto, who brought with him 10
large vessels, prepared and fitted out expressly for the
conquest of the new Spanish territory of Florida. After much
care and preparation, this expedition started out from the
city of Habana, the 12th of May [see FLORIDA: A. D.
1528-1542]. ... In this period, also, was promulgated that
order, secured, it is believed, by the noble efforts of Padre
Las Casas, prohibiting the enslaving of the aborigines; while,
also, such had become its importance as a town, all vessels
directed to and from Mexico were ordered to stop at Havana. In
the period of years that elapsed from 1607 to 1762, the island
seems to have been in a perfect state of lethargy, except the
usual changes of its many Governors, and the raids made upon
it by pirates, or by more legalized enemies in the form of
French and English men-of-war. In this latter year, however,
occurred an event of much import, from the fact that after it,
or upon its occurrence, the Government of Spain was led to see
the great importance of Cuba, and particularly Havana, as the
'Key to the New World,'--this event was the taking of Havana
by the English.
{639}
On the 6th of June, 1762, there arrived off the port of Havana
an English squadron of 32 ships and frigates, with some 200
transports, bringing with them a force of nearly 20,000 men of
all arms, under command of the Duke of Albemarle. This
formidable armament, the largest that America had ever seen,
laid siege to the city of Havana, whose garrison consisted at
that time of only about 2,700 regulars and the volunteers that
took up arms immediately for the defense of the place. ... The
garrison, however, made a very gallant and prolonged defense,
notwithstanding the smallness of their numbers, and finally,
surrendering, were permitted to march out with the honors of
war, the English thus coming into possession of the most
important defences on the coast, and, subsequently, taking
possession of the town of Matanzas. Remaining in possession of
this portion of the Island of Cuba for many months (until July
6, 1763), the English, by importing negro labor to cultivate
the large tracts of wild land, and by shipping large
quantities of European merchandize, gave a start to the trade
and traffic of the island that pushed it far on its way to the
state of prosperity it has now reached; but by the treaty of
peace, at Paris, in February, 1763 [see Seven Years War], was
restored to Spain the portion of the island wrested from her
by the English. ... In this period (1762-1801) the island made
rapid advances in improvement and civilization, many of the
Captains-General of this period doing much to improve the
towns and the people, beautifying the streets, erecting
buildings, etc. In 1763, a large emigration took place from
Florida, and in 1795 the French emigrants from Santo Domingo
came on to the island in large numbers. ... From 1801, rapid
increase in the prosperity of the island has taken place. ...
At various times insurrections, some of them quite serious in
their nature, have shown what the natural desire of the native
population is for greater privileges and freedom. ... In 1823,
there was a society of 'soles,' as it was called, formed for
the purpose of freeing the island, having at its head young D.
Francisco Lemus, and having for its pretext that the island
was about to be sold to England. In 1829, there was discovered
the conspiracy of the Black Eagle, as it was called (Aguila
Negra), an attempt on the part of the population to obtain
their freedom, some of the Mexican settlers in the island
being prominent in it. The insurrection, or attempt at one, by
the blacks in 1844, was remarkable for its wide-spread
ramifications among the slaves of the island, as well as its
thorough organization,--the intention being to murder all the
whites on the island. Other minor insurrections there were,
but it remained for Narciso Lopez, with a force of some 300
men, to make the most important attempt [1851], in which he
lost his life, to free the island."
S. Hazard, Cuba with Pen and Pencil, pages 547-550.
ALSO IN:
M. M. Ballou, History of Cuba, chapter 1-3.
Lord Mahon (Earl Stanhope),
History of England, 1713-1783, chapter 38 (volume 4).
J. Entick, History of the Late War, volume 5, pages 363-386.
D. Turnbull, Cuba, chapter 22-24.
CUBA: A. D. 1845-1860.
Acquisition coveted by the slave-power in the United States.
Attempted purchase.
Filibustering schemes.
The Ostend Manifesto.
"When the Spanish colonies in America became independent, they
abolished slavery. Apprehensive that the republics of Mexico
and Columbia would be anxious to wrest Cuba and Porto Rico
from Spain, secure their independence, and introduce into
those islands the idea, if they did not establish the fact, of
freedom, the slave-masters [of the United States] at once
sought to guard against what they deemed so calamitous an
event. ... But after the annexation of Texas, there was a
change of feeling and purpose, and Cuba, from being an object
of dread, became an object of vehement desire. The
propagandists, strengthened and emboldened by that signal
triumph, now turned their eyes towards this beautiful 'isle of
the sea,' as the theatre of new exploits; and they determined
to secure the 'gem of the Antilles' for the coronet of their
great and growing power. During Mr. Polk's administration an
attempt was made to purchase it, and the sum of $100,000,000
was offered therefor. But the offer was promptly declined.
What, however, could not be bought it was determined to steal,
and filibustering movements and expeditions became the order
of the day. For no sooner was President Taylor inaugurated
than he found movements on foot in that direction; and, in
August, 1849, he issued a proclamation, affirming his belief
that an 'armed expedition' was being fitted out 'against Cuba
or some of the provinces of Mexico,' and calling upon all good
citizens' to discountenance and prevent any such enterprise.'
In 1851 an expedition, consisting of some 500 men, sailed from
New Orleans under Lopez, a Cuban adventurer. But though it
effected a landing, it was easily defeated, and its leader and
a few of his followers were executed. Soon afterward, a secret
association, styling itself the Order of the Lone Star, was
formed in several of the Southern cities, having a similar
object in view; but it attracted little notice and
accomplished nothing. ... In August, 1854, President Pierce
instructed Mr. Marcy, his Secretary of State, to direct
Buchanan, Mason and Soulé, ministers respectively at the
courts of London, Paris and Madrid, to convene in some
European city and confer with each other in regard to the
matter of gaining Cuba to the United States. They met
accordingly, in October, at Ostend. The results of their
deliberations were published in a manifesto, in which the
reasons are set forth for the acquisition; and the declaration
was made that the Union could never enjoy repose and security 'as
long as Cuba is not embraced within its boundaries.' But the
great source of anxiety, the controlling motive, was the
apprehension that, unless so annexed, she would 'be
Africanized and become a second San Domingo,' thus 'seriously
to endanger' the Union. This paper attracted great attention
and caused much astonishment. It was at first received with
incredulity, as if there had been some mistake or imposition
practised. ... But there was no mistake. ... It was the
deliberate utterance of the conference, and it received the
indorsement of Mr. Pierce and his administration. The
Democratic national conventions of 1856 and of 1860 were quite
as explicit as were the authors of the Ostend manifesto 'in
favor of the acquisition of Cuba.'"
H. Wilson, History of the Rise and Fall of the
Slave Power in America, volume 2, ch.47.
{640}
ALSO IN:
H. Von Holst, Constitutional and Political History
of the United States,
volume 4, chapter 2, and volume 5, chapter 1.
G. T. Curtis, Life of James Buchanan, volume 2, chapter 6.
M. M. Ballou, History of Cuba, chapter 3.
J. J. Roche, The Story of the Filibusters, chapter 3.
----------CUBA: End----------
CUBIT, The.
"The length of the Egyptian foot is ... shown to be equal to
1.013 English foot, or 12.16 inches (0.3086 metre) and the
cubit to 18.24 English inches, or 0.463 metre. This cubit was
identical with the Phœnician or Olympic cubit, afterwards
adopted in Greece. ... The second of the two Egyptian cubits
was the royal cubit, or cubit of Memphis, of seven palms or
twenty-eight digits. ... The mean length of the Egyptian royal
cubit is ... ascertained to be 20.67 English inches, or 525
mm. ... There is much conflict of opinion as to the actual
length of the several cubits in use by the Jews at different
periods; but the fact that Moses always mentions the Egyptian
measures ... as well as the Egyptian weights ... proves that
the Hebrews originally brought their weights and measures from
Egypt. ... In his dissertation on cubits, Sir Isaac Newton
states grounds for his opinion that the sacred cubit of the
Jews was equal to 24.7 of our inches, and that the royal cubit
of Memphis was equivalent to five-sixths of this sacred Jewish
cubit, or 20.6 inches."
H. W. Chisholm, On the Science of Weighing and
Measuring, chapter 2.
CUCUTA, The Convention of.
See COLOMBIAN STATES: A. D. 1819-1830.
CUFA.
See BUSSORAH and KUFA.
CUICIDH, The.
See TUATH, THE.
CULDEES, The.
It used to be set forth by religious historians that the
Culdees were an ardent religious fraternity in Scotland,
probably founded by Columba, the saintly Irish missionary of
the sixth century, and having its principal seat in Iona; that
they "were the lights of Scotland in a dark and superstitious
age"; that they struggled for several centuries against the
errors and the oppressive pretensions of Rome, and that "the
strength and vigor of the Reformation in Scotland, where the
Papal power received its first and most decisive check, may be
traced not indirectly to the faith, the doctrines, and the
spirit of the ancient Culdees." It was claimed for the
Presbyterian Church that its form of church government
prevailed among the Culdees, while the supporters of
Episcopacy found evidences to the contrary. But all these
views, with all the controversies fomented by them, have been
dissipated by modern historical investigation. The facts
gathered by Dean Reeves and published in 1864, in his work on
the "Culdees of the British Islands," supported by the more
recent studies of Mr. W. F. Skene, are now generally accepted.
Says Mr. Skene, (Celtic Scotland, book 2, chapter 6): "It is not
till after the expulsion of the Columban monks from the
kingdom of the Picts, in the beginning of the eighth century,
that the name of Culdee appears. To Adamnan, to Eddi and to
Bede it was totally unknown. They knew of no body of clergy
who bore this name, and in the whole range of ecclesiastical
history there is nothing more utterly destitute of authority
than the application of this name to the Columban monks of the
sixth and seventh centuries, or more utterly baseless than the
fabric which has been raised upon that assumption." Mr.
Skene's conclusion is that the Culdees sprang from an ascetic
order called Deicolæ or God-worshippers; that in Irish the
name became Ceile De, thence corrupted into Culdee; that they
were hermits, who became in time associated in communities,
and were finally brought under the canonical rule of the Roman
church, along with the secular clergy.
CULEUS, The.
See AMPHORA.
CULHUACAN.
See MEXICO, ANCIENT: THE TOLTEC EMPIRE.
CULLODEN, Battle of (1746).
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1745-1746.
CULM, OR KULM, Battle of.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1813 (AUGUST).
CULTURKAMPF, The.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1873-1887.
CUMÆ.--CUMÆAN SIBYL.
"Earlier than 735 B. C., ... though we do not know the precise
era of its commencement, there existed one solitary Grecian
establishment in the Tyrrhenian Sea,--the Campanian Cumæ, near
Cape Misenum; which the more common opinion of chronologists
supposed to have been founded in 1050 B. U. and which has even
been carried back by some authors to 1139 B. C. ... We may at
least feel certain that it is the most ancient Grecian
establishment in any part of Italy. ... The Campanian
Cumæ--known almost entirely by this its Latin
designation--received its name and a portion of its
inhabitants from the Æolic Kymê in Asia Minor. ... Cumæ,
situated on the neck of the peninsula which terminates in Cape
Misenum, occupied a lofty and rocky hill overhanging the sea
and difficult of access on the land side. ... In the hollow
rock under the very walls of the town was situated the cavern
of the prophetic Sibyl,--a parallel and reproduction of the
Gergithian Sibyl, near Kymê in Æolis: in the immediate
neighborhood, too, stood the wild woods and dark lake of
Avernus, consecrated to the subterranean gods, and offering an
establishment of priests, with ceremonies evoking the dead,
for purposes of prophecy or for solving doubts and mysteries.
It was here that Grecian imagination localized the Cimmerians
and the fable of Odysseus; and the Cumæans derived gains from
the numerous visitors to this holy spot, perhaps hardly less
than those of the inhabitants of Krissa from the vicinity of
Delphi. Of the relations of these Cumæans with the Hellenic
world generally, we unfortunately know nothing; but they seem
to have been in intimate connection with Rome during the time
of the kings, and especially during that of the last king
Tarquin,--forming the intermediate link between the Greek and
Latin world, whereby the feelings of the Teukrians and
Gergitheans near the Æolic Kymê and the legendary stories of
Trojan as well as Grecian heroes,--Æneas and Odysseus--passed
into the antiquarian imagination of Rome and Latium. The
writers of the Augustan age knew Cumæ only in its decline, and
wondered at the vast extent of its ancient walls, yet
remaining in their time. But during the two centuries prior to
500 B. C. these walls inclosed a full and thriving population,
in the plenitude of prosperity."
G. Grote, History of Greece, part 2, chapter 22.
See, also, SIBYLS
CUMANS, OR KOMANS, The.
See HUNGARY: A. D. 1114-1301.
CUMBERLAND GAP, The capture of.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1863 (AUGUST-SEPTEMBER: TENNESSEE).
{641}
CUMBRIA:
The British kingdom.
"The Britons of Cumbria occupy a tolerably large space on the
map, but a very small one in history;--their annals have
entirely perished;--and nothing authentic remains concerning
them, except a very few passages, wholly consisting of
incidental notices relating to their subjection and their
misfortunes. Romance would furnish much more; for it was in
Cumbria that Rhyderc, or Roderic the magnificent, is therein
represented to have reigned, and Merlin to have prophesied.
Arthur held his court in merry Carlisle; and Peredur, the
Prince of Sunshine, whose name we find amongst the princes of
Strathclyde, is one of the great heroes of the 'Mabinogion,'
or tales of youth, long preserved by tradition amongst the
Cymri. These fantastic personages, however, are of importance
in one point of view, because they show, what we might
otherwise forget--that from the Ribble in Lancashire, or
thereabouts, up to the Clyde, there existed a dense population
composed of Britons, who preserved their national language and
customs, agreeing in all respects with the Welsh of the
present day. So that even in the tenth century, the ancient
Britons still inhabited the greater part of the western coast
of the island, however much they had been compelled to yield
to the political supremacy of the Saxon invaders. The 'Regnum
Cumbrense' comprehended many districts, probably governed by
petty princes or Reguli, in subordination to a chief monarch
or Pendragon. Reged appears to have been somewhere in the
vicinity of Annandale. Strathclyde is of course the district
or vale of Clydesdale. In this district, or state, was
situated Alcluyd, or Dunbritton, now Dumbarton, where the
British kings usually resided; and the whole Cumbrian kingdom
was not infrequently called Strathclyde, from the ruling or
principal state; just as the United Kingdom of Great Britain
and Ireland is often designated in common language as
'England,' because England is the portion where the monarch
and legislature are found. Many dependencies of the Cumbrian
kingdom extended into modern Yorkshire, and Leeds was the
frontier town between the Britons and the Angles. ... The
kings of Cumbria became the vassals, or 'men,' of the
Anglo-Saxon kings. Eugenius had thus submitted to Athelstane.
Of the nature of the obligation I shall speak hereafter. The
Anglo-Saxon kings appear to have been anxious to extend and
confirm their supremacy; Edmund proceeded against Donald, or
Dumhnail, the Scottish King of Cumbria (A. D. 945), with the
most inveterate and implacable hostility. ... Edmund, having
thus obtained possession of Cumbria, granted the country to
Malcolm, King of the Scots, upon condition, as the chronicles
say, of being his co-operator, both by sea and by land. ...
From this period the right of the Scottish kings or princes to
the kingdom of Cumbria, as vassals of the English crown, seems
to have been fully admitted: and the rights of the Scottish
kings to the 'Earldom of Cumberland'--for such it was
afterwards termed--were founded upon Edmund's grant. The
Britons of Strathclyde, and Reged, and Cumbria, gradually
melted away into the surrounding population; and, losing their
language, ceased to be discernible as a separate race. Yet it
is most probable that this process was not wholly completed
until a comparatively recent period."
F. Palgrave, History of the Anglo-Saxons,
chapter 11.
Cumbria and Cambria (Wales), the two states long maintained by
the Britons, against the Angles and Saxons, bore, in reality,
the same name, Cumbria being the more correct form of it. The
earliest development of the so-called Welsh poetry seems to
have been in Cumbria rather than in Wales. Taliesen and
Aneurin were Cumbrian bards, and Arthur, if any historical
personage stands behind his kingly shadow, was probably a
Cumbrian hero.
J. Rhys, Celtic Britain.
ALSO IN:
W. F. Skene, The Four Ancient Books of Wales.
See, also, KYMRY, ALCLYDE,
and SCOTLAND: 10TH-11TH CENTURIES.
CUNARD LINE, The founding of the.
See STEAM NAVIGATION: ON THE OCEAN.
CUNAXA, Battle of (B. C. 401).
See PERSIA: B. C. 401-400.
CUNEIFORM WRITING.
The characters employed for the written languages of ancient
Babylonia and Assyria, have been called cuneiform, from the
Latin cunens, a wedge, because the marks composing them are
wedge-shaped. All knowledge of those characters and of the
languages expressed in them had been lost for many centuries,
and its recent recovery is one of the most marvelous
achievements of our age. "Travellers had discovered
inscriptions engraved in cuneiform, or, as they were also
termed, arrow-headed characters, on the ruined monuments of
Persepolis and other ancient sites in Persia. Some of these
monuments were known to have been erected by the Achæmenian
princes--Darius, the son of Hystaspes, and his successors--and
it was therefore inferred that the inscriptions also had been
carved by order of the same kings. The inscriptions were in
three different systems of cuneiform writing; and since the
three kinds of inscription were always placed side by side, it
was evident that they represented different versions of the
same text. ... It was clear that the three versions of the
Achæmenian inscriptions were addressed to the three chief
populations of the Persian Empire, and that the one which
invariably came first was composed in ancient Persian, the
language of the sovereign himself. Now this Persian version
happened to offer the decipherer less difficulties than the
two others which accompanied it. The number of distinct
characters employed in writing it did not exceed forty, while
the words were divided from one another by a slanting wedge.
Some of the words contained so many characters that it was
plain that these latter must denote letters and not syllables,
and that consequently the Persian cuneiform system must have
consisted of an alphabet, and not of a syllabary. It was
further plain that the inscriptions had to be read from left
to right, since the ends of all the lines were exactly
underneath one another on the left side, whereas they
terminated irregularly on the right. ... The clue to the
decipherment of the inscriptions was first discovered by the
successful guess of a German scholar, Grotefend. Grotefend
noticed that the inscriptions generally began with three or
four words, one of which varied, while the others remained
unchanged. The variable word had three forms, though the same
form always appeared on the same monument. Grotefend,
therefore, conjectured that this word represented the name of
a king, the words which followed it being royal titles."
Working on this conjecture, he identified the three names with
Darius, Xerxes and Artaxerxes, and one of the supposed titles
with a Zend word for "king," which gave him a considerable
part of the cuneiform alphabet. He was followed in the work by
Burnouf, Lassen and Sir Henry Rawlinson, until, finally,
Assyrian inscriptions were read with "almost as much certainty
as a page of the Old Testament."
A. H. Sayce, Fresh Light from the ancient monuments,
chapter 1.
{642}
CUNIBERTUS, King of the Lombards, A. D. 691-700.
CUNIMARÉ, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
GUCK OR Coco GROUP.
CURDS, OR KURDS, The.
See CARDUCHI.
CURFEW-BELL, The.
"Except from its influence upon the imagination, it would be
hardly worth while to notice the legend of the curfew-bell, so
commonly supposed to have been imposed by William [the
Conqueror] upon the English, as a token of degradation and
slavery; but the 'squilla di lontano, che paja il giorno
pianger che si muore,' was a universal custom of police
throughout the whole of mediaeval Europe, not unconnected with
devotional feeling."
Sir F. Palgrave, History of Normandy and England,
volume 3, page 627.
"In the year [1061] after King Henry's death [Henry I. of
France], in a Synod held at Caen by the Duke's authority [Duke
William of Normandy, who became in 1066 the Conqueror, and
King of England], and attended by Bishops, Abbots, and Barons,
it was ordered that a bell should be rung every evening, at
hearing of which prayer should be offered, and all people
should get within their houses and shut their doors. This odd
mixture of piety and police seems to be the origin of the
famous and misrepresented Curfew. Whatever was its object, it
was at least not ordained as any special hardship on William's
English subjects."
E. A. Freeman, History of the Norman Conquest
of England, chapter 12, section 3 (volume 3).
CURIA, Ancient Roman.
See COMITIA-CURIATA.
CURIA, Municipal, of the later Roman empire.
Decuriones.
"It is only necessary in this work to describe the general
type of the municipal organization which existed in the
provinces of the Roman Empire after the time of Constantine.
... The proprietors of land in the Roman provinces generally
dwelt in towns and cities, as a protection against brigands
and man-stealers. Every town had an agricultural district
which formed its territory, and the landed proprietors
constituted the municipality. The whole local authority was
vested in an oligarchical senate called the Curia, consisting
probably of one hundred of the wealthiest landed proprietors
in the city or township. This body elected the municipal
authorities and officers, and filled up vacancies in its own
body. It was therefore independent of the proprietors from
among whom it was taken, and whose interests it ought to have
represented. The Curia--not the body of landed
proprietors--formed therefore the Roman municipality. The
Curia was used by the imperial government as an instrument of
fiscal extortion."
G. Finlay, Greece under the Romans, chapter 2, section 1.
"When the progress of fiscal tyranny had almost sapped the
vigor of society, the decuriones [members of the municipal
curiæ, called, also, curiales] ... being held jointly
responsible for the taxation, became the veriest slaves of the
empire. Responsible jointly for the taxes, they were, by the
same token, responsible for their colleagues and their
successors; their estates were made the securities of the
imperial dues; and if any estate was abandoned by its
proprietor, they were compelled to occupy it and meet the
imposts exigible from it. Yet they could not relinquish their
offices; they could not leave the city except by stealth; they
could not enter the army, or the priesthood, or any office
which might relieve them from municipal functions. ... Even
the children of the Curial were adscribed to his functions,
and could engage in no course of life inconsistent with the
onerous and intolerable duty. In short, this dignity was so
much abhorred that the lowest plebeian shunned admission to
it, the members of it made themselves bondmen, married
slave-women, or joined the barbaric hordes in order to escape
it; and malefactors, Jews and heretics were sometimes
condemned to it, as an appropriate penalty for their
offenses."
P. Godwin, History of France:
Ancient Gaul, book 2, chapter 8.
ALSO IN:
T. Hodgkin, Italy and her Invaders, book 3, chapter 9.
F. Guizot, History of Civilization, volume 2
(volume 1, France), lecture 2.
See, also ROME: A. D. 363-379.
CURIA, Papal.
College of Cardinals.
Consistory.
"The Court of Rome, commonly called the Roman Curia, consisted
of a number of dignified ecclesiastics who assisted the Pope
in the executive administration. The Pontiff's more intimate
advisers, or, as we should say, his privy council, were the
College of Cardinals [see PAPACY: A. D. 1059], consisting of a
certain number of cardinal bishops, cardinal priests, and
cardinal deacons. The cardinal deacons, at first seven and
afterwards fourteen in number, were originally ecclesiastics
appointed as overseers and guardians of the sick and poor in
the different districts of Rome. Equal to them in rank were
the fifty cardinal priests, as the chief priests of the
principal Roman churches were called; who, with the cardinal
deacons, formed, in very early times, the presbytery, or
senate of the Bishop of Rome. ... According to some
authorities, cardinal bishops were instituted in the 9th
century; according to others not till the 11th, when seven
bishops of the dioceses nearest to Rome--Ostia, Porto,
Velitrae, Tusculum, Præneste, Tibur, and the Sabines--were
adopted by the Pope partly as his assistants in the service of
the Lateran, and partly in the general administration of the
Church. In process of time, the appointment of such cardinal
bishops was extended not only to the rest of Italy but also to
foreign countries. Though the youngest of the cardinals in
point of time, cardinal bishops were the highest in rank, and
enjoyed the pre-eminence in the College. Their titles were
derived from their dioceses. ... But they were also called by
their own names. The number of the cardinals was indefinite
and varying. The Council of Basle endeavoured to restrict it
to 24. But this was not carried out, and Pope Sixtus V. at
length fixed the number at 70. The Council called the
Consistory, which advised with the Pope both in temporal and
ecclesiastical matters, was ordinarily private, and confined
to the cardinals alone; though on extraordinary occasions, and
for solemn purposes of state, as in the audiences of foreign
ambassadors, &c., other prelates, and even distinguished
laymen, might appear in it."
T. H. Dyer, History of Modern Europe, volume 1, page 38.
{643}
CURIA REGIS OF THE NORMAN KINGS.
"The Curia Regis [under the Norman Kings of England], the
supreme tribunal of judicature, of which the Exchequer was the
financial department or session, was ... the court of the king
sitting to administer justice with the advice of his
counsellors; those counsellors being, in the widest
acceptation, the whole body of tenants-in-chief, but in the
more limited usage, the great officers of the household and
specially appointed judges. The great gatherings of the
national council may be regarded as full sessions of the Curia
Regis, or the Curia Regis as a perpetual committee of the
national council."
William Stubbs, Constitutional History of England,
chapter 11, section 127.
"Not long after the granting of Magna Charta, the Curia Regis
was permanently divided into three committees or courts, each

taking a certain portion of the business:
(1) Fiscal matters were confined to the Exchequer;
(2) civil disputes, where neither the king's interest nor any
matter savouring of a criminal nature were involved, were
decided in the Common Pleas; and
(3) the court of King's Bench retained all the remaining
business and soon acquired the exclusive denomination of the
ancient Curia Regis."
"But the same staff of judges was still retained for all three
courts, with the chief justiciar at their head. Towards the
end of Henry III.'s reign, the three courts received each a
distinct staff, and on the abolition by Edward I. of the
office of chief justiciar, the only remaining bond of union
being severed, they became completely separated. Some trace of
their ancient unity of organization always survived, however,
in the court of Exchequer Chamber; until at length after six
centuries of independent existence they were again united by
the Judicature Act, 1873. Together with the Court of Chancery
and the Probate, Divorce and Admiralty courts, they now form
divisions of a consolidated High Court of Justice, itself a
branch of the Supreme Court of Judicature."
T. P. Taswell-Langmead,
English Constitutional History, page 154.
"The Aula Regia, or Curia Regis ... has been described in
various and at first sight contradictory terms. Thus it has
been called the highest Law Court, the Ministry of the King, a
Legislative Assembly, &c. The apparent inconsistency of these
descriptions vanishes on closer inspection, and throws great
light on mediæval history. For the Curia Regis possessed every
attribute which has been ascribed to it."
A. V. Dicey, The Privy Council, part 1.
ALSO IN:
R. Gneist, History of the English Constitution, chapter 19.
CURIALES.
See CURIA, MUNICIPAL.
CURIOSOLITÆ, The.
See VENETI OF WESTERN GAUL.
CURTIS, George W., and Civil-Service Reform.
See CIVIL SERVICE REFORM IN THE UNITED STATES.
CURULE ÆDILES.
See ROME: B. C. 494-492.
CURULE CHAIR.
In ancient Rome, "certain high offices of state conferred upon
the holder the right of using, upon public occasions, an ivory
chair of peculiar form. This chair was termed Sella Curulis.
... This was somewhat in the form of a modern camp-stool."
W. Ramsay, Manual of Roman Antiquity, chapters 2 and 4.
CURZOLA, Battle of (1298).
See GENOA: A. D. 1261-1299.
CUSCO: The Capital of the Incas of Peru.
See PERU: A. D. 1533-154.8.
CUSH.--CUSHITES.
"Genesis, like the Hebrews of later date, includes under the
name of Cush the nations dwelling to the South, the Nubians,
Ethiopians and tribes of South Arabia."
M. Duncker, History of Antiquity, book 2, chapter 1.
See, also, HAMITES, and ARABIA.
CUSHING, Lieutenant William B.
Destruction of the ram Albemarle.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D.1864 (OCTOBER: NORTH CAROLINA).
CUSTER'S LAST BATTLE.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1876.
CUSTOMS DUTIES.
See TARIFF.
CUSTOMS UNION, The German (Zollverein).
See TARIFF: A. D. 1833.
CUSTOZZA, Battles of (1848 and 1866).
See ITALY: A. D. 1848-1849; and 1862-1866.
CUTLER, Manasseh, and the Ordinance of 1787.
See NORTHWEST TERRITORY OF THE
UNITED STATES: A. D. 1787.
CUYRIRI, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
GUCK OR COCO GROUP.
CYCLADES, The.--SPORADES, The.
"Among the Ionic portion of Hellas are to be reckoned (besides
Athens) Eubœa, and the numerous group of islands included
between the southernmost Eubœan promontory, the eastern coast
of Peloponnesus, and the northwestern coast of Krête. Of these
islands some are to be considered as outlying prolongations,
in a southeasterly direction, of the mountain-system of
Attica; others of that of Eubœa; while a certain number of
them lie apart from either system, and seem referable to a
volcanic origin. To the first class belong Keôs, Kythnus,
Seriphus, Pholegandrus, Sikinus, Gyarus, Syra, Paros, and
Antiparos; to the second class Andros, Tênos, Mykonos, Dêlos,
Naxos, Amorgos; to the third class Kimôlus, Mêlos, Thêra.
These islands passed amongst the ancients by the general name
of the Cyclades and the Sporades; the former denomination
being commonly understood to comprise those which immediately
surrounded the sacred island of Dêlos,--the latter being given
to those which lay more scattered and apart. But the names are
not applied with uniformity or steadiness even in ancient
times: at present, the whole group are usually known by the
title of Cyclades."
G. Grote, History of Greece, part 2, chapter 12.
CYDONIA, Battles and siege of (B. C. 71-68).
See CRETE: B. C. 68-66.
CYLON, Conspiracy of.
See ATHENS: B. C. 612-595.
CYMBELINE, Kingdom of.
See COLCHESTER, ORIGIN OF.
CYMRY, The.
See KYMRY, THE.
CYNOSARGES AT ATHENS, The.
See GYMNASIA, GREEK.
CYNOSCEPHALÆ, Battle of (B. C. 364).
The battle in which Pelopidas, the Theban patriot, friend and
colleague of Epaminondas, was slain. It was fought B. C. 364,
in Thessaly, near Pharsalus, on the heights called
Cynoscephalæ, or the Dog's Heads, and delivered the Thessalian
cities from the encroachments of the tyrant of Pheræ.
C. Thirlwall, History of Greece, chapter 40.
CYNOSCEPHALÆ: (B. C. 197).
See GREECE: B. C. 214-146.
{644}
CYNOSSEMA, Naval battle of.
Two successive naval battles fought, one in July and the
second in October, B. C. 411, between the Athenians and the
Peloponnesian allies, in the Hellespont, are jointly called
the Battle of Cynossema. The name was taken from the headland
called Cynossema, or the "Dog's Tomb," "ennobled by the legend
and the chapel of the Trojan queen Hecuba." The Athenians had
the advantage in both encounters, especially in the latter
one, when they were joined by Alcibiades, with reenforcements,
just in time to decide the doubtful fortunes of the day.
E. Curtius, History of Greece, book 4, chapter 5.
ALSO IN:
G. Grote, History of Greece, part 2, chapter 63.
See GREECE: B. C. 411-407.
CYNURIANS, The.
See KYNURIANS.
CYPRUS: Origin of the name.
"The Greek name of the island was derived from the abundance
in which it produced the beautiful plant ('Copher') which
furnishes the 'al-henna,' coveted throughout the East for the
yellow dye which it communicates to the nails. It was rich in
mines of copper, which has obtained for it the name by which
it is known in the modern languages of the West."
J. Kenrick, Phœnicia, chapter 4.
CYPRUS: Early History.
"The first authentic record with regard to Cyprus is an
inscription on an Egyptian tombstone of the 17th century B.
C., from which it appears that the island was conquered by
Thothmes III. of Egypt, in whose reign the exodus of the
Children of Israel is supposed to have taken place. This was
no doubt anterior to the establishment of any Greek colonies,
and probably, also, before the Phœnicians had settled in the
island. ... As appears from various inscriptions and other
records, Cyprus became subject successively to Egypt, as just
mentioned, to Assyria, to Egypt again in 568 B. C., when it
was conquered by Amasis, and in 525 B. C. to Persia. Meanwhile
the power of the Greeks had been increasing. ... The
civilization of the West was about to assert itself at
Marathon and Salamis; and Cyprus, being midway between East
and West, could not fail to be involved in the coming
conflict. On the occasion of the Ionic revolt [see PERSIA: B.
C. 521-493] the Greek element in Cyprus showed its strength:
and in 502 B. C. the whole island, with the single exception
of the Phœnician town of Amathus, took part with the Ionians
in renouncing the authority of the Persian king." But in the
war which followed, the Persians, aided by the Phœnicians of
the mainland, reconquered Cyprus, and the Cyprian Greeks were
long disheartened. They recovered their courage, however,
about 410 B. C. when Evagoras, a Greek of the royal house of
Teucer, made himself master of Salamis, and finally
established a general sovereignty over the island--even
extending his power to the mainland and subjugating Tyre. "The
reign of Evagoras is perhaps the most brilliant period in the
history of Cyprus. Before his death, which took place in 374
B. C., he had raised the island from the position of a mere
dependency of one or other of the great Eastern monarchies,
had gained for it a place among the lending states of Greece,
and had solved the question as to which division of the
ancient world the Cyprian people should be assigned.
Consequently when, some forty years later, the power of Persia
was shattered by Alexander the Great at the battle of Issus,
the kings of the island hastened to offer him their submission
as the leader of the Greek race, and sent 120 ships to assist
him in the siege of Tyre." After Alexander's death, Cyprus was
disputed between Antigonus and Ptolemy.
See MACEDONIA: B. C. 310-301.
The king of Egypt secured the prize, and the island remained
under the Greek-Egyptian crown, until it passed, with the rest
of the heritage of the Ptolemys to the Romans. "When the
[Roman] empire was divided, on the death of Constantine the
Great, Cyprus, like Malta, passed into the hands of the
Byzantine Emperors. Like Malta, also, it was exposed to
frequent attacks from the Arabs; but, although they several
times occupied the island and once held it for no less than
160 years, they were always expelled again by the Byzantine
Emperors, and never established themselves there as firmly as
they did in Malta. The crusades first brought Cyprus into
contact with the western nations of modern Europe."
C. P. Lucas, Historical Geography of British Colonies,
section 1, chapter 2.
ALSO IN:
R. H. Lang, CYPRUS, chapter 1-8.
F. Von Loher, CYPRUS, chapter 12 and 30.
L. P. Di Cesnola, Cyprus; its ancient cities, &c.
CYPRUS: B. C. 58.
Annexed to the Roman Dominions.
"The annexation of Cyprus was decreed in 696 [B. C. 58] by the
people [of Rome], that is, by the leaders of the democracy,
the support given to piracy by the Cypriots being alleged as
the official reason why that course should now be adopted.
Marcus Cato, intrusted by his opponents with the execution of
this measure, came to the island without an army; but he had
no need of one. The king poison; the inhabitants submitted without offering resistance
to their inevitable fate, and were placed under the governor
of Cilicia."
T. Mommsen, History of Rome, book 5, chapter 4.
CYPRUS: A. D. 117.
Jewish insurrection.
"This rich and pleasant territory [the island of Cyprus] had
afforded a refuge to the Jews of the continent through three
generations of disturbance and alarm, and the Hebrew race was
now [A. D. 117] probably not inferior there in number to the
native Syrians or Greeks. On the first outburst of a Jewish
revolt [against the Roman domination, in the last year of the
reign of Trajan] the whole island fell into the hands of the
insurgents, and became an arsenal and rallying point for the
insurrection, which soon spread over Egypt, Cyrene and
Mesopotamia. The leader of the revolt in Cyprus bore the name
of Artemion, but we know no particulars of the war in this
quarter, except that 240,000 of the native population is said
to have fallen victims to the exterminating fury of the
insurgents. When the rebellion was at last extinguished in
blood, the Jews were forbidden thenceforth to set foot on the
island; and even if driven thither by stress of weather, the
penalty of death was mercilessly enforced. ... The Jewish
population of Cyrenaica outnumbered the natives. ... The
hostility of the Jews in these parts was less directed against
the central government and the Roman residents than the native
race. ... Of these 220,000 are said to have perished."
C. Merivale, History of the Romans, chapter 65.
{645}
CYPRUS: A. D. 1191.
Conquest by Richard Cœur de Lion.
Founding of the Latin Kingdom.
During the civil strife and confusion of the last years of the
Comnenian dynasty of emperors at Constantinople, one of the
members of the family, Isaac Comnenos, secured the sovereignty
of Cyprus and assumed the title of emperor. With the alliance
of the king of Sicily, he defeated the Byzantine forces sent
against him, and was planted securely, to all appearance, on
his newly built throne at the time of the Third Crusade.
Circumstances at that time (A. D. 1191) gave him a fatal
opportunity to provoke the English crusaders. First, he seized
the property and imprisoned the crews of three English ships
that were wrecked on the Cyprian coast. Not satisfied with
that violence, he refused shelter from the storm to a vessel
which bore Berengaria of Navarre, the intended wife of King
Richard. "The king of England immediately sailed to Cyprus;
and when Isaac refused to deliver up the ship-wrecked
crusaders, and to restore their property, Richard landed his
army and commenced a series of operations, which ended in his
conquering the whole island, in which he abolished the
administrative institutions of the Eastern Empire, enslaving
the Greek race, introducing the feudal system, by which he
riveted the chains of a foreign domination, and then gave it
as a present to Guy of Lusignan, the titular king of
Jerusalem, who became the founder of a dynasty of Frank kings
in Cyprus."
G. Finlay, History of the Byzantine and Greek Empires,
from 716 to 1453, book 3, chapter 3, section 1.
Before giving Cyprus to Guy of Lusignan, Richard had sold the
island to the Templars, and Guy had to pay the knights heavily
for the extinguishment of their rights. Richard, therefore,
was rather a negotiator than a giver in the transaction.
William Stubbs, Seventeen Lectures on the Study of Mediæval and
Modern History, lecture 8.
CYPRUS: A. D. 1192-1489.
The kingdom under the house of Lusignan.
"The house of Lusignan maintained itself in Cyprus for nearly
three centuries, during which, although fallen somewhat from
the blessedness which had been broken up by Isaac Comnenus,
the island seems to have retained so much fertility and
prosperity as to make its later history very dark by contrast.
... Guy, we are told, received Cyprus for life only, and did
homage for the island to Richard. As he already bore the title
of king, the question whether he should hold Cyprus as a
kingdom does not seem to have arisen. ... On his death, in
April, 1194, Richard putting in no claim for the reversion,
his brother, Amalric of Lusignan, constable of Palestine,
entered on the possession as his heir. ... Amalric succeeded
to the crown of Jerusalem; the crown of Jerusalem, which,
after the year 1269, became permanently united with that of
Cyprus, was an independent crown, and the king of Jerusalem an
anointed king: the union of the crowns therefore seems to have
precluded any question as to the tenure by which the kingdom
of Cyprus should be held. ... The homage then due to Richard,
or to the crown of England, ceased at the death of Guy."
William Stubbs, Seventeen Lectures on the Study of
Mediæval and Modern History, lecture 8.
See, also, JERUSALEM: A. D. 1291.
CYPRUS: A. D. 1291-1310.
The Knights Hospitallers of St. John.
See HOSPITALLERS OF ST. JOHN: A. D. 1118-1310.
CYPRUS: A. D. 1489-1570.
A Venetian dependency.
The last reigning king of Cyprus was James II., a bastard
brother of Queen Charlotte, whom he drove from the Cypriot
throne in 1464. This king married a Venetian lady, Caterina
Cornaro, in 1471 and was declared to be "the son-in·law of the
Republic." The unscrupulous republic is said to have poisoned
its son·in-law in order to secure the succession. He died in
1473, and a son, born after his death, lived but two years.
Cyprus was then ruled by the Venetians for fifteen years in
the name of Caterina, who finally renounced her rights wholly
in favor of the republic. After 1489, until its conquest by
the Turks, Cyprus was a Venetian dependency, in form as well
as in fact, but tributary to the Sultan of Egypt.
William Stubbs, Seventeen Lectures on the Study of
Mediæval and Modern History, lecture 8.
CYPRUS: A. D. 1570-1571.
Conquest by the Turks.
See TURKS: A. D. 1566-1571.
CYPRUS: A. D. 1821.
Turkish massacre of Christians.
See GREECE: A. D. 1821-1829.
CYPRUS: A. D. 1878.
Control surrendered by Turkey to England.
See TURKS: A. D. 1878, THE TREATIES OF
SAN STEFANO AND BERLIN.
----------CYPRUS: End----------
CYREANS, The.
See PERSIA: B. C. 401-400.
CYRENAICA.--CYRENE.--KYRENE.
A city, growing into a kingdom, which was founded at an early
day by the Greeks, on that projecting part of the coast of
Libya, or northern Africa, which lies opposite to Greece. The
first settlers were said to have been from the little island
of Thera, whose people were bold and enterprising. The site
they chose "was of an unusual nature, especially for
islanders, and lay several miles away from the sea, the shores
of which were devoid of natural bays for anchorage. But, with
this exception, every advantage was at hand: instead of the
narrow stony soil of their native land, they found the most
fertile corn-fields, a broad table-land with a healthy
atmosphere and watered by fresh springs; a well-wooded
coast-land, unusually well adapted for all the natural
products which the Hellenes deemed essential; while in the
background spread mysteriously the desert, a world passing the
comprehension of the Hellenes, out of which the Libyan tribes
came to the shore with horses and camels, with black slaves,
with apes, parrots and other wonderful animals, with dates and
rare fruits. ... An abundant spring of water above the shore
was the natural point at which the brown men of the deserts
and the mariners assembled. Here regular meetings became
customary. The bazaar became a permanent market, and the
market a city which arose on a grand scale, broad and lofty,
on two rocky heights, which jut out towards the sea from the
plateau of the desert. This city was called Cyrene. ... Large
numbers of population immigrated from Crete, the islands and
Peloponnesus. A large amount of new land was parcelled out,
the Libyans were driven back, the landing-place became the
port of Apollonia, and the territory occupied by the city
itself was largely extended. Cyrene became, like Massalia, the
starting point of a group of settlements, the centre of a
small Greece: Barca and Hesperides [afterwards called
Berenice] were her daughters. Gradually a nation grew up,
which extended itself and its agriculture, and contrived to
cover a large division of African land with Hellenic culture.
This was the new era which commenced for Cyrene with the reign
of the third king, the Battus who, on account of the
marvellously rapid rise of his kingdom, was celebrated as 'the
fortunate' in all Hellas. The Battiadæ [the family or dynasty
of Battus] were soon regarded as a great power."
E. Curtius, History of Greece, book 2, chapter 3.
{646}
Cyrenaica became subject to Egypt under the Ptolemys, and was
then usually called Pentapolis, from the five cities of
Cyrene, Apollonia, Arsinoë (formerly Teuchira), Berenice
(formerly Hesperis, or Hesperides) and Ptolemais (the port of
Barca). Later it became a province of the Roman Empire, and
finally, passing under Mahometan rule, sank to its present
state, as a district, called Barca, of the kingdom of
Tripoli.--Cyrene was especially famous for the production of a
plant called silphium--supposed to be assafœtida--on which
the ancients seem to have set an extraordinary value. This was
one of the principal sources of the wealth of Cyrene.--
E. H. Bunbury, History of Ancient Geography,
chapter 8, section 1, and chapter 12, section 2.
CYRENAICA: B. C. 525.
Tributary to Persia.
See EGYPT: B. C. 525-332.
CYRENAICA: B. C. 322.
Absorbed in the Kingdom of Egypt by Ptolemy Lagus.
See EGYPT: B. C. 323-30.
CYRENAICA: B. C. 97.
Transferred to the Romans by will.
"In the middle of this reign [of Ptolemy, called Lathyrus,
king of Egypt] died Ptolemy Apion, king of Cyrene. He was the
half-brother of Lathyrus and Alexander, and having been made
king of Cyrene by his father Euergetes II., he had there
reigned quietly for twenty years. Being between Egypt and
Carthage, then called the Roman province of Africa, and having
no army which he could lead against the Roman legions, he had
placed himself under the guardianship of Rome; he had bought a
truce during his lifetime, by making the Roman people his
heirs in his will, so that on his death they were to have his
kingdom. Cyrene had been part of Egypt for above two hundred
years, and was usually governed by a younger son or brother of
the king. But on the death of Ptolemy Apion, the Roman senate,
who had latterly been grasping at everything within their
reach, claimed his kingdom as their inheritance, and in the
flattering language of their decree by which the country was
enslaved, they declared Cyrene free."
S. Sharpe, History of Egypt, chapter 11.
CYRENAICA: A. D. 117.
Jewish insurrection.
See CYPRUS: A. D. 117.
CYRENAICA: A. D. 616.
Destroyed by Chosroes.
See EGYPT: A. D. 616-628.
CYRENAICA: 7th Century.
Mahometan conquest.
See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST: A. D. 647-709.
----------CYRENAICA: End----------
CYRUS, The empire of.
See PERSIA: B. C. 549-521.
CYRUS THE YOUNGER,
The expedition of.
See PERSIA: B. C. 401-400.
CYZICUS: B. C. 411-410, Battles at.
See GREECE: B. C. 411-407.
CYZICUS: B. C. 74.
Siege by Mithridates.
Cyzicus, which had then become one of the largest and
wealthiest cities of Asia Minor, was besieged for an entire
year (B. C. 74-73) by Mithridates in the Third Mithridatic
war. The Roman Consul Lucullus came to the relief of the city
and succeeded in gaining a position which blockaded the
besiegers and cut off their supplies. In the end, Mithridates
retreated with a small remnant only, of his great armament,
and never recovered from the disaster.
G. Long, Decline of the Roman Republic, volume 3, chapter 1.
CYZICUS: A. D. 267.
Capture by the Goths.
See GOTHS: A. D. 258-267.
----------CYZICUS: End----------
CZAR, OR TZAR.
See RUSSIA: A. D. 1547.
CZARTORISKYS, The, and the fall of Poland.
See POLAND: A. D. 1763-1773.
CZASLAU, OR CHOTUSITZ, Battle of (A. D. 1742).
See AUSTRIA: A. D. 1742 (JANUARY-MAY).
CZEKHS, The.
See BOHEMIA: ITS PEOPLE.
----------CZEKHS, End----------
D.
DACHTELFIELD, The.
See SAXONS: A. D. 772-804.
DACIA, The Dacians.
Ancient Dacia embraced the district north of the Danube
between the Theiss and the Dneister. "The Dacians [at the time
of Augustus, in the last half century B. C.] occupied the
whole of what now forms the southern part of Hungary, the
Banat and Transylvania. ... The more prominent part which they
henceforth assumed in Roman history was probably owing
principally to the immediate proximity in which they now found
themselves to the Roman frontier. The question of the relation
in which the Dacians stood to the Getæ, whom we find in
possession of these same countries at an earlier period, was
one on which there existed considerable difference of opinion
among ancient writers: but the prevailing conclusion was that
they were only different names applied to the same people.
Even Strabo, who describes them as distinct, though cognate
tribes, states that they spoke the same language. According to
his distinction the Getæ occupied the more easterly regions,
adjoining the Euxine, and the Dacians the western, bordering
on the Germans."
E. H. Bunbury, History of Ancient Geography,
chapter 20, section 1.
DACIA: A. D. 102-106.
Trajan's conquest.
At the beginning of the second century, when Trajan conquered
the Dacians and added their country to the Roman Empire, "they
may be considered as occupying the broad block of land bounded
by the Theiss, the Carpathians, the lower Danube or Ister, and
the Pruth." In his first campaign, A. D. 102, Trajan
penetrated the country to the heart of modern Transylvania,
and forced the Dacians to give him battle at a place called
Tapæ, the site of which is not known. He routed them with much
slaughter, as they had been routed at the same place, Tapæ,
sixteen years before, in one of the ineffectual campaigns
directed by Domitian. They submitted, and Trajan established
strong Roman posts in the country; but he had scarcely reached
Rome and celebrated his triumph there, before the Dacians were
again in arms. In the spring of the year 104, Trajan repaired
to the lower Danube in person, once more, and entered the
Dacian country with an overwhelming force. This time the
subjugation was complete, and the Romans established their
occupation of the country by the founding of colonies and the
building of roads.
{647}
Dacia was now made a Roman province, and "the language of the
Empire became, and to this day substantially remains, the
national tongue of the inhabitants. ... Of the Dacian
province, the last acquired and the first to be surrendered of
the Roman possessions, if we except some transient
occupations, soon to be commemorated, in the East, not many
traces now exist; but even these may suffice to mark the
moulding power of Roman civilization. ... The accents of the
Roman tongue still echo in the valleys of Hungary and
Wallachia; the descendants of the Dacians at the present day
repudiate the appellation of Wallachs, or strangers, and still
claim the name of Romúni."
C. Merivale, History of the Romans, chapter 63.
DACIA: A. D. 270.
Given up to the Goths.
See GOTHS: A. D. 268-270.
DACIA: 4th Century.
Conquest by the Huns.
See GOTHS (VISIGOTHS): A. D. 376,
and HUNS: A. D. 433-453.
DACIA: 6th Century.
Occupied by the Avars.
See AVARS.
DACIA: Modern history.
See BALKAN AND DANUBIAN STATES.
----------DACIA: End----------
DACOITS.
See DAKOITS.
DACOTAS.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: SIOUAN FAMILY,
and PAWNEE (CADDOAN) FAMILY.
DÆGSASTAN, Battle of.
Fought, A. D. 603, between the Northumbrians and the Scots of
Dalriada, the army of the latter being almost wholly
destroyed.
DAGOBERT I.,
King of the Franks
(Neustria), A.. D. 628-638;
(Austrasia), 622--633:
(Burgundy), 628-638.
Dagobert II., King of the Franks
(Austrasia), A.. D. 673-678.
Dagobert III., King of the Franks
(Neustria and Burgundy), A. D. 711-715.
DAHIS, The.
See BALKAN AND DANUBIAN STATES,
14TH-19TH CENTURIES (SERVIA).
DAHLGREN, Admiral John A.
Siege of Charleston.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1863 (JULY, and AUGUST-DECEMBER: S. CAROLINA).
DAHLGREN, Ulric.
Raid to Richmond.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1864 (FEBRUARY-MARCH: VIRGINIA).
DAKOITS.--DAKOITEE.
The Dakoits of India, who were suppressed soon after the
Thugs, were "robbers by profession, and even by birth."
Dakoitee "was established upon a broad basis of hereditary
caste, and was for the most part an organic state of society.
'I have always followed the trade of my ancestors, Dakoitee.'
said Lukha, a noted Dakoit, who subsequently became approver.
'My ancestors held this profession before me,' said another,
'and we train boys in the same manner. In my caste if there
were any honest persons, i. e., not robbers, they would be
turned out.'" The hunting down of the Dakoits was begun in
1838, under the direction of Colonel Sleeman, who had already
hunted down the Thugs.
J. W. Kaye, The Administration of the East India Co.,
part 3, chapter 3.
DAKOTA, North and South: A. D. 1803.-
Embraced in the Louisiana Purchase.
See LOUISIANA: A. D. 1798-1803.
DAKOTA: A. D. 1834-1838.
Partly joined, in succession, to Michigan, Wisconsin,
and Iowa Territories.
See WISCONSIN: A. D. 1805-1848.
DAKOTA: A. D. 1889.
Admission to the Union.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1889-1890.
DAKOTAS.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
SIOUAN FAMILY and PAWNEE (CADDOAN) FAMILY.
DALAI LAMA.
See LAMAS.
DALCASSIANS.
The people of North Munster figure prominently under that name
in early Irish history.
T. Moore, History of Ireland, volume 2.
DALHOUSIE, Lord, The India administration of.
See INDIA: A. D. 1845-1849; 1848-1856; and 1852.
DALMATIA.
"The narrow strip of land on the eastern side of the Hadriatic
on which the name of Dalmatia has settled down has a history
which is strikingly analogous to its scenery. ... As the
cultivation and civilization of the land lies in patches, as
harbours and cities alternate with barren hills, so Dalmatia
has played a part in history only by fits and starts. This
fitful kind of history goes on from the days of Greek colonies
and Illyrian piracy to the last war between Italy and Austria.
But of continuous history, steadily influencing the course of
the world's progress, Dalmatia has none to show."
E. A. Freeman, Subject and Neighbour Lands of Venice,
pages 85-87.
ALSO IN:
T. G. Jackson, Dalmatia, the Quarnero and Istria,
chapter 1-2.
See, also, ILLYRICUM OF THE ROMANS; SALONA;
and BALKAN AND DANUBIAN STATES.
DALMATIA: 6th-7th Centuries:
Slavonic occupation.
See SLAVONIC PEOPLES: 6TH AND 7TH CENTURIES;
also, BALKAN AND DANUBIAN STATES: 7TH CENTURY.
DALMATIA: A. D. 944.
Beginning of Venetian Conquest.
See VENICE: A. D. 810-961.
DALMATIA: A. D. 1102.
Conquest by the king of Hungary.
See HUNGARY: A. D. 972--1114.
DALMATIA: 14th Century.
Conquest from the Venetians by Louis the Great of Hungary.
See HUNGARY: A. D. 1301-1442.
DALMATIA: 16th Century.
The Uscocks.
See USCOCKS.
DALMATIA: A. D. 1694-1696.
Conquests by the Venetians.
See TURKS: A. D. 1684-1696.
DALMATIA: A. D. 1699.
Cession in great part to Venice by the Turks.
See HUNGARY: 1683-1699.
DALMATIA: A. D. 1797.
Acquisition by Austria.
See, FRANCE: A. D. 1797 (MAY-OCTOBER).
DALMATIA: A. D. 1805.
Ceded by Austria to the kingdom of Italy.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1805-1806.
DALMATIA: A. D. 1809.
Incorporated in the Illyrian Provinces of Napoleon.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1809 (JULY-SEPTEMBER).
DALMATIA: A. D. 1814.
Restored to Austria.
Austria recovered possession of Dalmatia under the
arrangements of the Congress of Vienna.
----------DALMATIA: End----------
DALRIADA.
"A district forming the northeast corner of Ireland and
comprising the north half of the county of Antrim, was called
Dalriada. It appears to have been one of the earliest
settlements of the Scots among the Picts of Ulster and to have
derived its name from its supposed founder Cairbre, surnamed
Righfhada or Riada. It lay exactly opposite the peninsula of
Kintyre [Scotland] from whence it was separated by a part of
the Irish channel of no greater breadth than about fourteen
miles; and from this Irish district the colony of Scots, which
was already Christian [fifth century] passed over and settled
in Kintyre and in the island of Isla"--establishing a Scotch
Dalriada.
W. F. Skene, Celtic Scotland, book 1, chapter 3.
For some account of the Scotch Dalriada,
See SCOTLAND: 7TH CENTURY.
{648}
DAMASCUS, Kingdom of.
The kingdom of Damascus, or "Aram of Damascus" as it was
entitled, was formed soon after that Syrian region threw off
the yoke of dependence which David and Solomon had imposed
upon it. "Rezon, the outlaw, was its founder. Hader, or Hadad,
and Rimmon, were the chief divinities of the race, and from
them the line of its kings derived their names,--Hadad,
Ben-hadad, Hadad-ezer, Tabrimmon."
Dean Stanley, Lectures on the History of
the Jewish Church, lecture. 33.
"Though frequently captured and plundered in succeeding
centuries by Egypt and Assyria, neither of those nations was
able to hold it long in subjection because of the other. It
was probably a temporary repulse of the Assyrians, under
Shalmaneser II., by the Damascene general Naaman to which
reference is made in 2 Kings volume 1: 'by him the Lord had given
deliverance unto Syria.' ... After the great conquerors of
Egypt and Asia, each in his day, had captured and plundered
Damascus, it was taken without resistance by Parmenio for
Alexander the Great [B. C. 333]. In it Pompey spent the
proudest year of his life, 64 B. C., distributing at his
pleasure the thrones of the East to the vassals of Rome.
Cleopatra had received the city as a love-gift from Mark
Antony, and Tiberius had bestowed it upon Herod the Great,
before Aretas of Petra, the father of the princess whom Herod
Antipas divorced for Herodias' sake, and the ruler whose
officers watched the city to prevent the escape of Paul, made
it, we know not how, a part of his dominions."
W. B. Wright, Ancient Cities, chapter 7.
DAMASCUS: A. D. 634.
Conquest by the Arabs.
See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST: A. D. 632-639.
DAMASCUS: A. D. 661.
Becomes the seat of the Caliphate.
See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST: A. D. 661.
DAMASCUS: A. D. 763.
The Caliphate transferred to Bagdad.
See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST: A. D. 763.
DAMASCUS: A. D. 1148-1217.
Capital of the Atabeg and the Ayoubite sultans.
See SALADIN, THE EMPIRE OF.
DAMASCUS: A. D. 1401.
Sack and massacre by Timour.
See Timour.
DAMASCUS: A. D. 1832.
Capture by Mehemed Ali.
See TURKS: A. D. 1831-1840.
----------DAMASCUS: End----------
DAMASUS II., Pope, A. D. 1048, July to August.
DAMIETTA: A. D. 1219-1220.
Siege, capture and surrender by the Crusaders.
See CRUSADES: A. D. 1216-1229.
DAMIETTA: A. D. 1249-1250.
Capture and loss by Saint Louis.
See CRUSADES: A. D. 1248-1254.
DAMIETTA: A. D. 1252.
Destruction by the Mamelukes.
"Two years after the deliverance of the king [Saint Louis],
and whilst he was still in Palestine, the Mamelukes, fearing a
fresh invasion of the Franks, in order to prevent their
enemies from taking Damietta and fortifying themselves in that
city, entirely destroyed it. Some years after, as their fears
were not yet removed, and the second crusade of Louis IX.
spread fresh alarms throughout the East, the Egyptians caused
immense heaps of stone to be cast into the mouth of the Nile,
in order that the Christian fleets might not be able to sail
up the river. Since that period a new Damietta has been built
at a small distance from the site of the former city."
J. F. Michaud, History of the Crusades, book 14.
DAMNONIA.
See BRITAIN: 6TH CENTURY.
DAMNONII, OR DAMNII, The.
See DUMNONII.
DAMOISEL.--DAMOISELLE.--DONZELLO.
"In mediæval Latin 'domicella' is used for the unmarried
daughter of a prince or noble, and 'domicellus,' contracted
from 'domnicellus,' the diminutive of 'dominus,' for the son.
These words are the forerunners of the old French 'dâmoisel'
in the masculine, and 'damoiselle' in the feminine gender.
Froissart calls Richard, prince of Wales, son of Edward: 'le
jeune damoisil Richart.' In Romance the word is indifferently
'damoisel' and' 'danzel,' in Italian 'donzello.' All of these
are evidently titles under the same notion as that of child
and 'enfant,' of which the idea belongs to the knights of an
earlier period."
R. T. Hampson, Origines Patriciæ, page 328.
DANAIDÆ, The.
See ARGOS.--ARGOLIS.
DANCING PLAGUE.
See PLAGUE, A. D. 1374.
DANDRIDGE, Engagement at.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1863-1864 (DECEMBER-APRIL:
TENNESSEE--MISSISSIPPI).
DANEGELD, The.
"A tax of two shillings on the hide of land, originally levied
as tribute to the Danes under Ethelred, but continued [even
under the Plantagenets], like the income tax, as a convenient
ordinary resource."
William Stubbs, The Early Plantagenets, page 53.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 979-1016.
DANELAGH, OR DANELAGA, OR DANELAU.
The district in England held by the Danes after their treaty
with Alfred the Great, extending south to the Thames, the Lea
and the Ouse; north to the Tyne; west of the mountain district
of Yorkshire, Westmoreland and Cumberland. "Over all this
region the traces of their colonization abound in the villages
whose names end in by, the Scandinavian equivalent of the English
tun or ham."
William Stubbs, Constitutional History of England,
chapter 7, section 77.
See, also, ENGLAND: A. D. 855-880.
DANES AS VIKINGS.
See, also, NORMANS.--NORTHMEN.
DANES: In England.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 855-880, 979-1016,
and 1016-1042;
also NORMANS: A. D. 787-880.
DANES: In Ireland.
See IRELAND: 9TH-10TH CENTURIES.
----------DANES: End----------
DANITES, The.
See MORMONISM: A. D. 1830-1846.
DANTE AND THE FACTIONS OF FLORENCE.
See FLORENCE: A. D. 1295-1300; and 1301-1313.
DANTON AND THE FRENCH REVOLUTION.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1791 (OCTOBER),
to 1793-1794 (NOVEMBER-JUNE).
DANTZIC:
In the Hanseatic League.
See HANSA TOWNS.
DANTZIC: A. D. 1577.
Submission to the king of Poland.
See POLAND: A. D. 1574-1590.
DANTZIC: A. D. 1793.
Acquisition by Prussia.
See POLAND: A. D. 1793-1796.
DANTZIC: A. D. 1806-1807.
Siege and capture by the French.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1807 (FEBRUARY-JUNE).
DANTZIC: A. D. 1807.
Declared a Free state.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1807 (JUNE-JULY).
DANTZIC: A. D. 1813.
Siege and capture by the Allies.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1813 (OCTOBER-DECEMBER).
{649}
DARA.
One of the capitals of the Parthian kings, the site of which
has not been identified.
DARA, Battle of (A. D. 529).
See PERSIA: A.. D. 226-627.
DARDANIANS OF THE TROAD.
See TROJA;
and ASIA MINOR: THE GREEK COLONIES;
also, AMORITES.
DARIEN, The Isthmus of.
See PANAMA.
DARIEN: The Scottish colony.
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1695-1699.
DARINI, The.
See IRELAND, TRIBES OF EARLY CELTIC
INHABITANTS.
DARIUS,
King of Persia, B. C. 521-486.
Darius II., B. C. 425-405.
Darius III. (Codomannus), B. C. 336-331.
DARK AGES, The.
The historical period, so-called, is nearly identical with
that more commonly named the Middle Ages; but its duration may
be properly considered as less by a century or two. From the
5th to the 13th century is a definition of the period which
most historians would probably accept.
See MIDDLE AGES.
DARORIGUM.
Modern Vannes.
See VENETI OF WESTERN GAUL.
DAR-UL-ISLAM AND DAR-UL-HARB.
"The Koran divides the world into two portions, the House of
Islam, Dar-ul-Islam, and the House of War, Dar-ul-harb. It has
generally been represented by Western writers on the
institutes of Mahometanism and on the habits of Mahometan
nations, that the Dar-ul-harb, the House of War, comprises all
lands of the misbelievers. ... There is even a widely-spread
idea among superficial talkers and writers that the holy
hostility, the Jehad [or Dhihad] of Mussulmans against
non-Mussulmans is not limited to warfare between nation and
nation; but that 'it is a part of the religion of every
Mahometan to kill as many Christians as possible, and that by
counting up a certain number killed, they think themselves
secure of heaven.' But careful historical investigators, and
statesmen long practically conversant with Mahometan
populations have exposed the fallacy of such charges against
those who hold the creed of Islam. ... A country which is
under Christian rulers, but in which Mahometans are allowed
free profession of their faith, and peaceable exercise of
their ritual, is not a portion of the House of War, of the
Dar-ul-harb; and there is no religious duty of warfare, no
Jehad, on the part of true Mussulmans against such a state.
This has been of late years formally determined by the chief
authorities in Mahometan law with respect to British India."
Sir E. S. Creasy, History of the Ottoman Turks, chapter 6.
DASTAGERD.
The favorite residence of the last great Persian king and
conqueror, Chosroes (A. D. 590-628), was fixed at Dastagerd,
or Artemita, sixty miles north of Ctesiphon, and east of the
Tigris. His palaces and pleasure grounds were of extraordinary
magnificence.
E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 46.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
DASYUS.
See INDIA: THE ABORIGINAL INHABITANTS.
DAUPHINS OF FRANCE.--DAUPHINE.
In 1349, Philip VI., or Philip de Valois, of France, acquired
by purchase from Humbert II., count of Vienne, the sovereignty
of the province of Dauphine. This principality became from
that time the appanage of the eldest sons of the kings of
France and gave them their peculiar name or title of the
Dauphins. The title in question had been borne by the counts
of Vienne (in Dauphiné), "on account of the dolphin which they
carried upon their helmets and on their armorial bearings."
E. De Bonnechose, History of France,
book 2, chapter 2, footnote.
ALSO IN:
E. Smedley, History of France, part 1, chapter 9.
See, also, BURGUNDY: A. D. 1127-1378.
DAVENPORT, John, and the founding of New Haven Colony.
See CONNECTICUT: A. D. 1638, and 1639.
DAVID, King of Israel and Judah.
See JEWS: THE KINGDOMS OF ISRAEL AND
JUDAH, and JERUSALEM: CONQUEST, &c.
DAVID I.,
King of Scotland, A. D. 1124-1153.
David II., 1329-1370.
DAVIS, Jefferson.
Election to the Presidency of the rebellious
"Confederate States."
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1861 (FEBRUARY).
Flight and capture.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1865 (APRIL-MAY).
DAVOUT, Marshal, Campaigns of.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1806 (OCTOBER);
1806-1807; 1807 (FEBRUARY-JUNE);
also RUSSIA: A. D. 1812;
and GERMANY: A. D. 1812-1813;
1813 (AUGUST), (OCTOBER-DECEMBER).
DAY OF BARRICADES, The.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1584-1589.
DAY OF DUPES, The.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1630-1632.
DAY OF THE SECTIONS, The.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1795 (OCTOBER-DECEMBER).
DAYAKS, OR DYAKS, The.
See MALAYAN RACE.
DEAK, Francis, and the recovery of Hungarian nationality.
See AUSTRIA: A. D. 1866-1867.
DEAN FOREST.
The "Royal Forest of Dean," situated in the southwestern angle
of the county of Gloucester, England, between the Severn and
the Wye, is still so extensive that it covers some 23,000
acres, though much reduced from its original dimensions. Its
oaks and its iron mines have played important parts in British
history. The latter were worked by the Romans and still give
employment to a large number of miners. The former were
thought to be so essential to the naval power of England that
the destruction of the Forest is said to have been one of the
special duties prescribed to the Spanish Armada.
J. C. Brown, Forests of England.
DEANE, Silas, and the American transactions
with Beaumarchais in France.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1776-1778.
DEARBORN, General Henry, and the War of 1812.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1812 (JUNE-OCTOBER),
(SEPTEMBER-NOVEMBER);
A. D. 1813 (OCTOBER-NOVEMBER).
DEBRECZIN, Battle of (1849).
See AUSTRIA: A. D. 1848-1849.
DEBT, Laws concerning: Ancient Greek.
At Athens, in the time of Solon (6th century, B. C.) the
Thetes--"the cultivating tenants, metayers and small
proprietors of the country ... are exhibited as weighed down
by debts and dependence, and driven in large numbers out of a
state of freedom into slavery--the whole mass of them (we are
told) being in debt to the rich, who were proprietors of the
greater part of the soil. They had either borrowed money for

their own necessities, or they tilled the lands of the rich as
dependent tenants, paying a stipulated portion of the produce,
and in this capacity they were largely in arrear.
{650}
All the calamitous effects were here seen of the old harsh law
of debtor and creditor--once prevalent in Greece, Italy, Asia,
and a large portion of the world--combined with the
recognition of slavery as a legitimate status, and of the
right of one man to sell himself as well as that of another
man to buy him. Every debtor unable to fulfil his contract was
liable to be adjudged as the slave of his creditor, until he
could find means either of paying it or working it out; and
not only he himself, but his minor sons and unmarried
daughters and sisters also, whom the law gave him the power of
selling. The poor man thus borrowed upon the security of his
body (to translate literally the Greek phrase) and upon that
of the persons in his family. So severely had these oppressive
contracts been enforced, that many debtors had been reduced
from freedom to slavery in Attica itself,--many others had
been sold for exportation,--and some had only hitherto
preserved their own freedom by selling their children. ... To
their relief Solon's first measure, the memorable
Seisachtheia, shaking off of burthens, was directed. The
relief which it afforded was complete and immediate. It
cancelled at once all those contracts in which the debtor had
borrowed on the security either of his person or of his land:
it forbade all future loans or contracts in which the person
of the debtor was pledged as security: it deprived the
creditor in future of all power to imprison, or enslave, or
extort work from, his debtor, and confined him to an effective
judgment at law authorizing the seizure of the property of the
latter. It swept off all the numerous mortgage pillars from
the landed properties in Attica, leaving the land free from
all past claims. It liberated and restored to their full
rights all debtors actually in slavery under previous legal
adjudication; and it even provided the means (we do not know
how) of re-purchasing in foreign lands, and bringing back to a
renewed life of liberty in Attica, many insolvents who had
been sold for exportation. And while Solon forbad every
Athenian to pledge or sell his own person into slavery, he
took a step farther in the same direction by forbidding him to
pledge or sell his son, his daughter, or an unmarried sister
under his tutelage--excepting only the case in which either of
the latter might be detected in unchastity. ... One thing is
never to be forgotten in regard to this measure, combined with
the concurrent amendments introduced by Solon in the law--it
settled finally the question to which it referred. Never again
do we hear of the law of debtor and creditor as disturbing
Athenian tranquility. The general sentiment which grew up at
Athens, under the Solonian money-law and under the
democratical government, was one of high respect for the
sanctity of contracts. ... There can be little doubt that
under the Solonian law, which enabled the creditor to seize
the property of his debtor, but gave him no power over the
person, the system of money-lending assumed a more beneficial
character."
G. Grote, History of Greece, part 2, chapter 11 (volume 3).
DEBT: Ancient Roman.
"The hold of the creditor was on the person of the debtor. The
obligation of a debt was a tying up or binding, or bondage, of
the person: the payment was a solution, a loosing or release
of the person from that bondage. The property of the debtor
was not a pledge for the debt. It could be made so by special
agreement, though in the earliest law only by transferring it
at once to the ownership of the creditor. Without such special
agreement, the creditor whose debtor failed to pay could not
touch his property. Even when the debtor had been prosecuted
and condemned to pay, if he still failed, the creditor could
not touch his property. He could seize his person--I speak
now of the early law, in the first centuries of the
republic--and after holding him in rigorous confinement for
sixty days, with opportunities, however, either to pay himself
or get somebody to pay for him, if payment still failed, he
could sell him as a slave, or put him to death; if there were
several creditors, they could cut his body into pieces and
divide it among them. This extreme severity was afterward
softened; but the principle remained long unchanged, that the
hold of the creditor was on the person of the debtor. If the
debtor obstinately and to the last refused to surrender his
property, the creditor could not touch it."
J. Hadley, Introduction to Roman Law, lecture 10.
"During the first half of the Samnite war [B. C. 326-304], but
in what year is uncertain, there was passed that famous law
which prohibited personal slavery for debt. No creditor might
for the future attach the person of his debtor, but he might
only seize his property; and all those whose personal freedom
was pledged for their debts (nexi), were released from their
liability, if they could swear that they had property enough
to meet their creditor's demands. It does not appear that this
great alteration in the law was the work of any tribune, or
that it arose out of any general or deliberate desire to
soften the severity of the ancient practice. It was
occasioned, we are told, by one scandalous instance of abuse
of power on the part of a creditor. ... But although personal
slavery for debt was thus done away with, yet the consequences
of insolvency were much more serious at Rome than they are in
modern Europe. He whose property had once been made over to
his creditors by the prætor's sentence, became, ipso facto,
infamous; he lost his tribe, and with it all his political
rights; and the forfeiture was irrevocable, even though he
might afterwards pay his debts to the full; nor was it even in
the power of the censors to replace him on the roll of
citizens. So sacred a thing did credit appear in the eyes of
the Romans."
T. Arnold, History of Rome, chapter 32 (volume 2).
DEBT: In England.
"Debt has been regarded as a crime by primitive society in
every part of the world. In Palestine, as in Rome, the
creditor had power over the person of the debtor, and
misfortune was commonly treated with a severity which was not
always awarded to crime."
[Leviticus 12 xxv., 39-41, and 2 Kings iv., 1]
{651}
"In this country [England] the same system was gradually
introduced in Plantagenet times. The creditor, who had been
previously entitled to seize the goods, or even the land of
the debtor, was at last authorised to seize his person. In one
sense, indeed, the English law was, in this respect, more
irrational than the cruel code of the Jews, or the awful
punishment [death and dismemberment or slavery--Gibbon, chapter
44] which the law of the Twelve Tables reserved for debtors.
In Palestine the creditor was, at least, entitled to the
service of the debtor or of his children, and the slave had
the prospect of an Insolvent Debtor's Relief Act in the
Sabbatical year. Even the law of the Twelve Tables allowed the
creditors to sell the debtor into slavery, instead of
resorting to the horrible alternative of partitioning his
body. But in England the creditors had no such choice. They
had nothing to do but to throw the debtor into prison; and by
his imprisonment deprive themselves of the only chance of his
earning money to pay their debts. A law of this kind was
intolerable to a commercial people. The debtor languished in
gaol, the creditor failed to obtain payment of his debt. When
trade increased in Tudor times, the wits of legislators were
exercised in devising some expedient for satisfying the
creditor without imprisoning the debtor. The Chancellor was
authorised to appoint commissioners empowered to divide the
debtor's property among the creditors. By an Act of Anne the
debtor who complied with the law was released from further
liability, and was practically enabled to commence life anew.
In 1826, a debtor was allowed to procure his own bankruptcy;
while in 1831, commissioners were appointed to carry out the
arrangements which had been previously conducted under the
Court of Chancery. The law of bankruptcy which was thus
gradually developed by the legislation of three centuries only
applied to persons in trade. No one who was not a trader could
become a bankrupt; the ordinary debtor became as a matter of
course an insolvent, and passed under the insolvent laws. The
statutes, moreover, omitted to give any very plain definition
of a trader. The distinction between trader and non-trader
which had been gradually drawn by the Courts was not based on
any very clear principle. A person who made bricks on his own
estate of his own clay was not a trader; but a person who
bought the clay and then made the bricks was a trader.
Farmers, again, were exempt from the bankruptcy law; but
farmers who purchased cattle for sale at a profit were liable
to it. The possibility, moreover, of a trader being made a
bankrupt depended on the size of his business. A petitioning
creditor in bankruptcy was required to be a person to whom at
least £100 was due; if two persons petitioned, their debts
were required to amount to £150; if more than two persons
petitioned, to £200. A small shopkeeper, therefore, who could
not hope to obtain credit for £200, £150, or £100, could not
become a bankrupt; he was forced to become an insolvent. The
treatment of the insolvent was wholly different from that of
the bankrupt. The bankruptcy law was founded on the principle
that the goods and not the person of the debtor should be
liable for the debt; the insolvency law enabled the person of
the debtor to be seized, but provided no machinery for
obtaining his goods. ... Up to 1838 the first step in
insolvency was the arrest of the debtor. Any person who made a
deposition on oath that some other person was in debt to him,
could obtain his arrest on what was known as 'mesne process.'
The oath might possibly be untrue; the debt might not be due;
the warrant issued on the sworn deposition as a matter of
course. But, in addition to the imprisonment on mesne process,
the insolvent could be imprisoned for a further period on what
was known as 'final process.' Imprisonment on mesne process
was the course which the creditor took to prevent the flight
of the debtor; imprisonment on final process was the
punishment which the Court awarded to the crime of debt. Such
a system would have been bad enough if the debtors' prisons
had been well managed. The actual condition of these prisons
almost exceeds belief. Dickens, indeed, has made the story of
a debtor's imprisonment in the Marshalsea familiar to a world
of readers. ... The Act of 1813 had done something to mitigate
the misery which the law occasioned. The Court which was
constituted by it released 50,000 debtors in 13 years. But
large numbers of persons were still detained in prison for
debt. In 1827 nearly 6,000 persons were committed in London
alone for debt. The Common Law Commissioners, reporting in
1830, declared that the loud and general complaints of the law
of insolvency were well founded; and Cottenham, in 1838,
introduced a bill to abolish imprisonment for debt in all
cases. The Lords were not prepared for so complete a remedy;
they declined to abolish imprisonment on final process, or to
exempt from imprisonment on mesne process, persons who owed
more than £20, and who were about to leave the country.
Cottenham, disappointed at these amendments, decided on
strengthening his own hands by instituting a fresh inquiry. He
appointed a commission in 1839, which reported in 1840, and
which recommended the abolition of imprisonment on final
process, and the union of bankruptcy and insolvency. In 1841,
in 1842, in 1843, and in 1844 Cottenham introduced bills to
carry out this report. The bills of 1841, 1842, and 1843 were
lost. The bill of 1844 was not much more successful. Brougham
declared that debtors who refused to disclose their property,
who refused to answer questions about it, who refused to give
it up, or who fraudulently made away with it, as well as
debtors who had been guilty of gross extravagance, deserved
imprisonment. He introduced an alternative bill giving the
Court discretionary power to imprison them. The Lords,
bewildered by the contrary counsels of two such great lawyers
as Cottenham and Brougham, decided on referring both bills to
one Select Committee. The Committee preferred Brougham's bill,
amended it, and returned it to the House. This bill became
ultimately law. It enabled both private debtors and traders
whose debts amounted to less than the sums named in the
Bankruptcy Acts to become bankrupts; and it abolished
Imprisonment in all cases where the debt did not exceed £20."
S. Walpole, History of England from 1815,
chapter 17 (volume 4).
DEBT: In the United States.
"In New York, by the act of April 26, 1831, c. 300, and which
went into operation on March 1st, 1832, arrest and
imprisonment on civil process at law, and on execution in
equity founded upon contract, were abolished. The provision
under the act was not to apply to any person who should have
been a non-resident of the state for a month preceding (and
even this exception was abolished by the act of April 25th,
1840); nor to proceedings as for a contempt to enforce civil
remedies; nor to actions for fines and penalties; nor to suits
founded in torts ... nor on promises to marry; or for moneys
collected by any public officer; or for misconduct or neglect
in office, or in any professional employment.
{652}
The plaintiff, however, in any suit, or upon any judgment or
decree, may apply to a judge for a warrant to arrest the
defendant, upon affidavit stating a debt or demand due, to
more than $50; and that the defendant is about to remove
property out of the jurisdiction of the court, with intent to
defraud his creditors; or that he has property or rights in
action which he fraudulently conceals; or public or corporate
stock, money, or evidences of debt, which he unjustly refuses
to apply to the payment of the judgment or decree in favor of
the plaintiff; or that he has assigned, or is about to assign
or dispose of his property, with intent to defraud his
creditors; or has fraudulently contracted the debt, or
incurred the obligation respecting which the suit is brought.
If the judge shall be satisfied, on due examination, of the
truth of the charge, he is to commit the debtor to jail,
unless he complies with certain prescribed conditions or some
one of them, and which are calculated for the security of the
plaintiff's claim. Nor is any execution against the body to be
issued on justices' judgments, except in cases essentially the
same with those above stated. ... By the New York act of 1846,
c. 150, the defendant is liable for imprisonment as in actions
for wrong, if he be sued and judgment pass against him in
actions on contracts for moneys received by him (and it
applies to all male persons) in a fiduciary character. The
legislature of Massachusetts, in 1834 and 1842, essentially
abolished arrest and imprisonment for debt, unless on proof
that the debtor was about to abscond. As early as 1790, the
constitution of Pennsylvania established, as a fundamental
principle, that debtors should not be continued in prison
after surrender of their estates in the mode to be prescribed
by law, unless in cases of a strong presumption of fraud. In
February, 1819, the legislature of that state exempted women
from arrest and imprisonment for debt; and this provision as
to women was afterwards applied in New York to all civil
actions founded upon contract. ... Females were first exempted
from imprisonment for debt in Louisiana and Mississippi; and
imprisonment for debt, in all cases free from fraud, is now
abolished in each of those states. The commissioners in
Pennsylvania, in their report on the Civil Code, in January,
1835, recommended that there be no arrest of the body of the
debtor on mesne process, without an affidavit of the debt, and
that the defendant was a non-resident, or about to depart
without leaving sufficient property, except in cases of force,
fraud, or deceit, verified by affidavit. This suggestion was
carried into effect by the act of the legislature of
Pennsylvania of July 12th, 1842, entitled 'An Act to abolish
imprisonment for debt, and to punish fraudulent debtors.' In
New Hampshire, imprisonment on mesne process and execution for
debt existed under certain qualifications, until December 23,
1840, when it was abolished by statute, in cases of contract
and debts accruing after the first of March, 1841. In Vermont,
imprisonment for debt, on contracts made after first January,
1839, is abolished, as to resident citizens, unless there be
evidence that they are about to abscond with their property;
so, also, the exception in Mississippi applies to cases of
torts, frauds, and meditated concealment, or fraudulent
disposition of property."
J. Kent, Commentaries on American Law;
edited by O. W. Holmes, Jr., volume 2 (foot-note).
"In many states the Constitution provides
(A) that there shall be no imprisonment for debt:
Indiana. C. 1, 22;
Minnesota. C. I, 12;
Kansas. C. B. Rts. 16;
Maryland. C. 3, 38;
North Carolina. C. 1, 16;
Missouri. C. 2. 16;
Texas. C. 1, 18;
Oregon. C. 1, 19;
Nevada. C. 1, 14;
South Carolina. C. 1, 20;
Georgia. C. 1, 1, 21;
Alabama. C. 1, 21;
Mississippi. C. 1, 11;
Florida. C. Decl'n Rts. 15.
(B) That there shall be no imprisonment for debt
(1) in any civil action on mesne or final process, in seven states:
Ohio. C. 1, 15;
Iowa. C. 1, 19;
Nebraska. C. 1, 20;
Tennessee. C. 1, 18;
Arkansas. C. 2, 16;
California. C. 1, 15;
Oregon. C. 1, 15;
Arizona. B. Uts. 18.
(2) In any action or judgment founded upon contract, in
three states:
New Jersey. C. 1, 17;
Michigan. C. 6, 33;
Wisconsin. C. 1, 16.
(C) In six, that there shall be no person imprisoned for debt
in any civil action when he has delivered up his property for
the benefit of his creditors in the manner prescribed by law;
Vermont. C. 2, 33;
Rhode Island. C. 1, 11;
Pennsylvania. C. 1, 16;
Illinois. C. 2, 12;
Kentucky. C. 13, 19;
Colorado. C. 2, 12.
... But the above principles are subject to the following
exceptions in the several states respectively:
(1) a debtor may be imprisoned in criminal actions: Tennessee.
So (2) for the non-payment of fines or penalties imposed by
law: Missouri.
So (3) generally, in civil or criminal actions, for fraud:
Vermont,
Rhode Island,
New Jersey,
Pennsylvania,
Ohio,
Indiana,
Illinois,
Michigan,
Iowa,
Minnesota,
Kansas,
Nebraska,
North Carolina,
Kentucky,
Arkansas,
California,
Oregon,
Nevada,
Colorado,
South Carolina,
Florida,
Arizona.
And so, in two, the legislature has power to provide for the
punishment of fraud and for reaching property of the debtor
concealed from his creditors:
Georgia. C. 1, 2, 6;
Louisiana. C. 223.
So (4) absconding debtors may be imprisoned: Oregon.
Or debtors (5) in cases of libel or slander: Nevada.
(6) In civil cases of tort generally: California, Colorado.
(7) In cases of malicious mischief: California.
(8) Or of breach of trust: Michigan, Arizona.
(9) Or of moneys collected by public officers,
or in any professional employment: Michigan, Arizona."
F. J. Stimson, American Statute Law:
Digest of Constitutions and Civil Public
Statutes of all the States and Territories relating
to Persons and Property, in force January 1, 1886,
art. 8.
----------DEBT: End----------
DÉCADI OF THE FRENCH REPUBLICAN CALENDAR.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1793 (OCTOBER).
The new republican calendar.
DECAMISADOS, The.
See SPAIN: A. D. 1814-1827.
DECATUR, Commodore Stephen.
Burning of the "Philadelphia."
See BARBARY STATES: A. D. 1803-1805.
In the War of 1812.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1812-1813; 1814.
DECCAN, The.
See INDIA: THE NAME;
and IMMIGRATION AND CONQUESTS OF THE ARYAS.
DECELIAN WAR, The.
See GREECE: B. C. 413.
DECEMVIRS, The.
See ROME: B. C. 451-449.
DECIUS: Roman Emperor. A. D. 249-251.
DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE (American).
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1776 (JANUARY-JUNE),
and (JULY);
also, INDEPENDENCE HALL.
{653}
DECLARATION OF PARIS, The.
"At the Congress of Paris in 1856, subsequently to the
conclusion of the treaty, which ended the Crimean war [see
RUSSIA: A. D. 1854-1856], a declaration of principles was
signed on April 16th, by the plenipotentiaries of all the
powers represented there, which contained four articles:
'First. Privateering is and remains abolished. Second, The
neutral flag covers enemies' goods, with the exception of
contraband of war. Third, Neutral goods, except of contraband
of war, are not liable to capture under an enemy's flag.
Fourth, Blockades, to be binding, must be effective--that is
to say, maintained by a force really sufficient to prevent
access to the coast of the enemy.' The adherence of other
powers was requested to these principles," and all joined in
signing it except the United States, Spain, and Mexico. The
objection on the part of the United States was stated in a
circular letter by Mr. Marcy, then Secretary of State, who
"maintained that the right to resort to privateers is as
incontestable as any other right appertaining to belligerents;
and reasoned that the effect of the declaration would be to
increase the maritime preponderance of Great Britain and
France, without even benefiting the general cause of
civilization; while, if public ships retained the right of
capturing private property, the United States, which had at
that time a large mercantile marine and a comparatively small
navy, would be deprived of all means of retaliation. ... The
President proposes, therefore [wrote Mr. Marcy] to add to the
first proposition contained in the declaration of the Congress
of Paris the following words: 'and that the private property
of the subjects and citizens of a belligerent on the high seas
shall be exempted from seizure by public armed vessels of the
other belligerent, except it be contraband.' ... Among the
minor states of Europe there was complete unanimity and a
general readiness to accept our amendment to the rules"; but
England opposed, and the offered amendment was subsequently
withdrawn. "Events ... have shown that ... our refusal to
accept the Declaration of Paris has brought the world nearer
to the principles which we proposed, which became known as the
'Marcy amendment for the abolition of war against private
property on the seas.'"
E. Schuyler. American Diplomacy, chapter 7.
ALSO IN:
F. Wharton, Digest of the International law of the United
States, chapter 17, section 342 (volume 3).
H. Adams, Historical Essays, chapter 6.
See, also, PRIVATEERS.
DECLARATION OF RIGHTS.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1689 (JANUARY-FEBRUARY).
DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF MAN,
French Revolutionary.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1789 (AUGUST-OCTOBER).
DECLARATORY ACT, The.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1766.
DECRETA, Roman imperial.
See CORPUS JURIS CIVILIS.
DECRETALS, The False.
See PAPACY: A. D. 829-847.
DECUMÆ.
See VECTIGAL.
DECUMATES LAND.
See AGRI DECUMATES,
also ALEMANNI;
and SUEVI.
DECURIONES.
See CURIA, MUNICIPAL, OF THE LATER ROMAN EMPIRE.
DEDITITIUS.--COLONUS.--SERVUS.
"The poor Provincial [of the provinces of the Roman empire at
the time of the breaking up in the fifth century] who could
not fly to the Goths because his whole property was in land,
hunted to despair by the tax-gatherer, would transfer that
land to some wealthy neighbour, apparently on condition of
receiving a small life annuity out of it. He was then called
the Dedititius (or Surrenderer) of the new owner, towards whom
he stood in a position of a certain degree of dependence. Not
yet, however, were his sorrows or those of his family at an
end, for the tax-gatherer still regarded him as responsible
for his land. ... On his death his sons, who had utterly lost
their paternal inheritance, and still found themselves
confronted with the claim for taxes, were obviously without
resource. The next stage of the process accordingly was that
they abdicated the position of free citizens and implored the
great man to accept them as Coloni, a class of labourers,
half-free, half-enslaved, who may perhaps with sufficient
accuracy be compared to the serfs 'adscripti glebæ' of the
middle ages. ... Before long they became mere slaves (Servi)
without a shadow of right or claim against their new lords."
T. Hodgkin, Italy and her Invaders, book 1, chapter 10.
With the "increase of great estates and simultaneous increase
in the number of slaves (so many Goths were made slaves by
Claudius [A. D. 268-270], to give one instance, that there was
not a district without them), the small proprietors could no
longer maintain the fruitless struggle, and, as a class,
wholly disappeared. Some, no doubt, became soldiers; others
crowded into the already overflowing towns; while others
voluntarily resigned their freedom, attached themselves to the
land of some rich proprietor, and became his villeins, or
coloni. But this was not the chief means by which this class
was formed and increased. ... After a successful war these
serfs were given ... to landed proprietors without payment;
and in this way not only was the class of free peasants
diminished or altogether destroyed--a happier result--the
slave system was directly attacked. The coloni themselves were
not slaves. The codes directly distinguish them from slaves,
and in several imperial constitutions they are caned
'ingenui.' They could contract a legal marriage and could hold
property. ... On the other hand, the coloni were like slaves
in that they were liable to personal punishment. ... A colonus
was indissolubly attached to the land, and could not get quit
of the tie, even by enlisting as a soldier. The proprietor
could sell him with the estate, but had no power whatever of
selling him without it; and if he sold the estate, he was
compelled to sell the coloni along with it. ... The position
of these villeins was a very miserable one. ... These coloni
in Gaul, combined together, were joined by the free peasants
still left [A. D. 287], whose lot was not less wretched than
their own, and forming into numerous bands, spread themselves
over the country to pillage and destroy. They were called
Bagaudæ, from a Celtic word meaning a mob or riotous assembly;
and under this name recur often in the course of the next
century both in Gaul and Spain."
W. T. Arnold, The Roman System of Provincial
Administration, ch.4.
DEEMSTERS.
See MANX KINGDOM, THE.
DEFENDERS.
See IRELAND: A. D. 1784.
DEFENESTRATION AT PRAGUE, The.
See BOHEMIA: A. D. 1611-1618.
DEFTERDARS.
See SUBLIME PORTE.
DEICOLÆ, The.
See CULDEES.
DEIRA, The kingdom of.
One of the kingdoms of the Angles, covering what is now called
the East Riding of Yorkshire, with some territory beyond it.
Sometimes it was united with the kingdom of Bernicia, north of
it, to form the greater kingdom of Northumbria.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 547-633.
{654}
DEKARCHIES.
See SPARTA: B. C. 404-403.
DEKELEIA.--DEKELEIAN WAR.
See GREECE: B. C. 413.
DELATION.--DELATORS.
Under the empire, there was soon bred at Rome an infamous
class of men who bore a certain resemblance--with significant
contrasts likewise--to the sycophants of Athens. They were
known as delators, and their occupation was delation. "The
delator was properly one who gave notice to the fiscal
officers of moneys that had become due to the treasury of the
state, or more strictly to the emperor's fiscus." But the
title was extended to informers generally, who dragged their
fellow-citizens before the tribunals for alleged violations of
law. Augustus made delation a profession by attaching rewards
to the information given against transgressors of his marriage
laws. Under the successor of Augustus, the sullen and
suspicious Tiberius, delation received its greatest
encouragement and development. "According to the spirit of
Roman criminal procedure, the informer and the pleader were
one and the same person. There was no public accuser, ... but
the spy who discovered the delinquency was himself the man to
demand of the senate, the prætor or the judge, an opportunity
of proving it by his own eloquence and ingenuity. The odium of
prosecution was thus removed from the government to the
private delator."
C. Merivale, History of the Romans, chapter 44.
See, also, ROME: A. D. 14-37.
DELAWARE BAY: A. D. 1609.
Discovered by Henry Hudson.
See AMERICA: A. D. 1609.
DELAWARE BAY:
The error perpetuated in its name.
"Almost every writer on American history that I have met with
appears to have taken pains to perpetuate the stereotyped
error that 'Lord Delawarr touched at this bay in his passage
to Virginia in 1610.' ... Lord Delawarr himself, in his letter
of the 7th of July, 1610, giving an account of his voyage to
Virginia, not only makes no mention of that bay, or of his
approaching it, but expressly speaks of his first reaching the
American coast on the '6th of June, at what time we made land
to the southward of our harbor, the Chesiopiock Bay.' The
first European who is really known to have entered the bay,
after Hudson, was Capt. Samuel Argall [July 1610]. ... The
name of Lord Delawarr, however, seems to have been given to
the bay soon afterwards by the Virginians."
J. R. Brodhead,
History of the State of New York, volume 1, appendix, note D.
----------DELAWARE BAY: End----------
DELAWARE: A. D. 1629-1631.
The Dutch occupancy and first settlement.
The first attempt at settlement on the Delaware was made by
the Dutch, who claimed the country in right of Hudson's
discovery and Mey's exploration of the Bay, notwithstanding
the broad English claim, which covered the whole of it as part
of an indefinite Virginia. In 1629, pursuant to the patroon
ordinance of the Dutch West India Company, which opened New
Netherland territory to private purchasers, "Samuel Godyn and
Samuel Blommaert, both directors of the Amsterdam Chamber,
bargained with the natives for the soil from Cape Henlopen to
the mouth of Delaware river; in July, 1630, this purchase of
an estate more than thirty miles long was ratified at Fort
Amsterdam by Minuit [then Governor of New Netherland] and his
council. It is the oldest deed for land in Delaware, and
comprises the water-line of the two southern counties of that
state. ... A company was soon formed to colonize the tract
acquired by Godyn and Blommaert. The first settlement in
Delaware, older than any in Pennsylvania, was undertaken by a
company, of which Godyn, Van Rensselaer, Blommaert, the
historian De Laet, and a new partner, David Petersen de Vries,
were members. By joint enterprise, in December, 1630, a ship
of 18 guns, commanded by Pieter Heyes, and laden with
emigrants, store of seeds, cattle and agricultural implements,
embarked from the Texel, partly to cover the southern shore of
Delaware Bay with fields of wheat and tobacco, and partly for
a whale fishery on the coast. ... Early in the spring of 1631,
the ... vessel reached its destination, and just within Cape
Henlopen, on Lewes Creek, planted a colony of more than thirty
souls. The superintendence of the settlement was intrusted to
Gillis Hosset. A little fort was built and well beset with
palisades: the arms of Holland were affixed to a pillar; the
country received the name Swaanendael; the water that of
Godyn's Bay. The voyage of Heyes was the cradling of a state.
That Delaware exists as a separate commonwealth is due to this
colony. According to English rule, occupancy was necessary to
complete a title to the wilderness; and the Dutch now occupied
Delaware. On the 5th of May, Heyes and Hosset, in behalf of
Godyn and Blommaert, made a further purchase from Indian
chiefs of the opposite coast of Cape May, for twelve miles on
the bay, on the sea, and in the interior; and, in June, this
sale of a tract twelve miles square was formally attested at
Manhattan. Animated by the courage of Godyn, the patroons of
Swaanendael fitted out a second expedition under the command
of De Vries. But, before he set sail, news was received of the
destruction of the fort, and the murder of its people. Hasset,
the commandant, had caused the death of an Indian chief; and
the revenge of the savages was not appeased till not one of
the emigrants remained alive. De Vries, on his arrival, found
only the ruins of the house and its palisades, half consumed
by fire, and here and there the bones of the colonists."
G. Bancroft, History of the United States,
part 2, chapter 13 (volume 1).
ALSO IN:
J. R. Brodhead, History of the State of New York,
volume 1, chapter 7.
DELAWARE: A. D. 1632.
Embraced in the Maryland grant to Lord Baltimore.
See MARYLAND: A. D. 1632.
DELAWARE: A. D. 1634.
Embraced in the Palatine grant of New Albion.
See NEW ALBION.
DELAWARE: A. D. 1638-1640.
The planting of the Swedish colony.
"William Usselinx, a distinguished merchant in Stockholm, was
the first to propose to the Swedish government a scheme for
planting a colony in America. He was a native of Antwerp, and
had resided in Spain, Portugal and the Azores, at a time when
the spirit of foreign adventure pervaded every class of
society. ... In the year 1624 he proposed to the Swedish
monarch, Gustavus Adolphus, a plan for the organization of a
trading company, to extend its operations to Asia, Africa,
America and Terra Magellanica. ...
{655}
Whether Usselinx had ever been in America is uncertain, but he
had, soon after the organization of the Dutch West India
Company, some connection with it, and by this and other means
was able to give ample information in relation to the country
bordering on the Delaware, its soil, climate, and productions.
... His plan and contract were translated into the Swedish
language by Schrader, the royal interpreter, and published to
the nation, with an address strongly appealing both to their
piety and their love of gain. The king recommended it to the
States, and an edict dated at Stockholm, July 2d, 1626, was
issued by royal authority, in which people of all ranks were
invited to encourage the project and support the Company.
Books were opened for subscription to the stock ... and
Gustavus pledged the royal treasure for its support to the
amount of 400,000 dollars. ... The work was ripe for
execution, when the German war [the Thirty Years War], and
afterwards the king's death, prevented it, and rendered the
fair prospect fruitless. ... The next attempt on the part of
the Swedes to plant a colony in America was more successful.
But there has been much difference among historians in
relation to the period when that settlement was made. ... It
is owing to the preservation, among the Dutch records at
Albany, of an official protest issued by Kieft, the Governor
at New Amsterdam, that we do certainly know the Swedes were
here in the spring of 1638. Peter Minuit, who conducted to our
shore the first Swedish colony, had been Commercial Agent, and
Director General of the Dutch West India Company, and Governor
of the New Netherlands. ... At this time Christina, the infant
daughter of Gustavus Adolphus, had ascended the throne of
Sweden. ... Under the direction of Oxenstiern, the celebrated
chancellor of Sweden, whose wisdom and virtue have shed a
glory on the age in which he lived, the patent which had been
granted in the reign of Gustavus to the company formed under
the influence of Usselinx was renewed, and its privileges
extended to the citizens of Germany. Minuit, being now out of
employment, and probably deeming himself injured by the
conduct of the Dutch Company [which had displaced him from the
governorship of the New Netherlands, through the influence of
the patroons, and appointed Wouter Van Twiller, a clerk, to
succeed him], had determined to offer his services to the
crown of Sweden. ... Minuit laid before the chancellor a plan
of procedure, urged a settlement on the Delaware, and offered
to conduct the enterprise. Oxenstiern represented the case to
the queen ... and Minuit was commissioned to command and
direct the expedition."
B. Ferris, History of the Original Settlements on the
Delaware, part 1, chapter 2-3.
"With two ships laden with provisions and other supplies
requisite for the settlement of emigrants in a new country,
and with fifty colonists, Minuit sailed from Sweden late in
1637, and entered Delaware Bay in April, 1638. He found the
country as he had left it, without white inhabitants. Minqua
Kill, now Wilmington, was selected as the place for the first
settlement, where he bought a few acres of land of the
natives, landed his colonists and stores, erected a fort, and
began a small plantation. He had conducted his enterprise with
some secrecy, that he might avoid collision with the Dutch;
but the watchful eyes of their agents soon discovered him, and
reported his presence to the director at New Amsterdam. Kieft
[successor to Van Twiller] had just arrived, and it became one
of his first duties to notify a man who had preceded him in
office that he was a trespasser and warn him off. Minuit,
knowing that Kieft was powerless to enforce his protest, being
without troops or money, paid no attention to his missive, and
kept on with his work. ... He erected a fort of considerable
strength, named Christina, for the Swedish queen, and
garrisoned it with 24 soldiers. Understanding the character of
the Indians, he conciliated their sachems by liberal presents
and secured the trade. In a few months he was enabled to load
his ships with peltries and despatch them to his patrons. ...
The colony had to all appearance a promising future. ...
Within two years, however, their prospects were clouded. The
Company had failed to send out another ship with supplies and
merchandise for the Indian trade. Provisions failed, trade
fell off, and sickness began to prevail. ... They resolved to
remove to Manhattan, where they could at least have 'enough to
eat.' On the eve of 'breaking up' to carry their resolution
into effect, succor came from an unexpected quarter. The fame
of New Sweden, as the colony was called, of its fertile lands
and profitable trade, had reached other nations of Europe. In
Holland itself a company was formed to establish a settlement
under the patronage of the Swedish Company." This Dutch
company "freighted a ship with colonists and supplies, which
fortunately arrived when the Swedish colony was about to be
broken up and the country abandoned. The spirits of the Swedes
were revived. ... Their projected removal was indefinitely
deferred and they continued their work with fresh vigor. The
Dutch colonists were located in a settlement by themselves,
only a few miles from Fort Christina. They were loyal to the
Swedes. ... In the autumn of the same year, 1640, Peter
Hollaendare, who had been appointed deputy governor of the
colony, and Moens Kling, arrived from Sweden with three ships
laden with provisions and merchandise for the straitened
colonists. They also brought out a considerable company of new
emigrants. New Sweden was now well established and prosperous.
More lands were bought, and new settlements were made. Peter
Minuit died the following year."
G. W. Schuyler, Colonial New York, volume 1,
introduction, section 2.
ALSO IN:
I. Acrelius, History of New Sweden
(Penn. Historical Society Mem., volume 11) chapter 1.
Documents relative to Colonial History of New York,
volume 12.
G. B. Keen, New Sweden (Narrative and Critical
History of America, volume 4, chapter 9).
J. F. Jameson, Willem Usselinx (Papers of the
American Historical Association., volume 2, number 3).
DELAWARE: A. D. 1640-1643.
Intrusions of the English from New Haven.
See NEW JERSEY: A. D. 1640-1655.
DELAWARE. A. D. 1640-1656.
The struggle between the Swedes and the Dutch and the final
victory of the latter.
"The [Swedish] colony grew to such importance that John
Printz, a lieutenant-colonel of cavalry, was sent out in 1642
as governor, with orders for developing industry and trade. He
took pains to command the mouth of the river, although the
Dutch had established Fort Nassau on its eastern bank, and the
Swedish settlements were on the western bank exclusively.
{656}
Collisions arose between the Dutch and the Swedes, and when
the former put up the arms of the States General on the
completion of a purchase of lands from the Indians, Printz in
a passion ordered them to be torn down. The Swedes gained in
strength while the Dutch lost ground in the vicinity. In 1648
the Dutch attempted to build a trading post on the Schuylkill,
when they were repulsed by force by the Swedes. Individuals
seeking to erect houses were treated in the same way. The
Swedes in turn set up a stockade on the disputed ground.
Director Stuyvesant found it necessary in 1651 to go to confer
with Printz with a view to holding the country against the
aggressive English. The Indians were called into council and
confirmed the Dutch title, allowing the Swedes little more
than the site of Fort Christina. Fort Casimir was erected
lower down the river, to protect Dutch interests. The two
rulers agreed to be friends and allies, and so continued for
three years. The distress of the Swedish colony led to appeals
for aid from the home country whither Governor Printz had
returned. In 1654 help was given, and a new governor, John
Claude Rysingh, marked his coming by the capture of Fort
Casimir, pretending that the Dutch West India Company
authorized the act. The only revenge the Dutch could take was
the seizure of a Swedish vessel which by mistake ran into
Manhattan Bay. But the next year orders came from Holland
exposing the fraud of Rysingh, and directing the expulsion of
the Swedes from the South River. A fleet was organized and
Director Stuyvesant recovered Fort Casimir without firing a
gun. After some parley Fort Christina was also surrendered.
Such Swedes as would not take the oath of allegiance to the
Dutch authorities were sent to the home country. Only twenty
persons accepted the oath, and of three clergymen two were
expelled, and the third escaped like treatment by the sudden
outbreak of Indian troubles. In 1656 the States General and
Sweden made these transactions [a] matter of international
discussion. The Swedes presented a protest against the action
of the Dutch, and it was talked over, but the matter was
finally dropped. In the same year the West India Company sold
its interests on the South River to the city of Amsterdam, and
the colony of New Amstel was erected, so that the authority of
New Netherland was extinguished."
E. H. Roberts, New York, volume 1, chapter 7.
ALSO IN:
E. Armstrong, Introduction to the Record of Upland
(Historical Society of Pennsylvania Memoirs, volume 7).
B. Ferris, History of the Original Settlements on the
Delaware, part 1, chapter 6-7.
S. Hazard, Annals of Pennsylvania, pages 62-228.
Report of the Amsterdam Chamber of the W. I. Co.
(Documents relative to Colonial History of New York,
volume 1, pages 587-646).
DELAWARE: A. D. 1664.
Conquest by the English, and annexation to New York.
"Five days after the capitulation of New Amsterdam
[surrendered by the Dutch to the English, Aug. 29, 1664 see
NEW YORK: A. D. 1664] Nicolls, with Cartwright and Maverick
... commissioned their colleague, Sir Robert Carr, to go,"
with three ships and an adequate military force, "and reduce
the Delaware settlements. Carr was instructed to promise the
Dutch the possession of all their property and all their
present privileges, 'only that they change their masters.' To
the Swedes he was to 'remonstrate their happy return under a
monarchical government, and his majesty's good inclination to
that nation.' To Lord Baltimore's officers in Maryland, he was
to declare that their proprietor's pretended right to the
Delaware being 'a doubtful case,' possession would be kept for
the king 'till his majesty is informed and satisfied
otherwise.' ... The Swedes were soon made friends," but the
Dutch attempted [October] some resistance, and yielded only
after a couple of broadsides from the ships had killed three
and wounded ten of their garrison. "Carr now landed ... and
claimed the pillage for himself as 'won by the sword.'
Assuming an authority independent of Nicolls, he claimed to be
the 'sole and chief commander and disposer' of all affairs on
the Delaware." His acts of rapacity and violence, when
reported to his fellow commissioners, at New York, were
condemned and repudiated, and Nicolls, the presiding
commissioner, went to the Delaware in person to displace him.
"Carr was severely rebuked, and obliged to give up much of his
ill-gotten spoil. Nevertheless, he could not be persuaded to
leave the place for some time. The name of New Amstel was now
changed to New Castle, and an infantry garrison established
there. ... Captain John Carr was appointed commander of the
Delaware, in subordination to the government of New York, to
which it was annexed 'as an appendage'; and thus affairs
remained for several years."
J. R. Brodhead, History of the State of New York,
volume 2, chapter 2.
DELAWARE: A. D. 1673.
The Dutch reconquest.
See NEW YORK: A. D. 1673.
DELAWARE: A. D. 1674.
Final recovery by the English.
See NETHERLANDS (HOLLAND): A. D. 1674.
DELAWARE: A. D. 1674-1760.
In dispute between the Duke of York and the
Proprietary of Maryland.
Grant by the Duke to William Penn:
See PENNSYLVANIA; A. D. 1682; 1685; and 1760-1767.
DELAWARE: A. D. 1691-1702.
The practical independence of Penn's "lower counties" acquired.
"In April, 1691, with the reluctant consent of William Penn,
the 'territories,' or 'lower counties,' now known as the State
of Delaware, became for two years a government by themselves
under Markham. ... The disturbance by Keith [see PENNSYLVANIA;
A. D. 1692-1696] creating questions as to the administration
of justice, confirmed the disposition of the English
government to subject Pennsylvania to a royal commission; and
in April 1693, Benjamin Fletcher, appointed governor by
William and Mary, once more united Delaware to Pennsylvania."
But Penn, restored to his authority in 1694, could not resist
the jealousies which tended so strongly to divide the Delaware
territories from Pennsylvania proper. "In 1702, Pennsylvania
convened its legislature apart, and the two colonies were
never again united. The lower counties became almost an
independent republic; for, as they were not included in the
charter, the authority of the proprietary over them was by
sufferance only, and the executive power intrusted to the
governor of Pennsylvania was too feeble to restrain the power
of their people. The legislature, the tribunals, the
subordinate executive officers of Delaware knew little of
external control."
G. Bancroft, History of the United States.
(author's last revision), part 3, chapter 2 (volume 2).
The question of jurisdiction over Delaware was involved
throughout in the boundary dispute between the proprietaries
of Pennsylvania and Maryland.
See PENNSYLVANIA; A. D. 1685; and 1760-1767.
{657}
DELAWARE: A. D. 1760-1766.
The question of taxation by Parliament.
The Stamp Act and its repeal.
The Declaratory Act.
The First Continental Congress.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1760-1775; 1763-1764; 1765; and 1766.
DELAWARE: A. D. 1766-1774
Opening events of the Revolution.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1766-1767 to 1774;
and BOSTON: A. D. 1768 to 1773.
DELAWARE: A. D. 1775.
The beginning of the war of the American Revolution.
Lexington.
Concord.
Action taken on the news.
Ticonderoga.
The siege of Boston.
Bunker Hill.
The Second Continental Congress.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1775.
DELAWARE: A. D. 1776.
Further introduction of slaves prohibited.
See SLAVERY, NEGRO: A. D.1776-1808.
DELAWARE: A. D. 1776-1783.
The War of Independence.
Peace with Great Britain.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1776 to 1783.
DELAWARE: A. D. 1777-1779.
Withholding ratification from the Articles of Confederation.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1781-1786.
DELAWARE: A. D. 1787.
The adoption and ratification of the Federal Constitution.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1787, and 1787-1789.
DELAWARE: A. D. 1861 (April).
Refusal of troops on the call of President Lincoln.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1861 (APRIL).
----------DELAWARE: End----------
DELAWARE RIVER,
Washington's passage of the.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1776-1777.
DELAWARES, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: DELAWARES.
DELFT: Assassination of the Prince of Orange (1584).
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1581-1584.
DELHI: 11th Century.
Capture by Mahmoud of Gazna.
See TURKS: A. D. 999-1183.
DELHI: A. D. 1192-1290.
The capital of the Mameluke or Slave dynasty.
See INDIA: A. D. 977-1290.
DELHI: A. D. 1399.
Sack and massacre by Timour.
See TIMOUR.
DELHI: A. D. 1526-1605.
The founding of the Mogul Empire by Babar and Akbar.
See INDIA: A. D. 1399-1605.
DELHI: A. D. 1739.
Sack and massacre by Nadir Shah.
See INDIA: A. D. 1662-1748.
DELHI: A. D. 1760-1761.

Taken and plundered by the Mahrattas.
Then by the Afghans.
Collapse of the Mogul Empire.
See INDIA: A. D. 1747-1761.
DELHI: A. D. 1857.
The Sepoy Mutiny.
Massacre of Europeans.
Explosion of the magazine.
English siege and capture of the city.
See INDIA: A. D. 1857 (MAY-AUGUST)
and (JUNE-SEPTEMBER).
----------DELHI: End----------
DELIAN CONFEDERACY.
See GREECE: B. C. 478--477;
and ATHENS: B. C. 466-454, and after.
DELIAN FESTIVAL.
See DELOS.
DELIUM, Battle of (B. C. 424).
A serious defeat suffered by the Athenians in the
Peloponnesian War, B. C. 424, at the hands of the Thebans and
other Bœotians. It was consequent upon the seizure by the
Athenians of the Bœotian temple of Delium--a temple of
Apollo--on the sea-coast, about five miles from Tanagra, which
they fortified and intended to hold. After the defeat of the
army which was returning from this exploit, the garrison left
at Delium was besieged and mostly captured. Among the hoplites
who fought at Delium was the philosopher Socrates. The
commander Hippocrates was slain.
Thucydides, History, book 4, section 89-100.
ALSO IN:
G. Grote, History of Greece, part 2, chapter 53.
See GREECE: B. C. 424-421.
DELOS.
Delos, the smallest island of the group called the Cyclades,
but the most important in the eyes of the Ionian Greeks, being
their sacred isle, the fabled birthplace of Apollo and long
the chief seat and center of his worship. "The Homeric Hymn to
Apollo presents to us the island of Delos as the centre of a
great periodical festival in honour of Apollo, celebrated by
all the cities, insular and continental, of the Ionic name.
What the date of this hymn is, we have no means of
determining: Thucydides quotes it, without hesitation, as the
production of Homer, and, doubtless, it was in his time
universally accepted as such,--though modern critics concur in
regarding both that and the other hymns as much later than the
Iliad and Odyssey. It cannot probably be later than 600 B. C.
The description of the Ionic visitors presented to us in this
hymn is splendid and imposing; the number of their ships, the
display of their finery, the beauty of their women, the
athletic exhibitions as well as the matches of song and
dance,--all these are represented as making an ineffaceable
impression on the spectator: 'the assembled Ionians look as if
they were beyond the reach of old age or death.' Such was the
magnificence of which Delos was the periodical theatre, and
which called forth the voices and poetical genius not merely
of itinerant bards, but also of the Delian maidens in the
temple of Apollo, during the century preceding 560 B. C. At
that time it was the great central festival of the Ionians in
Asia and Europe."
G. Grote, History of Greece, part 2, chapter 12.
During the war with Persia, Delos was made the common treasury
of the Greeks; but Athens subsequently took the custody and
management of the treasury to herself and reduced Delos to a
dependency. The island was long the seat of an extensive
commerce, and Delian bronze was of note in the arts.
DELOS: B. C. 490.
Spared by the Persians.
See GREECE: B. C. 490.
DELOS: B. C. 477.
The Delian Confederacy.
See GREECE: B. C. 478-477;
and ATHENS: B. C. 466-454, and after.
DELOS: B. C. 461-454 (?).
Removal of the Confederate treasury to Athens.
See ATHENS: B. C. 466-454.
DELOS: B. C. 425-422.
Purifications.
"In the midst of the losses and turmoil of the [Peloponnesian]
war it had been determined [at Athens] to offer a solemn
testimony of homage to Apollo on Delos, [B. C. 425]--a homage
doubtless connected with the complete cessation of the
pestilence, which had lasted as long as the fifth year of the
war. The solemnity consisted in the renewed consecration of
the entire island to the divine Giver of grace; all the
coffins containing human remains being removed from Delos, and
Rhenea appointed to be henceforth the sole burial-place. This
solemnity supplemented the act formerly performed by the
orders of Pisistratus, and it was doubtless in the present
instance also intended, by means of a brilliant renewal of the
Delian celebration, to strengthen the power of Athens in the
island sea, to give a festive centre to the Ionic world. ...
But the main purpose was clearly one of morality and religion.
It was intended to calm and edify the minds of the citizens."
E. Curtius, History of Greece, book 4, chapter 2.
{658}
Three years later (B. C. 422) the Athenians found some reason
for another purification of Delos which was more radical,
consisting in the expulsion of all the inhabitants from the
island. The unfortunate Delians found an asylum at Adramyttium
in Asia, until they were restored to their homes next year,
through the influence of the Delphic oracle.
Thucydides, History, book 5, section 1.
DELOS: B. C. 88.
Pontic Massacre.
Early in the first war of Mithridates with the Romans (B. C.
88), Delos, which had been made a free port and had become the
emporium of Roman commerce in the east, was seized by a Pontic
fleet, and pillaged, 20,000 Italians being massacred on the
island. The treasures of Delos were sent to Athens and the
island restored to the Athenian control.
W. Ihne, History of Rome, book 7, chapter 17.
DELOS: B. C. 69.
Ravaged by Pirates.
"Almost under the eyes of the fleet of Lucullus, the pirate
Athenodorus surprised in 685 [B. C. 69] the island of Delos,
destroyed its far-famed shrines and temples, and carried off
the whole population into slavery."
T. Mommsen, History of Rome, book 5, chapter 2.
DELOS: Slave Trade-under the Romans.
"Thrace and Sarmatia were the Guinea Coast of the Romans. The
entrepôt of this trade was Delos, which had been made a free
port by Rome after the conquest of Macedonia. Strabo tells us
that in one day 10,000 slaves were sold there in open market.
Such were the vile uses to which was put the Sacred Island,
once the treasury of Greece."
H. G. Liddell, History of Rome, book 5, chapter 48.
----------DELOS: End----------
DELPHI.--KRISSA (CRISSA).--KIRRHA (CIRRHA).
"In those early times when the Homeric Hymn to Apollo was
composed the town of Krissa [in Phocis, near Delphi] appears
to have been great and powerful, possessing all the broad
plain between Parnassus, Kirphis, and the gulf, to which
latter it gave its name,--and possessing also, what was a
property not less valuable, the adjoining sanctuary of Pytho
itself, which the Hymn identifies with Krissa, not indicating
Delphi as a separate place. The Krissæans, doubtless, derived
great profits from the number of visitors who came to visit
Delphi, both by land and by sea, and Kirrha was originally
only the name for their seaport. Gradually, however, the port
appears to have grown in importance at the expense of the
town; ... while at the same time the sanctuary of Pytho with
its administrators expanded into the town of Delphi, and came
to claim an independent existence of its own. ... In addition
to the above facts, already sufficient in themselves as seeds
of quarrel, we are told that the Kirrhæans abused their
position as masters of the avenue to the temple by sea, and
levied exorbitant tolls on the visitors who landed there. ...
Besides such offence against the general Grecian public, they
had also incurred the enmity of their Phocian neighbours by
outrages upon women, Phocian as well as Argeian, who were
returning from the temple. Thus stood the case, apparently,
about 595 B. C., when the Amphiktyonic meeting interfered ...
to punish the Kirrhæans. After a war of ten years, the first
Sacred War in Greece, this object was completely accomplished,
by a joint force of Thessalians under Eurylochus, Sikyonians
under Kleisthenes, and Athenians under Alkmæon; the Athenian
Solon being the person who originated and enforced, in the
Amphiktyonic council, the proposition of interference. Kirrha
... was destroyed, or left to subsist merely as a landing
place; and the whole adjoining plain was consecrated to the
Delphian god, whose domains thus touched the sea. ... The fate
of Kirrha in this war is ascertained: that of Krissa is not so
clear, nor do we know whether it was destroyed, or left
subsisting in a position of inferiority with regard to Delphi.
From this time forward, the Delphian community appears as
substantive and autonomous, exercising in their own right the
management of the temple; though we shall find, on more than
one occasion, that the Phocians contest this right. ... The
spoils of Kirrha were employed by the victorious allies in
founding the Pythian Games. The octennial festival hitherto
celebrated at Delphi in honour of the god, including no other
competition except in the harp and the pæan, was expanded into
comprehensive games on the model of the Olympic, with matches
not only of music, but also of gymnastics and
chariots,--celebrated, not at Delphi itself, but on the
maritime plain near the ruined Kirrha,--and under the direct
superintendence of the Amphiktyons themselves. ... They were
celebrated in the latter half of summer, or first half of
every third Olympic year. ... Nothing was conferred but
wreaths of laurel."
G. Grote, History of Greece, part 2, chapter 28.
See, also, ATHENS: B. C. 610-586;
PYTHO; ORACLES OF THE GREEKS;
and AMPHIKTYONIC COUNCIL.
DELPHI: B. C. 357-338.
Seizure by the Phocians.
The Sacred Wars.
Deliverance by Philip of Macedon.
War with Amphissa.
See GREECE: B. C. 357-336.
DELPHI: B. C. 279.
Discomfiture of the Gauls.
See GAULS: B. C. 280-279.
----------DELPHI: End----------
DELPHIC ORACLE, The.
See ORACLES OF THE GREEKS.
DELPHIC SIBYL, The.
See SIBYLS.
DEMES.--DEMI.
See PHYLÆ; also, ATHENS: B. C. 510-507.
DEMETES, The.
One of the tribes of ancient Wales.
See BRITAIN, CELTIC TRIBES.
DEMETRIUS,
The Impostor.
See RUSSIA: A. D. 1533-1682.
Demetrius Poliorcetes, and the wars of the Diadochi.
See MACEDONIA: B. C. 315-310, 310-301;
also GREECE: B. C. 307-301;
and RHODES: B. C. 305--304.
DEMIURGI.--COSMOS.--TAGOS OR TAGUS.
Of the less common titles applied among the ancient Greeks to
their supreme magistrates, are "Cosmos, or Cosmios, and Tagos
(signifying Arranger and Commander), the former of which we
find in Crete, the latter in the Thessalian cities. With the
former we may compare the title of Cosmopolis, which was in
use among the Epizephyrian Locrians. A more frequent title is
that of Demiurgi, a name which seems to imply a constitution
no longer oligarchical, but which bestowed certain rights on
the Demos. In the time of the Peloponnesian war magistrates of
this kind existed in Elis and in the Arcadian Mantinæa. ...
The title is declared by Grammarians to have been commonly
used among the Dorians. ... A similar title is that of
Demuchus, which the supreme magistrates of Thespiæ in Bœotia
seem to have borne. ... The Artyni at Epidaurus and Argos we
have already mentioned."
G. Schömann, Antiquity of Greece: The State,
part 2, chapter 5.
{659}
DEMOCRATIC OR DEMOCRATIC REPUBLICAN PARTY OF THE UNITED STATES.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1789-1792; 1825-1828; 1845-1846.
DEMOSTHENES,
the general at Sphacteria and at Syracuse.
See GREECE: B. C. 425,
and SYRACUSE: B. C. 415-413;
and ATHENS: B. C. 415-413.
Demosthenes the orator,
The Phillipics, and the Death of.
See GREECE: B. C. 357-336, 351-348,
and 323--322;
and ATHENS: B. C. 359-338, and 336-322.
DEMOTIC WRITING.
See HIEROGLYPHICS.
DEMUCHUS.
See DEMIURGI.
DENAIN. Battle of (1712).
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1710-1712.
DENARIUS, The.
See AS.
DENDERMONDE.
Surrender to the Spaniards (1584).
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1584-1585.
DENIS, King of Portugal, A. D. 1279-1323.
DENMARK.
See SCANDINAVIAN STATES.
DENNEWITZ, OR JÜTERBOGK, Battle of.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1813 (SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER).
DENNIKON, Peace of (1531).
See SWITZERLAND: A. D. 1531-1648.
DENVER, The founding of.
See COLORADO: A. D. 1806-1876.
DEORHAM, Battle of.
Fought A. D. 577, near Bath, England, between the invading
West Saxons and the Britons. The victory of the former gave
them possession of the lower valley of the Severn and
practically completed the Saxon conquest of England.
J. R. Green, The Making of England, pages 125-131.
DERBEND, Pass of.
See JUROIPACH.
DERBY-DISRAELI MINISTRIES The.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1851-1852; 1858-1859;
and 1868-1870.
DERRY.
See LONDONDERRY.
DE RUSSY, Fort, Capture of.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1864 (MARCH-MAY: LOUISIANA).
DESERET, The proposed state of.
See UTAH: A. D. 1849-1850.
DESMONDS, The.
See GERALDINES.
DESMOULINS, Camille, and the French Revolution.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1789 (JULY); 1790;
1792 (AUGUST), to 1793-1794 (NOVEMBER-JUNE).
DESPOT OF EPIRUS.
"The title of despot, by which they [the mediæval princes of
Epirus] are generally distinguished, was a Byzantine honorary
distinction, never borne by the earlier members of the family
until it had been conferred on them by the Greek Emperor."
G. Finlay, History of Greece from its conquest by the
Crusaders, chapter 6, section I.
See EPIRUS: A. D. 1204-1350.
DESPOTS,
Greek.
See TYRANTS.
Italian.
See ITALY: A. D. 1250-1520.
DESSAU, Battle of (1626).
See GERMANY: A. D. 1624-1626.
DESTRIERS.--PALFREYS.
"A cavaliere or man-at-arms was accompanied by one 'Destriero'
or strong war-horse, and one or two, sometimes three, mounted
squires who led the animal fully caparisoned; or carried the
helmet; lance and shield of their master: these 'Destrieri'
('rich and great horses' as Villani calls them), were so named
because they were led on the right hand without any rider, and
all ready for mounting: the squire's horses were of an
inferior kind called 'Ronzini,' and on the 'Palafreni' or
palfreys the knight rode when not in battle."
H. E. Napier, Florentine History, volume 1, page 633.
DESTROYING ANGELS, OR DANITES.
See MORMONISM: A. D. 1830-1846.
DETROIT:
First occupied by the Coureurs de Bois.
See COUREURS DE BOIS.
DETROIT: A. D. 1686-1701.
The first French forts.
Cadillac's founding of the city.
At the beginning of the war called "Queen Anne's War" (1702)
"Detroit had already been established. In June, 1701, la Mothe
Cadillac, with a Jesuit father and 100 men, was sent to
construct a fort and occupy the country; hence he is spoken of
as the founder of the city. In 1686, a fort [called Fort St.
Joseph] had been constructed to the south of the present city,
where Fort Gratiot now stands, but it soon fell into decay and
was abandoned. It was not the site selected by Cadillac."
W. Kingsford, History of Canada, volume 2, page 408.
"Fort St. Joseph was abandoned in the year 1688. The
establishment of Cadillac was destined to a better fate and
soon rose to distinguished importance among the western
outposts of Canada."
F. Parkman, The Conspiracy of Pontiac, volume 1, page 218.
DETROIT: A. D. 1701-1755.
Importance to the French.
See CANADA: A. D. 1700-1735.
DETROIT: A. D. 1712.
Siege by the Foxes and Massacre of that tribe.
See CANADA: A. D. 1711-1713.
DETROIT: A. D. 1760.
The French settlement when surrendered to the English.
"The French inhabitants here are settled on both sides of the
river for about eight miles. When I took possession of the
country soon after the surrender of Canada [see CANADA: A. D.
1760], they were about 2,500 in number, there being near 500
that bore arms (to whom I administered oaths of allegiance)
and near 300 dwelling houses. Our fort here is built of
stockadoes, is about 25 feet high, and 1,200 yards in
circumference. ... The inhabitants raise wheat and other grain
in abundance, and have plenty of cattle, but they enrich
themselves chiefly by their trade with the Indians, which is
here very large and lucrative."
Major R. Rogers, Concise Account of North America,
page 168.
DETROIT: A. D. 1763.
Pontiac's Siege.
See PONTIAC'S WAR.
DETROIT: A. D. 1775-1783.
Held by the British throughout the War of Independence.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1778-1779,
CLARK'S CONQUEST.
DETROIT: A. D. 1805.
Made the seat of government of the Territory of Michigan.
See INDIANA: A. D. 1800-1818.
DETROIT: A. D. 1812.
The surrender of General Hull.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1812 (JUNE-OCTOBER).
DETROIT: A. D 1813.
American recovery.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1812-1813.
{660}
DETTINGEN, Battle of (1743).
See AUSTRIA: A. D. 1743.
DEUSDEDIT, Pope, A. D. 615-618.
DEUTSCH. Origin of the name.
See GERMANY: THE NATIONAL NAME.
DEUTSCHBROD, Battle of (1422).
See BOHEMIA: A. D. 1419-1434.
DEVA.
One of the Roman garrison towns in
Britain, on the site of which is modern Chester,
taking its name from the castra or fortified
station of the legions. It was the station of
the 20th legion.
T. Mommsen, History of Rome, book 8, chapter 5.
DEVE-BOYUN, Battle of (1878).
See TURKS: A. D. 1877-1878.
DEVIL'S CAUSEWAY, The.
The popular name of an old Roman road in England which runs
from Silchester to London.
DEVIL'S HOLE,
The ambuscade and massacre at.
On the 13th of September, 1763, during the progress of
Pontiac's War, a train of wagons and packhorses, traversing
the Niagara portage between Lewiston and Fort Schlosser,
guarded by an escort of 24 soldiers, was ambuscaded by a party
of Seneca warriors at the place called the Devil's Hole, three
miles below the Niagara cataract. Seventy of the whites were
slain, and only three escaped.
F. Parkman, The Conspiracy of Pontiac, chapter 21 (volume 2).
DEVON COMMISSION, The.
See IRELAND: A. D. 1843-1848.
DEVONSHIRE, in the British age.
See DUMNONII.
DE WITT, John,
The administration and the murder of.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1651-1660, to 1672-1674.
DHIHAD.
See DAR-UL-ISLAM.
DIACRII, The.
See ATHENS: B. C. 594.
DIADOCHI, The.
The immediate successors of Alexander the Great, who divided
his empire, are sometimes so-called. "The word diadochi means
'successors,' and is used to include Antigonus, Ptolemy,
Seleucus, Lysimachus, etc.--the actual companions of
Alexander."
J. P. Mahaffy, Story of Alexander's Empire, chapter 5.
See MACEDONIA: B. C. 323-316.
DIAMOND, Battle of the (1795).
See IRELAND: A. D. 1795-1796.
DIAMOND DISCOVERY IN SOUTH AFRICA (1867).
See GRIQUAS.
DIAMOND NECKLACE, The affair of the.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1784-1785.
DIASPORA, The.
A name applied to the Jews scattered throughout the Roman
world.
DIAZ, Porfirio, The Mexican presidency of.
See MEXICO: A. D. 1867-1888.
DICASTERIA.
The great popular court, or jury, in ancient Athens, called
the Heliæa, or Heliastæ consisting at one time of six thousand
chosen citizens, was divided into ten sections, called
Dicasteria. Their places of meeting also bore the same name.
G. F. Schömann, Antiquity of Greece:
The State, part 3, chapter 3.
See ATHENS: B. C.445-431.
DICKINSON, John, in the American Revolution.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1767-1768; 1774 (SEPTEMBER);
1776 (JULY).
DICTATOR, Roman.
See CONSULS, ROMAN.
DIDIAN LAW, The.
See ORCHIAN, FANNIAN, DIDIAN LAWS.
DIDIER, OR DESIDERIUS,
King of the Lombards, A. D. 759-774.
DIDYMÆUM, The oracle of.
See ORACLES OF THE GREEKS.
DIEDENHOFEN, Battle of (1639).
See GERMANY: A. D. 1634-1639.
DIEPPE.
Bombardment and destruction by an English fleet.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1694.
DIES ATRI.
The days on which the Romans thought it unlucky to undertake
business of importance--for example, the day after the
Calends, Nones and Ides of each month--were called Dies Atri.
W. Ramsay, Manual of Roman Antiquity, chapter 11.
DIES FASTI.
Dies Nefasti.
Dies Festi.
See FASTI, and LUDI.
DIET.
"An assembly, council, ... Parliament. ... The peculiar sense
of the word undoubtedly arose from a popular etymology that
connected it with the Latin 'dies,' a day, especially a set day, a
day appointed for public business; whence, by extension, a
meeting for business, an assembly."
W. W. Skeat, Etymological Dictionary
DIET:
The Germanic.
"The annual general councils and special councils of Charles
the Great did not long survive him, and neither his
descendants nor their successors revived them. They were
compelled, to be sure, both by custom and by policy to advise
with the chief men of the kingdom before taking any important
step or doing anything that depended for success on their
consent and cooperation, but they varied the number of their
counsellors and the time, place, and manner of consulting them
to suit their own convenience. Great formal assemblies of
counsellors summoned from all parts of the realm were termed
Imperial Diets (Reichstage); small, or local, or informal
assemblies of a similar kind were known as Court Diets
(Hoftage). Princes and other royal vassals, margraves,
palsgraves, Graves, barons, and even royal Dienstmannen were
indiscriminately summoned, but the Diets were in no sense
representative bodies until the Great Interregnum [see
GERMANY: A. D. 1250-1272] when certain cities acquired such
influence in public affairs that they were invited to send
delegates. The first Diet in which they participated was held
at Worms in February, 1255, by King William of Holland. Most
of the cities of the Rhenish League were there represented,
and they constituted an important factor of the assembly. The
affairs of the church shared attention with temporal affairs
in the Diets until the Popes succeeded in making good their
claims to supremacy in spiritual matters. Thereafter they were
altogether left to synods and church councils. ... Imperial
Diets and Court Diets continued to be held at irregular
intervals, whenever and wherever it pleased the king to
convene them, but Imperial Diets were usually held in Imperial
cities. These were not such heterogenous assemblies as
formerly, for few royal vassals, except princes, and no royal
Dienstmannen whatever were now invited to attend. Graves and
barons, and prelates who were not princes, continued to be
summoned, but the number and influence of the Graves and
barons in the Diets steadily waned. Imperial cities were for
many years only occasionally asked to participate, that is to
say, only when the king had especial need of their good
offices, but in the latter half of the 14th century they began
to be regularly summoned.
{661}
Imperial Diets were so frequently held during the Hussite War
and thereafter, that it became pretty well settled what
persons and what cities should take part in them, and only
those persons and those cities that were entitled to take part
in them were regarded as Estates of the realm. In the 15th
century they developed into three chambers or colleges, viz.,
the College of Electors [see GERMANY: A. D. 1125-1152], the
College of Princes, Graves, and Barons, usually called the
Council of Princes of the Empire (Reichsfürstenrath), and the
College of Imperial Cities. The Archbishop of Mentz presided
in the College of Electors, and the Archbishop of Salzburg and
the Duke of Austria presided alternately in the Council of
Princes of the Empire. The office of presiding in the College
of Imperial Cities devolved upon the Imperial city in which
the Diet sat. The king and members of both the upper Colleges
sometimes sent deputies to represent them, instead of
attending in person. In 1474 the cities adopted a method of
voting which resulted in a division of their College into two
Benches, called the Rhenish Bench and the Swabian Bench,
because the Rhenish cities were conspicuous members of the
one, and the Swabian cities conspicuous members of the other.
In the Council of Princes, at least, no regard was had to the
number of votes cast, but only to the power and influence of
the voters, whence a measure might pass the Diet by less than
a majority of the votes present. Having passed, it was
proclaimed as the law of the realm, upon receiving the king's
assent, but was only effective law in so far as the members of
the Diet, present or absent, assented to it. ... Not a single
Imperial Diet was summoned between 1613 and 1640. The king
held a few Court Diets during that long interval, consisting
either of the Electors alone, or of the Electors and such
other Princes of the Empire as he chose to summon. The
conditions of membership, and the manner of voting in the
College of Electors and the College of Imperial Cities
remained unchanged. ... The cities long strove in vain to have
their votes recognized as of equal weight with the others, but
the two upper Colleges insisted on regarding them as summoned
for consultation only, until the Peace of Westphalia settled
the matter by declaring that 'a decisive vote (votum
decisivum) shall belong to the Free Imperial Cities not less
than to the rest of the Estates of the Empire.' Generally, but
not always, the sense of each College was expressed by the
majority of votes cast. The Peace of Westphalia provided that
'in religious matters and all other business, when the Estates
cannot be considered one body (corpus), as also when the
Catholic Estates and those of the Augsburg Confession go into
two parts (in duas partes euntibus), a mere amicable agreement
shall settle the differences without regard to majority of
votes.' When the 'going into parts,' (itio in partes) took
place each College deliberated in two bodies, the Corpus
Catholicorum and the Corpus Evangelicorum. The king no longer
attended the Imperial Diets in person, but sent commissioners
instead, and it was now the common practice of members of both
the upper Colleges to send deputies to represent them."
S. E. . Turner, Sketch of the Germanic
Constitution, chapter 4, 5, and 6.
"The establishment of a permanent diet, attended, not by the
electors in person, but by their representatives, is one of
the most striking peculiarities of Leopold's reign" (Leopold
I., 1657-1705). This came about rather accidentally than with
intention, as a consequence of the unusual prolongation of the
session of a general diet which Rudolph convoked at Ratisbon,
soon after his accession to the throne. "'So many new and
important objects ... occurred in the course of the
deliberations that the diet was unusually prolonged, and at
last rendered perpetual, as it exists at present, and
distinguishes the Germanic constitution as the only one of its
kind--not only for a certain length of time, as was formerly,
and as diets are generally held in other countries, where
there are national states; but the diet of the Germanic empire
was established by this event for ever. The diet acquired by
this circumstance an entirely different form. So long as it
was only of short duration, it was always expected that the
emperor, as well as the electors, princes, counts and
prelates, if not all, yet the greatest part of them, should
attend in person. ... It is true, it had long been customary
at the diets of Germany, for the states to deliver their votes
occasionally by means of plenipotentiaries; but it was then
considered only as an exception, whereas it was now
established as a general rule, that all the states should send
their plenipotentiaries, and never appear themselves. ... The
whole diet, therefore, imperceptibly acquired the form of a
congress, consisting solely of ministers, similar in a great
degree to a congress where several powers send their envoys to
treat of peace. In other respects, it may be compared to a
congress held in the name of several states in perpetual
alliance with each other, as in Switzerland, the United
Provinces, and as somewhat of a similar nature exists at
present in North America; but with this difference,--that in
Germany the assembly is held under the authority of one common
supreme head, and that the members do not appear merely as
deputies, or representatives invested with full power by their
principals, which is only the case with the imperial cities;
but so that every member of the two superior colleges of the
empire is himself an actual sovereign of a state, who permits
his minister to deliver his vote in his name and only
according to his prescription.'"
S. A. Dunham, History of the Germanic Empire,
book 3, chapter 3 (volume 3)--(quoting Putter's Historical
Development of the Germanic Constitution.)
Of the later Diet, of the Germanic Confederation, something
may be learned under GERMANY: A. D. 1814-1820, and 1848
(MARCH-SEPTEMBER).
----------DIET: End----------
DIFFIDATION, The Right of.
See LANDFRIEDE.
DIGITI.
See FOOT, THE ROMAN.
DIJON, Battle at.
See BURGUNDIANS: A. D. 500.
DIJON, Origin of.
Dijon, the old capital of the Dukes of Burgundy, was
originally a strong camp-city--an "urbs quadrata"--of the
Romans, known as the Castrum Divionense. Its walls were 30
feet high, 15 feet thick, and strengthened with 33 towers.
T. Hodgkin, Italy and Her Invaders, book 4, chapter 9.
DILEMITES, The.
See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST: A. D. 815-945.
DIMETIA.
See BRITAIN: 6th CENTURY.
DINAN, Battle of (1597).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1593-1598.
{662}
DINANT, Destruction of.
In the 15th century, down to the year 1466, Dinant was a
populous and thriving town. It was included in the little
state of the prince-bishop of Liege, and was involved in the
war of the Duke of Burgundy with Liege, which ruined both
Liege and Dinant. "It was inhabited by a race of industrious
artisans, preëminent for their skill in the manufacture of
copper. The excellence of their workmanship is attested by
existing specimens--organ-screens, baptismal fonts, and other
ecclesiastical decorations. But the fame of Dinant had been
chiefly spread by its production of more common and useful
articles, especially of kitchen utensils,--'pots and pans and
similar wares,'--which, under the name of 'Dinanderie,' were
known to housewives throughout Europe." In the course of the
war a party of rude young men from Dinant gave deep,
unforgivable provocation to the Duke of Burgundy by
caricaturing and questioning the paternity of his son, the
count of Charolais, afterwards Duke Charles the Bold. To
avenge this insult nothing less than the destruction of the
whole city would satisfy the implacable and ferocious
Burgundians. It was taken by the count of Charolais in August,
1466. His first proceeding was to sack the town, in the most
thorough and deliberate manner. Then 800 of the more obnoxious
citizens were tied together in pairs and drowned in the Meuse,
while others were hanged. This accomplished, the surviving
women, children and priests were expelled from the town and
sent empty-handed to Liege, while the men were condemned to
slavery, with the privilege of ransoming themselves at a heavy
price, if they found anywhere the means. Finally, the torch
was applied, Dinant was burned, and contractors were
subsequently employed by the Duke for several months, to
demolish the ruins and remove the very materials of which the
city had been built.
J. F. Kirk, History of Charles the Bold, book 1, chapter 8-9.
ALSO IN:
E. de Monstrelet (Johnes), Chronicles,
book 3, chapter 138-139.
Philip de Commines, Memoirs, book 2, chapter 1.
DINWIDDIE COURT HOUSE, Action at.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1865 (MARCH-APRIL: VIRGINIA).
DIOBOLY, The.
Pericles "was the proposer of the law [at Athens] which
instituted the 'Dioboly,' or free gift of two obols to each
poor citizen, to enable him to pay the entrance-money at the
theatre during the Dionysia."
C. W. C. Oman, History of Greece, page 271.
See ATHENS: B. C. 435-431.
DIOCESES OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE.
"The civil government of the empire was distributed [under
Constantine and his successors] into thirteen great dioceses,
each of which equalled the just measure of a powerful kingdom.
The first of these dioceses was subject to the jurisdiction of
the Count of the East. The place of Augustal Præfect of Egypt
was no longer filled by a Roman knight, but the name was
retained. ... The eleven remaining dioceses--of Asiana,
Pontica, and Thrace; of Macedonia, Dacia and Pannonia, or
Western Illyricum; of Italy and Africa; of Gaul, Spain, and
Britain--were governed by twelve vicars or vice-præfects."
E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 17.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
See PUÆTORIAN PRÆFECTS.
DIOCLETIAN, Roman Emperor.
See ROME: A. D. 284-305..
DIOCLETIAN: Abdication.
"The ceremony of his abdication was performed in a spacious
plain about three miles from Nicomedia [May 1, A. D. 305]. The
Emperor ascended a lofty throne, and, in a speech full of
reason and dignity, declared his intention, both to the people
and to the soldiers who were assembled on this extraordinary
occasion. As soon as lie had divested himself of the purple,
he withdrew from the gazing multitude, and, traversing the
city in a covered chariot, proceeded without delay to the
favourite retirement [Salona] which he had chosen in his
native country of Dalmatia."
E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 13.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
See, also, SALONA.
DIOKLÉS, Laws of.
A code of laws framed at Syracuse, immediately after the
Athenian siege, by a commission of ten citizens the chief of
whom was one Dioklês. These laws were extinguished in a few
years by the Dyonisian tyranny, but revived after a lapse of
sixty years. The code is "also said to have been copied in
various other Sicilian cities, and to have remained in force
until the absorption of all Sicily under the dominion of the
Romans."
G. Grote, History of Greece, part 2, chapter 81.
DIONYSIA AT ATHENS.
"The four principal Attik Dionysiak festivals were (1) the
Dionysia Mikra, the Lesser or Rural Dionysia; (2) the Dionysia
Lenaia; (3) the Anthesteria; and (4) the Dionysia Megala, the
Greater or City Dionysia. The Rural Dionysia, celebrated
yearly in the month Posideon (Dec.-January) throughout the
various townships of Attike, was presided over by the demarch
or mayor. The celebration occasioned a kind of rustic
carnival, distinguished like almost all Bakchik festivals, by
gross intemperance and licentiousness, and during which slaves
enjoyed a temporary freedom, with licence to insult their
superiors and behave in a boisterous and disorderly manner. It
is brought vividly before us in the 'Acharnes' of
Aristophanes. ... The Anthesteria, or Feast of Flowers,
celebrated yearly in the month Anthesterion (February-March), ...
lasted for three days, the first of which was called
Pithoigia, or Tap-barrel-day, on which they opened the casks
and tried the wine of the previous year. ... The Dionysia
Megala, the Greater or City Dionysia, celebrated yearly in the
month Elaphebolion (March-April) was presided over by the
Archon Eponymos, so-called because the year was registered in
his name, and who was first of the nine. The order of the
solemnities was as follows:
I. The great public procession.
II. The chorus of Youths.
III. The Komos, or band of Dionysiak revellers, whose
ritual is best illustrated in Milton's exquisite poem.
IV. The representation of Comedy and Tragedy; for at
Athenai the stage was religion and the theatre a temple.
At the time of this great festival the capital was filled with
rustics from the country townships, and strangers from all
parts of Hellas and the outer world."
R. Brown, The Great Dionysiak Myth, chapter 6.
DIONYSIAN TYRANNY AT SYRACUSE, The.
See SYRACUSE: B. C. 397-396, and 344.
DIPLAX, The.
See PEPLUM.
DIPYLUM, The.
See CERAMICUS OF ATHENS.
DIRECTORY, The French.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1795 (JUNE-SEPTEMBER);
(OCTOBER-DECEMBER); 1797 (SEPTEMBER).
{663}
DISINHERITED BARONS, The.
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1332-1333.
DISRAELI-DERBY AND BEACONSFIELD MINISTRIES.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1851-1852: 1858-1859;
1868-1870: and 1873-1880.
DISRUPTION OF THE CHURCH OF SCOTLAND.
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1843.
DISSENTERS, OR NONCONFORMISTS, English:
First bodies organized.
Persecutions under Charles II. and Anne.
Removal of Disabilities.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1559-1566; 1662-1665:
1672-1673: 1711-1714; 1827-1828.
DISTRIBUTION OF THE SURPLUS, The.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1835-1837.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, The.
See WASHINGTON (CITY): A. D. 1791.
DIVAN, The.
See SUBLIME PORTE.
DIVODURUM.
The Gallic name of the city afterwards called
Mediomatrici--now Metz.
DIVONA.
Modern Cahors.
See CADURCI.
DIWANI.
See INDIA: A. D. 1757-1772.
DIX, General John A.:
Message to New Orleans.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1860-1861 (DECEMBER-FEBRUARY).
DJEM, OR JEM, Prince, The Story of.
See TURKS: A. D. 1481-1520.
DOAB, The English acquisition of the.
See INDIA: A. D. 1798-1805.
DOBRIN, Knights of the Order of the Brethren of.
See PRUSSIA: 13TH CENTURY.
DOBRUDJA, The.
The peninsula formed between the Danube, near its mouth, and
the Black Sea.
DOBUNI, The.
A tribe of ancient Britons who held a region between the two
Avons.
See BRITAIN, CELTIC TRIBES.
DOCETISM.
"We note another phase of gnosticism in the doctrine so
directly and warmly combated in the epistles of John: we refer
to docetism--that is, the theory which refused to recognize
the reality of the human body of Christ."
E. Reuss, History of Christian Theology in the Apostolic
Age, page 323.
DODONA.
See HELLAS.
DOGE.
See VENICE: A. D. 697-810.
DOGGER BANKS, Naval Battle of the (1781).
See NETHERLANDS (HOLLAND): A. D. 1746-1787.
DOKIMASIA.
"All magistrates [in ancient Athens] whether elected by
cheirotonia or by lot, were compelled, before entering upon
their office, to subject themselves to a Dokimasia, or
scrutiny into their fitness for the post."
G. F. Schöman, Antiquity of Greece:
The State, part 3, chapter 3.
DÖLICHOCEPHALIC MEN.
A term used in ethnology, signifying "long-headed," as
distinguishing one class of skulls among the remains of
primitive men, from another class called brachycephalic, or
"broad-headed."
DOLLINGER, Doctor, and the dogma of Papal Infallibility.
See PAPACY: A. D. 1869-1870.
DOLMENS.
See CROMLECHS.
DOMESDAY, OR DOOMSDAY BOOK.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1085-1086.
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC, The.
See HAYTI: A. D. 1804-1880.
DOMINICANS.
See MENDICANT ORDERS:
also, INQUISITION: A. D. 1203-1525.
DOMINION OF CANADA.-DOMINION DAY.
See CANADA: A. D. 1867.
DOMINUS.
See IMPERATOR, FINAL SIGNIFICATION OF
THE ROMAN TITLE.
DOMITIAN, Roman Emperor, A. D. 81-96.
DOMITZ, Battle of (1635).
See GERMANY: A. D. 1634-1639.
DON JOHN OF AUSTRIA.
See JOHN (DON) OF AUSTRIA.
DON PACIFICO AFFAIR, The.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1849-1850;
and GREECE: A. D. 1846-1850.
DONALD BANE, King of Scotland, A. D. 1093-1098
(expelled during part of the period by Duncan II.)
DONATI, The.
See FLORENCE: A. D. 1295-1300, and 1301-1313.
DONATION OF CONSTANTINE.
See PAPACY: A. D. 774 (?).
DONATION OF THE COUNTESS MATILDA.
See PAPACY: A. D. 1077-1102.
DONATIONS OF PEPIN AND CHARLEMAGNE.
See PAPACY: A. D. 755-774.
DONATISTS, The.
"The Donatist controversy was not one of doctrine, but of
ecclesiastical discipline; the contested election for the
archbishopric of Carthage. Two competitors, Cecilius and
Donatus, had been concurrently elected while the church was
yet in a depressed state, and Africa subject to the tyrant
Maxentius [A. D. 306-312]. Scarcely had Constantine subdued
that province, when the two rivals referred their dispute to
him. Constantine, who still publicly professed paganism, but
had shown himself very favourable to the Christians,
instituted a careful examination of their respective claims,
which lasted from the year 312 to 315, and finally decided in
favour of Cecilius. Four hundred African bishops protested
against this decision; from that time they were designated by
the name of Donatists. ... In compliance with an order of the
emperor, solicited by Cecilius, the property of the Donatists
was seized and transferred to the antagonist body of the
clergy. They revenged themselves by pronouncing sentence of
excommunication against all the rest of the Christian world.
... Persecution on one side and fanaticism on the other were
perpetuated through three centuries, up to the period of the
extinction of Christianity in Africa. The wandering preachers
of the Donatist faction had no other means of living than the
alms of their flocks. ... As might be expected, they outdid
each other in extravagance, and soon gave in to the most
frantic ravings: thousands of peasants, drunk with the effect
of these exhortations, forsook their ploughs and fled to the
deserts of Getulia. Their bishops, assuming the title of
captains of the saints, put themselves at their head, and they
rushed onward, carrying death and desolation into the adjacent
provinces: they were distinguished by the name of
Circumcelliones: Africa was devastated by their ravages."
J. C. L. de Sismondi, Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 4.
ALSO IN:
P. Schaff, History of the Christian Church,
volume 2, chapter 6.
DONAUWÖRTH: A. D. 1632.
Taken by Gustavus Adolphus.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1631-1632.
DONAUWÖRTH: A. D. 1704.
Taken by Marlborough.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1704.
----------DONAUWÖRTH: End----------
DONELSON, Fort, Capture of.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1862 (JANUARY-FEBRUARY:
KENTUCKY-TENNESSEE).
{664}
DONGAN CHARTER, The.
See NEW YORK (CITY): A. D. 1686.
DONUM.
See TALLAGE.
DONUS I., Pope, A. D. 676-678.
Donus II., Pope, A. D. 974-975.
DONZELLO.
See DÂMOISEL.
DOOMS OF INE, The.
"These laws were republished by King Alfred as 'The Dooms of
Ine' who [Ine] came to the throne in A. D. 688. In their first
clause they claim to have been recorded by King Ine with the
counsel and teaching of his father Cenred and of Hedde, his
bishop (who was Bishop of Winchester from A. D. 676 to 705)
and of Eorcenweld, his bishop (who obtained the see of London
in 675); and so, if genuine, they seem to represent what was
settled customary law in Wessex during the last half of the
seventh century."
F. Seebohm, English Village Community, chapter 4.
DOOMSDAY, OR DOMESDAY BOOK.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1085-1086.
DOORANEES, OR DURANEES, The
See INDIA: A. D. 1747-1761.
DORDRECHT, OR DORT, Synod of.
See DORT;
also, NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1603-1619.
DORIA, Andrew, The deliverance of Genoa by.
See ITALY: A. D. 1527-1529.
DORIANS AND IONIANS, The.

"Out of the great Pelasgian population [see PELASGIANS], which
covered Anterior Asia Minor and the whole European peninsular
land, a younger people had issued forth separately, which we
find from the first divided into two races. These main races
we may call, according to the two dialects of the Greek
language, the Dorian and the Ionian, although these names are
not generally used until a later period to designate the
division of the Hellenic nation. No division of so thorough a
bearing could have taken place unless accompanied by an early
local separation. We assume that the two races parted company
while yet in Asia Minor. One of them settles in the
mountain-cantons of Northern Hellas, the other along the
Asiatic coast. In the latter the historic movement begins.
With the aid of the art of navigation, learnt from the
Phœnicians the Asiatic Greeks at an early period spread over
the sea; domesticating themselves in lower Egypt, in countries
colonized by the Phœnicians, in the whole Archipelago, from
Crete to Thrace; and from their original as well as from their
subsequent seats send out numerous settlements to the coast of
European Greece, first from the East side, next, after
conquering their timidity, also taking in the country, beyond
Cape Malea from the West. At first they land as pirates and
enemies, then proceed to permanent settlements in gulfs and
straits of the sea, and by the mouths of rivers, where they
unite with the Pelasgian population. The different periods of
this colonization may be judged of by the forms of divine
worship, and by the names under which the maritime tribes were
called by the natives. Their rudest appearance is as Carians;
as Leleges their influence is more beneficent and permanent."
Dr. E. Curtius, History of Greece, book 1, chapter 2.
In the view of Dr. Curtius, the later migration of Ionian
tribes from Southern Greece to the coasts of Asia
Minor,--which is an undoubted historic fact,--was really a
return "into the home of their ancestors"--"the ancient home
of the great Ionic race." Whether that be the true view or
not, the movement in question was connected, apparently, with
important movements among the Dorian Greeks in Greece itself.
These latter, according to all accounts, and the agreement of
all historians, were long settled in Thessaly, at the foot of
Olympus (see GREECE: THE MIGRATIONS). It was there that their
moral and political development began; there that they learned
to look at Olympus as the home of the gods, which all Greeks
afterwards learned to do from them. "The service rendered by
the Dorian tribe," says Dr. Curtius, "lay in having carried
the germs of national culture out of Thessaly, where the
invasion of ruder peoples disturbed and hindered their farther
growth, into the land towards the south, where these germs
received an unexpectedly new and grand development. ... A race
claiming descent from Heracles united itself in this
Thessalian coast-district with the Dorians and established a
royal dominion among them. Ever afterwards Heraclidæ and
Dorians remained together, but without ever forgetting the
original distinction between them. In their seats by Olympus
the foundations were laid of the peculiarity of the Dorians in
political order and social customs; at the foot of Olympus was
their real home."-
Dr. E. Curtius, History of Greece, book 1, chapter 4.
From the neighborhood of Olympus the Dorians moved southwards
and found another home in "the fertile mountain-recess between
Parnassus and Œta, ... the most ancient Doris known to us by
name." Their final movement was into Peloponnesus, which was
"the most important and the most fertile in consequences of
all the migrations of Grecian races, and which continued, even
to the latest periods to exert its influence upon the Greek
character." Thenceforwards the Dorians were the dominant race
in Peloponnesus, and to their chief state, Lacedæmonia, or
Sparta, was generally conceded the headship of the Hellenic
family. This Doric occupation of Peloponnesus, the period of
which is supposed to have been about 1100 B. C., no doubt
caused the Ionic migration from that part of Greece and
colonization of Asia Minor.
C. O. Müller, History and Antiquities of the Doric race,
book 1, chapter 3.
The subsequent division of the Hellenic world between Ionians
and Dorians is thus defined by Schömann: "To the Ionians
belong the inhabitants of Attica, the most important part of
the population of Eubœa, and the islands of the Ægean included
under the common name of Cyclades, as well as the colonists
both on the Lydian and Carian coasts of Asia Minor and in the
two larger islands Of Chios and Samos which lie opposite. To
the Dorians within the Peloponnese belong the Spartans, as
well as the dominant populations of Argos, Sicyon, Philus,
Corinth, Troezene and Epidaurus, together with the island of
Ægina; outside the Peloponnese, but nearest to it, were the
Megarid, and the small Dorian Tetrapolis [also called
Pentapolis and Tripolis] near Mount Parnassus; at a greater
distance were the majority of the scattered islands and a
large portion of the Carian coasts of Asia Minor and the
neighbouring islands, of which Cos and Rhodes were the most
important. Finally, the ruling portion of the Cretan
population was of Dorian descent."
G. F. Schömann, Antiquities of Greece:
The State, part 1, chapter 1.
See, also,
GREECE: THE MIGRATIONS; ASIA MINOR:
THE GREEK COLONIES; HERACLIDÆ; SPARTA;
and ÆOLIANS.
{665}
DORIS AND DRYOPIS.
"The little territory [in ancient Greece] called Doris and
Dryopis occupied the southern declivity of Mount Œta, dividing
Phokis on the north and northwest from the Ætolians, Ænianes
and Malians. That which was called Doris in the historical
times, and which reached in the times of Herodotus nearly as
far eastward as the Maliac gulf, is said to have formed a part
of what had been once called Dryopis; a territory which had
comprised the summit of Œta as far as the Sperchius,
northward, and which had been inhabited by an old Hellenic
tribe called Dryopes. The Dorians acquired their settlement in
Dryopis by gift from Hêraklês, who, along with the Malians (so
ran the legend), had expelled the Dryopes and compelled them
to find for themselves new seats at Hermionê, and Asinê, in
the Argolic peninsula of Peloponnesus,--at Styra and Karystus
in Eubœa,--and in the island of Kythnus; it is only in these
five last-mentioned places that history recognizes them. The
territory of Doris was distributed into four little
townships,--Pindus, or Akyphas, Bœon, Kytinion and Erineon.
... In itself this tetrapolis is so insignificant that we
shall rarely find occasion to mention it; but it acquired a
factitious consequence by being regarded as the metropolis of
the great Dorian cities in Peloponnesus, and receiving on that
ground special protection from Sparta."
G. Grote, History of Greece, part 2, chapter 3.
ALSO IN:
C. O. Müller, History and Antiquity of the Doric Race,
book 1, chapter 2.
See also, DORIANS AND IONIANS.
DORMANS, Battle of (1575).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1573-1576.
DORNACH, Battle of (1499).
See SWITZERLAND: A. D. 1396-1499.
DORR REBELLION, The.
See RHODE ISLAND: A. D. 1841-1843.
DORT, OR DORDRECHT, The Synod of.
"In the low-countries the supreme government, the
states-general, interfered [in the Calvinistic controversy],
and in the year 1618 convoked the first and only synod bearing
something of the character of a general council that has been
convened by protestants. It assembled at Dort, and continued
its sittings from November till May following. Its business
was to decide the questions at issue between the Calvinists
and Arminians; the latter party were also termed remonstrants.
James [I.] was requested to send over representatives for the
English Church, and chose four divines:--Carlton bishop of
Llandaff, Hall dean of Worcester, afterwards bishop
successively of Exeter and Norwich, Davenant afterwards bishop
of Salisbury, and Dr. S. Ward of Cambridge. They were men of
learning and moderation. ... The history of this famous synod
is told in various ways. Its decisions were in favour of the
doctrines termed Calvinistic, and the remonstrants were
expelled from Holland. ... The majority were even charged by
the other party with having bound themselves by an oath before
they entered upon business, to condemn the remonstrants."
J. B. Marsden, History of Early Puritans, page 329.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1603-1619.
DORYLAEUM, Battle of (1097).
See CRUSADES: A. D. 1096-1099.
DOUAI: A. D.1667.
Taken by the French.
See NETHERLANDS (THE SPANISH PROVINCES): A. D. 1667.
DOUAI: A. D. 1668.
Ceded to France.
See NETHERLANDS (HOLLAND): A. D. 1668.
DOUAI: A. D. 1710.
Siege and capture by Marlborough.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1710-1712.
----------DOUAI: End----------
DOUAI, The Catholic Seminary at.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1572-1603.
DOUBLOON.-DOBLON.
See SPANISH COINS.
DOUGHFACES.
The "Missouri Compromise," of 1820, in the United States, "was
a Northern measure, carried by Northern votes. With some the
threats of disunion were a sufficient influence; some, whom in
the debate Randolph [John Randolph, of Virginia] called
doughfaces, did not need even that. ... There has been always
a singular servility in the character of a portion of the
American people. In that class the slaveholder has always
found his Northern servitor. Randolph first gave it a name to
live by in the term doughface."
W. C. Bryant and S. H. Gay, Popular History of the
United States, volume 4, pages 270 and 294.
DOUGLAS, Stephen A.,
and the doctrine of Squatter Sovereignty.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1854.
Defeat in Presidential election.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1860 (APRIL.-NOVEMBER).
DOURO, Battle of the (1580).
See PORTUGAL: A. D. 1579-1580.
Wellington's passage of the.
See SPAIN: A. D. 1809 (FEBRUARY-JULY).
DOVER, Roman Origin of.
See DUBRIS
DOVER, Tennessee, Battle at.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1863 (FEBRUARY-APRIL: TENNESSEE).
DOVER, Treaty of.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1668-1670.
DOWLAH, Surajah, and the English in India.
See INDIA: A. D. 1755-1757, and 1757.
DRACHMA.
See TALENT.
DRACONIAN LAWS.
See ATHENS: B. C. 624.
DRAFT RIOTS, The.
See NEW YORK (CITY): A. D. 1863.
DRAGON.--PENDRAGON.
A title sometimes given in Welsh poetry to a king or great
military leader. Supposed to be derived from the figure of a
dragon on their flags, which they borrowed from the Romans.
See CUMBRIA.
DRAGONNADES, The.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1681-1698.
DRAKE'S PIRACIES, and his famous voyage.
See AMERICA: A. D. 1572-1580.
DRANGIANS, The.
See SARANGIANS.
DRAPIER'S LETTERS, The.
See IRELAND: A. D. 1722-1724.
DRAVIDIAN RACES.
See TURANIAN RACES;
also, INDIA: THE ABORIGINAL INHABITANTS.
DRED SCOTT CASE, The.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1857.
DREPANA, Naval battle at, B. C. 249.
See PUNIC WAR, THE FIRST.
DRESDEN: A. D. 1756.
Capture and occupation by Frederick the Great.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1756.
DRESDEN: A. D. 1759-1760.
Capture by the Austrians.
Bombardment by Frederick.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1759 (JULY-NOVEMBER), and 1760.
DRESDEN: A. D. 1813.
Occupied by the Prussians and Russians.
Taken by the French.
Invested by the Allies.
Great battle before the city and victory for Napoleon.
French reverses.
St Cyr's surrender.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1812-1813;
1813 (APRIL-MAY); (AUGUST);
(SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER);
and (OCTOBER-DECEMBER).
----------DRESDEN: End----------
{666}
DRESDEN, Treaty of.
See AUSTRIA: A. D. 1744-1745.
DREUX, Battle of (1562).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1560-1563.
DROGHEDA, OR TREDAH,
Cromwell's massacre at.
See IRELAND: A. D. 1649-1650.
DROITWICH, Origin of.
See SALINÆ.
DROMONES.
A name given to the light galleys of the Byzantine empire.
E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 53.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
DRUIDS.
The priesthood of a religion which existed among the Celts of
Gaul and Britain before they were Christianized. "Greek and
Roman writers give us very little information on this subject
and the early Welsh records and poetry none at all. Modern
Welsh writers have, however, made up for this want in their
genuine literature by inventing an elaborate Druidical system
of religion and philosophy which, they pretend, survived the
introduction of Christianity and was secretly upheld by the
Welsh bards in the Middle Ages. This Neo-Druidic imposture has
found numerous adherents."
W. K. Sullivan, Article, "Celtic Literature,"
Encyclopedia Britannica.
"Pliny, alluding to the Druids' predilection for groves of
oak, adds the words: 'ut inde appellati quoque interpretatione
Græca possint Druidæ videri.' ... Had he possessed knowledge
enough of the Gaulish language, he would have seen that it
supplied an explanation which rendered it needless to have
recourse to Greek, namely in the native word 'dru,' which we
have in 'Drunemeton,' or the sacred Oak-grove, given by Strabo
as the name of the place of assembly of the Galatians. In
fact, one has, if I am not mistaken, been skeptic with regard
to this etymology, not so much on phonological grounds as from
failing exactly to see how the oak could have given its name
to such a famous organization as the druidic one must be
admitted to have been. But the parallels just indicated, as
showing the importance of the sacred tree in the worship of
Zeus and the gods representing him among nations other than
the Greek one, help to throw some light on this point.
According to the etymology here alluded to, the Druids would
be the priests of the god associated or identified with the
oak; that is, as we are told, the god who seemed to those who
were familiar with the pagan theology of the Greeks, to stand
in the same position in Gaulish theology that Zeus did in the
former. This harmonizes thoroughly with all that is known
about the Druids."
J. Rhys, Hibbert Lectures., 1886, on Celtic
Heathendom, lecture 2, part. 2.
"Our traditions of the Scottish and Irish Druids are evidently
derived from a time when Christianity had long been
established. These insular Druids are represented as being
little better than conjurors, and their dignity is as much
diminished as the power of the king is exaggerated. ... He is
a Pharaoh or Belshazzar with a troop of wizards at his
command; but his Druids are sorcerers and rain-doctors. ...
The Druids of Strabo's description walked in scarlet and gold
brocade and wore golden collars and bracelets; but their
doctrines may have been much the same as those of the
soothsayers by the Severn, the Irish medicine-men or those
rustic wizards by the Loire. ... After the conversion of
Ireland was accomplished the Druids disappear from history.
Their mystical powers were transferred without much alteration
to the abbots and bishops who ruled the 'families of the
saints.'"
C. Elton, Origins of English History, chapter 10.
ALSO IN:
Julius Cæsar, Gallic War, book 6, chapters 13-18.
Strabo, Geography, book 4, chapter 4, sections 4-6.
For an account of the final destruction of the Druids, in
their last retreat, on the island of Mona, or Anglesey,
See BRITAIN: A. D. 61.
DRUMCLOG, The Covenanters at.
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1679 (MAY-JUNE).
DRURY'S BLUFF, Battle of.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1864 (MAY: VIRGINIA)
THE ARMY OF THE JAMES.
DRUSUS, Germanic campaigns of.
See GERMANY: B. C. 12-9.
DRYOPIANS, The.
One of the aboriginal nations of ancient Greece, whose
territory was in the valley of the Spercheus and extended as
far as Parnassus and Thermopylæ; but who were afterwards
widely dispersed in many colonies. It is, says C. O. Müller,
"historically certain that a great part of the Dryopians were
consecrated as a subject people to the Pythian Apollo (an
usage of ancient times, of which there are many instances) and
that for a long time they served as such."
History and Antiquity of the Doric Race,
book 1, chapter 2.
See, also, DORIS; and HIERODULI.
DUBARRY, Countess, Ascendancy of.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1723-1774.
DUBH GALLS.
See IRELAND: 9TH-10TH CENTURIES.
DUBIENKA, Battle of(1792).
See POLAND: A. D. 1791-1792.
DUBITZA: Taken by the Austrians (1787).
See TURKS: A. D. 1776-1792.
DUBLIN: The Danish Kingdom.
See IRELAND: 9TH-10TH CENTURIES:
also NORMANS.
NORTHMEN: 8TH-9TH CENTURIES.
DUBLIN: A. D. 1014.
The battle of Clontarf and the great defeat of the Danes.
See IRELAND: A. D. 1014.
DUBLIN: A. D. 1170
Taken by the Norman-English.
See IRELAND: A. D. 1169-1175.
DUBLIN: A. D. 1646-1649.
Sieges in the Civil War.
See IRELAND: A. D. 1646-1649.
DUBLIN: A. D. 1750.
The importance of the city.
"In the middle of the 18th century it was in dimensions and
population the second city in the empire, containing,
according to the most trustworthy accounts, between 100,000
and 120,000 inhabitants. Like most things in Ireland, it
presented vivid contrasts, and strangers were equally struck
with the crowds of beggars, the inferiority of the inns, the
squalid wretchedness of the streets of the old town, and with
the noble proportions of the new quarter, and the brilliant
and hospitable society that inhabited it. The Liffey was
spanned by four bridges, and another on a grander scale was
undertaken in 1753. St. Stephen's Green was considered the
largest square in Europe. The quays of Dublin were widely
celebrated."
W. E. H. Lecky, History of England,
18th Century, chapter 7 (volume 2).
----------DUBLIN: End----------
DUBRIS, OR DUBRÆ.
The Roman port on the east coast of Britain which is now known
as Dover. In Roman times, as now, it was the principal
landing-place on the British side of the channel.
T. Wright, Celt, Roman and Saxon, chapter 5.
{667}
DUCAT, Spanish.
See SPANISH COINS.
DUCES.
See COUNT AND DUKE.
DUDLEY, Thomas,
and the colony of Massachusetts Bay.
See MASSACHUSETTS: A. D. 1629-1630, and after.
DUFFERIN, Lord.
The Indian Administration of.
See INDIA: A. D. 1880-1888.
DU GUESCLIN'S CAMPAIGNS:
See FRANCE: A. D. 1360-1380.
DUKE, The Roman.
Origin of the title.
See COUNT AND DUKE.
DUKE'S LAWS, The.
See NEW YORK: A. D. 1665.
DULGIBINI AND CHASAURI, The.
"These people [tribes of the ancient Germans] first resided
near the head of the Lippe, and then removed to the
settlements of the Chamavi and the Angrevarii, who had
expelled the Bructeri."
Tacitus, Germany, chapter 34, Oxford trans., note.
See also, SAXONS.
DUMBARTON, Origin of.
See ALCLYDE.
DUMBARTON CASTLE, Capture of (1571).
Dumbarton Castle, held by the party of Mary Queen of Scots, in
the civil war which followed her deposition and detention in
England, was captured in 1571, for the regent Lennox, by an
extraordinary act of daring on the part of one Capt. Crawford.
P. F. Tytler, History of Scotland, volume 3, chapter 10.
DUMNONIA, OR DAMNONIA, The kingdom of.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 477-527.
DUMNONII, The.
"It is ... a remarkable circumstance that the Dumnonii, whom
we find in the time of Ptolemy occupying the whole of the
southwestern extremity of Britain, including both Devonshire
and Cornwall, and who must therefore have been one of the most
powerful nations in the island, are never once mentioned in
the history of the conquest of the country by the Romans; nor
is their name found in any writer before Ptolemy. ... The
conjecture of Mr. Beale Poste . . . that they were left in
nominal independence under a native king ... appears to me
highly probable."
E. H. Bunbury, History of Ancient Geography,
chapter 23, note B.
There appears to have been a northern branch of the Dumnonii
or Damnonii, which held an extensive territory on the Clyde
and the Forth.
See BRITAIN, CELTIC TRIBES.
DUMOURIEZ, Campaigns and treason of.
See FRANCE:
A. D. 1792 (SEPTEMBER-DECEMBER);
1792-1793; and 1793 (FEBRUARY-APRIL).
DUNBAR: A. D. 1296.-Battle.
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1290-1305.
DUNBAR: A. D. 1339. Siege.
The fortress of Dunbar, besieged by the English under the Earl
of Salisbury in 1339, was successfully defended in the absence
of the governor, the Earl of March, by his wife, known
afterwards in Scotch history and tradition as "Black Agnes of
Dunbar."
DUNBAR: A. D. 1650.-Battle.
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1650 (SEPTEMBER).
----------DUNBAR: End----------
DUNCAN I.,
King of Scotland, A. D. 1033-1039..
Duncan II., A. D. 1094-1095.
DUNDALK, Battle of (1318).
See IRELAND: A. D. 1314-1318.
DUNDEE (CLAVERHOUSE) AND THE COVENANTERS.
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1679 (MAY-JUNE);
1681-1689; and 1689 (JULY).
DUNDEE: A. D. 1645.
Pillaged by Montrose.
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1644-1645.
DUNDEE: A. D. 1651.
Storm and massacre by Monk.
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1651 (AUGUST'--SEPTEMBER).
----------DUNDEE: End----------
DUNES, Battle of the (1658).
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1655-1658.
DUNKELD, Battle of.
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1689 (AUGUST).
DUNKIRK: A. D. 1631.
Unsuccessful siege by the Dutch.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1621-1633.
DUNKIRK: A. D. 1646.
Siege and capture by the French.
Importance of the port.
Its harborage of pirates.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1645-1646.
DUNKIRK: A. D. 1652.
Recovered by the Spaniards.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1652.
DUNKIRK: A. D. 1658.
Acquired by Cromwell for England.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1655-1658;
and FRANCE: A. D. 1655-1658.
DUNKIRK: A. D. 1662.
Sold by Charles II. to France.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1662.
DUNKIRK: A. D. 1713.
Fortifications and harbor destroyed.
See UTRECHT: A. D. 1712-1713.
DUNKIRK: A. D. 1748.
Demolition of fortifications again stipulated.
See AIX-LA-CHAPELLE: THE CONGRESS.
DUNKIRK: A. D. 1763.
The demolition of fortifications pledged once more.
See SEVEN YEARS WAR: THE TREATIES.
DUNKIRK: A. D. 1793.
Unsuccessful siege by the English.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1793 (JULY-DECEMBER);
PROGRESS OF THE WAR.
----------DUNKIRK: End----------
DUNMORE, Lord,
and the end of royal government in Virginia.
See VIRGINIA: A. D. 1775 (JUNE); and 1775-1776.
DUNMORE'S WAR.
See OHIO (VALLEY): A. D. 1774.
DUNNICHEN, Battle of (A. D. 685).
See SCOTLAND: 7TH CENTURY.
DUPLEIX AND THE FRENCH IN INDIA.
See INDIA: A. D. 1743-1752.
DUPONT, Admiral Samuel F.
Naval attack on Charleston.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1863 (APRIL: SOUTH CAROLINA).
DÜPPEL, Siege and capture of (1864).
See GERMANY: A. D. 1861-1866.
DUPPELN, Battle of (1848).
See SCANDINAVIAN STATES (DENMARK):
A. D. 1848-1862.
DUPPLIN MOOR, Battle of (1332).
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1332-1333.
DUQUESNE, Fort.
See PITTSBURGH.
DURA, Treaty of.
The humiliating treaty of peace concluded with the Persians,
A. D. 363, after the defeat and death of the Roman emperor
Julian, by his successor Jovian.
G. Rawlinson, Seventh Great Oriental Monarchy chapter 10.
DURANEES, OR DOORANEES, The.
See INDIA: A. D. 1747-1761.
DURAZZO, Neapolitan dynasty of.
See ITALY (SOUTHERN): A. D. 1343-1389; 1386-1414,
and ITALY: A. D. 1412-1447.
DURBAR, OR DARBAR.
An audience room in the palace of an East Indian prince. Hence
applied to a formal audience or levee given by the
governor-general of India, or by one of the native princes.
Century Dictionary
DURHAM, OR NEVILLE'S CROSS, Battle of (A. D. 1346).
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1333-1370.
{668}
DUROBRIVÆ.
A name given to two Roman towns in Britain; one of which has
been identified with modern Rochester, the other with the town
of Castor, near Peterborough.
DUROBRIVIAN WARE.
See CASTOR WARE.
DUROCOBRIVÆ.
An important market-town in Roman Britain, supposed to have
been situated at or near modern Dunstable.
T. Wright, Celt, Roman and Saxon, chapter 5.
DUROTRIGES.
One of the tribes of ancient Britain whose home was in the
modern county of Dorset.
See BRITAIN, CELTIC TRIBES.
DUROVERNUM.
A Roman town in Britain, identified with the modern
Canterbury. Durovernum was destroyed by the Jutes in 455.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 449-473.
DUTCH EAST INDIA COMPANY.
See EAST INDIA COMPANY, THE DUTCH.
DUTCH GAP CANAL.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1864 (AUGUST: VIRGINIA).
DUTCH REPUBLIC,
The constitution and declared independence of the.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1577-1581, and 1584-1585.
DUTCH WEST INDIA COMPANY.
See NEW YORK: A. D. 1621-1646;
and BRAZIL: A. D. 1510-1661.
DÜTLINGEN, OR TUTTLINGEN, Battle of (1643).
See GERMANY: A. D. 1643-1644.
DYAKS, OR DAYAKS, The.
See MALAYAN RACE.
DYRRHACHIUM: The founding of.
See KORKYRA.
DYRRHACHIUM: Provoking cause of the Peloponnesian War.
See GREECE: B. C. 435-432.
DYRRHACHIUM: B. C. 48.
Cæsar's reverse.
See ROME: B. C. 48.
DYRRHACHIUM: A. D. 1081-1082.
Siege by Robert Guiscard.
See BYZANTINE EMPIRE: A. D. 1081-1085.
DYRRHACHIUM: A. D. 1204.
Acquired by the Despot of Epirus.
See EPIRUS: A. D. 1204-1350.
----------DYRRHACHIUM: End----------
DYRRHACHIUM, Peace of.
See GREECE: B. C. 214-146.
DYVED.
See BRITAIN: 6TH CENTURY.
E.
EADMUND, EADWINE, ETC.
See EDMUND, ETC.
EALDORMAN.
"The chieftains of the first settlers in our own island bore
no higher title than Ealdorman or Heretoga. ... The name of
Ealdorman is one of a large class; among a primitive people
age implies command and command implies age; hence in a
somewhat later stage of language the elders are simply the
rulers and the eldest are the highest in rank, without any
thought of the number of years which they may really have
lived. It is not perfectly clear in what the authority or
dignity of the King exceeded that of the Ealdorman. ... Even
the smallest Kingdom was probably formed by the union of the
districts of several Ealdormen."
E. A. Freeman, Norman Conquest, chapter 3, section 1.
"The organisation of the shire was of much the same character
as that of the hundred [each shire containing, however, a
number of hundreds], but it was ruled by an ealdorman as well
as by a gerefa, and in some other respects bore evidence of
its previous existence as an independent unity. Its gemot was
not only the scir-gemot but the folc-gemot also, the assembly
of the people; its ealdorman commanded not merely the military
force of the hundreds, but the lords of the franchises and the
church vassals with their men. Its gerefa or sheriff collected
the fiscal us well as the local imposts. Its ealdorman was one
of the king's witan. The ealdorman, the princeps of Tacitus,
and princeps, or satrapa, or subregulus of Bede, the dux of
the Latin chroniclers and the comes of the Normans, was
originally elected in the general assembly of the nation. ...
The hereditary principle appears however in the early days of
the kingdom as well as in those of Edward the Confessor; in
the case of an under-kingdom being annexed to a greater the
old royal dynasty seems to have continued to hand down its
delegated authority from father to son. The under-kings of
Hwiccia thus continued to act as ealdormen under Mercia for a
century; and the ealdormanship of the Gyrwas or fen-countrymen
seems likewise to have been hereditary. The title of ealdorman
is thus much older than the existing division of shires, nor
was it ever the rule for every shire to have an ealdorman to
itself as it had its sheriff. ... But each shire was under an
ealdorman, who sat with the sheriff and bishop in the
folkmoot, received a third part of the profits of the
jurisdiction, and commanded the military force of the whole
division. From the latter character he derived the name of
heretoga, leader of the host ('here'), or dux, which is
occasionally given him in charters."
William Stubbs, Constitutional History of England,
chapter 5, sections. 48-49.
EARL.
"The title of earl had begun to supplant that of ealdorman in
the reign of Ethelred; and the Danish jarl, from whom its use
in this sense was borrowed, seems to have been more certainly
connected by the tie of comitatus with his king than the
Anglo-Saxon ealdorman need be supposed to have been."
William Stubbs, Constitutional History of England,
chapter 6, section 66.
See, also, EORL and EALDORMAN.
EARLDOMS, English:
Canute's creation.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1016-1042.
EARLDOMS:
The Norman change.
See PALATINE, THE ENGLISH COUNTIES.
----------EARLDOMS: End----------
EARLY, General Jubal, Campaigns in the Shenandoah.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1864 (MAY-JUNE: VIRGINIA);
(JULY: VIRGINIA-MARYLAND);
(AUGUST-OCTOBER: VIRGINIA);
and 1865 (FEBRUARY-MARCH: VIRGINIA).
EARTHQUAKE: B. C. 464.
Sparta.
See MESSENIAN WAR, THE THIRD.
EARTHQUAKE: A. D. 115.
At Antioch.
See ANTIOCH: A. D. 115.
EARTHQUAKE: A. D. 365.
In the Roman world.
"In the second year of the reign of Valentinian and Valens [A.
D. 365], on the morning of the 21st day of July, the greater
part of the Roman world was shaken by a violent and
destructive earthquake. The impression was communicated to the
waters; the shores of the Mediterranean were left dry by the
sudden retreat of the sea. ... But the tide soon returned with
the weight of an immense and irresistible deluge, which was
severely felt on the coasts of Sicily, of Dalmatia, of Greece
and of Egypt. ... The city of Alexandria annually commemorated
the fatal day on which 50,000 persons had lost their lives in
the inundation."
E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 26.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
{669}
EARTHQUAKE: A. D. 526.
In the reign of Justinian.
See ANTIOCH: A. D. 526;
also, BERYTUS.
EARTHQUAKE: A. D. 1692.
In Jamaica.
See JAMAICA: A. D. 1692.
EARTHQUAKE: A. D. 1755.
At Lisbon.
See LISBON: A. D. 1755.
EARTHQUAKE: A. D. 1812.
In Venezuela.
See COLOMBIAN STATES: A. D. 1810-1819.
----------EARTHQUAKE: End----------
EAST AFRICA ASSOCIATIONS, British and German.
See AFRICA: A.. D. 1884-1889.
EAST ANGLIA.
The kingdom formed in Britain by that body of the Angles which
settled in the eastern district now embraced in the counties
of Norfolk and Suffolk (North-folk and South-folk).
EAST INDIA COMPANY,
The Dutch: A. D. 1602.
Its formation and first enterprises.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1594-1620.
EAST INDIA COMPANY: A. D. 1652.
Settlement at Cape of Good Hope.
See SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1486-1806.
EAST INDIA COMPANY: A. D. 1799.
Its dissolution.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1799 (SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER).
----------EAST INDIA COMPANY (DUTCH): End----------
EAST INDIA COMPANY, The English: A. D. 1600-1702.
Its rise and early undertakings.
See INDIA: A. D. 1600-1702.
EAST INDIA COMPANY: A. D. 1773.
Constitution of the Company changed by the Acts of Lord North.
See INDIA: A. D. 1770-1773.
EAST INDIA COMPANY: A. D. 1813-1833.-
Deprived of its monopoly of trade.
Reconstitution of government.
See INDIA: A. D. 1823-1833.
EAST INDIA COMPANY: A. D. 1858.
The end of its rule.
See INDIA: A. D. 1858.
----------EAST INDIA COMPANY (ENGLISH): End----------
EAST INDIA COMPANY, The French.
See INDIA: A. D. 1665-1743.
EAST INDIES, Portuguese in the.
See INDIA: A. D. 1498-1580.
EASTERN CHURCH, The.
See CHRISTIANITY: A. D. 330-1054.
EASTERN EMPIRE, The.
See ROME: 717-800;
and BYZANTINE EMPIRE.
EASTERN QUESTION, The.
"For a number of generations in Europe there has been one
question that, carelessly or maliciously touched upon, has
never failed to stimulate strife and discord among the
nations. This is 'the Eastern Question,' the problem how to
settle the disputes, political and religious, in the east of
Europe."
H. Murdock, The Reconstruction of Europe, page 17.
The first occasion in European politics on which the problems
of the Ottoman empire received the name of the Eastern
Question seems to have been that connected with the revolt of
Mehemet Ali in 1831 (see TURKS: A. D. 1831-1840). M. Guizot,
in his "Memoirs," when referring to that complication, employs
the term, and remarks: "I say the Eastern Question, for this
was in fact the name given by all the world to the quarrel
between the Sultan Mahmoud, and his subject the Pacha of
Egypt, Mehemet Ali. Why was this sounding title applied to a
local contest? Egypt is not the whole Ottoman empire. The
Ottoman empire is not the entire East. The rebellion, even the
dismemberment of a province, cannot comprise the fate of a
sovereignty. The great states of Western Europe have
alternately lost or acquired, either by internal dissension or
war, considerable territories; yet under the aspect of these
circumstances no one has spoken of the Western question. Why
then has a term never used in the territorial crises of
Christian Europe, been considered and admitted to be perfectly
natural and legitimate when the Ottoman empire is in argument?
It is that there is at present in the Ottoman empire no local
or partial question. If a shock is felt in a corner of the
edifice, if a single stone is detached, the entire building
appears to be, and is in fact, ready to fall. ... The Egyptian
question was in 1839 the question of the Ottoman empire
itself. And the question of the Ottoman empire is in reality
the Eastern question, not only of the European but of the
Asiatic East; for Asia is now the theatre of the leading
ambitions and rivalries of the great powers of Europe; and the
Ottoman empire is the highway, the gate, and the key of Asia."
F. P. Guizot, Memoirs to Illustrate the History of My Own
Time, volume 4, page 322.
The several occasions since 1840 on which the Eastern Question
has troubled Europe may be found narrated under the following
captions:
RUSSIA: A. D. 1853-1854, to 1854-1856;
TURKS: A. D. 1861-1877, 1877-1878, and 1878;
also BALKAN AND DANUBIAN STATES.
Among English writers, the term "the Eastern Question" has
acquired a larger meaning, which takes in questions connected
with the advance of Russia upon the Afghan and Persian
frontiers.
Duke of Argyll, The Eastern Question.
See AFGHANISTAN: A. D. 1860-1881.
EATON, Dorman B., and Civil-Service Reform.
See CIVIL-SERVICE REFORM IN THE UNITED STATES.
EBBSDORF, OR LUNEBURG HEATH, Battle of.
A great and disastrous battle of the Germans with the Danes,
or Northmen, fought February 2, 880. The Germans were terribly
beaten, and nearly all who survived the fight were swept away
into captivity and slavery. The slain received "martyrs'
honours; and their commemoration was celebrated in the
Sachsen-land churches till comparatively recent times. An
unexampled sorrow was created throughout Saxony by this
calamity, which, for a time, exhausted the country;
--Scandinavia and Jutland and the Baltic isles resounded with
exultation."
Sir F. Palgrave, History of Normandy and England,
book 1, chapter 4.
EBBSFLEET.
The supposed first landing-place in Britain of the Jutes,
under Hengest, A. D. 449 or 450, when English history, as
English, begins. It was also the landing-place, A. D. 597, of
Augustine and his fellow missionaries when they entered the
island to undertake the conversion of its new inhabitants to
Christianity. Ebbsfleet is in the Isle of Thanet, at the mouth
of the Thames.
See ENGLAND: 449-473, and 597-685.
EBERSBURG, Battle of.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1809 (JANUARY-JUNE).
EBIONISM.
The heresy (so branded) of a sect of Jewish Christians, which
spread somewhat extensively in the second, third and fourth
centuries. "The characteristic marks of Ebionism in all its
forms are: degradation of Christianity to the level of
Judaism; the principle of the universal and perpetual validity
of the Mosaic law; and enmity to the apostle Paul." The name
of the Ebionites came from a Hebrew word signifying "poor."
P. Schaff, History of the Christian Church,
second period, chapter 4, section 68.
{670}
EBLANI, The.
See IRELAND, TRIBES OF EARLY CELTIC INHABITANTS.
EBORACUM, OR EBURACUM.
The military capital of Roman Britain, and afterwards of the
Anglian kingdoms of Deira and Northumbria. In Old English its
name became Eorforwick, whence, by further corruption,
resulted the modern English name York. The city was one of
considerable splendor in Roman times, containing the imperial
palace with many temples and other imposing buildings.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 457-633.
EBURONES, Destruction of the.
The Eburones were a strong Germanic tribe, who occupied in
Cæsar's time the country between Liége and Cologne, and whose
ancestors were said to have formed part of the great migrant
horde of the Cimbri and Teutones. Under a young chief,
Ambiorix, they had taken the lead in the formidable revolt
which occurred among the Belgic tribes, B. C. 54-53. Cæsar,
when he had suppressed the revolt, determined to bring
destruction on the Eburones, and he executed his purpose in a
singular manner. He circulated a proclamation through all the
neighboring parts of Gaul and Germany, declaring the Eburones
to be traitors to Rome and outlaws, and offering them and
their goods as common prey to any who would fall on them. This
drew the surrounding barbarians like vultures to a feast, and
the wretched Eburones were soon hunted out of existence. Their
name disappeared from the annals of Gaul.
C. Merivale, History of the Romans, chapter 10.
ALSO IN:
Cæsar, Gallic Wars,
book 5, chapter 25-58; book 6, chapters 1-34.
G. Long, Decline of the Roman Republic,
volume 4, chapters 13-14.
See, also, BELGÆ.
ECBATANA.
"The Southern Ecbatana or Agbatana,--which the Medes and
Persians themselves knew as Hagmatán,--was situated, as we
learn from Polybius and Diodorus, on a plain at the foot of
Mount Orontes, a little to the east of the Zagros range. The
notices of these authors ... and others, render it as nearly
certain as possible that the site was that of the modern town
of Hamadan. ... The Median capital has never yet attracted a
scientific expedition. ... The chief city of northern Media,
which bore in later times the names of Gaza, Gazaca, or
Canzaca, is thought to have been also called Ecbatana, and to
have been occasionally mistaken by the Greeks for the southern
or real capital."
G. Rawlinson, Five Great Monarchies: Media, chapter 1.
ECCELINO, OR EZZELINO DI ROMANO,
The tyranny of, and the crusade against.
See VERONA: A. D. 1236-1259.
ECCLESIA.
The general legislative assembly of citizens in ancient Athens
and Sparta.
G. F. Schömann, Antiquity of Greece: The State, part 3.
ALSO IN:
G. Grote, History of Greece, chapter 31.
See ATHENS: B. C. 445-429.
ECCLESIASTICAL TITLES BILL, The.
See PAPACY: A. D. 1850.
ECENI, OR ICENI, The.
See BRITAIN: A. D. 61.
ECGBERHT, King of Wessex, A. D. 800-836.
ECKMÜHL, Battle of.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1809 (JANUARY-JUNE).
ECNOMUS, Naval battle of (B. C. 256).
See PUNIC WAR, THE FIRST.
ECORCHEURS, Les.
In the later period of the Hundred Years War, after the death
of the Maid of Orleans, when the English were being driven
from France and the authority of the king was not yet
established, lawless violence prevailed widely. "Adventurers
spread themselves over the provinces under a name, 'the
Skinners,' Les Ecorcheurs, which sufficiently betokens the
savage nature of their outrages, if we trace it to even its
mildest derivation, stripping shirts, not skins."
E. Smedley, History of France, part 1, chapter 14.
ECTHESIS OF HERACLIUS.
See MONOTHELITE CONTROVERSY.
ÉCU, The order of the.
See BOURBON, THE HOUSE OF.
ECUADOR: Aboriginal inhabitants.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ANDESIANS.
ECUADOR:
The aboriginal kingdom of Quito and its conquest by the
Peruvians and the Spaniards.
"Of the old Quitu nation which inhabited the highlands to the
north and south of the present capital, nothing is known to
tradition but the name of its last king, Quitu, after whom his
subjects were probably called. His domains were invaded and
conquered by the nation of the Caras, or Carans, who had come
by sea in balsas (rafts) from parts unknown. These Caras, or
Carans, established the dynasty of the Scyris at Quito, and
extended their conquests to the north and south, until checked
by the warlike nation of the Puruhas, who inhabited the
present district of Riobamba. ... In the reign of Hualcopo
Duchicela, the 13th Scyri, the Peruvian Incas commenced to
extend their conquests to the north. ... About the middle of
the 15th century the Inca Tupac Yupanqui, father of
Huaynacapac, invaded the dominions of the Scyris, and after
many bloody battles and sieges, conquered the kingdom of
Puruha and returned in triumph to Cuzco. Hualcopo survived his
loss but a few years. He is said to have died of grief, and
was succeeded by his son Cacha, the 15th and last of the
Scyris. Cacha Duchicela at once set out to recover his
paternal dominions. Although of feeble health, he seems to
have been a man of great energy and intrepidity. He fell upon
the garrison which the Inca had left at Mocha, put it to the
sword, and reoccupied the kingdom of Puruha, where he was
received with open arms. He even carried his banners further
south, until checked by the Cañares, the inhabitants of what
is now the district of Cuenca, who had voluntarily submitted
to the Inca, and now detained the Scyri until Huaynacapac, the

greatest of the Inca dynasty, came to their rescue." On the
plain of Tiocajas, and again on the plain of Hatuntaqui, great
battles were fought, in both of which the Scyri was beaten,
and in the last of which he fell. "On the very field of battle
the faithful Caranquis proclaimed Pacha, the daughter of the
fallen king, as their Scyri. Huaynacapac now regulated his
conduct by policy. He ordered the dead king to be buried with
all the honors due to royalty, and made offers of marriage to
young Pacha, by whom he was not refused. ... The issue of the
marriage was Atahuallpa, the last of the native rulers of
Peru. ...
{671}
As prudent and highly politic as the conduct of Huaynacapac is
generally reputed to have been, so imprudent and unpolitic was
the division of the empire which he made on his death bed,
bequeathing his paternal dominions to his first-born and
undoubtedly legitimate son, Huascar, and to Atahuallpa the
kingdom of Quito. He might have foreseen the evil consequences
of such a partition. His death took place about the year 1525.
For five or seven years the brothers lived in peace." Then
quarrels arose, leading to civil war, resulting in the defeat
and death of Huascar. Atahuallpa had just become master of the
weakened and shaken empire of the Incas, when the invading
Spaniards, under Pizarro, fell on the doomed land and made its
riches their own. The conquest of the Spaniards did not
include the kingdom of Quito at first, but was extended to the
latter in 1533 by Sebastian de Benalcazar, whom Pizarro had
put in command of the Port of San Miguel. Excited by stories
of the riches of Quito, and invited by ambassadors from the
Canares, the old enemies of the Quito tribes, Benalcazar,
"without orders or permission from Pizarro ... left San
Miguel, at the head of about 150 men. His second in command
was the monster Juan de Ampudia." The fate of Quito was again
decided on the plain of Tiocajas, where Rumiñagui, a chief who
had seized the vacant throne, made a desperate but vain
resistance. He gained time, however, to remove whatever
treasures there may have been at Quito beyond the reach of its
rapacious conquerors, and "where he hid them is a secret to
the present day. ... Traditions of the great treasures hidden
in the mountains by Rumiñagui are eagerly repeated and
believed at Quito. ... Having removed the gold and killed the
Virgins of the Sun, and thus placed two objects so eagerly
coveted by the invaders beyond their reach, Rumiñagui set fire
to the town, and evacuated it with an his troops and
followers. It would be difficult to describe the rage,
mortification and despair of the Spaniards, on finding smoking
ruins instead of the treasures which they had expected. ...
Thousands of innocent Indians were sacrificed to their
disappointed cupidity. ... Every nook and corner of the
province was searched; but only in the sepulchres some little
gold was found. ... Of the ancient buildings of Quito no stone
was left upon the other, and deep excavations were made under
them to search for hidden treasures. Hence there is no vestige
left at Quito of its former civilization; not a ruin, not a
wall, not a stone to which the traditions of the past might
cling. ... On the 28th of August, 1534, the Spanish village of
Quito [San Francisco de Quito] was founded."
F. Hassaurek, Fours Years among Spanish Americans, chapter 16.
ALSO IN:
W. H. Prescott, History of Conquest of Peru,
book 3, chapter 2 (volume 1), and chapter 9 (volume 2).
ECUADOR:
In the empire of the Incas.
See PERU: THE EMPIRE OF THE INCAS.
ECUADOR: A. D. 1542.
The Audiencia of Quito established.
See AUDIENCIAS.
ECUADOR: A. D. 1821-1854.
Emancipation of slaves.
See COLOMBIAN STATES: A. D. 1821-1854.
ECUADOR: A. D. 1822-1888.
Confederated with New Granada and Venezuela in the Colombian
Republic.
Dissolution of the Confederacy.
The rule of Flores.
In 1822 "the Province of Quito was incorporated into the
Colombian Republic [see COLOMBIAN STATES: A. D. 1819-1830]. It
was now divided into three departments on the French system:
and the southernmost of these received its name from the
Equator (Ecuador) which passes through it. Shortly after
Venezuela had declared itself independent of the Colombian
Republic [1826--see, as above], the old province of Quito did
the same, and placed its fortunes in the hands of one of
Bolivar's lieutenants, named Flores. The name of Ecuador was
now extended to all three departments. Flores exercised the
chief authority for 15 years. The constitution limited the
Presidency to four: but Flores made an arrangement with one of
his lieutenants called Roca-Fuerte, by which they succeeded
each other, the outgoing President becoming governor of
Guayaquil. In 1843 Flores found himself strong enough to
improve upon this system. He called a convention, which
reformed the constitution in a reactionary sense, and named
him dictator for ten years. In 1845 the liberal reaction had
set in all over Colombia; and it soon became too strong for
Flores. Even his own supporters began to fail him, and he
agreed to quit the country on being paid an indemnity of
$20,000." During the next 15 years Ecuador was troubled by the
plots and attempts of Flores to regain his lost power. In
1860, with Peruvian help, he succeeded in placing one of his
party, Dr. Moreno, in the presidency, and he, himself, became
governor of Guayaquil. In August, 1875, Moreno was
assassinated.
E. J. Payne, History of European Colonies, pages 251-252.
After the assassination of President Moreno, "the clergy
succeeded in seating Dr. Antonio Barrero in the presidential
chair by a peaceful and overwhelming election. ... Against his
government the liberal party made a revolution, and, September
8, 1876, succeeded in driving him from power, seating in his
place General Ygnacio de Veintemilla, who was one of Barrero's
officers, bound to him by many tics. ... He called an obedient
convention at Ambato, in 1878, which named him President ad
interim, and framed a constitution, the republicanism of which
it is difficult to find. Under this he was elected President
for four years, terminating 30th August, 1882, without right
of re-election except after an interval of four years."
G. E. Church, Report on Ecuador
(Senate Ex. Doc. 69, U. S. 47th Congress, 2d session, volume 3).
President Veintemilla seized power as a Dictator, by a
pronunciamento, April 2, 1882; but civil war ensued and he was
overthrown in 1883. Senor José M. P. Caamaño was then chosen
Provisional President, and in February, 1884, he was elected
President, by the Legislative body. He was succeeded in 1888
by Don Antonio Flores.
Statesman's Year-book, 1889.
----------ECUADOR: End----------
ECUMENICAL, OR ŒCUMENICAL COUNCIL.
A general or universal council of the Christian Church.
See COUNCILS OF THE CHURCH.
EDDAS, The.
"The chief depositories of the Norse mythology are the Elder
or Saemund's Edda (poetry) and the Younger or Snorre's Edda.
(prose). In Icelandic Edda means 'great-grand-mother,' and
some think this appellation refers to the ancient origin of
the myths it contains. Others connect it with the Indian
'Veda' and the Norse 'vide,' (Swedish 'vela,' to know)."
R. B. Anderson, Norse Mythology, chapter 7.
{672}
"The word Edda is never found at all in any of the dialects of
the Old Northern tongue, nor indeed in any other tongue known
to us. The first time it is met with is in the Lay of Righ,
where it is used as a title for great-grandmother, and from
this poem the word is cited (with other terms from the same
source) in the collection at the end of Scaldscaparmal. How or
why Snorri's book on the Poetic Art came to be called Edda we
have no actual testimony. ... Snorri's work, especially the
second part of it, Scaldscaparmal, handed down in copies and
abridgments through the Middle Ages, was looked on as setting
the standard and ideal of poetry. It seems to have kept up
indeed the very remembrance of court-poetry, the memory of
which, but for it, would otherwise have perished. But though
the mediæval poets do not copy Edda (i. e., Snorri's rules)
they constantly allude to it, and we have an unbroken series
of phrases from 1340 to 1640 in which Edda is used as a
synonym for the technical laws of the court-metre (a use, it
may be observed, entirely contrary to that of our own days)."
G. Vigfusson and F. Y. Powell, Corpus Poeticum
Boreale, volume 1, introduction, section 4.
EDESSA (Macedonia).
Edessa, or Ægre, the ancient Macedonian capital, "a place of
primitive antiquity, according to a Phrygian legend the site
of the gardens of Midas, at the northern extremity of Mount
Bermius, where the Lydias comes forth from the mountains. ...
Ægre was the natural capital of the land. With its foundation
the history of Macedonia had its beginning; Ægre is the germ
out of which the Macedonian empire grew."
E. Curtius, History of Greece, book 7, ch 1.
See, also, MACEDONIA.
EDESSA (Mesopotamia).
See OSRHŒNE.
EDESSA: The Church.
See CHRISTIANITY: A. D. 33-100, and 100-312.
EDESSA: The Theological School.
Sec NESTORIANS.
EDESSA: A. D. 260.
Battle of.
See PERSIA: A. D. 226-627.
EDESSA: A. D. 1097-1144.
The Frank principality.
On the march of the armies of the First Crusade, as they
approached Syria, Baldwin, the able, selfish and self-willed
brother of Godfrey of Bouillon, left the main body of the
crusaders, with a band of followers, and moved off eastwards,
seeking the prizes of a very worldly ambition, and leaving his
devouter comrades to rescue the holy sepulchre without his
aid. Good fortune rewarded his enterprise and he secured
possession of the important city of Edessa. It was governed by
a Greek prince, who owed allegiance to the Byzantine emperor,
but who paid tribute to the Turks. "It had surrendered to
Pouzan, one of the generals of Malek-shah, in the year 1087,
but during the contests of the Turks and Saracens in the north
of Syria it had recovered its independence. Baldwin now
sullied the honour of the Franks, by exciting the people to
murder their governor Theodore, and rebel against the
Byzantine authority [other historians say that he was guilty
of no more than a passive permission of these acts]; he then
took possession of the place in his own name and founded the
Frank principality of Edessa, which lasted about 47 years."
G. Finlay, History of Byzantine and Greek Empires
A. D. 716-1453, book 3, chapter 2, section 1.
See, also, CRUSADES: A. D, 1006-1099, and 1147-1149;
also, JERUSALEM: A. D. 1099-1144.
----------EDESSA: End----------
EDGAR,
King of Scotland, A. D.1098-1107.
Edgar, King of Wessex, A. D. 958-975.
EDGECOTE, Battle of.
See BANBURY, BATTLE OF.
EDGEHILL OR KEYNTON, Battle of.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1642 (OCTOBER-DECEMBER).
EDHEL
See ADEL.
EDHILING, OR ÆDHILING, The.
See ETHELING.
EDICT OF NANTES, and its revocation.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1508-1599, and 1681-1608.
EDICT OF RESTITUTION, The.
See GERMANY: A, D. 1627-1620.
EDICTS, Roman imperial.
See CORPUS JURIS CIVILIS.
EDINBURGH:
Origin of the city.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 547-633.
EDINBURGH:11th Century.
Made the capital of Scotland.
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1066-1003.
EDINBURGH: A. D. 1544.
Destroyed by the English.
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1544-1548.
EDINBURGH: A. D. 1559-1560.
Seized by the Lords of the Congregation.
The Treaty of July, 1560.
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1558-1560.
EDINBURGH: A. D. 1572-1573.
n the civil war.
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1570-1573.
EDINBURGH: A. D. 1637.
Laud's Liturgy and the tumult at St. Giles'.
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1637.
EDINBURGH: A. D. 1638.
The signing of the National Covenant.
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1638.
EDINBURGH: A. D. 1650.
Surrender to Cromwell.
Siege and reduction of the Castle.
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1650 (SEPTEMBER);
and 1651 (AUGUST).
EDINBURGH: A. D. 1688.
Rioting and revolution.
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1688-1690.
EDINBURGH: A. D. 1707.
The city at the time of the union.
"Edinburgh, though still but a small town, excited the
admiration of travellers who were acquainted with the greatest
cities of England and the Continent; nor was their admiration
entirely due to the singular beauty of its situation. The
quaint architecture of the older houses--which sometimes rose
to the height of nine, ten or eleven stories--indeed, carried
back the mind to very barbarous times; for it was ascribed to
the desire of the population to live as near as possible to
the protection of the castle. The filth of the streets in the
early years of the 18th century was indescribable. ... The new
quarter, which now strikes every stranger by its spacious
symmetry, was not begun till the latter half of the 18th
century, but as early as 1723 an English traveller described
the High Street as 'the stateliest street in the world.' ...
Under the influence of the Kirk the public manners of the town
were marked by much decorum and even austerity, but the
populace were unusually susceptible of fierce political
enthusiasm, and when excited they were extremely formidable.
... A city guard, composed chiefly of fierce Highlanders,
armed and disciplined like regular soldiers, and placed under
the control of the magistrates, was established in 1606; and
it was not finally abolished till the present century.
Edinburgh, at the beginning of the 18th century, was more than
twice as large as any other Scotch town. Its population at the
time of the union slightly exceeded 30,000, while that of
Glasgow was not quite 15,000, that of Dundee not quite 10,000,
and that of Perth about 7,000."
W. E. H. Lecky, History of England in the 18th Century,
chapter 5 (volume 2).
{673}
EDINBURGH: A. D. 1736.
The Porteous Riot.
"The circumstances of the Porteous Riot are familiar wherever
the English tongue is spoken, because they were made the
dramatic opening of one of his finest stories by that
admirable genius who, like Shakespeare in his plays, has
conveyed to plain men more of the spirit and action of the
past in noble fiction, than they would find in most professed
chronicles of fact. The early scenes of the 'Heart of
Midlothian' are an accurate account of the transaction which
gave so much trouble to Queen Caroline and the minister
[Walpole]. A smuggler who had excited the popular imagination
by his daring and his chivalry was sentenced to be hanged;
after his execution the mob pressed forward to cut down his
body: Porteous, the captain of the City Guard, ordered his men
to fire, and several persons were shot dead: he was tried for
murder, convicted, and sentenced, but at the last moment a
reprieve arrived from London, to the intense indignation of a
crowd athirst for vengeance: four days later, under mysterious
ringleaders who could never afterwards be discovered, fierce
throngs suddenly gathered together at nightfall to the beat of
drum, broke into the prison, dragged out the unhappy Porteous,
and sternly hanged him on a dyer's pole close by the common
place of public execution."
J. Morley, Walpole, chapter 9.
ALSO IN:
J. McCarthy, History of the Four Georges,
chapter 24 (volume 2).
EDINBURGH: A. D. 1745.
The Young Pretender in the city.
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1745-1746.
EDINBURGH: A. D. 1779.
No-Popery riots.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1778-1780.
----------EDINBURGH: End----------
EDINGTON, OR ETHANDUN, Battle of (A. D.878).
See ENGLAND: A. D. 855-880.
EDMUND,
King of Wessex, A. D. 940-947.
Edmund Ironside, King of Wessex, A. D. 1016.
EDOMITES, OR lDUMEANS, The.
"From a very early period the Edomites were the chief of the
nations of Arabia Petræa. Amongst the branches sprung,
according to Arab tradition, from the primitive Amalika, they
correspond to the Arcam, and the posterity of Esau, after
settling amongst them as we have seen, became the dominant
family from which the chiefs were chosen. The original
habitation of the Edomites was Mount Seir, whence they spread
over all the country called by the Greeks Gebalene, that is
the prolongation of the mountains joining on the north the
land of Moab, into the Valley of Arabah, and the surrounding
heights. ... Saul successfully fought the Edomites; under
David, Joab and Abishai, his generals, completely defeated
them, and David placed garrisons in their towns. In their
ports of Elath and Eziongeber were built the fleets sent to
India by Hiram and Solomon. ... After the schism of the ten
tribes, the Edomites remained dependent on the King of Judah."
F. Lenormant, Manual of Ancient History of the East,
book 7, chapter 4.
See, also,
NABATHEANS; JEWS: THE EARLY HEBREW
HISTORY; and AMALEKITES.
EDRED, King of Wessex, A. D. 947-955.
EDRISITES, The.
After the revolt of Moorish or Mahometan Spain from the
caliphate of Bagdad, the African provinces of the Moslems
assumed independence, and several dynasties became
seated--among them that of the Edrisites, which founded the
city and kingdom of Fez, and which reigned from A. D. 829 to
907.
E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 52.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
See, also, MAHOMETAN CONQUEST: A. D. 715-750.
----------EDRISITES: End----------
EDUCATION.
EDUCATION: Ancient.
Egypt.
"In the education of youth [the Egyptians] were particularly
strict; and 'they knew,' says Plato, 'that children ought to
be early accustomed to such gestures, looks, and motions as
are decent and proper; and not to be suffered either to hear
or learn any verses and songs other than those which are
calculated to inspire them with virtue; and they consequently
took care that every dance and ode introduced at their feasts
or sacrifices should be subject to certain regulations.'"
Sir J. G. Wilkinson, The Manners and Customs
of the Ancient Egyptians, volume 1. page 321.
"The children were educated according to their station and
their future position in life. They were kept in strict
subjection by their parents, and respect to old age was
particularly inculcated; the children of the priests were
educated very thoroughly in writing of all kinds,
hieroglyphic, hieratic, and demotic, and in the sciences of
astronomy, mathematics, etc. The Jewish deliverer Moses was
educated after the manner of the priests, and the 'wisdom of
the Egyptians' became a proverbial expression among the
outside nations, as indicating the utmost limit of human
knowledge."
E. A. W. Budge, The Dwellers on the Nile, chapter 10.
"On the education of the Egyptians, Diodorus makes the
following remarks:--'The children of the priests are taught
two different kinds of writing,--what is called the sacred,
and the more general; and they pay great attention to geometry
and arithmetic. For the river, changing the appearance of the
country very materially every year, is the cause of many and
various discussions among neighbouring proprietors about the
extent of their property; and it would be difficult for any
person to decide upon their claims without geometrical
reasoning, founded on actual observation. Of arithmetic they
have also frequent need, both in their domestic economy, and
in the application of geometrical theorems, besides its
utility in the cultivation of astronomical studies; for the
orders and motions of the stars are observed at least as
industriously by the Egyptians as by any people whatever; and
they keep record of the motions of each for an incredible
number of years, the study of this science having been, from
the remotest times, an object of national ambition with them.
... But the generality of the common people learn only from
their parents or relations that which is required for the
exercise of their peculiar professions, ... a few only being
taught anything of literature, and those principally the
better class of artificers.' Hence it appears they were not
confined to any particular rules in the mode of educating
their children, and it depended upon a parent to choose
the degree of instruction he deemed most suitable to their
mode of life and occupations, as among other civilised
nations."
Sir J. G. Wilkinson, The Manners and Customs of
the Egyptians, volume 1, pages 175-176.
{674}
"There is nothing like being a scribe,' the wise say; 'the
scribe gets all that is upon earth.' ... The scribe is simply
a man who knows how to read and write, to draw up
administrative formulas, and to calculate interest. The
instruction which he has received is a necessary complement of
his position if he belongs to a good family, whilst if he be
poor it enables him to obtain a lucrative situation in the
administration or at the house of a wealthy personage. There
is, therefore, no sacrifice which the smaller folk deem too
great, if it enables them to give their sons the acquirements
which may raise them above the common people, or at least
insure a less miserable fate. If one of them, in his infancy,
displays any intelligence, they send him, when about six or
eight years old, to the district school, where an old
pedagogue teaches him the rudiments of reading, writing, and
arithmetic. Towards ten or twelve years old, they withdraw him
from the care of this first teacher and apprentice him to a
scribe in some office, who undertakes to make him a 'learned
scribe.' The child accompanies his master to his office or
work-yard, and there passes entire months in copying letters,
circulars, legal documents, or accounts, which he does not at
first understand, but which he faithfully remembers. There are
books for his use full of copies taken from well-known
authors, which he studies perpetually. If he requires a brief,
precise report, this is how Ennana worded one of his:--'I
reached Elephantine and accomplished my mission. I reviewed
the infantry and the chariot soldiers from the temples, as
well as the servants and subordinates who are in the houses of
Pharaoh's ... officials. As my journey is for the purpose of
making a report in the presence of his Majesty, ... the course
of my business is as rapid as that of the Nile; you need not,
therefore, feel anxious about me.' There is not a superfluous
word. If, on the other hand, a petition in a poetical style be
required, see how Pentoïrit asked for a holiday. 'My heart has
left me, it is travelling and does not know how to return, it
sees Memphis and hastens there. Would that I were in its
place. I remain here, busy following my heart, which
endeavours to draw me towards Memphis. I have no work in hand,
my heart is tormented. May it please the god Ptah to lead me
to Memphis, and do thou grant that I may be seen walking
there. I am at leisure, my heart is watching, my heart is no
longer in my bosom, languor has seized my limbs; my eye is
dim, my ear hardened, my voice feeble, it is a failure of all
my strength. I pray thee remedy all this.' The pupil copies
and recopies, the master inserts forgotten words, corrects the
faults of spelling, and draws on the margin the signs or
groups unskilfully traced. When the book is duly finished and
the apprentice can write all the formulas from memory,
portions of phrases are detached from them, which he must join
together, so as to combine new formulas; the master then
entrusts him with the composition of a few letters, gradually
increasing the number and adding to the difficulties. As soon
as he has fairly mastered the ordinary daily routine his
education is ended, and an unimportant post is sought for. He
obtains it and then marries, becoming the head of a family,
sometimes before he is twenty years old; he has no further
ambition, but is content to vegetate quietly in the obscure
circle where fate has thrown him."
G. Maspéro, Life in Ancient Egypt and Assyria, chapter 1.
"In the schools, where the poor scribe's child sat on the
same bench beside the offspring of the rich, to be trained in
discipline and wise learning, the masters knew how by timely
words to goad on the lagging diligence of the ambitious
scholars, by holding out to them the future reward which
awaited youths skilled in knowledge and letters. Thus the
slumbering spark of self-esteem was stirred to a flame in the
youthful breast, and emulation was stimulated among the boys.
The clever son of the poor man, too, might hope by his
knowledge to climb the ladder of the higher offices, for
neither his birth nor position raised any barrier, if only
the youth's mental power justified fair hopes for the future.
In this sense, the restraints of caste did not exist, and
neither descent nor family hampered the rising career of the
clever. Many a monument consecrated to the memory of some
nobleman gone to his long home, who during life had held high
rank at the court of Pharaoh, is decorated with the simple
but laudatory inscription, 'His ancestors were unknown
people.' It is a satisfaction to avow that the training and
instruction of the young interested the Egyptians in the
highest degree. For they fully recognised in this the sole
means of cultivating their national life, and of fulfilling
the high civilizing mission which Providence seemed to have
placed in their hands. But above all things they regarded
justice, and virtue had the highest price in their eyes."
H. Brugsch-Bey, History of Egypt under the
Pharaohs, volume 1, page 22.
EDUCATION:
Babylonia and Assyria.
"The primitive Chaldeans were pre-eminently a literary people,
and it is by their literary relics, by the scattered contents
of their libraries, that we can know and judge them. As
befitted the inventors of a system of writing, like the
Chinese they set the highest value on education, even though
examinations may have been unknown among them. Education,
however, was widely diffused. ... Assur-bani-pal's library was
open to the use and enjoyment of all his subjects, and the
syllabaries, grammars, lexicons, and reading-books that it
contained, show the extent to which not only their own
language was studied by the Assyrians, but the dead language
of ancient Accad as well. It became as fashionable to compose
in this extinct tongue as it is now-a-days to display one's
proficiency in Latin prose, and 'dog-Accadian' was perpetrated
with as little remorse as 'dog-Latin' at the present time. One
of the Babylonian cylinders found by General di Cesnola in the
temple-treasure of Kurium, which probably belongs to the
period of Nebuchadnezzar's dynasty, has a legend which
endeavours to imitate the inscriptions of the early Accadian
princes; but the very first word, by an unhappy error, betrays
the insufficient knowledge of the old language possessed by
its composer. Besides a knowledge of Accadian, the educated
Assyrian was required to have also a knowledge of Aramaic,
which had now become the 'lingua franca' of trade and
diplomacy; and we find the Rabshakeh (Rab-sakki), or prime
minister, who was sent against Hezekiah by Sennacherib,
acquainted with Hebrew as well.
{675}
The grammatical and lexical works in the library of
Nineveh are especially interesting, as being the earliest
attempts of the kind of which we know, and it is curious to
find the Hamiltonian method of learning languages forestalled
by the scribes of Assur-bani-pal. In this case, as in all
others, the first enquiries into the nature of speech, and the
first grammars and dictionaries, were due to the necessity of
comparing two languages together; it was the Accadian which
forced the Semitic Assyrian or Babylonian to study his own
tongue. And already in these first efforts the main principles
of Semitic grammar are laid down clearly and definitely."
A. H. Sayce, Babylonian Literature, pages 71-72.
"The Babylonians were the Chinese of the ancient world. They
were essentially a reading and writing people. ... The books
were for the most part written upon clay with a wooden reed or
metal stylus, for clay was cheap and plentiful, and easily
impressed with the wedge-shaped lines of which the characters
were composed. But besides clay, papyrus and possibly also
parchment were employed as writing materials. ... The use of
clay for writing purposes extended, along with Babylonian
culture, to the neighbouring populations of the East. ... It
is astonishing how much matter can be compressed into the
compass of a single tablet: The cuneiform system of writing
allowed the use of many abbreviations--thanks to its
'ideographic' nature--and the characters were frequently of a
very minute size. Indeed, so minute is the writing on many of
the Assyrian (as distinguished from the Babylonian) tablets
that it is clear not only that the Assyrian scribes and
readers must have been decidedly short-sighted, but also that
they must have made use of magnifying glasses. We need not be
surprised, therefore, to learn that Sir A. H. Layard
discovered a crystal lens, which had been turned on a lathe,
upon the site of the great library of Nineveh. ... To learn
the cuneiform syllabary was a task of much time and labour.
The student was accordingly provided with various means of
assistance. The characters of the syllabary were classified
and named; they were further arranged according to a certain
order, which partly depended on the number of wedges or lines
of which each was composed. Moreover, what we may term
dictionaries were compiled. ... To learn the signs, however,
with their multitudinous phonetic values and ideographic
significations, was not the whole of the labour which the
Babylonian boy had to accomplish. The cuneiform system of
writing, along with the culture which had produced it, had
been the invention of the non-Semitic Accado-Sumerian race,
from whom it had been borrowed by the Semites. In Semitic
hands the syllabary underwent further modifications and
additions, but it bore upon it to the last the stamp of its
alien origin. On this account alone, therefore, the Babylonian
student who wished to acquire a knowledge of reading and
writing was obliged to learn the extinct language of the older
population of the country. There was, however, another reason
which even more imperatively obliged him to study the earlier
tongue. A large proportion of the ancient literature, more
especially that which related to religious subjects, was
written in Accado-Sumerian. Even the law-cases of earlier
times, which formed precedents for the law of a later age,
were in the same language. In fact, Accado-Sumerian stood in
much the same relation to the Semitic Babylonians that Latin
has stood to the modern inhabitants of Europe. ... Besides
learning the syllabary, therefore, the Babylonian boy had to
learn the extinct of Accad and Sumer. ... The study of foreign
tongues naturally brought with it an inquisitiveness about the
languages of other people, as well as a passion for etymology.
... But there were other things besides languages which the
young student in the schools of Babylonia and Assyria was
called upon to learn. Geography, history, the names and nature
of plants, birds, animals, and stones, as well as the elements
of law and religion, were all objects of instruction. The
British Museum possesses what may be called the historical
exercise of some Babylonian lad in the age of Nebuchadnezzar
or Cyrus, consisting of a list of the kings belonging to one
of the early dynasties, which he had been required to learn by
heart. ... A considerable proportion of the inhabitants of
Babylonia could read and write. The contract tablets are
written in a variety of running hands, some of which are as
bad as the worst that passes through the modern post. Every
legal document required the signatures of a number of
witnesses, and most of these were able to write their own
names. ... In Assyria, however, education was by no means so
widely spread. Apart from the upper and professional classes,
including the men of business, it was confined to a special
body of men--the public scribes. ... There was none of that
jealous exclusion of women in ancient Babylonia which
characterizes the East of today, and it is probable that boys
and girls pursued their studies at the same schools. The
education of a child must have begun early."
A. H. Sayce, Social Life among the Babylonians, chapter 3.
EDUCATION:
China.
"It is not, perhaps, generally known that Peking contains an
ancient university; for, though certain buildings connected
with it have been frequently described, the institution itself
has been but little noticed. It gives, indeed, so few signs of
life that it is not surprising it should be overlooked. ... If
a local situation be deemed an essential element of identity,
this old university must yield the palm of age to many in
Europe, for in its present site it dates, at most, only from
the Yuen, or Mongol, dynasty, in the beginning of the
fourteenth century. But as an imperial institution, having a
fixed organization and definite objects, it carries its
history, or at least its pedigree, back to a period far
anterior to the founding of the Great Wall. Among the
Regulations of the House of Chow, which flourished a thousand
years before the Christian era, we meet with it already in
full-blown vigor, and under the identical name which it now
bears, that of Kwotszekien, or 'School for the Sons of the
Empire.' It was in its glory before the light of science
dawned on Greece, and when Pythagoras and Plato were pumping
their secrets from the priests of Heliopolis. And it still
exists, but it is only an embodiment of 'life in death:' its
halls are tombs, and its officers living mummies. In the 13th
Book of the Chowle (see Rites de Tcheou, traduction par
Édouard Biot), we find the functions of the heads of the
Kwotszekien laid down with a good deal of minuteness.
{676}
The presidents were to admonish the Emperor of that which is
good and just, and to instruct the Sons of the State in the
'three constant virtues' and the 'three practical duties'--in
other words, to give a course of lectures on moral philosophy.
The vice-presidents were to reprove the Emperor for his faults
(i. e., to perform the duty of official censors) and to
discipline the Sons of the State in the sciences and
arts--viz., in arithmetic, writing, music, archery,
horsemanship and ritual ceremonies. ... The old curriculum is
religiously adhered to, but greater latitude is given, as we
shall have occasion to observe, to the term 'Sons of the
State.' In the days of Chow, this meant the heir-apparent,
princes of the blood, and children of the nobility. Under the
Tatsing dynasty it signifies men of defective scholarship
throughout the provinces, who purchase literary degrees, and
more specifically certain indigent students of Peking, who are
aided by the imperial bounty. The Kwotszekien is located in
the northeastern angle of the Tartar city, with a temple of
Confucius attached, which is one of the finest in the Empire.
The main edifice (that of the temple) consists of a single
story of imposing height, with a porcelain roof of tent-like
curvature. ... It contains no seats, as all comers are
expected to stand or kneel in presence of the Great Teacher.
Neither does it boast anything in the way of artistic
decoration, nor exhibit any trace of that neatness and taste
which we look for in a sacred place. Perhaps its vast area is
designedly left to dust and emptiness, in order that nothing
may intervene to disturb the mind in the contemplation of a
great name which receives the homage of a nation. ... In an
adjacent block or square stands a pavilion known as the
'Imperial Lecture-room,' because it is incumbent on each
occupant of the Dragon throne to go there at least once in his
life-time to hear a discourse on the nature and
responsibilities of his office. ... A canal spanned by marble
bridges encircles the pavilion, and arches of glittering
porcelain, in excellent repair, adorn the grounds. But neither
these nor the pavilion itself constitutes the chief attraction
of the place. Under a long corridor which encloses the entire
space may be seen as many as one hundred and eighty-two
columns of massive granite, each inscribed with a portion of
the canonical books. These are the 'Stone Classics'--the
entire 'Thirteen,' which formed the staple of a Chinese
education, being here enshrined in a material supposed to be
imperishable. Among all the Universities in the world, the
Kwotszekien is unique in the possession of such a library.
This is not, indeed, the only stone library extant--another of
equal extent being found at Singanfu, the ancient capital of
the Tangs. But, that too, was the property of the Kwotszekien
ten centuries ago, when Singan was the seat of empire. The
'School for the Sons of the Empire' must needs follow the
migrations of the court; and that library, costly as it was,
being too heavy for transportation, it was thought best to
supply its place by the new edition which we have been
describing. ... In front of the temple stands a forest of
columns of scarcely inferior interest. They are three hundred
and twenty in number, and contain the university roll of
honor, a complete list of all who since the founding of the
institution have attained to the dignity of the doctorate.
Allow to each an average of two hundred names, and we have an
army of doctors sixty thousand strong! (By the doctorate I
mean the third or highest degree.) All these received their
investiture at the Kwotszekien, and, throwing themselves at
the feet of its president, enrolled themselves among the 'Sons
of the Empire.' They were not, however--at least the most of
them were not--in any proper sense alumni of the Kwotszekien,
having pursued their studies in private, and won their honors
by public competition in the halls of the Civil-service
Examining Board. ... There is an immense area occupied by
lecture-rooms, examination-halls and lodging-apartments. But
the visitor is liable to imagine that these, too, are
consecrated to a monumental use--so rarely is a student or a
professor to be seen among them. Ordinarily they are as
desolate as the halls of Baalbec or Palmyra. In fact, this
great school for the 'Sons of the Empire' has long ceased to
be a seat of instruction, and degenerated into a mere
appendage of the civil-service competitive examinations on
which it hangs as a dead weight, corrupting and debasing
instead of advancing the standard of national education."
W. A. P. Martin, The Chinese, their Education,
Philosophy and Letters, pages 85-90.
EDUCATION:
Persia.
"All the best authorities are agreed that great pains were
taken by the Persians--or, at any rate, by those of the
leading clans--in the education of their sons. During the
first five years of his life the boy remained wholly with the
women, and was scarcely, if at all, seen by his father. After
that time his training commenced. He was expected to rise
before dawn, and to appear at a certain spot, where he was
exercised with other boys of his age in running, slinging
stones, shooting with the bow, and throwing the javelin. At
seven he was taught to ride, and soon afterward he was allowed
to begin to hunt. The riding included, not only the ordinary
management of the horse, but the power of jumping on and off
his back when he was at speed, and of shooting with the bow
and throwing the javelin with unerring aim, while the horse
was still at full gallop. The hunting was conducted by
state-officers, who aimed at forming by its means in the
youths committed to their charge all the qualities needed in
war. The boys were made to bear extremes of heat and cold, to
perform long marches, to cross rivers without wetting their
weapons, to sleep in the open air at night, to be content with
a single meal in two days, and to support themselves
occasionally on the wild products of the country, acorns, wild
pears and the fruit of the terebinth tree. On days when there
was no hunting they passed their mornings in athletic
exercises, and contests with the bow or the javelin, after
which they dined simply on the plain food mentioned above as
that of the men in the early times, and then employed
themselves during the afternoon in occupations regarded as not
illiberal--for instance, in the pursuits of agriculture,
planting, digging for roots, and the like, or in the
construction of arms and hunting implements, such as nets and
springes. Hardy and temperate habits being secured by this
training, the point of morals on which their preceptors mainly
insisted was the rigid observance of truth. Of intellectual
education they had but little. It seems to have been no part
of the regular training of a Persian youth that he should
learn to read.
{677}
He was given religious notions and a certain amount of moral
knowledge by means of legendary poems, in which the deeds of
gods and heroes were set before him by his teachers, who
recited or sung them in his presence, and afterwards required
him to repeat what he had heard, or, at any rate, to give some
account of it. This education continued for fifteen years,
commencing when the boy was five, and terminating when he
reached the age of twenty. The effect of this training was to
render the Persian an excellent soldier and a most
accomplished horseman. ... At fifteen years of age the Persian
was considered to have attained to manhood, and was enrolled
in the ranks of the army, continuing liable to military
service from that time till he reached the age of fifty. Those
of the highest rank became the body-guard of the king, and
these formed the garrison of the capital. ... Others, though
liable to military service, did not adopt arms as their
profession, but attached themselves to the Court and looked to
civil employment, as satraps, secretaries, attendants, ushers,
judges, inspectors, messengers. ... For trade and commerce the
Persians were wont to express extreme contempt."
G. Rawlinson, The Five Great Monarchies of the Ancient
Eastern World, volume 3, pages 238-242.
After the death of Cyrus, according to Xenophon, the Persians
degenerated, in the education of their youth and otherwise.
"To educate the youth at the gates of the palace is still the
custom," he says; "but the attainment and practice of
horsemanship are extinct, because they do not go where they
can gain applause by exhibiting skill in that exercise.
Whereas, too, in former times, the boys, hearing causes justly
decided there, were considered by that means to learn justice,
that custom is altogether altered; for they now see those gain
their causes who offer the highest bribes. Formerly, also,
boys were taught the virtues of the various productions of the
earth, in order that they might use the serviceable, and avoid
the noxious; but now they seem to be taught those particulars
that they may do as much harm as possible; at least there are
nowhere so many killed or injured by poison as in that
country."
Xenophon, Cyropædia and Hellenics; trans. by J. S.
Watson and H. Dale, pages 284-285.
EDUCATION:
Judæa.
"According to the statement of Josephus, Moses had already
prescribed 'that boys should learn the most important laws,
because that is the best knowledge and the cause of
prosperity.' 'He commanded to instruct children in the
elements of knowledge (reading and writing), to teach them to
walk according to the laws, and to know the deeds of their
forefathers. The latter, that they might imitate them; the
former, that growing up with the laws they might not
transgress them, nor have the excuse of ignorance.' Josephus
repeatedly commends the zeal with which the instruction of the
young was carried on. 'We take most pains of all with the
instruction of children, and esteem the observance of the laws
and the piety corresponding with them the most important
affair of our whole life.' 'If anyone should question one of
us concerning the laws, he would more easily repeat all than
his own name. Since we learn them from our first
consciousness, we have them, as it were, engraven on our
souls; and a transgression is rare, but the averting of
punishment impossible.' In like manner does Philo express
himself: 'Since the Jews esteem their laws as divine
revelations, and are instructed in the knowledge of them from
their earliest youth, they bear the image of the law in their
souls.' ... In view of all this testimony it cannot be
doubted, that in the circles of genuine Judaism boys were from
their tenderest childhood made acquainted with the demands of
the law. That this education in the law was, in the first
place, the duty and task of parents is self-evident. But it
appears, that even in the age of Christ, care was also taken
for the instruction of youth by the erection of schools on the
part of the community. ... The later tradition that Joshua ben
Gamla (Jesus the son of Gamaliel) enacted that teachers of
boys ... should be appointed in every province and in every
town, and that children of the age of six or seven should be
brought to them, is by no means incredible. The only Jesus the
son of Gamaliel known to history is the high priest of that
name, about 63-65 after Christ. ... It must therefore be he
who is intended in the above notice. As his measures
presuppose a somewhat longer existence of boys' schools, we
may without hesitation transfer them to the age of Christ,
even though not as a general and established institution. The
subject of instruction, as already appears from the above
passages of Josephus and Philo, was as good as exclusively the
law. For only its inculcation in the youthful mind, and not
the means of general education, was the aim of all this zeal
for the instruction of youth. And indeed the earliest
instruction was in the reading and inculcation of the text of
scripture. ... Habitual practice went hand in hand with
theoretical instruction. For though children were not actually
bound to fulfil the law, they were yet accustomed to it from
their youth up."
E. Schürer, History of the Jewish People in the time of
Jesus Christ, volume 2, pages 47-50.
In the fourth century B. C. the Council of Seventy Elders
"instituted regularly appointed readings from the Law; on
every sabbath and on every week day a portion from the
Pentateuch was to be read to the assembled congregation. Twice
a week, when the country people came up from the villages to
market in the neighbouring towns, or to appeal at the courts
of justice, some verses of the Pentateuch, however few, were
read publicly. At first only the learned were allowed to read,
but at last it was looked upon as so great an honour to belong
to the readers, that everyone attempted or desired to do so.
Unfortunately the characters in which the Torah was written
were hardly readable. Until that date the text of the Torah
had been written in the ancient style with Phœnician or old
Babylonian characters, which could only be deciphered by
practised scribes. ... From the constant reading of the Law,
there arose among the Judæans an intellectual activity and
vigour, which at last gave a special character to the whole
nation. The Torah became their spiritual and intellectual
property, and their own inner sanctuary. At this time there
sprang up other important institutions, namely, schools, where
the young men could stimulate their ardour and increase their
knowledge of the Law and its teachings. The intellectual
leaders of the people continually enjoined on the rising
generation, 'Bring up a great many disciples.' And what they
enjoined so strenuously they themselves must have assisted to
accomplish. One of these religious schools (Beth-Waad) was
probably established in Jerusalem.
{678}
The teachers were called scribes (sopherim) or wise men; the
disciples, pupils of the wise (Talmude Chachamim). The wise
men or scribes had a two-fold work; on the one hand they had
to explain the Torah, and on the other, to make the laws
applicable to each individual and to the community at large.
This supplementary interpretation was called 'explanation'
(Midrash); it was not altogether arbitrary, but rested upon
certain rules laid down for the proper interpretation of the
law. The supreme council and the houses of learning worked
together, and one completed the other. A hardly perceptible,
but most important movement was the result; for the
descendants of the Judæans of that age were endowed with a
characteristic, which they might otherwise have claimed as
inborn, the talent for research and the intellectual
penetration, needed for turning and returning words and data,
in order to discover some new and hidden meaning."
H. Graetz, History of the Jews, volume 1, chapter 20.
EDUCATION:
Schools of the Prophets.
"In his [Samuel's] time we first hear of what in modern
phraseology are called the Schools of the Prophets. Whatever
be the precise meaning of the peculiar word, which now came
first into use as the designation of these companies, it is
evident that their immediate mission consisted in uttering
religious hymns or songs, accompanied by musical
instruments--psaltery, tabret, pipe and harp, and cymbals. In
them, as in the few solitary instances of their predecessors,
the characteristic element was that the silent seer of visions
found an articulate voice, gushing forth in a rhythmical flow,
which at once riveted the attention of the hearer. These, or
such as these, were the gifts which under Samuel were now
organized, if one may say so, into a system."
Dean Stanley, Lectures on the History of the Jewish
Church, lecture 18.
EDUCATION:
Greece.
A description of the Athenian education of the young is given
by Plato in one of his dialogues: "Education," he says, "and
admonition commence in the first years of childhood, and last
to the very end of life. Mother and nurse and father and tutor
are quarrelling about the improvement of the child as soon as
ever he is able to understand them: he cannot say or do
anything without their setting forth to him that this is just
and that is unjust; this is honourable, that is dishonourable;
this is holy, that is unholy; do this and abstain from that.
And if he obeys, well and good; if not, he is straightened by
threats and blows, like a piece of warped wood. At a later
stage they send him to teachers, and enjoin them to see to his
manners even more than to his reading and music; and the
teachers do as they are desired. And when the boy has learned
his letters and is beginning to understand what is written·,
as before he understood only what was spoken, they put into
his hands the works of great poets, which he reads at school;
in these are contained many admonitions, and many tales, and
praises, and encomia of ancient famous men, which he is
required to learn by heart, in order that he may imitate or
emulate them and desire to become like them. Then, again, the
teachers of the lyre take similar care that their young
disciple is temperate and gets into no mischief; and when they
have taught him the use of the lyre, they introduce him to the
poems of other excellent poets, who are the lyric poets; and
these they set to music, and make their harmonies and rhythms
quite familiar to the children, in order that they may learn
to be more gentle, and harmonious, and rhythmical, and so more
fitted for speech and action; for the life of men in every
part has need of harmony and rhythm. Then they send them to
the master of gymnastic, in order that their bodies may better
minister to the virtuous mind, and that the weakness of their
bodies may not force them to play the coward in war or on any
other occasion. This is what is done by those who have the
means, and those who have the means are the rich; their
children begin education soonest and leave off latest. When
they have done with masters, the state again compels them to
learn the laws, and live after the pattern which they furnish,
and not after their own fancies; and just as in learning to
write, the writing-master first draws lines with a style for
the use of the young beginner, and gives him the tablet and