History for ready reference, Volume 4, Nicæa to Tunis

by J. N. Larned

[Transcriber's Notes: These modifications are intended to provide
continuity of the text for ease of searching and reading.
1. To avoid breaks in the narrative, page numbers (shown in curly
brackets "{1234}") are usually placed between paragraphs. In this
case the page number is preceded and followed by an empty line.
To remove page numbers use the Regular Expression:
"^{[0-9]+}" to "" (empty string)
2. If a paragraph is exceptionally long, the page number is
placed at the nearest sentence break on its own line, but
without surrounding empty lines.
3. Blocks of unrelated text are moved to a nearby break
between subjects.
5. Use of em dashes and other means of space saving are replaced
with spaces and newlines.
6. Subjects are arranged thusly:
Main titles are at the left margin, in all upper case
(as in the original) and are preceded by an empty line.
Subtitles (if any) are indented three spaces and
immediately follow the main title.
Text of the article (if any) follows the list of subtitles (if
any) and is preceded with an empty line and indented three
spaces.
References to other articles in this work are in all upper
case (as in the original) and indented six spaces. They
usually begin with "See", "Also" or "Also in".
Citations of works outside this book are indented six spaces
and in italics (as in the original). The bibliography in
Volume 1, APPENDIX F on page xxi provides additional details,
including URLs of available internet versions.
----------Subject: Start--------
----------Subject: End----------
indicates the start/end of a group of subheadings or other
large block.
To search for words separated by an unknown number of other
characters, use this Regular Expression to find the words
"first" and "second" separated by between 1 and 100 characters:
"first.{1,100}second"
End Transcriber's Notes.]
----------------------------------

History For Ready Reference, Volume 4 of 6
From The Best
Historians, Biographers, And Specialists
Their Own Words In A Complete
System Of History
For All Uses, Extending To All Countries And Subjects,
And Representing For Both Readers And Students The Better
And Newer Literature Of History In The English Language.
BY J. N. LARNED
With Numerous Historical Maps From Original Studies
And Drawings By Alan C. Reiley
In Five Volumes
VOLUME IV—NICÆA TO TUNIS
SPRINGFIELD, MASSACHUSETTS.
THE C. A. NICHOLS COMPANY, PUBLISHERS
MDCCCXCV
COPYRIGHT, 1894.
BY J. N. LARNED.
The Riverside Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts., U. S. A.
Printed by H. O. Houghton & Company.
LIST OF MAPS AND PLANS.
Two maps of Central Europe, at the abdication of Charles V.
(1556), and showing the distribution of Religions about 1618,
To follow page 2458
Map of Eastern Europe in 1768, and of Central Europe at
the Peace of Campo Formio (1797),
To follow page 2554
Map of the Roman Empire at its greatest extent,
under Trajan (A. D. 116),
To follow page 2712
Map of Europe at the death of Justinian (A. D. 565),
To follow page 2742
Two maps, of Eastern Europe and Central Europe, in 1715,
To follow page 2762
Four development maps of Spain,
9th, 11th, 12th and 13th centuries,
To follow page 2976
LOGICAL OUTLINE, IN COLORS.
Roman history,
To follow page 2656
CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES.
Ninth and Tenth Centuries,
To follow page 2746
{2359}
NICÆA OR NICE:
The founding of the city.
Nicæa, or Nice, in Bithynia, was founded by Antigonus, one of
the successors of Alexander the Great, and received originally
the name Antigonea. Lysimachus changed the name to Nicæa, in
honor of his wife.
NICÆA OR NICE:
Capture by the Goths.
See GOTHS: A. D. 258-267.
NICÆA OR NICE: A. D. 325.
The First Council.
"Constantine … determined to lay the question of Arianism [see
ARIANISM] before an Œcumenical council. … The council met [A.
D. 325] at Nicæa—the 'City of Victory'—in Bithynia, close to
the Ascanian Lake, and about twenty miles from Nicomedia. … It
was an Eastern council, and, like the Eastern councils, was
held within a measurable distance from the seat of government.
… Of the 318 bishops … who subscribed its decrees, only eight
came from the West, and the language in which the Creed was
composed was Greek, which scarcely admitted of a Latin
rendering. The words of the Creed are even now recited by the
Russian Emperor at his coronation. Its character, then, is
strictly Oriental. … Of the 318 members of the Council, we are
told by Philostorgius, the Arian historian, that 22 espoused
the cause of Arius, though other writers regard the minority
as still less, some fixing it at 17, others at 15, others as
low as 13. But of those 318 the first place in rank, though
not the first in mental power and energy of character, was
accorded to the aged bishop of Alexandria. He was the
representative of the most intellectual diocese in the Eastern
Church. He alone, of all the bishops, was named 'Papa,' or
'Pope.' The 'Pope of Rome' was a phrase which had not yet
emerged in history; but 'Pope of Alexandria' was a well-known
title of dignity."
R. W. Bush,
St. Athanasius,
chapter 6.
ALSO IN:
A. P. Stanley,
Lectures on the History of the Eastern Church,
lectures 3-5.
NICÆA OR NICE: A. D. 1080.
Acquired by the Turks.
The capital of the Sultan of Roum.
See TURKS (THE SELJUK): A. D. 1073-1092.
NICÆA OR NICE: A. D. 1096-1097.
Defeat and slaughter of the First Crusaders.
Recovery from the Turks.
See CRUSADES: A. D. 1096-1099.
NICÆA OR NICE: A. D. 1204-1261.
Capital of the Greek Empire.
See GREEK EMPIRE OF NICÆA.
NICÆA OR NICE: A. D. 1330.
Capture by the Ottoman Turks.
See TURKS (OTTOMAN): A. D. 1326-1359.
NICÆA OR NICE: A. D. 1402.
Sacked by Timour.
See TIMOUR.
----------NICARAGUA: Start--------
NICARAGUA:
The Name.
Nicaragua was originally the name of a native chief who ruled
in the region on the Lake when it was first penetrated by the
Spaniards, under Gil Gonzalez, in 1522. "Upon the return of
Gil Gonzalez, the name Nicaragua became famous, and besides
being applied to the cacique and his town, was gradually given
to the surrounding country, and to the lake."
H. H. Bancroft,
History of the Pacific States,
volume 1, page. 489, foot-note.
NICARAGUA: A. D. 1502.
Coasted by Columbus.
See AMERICA: A. D. 1498-1505.
NICARAGUA: A. D. 1821-1871.
Independence of Spain.
Brief annexation to Mexico.
Attempted federations and their failure.
See CENTRAL AMERICA: A. D. 1821-1871.
NICARAGUA: A. D. 1850.
The Clayton-Bulwer Treaty.
Joint protectorate of the United States and
Great Britain over the proposed inter-oceanic canal.
"The acquisition of California in May, 1848, by the treaty of
Guadalupe-Hidalgo, and the vast rush of population, which
followed almost immediately on the development of the gold
mines, to that portion of the Pacific coast, made the opening
of interoceanic communication a matter of paramount importance
to the United States. In December, 1846, had been ratified a
treaty with New Granada (which in 1862 assumed the name of
Colombia) by which a right of transit over the isthmus of
Panama was given to the United States, and the free transit
over the isthmus 'from the one to the other sea' guaranteed by
both of the contracting powers. Under the shelter of this
treaty the Panama Railroad Company, composed of citizens of
the United States, and supplied by capital from the United
States, was organized in 1850 and put in operation in 1855. In
1849, before, therefore, this company had taken shape, the
United States entered into a treaty with Nicaragua for the
opening of a ship-canal from Greytown (San Juan), on the
Atlantic coast, to the Pacific coast, by way of the Lake of
Nicaragua. Greytown, however, was then virtually occupied by
British settlers, mostly from Jamaica, and the whole eastern
coast of Nicaragua, so far at least as the eastern terminus of
such a canal was concerned, was held, so it was maintained by
Great Britain, by the Mosquito Indians, over whom Great
Britain claimed to exercise a protectorate. That the Mosquito
Indians had no such settled territorial site; that, if they
had, Great Britain had no such protectorate or sovereignty
over them as authorized her to exercise dominion over their
soil, even if they had any, are positions which … the United
States has repeatedly affirmed. But the fact that the
pretension was set up by Great Britain, and that, though it
were baseless, any attempt to force a canal through the
Mosquito country, might precipitate a war, induced Mr.
Clayton, Secretary of State in the administration of General
Taylor, to ask through Sir H. L. Bulwer, British minister at
Washington, the administration of Lord John Russell (Lord
Palmerston being then foreign secretary) to withdraw the
British pretensions to the coast so as to permit the
construction of the canal under the joint auspices of the
United States and of Nicaragua. This the British Government
declined to do, but agreed to enter into a treaty for a joint
protectorate over the proposed canal." This treaty, which was
signed at Washington April 19, 1850, and of which the
ratifications were exchanged on the 4th of July following, is
commonly referred to as the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty. Its
language in the first article is that "the Governments of the
United States and of Great Britain hereby declare that neither
the one nor the other will ever obtain or maintain for itself
any exclusive control over the said ship-canal; agreeing that
neither will ever erect or maintain any fortifications
commanding the same, or in the vicinity thereof, or occupy, or
fortify, or colonize, or assume or exercise any dominion over
Nicaragua, Costa Rica, the Mosquito coast, or any part of
Central America; nor will either make use of any protection
which either affords, or may afford, or any alliance which
either has or may have to or with any state or people, for the
purpose of erecting or maintaining any such fortifications, or
of occupying, fortifying, or colonizing Nicaragua, Costa Rica,
the Mosquito coast, or any part of Central America, or of
assuming or exercising dominion over the same;
{2360}
nor will the United States or Great Britain take advantage of
any intimacy, or use any alliance, connection, or influence
that either may possess, with any State or Government through
whose territory the said canal may pass, for the purpose of
acquiring or holding, directly or indirectly, for the citizens
or subjects of the one, any rights or advantages in regard to
commerce or navigation through the said canal which shall not
be offered on the same terms to the citizens or subjects of
the other." Since the execution of this treaty there have been
repeated controversies between the two governments respecting
the interpretation of its principal clauses. Great Britain
having maintained her dominion over the Belize, or British
Honduras, it has been claimed by the United States that the
treaty is void, or, has become voidable at the option of the
United States, on the grounds (in the language of a dispatch
from Mr. Frelinghuysen, Secretary of State, dated July 19,
1884) "first, that the consideration of the treaty having
failed, its object never having been accomplished, the United
States did not receive that for which they covenanted; and,
second, that Great Britain has persistently violated her
agreement not to colonize the Central American coast."
F. Wharton,
Digest of the International Law of the United States,
chapter 6, section 150 f. (volume 2).
ALSO IN:
Treaties and Conventions between the United States
and other Powers (edition of 1889),
page 440.
NICARAGUA: A. D. 1855-1860.
The invasion of Walker and his Filibusters.
"Its geographical situation gave … importance to Nicaragua. It
contains a great lake, which is approached from the Atlantic
by the river San Juan; and from the west end of the lake there
are only 20 miles to the coast of the Pacific. Ever since the
time of Cortes there have been projects for connecting the two
oceans through the lake of Nicaragua. … Hence Nicaragua has
always been thought of great importance to the United States.
The political struggles of the state, ever since the failure
of the confederation, had sunk into a petty rivalry between
the two towns of Leon and Granada. Leon enjoys the distinction
of being the first important town in Central America to raise
the cry of independence in 1815, and it had always maintained
the liberal character which this disclosed. Castellon, the
leader of the Radical party, of which Leon was the seat,
called in to help him an American named William Walker.
Walker, who was born in 1824, was a young roving American who
had gone during the gold rush of 1850 to California, and
become editor of a newspaper in San Francisco. In those days
it was supposed in the United States that the time for
engulfing the whole of Spanish America had come. Lopez had
already made his descent on Cuba; and Walker, in July, 1853,
had organized a band of filibusters for the conquest of
Sonora, and the peninsula of California, which had been left
to Mexico by the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. This wild
expedition … was a total failure; but when Walker came back to
his newspapers after an absence of seven months, he found
himself a hero. His fame, as we see, had reached Central
America; and he at once accepted Castellon's offer. In 1855,
having collected a band of 70 adventurers in California, he
landed in the country, captured the town of Granada, and,
aided by the intrigues of the American consul, procured his
own appointment as General-in-Chief of the Nicaraguan army.
Walker was now master of the place: and his own provisional
President, Rivas, having turned against him, he displaced him,
and in 1856 became President himself. He remained master of
Nicaragua for nearly two years, levying arbitrary customs on
the traffic of the lake, and forming plans for a great
military state to be erected on the ruins of Spanish America.
One of Walker's first objects was to seize the famous
gold-mines of Chontales, and the sudden discovery that the
entire sierra of America is a gold-bearing region had a good
deal to do with his extraordinary enterprise. Having assured
himself of the wealth of the country, he now resolved to keep
it for himself, and this proved in the end to be his ruin. The
statesmen of the United States, who had at first supposed that
he would cede them the territory, now withdrew their support
from him: the people of the neighbouring states rose in arms
against him, and Walker was obliged to capitulate, with the
remains of his filibustering party, at Rivas in 1857. Walker,
still claiming to be President of Nicaragua, went to New
Orleans, where he collected a second band of filibusters, at
the head of whom he again landed near the San Juan river
towards the end of the year: this time he was arrested and
sent back home by the American commodore. His third and last
expedition, in 1860, was directed against Honduras, where he
hoped to meet with a good reception at the hands of the
Liberal party. Instead of this he fell into the hands of the
soldiers of Guardiola, by whom he was tried as a pirate and
shot, September 12, 1860."
E. J. Payne,
History of European Colonies,
chapter 21, section 8.
"Though he never evinced much military or other capacity,
Walker, so long as he acted under color of authority from the
chiefs of the faction he patronized, was generally successful
against the pitiful rabble styled soldiers by whom his
progress was resisted. … But his very successes proved the
ruin of the faction to which he had attached himself, by
exciting the natural jealousy and alarm of the natives who
mainly composed it; and his assumption … of the title of
President of Nicaragua, speedily followed by a decree
reestablishing Slavery in that country, exposed his purpose
and insured his downfall. As if madly bent on ruin, he
proceeded to confiscate the steamboats and other property of
the Nicaragua Transit Company, thereby arresting all American
travel to and from California through that country, and
cutting himself off from all hope of further recruiting his
forces from the throngs of sanguine or of baffled
gold-seekers, who might otherwise have been attracted to his
standard. Yet he maintained the unequal contest for about two
years."
H. Greeley,
The American Conflict,
volume 1, chapter 19.
ALSO IN:
H. H. Bancroft,
History of the Pacific States,
volume 3, chapters 16-17.
J. J. Roche,
The Story of the Filibusters,
chapters 5-18.
----------NICARAGUA: End--------
NICE (NIZZA), Asia Minor.
See NICÆA.
----------NICE, France: Start--------
NICE (NIZZA), France: A. D. 1388.
Acquisition by the House of Savoy.
See SAVOY: 11-15TH CENTURIES.
{2361}
NICE: A. D. 1542.
Siege by French and Turks.
Capture of the town.
Successful resistance of the citadel.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1532-1547.
NICE: A. D. 1792.
Annexation to the French Republic.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1792 (SEPTEMBER-DECEMBER).
NICE: A. D. 1860.
Cession to France.
See ITALY: A. D. 1859-1861.
----------NICE, France: End--------
NICEPHORUS I.,
Emperor in the East (Byzantine or Greek), A. D. 802-811.
Nicephorus II.,
Emperor in the East (Byzantine or Greek), 963-969.
Nicephorus III.,
Emperor in the East (Byzantine or Greek), 1078-1081.
NICHOLAS, Czar of Russia, A. D. 1825-1855.
Nicholas I., Pope, 858-867.
Nicholas II., Pope, 1058-1061.
Nicholas III., Pope, 1277-1280.
Nicholas IV., Pope, 1288-1292.
Nicholas V., Pope, 1447-1455.
Nicholas Swendson, King of Denmark, 1103-1134.
NICIAS (NIKIAS), and the Siege of Syracuse.
See SYRACUSE: B. C. 415-413.
NICIAS (NIKIAS), The Peace of.
See GREECE: B. C. 424-421.
NICOLET, Jean, Explorations of.
See CANADA: A. D. 1634-1673.
----------NICOMEDIA: Start--------
NICOMEDIA: A. D. 258.
Capture by the Goths.
See GOTHS: A. D. 258-267.
NICOMEDIA: A. D. 292-305.
The court of Diocletian.
"To rival the majesty of Rome was the ambition … of
Diocletian, who employed his leisure, and the wealth of the
east, in the embellishment of Nicomedia, a city placed on the
verge of Europe and Asia, almost at an equal distance between
the Danube and the Euphrates. By the taste of the monarch, and
at the expense of the people, Nicomedia acquired, in the space
of a few years, a degree of magnificence which might appear to
have required the labour of ages, and became inferior only to
Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch, in extent or populousness. …
Till Diocletian, in the twentieth year of his reign,
celebrated his Roman triumph, it is extremely doubtful whether
he ever visited the ancient capital of the empire."
E. Gibbon,
Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,
chapter 13.
See ROME: A. D. 284-305.
NICOMEDIA: A. D. 1326.
Capture by the Turks.
See TURKS (OTTOMAN): A. D. 1326-1359.
----------NICOMEDIA: End--------
NICOPOLIS.
Augustus gave this name to a city which he founded, B. C. 31,
in commemoration of the victory at Actium, on the site of the
camp which his army occupied.
C. Merivale,
History of the Romans,
chapter 28.
----------NICOPOLIS: Start--------
NICOPOLIS, Armenia, Battle of (B. C. 66).
The decisive battle in which Pompeius defeated Mithridates and
ended the long Mithridatic wars was fought, B. C. 66, in
Lesser Armenia, at a place near which Pompeius founded a city
called Nicopolis, the site of which is uncertain.
G. Long,
Decline of the Roman Republic,
volume 3, chapter 8.
NICOPOLIS: Battle of (B. C. 48).
See ROME: B. C. 47-46.
----------NICOPOLIS, Armenia: End--------
NICOPOLIS, Bulgaria, Battle of (A. D. 1396).
See TURKS (THE OTTOMAN): A. D. 1389-1403.
NICOSIA:
Taken and sacked by the Turks (1570).
See TURKS: A. D. 1566-1571.
NIEUPORT, Battle of (1600).
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1594-1609.
NIGER COMPANY, The Royal.
See AFRICA: A. D. 1884-1891.
NIHILISM.
NIHILISTS.
"In Tikomirov's work on Russia seven or eight pages are
devoted to the severe condemnation of the use of the
expressions 'nihilism' and 'nihilist.' Nevertheless … they are
employed universally, and all the world understands what is
meant by them in an approximate and relative way. … It was a
novelist who first baptized the party who called themselves at
that time, 'new men.' It was Ivan Turguenief, who by the mouth
of one of the characters in his celebrated novel, 'Fathers and
Sons,' gave the young generation the name of nihilists. But it
was not of his coinage; Royer-Collard first stamped it; Victor
Hugo had already said that the negation of the infinite led
directly to nihilism, and Joseph Lemaistre had spoken of the
nihilism, more or less sincere, of the contemporary
generations; but it was reserved for the author of 'Virgin
Soil' to bring to light and make famous this word; which after
making a great stir in his own country attracted the attention
of the whole world. The reign of Nicholas I. was an epoch of
hard oppression. When he ascended the throne, the conspiracy
of the Decembrists broke out, and this sudden revelation of
the revolutionary spirit steeled the already inflexible soul
of the Czar. Nicholas, although fond of letters and an
assiduous reader of Homer, was disposed to throttle his
enemies, and would not have hesitated to pluck out the brains
of Russia; he was very near suppressing all the universities
and schools, and inaugurating a voluntary retrocession to
Asiatic barbarism. He did mutilate and reduce the instruction,
he suppressed the chair of European political laws, and after
the events of 1848 in France he seriously considered the idea
of closing his frontiers with a cordon of troops to beat back
foreign liberalism like the cholera or the plague. … However,
it was under his sceptre, under his systematic oppression,
that, by confession of the great revolutionary statesman
Herzen, Russian thought developed as never before; that the
emancipation of the intelligence, which this very statesman
calls a tragic event, was accomplished, and a national
literature was brought to light and began to flourish. When
Alexander II. succeeded to the throne, when the bonds of
despotism were loosened and the blockade with which Nicholas
vainly tried to isolate his empire was raised, the field was
ready for the intellectual and political strife. … Before
explaining how nihilism is the outcome of intelligence, we
must understand what is meant by intelligence in Russia. It
means a class composed of all those, of whatever profession or
estate, who have at heart the advancement of intellectual
life, and contribute in every way toward it. It may be said,
indeed, that such a class is to be found in every country; but
there is this difference,—in other countries the class is not
a unit; there are factions, or a large number of its members
shun political and social discussion in order to enjoy the
serene atmosphere of the world of art, while in Russia the
intelligence means a common cause, a homogeneous spirit,
subversive and revolutionary withal. … Whence came the
revolutionary element in Russia?
{2362}
From the Occident, from France, from the negative,
materialist, sensualist philosophy of the Encyclopædia,
imported into Russia by Catherine II.; and later from Germany,
from Kantism and Hegelianism, imbibed by Russian youth at the
German universities, and which they diffused throughout their
own country with characteristic Sclav impetuosity. By 'Pure
Reason' and transcendental idealism, Herzen and Bakunine, the
first apostles of nihilism, were inspired. But the ideas
brought from Europe to Russia soon allied themselves with an
indigenous or possibly an Oriental element; namely, a sort of
quietist fatalism, which leads to the darkest and most
despairing pessimism. On the whole, nihilism is rather a
philosophical conception of the sum of life than a purely
democratic and revolutionary movement. … Nihilism had no
political color about it at the beginning. During the decade
between 1860 and 1870 the youth of Russia was seized with a
sort of fever for negation, a fierce antipathy toward
everything that was,—authorities, institutions, customary
ideas, and old-fashioned dogmas. In Turguenief's novel,
'Fathers and Sons,' we meet with Bazarof, a froward,
ill-mannered, intolerable fellow, who represents this type.
After 1871 the echo of the Paris Commune and emissaries of the
Internationals crossed the frontier, and the nihilists began
to bestir themselves, to meet together clandestinely, and to
send out propaganda. Seven years later they organized an era
of terror, assassination, and explosions. Thus three phases
have followed upon one another,—thought, word, and deed,—along
that road which is never so long as it looks, the road that
leads from the word to the act, from Utopia to crime. And yet
nihilism never became a political party as we understand the
term. It has no defined creed or official programme. The
fulness of its despair embraces all negatives and all acute
revolutionary forms. Anarchists, federalists, cantonalists,
covenanters, terrorists, all who are unanimous in a desire to
sweep away the present order, are grouped under the ensign of
nihil."
E. P. Bazan,
Russia, its People and its Literature,
book 2, chapters 1-2.
"Out of Russia, an already extended list of revolutionary
spirits in this land has attracted the attention and kept
curiosity on the alert. We call them Nihilists,—of which the
Russian pronunciation is neegilist, which, however, is now
obsolete. Confined to the terrorist group in Europe, the
number of these persons is certainly very small. Perhaps, as
is thought in Russia, there are 500 in all, who busy
themselves, even if reluctantly, with thoughts of resorting to
bombs and murderous weapons to inspire terror. But it is not
exactly this group that is meant when we speak of that
nihilistic force in society which extends everywhere, into all
circles, and finds support and strongholds at widely spread
points. It is indeed not very different from what elsewhere in
Europe is regarded as culture, advanced culture: the profound
scepticism in regard to our existing institutions in their
present form, what we call royal prerogative, church,
marriage, property."
Georg Brandes,
Impressions of Russia,
chapter 4.
"The genuine Nihilism was a philosophical and literary
movement, which flourished in the first decade after the
Emancipation of the Serfs, that is to say, between 1860 and
1870. It is now (1883] absolutely extinct, and only a few
traces are left of it, which are rapidly disappearing. …
Nihilism was a struggle for the emancipation of intelligence
from every kind of dependence, and it advanced side by side
with that for the emancipation of the labouring classes from
serfdom. The fundamental principle of Nihilism, properly
so-called, was absolute individualism. It was the negation, in
the name of individual liberty of all the obligations imposed
upon the individual by society, by family life, and by
religion. Nihilism was a passionate and powerful reaction, not
against political despotism, but against the moral despotism
that weighs upon the private and inner life of the individual.
But it must be confessed that our predecessors, at least in
the earlier days, introduced into this highly pacific struggle
the same spirit of rebellion and almost the same fanaticism
that characterises the present movement."
Stepniak,
Underground Russia,
introduction.
ALSO IN:
Stepniak,
The Russian Storm-Cloud.
L. Tikhomirov,
Russia, Political and Social,
books 6-7 (volume 2).
E. Noble,
The Russian Revolt.
A. Leroy-Beaulieu,
The Empire of the Tsars,
part 1, book 3, chapter 4.
See, also, RUSSIA: A. D. 1879-1881;
and ANARCHISTS.
NIKA SEDITION, The.
See CIRCUS, FACTIONS OF THE ROMAN.
NIKIAS.
See NICIAS.
NILE, Naval Battle of the.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1798 (MAY-AUGUST).
NIMEGUEN:
Origin.
See BATAVIANS.
NIMEGUEN: A. D. 1591.
Siege and capture by Prince Maurice.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1588-1593.
NIMEGUEN, The Peace of (1678-1679).
The war which Louis XIV. began in 1672 by attacking Holland,
with the co-operation of his English pensioner, Charles II.,
and which roused against him a defensive coalition of Spain,
Germany and Denmark with the Dutch (see NETHERLANDS: A. D.
1672-1674, and 1674-1678), was ended by a series of treaties
negotiated at Nimeguen in 1678 and 1679. The first of these
treaties, signed August 10, 1678, was between France and
Holland. "France and Holland kept what was in their
possession, except Maestricht and its dependencies which were
restored to Holland. France therefore kept her conquests in
Senegal and Guiana. This was all the territory lost by Holland
in the terrible war which had almost annihilated her. The
United Provinces pledged themselves to neutrality in the war
which might continue between France and the other powers, and
guaranteed the neutrality of Spain, after the latter should
have signed the peace. France included Sweden in the treaty;
Holland included in it Spain and the other allies who should
make peace within six weeks after the exchange of
ratifications. To the treaty of peace was annexed a treaty of
commerce, concluded for twenty-five years."
H. Martin,
History of France: Age of Louis XIV.,
(translated by M. L. Booth),
volume 1, chapter 6.
The peace between France and Spain was signed September 17.
France gave back, in the Spanish Netherlands and elsewhere,
"Charleroi, Binch, Ath, Oudenarde, and Courtrai, which she had
gained by the Peace of Aix-la-Chapelle; the town and duchy of
Limburg, all the country beyond the Meuse, Ghent, Rodenhus,
and the district of the Waes, Leuze, and St. Ghislain, with
Puycerda in Catalonia, these having been taken since that
peace.
{2363}
But she retained Franche Comté, with the towns of
Valenciènnes, Bouchain, Condé, Cambrai and the Cambresis,
Aire, St. Omer, Ypres, Werwick, Warneton, Poperinge, Bailleul,
Cassel, Bavai, and Maubeuge. … On February 2, 1679, peace was
declared between Louis, the Emperor, and the Empire. Louis
gave back Philippsburg, retaining Freiburg with the desired
liberty of passage across the Rhine to Breisach; in all other
respects the Treaty of Munster, of October 24, 1648, was
reestablished. … The treaty then dealt with the Duke of
Lorraine. To his restitution Louis annexed conditions which
rendered Lorraine little more than a French province. Not only
was Nancy to become French, but, in conformity with the treaty
of 1661, Louis was to have possession of four large roads
traversing the country, with half a league's breadth of
territory throughout their length, and the places contained
therein. … To these conditions the Duke refused to subscribe,
preferring continual exile until the Peace of Ryswick in 1697,
when at length his son regained the ancestral estates."
Treaties between the Emperor and Sweden, between Brandenburg
and France and Sweden, between Denmark and the same, and
between Sweden, Spain and Holland, were successively concluded
during the year 1679. "The effect of the Peace of Nimwegen
was, … speaking generally, to reaffirm the Peace of
Westphalia. But … it did not, like the Peace of Westphalia,
close for any length of time the sources of strife."
O. Airy,
The English Restoration and Louis XIV.,
chapter 22.
ALSO IN:
Sir W. Temple,
Memoirs,
part 2 (Works, volume 2).
NINE WAYS, The.
See AMPHIPOLIS;
also, ATHENS: B. C. 466-454.
NINETY-FIVE THESES OF LUTHER, The.
See PAPACY: A. D. 1517.
NINETY-TWO, The.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1767-1768.
NINEVEH.
"In or about the year before Christ 606, Nineveh, the great
city, was destroyed. For many hundred years had she stood in
arrogant splendor, her palaces towering above the Tigris and
mirrored in its swift waters; army after army had gone forth
from her gates and returned laden with the spoils of conquered
countries; her monarchs had ridden to the high place of
sacrifice in chariots drawn by captive kings. But her time
came at last. The nations assembled and encompassed her around
[the Medes and the Babylonians, with their lesser allies].
Popular tradition tells how over two years lasted the siege;
how the very river rose and battered her walls; till one day a
vast flame rose up to heaven; how the last of a mighty line of
kings, too proud to surrender, thus saved himself, his
treasures and his, capital from the shame of bondage. Never
was city to rise again where Nineveh had been." The very
knowledge of the existence of Nineveh was lost so soon that,
two centuries later, when Xenophon passed the ruins, with his
Ten Thousand retreating Greeks, he reported them to be the
ruins of a deserted city of the Medes and called it Larissa.
Twenty-four centuries went by, and the winds and the rains, in
their slow fashion, covered the bricks and stones of the
desolated Assyrian capital with a shapeless mound of earth.
Then came the searching modern scholar and explorer, and began
to excavate the mound, to see what lay beneath it. First the
French Consul, Botta, in 1842; then the Englishman Layard, in
1845; then the later English scholar, George Smith, and
others; until buried Nineveh has been in great part brought to
light. Not only the imperishable monuments of its splendid art
have been exposed, but a veritable library of its literature,
written on tablets and cylinders of clay, has been found and
read. The discoveries of the past half-century, on the site of
Nineveh, under the mound called Koyunjik, and elsewhere in
other similarly-buried cities of ancient Babylonia and
Assyria, may reasonably be called the most extraordinary
additions to human knowledge which our age has acquired.
Z. A. Ragozin,
Story of Chaldea,
introduction, chapters 1-4.
ALSO IN:
A. H. Layard,
Nineveh and its Remains;
and Discoveries among the Ruins of Nineveh and Babylon.
G. Smith,
Assyrian Discoveries
See, also, ASSYRIA;
and LIBRARIES, ANCIENT.
NINEVEH, Battle of (A.D. 627).
See PERSIA: A. D. 226-627.
NINFEO, Treaty of.
See GENOA: A. D. 1261-1299.
NINIQUIQUILAS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: PAMPAS TRIBES.
NIPAL
NEPAUL:
English war with the Ghorkas.
See INDIA: A. D. 1805-1816.
NIPMUCKS,
NIPNETS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY;
also, NEW ENGLAND: A. D. 1674-1675, 1675,
and 1676-1678 KING PHILIP'S WAR.
NISÆAN PLAINS, The.
The famous horse-pastures of the ancient Medes. "Most probably
they are to be identified with the modern plains of Khawah and
Alishtar, between Behistun and Khorramabad, which are even now
considered to afford the best summer pasturage in Persia. …
The proper Nisæa is the district of Nishapur in Khorasan,
whence it is probable that the famous breed of horses was
originally brought."
G. Rawlinson,
Five Great Monarchies: Media,
chapter 1, with foot-note.
NISCHANDYIS.
See SUBLIME PORTE.
NISHAPOOR:
Destruction by the Mongols (1221).
See KHORASSAN: A. D. 1220-1221.
NISIB, Battle of (1839).
See TURKS: A. D. 1831-1840.
NISIBIS, Sieges of (A. D. 338-350).
See PERSIA: A. D. 226-627.
NISIBIS, Theological School of.
See NESTORIANS.
----------NISMES: Start--------
NISMES:
Origin.
See VOLCÆ.
NISMES: A. D. 752-759.
Recovery from the Moslems.
See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST: A. D. 752-759.
----------NISMES: End--------
NISSA, Siege and battle (1689-1690).
See HUNGARY; A. D. 1683-1699.
NITIOBRIGES, The.
These were a tribe in ancient Gaul whose capital city was
Aginnum, the modern town of Agen on the Garonne.
G. Long,
Decline of the Roman Republic,
volume 4, chapter 17.
NIVELLE, Battle of the (1813).
See SPAIN: A. D. 1812-1814.
NIVÔSE, The month.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1793 (OCTOBER)
THE NEW REPUBLICAN CALENDAR.
NIZAM.
Nizam's dominions.
See INDIA: A. D. 1662-1748.
NIZZA.
See NICE.
NO.
NO AMON.
See THEBES, EGYPT.
NO MAN'S LAND, Africa.
See GRIQUAS.
{2364}
NO MAN'S LAND, England.
In the open or common field system which prevailed in early
England, the fields were divided into long, narrow strips,
wherever practicable. In some cases, "little odds and ends of
unused land remained, which from time immemorial were called
'no man's land,' or 'anyone's land,' or 'Jack's land,' as the
case might be."
F. Seebohm,
English Village Community,
chapter 1.
NO POPERY RIOTS, The.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1778-1780.
NOBLES, Roman:
Origin of the term.
"When Livy in his first six books writes of the disputes
between the Patres or Patricians and the Plebs about the
Public Land, he sometimes designates the Patricians by the
name Nobiles, which we have in the form Nobles. A Nobilis is a
man who is known. A man who is not known is Ignobilis, a
nobody. In the later Republic a Plebeian who attained to a
curule office elevated his family to a rank of honour, to a
nobility, not acknowledged by any law, but by usage. … The
Patricians were a nobility of ancient date. … The Patrician
nobility was therefore independent of all office, but the new
Nobility and their Jus Imaginum originated in some Plebeian
who first of his family attained a curule office. … The true
conclusion is that Livy in his first six books uses the word
Nobiles improperly, for there is no evidence that this name
was given to the Patres before the consulship of L. Sextius."
G. Long,
Decline of the Roman Republic,
volume 1, chapter 11.
See, also, ROME: B. C. 146.
NOËTIANS AND SABELLIANS.
"At the head of those in this century [the 3d] who explained
the scriptural doctrine of the Father, Son, and holy Spirit,
by the precepts of reason, stands Noëtus of Smyrna; a man
little known, but who is reported by the ancients to have been
cast out of the church by presbyters (of whom no account is
given), to have opened a school, and to have formed a sect. It
is stated that, being wholly unable to comprehend how that
God, who is so often in Scripture declared to be one and
undivided, can, at the same time, be manifold, Noëtus
concluded that the undivided Father of all things united
himself, with the man Christ, was born in him, and in him
suffered and died. On account of this doctrine his followers
were called Patripassians. … After the middle of this century,
Sabellius, an African bishop, or presbyter, of Ptolemais, the
capital of the Pentapolitan province of Libya Cyrenaica,
attempted to reconcile, in a manner somewhat different from
that of Noëtus, the scriptural doctrine of Father, Son, and
holy Spirit, with the doctrine of the unity of the divine
nature." Sabellius assumed "that only an energy or virtue,
emitted from the Father of all, or, if you choose, a particle
of the person or nature of the Father, became united with the
man Christ. And such a virtue or particle of the Father, he
also supposed, constituted the holy Spirit."
J. L. von Mosheim,
Historical Commentaries, 3d Century,
sections 32-33.
NÖFELS,
NAEFELS, Battle of (1388).
See SWITZERLAND: A. D. 1386-1388.
Battle of (1799).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1799 (AUGUST-DECEMBER).
NOLA, Battle of (B. C. 88).
See ROME: B. C. 90-88.
NOMBRE DE DIOS:
Surprised and plundered by Drake (1572).
See AMERICA: A. D. 1572-1580.
NOMEN,
COGNOMEN,
PRÆNOMEN.
See GENS.
NOMES.
A name given by the Greeks to the districts into which Egypt
was divided from very ancient times.
NOMOPHYLAKES.
In ancient Athens, under the constitution introduced by
Pericles, seven magistrates called Nomophylakes, or
"Law-Guardians," "sat alongside of the Proedri, or presidents,
both in the senate and in the public assembly, and were
charged with the duty of interposing whenever any step was
taken or any proposition made contrary to the existing laws.
They were also empowered to constrain the magistrates to act
according to law."
G. Grote,
History of Greece,
part 2, chapter 46.
NOMOTHETÆ, The.
A legislative commission, elected and deputed by the general
assembly of the people, in ancient Athens, to amend existing
laws or enact new ones.
G. F. Schömann,
Antiquity of Greece: The State,
part 3, chapter 3.
NONCONFORMISTS,
DISSENTERS, 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.
NONES.
See CALENDAR, JULIAN.
NONINTERCOURSE LAW OF 1809, The American.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1804-1809.
NONJURORS, The.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1689 (APRIL-AUGUST).
NOOTKAS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: WAKASHAN FAMILY.
NOPH.
See MEMPHIS.
NÖRDLINGEN,
Siege and Battle (1634).
See GERMANY: A. D. 1634-1639.
Second Battle, or Battle of Allerheim (1645).
See GERMANY: A. D. 1640-1645.
NORE, Mutiny at the.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1797.
NOREMBEGA.
See NORUMBEGA.
----------NORFOLK, VIRGINIA: Start--------
NORFOLK, VIRGINIA: A. D. 1776.
Bombardment and destruction.
See VIRGINIA: A. D. 1775-1776.
NORFOLK, VIRGINIA: A. D. 1779.
Pillaged by British marauders.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1778-1779 WASHINGTON GUARDING THE HUDSON.
NORFOLK, VIRGINIA: A. D. 1861 (April).
Abandoned by the United States commandant.
Destruction of ships and property.
Possession taken by the Rebels.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1861 (APRIL).
NORFOLK, VIRGINIA: A. D. 1862 (February).
Threatened by the Federal capture of Roanoke Island.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1862 (JANUARY-APRIL: NORTH CAROLINA).
NORFOLK, VIRGINIA: A. D. 1862 (May).
Evacuated by the Confederates.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1862 (MAY: VIRGINIA) EVACUATION OF NORFOLK.
----------NORFOLK, VIRGINIA: End--------
NORFOLK ISLAND PENAL COLONY.
See AUSTRALIA: A. D. 1601-1800.
NORICUM.
See PANNONIA;
also, RHÆTIANS.
----------NORMANDY: Start--------
NORMANDY: A. D. 876-911.
Rollo's conquest and occupation.
See NORMANS.
NORTHMEN: A. D. 876-911.
{2365}
NORMANDY: A. D. 911-1000.
The solidifying of Rollo's duchy.
The Normans become French.
The first century which passed after the settlement of the
Northmen along the Seine saw "the steady growth of the duchy
in extent and power. Much of this was due to the ability of
its rulers, to the vigour and wisdom with which Hrolf forced
order and justice on the new community, as well as to the
political tact with which both Hrolf and William Longsword
[son and successor of Duke Rollo or Hrolf, A. D. 927-943]
clung to the Karolings in their strife with the dukes of
Paris. But still more was owing to the steadiness with which
both these rulers remained faithful to the Christianity which
had been imposed on the northmen as a condition of their
settlement, and to the firm resolve with which they trampled
down the temper and traditions which their people had brought
from their Scandinavian homeland, and welcomed the language
and civilization which came in the wake of their neighbours'
religion. The difficulties that met the dukes were indeed
enormous. … They were girt in by hostile states, they were
threatened at sea by England, under Æthelstan a network of
alliances menaced them with ruin. Once a French army occupied
Rouen, and a French king held the pirates' land at his will;
once the German lances were seen from the walls of their
capital. Nor were their difficulties within less than those
without. The subject population which had been trodden under
foot by the northern settlers were seething with discontent.
The policy of Christianization and civilization broke the
Normans themselves into two parties. … The very conquests of
Hrolf and his successor, the Bessin, the Cotentin, had to be
settled and held by the new comers, who made them strongholds
of heathendom. … But amidst difficulties from within and from
without the dukes held firm to their course, and their
stubborn will had its reward. … By the end of William
Longsword's days all Normandy, save the newly settled
districts of the west, was Christian, and spoke French. … The
work of the statesman at last completed the work of the sword.
As the connexion of the dukes with the Karoling kings had
given them the land, and helped them for fifty years to hold
it against the House of Paris, so in the downfall of the
Karolings the sudden and adroit change of front which bound
the Norman rulers to the House of Paris in its successful
struggle for the Crown secured the land for ever to the
northmen. The close connexion which France was forced to
maintain with the state whose support held the new royal line
on its throne told both on kingdom and duchy. The French dread
of the 'pirates' died gradually away, while French influence
spread yet more rapidly over a people which clung so closely
to the French crown."
J. R. Green,
The Conquest of England,
chapter 8.
NORMANDY: A. D. 1035-1063.
Duke William establishes his authority.
Duke Robert, of Normandy, who died in 1035, was succeeded by
his young son William, who bore in youth the opprobrious name
of "the Bastard," but who extinguished it in later life under
the proud appellation of "the Conqueror." By reason of his
bastardy he was not an acceptable successor, and, being yet a
boy, it seemed little likely that he would maintain himself on
the ducal throne. Normandy, for a dozen years, was given up to
lawless strife among its nobles. In 1047 a large part of the
duchy rose in revolt, against its objectionable young lord.
"It will be remembered that the western part of Normandy, the
lands of Bayeux and Coutances, were won by the Norman dukes
after the eastern part, the lands of Rouen and Evreux. And it
will be remembered that these western lands, won more lately,
and fed by new colonies from the North, were still heathen and
Danish some while after eastern Normandy had become Christian
and French-speaking. Now we may be sure that, long before
William's day, all Normandy was Christian, but it is quite
possible that the old tongue may have lingered on in the
western lands. At any rate there was a wide difference in
spirit and feeling between the more French and the more Danish
districts, to say nothing of Bayeux, where, before the Normans
came, there had been a Saxon settlement. One part of the duchy
in short was altogether Romance in speech and manners, while
more or less of Teutonic character still clave to the other.
So now Teutonic Normandy rose against Duke William, and
Romance Normandy was faithful to him. The nobles of the Bessin
and Cotentin made league with William's cousin Guy of
Burgundy, meaning, as far as one can see, to make Guy Duke of
Rouen and Evreux, and to have no lord at all for themselves. …
When the rebellion broke out, William was among them at
Valognes, and they tried to seize him. But his fool warned him
in the night; he rode for his life, and got safe to his own
Falaise. All eastern Normandy was loyal; but William doubted
whether he could by himself overcome so strong an array of
rebels. So he went to Poissy, between Rouen and Paris, and
asked his lord King Henry [of France] to help him. So King
Henry came with a French army; and the French and those whom
we may call the French Normans met the Teutonic Normans in
battle at Val-ès-dunes, not far from Caen. It was William's
first pitched battle," and he won a decisive victory. "He was
now fully master of his own duchy; and the battle of
Val-ès-dunes finally fixed that Normandy should take its
character from Romance Rouen and not from Teutonic Bayeux.
William had in short overcome Saxons and Danes in Gaul before
he came to overcome them in Britain. He had to conquer his own

Normandy before he could conquer England. … But before long
King Henry got jealous of William's power, and he was now
always ready to give help to any Norman rebels. … And the
other neighbouring princes were jealous of him as well as the
King. His neighbours in Britanny, Anjou, Chartres, and
Ponthieu, were all against him. But the great Duke was able to
hold his own against them all, and before long to make a great
addition to his dominions." Between 1053 and 1058 the French
King invaded Normandy three times and suffered defeat on every
occasion. In 1063 Duke William invaded the county of Maine,
and reduced it to entire submission. "From this time he ruled
over Maine as well as over Normandy," although its people were
often in revolt. "The conquest of Maine raised William's power
and fame to a higher pitch than it reached at any other time
before his conquest of England."
E. A. Freeman,
Short History of the Norman Conquest,
chapter 4.
ALSO IN:
E. A. Freeman,
History of the Norman Conquest,
chapter 8.
Sir F. Palgrave,
History of Normandy and England,
book 2, chapter 4.
{2366}
NORMANDY: A. D. 1066.
Duke William becomes King of England.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1042-1066; 1066; and 1066-1071.
NORMANDY: . D. 1087-1135.
Under Duke Robert and Henry Beauclerc.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1087-1135.
NORMANDY: A. D. 1096.
The Crusade of Duke Robert.
See CRUSADES: A. D. 1096-1099.
NORMANDY: A. D. 1203-1205.
Wrested from England and restored to France.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1180-1224;
and ENGLAND: A. D. 1205.
NORMANDY: A. D. 1419.
Conquest by Henry V. of England.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1417-1422.
NORMANDY: A. D. 1449.
Recovery from the English.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1431-1453.
NORMANDY: 16th Century.
Spread of the Reformation.
Strength of Protestantism.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1559-1561.
----------NORMANS: Start--------
NORMANS.
NORTH MEN:
Name and Origin.
"The northern pirates, variously called Danes or Normans,
according as they came from the islands of the Baltic Sea or
the coast of Norway, … descended from the same primitive race
with the Anglo-Saxons and the Franks; their language had roots
identical with the idioms of these two nations: but this token
of an ancient fraternity did not preserve from their hostile
incursions either Saxon Britain or Frankish Gaul, nor even the
territory beyond the Rhine, then exclusively inhabited by
Germanic tribes. The conversion of the southern Teutons to the
Christian faith had broken all bond of fraternity between them
and the Teutons of the north. In the 9th century the man of
the north still gloried in the title of son of Odin, and
treated as bastards and apostates the Germans who had become
children of the church. … A sort of religious and patriotic
fanaticism was thus combined in the Scandinavian with the
fiery impulsiveness of their character, and an insatiable
thirst for gain. They shed with joy the blood of the priests,
were especially delighted at pillaging the churches, and
stabled their horses in the chapels of the palaces. … In three
days, with an east wind, the fleets of Denmark and Norway,
two-sailed vessels, reached the south of Britain. The soldiers
of each fleet obeyed in general one chief, whose vessel was
distinguished from the rest by some particular ornament. … All
equal under such a chief, bearing lightly their voluntary
submission and the weight of their mailed armour, which they
promised themselves soon to exchange for an equal weight of
gold, the Danish pirates pursued the 'road of the swans,' as
their ancient national poetry expressed it. Sometimes they
coasted along the shore, and laid wait for the enemy in the
straits, the bays, and smaller anchorages, which procured them
the surname of Vikings, or 'children of the creeks'; sometimes
they dashed in pursuit of their prey across the ocean."
A. Thierry,
Conquest of England by the Normans,
book 2 (volume 1).
ALSO IN:
T. Carlyle,
The Early Kings of Norway.
NORMANS: 8-9th Centuries.
The Vikings and what sent them to sea.
"No race of the ancient or modern world have ever taken to the
sea with such heartiness as the Northmen. The great cause
which filled the waters of Western Europe with their barks was
that consolidation and centralization of the kingly power all
over Europe which followed after the days of Charlemagne, and
which put a stop to those great invasions and migrations by
land which had lasted for centuries. Before that time the
north and east of Europe, pressed from behind by other
nationalities, and growing straitened within their own bounds,
threw off from time to time bands of emigrants which gathered
force as they slowly marched along, until they appeared in the
west as a fresh wave of the barbarian flood. As soon as the
west, recruited from the very source whence the invaders came,
had gained strength enough to set them at defiance, which
happened in the time of Charlemagne, these invasions by land
ceased after a series of bloody defeats, and the north had to
look for another outlet for the force which it was unable to
support at home. Nor was the north itself slow to follow
Charlemagne's example. Harold Fairhair, no inapt disciple of
the great emperor, subdued the petty kings in Norway one after
another, and made himself supreme king. At the same time he
invaded the rights of the old freeman, and by taxes and tolls
laid on his allodial holding drove him into exile. We have
thus the old outlet cut off and a new cause for emigration
added. No doubt the Northmen even then had long been used to
struggle with the sea, and sea-roving was the calling of the
brave, but the two causes we have named gave it a great
impulse just at the beginning of the tenth century, and many a
freeman who would have joined the host of some famous leader
by land, or have lived on a little king at home, now sought
the waves as a birthright of which no king could rob him.
Either alone, or as the follower of some sea-king, whose realm
was the sea's wide wastes, he went out year after year, and
thus won fame and wealth. The name given to this pursuit was
Viking, a word which is in no way akin to king. It is derived
from 'Vik,' a bay or creek, because these sea-rovers lay
moored in bays and creeks on the look-out for merchant ships;
the 'ing' is a well known ending, meaning, in this case,
occupation or calling. Such a sea-rover was called 'Vikingr,'
and at one time or another in his life almost every man of
note in the North had taken to the sea and lived a Viking
life."
G. W. Dasent,
Story of Burnt Njal,
volume 2, appendix.
"Western viking expeditions have hitherto been ascribed to
Danes and Norwegians exclusively. Renewed investigations
reveal, however, that Swedes shared widely in these
achievements, notably in the acquisition of England, and that,
among other famous conquerors, Rolf, the founder of the
Anglo-Norman dynasty, issued from their country. … Norwegians,
like Swedes, were, in truth, merged in the terms Northmen and
Danes, both of which were general to all Scandinavians abroad.
… The curlier conversion of the Danes to Christianity and
their more immediate contact with Germany account for the
frequent application of their name to all Scandinavians."
W. Roos,
The Swedish Part in the Viking Expeditions
(English History Review, April, 1892).
ALSO IN:
S. Laing,
Preliminary Dissertation to Heimskringla.
C. F. Keary,
The Vikings of Western Christendom,
chapter 5.
P. B. Du Chaillu,
The Viking Age.
See, also, SCANDINAVIAN STATES.
{2367}
NORMANS: 8-9th Centuries.
The island empire of the Vikings.
We have hitherto treated the Norwegians, Swedes, and Danes
under the common appellation of Northmen; and this is in many
ways the most convenient, for it is often impossible to decide
the nationality of the individual settlement. Indeed, it would
appear probable that the devastating bands were often composed
indiscriminately of the several nationalities. Still, in
tracing the history of their conquests, we may lay it down as
a general rule that England was the exclusive prey of the
Danes; that Scotland and the islands to the north as far as
Iceland, and to the south as far as Anglesea and Ireland, fell
to the Norwegians, and Russia to the Swedes; while Gaul and
Germany were equally the spoil of the Norwegians and the
Danes. … While England had been overcome by the Danes, the
Norwegians had turned their attention chiefly to the north of
the British Isles and the islands of the West. Their
settlements naturally fell into three divisions, which tally
with their geographical position.
1. The Orkneys and Shetlands, lying to the N. E. of Scotland.
2. The isles to the west as far south as Ireland.
3. Iceland and the Faroe Isles.
The Orkneys and Shetlands: Here the Northmen first appear as
early as the end of the 8th century, and a few peaceful
settlements were made by those who were anxious to escape from
the noisy scenes which distracted their northern country. In
the reign of Harald Harfagr [the Fairhaired] they assumed new
importance, and their character is changed. Many of those
driven out by Harald sought a refuge here, and betaking
themselves to piracy periodically infested the Norwegian coast
in revenge for their defeat and expulsion. These ravages
seriously disturbing the peace of his newly acquired kingdom,
Harald fitted out an expedition and devoted a whole summer to
conquering the Vikings and extirpating the brood of pirates.
The country being gained, he offered it to his chief adviser,
Rögnwald, Jarl of Möri in Norway, father of Rollo of Normandy,
who, though refusing to go himself, held it during his life as
a family possession, and sent Sigurd, his brother, there. …
Rögnwald next sent his son Einar, and from his time [A. D.
875] we may date the final establishment of the Jarls of
Orkney, who henceforth owe a nominal allegiance to the King of
Norway. … The close of the 8th century also saw the
commencement of the incursions of the Northmen in the west of
Scotland, and the Western Isles soon became a favourite resort
of the Vikings. In the Keltic annals these unwelcome visitors
had gained the name of Fingall, 'the white strangers,' from
the fairness of their complexion; and Dugall, the black
strangers, probably from the iron coats of mail worn by their
chiefs. … By the end of the 9th century a sort of naval empire
had arisen, consisting of the Hebrides, parts of the western
coasts of Scotland, especially the modern Argyllshire, Man,
Anglesea, and the eastern shores of Ireland. This empire was
under a line of sovereigns who called themselves the Hy-Ivar
(grandsons of Ivar), and lived now in Man, now in Dublin.
Thence they often joined their kinsmen in their attacks on
England, and at times aspired to the position of Jarls of the
Danish Northumbria."
A. H. Johnson,
The Normans in Europe,
chapter 2.
"Under the government of these Norwegian princes [the Hy Ivar]
the Isles appear to have been very flourishing. They were
crowded with people; the arts were cultivated, and
manufactures were carried to a degree of perfection which was
then thought excellence. This comparatively advanced state of
society in these remote isles may be ascribed partly to the
influence and instructions of the Irish clergy, who were
established all over the island before the arrival of the
Norwegians, and possessed as much learning as was in those
ages to be found in any part of Europe, except Constantinople
and Rome; and partly to the arrival of great numbers of the
provincial Britons flying to them as an asylum when their
country was ravaged by the Saxons, and carrying with them the
remains of the science, manufactures, and wealth introduced
among them by their Roman masters. Neither were the Norwegians
themselves in those ages destitute of a considerable portion
of learning and of skill in the useful arts, in navigation,
fisheries, and manufactures; nor were they in any respect such
barbarians as those who know them only by the declamations of
the early English writers may be apt to suppose them. The
principal source of their wealth was piracy, then esteemed an
honourable profession, in the exercise of which these
islanders laid all the maritime countries of the west part of
Europe under heavy contributions."
D. Macpherson,
Geographical Illustrations of Scottish History
(Quoted by J. H. Burton, History of Scotland,
chapter 15, volume 2, foot-note).
See, also,
IRELAND: 9-10TH CENTURIES.
NORMANS: A. D. 787-880.
The so-called Danish invasions and settlements in England.
"In our own English chronicles, 'Dena' or Dane is used as the
common term for all the Scandinavian invaders of Britain,
though not including the Swedes, who took no part in the
attack, while Northman generally means 'man of Norway.' Asser
however uses the words as synonymous, 'Nordmanni sive Dani.'
Across the channel 'Northman' was the general name for the
pirates, and 'Dane' would usually mean a pirate from Denmark.
The distinction however is partly a chronological one; as,
owing to the late appearance of the Danes in the middle of the
ninth century, and the prominent part they then took in the
general Wiking movement, their name tended from that time to
narrow the area of the earlier term of 'Nordmanni.'"
J. R. Green,
The Conquest of England,
page 68, foot-note.
Prof. Freeman divides the Danish invasions of England into
three periods:
1. The period of merely plundering incursions, which
began A. D. 787.
2. The period of actual occupation and settlement, from 866 to
the Peace of Wedmore, 880.
3. The later period of conquest, within which England was
governed by Danish kings, A. D. 980-1042.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 855-880.
ALSO IN:
C. F. Keary,
The Vikings in Western Christendom,
chapters 6 and 12.
NORMANS: A. D. 841.
First expedition up the Seine.
In May, A. D. 841, the Seine was entered for the first time by
a fleet of Norse pirates, whose depredations in France had
been previously confined to the coasts. The expedition was
commanded by a chief named Osker, whose plans appear to have
been well laid. He led his pirates straight to the rich city
of Rouen, never suffering them to slacken oar or sail, or to
touch the tempting country through which they passed, until
the great prize was struck. "The city was fired and plundered.
Defence was wholly impracticable, and great slaughter ensued.
… Osker's three days' occupation of Rouen was remuneratingly
successful.
{2368}
Their vessels loaded with spoil and captives, gentle and
simple, clerks, merchants, citizens, soldiers, peasants, nuns,
dames, damsels, the Danes dropped down the Seine, to complete
their devastation on the shores. … The Danes then quitted the
Seine; having formed their plans for renewing the encouraging
enterprize,—another time they would do more. Normandy dates
from Osker's three days' occupation Of Rouen."
Sir F. Palgrave,
History of Normandy and England,
book 1, chapter 2 (volume 1).
ALSO IN:
C. F. Keary,
The Vikings in Western Christendom,
chapter 9.
NORMANS: A. D. 845-861.
Repeated ravages in the Seine.
Paris thrice sacked.
See PARIS; A. D. 845; and 857-861.
NORMANS: A. D. 849-860.
The career of Hasting.
"About the year of Alfred's birth [849] they laid siege to
Tours, from which they were repulsed by the gallantry of the
citizens, assisted by the miraculous aid of Saint Martin. It
is at this siege that Hasting first appears as a leader. His
birth is uncertain. In some accounts he is said to have been
the son of a peasant of Troyes, the capital of Champagne, and
to have forsworn his faith, and joined the Danes in his early
youth, from an inherent lust of battle and plunder. In others
he is called the son of the jarl Atte. But, whatever his
origin, by the middle of the century he had established his
title to lead the Northern hordes in those fierce forays which
helped to shatter the Carlovingian Empire to fragments. … When
the land was bare, leaving the despoiled provinces he again
put to sea, and, sailing southwards still, pushed up the Tagus
and Guadalquiver, and ravaged the neighbourhoods of Lisbon and
Seville. But no settlement in Spain was possible at this time.
The Peninsula had lately had for Caliph Abdalrahman the
Second, called El Mouzaffer, 'The Victorious,' and the vigour
of his rule had made the Arabian kingdom in Spain the most
efficient power for defence in Europe. Hasting soon recoiled
from the Spanish coasts, and returned to his old haunts. The
leaders of the Danes in England, the Sidrocs and Hinguar and
Hubba, had, as we have seen, a special delight in the
destruction of churches and monasteries, mingling a fierce
religious fanaticism with their thirst for battle and plunder.
This exceeding bitterness of the Northmen may be fairly laid
in great measure to the account of the thirty years of
proselytising warfare, which Charlemagne had waged in Saxony,
and along all the northern frontier of his empire. … Hasting
seems to have been filled with a double portion of this
spirit, which he had indulged throughout his career in the
most inveterate hatred to priests and holy places. It was
probably this, coupled with a certain weariness—commonplace
murder and sacrilege having grown tame, and lost their
charm—which incited him to the most daring of all his
exploits, a direct attack on the head of Christendom, and the
sacred city. Hasting then, about the year 860, planned an
attack on Rome, and the proposal was well received by his
followers. Sailing again round Spain, and pillaging on their
way both on the Spanish and Moorish coasts, they entered the
Mediterranean, and, steering for Italy, landed in the bay of
Spezzia, near the town of Luna. Luna was the place where the
great quarries of the Carrara marble had been worked ever
since the times of the Cæsars. The city itself was, it is
said, in great part built of white marble, and the 'candentia
mœnia Lunæ' deceived Hasting into the belief that he was
actually before Rome; so he sat down before the town which he
had failed to surprise. The hope of taking it by assault was
soon abandoned, but Hasting obtained his end by guile. … The
priests were massacred, the gates thrown open, and the city
taken and spoiled. Luna never recovered its old prosperity
after the raid of the Northmen, and in Dante's time had fallen
into utter decay. But Hasting's career in Italy ended with the
sack of Luna; and, giving up all hope of attacking Rome, he
re-embarked with the spoil of the town, the most beautiful of
the women, and all the youths who could be used as soldiers or
rowers. His fleet was, wrecked on the south coasts of France
on its return westward, and all the spoil lost; but the devil
had work yet for Hasting and his men, who got ashore in
sufficient numbers to recompense themselves for their losses
by the plunder of Provence."
T. Hughes,
Alfred the Great,
chapter 20.
NORMANS: A. D. 860-1100.
The discovery and settlement of Iceland.
Development of the Saga literature.
The discovery of Iceland is attributed to a famous Norse
Viking named Naddodd, and dated in 860, at the beginning of
the reign, in Norway, of Harald Haarfager, who drove out so
many adventurers, to seek fortune on the seas. He is said to
have called it Snowland; but others who came to the cold
island in 870 gave it the harsher name which it still bears.
"Within sixty years after the first settlement by the Northmen
the whole was inhabited; and, writes Uno Von Troil (p. 64),
'King Harold, who did not contribute a little towards it by
his tyrannical treatment of the petty kings and lords in
Norway, was obliged at last to issue an order, that no one
should sail to Iceland without paying four ounces of fine
silver to the Crown, in order to stop those continual
emigrations which weakened his kingdom.' … Before the tenth
century had reached its half-way period, the Norwegians had
fully peopled the island with not less, perhaps, than 50,000
souls. A census taken about A. D. 1100 numbered the franklins
who had to pay Thing-tax at 4,500, without including cotters
and proletarians."
R. F. Burton,
Ultima Thule, introduction,
section 3 (volume 1).
"About sixty years after the first settlement of the island, a
step was taken towards turning Iceland into a commonwealth,
and giving the whole island a legal constitution; and though
we are ignorant of the immediate cause which led to this, we
know enough of the state of things in the island to feel sure,
that it could only have been with the common consent of the
great chiefs, who, as Priests, presided over the various local
Things.
See THING.
The first, want was a man who could make a code of laws." The
man was found in one Ulfljót, who came from a Norwegian family
long famous for knowledge of the customary law, and who was
sent to the mother country to consult the wisest of his kin.
"Three years he stayed abroad; and when he returned, the
chiefs, who, no doubt, day by day felt more strongly the need
of a common centre of action as well as of a common code, lost
no time in carrying out their scheme. … The time of the annual
meeting was fixed at first for the middle of the month of June,
but in the year 999 it was agreed to meet a week later, and
the Althing then met when ten full weeks of summer had passed.
{2369}
It lasted fourteen days. … In its legal capacity it [the
Althing] was both a deliberative and executive assembly; both
Parliament and High Court of Justice in one. … With the
establishment of the Althing we have for the first time a
Commonwealth in Iceland."
G. W. Dasent,
The Story of Burnt Njal,
introduction (volume 1).
"The reason why Iceland, which was destitute of inhabitants at
the time of its discovery, about the middle of the 9th
century, became so rapidly settled and secured so eminent a
position in the world's history and literature, must be sought
in the events which took place in Norway at the time when
Harald Hárfragi (Fairhair), after a long and obstinate
resistance, succeeded in usurping the monarchical power. … The
people who emigrated to Iceland were for the most part the
flower of the nation. They went especially from the west coast
of Norway, where the peculiar Norse spirit had been most
perfectly developed. Men of the noblest birth in Norway set
out with their families and followers to find a home where
they might be as free and independent as their fathers had
been before them. No wonder then that they took with them the
cream of the ancient culture of the fatherland. … Toward the
end of the 11th century it is expressly stated that many of
the chiefs were so learned that they with perfect propriety
might have been ordained to the priesthood [Christianity
having been formally adopted by the Althing in the year 1000],
and in the 12th century there were, in addition to those to be
found in the cloisters, several private libraries in the
island. On the other hand, secular culture, knowledge of law
and history, and of the skaldic art, were, so to speak, common
property. And thus, when the means for committing a literature
to writing were at hand, the highly developed popular taste
for history gave the literature the direction which it
afterward maintained. The fact is, there really existed a
whole literature which was merely waiting to be put in
writing. … Many causes contributed toward making the
Icelanders preeminently a historical people. The settlers were
men of noble birth, who were proud to trace their descent from
kings and heroes of antiquity, nay, even from the gods
themselves, and we do not therefore wonder that they
assiduously preserved the memory of the deeds of their
forefathers. But in their minds was developed not only a taste
for the sagas of the past; the present also received its full
share of attention. … Nor did they interest themselves for and
remember the events that took place in Iceland only. Reports
from foreign lands also found a most hearty welcome, and the
Icelanders had abundant opportunity of satisfying their thirst
for knowledge in this direction. As vikings, as merchants, as
courtiers and especially as skalds accompanying kings and
other distinguished persons, and also as varangians in
Constantinople, many of them found splendid opportunities of
visiting foreign countries. … Such were then the conditions
and circumstances which produced that remarkable development
of the historical taste with which the people were endowed,
and made Iceland the home of the saga."
F. W. Horn,
History of the Literature of the Scandinavian North,
part 1, chapter 1.
"The Icelanders, in their long winter, had a great habit of
writing, and were, and still are, excellent in penmanship,
says Dahlmann. It is to this fact that any little history
there is of the Norse Kings and their old tragedies, crimes,
and heroisms, is almost all due. The Icelanders, it seems, not
only made beautiful letters on their paper or parchment, but
were laudably observant and desirous of accuracy; and have
left us such a collection of narratives (Sagas, literally
'Says') as, for quantity and quality, is unexampled among rude
nations."
T. Carlyle,
Early Kings of Norway,
Preface.
See, also,
THINGS.
THINGVALLA.
NORMANS: A. D. 876-911.
Rollo's acquisition of Normandy.
"One alone among the Scandinavian settlements in Gaul was
destined to play a real part in history. This was the
settlement of Rolf or Rollo at Rouen. [The genuine name is
Hrolfr, Rolf, in various spellings. The French form is Rou,
sometimes Rous …; the Latin is Rollo.—Foot-note.] This
settlement, the kernel of the great Norman Duchy, had, I need
hardly say, results of its own and an importance of its own,
which distinguish it from every other Danish colony in Gaul.
But it is well to bear in mind that it was only one colony
among several, and that, when the cession was made, it was
probably not expected to be more lasting or more important
than the others. But, while the others soon lost any
distinctive character, the Rouen settlement lasted, it grew,
it became a power in Europe, and in Gaul it became even a
determining power. … The lasting character of his work at once
proves that the founder of the Rouen colony was a great man,
but he is a great man who must be content to be judged in the
main by the results of his actions. The authentic history of
Rolf, Rollo, or Rou, may be summed up in a very short space.
We have no really contemporary narrative of his actions,
unless a few meagre and uncertain entries in some of the
Frankish annals may be thought to deserve that name. … I
therefore do not feel myself at all called upon to narrate in
detail the exploits which are attributed to Rolf in the time
before his final settlement. He is described as having been
engaged in the calling of a Wiking both in Gaul and in Britain
for nearly forty years before his final occupation of Rouen. …
The exploits attributed to Rolf are spread over so many years,
that we cannot help suspecting that the deeds of other
chieftains have been attributed to him, perhaps that two
leaders of the same name have been confounded. Among countless
expeditions in Gaul, England, and Germany, we find Rolf
charged with an earlier visit to Rouen [A. D. 876], with a
share in the great siege of Paris [A. D. 885], and with an
occupation or destruction of Bayeux. But it is not till we
have got some way into the reign of Charles the Simple, not
till we have passed several years of the tenth century, that
Rolf begins clearly to stand out as a personal historic
reality. He now appears in possession of Rouen, or of whatever
vestiges of the city had survived his former ravages, and from
that starting-point he assaulted Chartres. Beneath the walls
of that city he underwent a defeat [A. D. 911] at the hands of
the Dukes Rudolf of Burgundy and Robert of Paris, which was
attributed to the miraculous powers of the great local relic,
the under-garment of the Virgin.
{2370}
But this victory, like most victories over the Northmen, had
no lasting effect. Rolf was not dislodged from Rouen, nor was
his career of devastation and conquest at all seriously
checked. But, precisely as in the case of Guthrum in England,
his evident disposition to settle in the country suggested an
attempt to change him from a devastating enemy into a
peaceable neighbour. The Peace of Clair-on-Epte [A. D. 911]
was the duplicate of the Peace of Wedmore, and King Charles
and Duke Robert of Paris most likely had the Peace of Wedmore
before their eyes. A definite district was ceded to Rolf, for
which he became the King's vassal; he was admitted to baptism
and received the king's natural daughter in marriage. And,
just as in the English case, the territory ceded was not part
of the King's immediate dominions. … The grant to Rolf was
made at the cost not of the Frankish King at Laon but of the
French Duke at Paris. The district ceded to Rolf was part of
the great Neustrian March or Duchy which had been granted to
Odo [or Eudes] of Paris and which was now held by his brother
Duke Robert. … It must not be thought that the district now
ceded to Rolf took in the whole of the later Duchy of
Normandy. Rouen was the heart of the new state, which took in
lands on both sides of the Seine. From the Epte to the sea was
its undoubted extent from the south-east to the north. But the
western frontier is much less clearly defined. On the one
hand, the Normans always claimed a certain not very well
defined superiority over Britanny as part of the original
grant. On the other hand, it is quite certain that Rolf did
not obtain immediate possession of what was afterwards the
noblest portion of the heritage of his descendants. The
Bessin, the district of Bayeux, was not won till several years
later, and the Côtentin, the peninsula of Coutances, was not
won till after the death of Rolf. The district granted to Rolf
… had—sharing therein the fate of Germany and France—no
recognized geographical name. Its inhabitants were the
Northmen, the Northmen of the Seine, the Northmen of Rouen.
The land itself was, till near the end of the century, simply
the Land of the Northmen"—the Terra Northmannorum.
E. A. Freeman,
Historical Norman Conquest of England,
chapter 4 (volume 1).
ALSO IN:
Sir F. Palgrave,
History of Normandy and England,
book 1, chapters 3-5.
A. Thierry,
Norman Conquest of England,
book 2.
See, also,
FRANCE: A. D. 877-987.
NORMANS: A. D. 876-984.
Discovery and settlement of Greenland.
"The discovery of Greenland was a natural consequence of the
settlement of Iceland, just as the discovery of America
afterward was a natural consequence of the settlement of
Greenland. Between the western part of Iceland and the eastern
part of Greenland there is a distance of only 45 geographical
miles. Hence, some of the ships that sailed to Iceland, at the
time of the settlement of this island and later, could in case
of a violent east wind, which is no rare occurrence in those
regions, scarcely avoid approaching the coast of Greenland
sufficiently to catch a glimpse of its jokuls,—nay, even to
land on its islands and promontories. Thus it is said that
Gunnbjorn, Ulf Krage's son, saw land lying in the ocean at the
west of Iceland, when, in the year 876, he was driven out to
the sea by a storm. Similar reports were heard, from time to
time, by other mariners. About a century later a certain man,
by name Erik the Red, … resolved to go in search of the land
in the west that Gunnbjorn and others had seen. He set sail in
the year 984, and found the land as he had expected, and
remained there exploring the country for two years. At the end
of this period he returned to Iceland, giving the
newly-discovered country the name of Greenland, in order, as
he said, to attract settlers, who would be favorably impressed
with so pleasing a name. The result was that many Icelanders
and Norsemen emigrated to Greenland, and a flourishing colony
was established, with Gardar for its capital city, which, in
the year 1261, became subject to the crown of Norway. The
Greenland colony maintained its connection with the mother
countries for a period of no less than 400 years: yet it
finally disappeared, and was almost forgotten. Torfæus gives a
list of seventeen bishops who ruled in Greenland."
R. B. Anderson,
America not Discovered by Columbus,
chapter 7.
ALSO IN:
D. Crantz,
History of Greenland,
book 4, chapter 1.
NORMANS: A. D. 885-886.
The Great Siege of Paris.
See PARIS: A. D. 885-886.
NORMANS: 9-10th Centuries.
The Danish conquests and settlements in Ireland.
See IRELAND: 9-10th CENTURIES and A. D. 1014.
NORMANS: 9-10th Centuries.
The ravages of the Vikings on the Continent.
"Take the map and colour with vermilion the provinces,
districts and shores which the Northmen visited. The colouring
will have to be repeated more than ninety times successively
before you arrive at the conclusion of the Carlovingian
dynasty. Furthermore, mark by the usual symbol of war, two
crossed swords, the localities where battles were fought by or
against the pirates: where they were defeated or triumphant,
or where they pillaged, burned or destroyed; and the valleys
and banks of Elbe, Rhine and Moselle, Scheldt, Meuse, Somme
and Seine, Loire, Garonne and Adour, the inland Allier, and
all the coasts and coast-lands between estuary and estuary and
the countries between the river-streams, will appear bristling
as with chevaux-de-frise. The strongly-fenced Roman cities,
the venerated Abbeys and their dependent bourgades, often more
flourishing and extensive than the ancient seats of
government, the opulent seaports and trading towns, were all
equally exposed to the Danish attacks, stunned by the
Northmen's approach, subjugated by their fury. … They
constitute three principal schemes of naval and military
operations, respectively governed and guided by the great
rivers and the intervening sea-shores. … The first scheme of
operations includes the territories between Rhine and Scheldt,
and Scheldt and Elbe: the furthest southern point reached by
the Northmen in this direction was somewhere between the Rhine
and the Neckar. Eastward, the Scandinavians scattered as far
as Russia; but we must not follow them there. The second
scheme of operations affected the countries between Seine and
Loire, and again from the Seine eastward towards the Somme and
Oise. These operations were connected with those of the Rhine
Northmen. The third scheme of operations was prosecuted in the
countries between Loire and Garonne, and Garonne and Adour,
frequently flashing towards Spain, and expanding inland as far
as the Allier and central France, nay, to the very centre, to
Bourges."
Sir F. Palgrave,
History of Normandy and England,
book 1, chapter 3 (volume 1).
{2371}
ALSO IN:
C. F. Keary,
The Vikings in Western Christendom,
chapters 9-15.
NORMANS: A. D. 979-1016.
The Danish conquest of England.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 979-1016.
NORMANS: A. D. 986-1011.
Supposed voyages to America.
See AMERICA: 10-11th CENTURIES.
NORMANS: 10-13th Centuries.
The breaking up of the Norse island empire.
"At the close of the 10th and beginning of the 11th century
the battles of Tara and Clontarf overthrew the power of these
Norsemen (or Ostmen as they were called) in Ireland, and
restored the authority of the native Irish sovereign. About
this time they [the 'Hy-Ivar,' or sovereigns of the
island-empire of the Northmen—see above: 8-9TH CENTURIES]
became Christians, and in the year 1066 we find one of their
princes joining Harald Hardrada of Norway in his invasion of
England, which ended so disastrously in the battle of Stamford
Bridge. Magnus of Norway, thirty-two years later, after
subduing the independent Jarls of Shetland and the Orkneys,
attempted to reassert his supremacy along the western coast.
But after conquering Anglesea, whence he drove out the Normans
[from England] who had just made a settlement there, he
crossed to Ireland to meet his death in battle. The
sovereignty of the Isles was then restored to its original
owners, but soon after split into two parts—the Suderies and
Norderies (whence the term Sodor and Man), north and south of
Ardnamurchan Point. The next glimpse we have of these
dominions is at the close of the 12th century, when we find
them under a chief named Somarled, who exercised authority in
the islands and Argyleshire, and from him the clans of the
Highlands and the Western Isles love to trace their ancestry.
After his death, according to the Highland traditions, the
islands and Argyleshire were divided amongst his three sons.
Thus the old Norse empire was finally broken up, and in the
13th century, after another unsuccessful attempt by Haco, King
of Norway, to re-establish the authority of the mother kingdom
over their distant possessions, an attempt which ended in his
defeat at the battle of Largs by the Scottish king, Alexander
III., they were ceded to the Scottish kings by Magnus IV., his
son, and an alliance was cemented between the two kingdoms by
the marriage of Alexander's daughter, Margaret, to Eric of
Norway." At the north of Scotland the Jarls of Orkney, in the
11th century, "conquered Caithness and Sutherland, and wrested
a recognition of their claim from Malcolm II. of Scotland.
Their influence was continually felt in the dynastic and other
quarrels of Scotland; the defeat of Duncan, in 1040, by the
Jarl of Orkney, contributing not a little to Duncan's
subsequent overthrow by Macbeth. They fostered the
independence of the north of Scotland against the southern
king, and held their kingdom until, in 1355, it passed by the
female line to the house of Sinclair. The Sinclairs now
transferred their allegiance to their natural master, the King
of Scotland; and finally the kingdom of the Orkneys was handed
over to James III. as the dowry of his bride, Margaret of
Norway."
A. H. Johnson,
The Normans in Europe,
chapter 2.
ALSO IN:
J. H. Burton,
History of Scotland,
chapter 15 (volume 2).
See, also, IRELAND: A. D. 1014.
NORMANS: A. D. 1000-1063.
The Northmen in France become French.
See NORMANDY; A. D. 911-1000; and 1035-1063.
NORMANS: A. D. 1000-1194.
Conquests and settlement in Southern Italy and Sicily.
See ITALY (SOUTHERN): A. D. 1000-1090;
and 1081-1194.
NORMANS: A. D. 1016-1042.
The reign of the Danish kings in England.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1016-1042.
NORMANS: A. D. 1066-1071.
Conquest of England by Duke William of Normandy.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1042-1066; 1066; and 1066-1071.
NORMANS: A. D. 1081-1085.
Attempted conquest of the Byzantine Empire.
See BYZANTINE EMPIRE: A. D. 1081-1085.
NORMANS: A. D. 1084.
The sack and burning of Rome.
See ROME: A. D. 1081-1084.
NORMANS: A. D. 1146.
Ravages in Greece.
See BYZANTINE EMPIRE: A. D. 1146.
NORMANS: A. D. 1504.
Early enterprise on the Newfoundland fishing banks.
See NEWFOUNDLAND: A. D. 1501-1578.
----------NORMANS: End--------
NORTH, Lord, Administration of.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1770, to 1782-1783.
NORTH ANNA, The passage of the.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1864 (MAY: VIRGINIA).
NORTH BRITON, Number 45, The.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1762-1764.
----------NORTH CAROLINA: Start--------
NORTH CAROLINA:
The aboriginal inhabitants.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
ALGONQUIAN FAMILY, CHEROKEES,
IROQUOIS TRIBES OF THE SOUTH,
SHAWANESE, and TIMUQUANAN FAMILY.
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1524.
Discovery of the coast by Verrazano.
See AMERICA: A. D. 1523-1524.
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1585-1587.
Raleigh's attempted settlements at Roanoke.
See AMERICA: A. D. 1584-1586; and 1587-1590.
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1629.
The grant to Sir Robert Heath.
See AMERICA: A. D. 1629.
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1639-1663.
Pioneer and unorganized colonization.
"An abortive attempt at colonization was made in 1639, and a
titular governor appeared in Virginia; but this, and a number
of conflicting claims originating in this patent [to Sir
Robert Heath], and sufficiently troublesome to the
proprietaries of a later time, were the only results of the
grant of Charles I. This action on the part of the Crown, and
the official information received, did not, however, suffice
to prevent the Virginia Assembly lending itself to a scheme by
which possession might be obtained of the neighboring
territory, or at least substantial benefits realized therefrom
by their constituents. With this object, they made grants to a
trading company, which led, however, only to exploration and
traffic. Other grants of a similar nature followed for the
next ten years, at the expiration of which a company of
Virginians made their way from Nansemond to Albemarle, and
established a settlement there. The Virginian Burgesses
granted them lands, and promised further grants to all who
would extend these settlements to the southward. Emigration
from Virginia began. Settlers, singly and in companies,
crossed the border, and made scattered and solitary clearings
within the wilds of North Carolina. Many of these people were
mere adventurers; but some of them were of more substantial
stuff, and founded permanent settlements on the Chowan and
elsewhere. Other eyes, however, as watchful as those of the
Virginians, were also turned to the rich regions of the South.
{2372}
New England enterprise explored the American coast from one
end to the other, in search of lucrative trade and new
resting-places. After a long acquaintance with the North
Carolina coast, they bought land of the Indians, near the
mouth of Cape Fear River, and settled there. For some
unexplained cause—possibly on account of the wild and
dangerous character of the scattered inhabitants, who had
already drifted thither from Virginia, possibly from the
reason which they themselves gave—the New England colonists
abandoned their settlement and departed, leaving a written
opinion of the poor character of the country expressed in very
plain language and pinned to a post. Here it was found by some
wanderers from Barbadoes, who were of a different opinion from
the New Englanders as to the appearance of things; and they
accordingly repurchased the land from the Indians and began a
settlement. At this date [1663], therefore, there was in North
Carolina this infant settlement of the Barbadoes men, on the
extreme southeastern point of the present State, and in the
north-eastern corner the Virginia settlers scattered about,
with here a solitary plantation and there a little group of
farms, and always a restless van of adventurers working their
way down the coast and into the interior. … Whatever rights
the North Carolina settlers may have had in the eyes of the
Virginians, who had granted them land, or in those of the
Indians who had sold it, they had none recognized by the
English King, who claimed to own all that vast region. It may
be doubted whether anything was known of these early colonists
in England; and their existence was certainly not regarded in
the least when Charles II. lavished their territory, and much
besides, upon a band of his courtiers and ministers."
H. C. Lodge,
Short History of the English Colonies,
chapter 5.
ALSO IN:
J. W. Moore,
History of North Carolina,
volume 1, chapter 2.
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1663-1670.
The grant to Monk, Clarendon, Shaftesbury and others.
The organized colonies.
"On the 24th March, 1663, King Charles II. granted to Edward,
Earl of Clarendon; George [Monk], Duke of Albemarle; William,
Earl of Craven; John, Lord Berkeley; Anthony, Lord Ashley
[Earl of Shaftesbury]; Sir George Carteret, Sir John Colleton,
and Sir William Berkeley, all the country between the Pacific
and Atlantic Oceans, between 31° and 36° parallels of
latitude, called Carolina, in honor of Charles. [The grant
embraced the present States of Georgia, Alabama and
Mississippi, as well as the two Carolinas.] In 1663, Sir
William Berkeley, Governor of the Colony of Virginia, visited
the province, and appointed William Drummond Governor of the
Colony of Carolina. … Drummond, at his death in 1667, was
succeeded by Stevens as governor. … The first assembly that
made laws for Carolina, assembled in the fall of 1669. … A
form of government, magnificent in design, and labored in
detail, called 'The fundamental constitutions of Carolina,'
were drawn up by the celebrated author of the Essay on the
Human Understanding, John Locke. … On the death of Governor
Stevens, who died in the colony full of years and wealth, the
assembly chose Carteret for their governor, and on his return
to England soon after, Eastchurch, who then was in Eng]and,
was appointed governor, and Miller secretary."
J. H. Wheeler,
Historical Sketches of North Carolina,
chapter 4.
"The earliest grant made to the lords proprietors did not
include the whole of the present State of North Carolina. Its
northern line fell short of the southern boundary of Virginia
by half a degree of latitude. Notwithstanding this, an
unwarranted exhibition of authority established virtually the
proprietary dominion over this unappropriated territory. …
Colonel Byrd of Virginia, who was born not long after the
charter of 1665 was made, and who lived during the
administration of Berkeley, states, and no doubt truly, that
'Sir William Berkeley, who was one of the grantees, and at
that time governor of Virginia, finding a territory of 31
miles in breadth between the inhabited part of Virginia and
the above-mentioned boundary of Carolina [36°], advised the
Lord Clarendon of it. And his lordship had interest enough
with the king to obtain a second patent to include it, dated
June 30th, 1665.' By this patent very large powers were
granted; so large that, as Chalmers has remarked, 'no one
prerogative of the crown was preserved, except only the
sovereign dominion. … The existence of the colony from
Barbadoes, under Sir John Yeamans, that settled in the old
county of Clarendon, from its inception in 1665 to its
abandonment in 1690, forms but an episode in the proprietary
history of North Carolina. The colony, like all others
similarly situated, sought at first to make provision for the
supply of bodily wants, in securing food and shelter only; but
having done this it next proceeded to make profitable the
gifts of Heaven that were around it. Yeamans had brought with
him negro slaves from Barbadoes, and so inviting was the new
settlement deemed, that in the second year of its existence it
contained 800 inhabitants. … But with all this prosperity, the
colony on the Cape Fear was not destined to be permanent. The
action of the lords proprietors themselves caused its
abandonment. … In 1670, the lords proprietors, who seem to
have been anxious to proceed more and more to the southward,
sent out a considerable number of emigrants to form a colony
at Port Royal, now Beaufort, in the present State of South
Carolina. The individual who led the expedition was William
Sayle, 'a man of experience,' says Chalmers, 'who had been
appointed governor of that part of the coast lying
southwestward of Cape Carteret.' … Scarcely however, had Sayle
carried out his instructions and made his colonists somewhat
comfortable, before his constitution yielded to a new and
insalubrious climate, and he died. … It was not easy for the
proprietors immediately to find a fit successor; and, even had
such been at hand, some time must necessarily have elapsed
before he could safely reach the scene of his labors. But Sir
John Yeamans was near the spot: his long residence had
acclimated him, and, as the historian states, he 'had hitherto
ruled the plantation around Cape Fear with a prudence which
precluded complaint.' He therefore was directed to extend his
command from old Clarendon, on the Cape Fear, to the territory
which was southwest of Cape Carteret. This was in August,
1671. The shores with the adjacent land, and the streams
making into the sea, were by this time very well known to all
the dwellers in Carolina, for the proprietors had caused them
to be surveyed with accuracy.
{2373}
On the banks of Ashley River there was good pasturage, and
land fit for tillage. The planters of Clarendon, therefore,
turned their faces southward, while those from Port Royal
travelled northward; and so the colonists from both
settlements met on the banks of the Ashley, as on a middle
ground, and here in the same year (1671) they laid, 'on the
first high land,' the foundations of 'old Charlestown.' In
1679, it was found that 'Oyster Point,' formed by the
confluence of Ashley and Cooper rivers, was more convenient
for a town than the spot previously selected, and the people,
with the encouragement of the lords proprietors, began to
remove thither. In the next year (1680) were laid the
foundations of the present city of Charleston; thirty houses
were built, and it was declared to be the capital of the
southern part of the province, and also the port for all
commercial traffic. This gradually depopulated old Clarendon.
… We now return to trace the fortunes of the settlement on
Albemarle, under Stephens. As before stated he entered upon
his duties as governor in October, 1667. … His instructions
were very full and explicit. The Assembly was to be composed
of the governor, a council of twelve, and twelve delegates
chosen by the freeholders. Of the twelve councillors, whose
advice, by the way, the governor was required always to take
and follow, one half was to be appointed by the Assembly, the
other half by himself. To this Assembly belonged not only the
power to make laws, but a large share of the executive
authority also. … In 1669, the first legislature under this
constitution assembled. And it is worthy of remark, that at
this period, when the province may be said to have had, for
the first time, a system of regular government, there was in
it a recognition of two great principles which are now part of
the political creed of our whole country, without distinction
of party. These are, first, that the people are entitled to a
voice in the selection of their law-makers; and secondly, that
they cannot rightfully be taxed but by their own
representatives. … The people, we have reason to believe, were
contented and happy during the early part of Stephens'
administration. … But this quiet condition of affairs was not
to last. We have now reached a period in our history which
illustrates the fact, that whatever wisdom may be apparent in
the constitution given to the Albemarle colony by the
proprietors, on the accession of Stephens, was less the result
of deliberation than of a happy accident. … But the time had
now come for the proprietors to carry out their magnificent
project of founding an empire; and disregarding alike the
nature of man, the lessons of experience, and the physical
obstacles of an unsubdued wilderness (even not yet entirely
reclaimed), they resolved that all should yield to their
theories of government, and invoked the aid of philosophy to
accomplish an impossibility. Locke was employed to prepare
'the fundamental constitutions.'"
F. L. Hawks,
History of North Carolina,
volume 2, pages 441-462.
ALSO IN:

W. C. Bryant and S. H. Gay,
Popular History of thee United States,
volume 2, chapter 12.
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1669-1693.
The Fundamental Constitutions of John Locke,
and their failure.
The royal grant of the Carolinas to Monk, Shaftesbury,
Clarendon, and their associates invested them with "all the
rights, jurisdiction, royalties, privileges, and liberties
within the bounds of their province, to hold, use, and enjoy
the same, in as ample a manner as the bishop of Durham did in
that county-palatine in England: … Agreeably to these powers,
the proprietors proceeded to frame a system of laws for the
colony which they projected. Locke, the well-known
philosopher, was summoned to this work, and the largest
expectations were entertained in consequence of his
co-operation. Locke, though subsequently one of the
proprietors, was, at the beginning, simply the secretary of
the earl of Shaftesbury. The probability is that, in preparing
the constitution for the Carolinas, he rather carried out the
notions of that versatile nobleman than his own. … The code of
laws called the 'Fundamental Constitutions,' which was
devised, and which subsequently became unpopular in the
colony, is not certainly the work of his hands. It is ascribed
by Oldmixon, a contemporary, to the earl of Shaftesbury, one
of the proprietors. The most striking feature in this code
provided for the creation of a nobility, consisting of land
graves, cassiques, and barons. These were to be graduated by
the landed estates which were granted with the dignity; the
eldest of the proprietary lords was to be the superior, with
the title of Palatine, and the people were to be serfs." The
tenants, and the issue of the tenants, "were to be transferred
with the soil, and not at liberty to leave it, but with the
lord's permission, under hand and seal. The whole system was
rejected after a few years' experiment. It has been harshly
judged as … the crude conception of a mind conversant rather
with books than men—with the abstract rather than the
practical in government and society. And this judgment is
certainly true of the constitutions in the case in which they
were employed. They did not suit the absolute conditions of
the country, or the class of people which subsequently made
their way to it. But contemplating the institution of domestic
slavery, as the proprietors had done from the beginning—a
large villanage and a wealthy aristocracy, dominating almost
without restraint or responsibility over the whole—the scheme
was not without its plausibilities. But the feudal tenures
were everywhere dying out. The time had passed, even in
Europe, for such a system. … The great destitution of the
first settlers left them generally without the means of
procuring slaves; and the equal necessities, to which all are
subject who peril life and fortune in a savage forest and on a
foreign shore, soon made the titular distinctions of the few a
miserable mockery, or something worse."
W. G. Simms,
History of South Carolina,
book 2, chapter 1.
"The constitutions were signed on the 21st of July, 1669;" but
subsequently revised by the interpolation of a clause, against
the wishes of Locke, establishing the Church of England. "This
revised copy of 'the model' was not signed till March, 1670.
To a colony of which the majority were likely to be
dissenters, the change was vital; it was scarcely noticed in
England, where the model became the theme of extravagant
applause. … As far as depended upon the proprietaries, the
government was immediately organized with Monk, duke of
Albemarle, as palatine." But, meantime, the colonists in the
northern part of the Carolina province had instituted a simple
form of government for themselves, with a council of twelve,
and an assembly composed of the governor, the council, and
twelve delegates from the freeholders of the incipient
settlements.
{2374}
The assembly had already met and had framed some important
laws, which remained "valid in North Carolina for more than
half a century. Hardly had these laws been established when
the new constitution was forwarded to Albemarle. Its
promulgation did but favor anarchy by invalidating the
existing system, which it could not replace. The
proprietaries, contrary to stipulations with the colonists,
superseded the existing government, and the colonists
resolutely rejected the substitute." Much the same state of
things appeared in the South Carolina settlements (not yet
separately named), and successive disorders and revolutionary
changes made up the history of the pseudo palatinate for many
years.
G. Bancroft,
History of the United States
(Author's last revision),
part 2, chapter 7 (volume 1).
In 1693, "to conciliate the colonists, and to get rid of the
dispute which had arisen as to the binding force of the 'Grand
Model,' the proprietors voted that, 'as the people have
declared they would rather be governed by the powers granted
by the charter, without regard to the fundamental
constitutions, it will be for their quiet, and the protection
of the well-disposed, to grant their request.' This abrogation
of the labors of Locke removed one bone of contention; but as
the 'Grand Model' had never been actually carried into effect,
the government went on much as before. Each of the
proprietaries continued to have his special delegate in the
colony, or rather two delegates, one for South Carolina, the
other for Albemarle, the eight together constituting the
council in either province, over which the governor presided
as delegate of the palatine, to whom his appointment
belonged."
R. Hildreth,
History of the United States,
chapter 21 (volume 2).
The text of the "fundamental constitutions" is printed in
volume 9 of the 12th edition of Locke's complete works, and in
volume 10 of several prior editions.
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1688-1729.
Slow progress and unprosperous state of the colony.
End of the Proprietary Government.
In 1688, Carolina (the northern province) being afflicted with
a governor, one Seth Sothel, who is accused of every variety
of extortion and rapacity, the colonists rose up against him,
tried him before their assembly, deposed him from his office
and drove him into exile. "The Proprietors demurred to the
form of this procedure, but acquiesced in the substance of it,
and thereby did something to confirm that contempt for
government which was one of the leading characteristics of the
colony. During the years which followed, the efforts of the
Proprietors to maintain any authority over their Northern
province, or to connect it in any way with their Southern
territory, were little more than nominal. For the most part
the two settlements were distinguished by the Proprietors as
'our colony north-east of Cape Fear,' and 'our colony
south-west of Cape Fear.' As early as 1691 we find the
expression North Carolina once used. After that we do not meet
with it till 1696. From that time onward both expressions are
used with no marked distinction, sometimes even in the same
document. At times the Proprietors seem to have aimed at
establishing a closer connexion between the two colonies by
placing them under a single Governor. But in nearly all these
cases provision was made for the appointment of separate
Deputy-Governors, nor does there seem to have been any project
for uniting the two legislative bodies. … In 1720 the first
event occurred which throws any clear light from without on
the internal life of the colony. In that year boundary
disputes arose between Virginia and her southern neighbour and
it was found necessary to appoint representatives on each side
to settle the boundary line. The chief interest of the matter
lies in the notes left to us by one of the Virginia
Commissioners [Colonel William Byrd]. … After making all …
deductions and checking Byrd's report by that of graver
writers, there remains a picture of poverty, indolence, and
thriftlessness which finds no counterpart in any of the other
southern colonies. That the chief town contained only some
fifty poor cottages is little or nothing more than what we
find in Maryland or Virginia. But there the import trade with
England made up for the deficiencies of colonial life. North
Carolina, lacking the two essentials of trade, harbours and a
surplus population, had no commercial dealings with the mother
country. … The only possessions which abounded were horses and
swine, both of which could be reared in droves without any
care or attention. … The evils of slavery existed without its
counterbalancing advantages. There was nothing to teach those
habits of administration which the rich planters of Virginia
and South Carolina learnt as part of their daily life. At the
same time the colony suffered from one of the worst effects of
slavery, a want of manual skill. … In 1729 the faint and
meaningless shadow of proprietary government came to an end.
The Crown bought up first the shares of seven Proprietors,
then after an interval that of the eighth. In the case of
other colonies the process of transfer had been effected by a
conflict and by something approaching to revolution. In North
Carolina alone it seems to have come about with the peaceful
assent of all parties. … Without a struggle, North Carolina
cast off all traces of its peculiar origin and passed into the
ordinary state of a crown colony."
J. A. Doyle,
The English in America:
Virginia, Maryland and the Carolinas,
chapter 12.
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1710.
Palatine colonization at New Berne.
See PALATINES.
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1711-1714.
Indian rising and massacre of colonists.
Subjugation and expulsion of the Tuscaroras.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
IROQUOIS TRIBES OF THE SOUTH.
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1740.
War with the Spaniards in Florida.
See GEORGIA: A. D. 1738-1743.
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1759-1761.
The Cherokee War.
See SOUTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1759-1761.
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1760-1766.
The question of taxation by Parliament.
The Stamp Act.
The First Continental Congress.
The repeal of the Stamp Act and the Declaratory Act.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1760-1775; 1763-1764; 1765; and 1766.
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1766-1768.
The Townshend Duties.
The Circular Letter of Massachusetts.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1766-1767; and 1767-1768.
{2375}
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1766-1771.
The insurrection of the Regulators.
Battle of Alamance.
Complaints of official extortion, which were loud in several
of the colonies at about the same period, led to serious
results in North Carolina. "Complaints were most rife in the
middle counties, a very barren portion of the province, with a
population generally poor and ignorant. These people
complained, and not without reason—for the poor and ignorant
are ever most exposed to oppression—not only that excessive
fees were extorted, but that the sheriffs collected taxes of
which they rendered no account. They seem also to have held
the courts and lawyers—indeed, the whole system for the
collection of debts —in great detestation. Presently, under
the name of 'Regulators,' borrowed from South Carolina, they
formed associations which not only refused the payment of
taxes, but assaulted the persons and property of lawyers,
judges, sheriffs, and other obnoxious individuals, and even
proceeded so far as to break up the sessions of the courts.
The common name of Regulators designated, in the two
Carolinas, combinations composed of different materials, and
having different objects in view. The Assembly of the province
took decided ground against them, and even expelled one of
their leaders, who had been elected a member. After
negotiations and delays, and broken promises to keep the
peace, Governor Tryon, at the head of a body of volunteers,
marched into the disaffected counties. The Regulators
assembled in arms, and an action was fought at Alamance, on
the Haw, near the head waters of Cape Fear River, in which
some 200 were left dead upon the field. Out of a large number
taken prisoners, six were executed for high treason. Though
the Regulators submitted, they continued to entertain a deadly
hatred against the militia of the lower counties, which had
taken part against them. Tryon was presently removed from
North Carolina to New York. His successor, Joseph Martin,
anxious to strengthen himself against the growing discontents
of the province, promised to redress the grievances, and
sedulously cultivated the good will of the Regulators, and
with such success that they became, in the end, staunch
supporters of the royal authority."
R. Hildreth,
History of the United States,
chapter 29 (volume 2).
ALSO IN:
F. X. Martin,
History of North Carolina,
chapters 7-8.
J. H. Wheeler,
History of North Carolina,
chapter 8.
F. L. Hawks,
Battle of the Alamance
(Revised History of North Carolina).
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1768-1774.
Opening events of the Revolution.
See BOSTON: A. D. 1768, to 1773;
and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1770, to 1774.
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1769-1772.
The first settlement of Tennessee.
The Watauga Association.
See TENNESSEE: A. D. 1769-1772.
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1775.
The beginning of the War of the American Revolution.
Lexington.
Concord.
Action on the news.
Ticonderoga.
The Siege of Boston.
Bunker Hill.
The Second Continental Congress.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1775.
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1775 (May).
The Mecklenburg Declaration.
"It has been strenuously claimed and denied that, at a meeting
of the people of Mecklenburg County, in North Carolina, on May
20, 1775, resolutions were passed declaring their independence
of Great Britain. The facts in the case appear to be these:—On
the 31st of May, 1775, the people of this county did pass
resolutions quite abreast of the public sentiment of that
time, but not venturing on the field of independency further
than to say that these resolutions were to remain in force
till Great Britain resigned its pretensions. These resolutions
were well written, attracted notice, and were copied into the
leading newspapers of the colonies, North and South, and can
be found in various later works (Lossing's 'Field-Book,' ii,
619, etc.). A copy of the 'South Carolina Gazette' containing
them was sent by Governor Wright, of Georgia, to Lord
Dartmouth, and was found by Bancroft in the State Paper
Office, while in the Sparks MSS. (no. lvi) is the record of a
copy sent to the home government by Governor Martin of North
Carolina, with a letter dated June 30, 1775. Of these
resolutions there is no doubt (Frothingham's 'Rise of the
Republic,' 422). In 1793, or earlier, some of the actors in
the proceeding, apparently ignorant that the record of these
resolutions had been preserved in the newspapers, endeavored
to supply them from memory, unconsciously intermingling some
of the phraseology of the Declaration of July 4th, in
Congress, which gave them the tone of a pronounced
independency. Probably through another dimness of memory they
affixed the date of May 20, 1775, to them. These were first
printed in the 'Raleigh Register,' April 30, 1819. They are
found to resemble in some respects the now known resolves of
May 31st, as well as the national Declaration in a few
phrases. In 1829 Martin printed them, much altered, in his
'North Carolina' (ii, 272) but it is not known where this copy
came from. In 1831 the State printed the text of the 1819
copy, and fortified it with recollections and certificates of
persons affirming that they were present when the resolutions
were passed on the 20th."
J. Winsor,
Note in Narrative and Critical History of America,
volume 6, page 256.
"We are inclined to conjecture that there was a popular
meeting at Charlottetown on the 19th and 20th of May, where
discussion was had on the subject of independence, and
probably some more or less explicit understanding arrived at,
which became the basis of the committee's action on the 31st.
If so, we make no doubt that J. McN. Alexander was secretary
of that meeting. He, probably, in that case, recorded the
proceedings, and among them some resolution or resolutions in
regard to the propriety of throwing off the British yoke. … It
was in attempting to remember the records of that meeting,
destroyed by fire, that John McN. Alexander, then an old man,
fell into the errors" which led him, in 1800, to certify, as
Secretary, a copy of the document called the Mecklenburg
Declaration of Independence.
H. S. Randall,
Life of Jefferson,
volume 3, appendix 2.
ALSO IN:
W. A. Graham,
Address on the Mecklenburg Declaration, 1875.
F. L. Hawks,
The Mecklenburg Declaration
(Revised History of Georgia).
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1775-1776.
The arming of the loyalist Highlanders
and their defeat at Moore's Creek.
The first colony vote for independence.
"North Carolina was the first colony to act as a unit in favor
of independence. It was the fourth in importance of the United
Colonies. Its Provincial Congress had organized the militia,
and vested the public authority in a provincial council for
the whole colony, committees of safety for the districts, and
county and town committees. A large portion of the people were
adherents of the crown,—among them a body of Highland
emigrants, and most of the party of regulators. Governor
Martin represented, not without grounds, that, if these
loyalists were supported by a British force, the colony might
be gained to the royal side.
{2376}
The loyalists were also numerous in Georgia and South
Carolina. Hence it was determined by the King to send an
expedition to the Southern Colonies in the winter, to restore
the royal authority. This was put under the command of Sir
Henry Clinton, and ordered to rendezvous at Cape Fear. 'I am
clear,' wrote George III., 'the first attempt should be made
on North Carolina, as the Highland settlers are said to be
well inclined.' Commissions were issued to men of influence
among them, one being Allan McDonald, the husband of the
chivalrous Flora McDonald, who became famous by romantic
devotion to Prince Charles Edward. Donald McDonald was
appointed the commander. These officers, under the direction
of the governor, after much secret consultation, enrolled
about 1,500 men. The popular leaders, however, were informed
of their designs. The militia were summoned, and took the
field under Colonel James Moore. At length, when Sir Henry
Clinton was expected at Cape Fear, General McDonald erected
the royal standard at Cross Creek, now Fayetteville, and moved
forward to join Clinton. Colonel Moore ordered parties of the
militia to take post at Moore's Creek Bridge, over which
McDonald would be obliged to pass. Colonel Richard Caswell was
at the head of one of these parties: hence the force here was
under his command: and this place on the 27th of February
[1776] became a famous battle-field. The Provincials were
victorious. They captured a great quantity of military
supplies, nearly 900 men, and their commander. This was the
Lexington and Concord of that region. The newspapers
circulated the details of this brilliant result. The spirit of
the Whigs run high. … A strong force was soon ready and
anxious to meet Clinton. Amidst these scenes, the people
elected delegates to a Provincial Congress, which met, on the
4th of April [1776], at Halifax. … Attempts were made to
ascertain the sense of the people on independence. … The
subject was referred to a committee, of which Cornelius
Harnett was the chairman. They reported an elaborate preamble
… and a resolution to empower the delegates in the General
Congress 'to concur with the delegates in the other colonies
in declaring independency and forming foreign
alliances,—reserving to the colony the sole and exclusive
right of forming a constitution and laws for it,' also 'of
appointing delegates in a general representation of the
colonies for such purposes as might be agreed upon.' This was
unanimously adopted on the 12th of April. Thus the popular
party carried North Carolina as a unit in favor of
independence, when the colonies, from New England to Virginia,
were in solid array against it. The example was warmly
welcomed by the patriots, and commended for imitation."
R. Frothingham,
The Rise of the Republic,
chapter 11.
ALSO IN:
J. W. Moore,
History of North Carolina,
volume 1, chapter 10.
D. L. Swain,
British Invasion of North Carolina in 1776
(Revised History of North Carolina).
See, also, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A: D. 1776 (JUNE).
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1776.
Annexation of the Watauga settlements (Tennessee).
See TENNESSEE: A. D. 1776-1784.
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1776-1780.
Independence declared.
Adoption of State Constitution.
The war in the North.
British conquest of Georgia.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1776, to 1780.
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1780-1783.
The war in the South.
Greene's campaign.
King's Mountain.
The Cowpens.
Guilford Court House.
Hobkirk's Hill.
Eutaw Springs.
Yorktown.
Peace.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1780, to 1783.
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1784.
Revolt of the Tennessee settlements
against their cession to Congress.
See TENNESSEE: A. D. 1776-1784.
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1785-1788.
The state of Franklin organized by the Tennessee settlers.
Its brief and troubled history.
See TENNESSEE: A. D. 1785; and 1785-1796.
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1786.
Importation of Negroes discouraged.
See SLAVERY, NEGRO: A. D. 1776-1808.
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1787~1789.
Formation and adoption of the Federal Constitution.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1787; and 1787-1789.
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1790.
Renewed cession of western Territory (Tennessee)
to the United States.
See TENNESSEE: A. D. 1785-1796;
also, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1781-1786.
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1861 (January-May).
The difficult dragging of the state into Secession.
"A large majority of the people of North Carolina were opposed
to secession. They did not regard it as a constitutional
right. They were equally opposed to a separation from the
Union in resentment of the election of Mr. Lincoln. But the
Governor, John W. Ellis, was in full sympathy with the
secessionists. He spared no pains to bring the state into line
with South Carolina [which had passed her ordinance of
Secession December 20, 1860.]
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1860 (NOVEMBER-DECEMBER).
The legislature met on the 20th of November. The governor, in
his message, recommended that the legislature should invite a
conference with the Southern States, or send delegates to them
for the purpose of securing their co-operation. He also
recommended the reorganization of the militia, and the call of
a state convention. Bills were introduced for the purpose of
carrying these measures into effect. … On the 30th of January,
a bill for calling a state convention was passed. It provided
that no secession ordinance, nor one connecting the state with
the Southern Confederacy, would be valid until it should be
ratified by a majority of the qualified voters of the state.
The vote of the people was appointed to take place on the 28th
of February. The delegates were elected on the day named. A
large majority of them were Unionists. But, at the same time,
the convention itself was voted down. The vote for a
convention was 46,671; against a convention, 47,333. The
majority against it was 662. This majority against a
convention, however, was no criterion of popular sentiment in
regard to secession. The true test was the votes received,
respectively, by the Union and secession delegates. The former
received a majority of nearly 30,000. But the indefatigable
governor was not to be balked by the popular dislike for
secession. The legislature was called together in extra
session on May 1. On the same day they voted to have another
election for delegates to a state convention on the 13th of
the month. The election took place accordingly, and the
delegates convened on the 20th. On the following day the
secession ordinance was adopted, and the Confederate
Constitution ratified. To save time, and avoid further
obstructions, the question of popular approval was taken for
granted."
S. S. Cox,
Three Decades of Federal Legislation,
pages 119-120.
ALSO IN:
J. W. Moore,
History of North Carolina,
volume 2, chapter 5.
See, also, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1861 (MARCH-APRIL).
{2377}
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1861 (April).
Governor Ellis' reply to President Lincoln's call for troops.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1861 (APRIL)
PRESIDENT LINCOLN'S CALL TO ARMS.
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1861 (August).
Hatteras Inlet taken by the Union forces.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1861 (AUGUST: NORTH CAROLINA).
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1862 (January-April).
Capture of Roanoke Island, Newbern and Beaufort
by the Union forces.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1862 (JANUARY-APRIL: NORTH CAROLINA).
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1862 (May).
Appointment of a Military Governor.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D.1862 (MARCH-JUNE).
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1864 (April-May).
Exploits of the ram Albemarle.
Confederate capture of Plymouth.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1864 (APRIL-MAY: NORTH CAROLINA).
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1864 (October).
Destruction of the ram Albemarle.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1864 (OCTOBER: NORTH CAROLINA).
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1864-1865 (December-January).
The capture of Fort Fisher.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1864-1865 (DECEMBER-JANUARY:
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1865 (February-March).
Sherman's March.
The Battle of Bentonsville.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1865 (FEBRUARY-MARCH: THE CAROLINAS).
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1865 (February-March).
Federal occupation of Wilmington.
Battle of Kinston.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1865 (FEBRUARY-MARCH: NORTH CAROLINA).
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1865 (May).
Provisional government under
President Johnson's Plan of Reconstruction.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1865 (MAY-JULY).
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1865-1868.
Reconstruction.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1865 (MAY-JULY), and after, to 1868-1870.
----------NORTH CAROLINA: End--------
NORTH DAKOTA:
Admission to the Union (1889).
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1889-1890.
NORTH GERMAN CONFEDERATION.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1866.
NORTH RIVER, The.
See SOUTH RIVER.
NORTHAMPTON, Battle of.
One of the battles in the English civil wars of the 15th
century called the Wars of the Roses, fought July 10, 1460.
The royalist party (Lancastrians) were signally defeated, King
Henry VI. taken prisoner, and Queen Margaret driven in flight
to the north.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1455-1471.
NORTHAMPTON, Peace of.
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1328.
NORTHBROOK, LORD, The Indian administration of.
See INDIA: A. D. 1862-1876.
NORTHEASTERN BOUNDARY QUESTION, Settlement of the.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1842.
NORTHERN CIRCARS, OR SIRKARS.
See INDIA: A. D. 1758-1761.
NORTHERN MARITIME LEAGUE, The.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1801-1802.
NORTHMEN.
See NORMANS.
----------NORTHUMBRIA: Start--------
NORTHUMBRIA, Kingdom of.
The northernmost of the kingdoms formed by the Angles in
Britain in the 6th century. It embraced the two kingdoms of
Bernicia and Deira, sometimes ruled by separate princes,
sometimes united, as Northumbria, under one, and extending
from the Humber to the Forth.
See ENGLAND: IA. D. 547-633.
NORTHUMBRIA: 10-11th Centuries.
Lothian joined to Scotland.
See SCOTLAND: 10-11th CENTURIES.
----------NORTHUMBRIA: End--------
NORTHWEST FUR COMPANY.
See CANADA: A. D. 1869-1873.
NORTHWEST TERRITORIES OF CANADA.
"The North West Territories comprise all lands [of the
Dominion of Canada] not within the limits of any province or
of the District of Keewatin. The area of the Territories is
about 3,000,000 square miles or four times as great as the
area of all the provinces together. The Territories were ceded
to Canada by an Order in Council dated the 24th June 1870. …
See CANADA: A. D. 1869-1873.
The southern portion of the territories between Manitoba and
British Columbia has been formed into four provisional
districts, viz. Assiniboia, Saskatchewan, Alberta and
Athabasca. By the Dominion Act 38 Vie. c. 49 executive and
legislative powers were conferred on a Lieutenant-Governor and
a Council of five members subject to instructions given by
Order in Council or by the Canadian Secretary of State."
J. E. C. Munro,
The Constitution of Canada,
chapter 2.
----------NORTHWEST TERRITORY OF THE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Start--------
NORTHWEST TERRITORY OF THE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
The Old.
"This northwestern land lay between the Mississippi, the Ohio,
and the Great Lakes. It now constitutes five of our large
States and part of a sixth [namely, western Pennsylvania,
Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, and Michigan]. But when
independence was declared it was quite as much a foreign
territory, considered from the standpoint of the old thirteen
colonies, as Florida or Canada; the difference was that,
whereas during the war we failed in our attempts to conquer
Florida and Canada, we succeeded in conquering the Northwest.
The Northwest formed no part of our country as it originally
stood; it had no portion in the declaration of independence.
It did not revolt; it was conquered. … We made our first
important conquest during the Revolution itself."
T. Roosevelt,
The Winning of the West,
volume 1, pages 32-33.
NORTHWEST TERRITORY OF USA: A. D. 1673-1751.
Early French exploration and occupation.
See CANADA: A. D. 1634-1673; 16611-1687; 1700-1735;
also ILLINOIS: A. D. 1700-1750; and 1751.
NORTHWEST TERRITORY OF USA: A. D. 1748-1763.
Struggle of the French and English for possession.
See OHIO (VALLEY): A. D. 1748-1754, 1754, 1755;
and CANADA: A. D. 1758.
NORTHWEST TERRITORY OF USA: A. D. 1763.
Cession to Great Britain by the Treaty of Paris.
Possession taken.
See SEVEN YEARS WAR: THE TREATIES;
and ILLINOIS: A. D. 1765.
{2378}
NORTHWEST TERRITORY OF USA: A. D. 1763.
The king's proclamation excluding settlers, and reserving
the whole interior of the continent for the Indians.
"On the 7th of October, 1763, George III. issued a
proclamation, providing for four new governments or colonies,
namely: Quebec, East Florida, West Florida, and Grenada [the
latter embracing 'the island of that name, together with the
Grenadines, and the islands of Dominico, St. Vincent and
'Tobago'], and defining their boundaries. The limits of Quebec
did not vary materially from those of the present province of
that name, and those of East and West Florida comprised the
present State of Florida and the country north of the Gulf of
Mexico to the parallel of 31° latitude. It will be seen that
no provision was made for the government of nine tenths of the
new territory acquired by the Treaty of Paris, and the
omission was not an oversight, but was intentional. The
purpose was to reserve as crown lands the Northwest territory,
the region north of the great lakes, and the country between
the Alleghanies and the Mississippi, and to exclude them from
settlement by the American colonies. They were left, for the
time being, to the undisputed possession of the savage tribes.
The king's 'loving subjects' were forbidden making purchases
of land from the Indians, or forming any settlements 'westward
of the sources of the rivers which fall into the sea from the
West and Northwest,' 'and all persons who have wilfully or
inadvertently seated themselves upon any lands' west of this
limit were warned 'forthwith to remove themselves from such
settlements.' Certain reasons for this policy were assigned in
the proclamation, such as, 'preventing irregularities in the
future, and that the Indians may be convinced of our justice,'
etc.; but the real explanation appears in the Report of the
Lords Commissioners for Trade and Plantations, in 1772, on the
petition of Thomas Walpole and others for a grant of land on
the Ohio. The report was drawn by Lord Hillsborough, the
president of the board. The report states: 'We take leave to
remind your lordships of that principle which was adopted by
this Board, and approved and confirmed by his Majesty,
immediately after the Treaty of Paris, viz.: the confining the
western extent of settlements to such a distance from the
sea-coasts as that those settlements should lie within reach
of the trade and commerce of this kingdom, … and also of the
exercise of that authority and jurisdiction which was
conceived to be necessary for the preservation of the colonies
in a due subordination to, and dependence upon, the mother
country. And these we apprehend to have been the two capital
objects of his Majesty's proclamation of the 7th of October,
1763. … The great object of colonizing upon the continent of
North America has been to improve and extend the commerce,
navigation, and manufactures of this kingdom. … It does appear
to us that the extension of the fur trade depends entirely
upon the Indians being undisturbed in the possession of their
hunting-grounds, and that all colonizing does in its nature,
and must in its consequences, operate to the prejudice of that
branch of commerce. … Let the Savages enjoy their deserts in
quiet. Were they driven from their forests the peltry-trade
would decrease.' … Such in clear and specific terms was the
cold and selfish policy which the British crown and its
ministers habitually pursued towards the American colonies;
and in a few years it changed loyalty into hate, and brought
on the American Revolution."
W. F. Poole,
The West, from 1763 to 1783
(Narrative and Critical History of America,
volume 6, chapter 9).
"The king's proclamation [of 1763] shows that, in the
construction put upon the treaty by the crown authorities, the
ceded territory was a new acquisition by conquest. The
proclamation was the formal appropriation of it as the king's
domain, embracing all the country west of the heads or sources
of the rivers falling into the Atlantic."
R. King,
Ohio,
chapter 5.
The text of the Proclamation of 1763 is in
Force's
American Archives,
series 4, volume 1, page 172.
NORTHWEST TERRITORY OF USA: A. D. 1763-1764.
Pontiac's War.
See PONTIAC'S WAR.
NORTHWEST TERRITORY OF USA: A. D. 1765-1768.
The Indian Treaties of German Flats and Fort Stanwix.
Boundary arrangement with the Six Nations.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1765-1768.
NORTHWEST TERRITORY OF USA: A. D. 1774.
The territorial claims of Virginia.
Lord Dunmore's War.
See OHIO (VALLEY): A. D. 1774;
also UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1781-1786.
NORTHWEST TERRITORY OF USA: A. D. 1774.
Embraced in the Province of Quebec.
See CANADA: A. D. 1763-1774.
NORTHWEST TERRITORY OF USA: A. D. 1778-1779.
Its conquest from the British by the Virginian General Clark,
and its organization under the jurisdiction of Virginia.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1778-1779 CLARK'S CONQUEST.
NORTHWEST TERRITORY OF USA: A. D. 1781-1786.
Cession of the conflicting territorial claims of the States
to the United States.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1781-1786.
NORTHWEST TERRITORY OF USA:A. D. 1784.
Jefferson's plan for new States.
"The condition of the northwestern territory had long been
under the consideration of the House [the Congress of the
Confederation]. Several committees had been appointed, and
several schemes listened to, for laying out new States, but it
was not till the middle of April [1784], that a resolution
was finally reached. One plan was to divide the ceded and
purchased lands into seventeen States. Eight of these were to
lie between the banks of the Mississippi and a north and south
line through the falls of the Ohio. Eight more were to be
marked out between this line and a second one parallel to it,
and passing through the western bank of the mouth of the Great
Kanawha. What remained was to form the seventeenth State. But
few supporters were found for the measure, and a committee,
over which Jefferson presided, was ordered to place before
Congress a new scheme of division. Chase and Howe assisted
him; and the three devised a plan whereby the prairie-lands
were to be parted out among ten new States. The divisions then
marked down have utterly disappeared, and the names given to
them become so forgotten that nine tenths of the population
which has, in our time, covered the whole region with wealthy
cities and prosperous villages, and turned it from a waste to
a garden, have never in their lives heard the words
pronounced. Some were borrowed from the Latin and some from
the Greek; while others were Latinized forms of the names the
Indians had given to the rivers. The States were to be, as far
as possible, two degrees of latitude in width and arranged in
three tiers. The Mississippi and a meridian through the falls
of the Ohio included the western tier. The meridian through
the falls of the Ohio and a second through the mouth of the
Great Kanawha were the boundaries of the middle tier. Between
this and the Pennsylvania West Line lay the third tier. That
vast tract stretching from the 45th parallel of latitude to
the Lake of the Woods, and dense with forests of pine, of
hickory, and of oak, they called Sylvania.
{2379}
It was the northern State of the western tier. To the long
tongue of land separating the water of Michigan from the
waters of Erie and Huron they gave the name Cherronesus. A
narrow strip, not more than two degrees of latitude in width,
and stretching from Lake Michigan to the Mississippi, was
called Michigania. As marked down on their rude maps,
Michigania lay under Sylvania, in the very heart of what is
now Wisconsin. South of this to the 41st parallel of latitude
was Assenisipia, a name derived from Assenisipi, the Indian
title of the river now called the Rock. Eastward, along the
shore of Lake Erie, the country was named Metropotamia. It
took the name Mother of Rivers from the belief that within its
boundary were the fountains of many rivers, the Muskingum, the
two Miamis of Ohio, the Wabash, the Illinois, the Sandusky,
and the Miami of the Lake. That part of Illinois between the
39th and 41st parallels was called, from the river which
waters it, Illinoia. On to the east was Saratoga, and beyond
this lay Washington, a broad and level tract shut in by the
Ohio river, the waters of the lake, and the boundaries of
Pennsylvania. Under Illinoia and Saratoga, and stretching
along the Ohio, was the ninth State. Within its confines the
waters of the Wabash, the Sawane, the Tanissee, the Illinois,
and the Ohio were mingled with the waters of the Mississippi
and Missouri. The committee therefore judged that a fitting
name would be Polypotamia. Pelisipia was the tenth State. It
lay to the east of Polypotamia, and was named from Pelisipi, a
term the Cherokees often applied to the river Ohio. At the
same time that the boundaries of the new States were defined,
a code of laws was drawn up which should serve as a
constitution for each State, till 20,000 free inhabitants
acquired the right of self-government. The code was in no wise
a remarkable performance, yet there were among its articles
two which cannot be passed by in silence. One provided for the
abolition of slavery after the year 1800. The other announced
that no one holding an hereditary title should ever become a
citizen of the new States. Each was struck out by the House.
Yet each is deserving of notice. The one because it was the
first attempt at a national condemnation of slavery, the other
because it was a public expression of the dread with which our
ancestors beheld the growth of the Society of the Cincinnati."
J. B. McMaster,
History of the People of the United States,
chapter 2 (volume 1).
The report of Jefferson's committee "was recommitted to the
same committee on the 17th of March, and a new one was
submitted on the 22d of the same month. The second report
agreed in substance with the first. The principal difference
was the omission of the paragraph giving names to the States to
be formed out of the Western Territory." After striking out the
clauses prohibiting slavery after the year 1800 and denying
citizenship to all persons holding hereditary titles, the
Congress adopted the report, April 23, 1784. "Thus the
substance of the report of Mr. Jefferson of a plan for the
government of the Western Territory (without restrictions as to
slavery) became a law, and remained so during 1784 to 1787,
when these resolutions were repealed in terms by the passage of
the ordinance for the government of the 'Territory of the
United States northwest of the river Ohio.'"
T. Donaldson,
The Public Domain: its History,
pages 148-149.
NORTHWEST TERRITORY OF USA: A. D. 1786-1788.
The Ohio Company of Revolutionary soldiers and
their land purchase.
The settlement at Marietta.
"The Revolutionary War had hardly closed before thousands of
the disbanded officers and soldiers were looking anxiously to
the Western lands for new homes, or for means of repairing
their shattered fortunes. In June, 1783, a strong memorial was
sent to Congress asking a grant of the lands between the Ohio
and Lake Erie. Those who lived in the South were fortunate in
having immediate access to the lands of Kentucky, Tennessee,
and the back parts of Georgia. The strife in Congress over the
lands of the Northwest delayed the surveys and the bounties so
long that the soldiers of the North almost lost hope."
Finally, there "was a meeting of officers and soldiers,
chiefly of the Massachusetts, Rhode Island and Connecticut
lines, at Boston, March 1, 1786, when they formed a new Ohio
Company for the purchase and settlement of Western lands, in
shares of $1,000. General Putnam [Rufus], General Samuel H.
Parsons, and the Rev. Manasseh Cutler, were made the
directors, and selected for their purchase the lands on the
Ohio River situated on both sides of the Muskingum, and
immediately west of the Seven Ranges. The treasury board in
those days were the commissioners of public lands, but with no
powers to enter into absolute sales unless such were approved
by Congress. Weeks and months were lost in waiting for a
quorum of that body to assemble. This was effected on the 11th
of July, and Dr. Cutler, deputed by his colleagues, was in
attendance, but was constantly baffled in pursuing his
objects. … The members were disposed to insert conditions
which were not satisfactory to the Ohio Company. But the
doctor carried his point by formally intimating that he should
retire, and seek better terms with some of the States, which
were offering their lands at half the price Congress was to
receive. The grant to the Ohio Company, upon the terms
proposed, was voted by Congress, and the contract formally
signed October 27, 1787, by the treasury board, and by Dr.
Cutler and Winthrop Sargent, as agents of the Ohio Company.
Two companies, including surveyors, boat-builders, carpenters,
smiths, farmers and laborers, 48 persons in all, with their
outfit, were sent forward in the following months of December
and January, under General Putnam as leader and
superintendent. They united in February on the Youghiogheny
River and constructed boats. … Embarking with their stores
they descended the Ohio, and on the 7th of April, 1788, landed
at the Muskingum. On the upper point, opposite Fort Harmar,
they founded their town, which at Boston had first been named
Adelphia. At the first meeting of the directors, held on the
ground July 2d, the name of Marietta was adopted, in honor of
the French Queen Marie Antoinette, and compounded of the first
and last syllables."
R. King,
Ohio,
chapter 8.
ALSO IN:
W. P. and J. P. Cutler,
Life, Journals and Correspondence
of Reverend Manasseh Cutler,
volume 1, chapters 4-7 and 9.
C. M. Walker,
History of Athens County, Ohio,
chapter 2.
{2380}
NORTHWEST TERRITORY OF USA: A. D. 1787.
The great Ordinance for its government.
Perpetual Exclusion of Slavery.
"Congress at intervals discussed the future of this great
domain, but for a while little progress was made except to
establish that Congress could divide the territory as might
seem best. Nathan Dane came forward with a motion for a
committee to plan some temporary scheme of government. A
committee on this point reported (May 10, 1786) that the
number of States should be from two to five, to be admitted as
States according to Jefferson's proposition, but the question
of slavery in them was left open. Nothing definite was done
till a committee—Johnson of Connecticut, Pinckney of South
Carolina, Smith of New York, Dane of Massachusetts, and Henry
of Maryland—reported on April 26, 1787, 'An ordinance for the
government of the Western territory,' and after various
amendments it was fairly transcribed for a third reading, May
10th. Further consideration was now delayed until July. It was
at this point that Manasseh Cutler appeared in New York,
commissioned to buy land for the Ohio Company in the region
whose future was to be determined by this ordinance, and it
was very likely, in part, by his influence that those features
of the perfected ordinance as passed five days later, and
which has given it its general fame, were introduced. On July
9th the bill was referred to a new committee, of which a
majority were Southern men, Carrington of Virginia taking the
chairmanship from Johnson; Dane and Smith were retained, but
Richard Henry Lee and Kean of South Carolina supplanted
Pinckney and Henry. This change was made to secure the
Southern support; on the other hand, acquiescence in the
wishes of Northern purchasers of lands was essential in any
business outcome of the movement. 'Up to this time,' says
Poole, 'there were no articles of compact in the bill, no
anti-slavery clause, nothing about liberty of conscience or of
the press, the right of habeas corpus, or of trial by jury, or
the equal distribution of estates. The clause that, "religion,
morality, and knowledge being necessary to good government and
the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education
shall be forever encouraged," was not there.' These omissions
were the New England ideas, which had long before this been
engrafted on the Constitution of Massachusetts. This new
committee reported the bill, embodying all these provisions
except the anti-slavery clause, on the 11th, and the next day
this and other amendments were made. On the 13th, but one
voice was raised against the bill on its final passage, and
that came from Yates of New York. Poole intimates that it was
the promise of the governorship of the territory under the
ordinance which induced St. Clair, then President of Congress,
to lend it his countenance. The promise, if such it was, was
fulfilled, and St. Clair became the first governor."
J. Winsor and E. Channing,
Territorial Acquisitions and Divisions
(Narrative and Critical History of America,
volume 7, appendix).
ALSO IN:
B. A. Hinsdale,
The Old Northwest,
chapter 15.
W. F. Poole,
Doctor Cutler and the Ordinance of 1787
(North American Review, April, 1876.
W. P. and J. P. Cutler,
Life of Manasseh Cutler,
volume 1, chapter 8.
J. P. Dunn, Jr.,
Indiana,
chapter 5.
T. Donaldson,
The Public Domain,
pages 149-159.
J. A. Barrett,
Evolution of the Ordinance of 1787
(University of Nebraska, Seminary Papers, 1891).
J. P. Dunn, editor,
Slavery Petitions
(Indiana Historical Society,
volume 2, number 12).
See, also,
EDUCATION, MODERN: AMERICA.: A. D. 1785-1880.
The following is the text of the "Ordinance for the Government
of the Territory of the United States Northwest of the River
Ohio," commonly known as the "Ordinance of 1787":
"Be it ordained by the United States in Congress assembled,
That the said territory, for the purposes of temporary
government, be one district, subject, however, to be divided
into two districts, as future circumstances may, in the
opinion of Congress, make it expedient. Be it ordained by the
authority aforesaid, That the estates, both of resident and
non-resident proprietors in the said territory, dying
intestate, shall descend to, and be distributed among, their
children, and the descendants of a deceased child, in equal
parts; the descendants of a deceased child or grandchild to
take the share of their deceased parent in equal parts among
them: And where there shall be no children or descendants,
then in equal parts to the next of kin in equal degree; and,
among collaterals, the children of a deceased brother or
sister of the intestate shall have, in equal parts among them,
their deceased parents' share; and there shall, in no case, be
a distinction between kindred of the whole and half-blood;
saving, in all cases, to the widow of the intestate her third
part of the real estate for life, and one-third part of the
personal estate; and this law, relative to descents and dower,
shall remain in full force until altered by the legislature of
the district. And, until the governor and judges shall adopt
laws as hereinafter mentioned, estates in the said territory
may be devised or bequeathed by wills in writing, signed and

sealed by him or her, in whom the estate may be (being of full
age,) and attested by three witnesses; and real estates may be
conveyed by lease and release, or, bargain and sale, signed,
sealed, and delivered by the person, being of full age, in
whom the estate may be, and attested by two witnesses,
provided such wills be duly proved, and such conveyances be
acknowledged, or the execution thereof duly proved, and be
recorded within one year after proper magistrates, courts, and
registers shall be appointed for that purpose: and personal
property may be transferred by delivery; saving, however to
the French and Canadian inhabitants, and other settlers of the
Kaskaskias, St. Vincents, and the neighboring villages who
have heretofore professed themselves citizens of Virginia,
their laws and customs now in force among them, relative to
the descent and conveyance of property. Be it ordained by the
authority aforesaid, That there shall be appointed, from time
to time, by Congress, a governor, whose commission shall
continue in force for the term of three years, unless sooner
revoked by Congress; he shall reside in the district, and have
a freehold estate therein in 1,000 acres of land, while in the
exercise of his office. There shall be appointed, from time to
time, by Congress, a secretary, whose commission shall
continue in force for four years unless sooner revoked; he
shall reside in the district, and have a freehold estate
therein in 500 acres of land, while in the exercise of his
office; it shall be his duty to keep and preserve the acts and
laws passed by the legislature, and the public records of the
district, and the proceedings of the governor in his Executive
department; and transmit authentic copies of such acts and
proceedings, every six months, to the Secretary of Congress:
{2381}
There shall also be appointed a court to consist of three
judges, any two of whom to form a court, who shall have a
common law jurisdiction, and reside in the district, and have
each therein a freehold estate in, 500 acres of land while in
the exercise of their offices; and their commissions shall
continue in force during good behavior. The governor and
judges, or a majority of them, shall adopt and publish in the
district such laws of the original States, criminal and civil,
as may be necessary and best suited to the circumstances of
the district, and report them to Congress from time to time:
which laws shall be in force in the district until the
organization of the General Assembly therein, unless
disapproved of by Congress; but, afterwards, the legislature
shall have authority to alter them as they shall think fit.
The governor, for the time being, shall be commander-in-chief
of the militia, appoint and commission all officers in the
same below the rank of general officers; all general Officers
shall be appointed and commissioned by Congress. Previous to
the organization of the General Assembly, the governor shall
appoint such magistrates and other civil officers, in each
county or township, as he shall find necessary for the
preservation of the peace and good order in the same: After
the General Assembly shall be organized, the powers and duties
of the magistrates and other civil officers, shall be
regulated and defined by the said assembly; but all
magistrates and other civil officers, not herein otherwise
directed, shall, during the continuance of this temporary
government, be appointed by the governor. For the prevention
of crimes and injuries, the laws to be adopted or made shall
have force in all parts of the district, and for the execution
of process, criminal and civil, the governor shall make proper
divisions thereof; and he shall proceed, from time to time, as
circumstances may require, to layout the parts of the district
in which the Indian titles shall have been extinguished, into
counties and townships, subject, however, to such alterations
as may thereafter be made by the legislature. So soon as there
shall be 5,000 free male inhabitants of full age in the
district, upon giving proof thereof to the governor, they
shall receive authority, with time and place, to elect
representatives from their counties or townships to represent
them in the General Assembly: Provided, That, for every 500
free male inhabitants, there shall be one representative, and
so on progressively with the number of free male inhabitants,
shall the right of representation increase, until the number
of representatives shall amount to 25; after which, the number
and proportion of representatives shall be regulated by the
legislature: Provided, That no person be eligible or qualified
to act as a representative unless he shall have been a citizen
of one of the United States three years, and be a resident in
the district, or unless he shall have resided in the district
three years; and, in either case, shall likewise hold in his
own right, in fee simple, 200 acres of land within the same:
Provided, also, That a freehold in 50 acres of land in the
district, having been a citizen of one of the States, and
being resident in the district, or the like freehold and two
years residence in the district, shall be necessary to qualify
a man as an elector of a representative. The representatives
thus elected, shall serve for the term of two years; and, in
case of the death of a representative, or removal from office,
the governor shall issue a writ to the county or township for
which he was a member, to elect another in his stead, to serve
for the residue of the term. The General Assembly, or
Legislature, shall consist of the governor, legislative
council, and a house of representatives. The legislative
council shall consist of five members, to continue in office
five years, unless sooner removed by Congress; any three of
whom to be a quorum: and the members of the council shall be
nominated and appointed in the following manner, to wit: As
soon as representatives shall be elected, the governor shall
appoint a time and place for them to meet together; and, when
met, they shall nominate ten persons, residents in the
district, and each possessed of a freehold in 500 acres of
land, and return their names to Congress; five of whom
Congress shall appoint and commission to serve as aforesaid;
and, whenever a vacancy shall happen in the council, by death
or removal from office, the house of representatives shall
nominate two persons, qualified as aforesaid, for such
vacancy, and return their names to Congress; one of whom
Congress shall appoint and commission for the residue of the
term. And every five years, four months at least before the
expiration of the time of service of the members of council,
the said house shall nominate ten persons, qualified as
aforesaid, and return their names to Congress; five of whom
Congress shall appoint and commission to serve as members of
the council five years, unless sooner removed. And the
governor, legislative council, and house of representatives,
shall have authority to make laws in all cases, for the good
government of the district, not repugnant to the principles
and articles in this ordinance established and declared. And
all bills, having passed by a majority in the house, and by a
majority in the council, shall be referred to the governor for
his assent; but no bill, or legislative act whatever, shall be
of any force without his assent. The governor shall have power
to convene, prorogue, and dissolve the General Assembly, when,
in his opinion, it shall be expedient. The governor, judges,
legislative council, secretary, and such other officers as
Congress shall appoint in the district, shall take an oath or
affirmation of fidelity and of office; the governor before the
President of Congress, and all other officers before the
governor. As soon as a legislature shall be formed in the
district, the council and house assembled in one room, shall
have authority, by joint ballot, to elect a delegate to
Congress, who shall have a seat in Congress, with a right of
debating but not of voting during this temporary government.
And, for extending the fundamental principles of civil and
religious liberty, which form the basis whereon these
republics, their laws and constitutions are erected; to fix
and establish those principles as the basis of all laws,
constitutions, and governments, which forever hereafter shall
be formed in the said territory: to provide also for the
establishment of States, and permanent government therein, and
for their admission to a share in the federal councils on an
equal footing with the original States, at as early periods as
may be consistent with the general interest: It is hereby
ordained and declared by the authority aforesaid, That the
following articles shall be considered as articles of compact
between the original States and the people and States in the
said territory and forever remain unalterable, unless by
common consent, to wit:
{2382}
Article 1st.
No person, demeaning himself in a peaceable and orderly
manner, shall ever be molested on account of his mode of
worship or religious sentiments, in the said territory.
Article 2d.
The inhabitants of the said territory shall always be entitled
to the benefits of the writ of habeas corpus, and of the trial
by jury; of a proportionate representation of the people in
the legislature; and of judicial proceedings according to the
course of the common law. All persons shall be bailable,
unless for capital offences, where the proof shall be evident
or the presumption great. All fines shall be moderate; and no
cruel or unusual punishments shall be inflicted. No man shall
be deprived of his liberty or property, but by the judgment of
his peers or the law of the land: and, should the public
exigencies make it necessary, for the common preservation, to
take any person's property, or to demand his particular
services, full compensation shall be made for the same. And,
in the just preservation of rights and property, it is
understood and declared, that no law ought ever to be made, or
have force in the said territory, that shall, in any manner
whatever, interfere with or affect private contracts or
engagements, bona fide, and without fraud, previously formed.
Article 3d.
Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good
government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means
of education shall forever be encouraged. The utmost good
faith shall always be observed towards the Indians; their
lands and property shall never be taken from them without
their consent; and, in their property, rights, and liberty,
they shall never be invaded or, disturbed, unless in just and
lawful wars authorized by Congress; but laws founded in
justice and humanity, shall, from time to time, be made for
preventing wrongs being done to them, and for preserving peace
and friendship with them.
Article 4th.
The said territory, and the States which may be formed
therein, shall forever remain a part of this confederacy of
the United States of America, subject to the Articles of
Confederation, and to such alterations therein as shall be
constitutionally made; and to all the acts and ordinances of
the United States in Congress assembled, conformable thereto.
The inhabitants and settlers in the said territory shall be
subject to pay a part of the federal debts contracted or to be
contracted, and a proportional part of the expenses of
government, to be apportioned on them by Congress according to
the same common rule and measure by which apportionments
thereof shall be made on the other States; and the taxes, for
paying their proportion, shall be laid and levied by the
authority and direction of the legislatures of the district or
districts, or new States, as in the original States, within
the time agreed upon by the United States in Congress
assembled. The legislatures of those districts or new States,
shall never interfere with the primary disposal of the soil by
the United States in Congress assembled, nor with any
regulations Congress may find necessary for securing the title
in such soil to the bona fide purchasers. No tax shall be
imposed on lands the property of the United States: and, in no
case, shall non-resident proprietors be taxed higher than
residents. The navigable waters leading into the Mississippi
and St. Lawrence, and the carrying places between the same,
shall be common highways, and forever free, as well to the
inhabitants of the said territory as to the citizens of the
United States, and those of any other States that may be
admitted into the Confederacy, without any tax, impost, or
duty, therefor.
Article 5th.
There shall be formed in the said territory, not less than
three nor more than five States; and the boundaries of the
States, as soon as Virginia shall alter her act of cession,
and consent to the same, shall become fixed and established as
follows, to wit: The Western State in the said territory,
shall be bounded by the Mississippi, the Ohio, and Wabash
rivers; a direct line drawn from the Wabash and Post St.
Vincent's, due North, to the territorial line between the
United States and Canada; and, by the said territorial line,
to the Lake of the Woods and Mississippi. The middle State
shall be bounded by the said direct line, the Wabash from Post
Vincent's, to the Ohio: by the Ohio, by a direct line, drawn
due North from the mouth of the Great Miami, to the said
territorial line, and by the said territorial line. The
Eastern State shall be bounded by the last mentioned direct
line, the Ohio, Pennsylvania, and the said territorial line:
Provided, however, and it is further understood and declared,
that the boundaries of these three States shall be subject so
far to be altered, that, if Congress shall hereafter find it
expedient, they shall have authority to form one or two States
in that part of the said territory which lies North of an East
and West line drawn through the Southerly bend or extreme of
Lake Michigan. And, whenever any of the said States shall have
60,000 free inhabitants therein, such State shall be admitted,
by its delegates, into the Congress of the United States, on
an equal footing with the original States in all respects
whatever, and shall be at liberty to form a permanent
constitution and State government: Provided, the constitution
and government so to be formed, shall be republican, and in
conformity to the principles contained in these articles; and,
so far as it can be consistent with the general interest of
the confederacy, such admission shall be allowed at an earlier
period, and when there may be a less number of free
inhabitants in the State than 60,000.
Article 6th.
There shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in
the said territory, otherwise than in the punishment of
crimes, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted:
Provided, always, That any person escaping into the same, from
whom labor or service is lawfully claimed in any one of the
original States, such fugitive may be lawfully reclaimed and
conveyed to the person claiming his or her labor or service as
aforesaid. Be It ordained by the authority aforesaid, That the
resolutions of the 23d of April, 1784, relative to the subject
of this ordinance, be, and the same are hereby, repealed and
declared null and void. Done by the United States, in Congress
assembled, the 13th day of July, in the year of our Lord 1787,
and of their sovereignty and independence the twelfth."
{2383}
NORTHWEST TERRITORY: A. D. 1788-1802.
Extinguished by divisions.
Creation of the Territory of Indiana and the State of Ohio.
"Arthur St. Clair was appointed governor by the Congress [of
the Confederation] February 1, 1788, and Winthrop Sargent
secretary. August 7th, 1789, Congress [under the federal
constitution], in view of the new method of appointment of
officers as provided in the Constitution, passed an amendatory
act to the Ordinance of 1787, providing for the nomination of
officers for the Territory by the President. … August 8, 1789,
President Washington sent to the Senate the names of Arthur
St. Clair for governor, Winthrop Sargent for secretary, and
Samuel Holden Parsons, John Cleves Symmes, and William Barton,
for judges. … They were all confirmed. President Washington in
this message designated the country as 'The Western
Territory.' The supreme court was established at Cincinnati (…
named by St. Clair in honor of the Society of the Cincinnati,
he having been president of the branch society in
Pennsylvania). St. Clair remained governor until November 22,
1802. Winthrop Sargent afterwards, in 1798, went to
Mississippi as governor of that Territory. William Henry
Harrison became secretary in 1797, representing it in Congress
in 1799-1800, and he became governor of the Territory of
Indiana in 1800. May 7, 1800, Congress, upon petition, divided
this [Northwest] Territory into two separate governments.
Indiana Territory was created, with its capital at St.
Vincennes, and from that portion of the Northwest Territory
west of a line beginning opposite the mouth of the Kentucky
River in Kentucky, and running north to the Canada line. The
eastern portion now became the 'Territory Northwest of the
river Ohio,' with its capital at Chillicothe. This portion,
November 29, 1802, was admitted into the Union. … The
territory northwest of the river Ohio ceased to exist as a
political division after the admission of the State of Ohio
into the Union, November 29, 1802, although in acts of
Congress it was frequently referred to and its forms affixed
by legislation to other political divisions."
T. Donaldson,
The Public Domain,
pages 159-160.
ALSO IN:
J. Burnet,
Notes on the Settlement of the Northwest Territory,
chapters 14-20.
C. Atwater,
History of Ohio, period 2.
J. B. Dillon,
History of Indiana,
chapters 19-31.
W. H. Smith,
The St. Clair Papers,
volume 1, chapters 6-9.
NORTHWEST TERRITORY: A. D. 1790-1795.
Indian war.
The disastrous expeditions of Harmar and St. Clair
and Wayne's decisive victory.
The Greenville Treaty.
"The Northwestern Indians, at Washington's installation,
numbered, according to varying estimates, from 20,000 to
40,000 souls. Of these the Wabash tribes had for years been
the scourge of the new Kentucky settlers. So constant, indeed,
was bloodshed and retaliation, that the soil of this earliest
of States beyond the mountains acquired the name of 'the dark
and bloody ground.' A broad river interposed no sufficient
barricade to these deadly encounters. … What with their own
inadmissible claims to territory, and this continuous war to
the knife, all the tribes of the Northwestern country were now
so maddened against the United States that the first
imperative necessity, unless we chose to abandon the Western
settlements altogether, was to chastise the Indians into
submission. … Brigadier-General Harmar, who commanded the
small force of United States regulars in the Territory, was …
a Revolutionary veteran. Our frontier military stations
extended as far as Vincennes, on the Wabash, which Major
Hamtranck, a Canadian Frenchman, commanded. The British
commandant was at Detroit, whence he communicated constantly
with the Governor-General of the provinces, Lord Dorchester,
by whose instigation the Northwestern Indians at this period
were studiously kept at enmity with the United States. … A
formidable expedition against the Indians was determined upon
by the President and St. Clair [Governor of the Northwest
Territory]; and in the fall of the year [1790] General Harmar
set out from Fort Washington for the Miami country, with a
force numbering somewhat less than 1,500, near three-fourths
of whom were militia raised in Western Pennsylvania and
Kentucky." Successful at first, the campaign ended in a
disastrous defeat on the Maumee.
J. Schouler,
History of the United States,
chapter 2, section 1 (volume 1).
"The remnant of his army which Harmar led back to Cincinnati
[Fort Washington] had the unsubdued savages almost continually
at their heels. As a rebuke to the hostile tribes the
expedition was an utter failure, a fact which was soon made
manifest. Indian attacks on the settlers immediately became
bolder. … Every block house in the territory was soon almost
in a state of siege. … Washington was authorized to raise an
army of 3,000 men for the protection of the Northwest. The
command of this army was given to St. Clair. At the same time
a corps of Kentucky volunteers was selected and placed under
General Charles Scott. The Kentuckians dashed into the Wabash
country, scattered the Indians, burned their villages and
returned with a crowd of prisoners. The more pretentious
expedition of St. Clair was not to be accomplished with so
fine a military flourish. Like Harmar's army, that led by St.
Clair was feeble in discipline, and disturbed by jealousies.
The agents of the Government equipped the expedition in a
shameful manner, delivering useless muskets, supplying powder
that would scarcely burn, and neglecting entirely a large
number of necessary supplies; so that after St. Clair with his
2,300 regulars and 600 militia had marched from Ludlow's
Station, north of Cincinnati, he found himself under the
necessity of delaying the march to secure supplies. The
militia deserted in great numbers. For the purpose of
capturing deserters and bringing up belated supplies, one of
the best regiments in the army was sent southward. While
waiting on one of the branches of the Wabash for the return of
this regiment the main force was on the fourth of November,
1791, surrounded and attacked by the lurking Indians. At the
first yell of the savages scores of the terrified militia
dropped their guns and bolted. St. Clair, who for some days
had been too ill to sit upon a horse, now exerted all his
strength in an effort to rally the wavering troops. His horses
were all killed, and his hat and clothing were ripped by the
bullets. But the lines broke, the men scattered and the
artillery was captured. Those who stood their ground fell in
their tracks till the fields were covered by 600 dead and
dying men. At last a retreat was ordered. … For many miles,
over a track littered with coats, hats, boots and powder
horns, the whooping victors chased the routed survivors of St.
Clair's army. It was a ghastly defeat. The face of every
settler in Ohio blanched at the news. Kentucky was thrown into
excitement and even Western Pennsylvania nervously petitioned
for protection. St. Clair was criticised and insulted. A
committee of Congress found him without blame. But he had been
defeated, and no amount of reasoning could unlink his name from
the tragedy of the dark November morning.
{2384}
Every effort was made to win over the Indians before making
another use of force. The Government sent peace messengers
into the Northwest. In one manner or another nearly every one
of the messengers was murdered. The Indians who listened at
all would hear of no terms of peace that did not promise the
removal of the whites from the northern side of the Ohio. The
British urged the tribes to make this extreme demand. Spain
also sent mischief-makers into the camps of the exultant red
men. … More bloodshed became inevitable; and in execution of
this last resort came one of the most popular of the
Revolutionary chieftains—'Mad Anthony' Wayne. Wayne led his
army from Cincinnati in October of 1793. He advanced carefully
in the path taken by St. Clair, found and buried the bones of
St. Clair's 600 lost, wintered at Greenville, and in the
summer of 1794 moved against the foe with strong
reinforcements from Kentucky. After a preliminary skirmish
between the Indians and the troops, Wayne, in accordance with
his instructions, made a last offer of peace. The offer was
evasively met, and Wayne pushed on. On the morning of
Wednesday the twentieth of August, 1794, the 'legion' came
upon the united tribes of Indians encamped on the north bank
of the Maumee and there, near the rapids of the Maumee, the
Indians were forced to face the most alert and vigorous enemy
they had yet encountered. The same daring tactics that had
carried Stony Point and made Anthony Wayne historic were here
directed against the Indian's timber coverts. … Encouraging
and marshaling the Indians were painted Canadian white men
bearing British arms. Many of these fell in the heaps of dead
and some were captured. When Wayne announced his victory he
declared that the Indian loss was greater than that incurred
by the entire Federal army in the war with Great Britain. Thus
ended the Indian reign of terror. After destroying the Indian
crops and possessions, in sight of the British fort, Wayne
fell back to Greenville and there made the celebrated treaty
by which on August 3, 1795, the red men came to a permanent
peace with the Thirteen Fires. From Cincinnati to Campus
Martius Wayne's victory sent a thrill of relief. The treaty,
ceding to the Union two thirds of the present State,
guaranteed the safety of all settlers who respected the
Indians' rights, and set in motion once more the machinery of
immigration."
A. Black,
The Story of Ohio,
chapter 6.
ALSO IN:
A. St. Clair,
Narrative of Campaign.
C. W. Butterfield,
History of the Girtys,
chapters 23-30.
W. H. Smith,
The St. Clair Papers,
volume 2.
W. L. Stone,
Life of Brant,
volume 2, chapters 10-12.
NORTHWEST TERRITORY: A. D. 1811.
Harrison's campaign against Tecumseh and his League.
Battle of Tippecanoe.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1811.
----------NORTHWEST TERRITORY: End--------
NORTHWESTERN OR OREGON BOUNDARY QUESTION, Settlement of the.
See OREGON: A. D. 1844-1846,
and ALABAMA CLAIMS: A. D. 1871.
NORTHWESTERN OR SAN JUAN WATER-BOUNDARY QUESTION.
See SAN JUAN WATER-BOUNDARY QUESTION.
NORTHWESTERN PROVINCES OF INDIA, English Acquisition of the.
See INDIA: A. D. 1798-1805.
NORUMBEGA.
"Norembega, or Norumbega, more properly called Arambec
(Hakluyt, III. 167), was, in Ramusio's map, the country
embraced within Nova Scotia, southern New Brunswick, and a
part of Maine. De Laet confines it to a district about the
mouth of the Penobscot. Wytfleit and other early writers say
that it had a capital city of the same name; and in several
old maps this fabulous metropolis is laid down, with towers
and churches, on the river Penobscot. The word is of Indian
origin."
F. Parkman,
Pioneers of France in the New World: Champlain,
chapter 1, foot-note.
On Gastaldi's map, of New France, made in 1550, "the name 'La
Nuova Francia' is written in very large letters, indicating
probably that this name is meant for the entire country. The
name 'Terra de Nurumbega' is written in smaller letters, and
appears to be attached only to the peninsula of Nova Scotia.
Crignon, however, the author of the discourse which this map
is intended to illustrate, gives to this name a far greater
extent. He says: 'Going beyond the cape of the Bretons, there
is a country contiguous to this cape, the coast of which
trends to the west a quarter southwest to the country of
Florida, and runs along for a good 500 leagues; which coast
was discovered fifteen years ago by Master Giovanni da
Verrazano, in the name of the king of France and of Madame la
Regente; and this country is called by many 'La Francese,' and
even by the Portuguese themselves; and its end is toward
Florida under 78° W., and 38° N. … The country is named by the
inhabitants 'Nurumbega'; and between it and Brazil is a great
gulf, in which are the islands of the West Indies, discovered
by the Spaniards. From this it would appear that, at the time
of the discourse, the entire east coast of the United States,
as far as Florida, was designated by the name of Nurumbega.
Afterwards, this name was restricted to New England; and, at a
later date, it was applied only to Maine, and still later to
the region of the Penobscot. … The name 'Norumbega,' or
'Arambec,' in Hakluyt's time, was applied to Maine, and
sometimes to the whole of New England."
J. G. Kohl,
History of the Discovery of Maine
(Maine Historical Society Collection,
series 2, volume 1), pages 231 and 283.
"The story of Norumbega is invested with the charms of fable
and romance. The name is found in the map of Hieronimus da
Verrazano of 1529, as 'Aranbega,' being restricted to a
definite and apparently unimportant locality. Suddenly, in
1539, Norumbega appears in the narrative of the Dieppe Captain
as a vast and opulent region, extending from Cape Breton to
the Cape of Florida. About three years later Allefonsce
described the 'River of Norumbega,' now identified with the
Penobscot, and treated the capital of the country as an
important market for the trade in fur. Various maps of the
period of Allefonsce confine the name of Norumbega to a
distinct spot; but Gastaldi's map, published by Ramusio in
1556,—though modelled after Verrazano's, of which indeed it is
substantially an extract,—applies the name to the region lying
between Cape Breton and the Jersey coast. From this time until
the seventeenth century Norumbega was generally regarded as
embracing all New England, and sometimes portions of Canada,
though occasionally the country was known by other names.
{2385}
Still, in 1582, Lok seems to have thought that the Penobscot
formed the southern boundary of Norumbega, which he shows on
his map as an island; while John Smith, in 1620, speaks of
Norumbega as including New England and the region as far south
as Virginia. On the other hand Champlain, in 1605, treated
Norumbega as lying within the present territory of Maine. He
searched for its capital on the banks of the Penobscot, and as
late as 1669 Heylin was dreaming of the fair city of
Norumbega. Grotius, for a time at least, regarded the name as
of Old Northern origin and connected with 'Norbergia.' It was
also fancied that a people resembling the Mexicans once lived
upon the banks of the Penobscot. Those who have labored to
find an Indian derivation for the name say that it means 'the
place of a fine city.' At one time the houses of the city were
supposed to be very splendid, and to be supported upon pillars
of crystal and silver."
B. F. De Costa,
Norumbega and its English Explorers
(Narrative and Critical History of America,
volume 3, chapter 6).
ALSO IN:
J. Winsor,
Cartography of North East Coast of America,
(N. and C. History of America,
volume 4, chapter 2).
NORWAY.
See SCANDINAVIAN STATES.
NOSE MONEY.
A poll-tax levied among the ancient Scandinavians seems to
have borne this name because a defaulting tax-payer might
suffer the loss of his nose, and the Danes in Ireland are
thought to have imposed the same there.
T. Moore,
History of Ireland,
volume 2, chapter 17.
NOTABLES, The Assembly of the.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1774-1788.
NOTIUM, Battle of (B. C. 407).
See GREECE: B. C. 411-407.
NOTTOWAYS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: IROQUOIS TRIBES OF THE SOUTH.
----------NOVA SCOTIA: Start--------
NOVA SCOTIA:
The aboriginal inhabitants.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ABNAKIS, and ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
NOVA SCOTIA: A. D. 1000.
Supposed identity with the Markland of Norse sagas.
See AMERICA: 10-11TH CENTURIES.
NOVA SCOTIA: 16th century.
Embraced in the Norumbega of the old geographers.
See NORUMBEGA;
also CANADA: NAMES.
NOVA SCOTIA: A. D. 1603-1608.
The first French settlements, at Port Royal (Annapolis).
See CANADA: A. D. 1603-1605; and 1606-1608.
NOVA SCOTIA: A. D. 1604.
Origin of the name Acadia.
In 1604, after the death of De Chastes, who had sent out
Champlain on his first voyage to Canada, Pierre du Guast,
Sieur de Monts, took the enterprise in hand and "petitioned
the king for leave to colonize La Cadie, or Acadie, a region
defined as extending from the 40th to the 46th degree of north
latitude, or from Philadelphia to beyond Montreal. … De Monts
gained his point. He was made Lieutenant-General in Acadia. …
This name is not found in any earlier public document. It was
afterwards restricted to the peninsula of Nova Scotia, but the
dispute concerning the limits of Acadia was a proximate cause
of the war of 1755. The word is said to be derived from the
Indian Aquoddiauke, or Aquoddie, supposed to mean the fish
called a pollock. The Bay of Passamaquoddy, 'Great Pollock
Water,' if we may accept the same authority, derives its name
from the same origin, Potter in 'Historical Magazine,' I. 84.
This derivation is doubtful. The Micmac word, 'Quoddy,'
'Kady,' or 'Cadie,' means simply a place or region, and is
properly used in conjunction with some other noun; as, for
example, 'Katakady,' the Place of Eels. … Dawson and Rand, in
'Canadian Antiquarian and Numismatic Journal.'"
F. Parkman,
Pioneers of France in the New World: Champlain,
chapter 2, and foot-note.
NOVA SCOTIA: A. D. 1610-1613.
The Port Royal colony revived,
but destroyed by the English of Virginia.
See CANADA: A. D. 1610-1613.
NOVA SCOTIA: A. D. 1621-1668.
English grant to Sir William Alexander.
Cession to France.
Quarrels of La Tour and D'Aulnay.
English reconquest and recession to France.
"In 1621, Sir William Alexander, a Scotchman of some literary
pretensions, had obtained from King James [through the Council
for New England, or Plymouth Company—see NEW ENGLAND: A. D.
1621-1631] a charter, (dated September 10, 1621) for the
lordship and barony of New Scotland, comprising the territory
now known as the provinces of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick.
Under this grant he made several unsuccessful attempts at
colonization; and in 1625 he undertook to infuse fresh life
into his enterprise by parcelling out the territory into
baronetcies. Nothing came of the scheme, and by the treaty of
St. Germains, in 1632, Great Britain surrendered to France all
the places occupied by the English within these limits. Two
years before this, however, Alexander's rights in a part of
the territory had been purchased by Claude and Charles de la
Tour; and shortly after the peace the Chevalier Razilly was
appointed by Louis XIII. governor of the whole of Acadia. He
designated as his lieutenants Charles de la Tour for the
portion east of the St. Croix, and Charles de Menou, Sieur
d'Aulnay-Charnisé, for the portion west of that river. The
former established himself on the River St. John, where the
city of St. John now stands, and the latter at Castine, on the
eastern shore of Penobscot Bay. Shortly after his appointment,
La Tour attacked and drove away a small party of Plymouth men
who had set up a trading-post at Machias; and in 1635 D'Aulnay
treated another party of the Plymouth colonists in a similar
way. In retaliation for this attack, Plymouth hired and
despatched a vessel commanded by one Girling, in company with
their own barque, with 20 men under Miles Standish, to
dispossess the French; but the expedition failed to accomplish
anything. Subsequently the two French commanders quarrelled,
and, engaging in active hostilities, made efforts (not
altogether unsuccessful) to enlist Massachusetts in their
quarrel. For this purpose La Tour visited Boston in person in
the summer of 1643, and was hospitably entertained. He was not
able to secure the direct cooperation of( Massachusetts; but
he was permitted to hire four vessels and a pinnace to aid him
in his attack on D'Aulnay. The expedition was so far
successful as to destroy a mill and some standing corn
belonging to his rival. In the following year La Tour made a
second visit to Boston for further help; but he was able only
to procure the writing of threatening letters from the
Massachusetts authorities to D'Aulnay. Not long after La
Tour's departure from Boston, envoys from D'Aulnay arrived
here; and after considerable delay a treaty was signed
pledging the colonists to neutrality, which was ratified by
the Commissioners of the United Colonies in the following
year; but it was not until two years later that it was
ratified by new envoys from the crafty Frenchman.
{2386}
In this interval D'Aulnay captured by assault La Tour's fort
at St. John, securing booty to a large amount; and a few weeks
afterward Madame la Tour, who seems to have been of a not less
warlike turn than her husband, and who had "bravely defended
the fort, died of shame and mortification. La Tour was reduced
to the last extremities; but he finally made good his losses,
and in 1653 he married the widow of his rival, who had died
two or three years before. In 1654, in accordance with secret
instructions from Cromwell, the whole of Acadia was subjugated
by an English force from Boston under the command of Major
Robert Sedgwick, of Charlestown, and Captain John Leverett, of
Boston. To the latter the temporary government of the country
was intrusted. Ineffectual complaints of this aggression were
made to the British government; but by the treaty of
Westminster, in the following year, England was left in
possession, and the question of title was referred to
commissioners. In 1656 it was made a province by Cromwell, who
appointed Sir Thomas Temple governor, and granted the whole
territory to Temple and to one William Crown and Stephen de la
Tour, son of the late governor. The rights of the latter were
purchased by the other two proprietors, and Acadia remained in
possession of the English until the treaty of Breda, in 1668,
when it was ceded to France with undefined limits. Very little
was done by the French to settle and improve the country."
C. C. Smith,
Acadia
(Narrative and Critical History of America,
volume 4, chapter 4).
NOVA SCOTIA: A. D. 1690-1692.
Temporary conquest by the Massachusetts colonists.
Recovery by the French.
See CANADA: A. D. 1689-1690; and 1692-1697.
NOVA SCOTIA: A. D. 1710.
Final conquest by the English and change of name.
See NEW ENGLAND: A. D. 1702-1710.
NOVA SCOTIA: A. D. 1713.
Relinquished to Great Britain.
See UTRECHT: A. D. 1712-1714;
NEWFOUNDLAND: A. D. 1713;
and CANADA: A. D. 1711-1713.
NOVA SCOTIA: A. D. 1713-1730.
Troubles with the French inhabitants—the Acadians.
Their refusal to swear allegiance.
Hostilities with the Indians.
"It was evident from the first that the French intended to
interpret the cession of Acadia in as restricted a sense as
possible, and that it was their aim to neutralize the power of
England in the colony, by confining it within the narrowest
limits. The inhabitants numbered some 2,500 at the time of the
treaty of Utrecht, divided into three principal settlements at
Port Royal, Mines, and Chignecto. The priests at these
settlements during the whole period from the treaty of Utrecht
to the expulsion of the Acadians were, with scarcely an
exception, agents of the French Government, in their pay, and
resolute opponents of English rule. The presence of a powerful
French establishment at Louisburg, and their constant
communications with Canada, gave to the political teachings of
those priests a moral influence, which went far towards making
the Acadians continue faithful to France. They were taught to
believe that they might remain in Acadia, in an attitude of
scarcely concealed hostility to the English Government, and
hold their lands and possessions as neutrals, on the condition
that they should not take up arms either for the French or
English. … By the 14th article of the treaty of Utrecht, it
was stipulated 'that the subjects of the King of France may
have liberty to remove themselves within a year to any other
place, with all their movable effects. But those who are
willing to remain, and to be subject to the King of Great
Britain, "are to enjoy the free exercise of their religion
according to the usages of the church of Rome, as far as the
laws of Great Britain do allow the same.' … It was never
contemplated that the Acadians should establish themselves in
the country a colony of enemies of British power, ready at all
times to obstruct the authority of the government, and to make
the possession of Acadia by England merely nominal. … Queen
Anne died in August, 1714, and in January, 1715, Messrs.
Capoon and Button were commissioned by Governor Nicholson to
proceed in the sloop of war Caulfield to Mines, Chignecto,
River St. John, Passamaquoddy and Penobscot, to proclaim King
George, and to tender and administer the oaths of allegiance
to the French inhabitants. The French refused to take the
oaths, and some of the people of Mines made the pretence that
they intended to withdraw from the colony. … A year later the
people of Mines notified Caulfield [Lieutenant-Governor] that
they intended to remain in the country, and at this period it
would seem that most of the few French inhabitants who
actually left the Province had returned. Caulfield then
summoned the inhabitants of Annapolis, and tendered them the
oath of allegiance, but with no better success than his
deputies had met at Mines and Chignecto. … General Phillips,
who became Governor of Nova Scotia in 1717, and who arrived in
the Province early in 1720, had no more success than his
predecessors in persuading the Acadians to take the oaths.
Every refusal on their part only served to make them more bold
in defying the British authorities. … They held themselves in
readiness to take up arms against the English the moment war
was declared between the two Crowns, and to restore Acadia to
France. But, as there was a peace of thirty years duration
between France and England after the treaty of Utrecht, there
was no opportunity of carrying this plan into effect.
Vaudreuil, Governor of Canada, however, continued to keep the
Acadians on the alert by means of his agents, and the Indians
were incited to acts of hostility against the English, both in
Acadia and Maine. The first difficulty occurred at Canso in
1720, by a party of Indians assailing the English fishermen
there. … The Indians were incited to this attack by the French
of Cape Breton, who were annoyed at one of their vessels being
seized at Canso by a British war vessel for illegal fishing. …
The Indians had indeed some reason to be disquieted, for the
progress of the English settlements east of the Kennebec
filled them with apprehensions. Unfortunately the English had
not been always so just in their dealings with them that they
could rely entirely on their forbearance. The Indians claimed
their territorial rights in the lands over which the English
settlements were spreading; the French encouraged them in this
claim, alleging that they had never surrendered this territory
to the English. While these questions were in controversy the
Massachusetts authorities were guilty of an act which did not
tend to allay the distrust of the Indians.
{2387}
This was nothing less than an attempt to seize the person of
Father Ralle, the Jesuit missionary at Norridgewock. He,
whether justly or not, was blamed for inciting the Indians to
acts of hostility, and was therefore peculiarly obnoxious to
the English." The attempt to capture Father Ralle, at
Norridgewock, which was made in December, 1721, and which
failed, exasperated the Indians, and "in the summer of 1722 a
war commenced, in which all the Indian tribes from Cape Canso
to the Kennebec were involved. The French could not openly
take part in the war, but such encouragement and assistance as
they could give the Indians secretly they freely supplied."
This war continued until 1725, and cost the lives of many of
the colonists of New England and Nova Scotia. Its most serious
event was the destruction of Norridgewock and the barbarous
murder of Father Ralle, by an expedition from Massachusetts in
the summer of 1724. In November, 1725, a treaty of peace was
concluded, the Indians acknowledging the sovereignty of King
George. After the conclusion of the Indian war, the
inhabitants of Annapolis River took a qualified oath of
allegiance, with a clause exempting them from bearing arms. At
Mines and Chignecto they still persisted in their refusal; and
when, on the death of George I. and the accession of George
II., the inhabitants of Annapolis were called upon to renew
their oath, they also refused again. In 1729 Governor Phillips
returned to the province and had great success during the next
year in persuading the Acadians, with a few exceptions only
throughout the French settlements, to take an oath of
allegiance without any condition as to the bearing or not
bearing of arms. "The Acadians afterwards maintained that when
they took this oath of allegiance, it was with the
understanding that a clause was to be inserted, relieving them
from bearing arms. The statement was probably accurate, for
that was the position they always assumed, but the matter
seems to have been lost sight of, and so for the time the
question of oaths, which had been such a fertile cause of
discord in the Province, appeared to be set at rest."
J. Hannay,
History of Acadia,
chapter 17.
ALSO IN:
F. Parkman,
Montcalm and Wolfe,
volume 1, chapter 4.
P. H. Smith,
Acadia,
pages 114-121.
NOVA SCOTIA: A. D. 1744-1748.
The Third Intercolonial War (King George's War).
See NEW ENGLAND: A. D. 1744; 1745;
and 1745-1748.
NOVA SCOTIA: A. D. 1749-1755.
Futile discussion of boundary questions.
The Acadian "Neutrals" and their conduct.
The founding of Halifax.
Hostilities renewed.
"During the nominal peace which followed the Treaty of
Aix-la-Chapelle, the representatives of the two governments
were anxiously engaged in attempting to settle by actual
occupation the question of boundaries, which was still left
open by that treaty. It professed to restore the boundaries as
they had been before the war; and before the war the entire
basin of the Mississippi, as well as the tract between the St.
Lawrence River and Gulf, the Bay of Fundy, and the Kennebec,
was claimed by both nations, with some show of reason, as no
convention between them had ever defined the rights of each.
Names had been given to vast tracts of land whose limits were
but partly defined, or at one time defined in one way, at
another time in another, and when these names were mentioned
in treaties they were understood by each party according to
its own interest. The treaty of 1748, therefore, not only left
abundant cause for future war, but left occasion for the
continuance of petty border hostilities in time of nominal
peace. Commissioners were appointed, French and English, to
settle the question of the disputed territory, but the
differences were too wide to be adjusted by anything but
conquest. While the most important question was that of the
great extent of territory at the west, and … both nations were
devising means for establishing their claims to it, Acadia, or
Nova Scotia, was the scene of a constant petty warfare. The
French were determined to restrict the English province to the
peninsula now known by that name. The Governor of Canada sent
a "few men under Boishebert to the mouth of the St. John's to
hold that part of the territory. A little old fort built by
the Indians had stood for fifty years on the St. John's at the
mouth of the Nerepis, and there the men established
themselves. A larger number was sent under La Corne to keep
possession of Chignecto, on the isthmus which, according to
French claims, formed the northern boundary of English
territory. In all the years that England had held nominal rule
in Acadia, not a single English settlement had been formed,
and apparently not a step of progress had been taken in
gaining the loyalty of the inhabitants. A whole generation had
grown up during the time; but they were no less devoted to
France than their fathers had been. It was said that the king
of England had not one truly loyal subject in the peninsula,
outside of the fort at Annapolis. … Among the schemes
suggested for remedying this state of affairs, was one by
Governor Shirley [of Massachusetts], to place strong bands of
English settlers in all the important towns, in order that the
Government might have friends and influence throughout the
country. Nothing came of this; but in 1749 Parliament voted
£40,000 for the purpose of settling a colony. … Twenty-five
hundred persons being ready to go in less than two months from
the time of the first advertisement, the colony was entrusted
to Colonel Edward Cornwallis (uncle of the Cornwallis of the
Revolutionary War), and he was made Governor of Nova Scotia.
Chebucto was selected as the site of the colony, and the town
was named Halifax in honor of the president of the Lords of
Trade and Plantations [see, also, HALIFAX: A. D. 1749]. … In
July, a council was held at Halifax, when Governor Cornwallis
gave the French deputies a paper declaring what the Government
would allow to the French subjects, and what would be required
of them." They were called upon to take the oath of
allegiance, so often refused before. They claimed the
privilege of taking a qualified oath, such as had been
formerly allowed in certain cases, and which exempted them
from bearing arms. "They wished to stand as neutrals, and,
indeed, were often called so. Cornwallis replied that nothing
less than entire allegiance would be accepted. … About a month
later the people sent in a declaration with a thousand
signatures, stating that they had resolved not to take the
oath, but were determined to leave the country. Cornwallis
took no steps to coerce them, but wrote to England for
instructions."
{2388}
Much of the trouble with the Acadians was attributed to a
French missionary, La Loutre, who was also accused of inciting
the Indians to hostilities. In 1750, Major Lawrence was sent
to Chignecto, with 400 men, to build a block-house on the
little river Messagouche, which the French claimed as their
southern boundary. "On the southern bank was a prosperous
village called Beaubassin, and La Corne [the French commander]
had compelled its inhabitants to take the oath of allegiance
to the King of France. When Lawrence arrived, all the
inhabitants of Beaubassin, about 1,000, having been persuaded
by La Loutre, set fire to their houses, and, leaving behind
the fruits of years of industry, turned their backs on their
fertile fields, and crossed the river, to put themselves under
the protection of La Corne's troops. Many Acadians from other
parts of the peninsula also left their homes, and lived in
exile and poverty under the French dominion, hoping for a
speedy change of masters in Nova Scotia. … In the same year a
large French fort, Beau Séjour, was built on the northern side
of the Messagouche, and a smaller one, Gaspereaux, at Baie
Verte. Other stations were also planted, forming a line of
fortified posts from the Gulf of St. Lawrence to the month of
the St. John's. … The commission appointed to settle the
question of boundaries had broken up without accomplishing any
results; and it was resolved by the authorities in Nova Scotia
and Massachusetts [1754] that an expedition should be sent
against Fort Beau Séjour. … Massachusetts … raised about 2,000
troops for the contemplated enterprise, who were under the
command of Lieutenant-Colonel John Winslow. To this force were
added about 800 regulars, and the whole was placed under the
command of Lieutenant-Colonel Moncton. They reached Chignecto
on the 2d of June," 1755. The French were found unprepared for
long resistance, and Beau Séjour was surrendered on the 16th.
"After Beau Séjour, the smaller forts were quickly reduced.
Some vessels sent to the mouth of the St. John's found the
French fort deserted and burned. The name of Beau Séjour was
changed to Cumberland."
R. Johnson.
History of the French War,
chapter 10.
ALSO IN:
J. G. Palfrey,
History of New England,
book 5, chapter 11 (volume 5).
W. Kingsford,
History of Canada,
book 11, chapters 3 and 6 (volume 3).
See, also, CANADA: A. D. 1750-1753;
and ENGLAND: A. D. 1754-1755.
NOVA SCOTIA: A. D. 1755.
Frustrated naval expedition of the French.
See CANADA: A. D. 1755 (JUNE).
NOVA SCOTIA: A. D. 1755.
The removal of the Acadians and their dispersion in exile.
"The campaign of the year 1755, which had opened in Nova
Scotia with so much success, and which promised a glorious
termination, disappointed the expectations and awakened the
fears of the Colonists. The melancholy and total defeat of the
army under General Braddock, while on his march against Fort
du Quesnè, threw a gloom over the British Provinces. Niagara
and Crown-point were not only unsubdued, but it was evident
that Governor Shirley would have to abandon, for this year at
least, the attempt; while Louisburg was reinforced, the
savages let loose upon the defenceless settlements of the
English, and the tide of war seemed ready to roll back upon
the invaders. Amidst this general panic, Governor Lawrence and
his Council, aided by Admirals Boscawen and Moystyn, assembled
to consider the necessary measures that were to be adopted
towards the Acadians, whose character and situation were so
peculiar as to distinguish them from every other people who
had suffered under the scourge of war. … It was finally
determined, at this consultation, to remove and disperse this
whole people among the British Colonies; where they could not
unite in any offensive measures, and where they might be
naturalized to the Government and Country. The execution of
this unusual and general sentence was allotted chiefly to the

New England Forces, the Commander of which [Colonel Winslow],
from the humanity and firmness of his character, was well
qualified to carry it into effect. It was, without doubt, as
he himself declared, disagreeable to his natural make and
temper; and his principles of implicit obedience as a soldier
were put to a severe test by this ungrateful kind of duty;
which required an ungenerous, cunning, and subtle severity. …
They were kept entirely ignorant of their destiny until the
moment of their captivity, and were overawed, or allured, to
labour at the gathering in of their harvest, which was
secretly allotted to the use of their conquerors."
T. C. Haliburton,
Account of Nova Scotia,
volume 1, pages 170-175.
"Winslow prepared for the embarkation. The Acadian prisoners
and their families were divided into groups answering to their
several villages, in order that those of the same village
might, as far as possible, go in the same vessel. It was also
provided that the members of each family should remain
together; and notice was given them to hold themselves in
readiness. 'But even now,' he writes. 'I could not persuade
the people I was in earnest.' Their doubts were soon ended.
The first embarkation took place on the 8th of October [1755].
… When all, or nearly all, had been sent off from the various
points of departure, such of the houses and barns as remained
standing were burned, in obedience to the orders of Lawrence,
that those who had escaped might be forced to come in and
surrender themselves. The whole number removed from the
province, men, women, and children, was a little above 6,000.
Many remained behind; and while some of these withdrew to
Canada, Isle St. Jean, and other distant retreats, the rest
lurked in the woods, or returned to their old haunts, whence
they waged for several years a guerilla warfare against the
English. Yet their strength was broken, and they were no
longer a danger to the province. Of their exiled countrymen,
one party overpowered the crew of the vessel that carried
them, ran her ashore at the mouth of the St. John, and
escaped. The rest were distributed among the colonies from
Massachusetts to Georgia, the master of each transport having
been provided with a letter from Lawrence addressed to the
Governor of the province to which he was bound, and desiring
him to receive the unwelcome strangers. The provincials were
vexed at the burden imposed upon them; and though the Acadians
were not in general ill-treated, their lot was a hard one.
Still more so was that of those among them who escaped to
Canada. … Many of the exiles eventually reached Louisiana,
where their descendants now form a numerous and distinct
population. Some, after incredible hardship, made their way
back to Acadia, where, after the peace, they remained
unmolested. … In one particular the authors of the deportation
were disappointed in its results.
{2389}
They had hoped to substitute a loyal population for a
disaffected one; but they failed for some time to find
settlers for the vacated lands. … New England humanitarianism,
melting into sentimentality at a tale of woe, has been unjust
to its own. Whatever judgment may be passed on the cruel
measure of wholesale expatriation, it was not put in execution
till every resource of patience and persuasion had been tried
in vain."
F. Parkman,
Montcalm and Wolfe,
volume 1, chapter 8.
"The removal of the French Acadians from their homes was one
of the saddest episodes in modern history, and no one now will
attempt to justify it; but it should be added that the genius
of our great poet [Longfellow in 'Evangeline'] has thrown a
somewhat false and distorted light over the character of the
victims. They were not the peaceful and simple-hearted people
they are commonly supposed to have been; and their houses, as
we learn from contemporary evidence, were by no means the
picturesque, vine-clad, and strongly built cottages described
by the poet. The people were notably quarrelsome among
themselves, and to the last degree superstitious. They were
wholly under the influence of priests appointed by the French
bishops. … Even in periods when France and England were at
peace, the French Acadians were a source of perpetual danger
to the English colonists. Their claim to a qualified
allegiance was one which no nation then or now could sanction.
But all this does not justify their expulsion in the manner in
which it was executed."
C. C. Smith,
The Wars on the Seaboard
(Narrative and Critical History of America,
volume 5, chapter 7).
"We defy all past history to produce a parallel case, in which
an unarmed and peaceable people have suffered to such an
extent as did the French Neutrals of Acadia at the hands of
the New England troops."
P. H. Smith,
Acadia,
page 216.
ALSO IN:
W. B. Reed,
The Acadian Exiles in Pennsylvania
(Pennsylvania Historical Society Memoirs,
volume 6, pages 283-316).
NOVA SCOTIA: A. D. 1763.
Cession by France to England confirmed in the Treaty of Paris.
See SEVEN YEARS WAR: THE TREATIES.
NOVA SCOTIA: A. D. 1763.
Cape Breton added to the government.
See CANADA: A. D. 1763-1774.
NOVA SCOTIA: A. D. 1782-1784.
Influx of Refugee Loyalists from the United States.
See TORIES OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION.
NOVA SCOTIA: A. D. 1820-1837.
The Family Compact.
See CANADA: A. D. 1820-1837.
NOVA SCOTIA: A. D. 1854-1866.
The Reciprocity Treaty with the United States.
See TARIFF LEGISLATION (UNITED STATES AND CANADA):
A. D. 1854-1866.
NOVA SCOTIA: A. D. 1867.
Embraced in the Confederation of the Dominion of Canada.
See CANADA: A. D. 1867.
NOVA SCOTIA: A. D. 1871.
The Treaty of Washington.
See ALABAMA CLAIMS: A. D. 1871.
NOVA SCOTIA: A. D. 1877-1888.
The Halifax Fishery Award.
Termination of the Fishery Articles of the Treaty of Washington.
Renewed Fishery disputes.
See FISHERIES, NORTH AMERICAN: A. D. 1877-1888.
----------NOVA SCOTIA: End--------
NOVANTÆ, The.
A tribe which, in Roman times, occupied the modern counties of
Kirkcudbright and Wigtown, Scotland.
See BRITAIN: CELTIC TRIBES.
NOVARA,
Battle of (1513).
See ITALY: A. D. 1510-1513.
NOVARA,
Battle of (1821).
See ITALY: A. D. 1820-1821.
NOVARA,
Battle of (1849).
See ITALY: A. D. 1848-1849.
NOVELS OF JUSTINIAN.
See CORPUS JURIS CIVILIS.
NOVEMBER FIFTH.
See Guy FAWKES' DAY.
----------NOVGOROD: Start--------
NOVGOROD: Origin.
See RUSSIA.
RUSSIANS: A. D. 862.
NOVGOROD: 11th Century.
Rise of the Commonwealth.
See RUSSIA: A. D. 1054-1237.
NOVGOROD: A. D. 1237-1478.
Prosperity and greatness of the city as a commercial republic.
See RUSSIA: A. D. 1237-1480.
NOVGOROD: 14-15th Centuries.
In the Hanseatic League.
See HANSA TOWNS.
----------NOVGOROD: End--------
NOVI, Battle of.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1799 (APRIL-SEPTEMBER).
NOVIOMAGUS.
Modern Nimeguen.
See BATAVIANS.
NOYADES.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1793-1794 (OCTOBER-APRIL).
NOYON, Treaty of.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1516-1517.
NUBIANS, The.
See AFRICA: THE INHABITING RACES.
NUITHONES, The.
See AVIONES.
----------NULLIFICATION: Start--------
NULLIFICATION:
First assertion of the doctrine
in the United States of America.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1798.
NULLIFICATION:
Doctrine and Ordinance in South Carolina.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1828-1833.
----------NULLIFICATION: End--------
NUMANTIAN WAR, The.
"In 143 B. C. the Celtiberians again appeared in the field
[resisting the Romans in Spain]; and when, on the death of
Viriathus, D. Junius Brutus had pushed the legions to the
Atlantic in 137 B. C., and practically subdued Lusitania, the
dying spirit of Spanish independence still held out in the
Celtiberian fortress city of Numantia. Perched on a
precipitous hill by the banks of the upper Douro, occupied
only by eight thousand men, this little place defied the power
of Rome as long as Troy defied the Greeks. … In 137 B. C. the
consul, C. Hostilius Mancinus, was actually hemmed in by a
sortie of the garrison, and forced to surrender. He granted
conditions of peace to obtain his liberty; but the senate
would not ratify them, though the young quæstor, Tiberius
Gracchus, who had put his hand to the treaty, pleaded for
faith and honour. Mancinus, stripped and with manacles on his
hands, was handed over to the Numantines, who, like the
Samnite Pontius, after the Caudine Forks, refused to accept
him. In 134 B. C. the patience of the Romans was exhausted;
Scipio was sent. … The mighty destroyer of Carthage drew
circumvallations five miles in length around the stubborn
rock, and waited for the result. The Virgilian picture of the
fall of Troy is not more moving than are the brave and ghastly
facts of the fall of Numantia. The market-place was turned
into a funeral pyre for the gaunt, famine-stricken citizens to
leap upon. … When the surrender was made only a handful of men
marched out."
R. F. Horton,
History of the Romans,
chapter 18.
ALSO IN:
G. Long,
Decline of the Roman Republic,
chapters 6-7.
See, also, LUSITANIA;
and SPAIN: B. C. 218-25.
{2390}
NUMERIANUS, Roman Emperor, A. D. 283-284.
----------NUMIDIA: Start--------
NUMIDIA: The Country and People.
See NUMIDIANS.
NUMIDIA: B. C. 204.
Alliance with Carthage.
Subjection to Rome.
See PUNIC WAR, THE SECOND.
NUMIDIA: B. C. 118-104.
The Jugurthine War.
The Numidian kingdom, over which the Romans, at the end of the
second Punic War, had settled their friend Masinissa, passed
at his death to his son Micipsa. In 118 B. C. Micipsa died,
leaving two young sons, and also a bastard nephew, Jugurtha,
whom he feared. He divided the kingdom between these three,
hoping to secure the fidelity of Jugurtha to his sons. It was
a policy that failed. Jugurtha made sure of what was given to
him, and then grasped at the rest. One of his young cousins
was soon cleared from his path by assassination; on the other
he opened war. This latter, Adherbal by name, appealed to
Rome, but Jugurtha despatched agents with money to bribe the
senate, and a commission sent over to divide Numidia gave him
the western and better half. The commissioners were no sooner
out of Africa than he began war upon Adherbal afresh, shut him
up in his strong capital, Cirta [B. C. 112], and placed the
city under siege. The Romans again interfered, but, he
captured Cirta, notwithstanding, and tortured Adherbal to
death. The corrupt party at Rome which Jugurtha kept in his
pay made every effort to stifle discussion of his nefarious
doings; but one bold tribune, C. Memmius, roused the people on
the subject and forced the senate to declare war against him.
Jugurtha's gold, however, was still effectual, and it
paralyzed the armies sent to Africa, by corrupting the venial
officers who commanded them. Once, Jugurtha went to Rome,
under a safe conduct, invited to testify as a witness against
the men whom he had bribed, but really expecting to be able to
further his own cause in the city. He found the people furious
against him and he only saved himself from being forced to
criminate his Roman senatorial mercenaries by buying a
tribune, who brazenly vetoed the examination of the Numidian
king. Jugurtha being, then, ordered out of Rome, the war
proceeded again, and in 109 B. C. the command passed to an
honest general, Q. Metellus, who took with him Caius Marius,
the most capable soldier of Rome, whose capability was at that
time not half understood. Under Metellus the Romans penetrated
Numidia to Zama, but failed to take the town, and narrowly
escaped a great disaster on the Muthul, where a serious battle
was fought. In 107 B. C. Metellus was superseded by Marius,
chosen consul for that year and now really beginning his
remarkable career. Meantime Jugurtha had gained an ally in
Bocchus, king of Mauretania, and Marius, after two campaigns
of doubtful result, found more to hope from diplomacy than
from war. With the help of Sulla,—his future great rival—who
had lately been sent over to his army, in command of a troop
of horse, he persuaded the Mauretanian king to betray Jugurtha
into his hands. The dreaded Numidian was taken to Rome [B. C.
104], exhibited in the triumph of Marius, and then brutally
thrust into the black dungeon called the Tullianum to die of
slow starvation. Bocchus was rewarded for his treachery by the
cession to him of part of Numidia; Marius, intoxicated with
the plaudits of Rome, first saved it from the Cimbri and then
stabbed it with his own sword; Sulla, inexplicable harbinger
of the coming Cæsars, bided his time.
W. Ihne,
History of Rome,
book 7, chapter 8.
ALSO IN:
G. Long,
Decline of the Roman Republic,
volume 1, chapters 26-29.
Sallust,
Jugurthine War.
NUMIDIA: B. C. 46.
The kingdom extinguished by Cæsar and annexed to Rome.
See ROME: B. C. 47-46.
NUMIDIA: A. D. 374-398.
Revolts of Firmus and Gildo.
See ROME: A. D. 396-398.
----------NUMIDIA: End--------
NUMIDIANS AND MAURI, The.
"The union of the Aryan invaders [of North Africa] with the
ancient populations of the coast sprung from Phut gave birth
to the Mauri, or Maurusii, whose primitive name it has been
asserted was Medes, probably an alteration of the word
Amazigh. The alliance of the same invaders with the Getulians
beyond the Atlas produced the Numidians. The Mauri were
agriculturists, and of settled habits; the Numidians, as their
Greek appellation indicates, led a nomadic life."
F. Lenormant,
Manual of Ancient History of the East,
book 6, chapter 5 (volume 2).
In northern Africa, "on the south and west of the immediate
territory of the Carthaginian republic, lived various races of
native Libyans who are commonly known by the name of
Numidians. But these were in no way, as their Greek name
('Nomads') would seem to imply, exclusively pastoral races.
Several districts in their possession, especially in the
modern Algeria, were admirably suited for agriculture. Hence
they had not only fixed and permanent abodes, but a number of
not unimportant cities, of which Hippo and Cirta, the
residences of the chief Numidian princes, were the most
considerable."
W. Ihne,
History of Rome,
book 4, chapter 1 (volume 2).
The various peoples of North Africa known anciently and
modernly as Libyans, Numidians, or Nomades, Mauri,
Mauritanians or Moors, Gaetulians and Berbers, belong
ethnographically to one family of men, distinguished alike
from the negroes and the Egyptians.
T. Mommsen,
History of Rome,
book 8, chapter 13.
See, also, LIBYANS; CARTHAGE: B. C. 146;
PUNIC WAR, THE SECOND; and NUMIDIA: B. C. 118-104.
NUNCOMAR AND WARREN HASTINGS.
See INDIA: A. D. 1773-1785.
NUR MAHAL, OR NUR JAHAN, Empress of India.
See INDIA: A. D. 1605-1658.
----------NUREMBERG: Start--------
NUREMBERG.
"Nuremberg (Nürnberg) (Norimberga) is situated on the Regnitz,
in the centre of Middle Franconia, about 90 miles northwest of
Munich, to which it is second in size and importance, with a
population of about 90,000. The name is said to be derived
from the ancient inhabitants of Noricum, who migrated hither
about the year 451, on being driven from their early
settlements on the Danube by the Huns. Here they distinguished
themselves by their skill in the working of metals, which
abound in the neighbouring mountains. Before the eleventh
century the history of Nuremberg is enveloped in a mist of
impenetrable obscurity, from which it does not emerge until
the time of the Emperor Henry III., who issued an edict, dated
July 16, 1050, 'ad castrum Noremberc,' a proof that it was a
place of considerable importance even at this early period.
Nuremberg afterwards became the favourite residence of the
Emperor Henry IV."
W. J. Wyatt,
History of Prussia,
volume 2, page 456.
{2391}
NUREMBERG: A. D. 1417.
Office of Burgrave bought by the city.
See BRANDENBURG: A. D. 1417-1640.
NUREMBERG: A. D. 1522-1524.
The two diets, and their recesses in favor of the Reformation.
See PAPACY: A. D. 1522-1525.
NUREMBERG: A. D. 1525.
Formal establishment of the Reformed Religion.
See PAPACY: A. D. 1522-1525.
NUREMBERG: A. D. 1529.
Joined in the Protest which gave rise to the name Protestants.
See PAPACY: A. D. 1525-1529.
NUREMBERG: A. D. 1532.
Pacification of Charles V. with the Protestants.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1530-1532.
NUREMBERG: A. D. 1632.
Welcome to Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden.
Siege by Wallenstein.
Battle on the Fürth.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1631-1632.
NUREMBERG: A. D. 1801-1803.
One of six free cities which survived the Peace of Luneville.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1801-1803.
NUREMBERG: A. D. 1806.
Loss of municipal freedom.
Absorption in the kingdom of Bavaria.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1805-1806.
----------NUREMBERG: End--------
NUYS, The Siege of
In 1474 Charles the Bold, Duke of Burgundy, ambitious to
extend his dominions along the left bank of the Rhine, down to
the Netherlands, took advantage of a quarrel between the
citizens of Cologne and their prince-archbishop, to ally
himself with the latter. The citizens of Cologne had appointed
Herman of Hesse to be protector of the see, and he had
fortified himself at Nuys. Charles, with 60,000 men, laid
siege to the place, expecting to reduce it speedily. On the
contrary, he wasted months in the fruitless endeavor, and
became involved in the quarrel with the Swiss which brought
about his downfall. The abortive siege of Nuys was the
beginning of his disasters.
C. M. Davies,
History of Holland,
part 2, chapter 2.
See BURGUNDY: A. D. 1476-1477.
NYANTICS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
NYSTAD, Peace of.
See SCANDINAVIAN STATES (SWEDEN): A. D. 1719-1721.
O.
O. S.
Old Style.
See GREGORIAN CALENDAR.
OAK BOYS.
See. IRELAND: A. D. 1760-1798.
OATES, Titus, and the "Popish Plot."
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1678-1679.
OBELISKS, Egyptian.
See EGYPT: ABOUT B. C. 1700-1400.
OBERPFALZ.
See FRANCONIA: THE DUCHY AND THE CIRCLE.
OBES, The.
See GERUSIA;
and SPARTA: THE CONSTITUTION, &c.
OBLATES, The.
"The Oblates, or Volunteers, established by St. Charles
Borromeo in 1578, are a congregation of secular priests. …
Their special aim was to give edification to the diocese, and
to maintain the integrity of religion by the purity of their
lives, by teaching, and by zealously discharging the duties
committed to them by their bishop. These devoted ecclesiastics
were much loved by St. Charles. … Strange to say, they do not
seem to have been much appreciated elsewhere."
J. Alzog,
Manual of Universal Church History,
volume 3, page 456.
OBNUNTIATIO.
See ÆLIAN AND FUFIAN LAWS.
OBOLLA.
See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST: A. D. 632-651.
OBOLUS.
See TALENT.
OBOTRITES, The.
See SAXONY: A. D. 1178-1183.
OBRENOVITCH DYNASTY, The.
See BALKAN AND DANUBIAN STATES: 14-19TH CENTURIES (SERVIA).
OC, Langue d'.
See LANGUE D'OC.
OCANA, Battle of.
See SPAIN: A. D. 1809 (AUGUST-NOVEMBER).
OCCASIONAL CONFORMITY BILL.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1711-1714.
OCEAN STEAM NAVIGATION, The beginnings of.
See STEAM NAVIGATION: ON THE OCEAN.
OCHLOCRACY.
This term was applied by the Greeks to an unlimited democracy,
where rights were made conditional on no gradations of
property, and where "provisions were made, not so much that
only a proved and worthy citizen should be elected, as that
everyone, without distinction, should be eligible for
everything."
G. Schömann,
Antiquity of Greece: The State,
part 1, chapter 3.
O'CONNELL, Daniel, The political agitations of.
See IRELAND: A. D. 1811-1829, to 1841-1848.
OCTAETËRIS, The.
See METON, THE YEAR OF.
OCTAVIUS, Caius (afterwards called Augustus),
and the founding of the Roman Empire.
See ROME: B. C. 44, after Cæsar's death,
to B. C. 31-A. D. 14.
OCTOBER CLUB, The.
See CLUBS: THE OCTOBER.
ODAL.
See ADEL.
ODELSRET.
See CONSTITUTION OF NORWAY, TITLE V., ARTICLE 16.
ODELSTHING.
See CONSTITUTION OF NORWAY.
ODENATHUS, The rule at Palmyra of.
See PALMYRA: THE RISE AND THE FALL.
ODEUM AT ATHENS, The.
"Pericles built, at the south-eastern base of the citadel, the
Odeum, which differed from the neighbouring theatre in this,
that the former was a covered space, in which musical
performances took place before a less numerous public. The
roof, shaped like a tent, was accounted an imitation of the
gorgeous tent pitched of old by Xerxes upon the soil of
Attica."
E. Curtius,
History of Greece,
book 3, chapter 3.
ODOACER, and the end of the line of Roman Emperors in the West.
See ROME: A. D. 455-476; and 488-526.
ODYSSEY, The.
See HOMER.
ŒA.
See LEPTIS MAGNA.
ŒCUMENICAL, OR ECUMENICAL, COUNCIL.
A general or universal council of the entire Christian Church.
Twenty such councils are recognized by the Roman Catholic
Church.
See COUNCILS OF THE CHURCH.
{2392}
ŒKIST.
The chief-founder of a Greek colonial city,—the leader of a
colonizing settlement, —was so entitled.
G. Grote,
History of Greece,
part 2, chapter 47.
OELAND, Naval battle of (1713).
See SCANDINAVIAN STATES (SWEDEN): A. D. 1707-1718.
ŒNOË, Battle of.
A battle of some importance in the Corinthian War, fought
about B. C. 388, in the valley of the Charander, on the road
from Argos to Mantinea. The Lacedæmonians were defeated by the
Argives and Athenians.
E. Curtius,
History of Greece,
book 5, chapter 4.
ŒNOPHYTA, Battle of (B. C. 456).
See GREECE: B. C. 458-456.
ŒNOTRIANS, The.
"The territory [in Italy] known to Greek writers of the fifth
century B. C. by the names of Œnotria on the coast of the
Mediterranean, and Italia on that of the Gulfs of Tarentum and
Squillace, included all that lies south of a line drawn across
the breadth of the country, from the Gulf of Poseidonia
(Pæstum) and the river Silarus on the Mediterranean Sea, to
the north-west corner of the Gulf of Tarentum. It was bounded
northwards by the Iapygians and Messapians, who occupied the
Salentine peninsula and the country immediately adjoining to
Tarentum, and by the Peuketians on the Ionic Gulf. … This
Œnotrian or Pelasgian race were the population whom the Greek
colonists found there on their arrival. They were known
apparently under other names, such as the Sikels [Sicels],
(mentioned even in the Odyssey, though their exact locality in
that poem cannot be ascertained) the Italians, or Itali,
properly so called—the Morgetes,—and the Chaones,—all of them
names of tribes either cognate or subdivisional. The Chaones
or Chaonians are also found, not only in Italy, but in Epirus,
as one of the most considerable of the Epirotic tribes. … From
hence, and from some other similarities of name, it has been
imagined that Epirots, Œnotrians, Sikels, &c., were all names
of cognate people, and all entitled to be comprehended under
the generic appellation of Pelasgi. That they belonged to the
same ethnical kindred there seems fair reason to presume, and
also that in point of language, manners, and character, they
were not very widely separated from the ruder branches of the
Hellenic race. It would appear, too (as far as any judgment
can be formed on a point essentially obscure) that the
Œnotrians were ethnically akin to the primitive population of
Rome and Latium on one side, as they were to the Epirots on
the other; and that tribes of this race, comprising Sikels and
Itali properly so called, as sections, had at one time
occupied most of the territory from the left bank of the river
Tiber southward between the Appenines and the Mediterranean."
G. Grote,
History of Greece,
part 2, chapter 22.
OESTERREICH.
See AUSTRIA.
ŒTA.
See THESSALY.
OFEN, Sieges and capture of (1684-1686).
See HUNGARY: A. D. 1683-1699.
OFFA, King of Mercia, A. D. 758-794.
OFFA'S DYKE.
An earthen rampart which King Offa, of Mercia, in the eighth
century, built from the mouth of the Wye to the mouth of the
Tee, to divide his kingdom from Wales and protect it from
Welsh incursions. A few remains of it are still to be seen.
J. Rhys,
Celtic Britain.
OGALALAS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: SIOUAN FAMILY.
OGAM.
See OGHAM.
OGDEN TRACT, The.
See NEW YORK: A. D. 1786-1799.
OGHAM INSCRIPTIONS.
"In the south and south-western counties of Ireland are to be
found, in considerable numbers, a class of inscribed
monuments, to which the attention of Irish archæologists has
been from time to time directed, but with comparatively little
result. … They [the inscriptions] are found engraved on pillar
stones in that archaic character known to Irish philologists
as the Ogham, properly pronounced Oum, and in an ancient
dialect of the Gaedhelic (Gaelic). These monuments are almost
exclusively found in the counties of Kerry, Cork, and
Waterford, numbering, as far as I have been able to ascertain,
147; the rest of Ireland supplies 13. … Again it is worthy of
remark, that while 29 Irish counties cannot boast of an Ogham
monument, they have been found in England, Wales, and
Scotland. In Devonshire, at Fardel, a stone has been
discovered bearing not only a fine and well-preserved Ogham
inscription, but also one in Romano-British letters. It is now
deposited in the British Museum. … The Ogham letters, as found
on Megalithic monuments, are formed by certain combinations of
a simple short line, placed in reference to one continuous
line, called the fleasg, or stem line; these combinations
range from one to five, and their values depend upon their
being placed above, across, or below the stem line; there are
five consonants above, five consonants below, and five
consonants across the line, two of which, NG and ST are
double, and scarcely ever used. The vowels are represented by
oval dots, or very short lines across the stem line. … The
characters in general use on the monuments are 18 in number. …
It may be expected from me that I should offer some conjecture
as to the probable age of this mode of writing. This, I
honestly acknowledge, I am unable to do, even approximately. …
I am however decided in one view, and it is this, that the
Ogham was introduced into Ireland long anterior to
Christianity, by a powerful colony who landed on the
south-west coast, who spread themselves along the southern and
round the eastern shores, who ultimately conquered or settled
the whole island, imposing their language upon the aborigines,
if such preceded them."
R. R. Brash,
Trans. Int. Cong. of Prehistoric Archæology, 1868.
ALSO IN:
R. R. Brash,
Ogam Inscribed Monuments.
OGLETHORPE'S GEORGIA COLONY.
See GEORGIA: A. D. 1732-1739.
OGULNIAN LAW, The.
See ROME: B. C. 300.
OGYGIA.
See IRELAND: THE NAME.
----------OHIO: Start--------
OHIO:
The Name.
"The words Ohio, Ontario, and Onontio (or Yonnondio)—which
should properly be pronounced as if written 'Oheeyo,'
'Ontareeyo,' and 'Ononteeyo'—are commonly rendered 'Beautiful
River,' 'Beautiful Lake,' 'Beautiful Mountain.' This,
doubtless, is the meaning which each of the words conveys to
an Iroquois of the present day, unless he belongs to the
Tuscarora tribe. But there can be no doubt that the
termination 'īo' (otherwise written 'iyo,' 'iio,' 'eeyo,'
etc.) had originally the sense, not of 'beautiful,' but of
'great.' … Ontario is derived from the Huron 'yontare,' or
'ontare,' lake (Iroquois, 'oniatare'), with this termination.
… Ohio, in like manner, is derived, as M. Cuoq in the valuable
notes to his Lexicon (p. 159) informs us, from the obsolete
'ohia,' river, now only used in the compound form 'ohionha.'"
H. Hale,
The Iroquois Book of Rites,
appendix, note B.
{2393}
OHIO: (Valley):
The aboriginal inhabitants.
See AMERICA, PREHISTORIC;
AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY,
ALLEGHANS, DELAWARES, SHAWANESE.
OHIO: (Valley): A. D. 1700-1735.
The beginnings of French Occupation.
See CANADA: A. D. 1700-1735.
OHIO: (Valley): A. D. 1748-1754.
The first movements of the struggle
of French and English for possession.
"The close of King George's War was marked by an extraordinary
development of interest in the Western country. The
Pennsylvanians and Virginians had worked their way well up to
the eastern foot-hills of the last range of mountains
separating them from the interior. Even the Connecticut men
were ready to overleap the province of New York and take
possession of the Susquehanna. The time for the English
colonists to attempt the Great Mountains in force had been
long in coming, but it had plainly arrived. In 1748 the
Ingles-Draper settlement, the first regular settlement of
English-speaking men on the Western waters, was made at
'Draper's Meadow,' on the New River, a branch of the Kanawha.
The same year Dr. Thomas Walker, accompanied by a number of
Virginia gentlemen and a party of hunters, made their way by
Southwestern Virginia into Kentucky and Tennessee. … The same
year the Ohio company, consisting of thirteen prominent
Virginians and Marylanders, and one London merchant, was
formed. Its avowed objects were to speculate in Western lands,
and to carry on trade on an extensive scale with the Indians.
It does not appear to have contemplated the settlement of a
new colony. The company obtained from the crown a conditional
grant of 500,000 acres of land in the Ohio Valley, to be
located mainly between the Monongahela and Kanawha Rivers, and
it ordered large shipments of goods for the Indian trade from
London. … In 1750 the company sent Christopher Gist, a veteran
woodsman and trader living on the Yadkin, down the northern
side of the Ohio, with instructions, as Mr. Bancroft
summarizes them, 'to examine the Western country as far as the
Falls of the Ohio; to look for a large tract of good level
land; to mark the passes in the mountains; to trace the
courses of the rivers; to count the falls; to observe the
strength of the Indian nations.' Under these instructions,
Gist made the first English exploration of Southern Ohio of
which we have any report. The next year he made a similar
exploration of the country south of the Ohio, as far as the
Great Kanawha. … Gist's reports of his explorations added to
the growing interest in the over-mountain country. At that
time the Ohio Valley was waste and unoccupied, save by the
savages, but adventurous traders, mostly Scotch-Irish, and
commonly men of reckless character and loose morals, made
trading excursions as far as the River Miami. The Indian town
of Pickawillany, on the upper waters of that stream, became a
great centre of English trade and influence. Another evidence
of the growing interest in the West is the fact that the
colonial authorities, in every direction, were seeking to
obtain Indian titles to the Western lands, and to bind the
Indians to the English by treaties. The Iroquois had long
claimed, by right of conquest, the country from the Cumberland
Mountains to the Lower Lakes and the Mississippi, and for many
years the authorities of New York had been steadily seeking to
gain a firm treaty-hold of that country. In 1684, the
Iroquois, at Albany, placed themselves under the protection of
King Charles and the Duke of York [see NEW YORK: A. D. 1684];
in 1726, they conveyed all their lands in trust to England
[see NEW YORK: A. D. 1726], to be protected and defended by
his Majesty to and for the use of the grantors and their
heirs, which was an acknowledgment by the Indians of what the
French had acknowledged thirteen years before at Utrecht. In
1744, the very year that King George's War began, the deputies
of the Iroquois at Lancaster, Pennsylvania, confirmed to
Maryland the lands within that province, and made to Virginia
a deed that covered the whole West as effectually as the
Virginian interpretation of the charter of 1609 [see VIRGINIA:
A. D. 1744]. … This treaty is of the greatest importance in
subsequent history; it is the starting-point of later
negotiations with the Indians concerning Western lands. It
gave the English their first real treaty-hold upon the West;
and it stands in all the statements of the English claim to
the Western country, side by side with the Cabot voyages. …
There was, indeed, no small amount of dissension among the
colonies, and it must not be supposed that they were all
working together to effect a common purpose, The royal
governors could not agree. There were bitter dissensions
between governors and assemblies. Colony was jealous of
colony. … Fortunately, the cause of England and the colonies
was not abandoned to politicians. The time had come for the
Anglo-Saxon column, that had been so long in reaching them, to
pass the Endless Mountains; and the logic of events swept
everything into the Westward current. In the years following
the treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle the French were not idle.
Galissonière, the governor of Canada, thoroughly comprehended
what was at stake. In 1749 he sent Cèloron de Bienville into
the Ohio Valley, with a suitable escort of whites and savages,
to take formal possession of the valley in the name of the
King of France, to propitiate the Indians, and in all ways
short of actual warfare to thwart the English plans. Bienville
crossed the portage from Lake Erie to Lake Chautauqua, the
easternmost of the portages from the Lakes to the southern
streams ever used by the French, and made his way by the
Alleghany River and the Ohio as far as the Miami, and returned
by the Maumee and Lake Erie to Montreal. His report to the
governor was anything but reassuring. He found the English
traders swarming in the valley, and the Indians generally well
disposed to the English. Nor did French interests improve the
two or three succeeding years. The Marquis Duquesne, who
succeeded Galissonière, soon discovered the drift of events.
He saw the necessity of action; he was clothed with power to
act, and he was a man of action, And so, early in the year
1753, while the English governors and assemblies were still
hesitating and disputing, he sent a strong force by Lake
Ontario and Niagara to seize and hold the northeastern
branches of the Ohio. This was a master stroke: unless
recalled, it would lead to war; and Duquesne was not the man
to recall it.
{2394}
This force, passing over the portage between Presque Isle and
French Creek, constructed Forts Le Bœuf and Venango, the
second at the confluence of French Creek and the Alleghany
River."
B. A. Hinsdale,
The Old Northwest,
chapter 5.
ALSO IN:
J. H. Perkins,
Annals of the West,
chapter 2.
B. Fernow
The Ohio Valley in Colonial Days,
chapter 5.
See, also, CANADA: A. D. 1750-1753.
O. H. Marshall,
De Celoron's Expedition to the Ohio in 1749
(Historical Writings, pages 237-274).
N. B. Craig,
The Olden Time,
volume 1, pages 1-10.
OHIO: (Valley): A. D. 1754.
The opening battle.
Washington's first campaign.
The planting of the French at Forts Le Bœuf and Venango "put
them during high water in easy communication by boat with the
Alleghany River. French tact conciliated the Indians, and
where that failed arrogance was sufficient, and the expedition
would have pushed on to found new forts, but sickness weakened
the men, and Marin, the commander, now dying, saw it was all
he could do to hold the two forts, while he sent the rest of
his force back to Montreal to recuperate. Late in the autumn
Legardeur de Saint-Pierre arrived at Le Bœuf, as the successor
of Marin. He had not been long there when on the 11th of
December [1753] a messenger from Governor Dinwiddie, of
Virginia, with a small escort, presented himself at the fort.
The guide of the party was Christopher Gist; the messenger was
George Washington, then adjutant-general of the Virginia
militia. Their business was to inform the French commander
that he was building forts on English territory, and that he
would do well to depart peaceably. … At Le Bœuf Washington
tarried three days, during which Saint-Pierre framed his
reply, which was in effect that he must hold his post, while
Dinwiddie's letter was sent to the French commander at Quebec.
It was the middle of February, 1754, when Washington reached
Williamsburg on his return, and made his report to Dinwiddie.
The result was that Dinwiddie drafted 200 men from the
Virginia militia, and despatched them under Washington to
build a fort at the forks of the Ohio. The Virginia assembly,
forgetting for the moment its quarrel with the governor, voted
£10,000 to be expended, but only under the direction of a
committee of its own. Dinwiddie found difficulty in getting
the other colonies to assist, and the Quaker element in
Pennsylvania prevented that colony from being the immediate
helper which it might, from its position, have become.
Meanwhile some backwoodsmen had been pushed over the mountains
and had set to work on a fort at the forks. A much larger
French force under Contrecœur soon summoned them, and the
English retired. The French immediately began the erection of
Fort Duquesne [on the site now covered by the city of
Pittsburgh]. While this was doing, Dinwiddie was toiling with
tardy assemblies and their agents to organize a regiment to
support the backwoodsmen. Joshua Fry was to be its colonel,
with Washington as second in command. The latter, with a
portion of the men, had already pushed forward to Will's
Creek, the present Cumberland. Later he advanced with 150 men
to Great Meadows, where he learned that the French, who had
been reinforced, had sent out a party from their new fort,
marching towards him. Again he got word from an Indian —who,
from his tributary character towards the Iroquois, was called
Half-King, and who had been Washington's companion on his trip
to Le Bœuf—that this chieftain with some followers had tracked
two men to a dark glen, where he believed the French party
were lurking. Washington started with forty men to join
Half-King, and under his guidance they approached the glen and
found the French. Shots were exchanged. The French leader,
Jumonville, was killed, and all but one of his followers were
taken or slain. The mission of Jumonville was to scour for
English, by order of Contrecœur, now in command of Duquesne,
and to bear a summons to any he could find, warning them to
retire from French territory. The precipitancy of Washington's
attack gave the French the chance to impute to Washington the
crime of assassination; but it seems to have been a pretence
on the part of the French to cover a purpose which Jumonville
had of summoning aid from Duquesne, while his concealment was
intended to shield him till its arrival. Rash or otherwise,
this onset of the youthful Washington began the war. The
English returned to Great Meadows, and while waiting for
reinforcements from Fry, Washington threw up some
entrenchments, which he called Fort Necessity. The men from
Fry came without their leader, who had sickened and died, and
Washington, succeeding to the command of the regiment, found
himself at the head of 300 men, increased soon by an
independent company from South Carolina. Washington again
advanced toward Gist's settlement, when, fearing an attack, he
sent back for Mackay, whom he had left with a company of
regulars at Fort Necessity. Rumors thickening of an advance of
the French, the English leader again fell back to Great
Meadows, resolved to fight there. It was now the first of
July, 1754. Coulon de Villiers, a brother of Jumonville, was
now advancing from Duquesne. The attack was made on a rainy
day, and for much of the time a thick mist hung between the
combatants. After dark a parley resulted in Washington's
accepting terms offered by the French, and the English marched
out with the honors of war. The young Virginian now led his
weary followers back to Will's Creek. … Thus they turned their
backs upon the great valley, in which not an English flag now
waved."
J. Winsor,
The Struggle for the Great Valleys of North America
(Narrative and Critical History of America,
volume 5, chapter 8).
ALSO IN:
W. Irving,
Life of Washington,
volume 1, chapters 7-12.
H. C. Lodge,
George Washington,
volume 1, chapter 3.
N. B. Craig,
The Olden Time,
volume 1, pages 10-62.
OHIO: (Valley): A. D. 1755.
Braddock's defeat.
The French possess the West and
devastate the English frontiers.
"Now the English Government awoke to the necessity of vigorous
measures to rescue the endangered Valley of the Ohio. A
campaign was planned which was to expel the French from Ohio,
and wrest from them some portions of their Canadian territory.
The execution of this great design was intrusted to General
Braddock, with a force which it was deemed would overbear all
resistance.
{2395}
Braddock was a veteran who had seen the wars of forty years. …
He was a brave and experienced soldier, and a likely man, it
was thought, to do the work assigned to him. But that proved a
sad miscalculation. Braddock had learned the rules of war; but
he had no capacity to comprehend its principles. In the
pathless forests of America he could do nothing better than
strive to give literal effect to those maxims which he had
found applicable in the well-trodden battlegrounds of Europe.
The failure of Washington in his first campaign had not
deprived him of public confidence. Braddock heard such
accounts of his efficiency that he invited him to join his
staff. Washington, eager to efface the memory of his defeat,
gladly accepted the offer. The troops disembarked at
Alexandria. … After some delay, the army, with such
reinforcements as the province afforded, began its march.
Braddock's object was to reach Fort Du Quesne, the great
centre of French influence on the Ohio. … Fort Du Quesne had
been built [or begun] by the English, and taken from them by
the French. It stood at the confluence of the Alleghany and
Monongahela; which rivers, by their union at this point, form
the Ohio. It was a rude piece of fortification, but the
circumstances admitted of no better. … Braddock had no doubt
that the fort would yield to him directly he showed himself
before it. Benjamin Franklin looked at the project with his
shrewd, cynical eye. He told Braddock that he would assuredly
take the fort if he could only reach it; but that the long
slender line which his army must form in its march 'would be
cut like thread into several pieces' by the hostile Indians.
Braddock 'smiled at his ignorance.' Benjamin offered no
further opinion. It was his duty to collect horses and
carriages for the use of the expedition, and he did what was
required of him in silence. The expedition crept slowly
forward, never achieving more than three or four miles in a
day; stopping, as Washington said, 'to level every mole-hill,
to erect a bridge over every brook.' It left Alexandria on the
20th April. On the 9th July Braddock, with half his army, was
near the fort. There was yet no evidence that resistance was
intended. No enemy had been seen; the troops marched on as to
assured victory. So confident was their chief that he refused
to employ scouts, and did not deign to inquire what enemy
might be lurking near. The march was along a road twelve feet
wide, in a ravine, with high ground in front and on both
sides. Suddenly the Indian war-whoop burst from the woods. A
murderous fire smote down the troops. The provincials, not
unused to this description of warfare, sheltered themselves
behind trees and fought with steady courage. Braddock,
clinging to his old rules, strove to maintain his order of
battle on the open ground. A carnage, most grim and
lamentable, was the result. His undefended soldiers were shot
down by an unseen foe. For three hours the struggle lasted;
then the men broke and fled in utter rout and panic. Braddock,
vainly fighting, fell mortally wounded, and was carried off
the field by some of his soldiers. The poor pedantic man never
got over his astonishment at a defeat so inconsistent with the
established rules of war. 'Who would have thought it?' he
murmured, as they bore him from the field. He scarcely spoke
again, and died in two or three days. Nearly 800 men, killed
and wounded, were lost in this disastrous encounter —about
one-half of the entire force engaged. All the while England
and France were nominally at peace. But now war was declared."
R. Mackenzie,
America: a history,
book 2, chapter 3.
"The news of the defeat caused a great revulsion of feeling.
The highest hopes had been built on Braddock's expedition. …
From this height of expectation men were suddenly plunged into
the yawning gulf of gloom and alarm. The whole frontier lay
exposed to the hatchet and the torch of the remorseless red
man. … The apprehensions of the border settlers were soon
fully justified. Dumas, who shortly succeeded de Contrecœur in
the command at Fort Duquesne, set vigorously to work to put
the Indians on the war-path against the defenceless
settlements. 'M. de Contrecœur had not been gone a week,' he
writes, 'before I had six or seven different war parties in
the field at once, always accompanied by Frenchmen. Thus far,
we have lost only two officers and a few soldiers; but the
Indian villages are full of prisoners of every age and sex.
The enemy has lost far more since the battle than on the day
of his defeat.' All along the frontier the murderous work went
on."
T. J. Chapman,
The French in the Allegheny Valley,
pages 71-73.
ALSO IN:
F. Parkman,
Montcalm and Wolfe,
volume 1, chapters 7 and 10.
W. Sargent,
History of Braddock's Expedition
(Pennsylvania Historical Society Mem's, volume 5).
N. B. Craig,
The Olden Time,
volume 1, pages 64-133.
OHIO:(Valley): A. D. 1758.
Retirement of the French.
Abandonment of Fort Duquesne.
See CANADA: A. D. 1758.
OHIO:(Valley): A. D. 1763.
Relinquishment to Great Britain by the Treaty of Paris.
See SEVEN YEARS WAR: THE TREATIES.
OHIO:(Valley): A. D. 1763.
The king's proclamation excluding settlers.
See NORTHWEST TERRITORY: A. D. 1763.
OHIO:(Valley): A. D; 1763-1764.
Pontiac's War.
See PONTIAC'S WAR
OHIO:(Valley): A. D. 1765-1768.
Indian Treaties of German Flats and Fort Stanwix.
Pretended cession of lands south of the Ohio.

The Walpole Company and its proposed Vandalia settlement.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1765-1768.
OHIO:(Valley): A. D. 1772-1782.
The Moravian settlement and mission on the Muskingum.
See MORAVIAN BRETHREN.
OHIO:(Valley): A. D. 1774.
Lord Dunmore's War with the Indians.
The territorial claims of Virginia.
The wrongs of Logan and his famous speech.
"On the eve of the Revolution, in 1774, the frontiersmen had
planted themselves firmly among the Alleghanies. Directly west
of them lay the untenanted wilderness, traversed only by the
war parties of the red men, and the hunting parties of both
reds and whites. No settlers had yet penetrated it, and until
they did so there could be within its borders no chance of
race warfare. … But in the southwest and the northwest alike,
the area of settlement already touched the home lands of the
tribes. … It was in the northwest that the danger of collision
was most imminent; for there the whites and Indians had
wronged one another for a generation, and their interests
were, at the time, clashing more directly than ever. Much the
greater part of the western frontier was held or claimed by
Virginia, whose royal governor was, at the time, Lord Dunmore.
{2396}
… The short but fierce and eventful struggle that now broke
out was fought wholly by Virginians, and was generally known
by the name of Lord Dunmore's war. Virginia, under her
charter, claimed that her boundaries ran across to the South
Seas, to the Pacific Ocean. The king of Britain had graciously
granted her the right to take so much of the continent as lay
within these lines, provided she could win it from the
Indians, French, and Spaniards. … A number of grants had been
made with the like large liberality, and it was found that
they sometimes conflicted with one another. The consequence
was that while the boundaries were well marked near the coast,
where they separated Virginia from the long-settled regions of
Maryland and North Carolina, they became exceeding vague and
indefinite the moment they touched the mountains. Even at the
south this produced confusion, … but at the north the effect
was still more confusing, and nearly resulted in bringing
about an inter-colonial war between Pennsylvania and Virginia.
The Virginians claimed all of extreme western Pennsylvania,
especially Fort Pitt and the valley of the Monongahela, and,
in 1774, proceeded boldly to exercise jurisdiction therein.
Indeed a strong party among the settlers favored the Virginian
claim. … The interests of the Virginians and Pennsylvanians
not only conflicted in respect to the ownership of the land,
but also in respect to the policy to be pursued regarding the
Indians. The former were armed colonists, whose interest it
was to get actual possession of the soil; whereas in
Pennsylvania the Indian trade was very important and
lucrative. … The interests of the white trader from
Pennsylvania and of the white settler from Virginia were so
far from being identical that they were usually diametrically
opposite. The northwestern Indians had been nominally at peace
with the whites for ten years, since the close of Bouquet's
campaign. … Each of the ten years of nominal peace saw plenty
of bloodshed. Recently they had been seriously alarmed by the
tendency of the whites to encroach on the great
hunting-grounds south of the Ohio. … The cession by the
Iroquois of the same hunting-grounds, at the treaty of Fort
Stanwix [see UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1765-1768], while
it gave the whites a colorable title, merely angered the
northwestern Indians. Half a century earlier they would hardly
have dared dispute the power of the Six Nations to do what
they chose with any land that could be reached by their war
parties; but in 1774 they felt quite able to hold their own
against their old oppressors. … The savages grew continually
more hostile, and in the fall of 1773 their attacks became so
frequent that it was evident a general outbreak was at hand. …
The Shawnees were the leaders in all these outrages; but the
outlaw bands, such as the Mingos and Cherokees, were as bad,
and parties of Wyandots and Delawares, as well as of the
various Miami and Wabash tribes, joined them. Thus the spring
of 1774 opened with everything ripe for an explosion. … The
borderers were anxious for a war; and Lord Dunmore was not
inclined to baulk them. … Unfortunately the first stroke fell
on friendly Indians." Dunmore's agent or lieutenant in the
country, one Dr. Conolly, issued an open letter in April which
was received by the backwoodsmen as a declaration and
authorization of war. One band of these, led by a Maryland
borderer, Michael Cresap, proceeded to hostilities at once by
ambushing and shooting down some friendly Shawnees who were
engaged in trade. This same party then set out to attack the
camp of the famous chief Logan, whose family and followers
were then dwelling at Yellow Creek, some 50 miles away. Logan
was "an Iroquois warrior, who lived at that time away from the
bulk of his people, but who was a man of note … among the
outlying parties of Senecas and Mingos, and the fragments of
broken tribes that dwelt along the upper Ohio. … He was
greatly liked and respected by all the white hunters and
frontiersmen whose friendship and respect were worth having;
they admired him for his dexterity and prowess, and they loved
him for his straightforward honesty, and his noble loyalty to
his friends." Cresap's party, after going some miles toward
Logan's camp, "began to feel ashamed of their mission; calling
a halt, they discussed the fact that the camp they were
preparing to attack consisted exclusively of friendly Indians,
and mainly of women and children; and forthwith abandoned
their proposed trip and returned home. … But Logan's people
did not profit by Cresap's change of heart. On the last day of
April a small party of men, women, and children, including
almost all of Logan's kin, left his camp and crossed the river
to visit Greathouse [another borderer, of a more brutal type],
as had been their custom; for he made a trade of selling rum
to the savages, though Cresap had notified him to stop. The
whole party were plied with liquor, and became helplessly
drunk, in which condition Greathouse and his associated
criminals fell on and massacred them, nine souls in all. … At
once the frontier was in a blaze, and the Indians girded
themselves for revenge. … They confused the two massacres,
attributing both to Cresap, whom they well knew as a warrior.
… Soon all the back country was involved in the unspeakable
horrors of a bloody Indian war," which lasted, however, only
till the following October. Governor Dunmore, during the
summer, collected some 3,000 men, one division of which he led
personally to Fort Pitt and thence down the Ohio,
accomplishing nothing of importance. The other division,
composed exclusively of backwoodsmen, under General Andrew
Lewis, marched to the mouth of the Kanawha River, and there,
at Point Pleasant, the cape of land jutting out between the
Ohio and the Kanawha, they fought, on the 10th of October, a
great battle with the Indians which practically ended the war.
This is sometimes called the battle of Point Pleasant, and
sometimes the battle of the Great Kanawha. "It was the most
closely contested of any battle ever fought with the
northwestern Indians; and it was the only victory gained over
a large body of them by a force but slightly superior in
numbers. … Its results were most important. It kept the
northwestern tribes quiet for the first two years of the
Revolutionary struggle; and above all it rendered possible the
settlement of Kentucky, and therefore the winning of the West.
Had it not been for Lord Dunmore's War, it is more than likely
that when the colonies achieved their freedom they would have
found their western boundary fixed at the Alleghany
Mountains."
{2397}
For some time after peace had been made with the other chiefs
Logan would not join in it. When he did yield a sullen assent,
Lord Dunmore "was obliged to communicate with him through a
messenger, a frontier veteran named John Gibson. … To this
messenger Logan was willing to talk. Taking him aside, he
suddenly addressed him in a speech that will always retain its
place as perhaps the finest outburst of savage eloquence of
which we have any authentic record. The messenger took it down
in writing, translating it literally." The authenticity of
this famous speech of Logan has been much questioned, but
apparently with no good ground.
T. Roosevelt,
The Winning of the West,
volume 1, chapters 8-9.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/11941
ALSO IN:
J. H. Perkins,
Annals of the West,
chapter 5.
J. G. M. Ramsey,
Annals of Tennessee,
page 112.
V. A. Lewis,
History of West Virginia,
chapter 9.
J. R. Gilmore (E. Kirke),
The Rear-guard of the Revolution,
chapter 4.
OHIO: (Valley): A. D. 1774.
Embraced in the Province of Quebec.
See CANADA: A. D. 1763-1774.
OHIO: (Valley): A. D. 1778-1779.
Conquest of the Northwest from the British by the Virginia
General Clark, and its annexation to the Kentucky
District of Virginia.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1778-1779 CLARK'S CONQUEST.
OHIO: (Valley): A. D. 1781-1786.
Conflicting territorial claims of Virginia, New York and
Connecticut.
Their cession to the United States,
except the Western Reserve of Connecticut.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1781-1786.
OHIO: (Valley): A: D. 1784.
Included in the proposed States of Metropotamia, Washington,
Saratoga and Pelisipia.
See NORTHWEST TERRITORY: A. D. 1784.
OHIO: (Valley): A. D. 1786-1788.
The Ohio Company of Revolutionary soldiers
and their settlement at Marietta.
See NORTHWEST TERRITORY: A. D. 1786-1788.
OHIO: (Valley): A. D. 1786-1796.
Western Reserve of Connecticut.
Founding of Cleveland.
In September, 1786, Connecticut ceded to Congress the western
territory which she claimed under her charter (see UNITED
STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1781-1786; and PENNSYLVANIA: A. D.
1753-1799), reserving, however, from the cession a tract
"bounded north by the line of 42° 2', or, rather, the
international line, east by the western boundary of
Pennsylvania, south by the 41st parallel, and west by a line
parallel with the eastern boundary and distant from it 120
miles—supposed, at the time, to be equal in extent to the
Susquehanna tract given to Pennsylvania, 1782. … This
territory Connecticut was said 'to reserve,' and it soon came
to be called 'The Connecticut Western Reserve,' 'The Western
Reserve,' etc. … On May 11, 1792, the General Assembly
quit-claimed to the inhabitants of several Connecticut towns
who had lost property in consequence of the incursions into
the State made by the British troops in the Revolution, or
their legal representatives when they were dead, and to their
heirs and assigns, forever, 500,000 acres lying across the
western end of the reserve, bounded north by the lake shore. …
The total number of sufferers, as reported, was 1,870, and the
aggregate losses, £161,548, 11s., 6½. The grant was of the
soil only. These lands are known in Connecticut history as
'The Sufferers' Lands,' in Ohio history as 'The Fire Lands.'
In 1796 the Sufferers were incorporated in Connecticut, and in
1803 in Ohio, under the title 'The Proprietors of the
Half-million Acres of Land lying south of Lake Erie.' … In
May, 1793, the Connecticut Assembly offered the remaining part
of the Reserve for sale." In September, 1795, the whole tract
was sold, without surveyor measurement, for $1,200,000, and
the Connecticut School Fund, which amounts to something more
than two millions of dollars, consists wholly of the proceeds
of that sale, with capitalized interest. "The purchasers of
the Reserve, most of them belonging to Connecticut, but some
to Massachusetts and New York, were men desirous of trying
their fortunes in Western lands. Oliver Phelps, perhaps the
greatest land-speculator of the time, was at their head.
September 5, 1795, they adopted articles of agreement and
association, constituting themselves the Connecticut Land
Company. The company was never incorporated, but was what is
called to-day a 'syndicate.'" In the spring of 1796 the
company sent out a party of surveyors, in charge of its agent,
General Moses Cleaveland, who reached "the mouth of the
Cuyahoga River, July 22d, from which day there have always
been white men on the site of the city that takes its name
from him." In 1830 the spelling of the name of the infant city
was changed from Cleaveland to Cleveland by the printer of its
first newspaper, who found that the superfluous "a" made a
heading too long for his form, and therefore dropped it out.
B. A. Hinsdale,
The Old Northwest,
chapter 19, with foot-notes.
ALSO IN:
C. Whittlesey,
Early History of Cleveland,
page 145, and after.
H. Rice,
Pioneers of the Western Reserve,
chapters 6-7.
R. King,
Ohio,
chapters 7-8.
OHIO: (Valley): A. D. 1787.
The Ordinance for the government of the Northwest Territory.
Perpetual exclusion of Slavery.
See NORTHWEST TERRITORY: A. D. 1787.
OHIO: (Valley): A. D. 1788.
The founding of Cincinnati.
See CINCINNATI: A. D. 1788.
OHIO: (Valley): A. D. 1790-1795.
Indian war.
Disastrous expeditions of Harmar and St. Clair,
and Wayne's decisive victory.
The Greenville Treaty.
See NORTHWEST TERRITORY: A. D. 1790-1795.
OHIO: (Territory and State): A. D. 1800-1802.
Organized as a separate Territory
and admitted to the Union as a State.
See NORTHWEST TERRITORY: A. D. 1788-1802.
OHIO: A. D. 1812-1813.
Harrison's campaign for the recovery of Detroit.
Winchester's defeat.
Perry's naval victory.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1812-1813.
OHIO: A. D. 1835.
Settlement of Boundary dispute with Michigan.
See MICHIGAN: A. D. 1836.
OHIO: A. D. 1863.
John Morgan's Rebel Raid.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1863 (JULY: KENTUCKY).
----------OHIO: End--------
OHOD, Battle of.
See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST; A. D. 609-632.
OJIBWAS, OR CHIPPEWAS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: OJIBWAS;
also, ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
OKLAHOMA, The opening of.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1889-1890.
OL., OR OLYMP.
See OLYMPIADS.
OLAF II.,
King of Denmark, A. D. 1086-1095.
Olaf III., King of Denmark, 1376-
{2398}
1387; and VII. of Norway, 1380-1387.
Olaf III. (Tryggveson), King of Norway, 995-1000.
Olaf IV. (called The Saint), King of Norway, 1000-1030.
Olaf V., King of Norway, 1069-1093.
Olaf VI., King of Norway, 1103-1116.
OLBIA.
See BORYSTHENES.
OLD CATHOLIC MOVEMENT, The.
See PAPACY: A. D. 1869-1870.
OLD COLONY, The.
See MASSACHUSETTS: A. D. 1623-1629.
OLD DOMINION, The.
See VIRGINIA: A. D. 1650-1660.
OLD IRONSIDES.
This name was popularly given to the "Constitution," the most
famous of the American frigates in the War of 1812-14 with
Great Britain.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1812-1813; and 1814.
OLD LEAGUE OF HIGH GERMANY, The.
See SWITZERLAND: A. D. 1332-1460.
OLD MAN OF THE MOUNTAIN, The.
See ASSASSINS.
OLD POINT COMFORT: Origin of its Name.
See VIRGINIA: A. D. 1606-1607.
----------OLD SARUM: Start--------
OLD SARUM:
Origin.
See SORBIODUNUM.
OLD SARUM:
A Rotten Borough.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1830.
----------OLD SARUM: End--------
OLD SOUTH CHURCH, The founding of the.
See BOSTON: A. D. 1657-1669.
OLD STYLE.
See CALENDAR, GREGORIAN.
OLDENBURG: The duchy annexed to France by Napoleon.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1810 (FEBRUARY-DECEMBER).
OLERON, The Laws of.
"The famous maritime laws of Oleron (which is an island
adjacent to the coast of France) are usually ascribed to
Richard I, though none of the many writers, who have had
occasion to mention them, have been able to find any
contemporary authority, or even any antient satisfactory
warrant for affixing his name to them. They consist of
forty-seven short regulations for average, salvage, wreck, &c.
copied from the antient Rhodian maritime laws, or perhaps more
immediately from those of Barcelona."
D. Macpherson,
Annals of Commerce,
volume 1, page 358.
OLIGARCHY.
See ARISTOCRACY.
OLISIPO.
The ancient name of Lisbon.
See PORTUGAL: EARLY HISTORY.
OLIVA, Treaty of (1660).
See BRANDENBURG: A. D. 1640-1688;
and SCANDINAVIAN STATES (SWEDEN): A. D. 1644-1697.
OLIVETANS, The.
"The Order of Olivetans, or Brethren of St. Mary of Mount
Olivet, … was founded in 1313, by John Tolomei of Siena, a
distinguished professor of philosophy in his native city, in
gratitude for the miraculous restoration of his sight. In
company with a few companions, he established himself in a
solitary olive-orchard, near Siena, obtained the approbation
of John XXII. for his congregation, and, at the command of the
latter, adopted the Rule of St. Benedict."
J. Alzog,
Manual of Universal Church History,
volume 3, page 149.
OLLAMHS.
The Bards (see FILI) of the ancient Irish.
OLMUTZ, Abortive siege of.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1758.
OLNEY, Treaty of.
A treaty between Edmund Ironsides and Canute, or Cnut,
dividing the English kingdom between them, A. D. 1016. The
conference was held on an island in the Severn, called Olney.
OLPÆ, Battle of.
A victory won, in the Peloponnesian War (B. C. 426-5) by the
Acarnanians and Messenians, under the Athenian general
Demosthenes, over the Peloponnesians and Ambraciotes, on the
shore of the Ambracian gulf.
E. Curtius,
History of Greece,
book 4, chapter 2.
OLUSTEE, Battle of.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1864 (JANUARY-FEBRUARY: FLORIDA).
OLYBRIUS, Roman Emperor (Western), A. D. 472.
OLYMPIA, Battle of (B. C. 365).
See GREECE: B. C. 371-362.
OLYMPIADS, The Era of the.
"The Era of the Olympiads, so called from its having
originated from the Olympic games, which occurred every fifth
year at Olympia, a city in Elis, is the most ancient and
celebrated method of computing time. It was first instituted
in the 776th year before the birth of our Saviour, and
consisted of a revolution of four years. The first year of
Jesus Christ is usually considered to correspond with the
first year of the 195th olympiad; but as the years of the
olympiads commenced at the full moon next after the summer
solstice, i. e., about the first of July, … it must be
understood that it corresponds only with the six last months
of the 195th olympiad. … Each year of an olympiad was
luni–solar, and contained 12 or 13 months, the names of which
varied in the different states of Greece. The months consisted
of 30 and 29 days alternately; and the short year consequently
contained 354 days, while the intercalary year had 384. The
computation by olympiads … ceased after the 364th olympiad, in
the year of Christ 440."
Sir H. Nicolas,
Chronology of History,
pages 1-2.
OLYMPIC GAMES.
"The character of a national institution, which the
Amphictyonic council affected, but never really acquired, more
truly belonged to the public festivals, which, though
celebrated within certain districts, were not peculiar to any
tribe, but were open and common to all who could prove their
Hellenic blood. The most important of these festivals was that
which was solemnized every fifth year on the banks of the
Alpheus, in the territory of Elis; it lasted four days, and,
from Olympia, the scene of its celebration, derived the name
of the Olympic contest, or games, and the period itself which
intervened between its returns was called an olympiad. The
origin of this institution is involved in some obscurity,
partly by the lapse of time, and partly by the ambition of the
Eleans to exaggerate its antiquity and sanctity. … Though,
however, the legends fabricated or adopted by the Eleans to
magnify the antiquity and glory of the games deserve little
attention, there can be no doubt that, from very early times,
Olympia had been a site hallowed by religion; and it is highly
probable that festivals of a nature similar to that which
afterwards became permanent had been occasionally celebrated
in the sanctuary of Jupiter. … Olympia, not so much a town as
a precinct occupied by a great number of sacred and public
buildings, originally lay in the territory of Pisa, which, for
two centuries after the beginning of the olympiads, was never
completely subject to Elis, and occasionally appeared as her
rival, and excluded her from all share in the presidency of
the games.
{2399}
… It is probable that the northern Greeks were not at first
either consulted or expected to take any share in the
festival; and that, though never expressly confined to certain
tribes, in the manner of an Amphictyonic congress, it
gradually enlarged the sphere of its fame and attraction till
it came to embrace the whole nation. The sacred truce was
proclaimed by officers sent round by the Eleans: it put a stop
to warfare, from the time of the proclamation, for a period
sufficient to enable strangers to return home in safety.
During this period the territory of Elis itself was of course
regarded as inviolable, and no armed force could traverse it
without incurring the penalty of sacrilege. … It [the
festival] was very early frequented by spectators, not only
from all parts of Greece itself, but from the Greek colonies
in Europe, Africa, and Asia; and this assemblage was not
brought together by the mere fortuitous impulse of private
interest or curiosity, but was in part composed of deputations
which were sent by most cities as to a religious solemnity,
and were considered as guests of the Olympian god. The
immediate object of the meeting was the exhibition of various
trials of strength and skill, which, from time to time, were
multiplied so as to include almost every mode of displaying
bodily activity. They included races on foot and with horses
and chariots; contests in leaping, throwing, wrestling, and
boxing; and some in which several of the exercises were
combined; but no combats with any kind of weapon. The
equestrian contests, particularly that of the four-horsed
chariots, were, by their nature, confined to the wealthy; and
princes and nobles vied with each other in such demonstrations
of their opulence. But the greater part were open to the
poorest Greek, and were not on that account the lower in
public estimation. … In the games described by Homer valuable
prizes were proposed, and this practice was once universal;
but, after the seventh olympiad, a simple garland, of leaves
of the wild olive, was substituted at Olympia, as the only
meed of victory. The main spring of emulation was undoubtedly
the celebrity of the festival and the presence of so vast a
multitude of spectators, who were soon to spread the fame of
the successful athletes to the extremity of the Grecian world.
… The Altis, as the ground consecrated to the games was called
at Olympia, was adorned with numberless statues of the
victors, erected, with the permission of the Eleans, by
themselves or their families, or at the expense of their
fellow citizens. It was also usual to celebrate the joyful
event, both at Olympia and at the victor's home, by a
triumphal procession, in which his praises were sung, and were
commonly associated with the glory of his ancestors and his
country. The most eminent poets willingly lent their aid on
such occasions, especially to the rich and great. And thus it
happened that sports, not essentially different from those of
our village greens, gave birth to masterpieces of sculpture,
and called forth the sublimest strains of the lyric muse. …
Viewed merely as a spectacle designed for public amusement,
and indicating the taste of the people, the Olympic games
might justly claim to be ranked far above all similar
exhibitions of other nations. It could only be for the sake of
a contrast, by which their general purity, innocence, and
humanity would be placed in the strongest light, that they
could be compared with the bloody sports of a Roman or a
Spanish amphitheatre, and the tournaments of our chivalrous
ancestors, examined by their side, would appear little better
than barbarous shows."
C. Thirlwall,
History of Greece,
chapter 10.
OLYMPIUM AT ATHENS, The.
The building of a great temple to Jupiter Olympius was begun
at Athens by Peisistratus as early as 530 B. C. Republican
Athens refused to carry on a work which would be associated
with the hateful memory of the tyrant, and it stood untouched
until B. C. 174, when Antiochus Epiphanes employed a Roman
architect to proceed with it. He, in turn, left it still
unfinished, to be afterwards resumed by Augustus, and
completed at last by Hadrian, 650 years after the foundations
were laid.
W. M. Leake,
Topography of Athens,
volume 1, appendix 10.
OLYMPUS.
The name Olympus was given by the Greeks to a number of
mountains and mountain ranges; but the one Olympus which
impressed itself most upon their imaginations, and which
seemed to be the home of their gods, was the lofty height that
terminates the Cambunian range of mountains at the east and
forms part of the boundary between Thessaly and Macedonia. Its
elevation is nearly 10,000 feet above the level of the sea and
all travelers have seemed to be affected by the peculiar
grandeur of its aspect. Other mountains called Olympus were in
Elis, near Olympia, where the great games were celebrated, and
in Laconia, near Sellasia. There was also an Olympus in the
island of Cyprus, and two in Asia Minor, one in Lycia, and a
range in Mysia, separating Bithynia from Galatia and Phrygia.
See THESSALY, and DORIANS AND IONIANS.
OLYNTHIAC ORATIONS, The.
See GREECE: B. C. 351-348.
----------OLYNTHUS: Start--------
OLYNTHUS: B. C. 383-379.
The Confederacy overthrown by Sparta.
See GREECE: B. C. 383-379.
OLYNTHUS: B. C. 351-348.
War with Philip of Macedon.
Destruction of the city.
See GREECE: B. C. 351-348.
----------OLYNTHUS: End--------
OMAGUAS, The.
See EL DORADO.
OMAHAS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: PAWNEE (CADDOAN) FAMILY,
and SIOUAN FAMILY.
OMAR I.,
Caliph, A. D. 634-643.
Omar II., Caliph, 717-720.
OMER, OR GOMER, The.
See EPHAH.
OMMIADES,
OMEYYADES, The.
See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST:
A. D. 661; 680; 715-750, and 756-1031.
OMNIBUS BILL, The.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1850.
ON.
"A solitary obelisk of red granite, set up at least 4,000
years ago, alone marks the site of On, also called the City of
the Sun, in Hebrew Beth-shemesh, in Greek Heliopolis. Nothing
else can be seen of the splendid shrine and the renowned
university which were the former glories of the place. … The
university to which the wise men of Greece resorted perished
when a new centre of knowledge was founded in the Greek city
of Alexandria. … It was during the temporary independence of
the country under native kings, after the first Persian rule,
that Plato the philosopher and Eudoxus the mathematician
studied at Heliopolis. … The civil name of the town was An,
the Hebrew On, the sacred name Pe-Ra, the 'Abode of the Sun.'"
R. S. Poole,
Cities of Egypt,
chapter 9.
{2400}
The site of On, or Heliopolis, is near Cairo. There was
another city in Upper Egypt called An by the Egyptians, but
Hermonthis by the Greeks.
ONEIDAS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: IROQUOIS CONFEDERACY.
O'NEILS, The wars and the flight of the.
See IRELAND: A. D. 1559-1603;
and 1607-1611.
ONONDAGAS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: IROQUOIS CONFEDERACY.
ONTARIO:
The Name.
See OHIO: THE NAME.
ONTARIO, Lake, The Discovery of.
See CANADA: A. D. 1611-1616.
ONTARIO, The province.
The western division of Canada, formerly called Upper Canada,
received the name of Ontario when the Confederation of the
Dominion of Canada was formed.
See CANADA: A. D. 1867.
ONTARIO SCHOOL SYSTEM.
See EDUCATION, MODERN: AMERICA: A. D. 1844-1876.
OODEYPOOR.
See RAJPOOTS.
OPEQUAN CREEK, OR WINCHESTER, Battle of.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1864 (AUGUST-OCTOBER: VIRGINIA).
OPHIR, Land of.
The geographical situation of the land called Ophir in the
Bible has been the subject of much controversy. Many recent
historians accept, as "conclusively demonstrated," the opinion
reached by Lassen in his Indische Alterthumskunde, that the
true Ophir of antiquity was the country of Abhira, near the
mouths of the Indus, not far from the present province of
Guzerat. But some who accept Abhira as being the original
Ophir conjecture that the name was extended in use to southern
Arabia, where the products of the Indian Ophir were marketed.
OPIUM WAR, The.
See CHINA: A. D. 1839-1842.
----------OPORTO: Start--------
OPORTO: Early history.
Its name given to Portugal.
See PORTUGAL: EARLY HISTORY.
OPORTO: A. D. 1832.
Siege by Dom Miguel.
See PORTUGAL: A. D. 1824-1889.
----------OPORTO: End--------
OPPIAN LAW, The.
A law passed at Rome during the second Punic War (3d century,
B. C.), forbidding any woman to wear a gay–colored dress, or
more than half an ounce of gold ornament, and prohibiting the
use of a car drawn by horses within a mile of any city or
town. It was repealed B. C. 194.
H. G. Liddell,
History of Rome,
book 4, chapter 3 (volume 1).
ALSO IN:
R. F. Horton,
History of the Romans,
chapter 16.
OPPIDUM.
Among the Gauls and the Britons a town, or a fortified place,
was called an oppidum. As Cæsar explained the term, speaking
of the oppidum of Cassivellaunus, in Britain, it signified a
"stockade or enclosed space in the midst of a forest, where
they took refuge with their flocks and herds in case of an
invasion."
E. H. Bunbury,
History of Ancient Geography,
chapter 19, note E (volume 2).
ALSO IN:
Cæsar,
Gallic War,
book 5, chapter 21.
OPTIMATES.
"New names came into fashion [in Rome], but it is difficult to
say when they were first used. We may probably refer the
origin of them to the time of the Gracchi [B. C. 133-121]. One
party was designated by the name of Optimates, 'the class of
the best.' The name shows that it must have been invented by
the 'best,' for the people would certainly not have given it
to them. We may easily guess who were the Optimates. They were
the rich and powerful, who ruled by intimidation, intrigue,
and bribery, who bought the votes of the people and sold their
interests. … Opposed to the Optimates were the Populares."
G. Long,
Decline of the Roman Republic,
volume 1, chapter 20.
See ROME: B. C. 159-133.
ORACLES OF THE GREEKS.
"Wherever the worship of Apollo had fixed its roots, there
were sibyls and prophets; for Apollo is nowhere conceivable
without the beneficent light of prophecy streaming out from
his abode. The happy situation and moral significance of
leading colleges of priests procured a peculiar authority for
individual oracles. Among these are the Lycian Patara, the
Thymbræan oracle near Troja (to which belongs Cassandra, the
most famed of Apollo's prophetesses), the Gryneum on Lesbos,
the Clarian oracle near Colophon, and finally the most
important of all the oracles of Asia Minor, the Didymæum near
Miletus, where the family of the Branchidæ held the prophetic
office as a hereditary honorary right. Delos connects the
Apolline stations on the two opposite sides of the water:
here, too, was a primitive oracle, where Anius, the son of
Apollo, was celebrated as the founder of a priestly family of
soothsayers. … The sanctuaries of Ismenian Apollo in Thebes
were founded, the Ptoïum on the hill which separates the
Hylian plain of the sea from the Copæic, and in Phocis the
oracle of Abæ. The reason why the fame of all these celebrated
seats of Apollo was obscured by that of Delphi lies in a
series of exceptional and extraordinary circumstances by which
this place was qualified to become a centre, not only of the
lands in its immediate neighbourhood, like the other oracles,
but of the whole nation. … With all the more important
sanctuaries there was connected a comprehensive financial
administration, it being the duty of the priests, by shrewd
management, by sharing in profitable undertakings, by
advantageous leases, by lending money, to increase the annual
revenues. … There were no places of greater security, and they
were, therefore, used by States as well as by private persons
as places of deposit for their valuable documents, such as
wills, compacts, bonds, or ready money. By this means the
sanctuary entered into business relations with all parts of
the Greek world, which brought it gain and influence. The
oracles became money-institutions, which took the place of
public banks. … It was by their acquiring, in addition to the
authority of religious holiness, and the superior weight of
mental culture, that power which was attainable by means of
personal relations of the most comprehensive sort, as well as
through great pecuniary means and national credit, that it was
possible for the oracle-priests to gain so comprehensive an
influence upon all Grecian affairs. … With the extension of
colonies the priests' knowledge of the world increased, and
with this the commanding eminence of the oracle-god. … The
oracles were in every respect not only the provident eye, not
only the religious conscience, of the Greek nation, but they
were also its memory."
E. Curtius,
History of Greece,
book 2, chapter 4.
{2401}
"The sites selected for these oracles were generally marked by
some physical property, which fitted them to be the scenes of
such miraculous manifestations. They were in a volcanic
region, where gas escaping from a fissure in the earth might
be inhaled, and the consequent exhilaration or ecstasy, partly
real and partly imaginary, was a divine inspiration. At the
Pythian oracle in Delphi there was thought to be such an
exhalation. Others have supposed that the priests possessed
the secret of manufacturing an exhilarating gas. … In each of
the oracular temples of Apollo, the officiating functionary
was a woman, probably chosen on account of her nervous
temperament;—at first young, but, a love affair having
happened, it was decided that no one under fifty should be
eligible to the office. The priestess sat upon a tripod,
placed over the chasm in the centre of the temple."
C. C. Felton,
Greece, Ancient and Modern,
chapter 2, lecture 9.
----------ORAN: Start--------
ORAN: A. D. 1505.
Conquest by Cardinal Ximenes.
See BARBARY STATES: A. D. 1505-1510.
ORAN: A. D. 1563.
Siege, and repulse of the Moors.
See BARBARY STATES: A. D. 1563-1565:
----------ORAN: End--------
ORANGE, The Prince of:
Assassination.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1581-1584, and 1584-1585.
ORANGE, The Principality.
"The little, but wealthy and delicious, tract of land, of
which Orange is the capital, being about four miles in length
and as many in breadth, lies in the Comté Venaissin, bordering
upon that of Avignon, within a small distance of the Rhone;
and made no inconsiderable part of that ancient and famous
Kingdom of Arles which was established by Boso towards the end
of the 9th century. …"
See BURGUNDY: A. D. 888-1032; and 1032.
"In the beginning of the 9th century, historians tell us of
one William, sirnamed Cornet, of uncertain extraction,
sovereign of this State, and highly esteemed by the great
Emperor Charlemagne, whose vassal he then was. Upon failure of
the male descendants of this prince in the person of Rambald
IV.; who died in the 13th century, his lands devolved to
Tiburga, great aunt to the said Rambald, who brought them in
marriage to Bertrand II. of the illustrious house of Baux.
These were common ancestors to Raymond V., father to Mary,
with whom John IV. of Chalon contracted an alliance in 1386;
and it was from them that descended in a direct male line the
brave Philibert of Chalon, who, after many signal services
rendered the Emperor Charles V., as at the taking of Rome more
particularly, had the misfortune to be slain, leaving behind
him no issue, in a little skirmish at Pistoya, while he had
the command of the siege before Florence. Philibert had one
only sister, named Claudia, whose education was at the French
court," where, in 1515, she married Henry, of Nassau, whereby
the principality passed to that house which was made most
illustrious, in the next generation, by William the Silent,
Prince of Orange. The Dutch stadtholders retained the title of
Princes of Orange until William III. Louis XIV. seized the
principality in 1672, but it was restored to the House of
Nassau by the Peace of Ryswick.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1697.
On the death of William III. it was declared to be forfeited
to the French crown, and was bestowed on the Prince of Conti;
but the king of Prussia, who claimed it, was permitted, under
the Treaty of Utrecht, to bear the title, without possession
of the domain.
See UTRECHT: A. D. 1712-1714.
J. Breval,
History of the House of Nassau.
ALSO IN:
E. A. Freeman,
Orange
(Historical Essays, volume 4).
See, also, NASSAU.
ORANGE, The town: Roman origin.
See ARAUSIO.
ORANGE FREE STATE.
See SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1806-1881.
ORANGE SOCIETY, The formation of the.
See IRELAND: A. D. 1795-1796.
ORARIANS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ESKIMAUAN FAMILY.
ORATIONES, Roman Imperial.
See CORPUS JURIS CIVILIS.
ORATORY, Congregation of the.
See CONGREGATION OF THE ORATORY.
ORBITELLO, Siege of (1646).
See ITALY: A. D. 1646-1654.
ORCHA, Battle of.
See RUSSIA: A. D. 1812 (JUNE-SEPTEMBER).
ORCHAN, Ottoman Turkish Sultan, A. D. 1325-1359.
ORCHIAN, FANNIAN, DIDIAN LAWS.
"In the year 181 B. C. [Rome] a law (the Lex Orchia) was
designed to restrain extravagance in private banquets, and to
limit the number of guests. This law proved ineffectual, and
as early as 161 B. C. a far stricter law was introduced by the
consul, C. Fannius (the Lex Fannia) which prescribed how much
might be spent on festive banquets and common family meals. …
The law, moreover, prohibited certain kinds of food and drink.
By a law in the year 143 B. C. (the Lex Didia) this regulation
was extended over the whole of Italy."
W. Ihne,
History of Rome,
book 6, chapter 12 (volume 4).
ORCHOMENOS.
See MINYI, THE.
ORCHOMENOS, Battle of (B. C. 85).
See MITHRIDATIC WARS.
ORCYNIAN FOREST, The.
See HERCYNIAN.
ORDAINERS, The.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1310-1311.
ORDEAL, The.
"During the full fervor of the belief that the Divine
interposition could at all times be had for the asking, almost
any form of procedure, conducted under priestly observances,
could assume the position and influence of an ordeal. As early
as 592, we find Gregory the Great alluding to a simple
purgatorial oath, taken by a Bishop on the relics of St.
Peter, in terms which convey evidently the idea that the
accused, if guilty, had exposed himself to imminent danger,
and that by performing the ceremony unharmed he had
sufficiently proved his innocence. But such unsubstantial
refinements were not sufficient for the vulgar, who craved the
evidence of their senses, and desired material proof to rebut
material accusations. In ordinary practice, therefore, the
principal modes by which the will of Heaven was ascertained
were the ordeal of fire, whether administered directly, or
through the agency of boiling water or red-hot iron; that of
cold water; of bread or cheese; of the Eucharist; of the
cross; the lot; and the touching of the body of the victim in
cases of murder.
{2402}
Some of these, it will be seen, required a miraculous
interposition to save the accused; others to condemn; some
depended altogether on volition, others on the purest chance;
while others, again, derived their power from the influence
exerted on the mind of the patient. They were all accompanied
with solemn religious observances. … The ordeal of boiling
water ('æneum,' 'judicium aquæ ferventis,' 'cacabus,'
'caldaria') is probably the oldest form in which the
application of fire was judicially administered in Europe as a
mode of proof. … A caldron of water was brought to the boiling
point, and the accused was obliged with his naked hand to find
a small stone or ring thrown into it; sometimes the latter
portion was omitted, and the hand was simply inserted, in
trivial cases to the wrist, in crimes of magnitude to the
elbow, the former being termed the single, the latter the
triple ordeal. … The cold-water ordeal ('judicium aquæ
frigidæ') differed from most of its congeners in requiring a
miracle to convict the accused, as in the natural order of
things he escaped. … The basis of this ordeal was the
superstitious belief that the pure element would not receive
into its bosom anyone stained with the crime of a false oath."
H. C. Lea,
Superstition and Force,
chapter 3.
See, also, LAW, CRIMINAL: A. D. 1198-1199.
ORDERS, Monastic.
See
AUSTIN CANONS;
BENEDICTINE ORDERS;
CAPUCHINS;
CARMELITE FRIARS;
CARTHUSIAN ORDER;
CISTERCIAN ORDER;
CLAIRVAUX;
CLUGNY;
MENDICANT ORDERS;
RECOLLECTS;
SERVITES;
THEATINES;
TRAPPISTS.
ORDERS IN COUNCIL, Blockade by British.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1806-1810; and
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1804-1809.
ORDERS OF KNIGHTHOOD.
See KNIGHTHOOD.
ORDINANCE OF 1787.
See NORTHWEST TERRITORY: A. D. 1787.
ORDINANCES OF SECESSION.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1860 (NOVEMBER-DECEMBER);
1861 (JANUARY-FEBRUARY).
ORDINANCES OF 1311.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1310-1311.
ORDOÑO I.,
King of Leon and the Asturias, or Oviedo, A. D. 850-866.
Ordoño II., King of Leon and the Asturias, or Oviedo, 914-923.
Ordoño III., King of Leon and the Asturias, or Oviedo, 950-955.
ORDOVICES, The.
One of the tribes of ancient Wales.
See BRITAIN, CELTIC TRIBES.
----------OREGON: Start--------
OREGON:
The aboriginal inhabitants.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: CHINOOKAN FAMILY,
and SHOSHONEAN FAMILY.
OREGON: A. D: 1803.
Was it embraced in the Louisiana Purchase?
Grounds of American possession.
See LOUISIANA: A. D. 1798-1803.
OREGON: A. D. 1805.
Lewis and Clark's exploring expedition.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1804-1805.
OREGON: A. D. 1844-1846.
The Boundary dispute with Great Britain and its settlement.
"The territory along the Pacific coast lying between
California on the south and Alaska on the north —Oregon as it
was comprehensively called—had been a source of dispute for
some time between the United States and Great Britain. After
some negotiations both had agreed with Russia to recognize the
line of 54° 40' as the southern boundary of the latter's
possessions; and Mexico's undisputed possession of California
gave an equally well marked southern limit, at the 42d
parallel. All between was in dispute. The British had trading
posts at the mouth of the Columbia, which they emphatically
asserted to be theirs; we, on the other hand, claimed an
absolutely clear title up to the 49th parallel, a couple of
hundred miles north of the mouth of the Columbia, and asserted
that for all the balance of the territory up to the Russian
possessions our title was at any rate better than that of the
British. In 1818 a treaty had been made providing for the
joint occupation of the territory by the two powers, as
neither was willing to give up its claim to the whole, or at
the time at all understood the value of the possession, then
entirely unpeopled. This treaty of joint occupancy had
remained in force ever since. Under it the British had built
great trading stations, and used the whole country in the
interests of certain fur companies. The Americans, in spite of
some vain efforts, were unable to compete with them in this
line; but, what was infinitely more important, had begun, even
prior to 1840, to establish actual settlers along the banks of
the rivers, some missionaries being the first to come in. …
The aspect of affairs was totally changed when in 1842 a huge
caravan of over 1,000 Americans made the journey from the
frontiers of Missouri, taking with them their wives and their
children, their flocks and herds, carrying their long rifles
on their shoulders, and their axes and spades in the great
canvas-topped wagons. The next year 2,000 more settlers of
the same sort in their turn crossed the vast plains, wound
their way among the Rocky Mountains through the pass explored
by Fremont, Benton's son-in-law, and after suffering every
kind of hardship and danger, and warding off the attacks of
hostile Indians, descended the western slope of the great
water–shed to join their fellows by the banks of the Columbia.
When American settlers were once in actual possession of the
disputed territory, it became evident that the period of Great
Britain's undisputed sway was over. … Tyler's administration
did not wish to embroil itself with England; so it refused any
aid to the settlers, and declined to give them grants of land,
as under the joint occupancy treaty that would have given
England offense and cause for complaint. But Benton and the
other Westerners were perfectly willing to offend England, if
by so doing they could help America to obtain Oregon, and were
too rash and headstrong to count the cost of their actions.
Accordingly, a bill was introduced providing for the
settlement of Oregon, and giving each settler 640 acres, and
additional land if he had a family. … It passed the Senate by
a close vote, but failed in the House. … The unsuccessful
attempts made by Benton and his supporters, to persuade the
Senate to pass a resolution, requiring that notice of the
termination of the joint occupancy treaty should forthwith be
given, were certainly ill-advised. However, even Benton was
not willing to go to the length to which certain Western men
went, who insisted upon all or nothing. … He sympathized with
the effort made by Calhoun while secretary of state to get the
British to accept the line of 49° as the frontier; but the
British government then rejected this proposition. In 1844 the
Democrats made their campaign upon the issue of 'fifty-four
forty or fight'; and Polk, when elected, felt obliged to
insist upon this campaign boundary.
{2403}

To this, however, Great Britain naturally would not consent;
it was, indeed, idle to expect her to do so, unless things
should be kept as they were until a fairly large American
population had grown up along the Pacific coast, and had thus
put her in a position where she could hardly do anything else.
Polk's administration was neither capable nor warlike, however
well disposed to bluster; and the secretary of state, the
timid, shifty, and selfish politician, Buchanan, naturally
fond of facing both ways, was the last man to wish to force a
quarrel on a high-spirited and determined antagonist, like
England. Accordingly, he made up his mind to back down and try
for the line of 49°, as proposed by Calhoun, when in Tyler's
cabinet; and the English, for all their affected indifference,
had been so much impressed by the warlike demonstrations in
the United States, that they in turn were delighted …;
accordingly they withdrew their former pretensions to the
Columbia River and accepted [June 15, 1846] the offered
compromise."
T. Roosevelt,
Life of Thomas H. Benton,
chapter 12.
ALSO IN:
T. H. Benton,
Thirty Years' View,
volume 2, chapters 143, and 156-159.
Treaties and Conventions between the United States
and other countries (edition of 1889),
page 438.
W. Barrows,
Oregon.
OREGON: A. D. 1859.
Admission into the Union, with a constitution
excluding free people of color.
"The fact that the barbarism of slavery was not confined to
the slave States had many illustrations. Among them, that
afforded by Oregon was a signal example. In 1857 she formed a
constitution, and applied for admission into the Union. Though
the constitution was in form free, it was very thoroughly
imbued with the spirit of slavery; and though four fifths of
the votes cast were for the rejection of slavery, there were
seven eighths for an article excluding entirely free people of
color. As their leaders were mainly proslavery, it is probable
that the reason why they excluded slavery from the
constitution was their fear of defeat in their application for
admission. … On the 11th of February, 1859, Mr. Stephens
reported from the Committee on Territories a bill for the
admission of Oregon as a State. A minority report, signed by
Grow, Granger, and Knapp, was also presented, protesting
against its admission with a constitution so discriminating
against color. The proposition led to an earnest debate;" but
the bill admitting Oregon prevailed, by a vote of 114 to 103
in the House and 35 to 17 in the Senate.
H. Wilson,
History of the Rise and Fall of the Slave Power,
volume 2, chapter 49.
----------OREGON: End--------
OREJONES, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: PAMPAS TRIBES.
ORELLANA, and his discovery of the Amazons River (1541).
See AMAZONS RIVER.
ORESTÆ, The.
See MACEDONIA.
ORIENTAL CHURCH, The.
See CHRISTIANITY: A. D. 330-1054;
ICONOCLASTIC CONTROVERSY; and FILIOQUE CONTROVERSY.
ORIFLAMME, The.
"The Oriflamme was originally the Banner of the Abbey of St.
Denis, and was received by the Counts of the Vexin, as
'Avoués' of that Monastery, whenever they engaged in any
military expedition. On the union of the Vexin with the Crown
effected by Philip I., a similar connexion with the Abbey was
supposed to be contracted by the Kings; and accordingly Louis
the Fat received the Banner, with the customary solemnities,
on his knees, bare-headed, and ungirt. The Banner was a square
Gonfalon of flame-coloured silk, unblazoned, with the lower
edge cut into three swallow-tails."
E. Smedley,
History of France,
part 1, chapter 3, foot-note.
"The Oriflamme was a flame-red banner of silk; three-pointed
on its lower side, and tipped with green. It was fastened to a
gilt spear."
G. W. Kitchin,
History of France,
volume 1, book 3, chapter 5, foot-note.
ORIK, OR OURIQUE, Battle of (1139).
See PORTUGAL: A. D. 1095-1325.
ORISKANY, Battle of.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1777 (JULY-OCTOBER).
ORKNEYS: 8-14th Centuries.
The Norse Jarls.
See NORMANS: 8-9TH CENTURIES; and 10-13TH CENTURIES.
ORLEANISTS.
See LEGITIMISTS.
ORLEANS, The Duke of: Regency.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1715-1723.
----------ORLEANS, The House of: Start--------
ORLEANS, The House of:
Origin.
See BOURBON, THE HOUSE OF.
ORLEANS, The House of: A. D. 1447.
Origin of claims to the duchy of Milan.
See MILAN: A. D. 1447-1454.
----------ORLEANS, The House of: End--------
----------ORLEANS, The City: Start--------
ORLEANS, The City:
Origin and name.
"The Loire, flowing first northwards, then westwards,
protects, by its broad sickle of waters, this portion of Gaul,
and the Loire itself is commanded at its most northerly point
by that city which, known in Caesar's day as Genabum, had
taken the name Aureliani from the great Emperor, the conqueror
of Zenobia, and is now called Orleans."
T. Hodgkin,
Italy and Her Invaders,
book 2, chapter 3 (volume 2).
See, also, GENABUM.
ORLEANS, The City:
Early history.
See GAUL: B. C. 58-51.
ORLEANS, The City: A. D. 451.
Siege by Attila.
See HUNS: A. D. 451.
ORLEANS, The City: A. D. 511-752.
A Merovingian capital.
See FRANKS: A. D. 511-752.
ORLEANS, The City: A. D. 1429.
Deliverance by Joan of Arc.
In the summer of 1428 the English, under the Duke of Bedford,
having maintained and extended the conquests of Henry V., were
masters of nearly the whole of France north of the Loire. The
city of Orleans, however, on the north bank of that river, was
still held by the French, and its reduction was determined
upon. The siege began in October, and after some months of
vigorous operations there seemed to be no doubt that the
hard-pressed city must succumb. It was then that Joan of Arc,
known afterwards as the Maid of Orleans, appeared, and by the
confidence she inspired drove the English from the field. They
raised the siege on the 12th of May, 1429, and lost ground in
France from that day.
Monstrelet,
Chronicles,
book 2, chapters 52-60.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1429-1431.
ORLEANS, The City: A. D. 1870.
Taken by the Germans.
Recovered by the French.
Again lost.
Repeated battles.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1870 (SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER); and 1870-1871.
----------ORLEANS, The City: End--------
ORLEANS, The Territory of.
See LOUISIANA: A. D. 1804-1812; and 1812.
ORMÉE OF BORDEAUX, The.
See BORDEAUX: A. D. 1652-1653.
{2404}
OROPUS, Naval Battle at.
The Athenians suffered a defeat at the hands of the Spartans
in a sea fight at Oropus, B. C. 411, as a consequence of which
they lost the island of Eubœa. It was one of the most disastrous
in the later period of the Peloponnesian War.
Thucydides,
History,
book 8, section 95.
ORPHANS, The.
See BOHEMIA: A. D. 1419-1434.
ORSINI, OR URSINI, The.
See ROME: 13-14TH CENTURIES.
ORTHAGORIDÆ, The.
See SICYON.
ORTHES, Battle of (1814).
See SPAIN: A. D. 1812-1814.
ORTHODOX, OR GREEK CHURCH, The.
See CHRISTIANITY: A. D. 330-1054;
also, ICONOCLASTIC CONTROVERSY,
and FILIOQUE CONTROVERSY.
ORTOSPANA.
The ancient name of the city of Cabul.
ORTYGIA.
See SYRACUSE.
OSAGES, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
PAWNEE (CADDOAN) FAMILY, and SIOUAN FAMILY.
OSCANS, The.
"The Oscan or Opican race was at one time very widely spread
over the south (of Italy]. The Auruncans of Lower Latium
belonged to this race, as also the Ausonians, who once gave
name to Central Italy, and probably also the Volscians and the
Æquians. In Campania the Oscan language was preserved to a
late period in Roman history, and inscriptions still remain
which can be interpreted by those familiar with Latin."
H. G. Liddell,
History of Rome,
introduction, section 2.
See, also, ITALY: ANCIENT.
OSCAR I.,
King of Sweden, A. D. 1844-1859.
Oscar II., King of Sweden, 1872-.
OSI, The.
See ARAVISCI; also, GOTHINI.
OSISMI, The.
See VENETI OF WESTERN GAUL.
OSMAN.
OSMANLI.
See OTHMAN.
OSMANLIS.
See TURKS (OTTOMANS): A. D. 1240-1326.
OSNABRÜCK: A. D. 1644-1648.
Negotiation of the Peace of Westphalia.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1648.
OSRHOËNE,
OSROËNE.
A small principality or petty kingdom surrounding the city of
Edessa, its capital, in northwestern Mesopotamia. It appears
to have acquired its name and some little importance during
the period of Parthian supremacy. It was a prince of Osrhoëne
who betrayed the ill-fated army of Crassus to the Parthians at
Carrhæ. In the reign of Caracalla Osrhoëne was made a Roman
province. Edessa, the capital, claimed great antiquity, but is
believed to have been really founded by Seleucus. During the
first ten or eleven centuries of the Christian era Edessa was
a city of superior importance in the eastern world, under
dependent kings or princes of its own. It was especially noted
for its schools of theology.
G. Rawlinson,
Sixth Great Oriental Monarchy,
chapter 11.
ALSO IN:
T. Mommsen,
History of Rome,
book 5, chapter 2.
E. Gibbon,
Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,
chapters 8 and 47.
P. Smith,
History of the World,
volume 3 (American edition),
page 151.
OSSA AND PELION.
See THESSALY.
----------OSTEND: Start--------
OSTEND: A. D. 1602-1604.
Siege and capture by the Spaniards.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1594-1609.
OSTEND: A. D. 1706.
Besieged and reduced by the Allies.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1706-1707.
OSTEND: A. D. 1722-1731.
The obnoxious Company.
See SPAIN: A. D. 1713-1725; and 1726-1731.
OSTEND: A. D. 1745-1748.
Taken by the French, and restored.
See NETHERLANDS (AUSTRIAN PROVINCES): A. D. 1745;
and AIX-LA-CHAPELLE: THE CONGRESS.
----------OSTEND: End--------
OSTEND MANIFESTO, The.
See CUBA: A. D. 1845-1860.
OSTIA.
Ostia, the ancient port of Rome, at the mouth of the Tiber,
was regarded as a suburb of the city and had no independent
existence. Its inhabitants were Roman citizens. In time, the
maintaining of a harbor at Ostia was found to be
impracticable, owing to deposits of silt from the Tiber, and
artificial harbors were constructed by the emperors Claudius,
Nero and Trajan, about two miles to the north of Ostia. They
were known by the names Portus Augusti and Portus Trajani. In
the 12th century the port and channel of Ostia were partially
restored, for a time, but only to be abandoned again. The
ancient city is now represented by a small hamlet, about two
miles from the sea shore.
R. Burn,
Rome and the Campagna,
chapter 14.
OSTMEN.
See NORMANS: 10-13TH CENTURIES.
OSTRACH, Battle of (1799).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1798-1799.(AUGUST-APRIL).
OSTRACISM.
"The state [Athens] required means of legally removing persons
who, by an excess of influence and adherents, virtually put an
end to the equality among the citizens established by law, and
thus threatened the state with a revival of party-rule. For
this purpose, in the days of Clisthenes, and probably under
his influence, the institution of ostracism, or judgment by
potsherds, was established. By virtue of it the people were
themselves to protect civic equality, and by a public vote
remove from among them whoever seemed dangerous to them. For
such a sentence, however, besides a public preliminary
discussion, the unanimous vote of six thousand citizens was
required. The honour and property of the exile remained
untouched, and the banishment itself was only pronounced for a
term of ten years."
E. Curtius,
History of Greece,
book 2, chapter 2 (volume 1).
"The procedure (in ostracism] was as follows: —Every year, in
the sixth or seventh Prytany, the question was put to the
people whether it desired ostracism to be put in force or not.
Hereupon of course orators came forward to support or oppose
the proposal. The former they could only do by designating
particular persons as sources of impending danger to freedom,
or of confusion and injury to the commonwealth; in opposition
to them, on the other side, the persons thus designated, and
anyone besides who desired it, were of course free to deny the
danger, and to show that the anxiety was unfounded. If the
people decided in favour of putting the ostracism in force, a
day was appointed on which it was to take place. On this day
the people assembled at the market, where an enclosure was
erected with ten different entrances and accordingly, it is
probable, the same number of divisions for the several Phylæ.
Every citizen entitled to a vote wrote the name of the person
he desired to have banished from the state upon a potsherd. …
At one of the ten entrances the potsherds were put into the
hands of the magistrates posted there, the Prytanes and the
nine Archons, and when the voting was completed were counted
one by one. The man whose name was found written on at least
six thousand potsherds was obliged to leave the country within
ten days at latest."
G. F. Schömann,
Antiquities of Greece,
part 3, chapter 3.
{2405}
OSTROGOTHS.
See GOTHS.
OSTROLENKA, Battle of (1831).
See POLAND: A. D. 1830-1832.
OSTROVNO, Battle of.
See RUSSIA: A. D. 1812 (JUNE-SEPTEMBER).
OSWALD, King of Northumbria, A. D. 635-642.
----------OSWEGO: Start--------
OSWEGO: A. D. 1722.
Fort built by the English.
See CANADA: A. D. 1700-1735.
OSWEGO: A. D. 1755.
English position strengthened.
See CANADA: A. D. 1755 (AUGUST-OCTOBER).
OSWEGO: A. D. 1756.
The three forts taken by the French.
See CANADA: A. D. 1756-1757.
OSWEGO: A. D. 1759.
Reoccupied by the English.
See CANADA: A. D. 1759.
OSWEGO: A. D. 1783-1796.
Retained by the English after peace with the United States.
Final surrender.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1783-1796; and 1794-1795.
----------OSWEGO: End--------
OSWI, King of Northumbria, A. D. 655-670.
OTADENI,
OTTEDENI, The.
One of the tribes in Britain whose territory lay between the
Roman wall and the Firth of Forth. Mr. Skene thinks they were
the same people who are mentioned in the 4th century as the
"Attacotti."
W. F. Skene,
Celtic Scotland,
volume l.
See BRITAIN, CELTIC TRIBES.
OTCHAKOF, Siege of (1737).
See RUSSIA: A. D. 1725-1739.
OTFORD, Battle of.
Won by Edmund Ironsides, A. D. 1016, over Cnut, or Canute, the
Danish claimant of the English crown.
OTHMAN, Caliph, A. D. 643-655.
Othman, or Osman, founder of the Ottoman or
Osmanli dynasty of Turkish Sultans, 1307-1325.
Othman II., Turkish Sultan, 1618-1622.
Othman III., Turkish Sultan, 1754-1757.
OTHO,
Roman Emperor, A. D. 69.
Otho (of Bavaria), King of Hungary, 1305-1307.
Otho, or Otto I. (called the Great),
King of the East Franks (Germany), 936-973;
King of Lombardy, and Emperor, 962-973.
Otho II., King of the East Franks (Germany),
King of Italy, and Emperor, 967-983.
Otho Ill., King of the East Franks (Germany), 983-1002;
King of Italy and Emperor, 996-1002.
Otho IV., King of Germany, 1208-1212; Emperor, 1209-1212.
OTHRYS.
See THESSALY.
OTIS, James, The speech of, against Writs of Assistance.
See MASSACHUSETTS: A. D. 1761.
OTOES,
OTTOES, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
PAWNEE (CADDOAN) FAMILY, and SIOUAN FAMILY.
OTOMIS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: OTOMIS.
OTRANTO: Taken by the Turks (1480).
See TURKS: A. D. 1451-1481.
OTTAWA, Canada:
The founding of the City.
"In 1826 the village of Bytown, now Ottawa, the capital of the
Dominion of Canada, was founded. The origin of this beautiful
city was this: Colonel By, an officer of the Royal Engineers,
came to survey the country with a view of making a canal to
connect the tidal waters of the St. Lawrence with the great
lakes of Canada. After various explorations, an inland route
up the Ottawa to the Rideau affluent, and thence by a ship
canal to Kingston on Lake Ontario, was chosen. Colonel By made
his headquarters where the proposed canal was to descend, by
eight locks, a steep declivity of 90 feet to the Ottawa River.
'The spot itself was wonderfully beautiful.' … It was the
centre of a vast lumber-trade, and had expanded by 1858 to a
large town."
W. P. Greswell,
History of the Dominion of Canada,
page 168.
OTTAWAS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY, and OJIBWAS;
also PONTIAC'S WAR.
OTTERBURN, Battle of.
This famous battle was fought, August 19, 1388, between a
small force of Scots, harrying the border, under Earl Douglas
and a hastily assembled body of English led by Sir Henry
Percy, the famous Hotspur. The English, making a night attack
on the Scottish camp, not far from Newcastle, were terribly
beaten, and Hotspur was taken prisoner; but Douglas fell
mortally wounded. The battle was a renowned encounter of
knightly warriors, and greatly interested the historians of
the age. It is narrated in Froissart's chronicles (volume 3,
chapter 126), and is believed to be the action sung of in the
famous old ballad of Chevy Chase, or the "Hunting of the
Cheviot."
J. H. Burton,
History of Scotland,
chapter 26 (volume 3).
OTTIMATI, The.
See FLORENCE: A. D. 1498-1500.
OTTO.
See OTHO.
OTTOCAR,
OTOKAR,
King of Bohemia, A. D. 1253-1278.
OTTOMAN EMPIRE.
See TURKS (OTTOMANS): A. D. 1240-1326, and after.
OTTOMAN GOVERNMENT.
See SUBLIME PORTE.
OTUMBA, Battle of.
See MEXICO: A. D. 1520-1521.
OTZAKOF:
Storming, capture, and massacre of inhabitants
by the Russians (1788).
See TURKS: A. D. 1776-1792.
OUAR KHOUNI, The.
See AVARS.
----------OUDE: Start--------
OUDE, OR OUDH.
"Before the British settler had established himself on the
peninsula of India, Oude was a province of the Mogul Empire.
When that empire was distracted and weakened by the invasion
of Nadir Shah [see INDIA: A. D. 1662-1748], the treachery of
the servant was turned against the master, and little by
little the Governor began to govern for himself. But holding
only an official, though an hereditary title, he still
acknowledged his vassalage; and long after the Great Mogul had
shrivelled into a pensioner and pageant, the Newab–Wuzeer of
Oude was nominally his minister. Of the earliest history of
British connexion with the Court of the Wuzeer, it is not
necessary to write in detail. There is nothing less creditable
in the annals of the rise and progress of the British power in
the East. The Newab had territory; the Newab had subjects; the
Newab had neighbours; more than all, the Newab had money.
{2406}
But although he possessed in abundance the raw material of
soldiers, he had not been able to organise an army sufficient
for all the external and internal requirements of the State;
and so he was fain to avail himself of the superior military
skill and discipline of the white men, and to hire British
battalions to do his work. … In truth it was a vicious system,
one that can hardly be too severely condemned. By it we
established a Double Government of the worst kind. The
Political and Military government was in the hands of the
Company; the internal administration of the Oude territories
still rested with the Newab–Wuzeer. In other words, hedged in
and protected by the British battalions, a bad race of Eastern
Princes were suffered to do, or not to do, what they liked. …
Every new year saw the unhappy country lapsing into worse
disorder, with less disposition, as time advanced, on the part
of the local Government to remedy the evils beneath which it
was groaning. Advice, protestation, remonstrance were in vain.
Lord Cornwallis advised, protested, remonstrated: Sir John
Shore advised, protested, remonstrated. At last a statesman of
a very different temper appeared upon the scene. Lord
Wellesley was a despot in every pulse of his heart. But he was
a despot of the right kind; for he was a man of consummate
vigour and ability, and he seldom made a mistake. The
condition of Oude soon attracted his attention; not because
its government was bad and its people were wretched, but
because that country might either be a bulwark of safety to
our own dominions, or A sea of danger which might overflow and
destroy us. … It was sound policy to render Oude powerful for
good and powerless for evil. To the accomplishment of this it
was necessary that large bodies of ill-disciplined and
irregularly paid native troops in the service of the
Newab-Wuzeer—lawless bands that had been a terror alike to him
and to his people—should be forthwith disbanded, and that
British troops should occupy their place. … The additional
burden to be imposed upon Oude was little less than half a
million of money, and the unfortunate Wuzeer, whose resources
had been strained to the utmost to pay the previous subsidy,
declared his inability to meet any further demands on his
treasury. This was what Lord Wellesley expected—nay, more, it
was what he wanted. If the Wuzeer could not pay in money, he
could pay in money's worth. He had rich lands that might be
ceded in perpetuity to the Company for the punctual payment of
the subsidy. So the Governor-General prepared a treaty ceding
the required provinces, and with a formidable array of British
troops at his call, dragooned the Wuzeer into sullen
submission to the will of the English Sultan. The new treaty
was signed; and districts then yielding a million and a half
of money, and now nearly double that amount of annual revenue,
passed under the administration of the British Government.
Now, this treaty—the last ever ratified between the two
Governments—bound the Newab-Wuzeer to 'establish in his
reserved dominions such a system of administration, to be
carried on by his own officers, as should be conducive to the
prosperity of his subjects, and he calculated to secure the
lives and properties of the inhabitants,' and he undertook at
the same time 'always to advise with and to act in conformity
to the counsels of the officers of the East India Company.'
But the English ruler knew well that there was small hope of
these conditions being fulfilled. … Whilst the counsels of our
British officers did nothing for the people, the bayonets of
our British soldiers restrained them from doing anything for
themselves. Thus matters grew from bad to worse, and from
worse to worst. One Governor-General followed another; one
Resident followed another; one Wuzeer followed another; but
still the great tide of evil increased in volume, in darkness,
and in depth. But, although the Newab-Wuzeers of Oude were,
doubtless, bad rulers and bad men, it must be admitted that
they were good allies. … They supplied our armies, in time of
war, with grain; they supplied us with carriage–cattle; better
still, they supplied us with cash. There was money in the
Treasury of Lucknow, when there was none in the Treasury of
Calcutta; and the time came when the Wuzeer's cash was needed
by the British ruler. Engaged in an extensive and costly war,
Lord Hastings wanted more millions for the prosecution of his
great enterprises. They were forthcoming at the right time;
and the British Government were not unwilling in exchange to
bestow both titles and territories on the Wuzeer. The times
were propitious. The successful close of the Nepaul war placed
at our disposal an unhealthy and impracticable tract of
country at the foot of the Hills. This 'terai' ceded to us by
the Nepaulese was sold for a million of money to the Wuzeer,
to whose domains it was contiguous, and he himself expanded
and bloomed into a King under the fostering sun of British
favour and affection."
J. W. Kaye,
History of the Sepoy War in India,
chapter 3 (volume 1).
"By Lord Wellesley's treaty with the then Nawab-Vizier of
Oude, that prince had agreed to introduce into his then
remaining territories, such a system of administration as
should be conducive to the prosperity of his subjects, and to
the security of the lives and property of the inhabitants; and
always to advise with, and act in conformity to the counsel
of, the officers of the Company's Government. Advantage had
been taken of this clause, from time to time, to remonstrate
with the Oude princes on their misgovernment. I have no doubt
that the charges to this effect were in great measure correct.
The house of Oude has never been remarkable for peculiar
beneficence as governors. A work lately published, the
'Private Life of an Eastern King,' affords, I suppose, a true
picture of what they may have been as men. Still, the charges
against them came, for the most part, from interested lips. …
Certain it is that all disinterested English observers—Bishop
Heber, for instance—entering Oude fresh from Calcutta, and
with their ears full of the current English talk about its
miseries, were surprised to find a well–cultivated country, a
manly and independent people. … Under Lord Dalhousie's rule,
however, and after the proclamation of his annexation policy,
complaints of Oude misgovernment became—at Calcutta—louder
and louder. Within Oude itself, these complaints were met, and
in part justified, by a rising Moslem fanaticism. Towards the
middle of 1855, a sanguinary affray took place at Lucknow"
between Hindoos and Mussulmans, "in which the King took part
with his co-religionists, against the advice of Colonel
Outram, the then Resident. Already British troops near Lucknow
were held in readiness to act; already the newspapers were
openly speculating on immediate annexation. … At Fyzabad, new
disturbances broke out between Hindoos and Moslems.
{2407}
The former were victorious. A Moolavee, or doctor, of high
repute, named Ameer Alee, proclaimed the holy war. Troops were
ordered against him. … The talk of annexation grew riper and
riper. The Indian Government assembled 16,000 men at Cawnpore.
For months the Indian papers had been computing what revenue
Oude yielded to its native prince—what revenue it might yield
under the Company's management. Lord Dalhousie's successor,
Lord Canning, was already at Bombay. But the former seems to
have been anxious to secure for himself the glory of this
step. The plea—the sole plea—for annexation, was maltreatment
of their people by the Kings of Oude. … The King had been
warned by Lord William Bentinck, by Lord Hardinge. He had
declined to sign a new treaty, vesting the government of his
country exclusively in the East India Company. He was now to
be deposed; and all who withheld obedience to the
Governor-General's mandate were to be rebels (7th February,
1856). The King followed the example of Pertaub Shean of
Sattara—withdrew his guns, disarmed his troops, shut up his
palace. Thus we entered into possession of 24,000 square miles
of territory, with 3,000,000 to 4,000,000 inhabitants,
yielding £1,000,000 of revenue. But it was expected by
officials that it could be made to yield £1,500,000 of
surplus. Can you wonder that it was annexed?"
J. M. Ludlow,
British India,
part 2, lecture 15 (volume 2).
ALSO IN:
E. Arnold,
The Marquis of Dalhousie's Administration of British India,
chapter 25 (volume 2).
Sir W. W. Hunter,
The Marquess of Dalhousie,
chapter 8.
W. M. Torrens,
Empire in Asia: How we came by it,
chapter 26.
OUDE: A. D. 1763-1765.
English war with the Nawab.
See INDIA: A. D. 1757-1772.
----------OUDE: End--------
OUDE, The Begums of, and Warren Hastings.
See INDIA: A. D. 1773-1785.
----------OUDENARDE: Start--------
OUDENARDE: A. D. 1582.
Siege and capture by the Spaniards.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1581-1584.
OUDENARDE: A. D. 1659.
Taken by the French and restored to Spain.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1659-1661.
OUDENARDE: A. D. 1667.
Taken by the French.
See NETHERLANDS (THE SPANISH PROVINCES): A. D. 1667.
OUDENARDE: A. D. 1668.
Ceded to France.
See NETHERLANDS (HOLLAND): A. D. 1668.
OUDENARDE: A. D. 1679.
Restored to Spain.
See NIMEGUEN, THE PEACE OF.
OUDENARDE: A. D. 1706.
Surrendered to Marlborough and the Allies.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1706-1707.
OUDENARDE: A. D. 1708.
Marlborough's victory.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1708-1709.
OUDENARDE: A. D. 1745-1748.
Taken by the French, and restored.
See NETHERLANDS (AUSTRIAN PROVINCES): A. D. 1745;
and AIX-LA-CHAPELLE; THE CONGRESS.
----------OUDENARDE: End--------
OUDH.
See OUDE.
OUIARS,
OUIGOURS, The.
See AVARS.
OUMAS,
HUMAS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: MUSKOGEAN FAMILY.
OUR LADY OF MONTESA, The Order of.
This was an order of knighthood founded by King Jayme II., of
Aragon, in 1317.
S. A. Dunham,
History of Spain and Portugal,
volume 4, page 238 (American edition).
OURIQUE, Battle of (1139).
See PORTUGAL: A. D. 1095-1325.
OVATION, The Roman.
See TRIUMPH.
OVIEDO, Origin of the kingdom of.
See SPAIN: A. D. 713-737.
OVILIA.
See CAMPUS MARTIUS.
OXENSTIERN, Axel: His leadership in Germany.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1632-1634.
OXFORD, The Headquarters of King Charles.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1642 (OCTOBER-DECEMBER).
OXFORD, Provisions of.
A system or constitution of government secured in 1258 by the
English barons, under the lead of Earl Simon de Montfort. The
king, Henry III., "was again and again forced to swear to it,
and to proclaim it throughout the country. The special
grievances of the barons were met by a set of ordinances
called the Provisions of Westminster, which were produced
after some trouble in October 1259."
W. Stubbs,
The Early Plantagenets,
page 190.
The new constitution was nominally in force for nearly six
years, repeatedly violated and repeatedly sworn to afresh by
the king, civil war being constantly imminent. At length both
sides agreed to submit the question of maintaining the
Provisions of Oxford to the arbitration of Louis IX. of
France, and his decision, called the Mise of Amiens, annulled
them completely. De Montfort's party thereupon repudiated the
award and the civil war called the "Barons' War" ensued.
C. H. Pearson,
History of England in the Early and Middle Ages,
volume 2, chapter 8.
ALSO IN:
W. Stubbs,
Select Charters,
part 6.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1216-1274.
OXFORD, OR TRACT ARIAN MOVEMENT, The.
"Never was religion in England so uninteresting as it was in
the earlier part of the 19th century. Never was a time when
thought was so active, criticism so keen, taste so fastidious;
and which so plainly demanded a religion intellectual,
sympathetic, and attractive. This want the Tractarian, or
Oxford movement, as it is called, attempted to supply. … But
the Tractarians put before themselves an aim far higher than
that. They attempted nothing less than to develope and place
on a firm and imperishable basis what Laud and the Non-Jurors
had tried tentatively to do; namely, to vindicate the Church
of England from all complicity with foreign Protestantism, to
establish her essential identity with the Church of the
Apostles and Fathers through the mediæval Church, and to place
her for the first time since the Reformation in her true
position with regard to the Church in the East and the West. …
Naturally the first work undertaken was the explanation of
doctrine. The 'Tracts for the Times,' mainly written by Dr.
Newman and Dr. Pusey, put before men what the writers believed
to be the doctrine of the Church of England, with a boldness
and precision of statement hitherto unexampled. The divine
Authority of the Church. Her essential unity in all parts of
the world. The effectiveness of regeneration in Holy Baptism.
The reality of the presence of our Lord in Holy Communion. The
sacrificial character of Holy Communion. The reality of the
power to absolve sin committed by our Lord to the priesthood.
{2408}
Such were the doctrines maintained in the Tractarian writings.
… They were, of course, directly opposed to the popular
Protestantism of the day, as held by the Evangelical party.
They were equally opposed to the Latitudinarianism of the
Broad Church party, who—true descendants of Tillotson and
Burnet—were under the leadership of men like Arnold and
Stanley, endeavouring to unite all men against the wickedness
of the time on the basis of a common Christian morality under
the guardianship of the State, unhampered by distinctive
creeds or definite doctrines. No two methods could be more
opposite."
H. O. Wakeman,
History of Religion in England,
chapter 11.
"The two tasks … which the Tractarians set themselves, were to
establish first that the authority of the primitive Church
resided in the Church of England, and second, that the
doctrines of the English Church were really identical with
those of pre-Tridentine Christianity. … The Tractarians'
second object is chiefly recollected because it produced the
Tract which brought their series to an abrupt conclusion
[1841]. Tract XC. is an elaborate attempt to prove that the
articles of the English Church are not inconsistent with the
doctrines of mediæval Christianity; that they may be
subscribed by those who aim at being Catholic in heart and
doctrine. … Few books published in the present century have
made so great a sensation as this famous Tract. … Bagot,
Bishop of Oxford, Mr. Newman's own diocesan, asked the author
to suppress it. The request placed the author in a singular
dilemma. The double object which he had set himself to
accomplish became at once impossible. He had laboured to prove
that authority resided in the English Church, and authority,
in the person of his own diocesan, objected to his
interpretation of the articles. For the moment Mr. Newman
resolved on a compromise. He did not withdraw Tract XC., but
he discontinued the series. … The discontinuance of the
Tracts, however, did not alter the position of authority. The
bishops, one after another; 'began to charge against' the
author. Authority, the authority which Mr. Newman had laboured
to establish, was shaking off the dust of its feet against
him. The attacks of the bishops made Mr. Newman's continuance
in the Church of England difficult. But, long before the
attack was made, he had regarded his own position with
dissatisfaction." It became intolerable to him when, in 1841,
a Protestant bishop of Jerusalem was appointed, who exercised
authority over both Lutherans and Anglicans. "A communion with
Lutherans, Calvinists, and even Monophysites seemed to him an
abominable thing, which tended to separate the English Church
further and further from Rome. … From the hour that the see
was established, his own lot was practically decided. For a
few years longer he remained in the fold in which he had been
reared, but he felt like a dying man. He gradually withdrew
from his pastoral duties, and finally [in 1845] entered into
communion with Rome. … A great movement never perishes for
want of a leader. After the secession of Mr. Newman, the
control of the movement fell into the hands of Dr. Pusey."
S. Walpole,
History of England from 1815,
chapter 21 (volume 4).
ALSO IN:
J. H. Newman,
History of my Religious Opinions (Apologia pro Vita Sua).
J. H. Newman,
Letters and Correspondence to 1845.
R. W. Church,
The Oxford Movement.
W. Palmer,
Narrative of Events Connected with
the Tracts for the Times.
T. Mozley,
Reminiscences.
Sir J. T. Coleridge,
Life of John Keble.
OXFORD UNIVERSITY.
See EDUCATION, MEDIÆVAL: ENGLAND, and after.
OXGANG.
See BOVATE.
OXUS, The.
Now called the Amoo, or Jihon River, in Russian Central Asia.
OYER AND TERMINER, Courts of.
See LAW, CRIMINAL: A. D. 1285.
P.
PACAGUARA, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ANDESIANS.
PACAMORA, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ANDESIANS.
PACHA.
See BEY.
PACIFIC OCEAN:
Its Discovery and its Name.
The first European to reach the shores of the Pacific Ocean
was Vasco Nuñez de Balboa, who saw it, from "a peak in Darien"
on the 25th of September, 1513 (see AMERICA: A. D. 1513-1517).
"It was not for some years after this discovery that the name
Pacific was applied to any part of the ocean; and for a long
time after parts only of it were so termed, this part of it
retained the original name of South Sea, so called because it
lay to the south of its discoverer. The lettering of the early
maps is here significant. All along from this time to the
middle of the 17th century, the larger part of the Pacific was
labeled 'Oceanus Indicus Orientalis,' or 'Mar del Sur,' the
Atlantic, opposite the Isthmus, being called 'Mar del Norte.'
Sometimes the reporters called the South Sea 'La Otra Mar,' in
contradistinction to the 'Mare Oceanus' of Juan de la Cosa, or
the 'Oceanus Occidentalis' of Ptolemy, as the Atlantic was
then called. Indeed, the Atlantic was not generally known by
that name for some time yet. Schöner, in 1520, terms it, as
does Ptolemy in 1513, 'Oceanus Occidentalis'; Grynæus, in
1532, 'Oceanus Magnus'; Apianus, appearing in the Cosmography
of 1575, although thought to have been drawn in 1520, 'Mar
Atlicum.' Robert Thorne, 1527, in Hakluyt's Voy., writes'
Oceanus Occiden.'; Bordone, 1528, 'Mare Occidentale'; Ptolemy,
1530, 'Occean Occidentalis'; Ramusio, 1565, Viaggi, iii. 455,
off Central America, 'Mar del Nort,' and in the great ocean,
both north and south, 'Mar Ociano'; Mercator, 1569, north of
the tropic of cancer, 'Oceanius Atlanticvs'; Hondius, 1595,
'Mar del Nort'; West-Indische Spieghel, 1624, 'Mar del Nort';
De Laet, 1633, 'Mar del Norte'; Jacob Colon, 1663, 'Mar del
Nort'; Ogilby, 1671, 'Oceanus Atlanticum,' 'Mar del Norte,'
and 'Oceanus Æthiopicus'; Dampier, 1699, 'the North or
Atlantick Sea.' The Portuguese map of 1518, Munich Atlas, iv.,
is the first upon which I have seen a name applied to the
Pacific; and there it is given … as 'Mar visto pelos
Castelhanos,' Sea seen by the Spaniards. … On the globe of
Johann Schöner, 1520, the two continents of America are
represented with a strait dividing them at the Isthmus.
{2409}
The great island of Zipangri, or Japan, lies about midway
between North America and Asia. North of this island … are the
words 'Orientalis Oceanus,' and to the same ocean south of the
equator the words 'Oceanus Orientalis Indicus' are applied.
Diego Homem, 1558, marks out upon his map a large body of
water to the north-west of 'Terra de Florida,' and west of
Canada, and labels it 'Mare leparamantium.' … Colon and Ribero
call the South Sea 'Mar del Svr.' In Hakluyt's Voy. we find
that Robert Thorne, in 1527, wrote 'Mare Australe.' Ptolemy,
in 1530, places near the Straits of Magellan, 'Mare
pacificum.' Ramusio, 1565, Viaggi, iii. 455, off Central
America, places 'Mar del Sur,' and off the Straits of
Magellan, 'Mar Oceano.' Mercator places in his atlas of 1569
plainly, near the Straits of Magellan, 'El Mar Pacifico,' and
in the great sea off Central America 'Mar del Zur.' On the map
of Hondius, about 1595, in Drake's' 'World Encompassed,' the
general term 'Mare Pacificvm' is applied to the Pacific Ocean,
the words being in large letters extending across the ocean
opposite Central America, while under it in smaller letters is
'Mar del Sur.' This clearly restricts the name South Sea to a
narrow locality, even at this date. In Hondius' Map, 'Purchas,
His Pilgrimes,' iv. 857, the south Pacific is called 'Mare
Pacificum,' and the central Pacific 'Mar del Sur.'"
H. H. Bancroft,
History of the Pacific States,
volume 1, pages 373-374, foot-note.
PACTA CONVENTA, The Polish.
See POLAND: A. D. 1573.
PACTOLUS, Battle of the (B. C. 395).
See GREECE: B. C. 399-387.
PADISCHAH.
See BEY; also CRAL.
----------PADUA: Start--------
PADUA: Origin.
See VENETI OF CISALPINE GAUL.
PADUA: A. D. 452.
Destruction by the Huns.
See HUNS: A. D. 452;
also VENICE: A. D. 452.
PADUA: 11-12th Centuries.
Rise and acquisition of Republican independence.
See ITALY: A. D. 1056-1152.
PADUA: A. D. 1237-1256:
The tyranny of Eccelino di Romano.
The Crusade against him.
Capture and pillage of the city by its deliverers.
See VERONA: A. D. 1236-1259.
PADUA: A. D. 1328-1338.
Submission to Can' Grande della Scala.
Recovery from his successor.
The founding of the sovereignty of the Carrara family.
See VERONA: A. D. 1260-1338.
PADUA: A. D. 1388.
Yielded to the Visconti of Milan.
See MILAN: A. D. 1277-1447.
PADUA: A. D. 1402.
Struggle of Francesco Carrara with Visconti of Milan.
See MILAN: A. D. 1277-1447;
and FLORENCE: A. D. 1390-1406.
PADUA: A. D. 1405.
Added to the dominion of Venice.
See ITALY: A. D. 1402-1406.
PADUA: A. D. 1509-1513.
In the War of the League of Cambrai.
Siege by the Emperor Maximilian.
See ITALY: A. D. 1510-1513.
----------PADUA: End--------
PADUCAH: Repulse of Forrest.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1864 (APRIL: TENNESSEE).
PADUS, The.
The name by which the river Po was known to the Romans.
Dividing Cisalpine Gaul, as the river did, into two parts,
they called the northern part Transpadane and the southern
part Cispadane Gaul.
PÆANS.
"The pæans [among the ancient Greeks] were songs of which the
tune and words expressed courage and confidence. 'All sounds
of lamentation,' … says Callimachus, 'cease when the Ie Pæan,
Ie Pæan, is heard.' … Pæans were sung, not only when there was
a hope of being able, by the help of the gods, to overcome a
great and imminent danger, but when the danger was happily
past; they were songs of hope and confidence as well as of
thanksgiving for, victory and safety."
K. O. Müller,
History of the Literature of Ancient Greece,
volume 1, page 27.
PÆONIANS, The.
"The Pæonians, a numerous and much-divided race, seemingly
neither Thracian nor Macedonian nor Illyrian, but professing
to be descended from the Teukri of Troy, … occupied both banks
of the Strymon, from the neighbourhood of Mount Skomius, in
which that river rises, down to the lake near its mouth. … The
Pæonians, in their north-western tribes, thus bordered upon
the Macedonian Pelagonia, —in their northern tribes upon the
Illyrian Dardani and Autariatæ,—in the eastern, southern and
south-eastern tribes, upon the Thracians and Pierians."
G. Grote,
History of Greece,
part 2, chapter 25.
Darius, king of Persia, is said to have caused a great part of
the Pæonians to be transported to a district in Phrygia, but
they escaped and returned home.
PAGANISM: Suppressed in the Roman Empire.
See ROME: A. D. 391-395.
PAGE.
See CHIVALRY.
PAGUS.
See GENS, ROMAN;
also, HUNDRED.
PAIDONOMUS, The.
The title of an officer who was charged with the general
direction of the education and discipline of the young in
ancient Sparta.
G. Schömann,
Antiquities of Greece: The State,
part 3, chapter 1.
PAINE, Thomas, and the American Revolution.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1776 (JANUARY-JUNE)
KING GEORGE'S WAR MEASURES.
PAINTED CHAMBER.
See WESTMINSTER PALACE.
PAINTSVILLE, Battle of.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1862 (JANUARY-FEBRUARY: KENTUCKY-TENNESSEE).
PAIONIANS, The.
See ALBANIANS.
PAIRS, Legislative.
See WHIPS, PARTY.
PAITA: A. D. 1740.
Destroyed by Commodore Anson.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1739-1741.
PAITA, The.
See CASTE SYSTEM OF INDIA.
PALACE, Origin of the name.
The house of the first of the Roman Emperors, Augustus, was on
the Palatine Hill, which had been appropriated by the nobility
for their residence from the earliest age of the republic. The
residence of Augustus was a quite ordinary mansion until A. U.
C. 748 (B. C. 6) when it was destroyed by fire. It was then
rebuilt on a grander scale, the people contributing, in small

individual sums—a kind of popular testimonial—to the cost.
Augustus affected to consider it public property, and gave up
a large part of it to the recreation of the citizens. His
successors added to it, and built more and more edifices
connected with it; so that, naturally, it appropriated to
itself the name of the hill and came to be known as the
Palatium, or Palace.
C. Merivale,
History of the Romans,
chapter 40.
PALÆOLITHIC PERIOD.
See STONE AGE.
{2410}
PALÆOLOGI, The.
The family which occupied the Greek imperial throne, at Nicæa
and at Constantinople, from 1260, when Michael Palæologus
seized the crown, until the Empire was extinguished by the
Turks in 1453.
E. Gibbon,
Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,
chapter 62 (Genealogical table).
ALSO IN:
Sir J. E. Tennant,
History of Modern Greece.
PALÆOPOLIS,
PALÆPOLIS.
See NEAPOLIS.
PALÆSTRA, The.
See GYMNASIA, GREEK.
PALAIS ROYAL, The.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1642-1643.
----------PALATINATE OF THE RHINE: Start--------
PALATINATE OF THE RHINE.
PALATINE ELECTORATE.
The Palatine Electorate or Palatinate (Pfalz in German), arose
in the breaking up of the old Duchy of Franconia.
See FRANCONIA;
also PALATINE COUNTS,
and GERMANY: A. D. 1125-1152.
PALATINATE OF THE RHINE: A. D. 1214.
Acquisition by the Wittelsbach or Bavarian House.
The House of Wittelsbach (or Wisselbach), which acquired the
Duchy of Bavaria in 1180, came also into possession of the
Palatinate of the Rhine in 1214 (see BAVARIA: A. D.
1180-1356). In the next century the two possessions were
divided. "Rudolph, the elder brother of Louis III. [the
emperor, known as Louis the Bavarian] inherited the County
Palatine, and formed a distinct line from that of Bavaria for
many generations. The electoral dignity was attached to the
Palatine branch."
Sir A. Halliday,
Annals of the House of Hanover,
volume I, page 424.
PALATINATE OF THE RHINE: A. D. 1518-1572.
The Protestant Reformation.
Ascendancy of Calvinism.
"The Electors Palatine of the Rhine might be justly regarded,
during the whole course of the 16th century, as more powerful
princes than those of Brandenburg. The lower Palatine, of
which Heidelberg was then the capital, formed a considerable
tract of country, situate on the banks of the Rhine and the
Neckar, in a fertile, beautiful, and commercial part of
Germany. … The upper Palatinate, a detached and distant
province situated between Bohemia, Franconia, and Bavaria,
which constituted a part of the Electoral dominions, added
greatly to their political weight, as members of the Germanic
body. … Under Louis V., Luther began to disseminate his
doctrines at Heidelberg, which were eagerly and generally
imbibed; the moderate character of the Elector, by a felicity
rare in that age, permitting the utmost freedom of religious
opinion, though he continued, himself, to profess the Catholic
faith. His successors, who withdrew from the Romish see,
openly declared their adherence to Lutheranism; but, on the
accession of Frederic III., a new ecclesiastical revolution
took place. He was the first among the Protestant German
princes who introduced and professed the reformed religion
denominated Calvinism. As the toleration accorded by the
'Peace of religion' to those who embraced the 'Confession of
Augsburg,' did not in a strict and legal sense extend to or
include the followers of Calvin, Frederic might have been
proscribed and put to the Ban of the Empire: nor did he owe
his escape so much to the lenity or friendship of the
Lutherans, as to the mild generosity of Maximilian II., who
then filled the Imperial throne, and who was an enemy to every
species of persecution. Frederic III., animated with zeal for
the support of the Protestant cause, took an active part in
the wars which desolated the kingdom of France under Charles
IX.; protected all the French exiles who fled to his court or
dominions; and twice sent succours, under the command of his
son John Casimir, to Louis, Prince of Condé, then in arms, at
the head of the Hugonots."
Sir N. W. Wraxall,
History of France, 1574-1610,
volume 2, pages 163-165.
PALATINATE OF THE RHINE: A. D. 1608.
The Elector at the head of the Evangelical Union.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1608-1618.
PALATINATE OF THE RHINE: A. D. 1619-1620.
Acceptance of the crown of Bohemia by the Elector.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1618-1620.
PALATINATE OF THE RHINE: A. D. 1621-1623.
The Elector placed under the ban of the empire.
Devastation and conquest of his dominions.
The electoral dignity transferred to the Duke of Bavaria.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1621-1623.
PALATINATE OF THE RHINE: A. D. 1631-1632.
Temporary recovery by Gustavus Adolphus.
Obstinate bigotry of the Elector.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1631-1632.
PALATINATE OF THE RHINE: A. D. 1632.
Death of Frederick V.
Treaty with the Swedes.
Nominal restoration of the young Elector.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1632-1634.
PALATINATE OF THE RHINE: A. D. 1648.
Division in the Peace of Westphalia.
Restoration of the Lower Palatinate to the old Electoral Family.
Annexation of the Upper to Bavaria.
The recreated electorate.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1648.
PALATINATE OF THE RHINE: A. D. 1674.
In the Coalition against Louis XIV.
Ravaged by Turenne.
See NETHERLANDS (HOLLAND): A. D. 1672-1674; and 1674-1678.
PALATINATE OF THE RHINE: A. D. 1679-1680.
Encroachments by France upon the territory of the Elector.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1679-1680.
PALATINATE OF THE RHINE: A. D. 1686.
The claims of Louis XIV. in the name of the Duchess of Orleans.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1686.
PALATINATE OF THE RHINE: A. D. 1690.
The second devastation and the War of the League of Augsburg.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1689-1690, and after.
PALATINATE OF THE RHINE: A. D. 1697.
The Peace of Ryswick.
Restitutions by France.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1697.
PALATINATE OF THE RHINE: A. D. 1705.
The Upper Palatinate restored to the Elector.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1705.
PALATINATE OF THE RHINE: A: D. 1709-1710.
Emigration of inhabitants to England,
thence to Ireland and America.
See PALATINES.
PALATINATE OF THE RHINE: A. D. 1714.
The Upper Palatinate ceded to the Elector of Bavaria
in exchange for Sardinia.
See UTRECHT: A. D. 1712-1714.
PALATINATE OF THE RHINE: A. D. 1801-1803.
Transferred in great part to Baden.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1801-1803.
PALATINATE OF THE RHINE: A. D. 1849.
Revolution suppressed by Prussian troops.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1848-1850.
----------PALATINATE OF THE RHINE: Start--------
PALATINATES, American.
See MARYLAND: A. D. 1632;
NEW ALBION;
MAINE: A. D. 1639;
NEWFOUNDLAND: A. D. 1610-1655;
NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1669-1693.
PALATINE, Counts.
In Germany, under the early emperors, after the dissolution of
the dominion of Charlemagne, an office came into existence
called that of the 'comes palatii'—Count Palatine. This office
was created in the interest of the sovereign, as a means of
diminishing the power of the local rulers.
{2411}
The Counts Palatine were appointed as their coadjutors, often
with a concurrent and sometimes with a sole jurisdiction.
Their "functions were more extensive than those of the ancient
'missi dominici.' Yet the office was different. Under the
Carlovingian emperors there had been one dignitary with that
title, who received appeals from all the secular tribunals of
the empire. The missi dominici were more than his mere
colleagues, since they could convoke any cause pending before
the ordinary judges and take cognisance of more serious cases
even in the first instance. As the missi were disused, and as
the empire became split among the immediate descendants of
Louis le Debonnaire, the count palatine (comes palatii) was
found inadequate to his numerous duties; and coadjutors were
provided him for Saxony, Bavaria, and Swabia. After the
elevation of Arnulf, however, most of these dignities ceased;
and we read of one count palatine only—the count or duke of
Franconia or Rhenish France. Though we have reason to believe
that this high functionary continued to receive appeals from
the tribunals of each duchy, he certainly could not exercise
over them a sufficient control; nor, if his authority were
undisputed, could he be equal to his judicial duties. Yet to
restrain the absolute jurisdiction of his princely vassals was
no less the interest of the people than the sovereign; and in
this view Otho I. restored, with even increased powers, the
provincial counts palatine. He gave them not only the
appellant jurisdiction of the ancient comes palatii, but the
primary one of the missi dominici. … They had each a castle,
the wardenship of which was intrusted to officers named
burgraves, dependent on the count palatine of the province. In
the sequel, some of these burgraves became princes of the
empire."
S. A. Dunham,
History of the Germanic Empire,
volume 1, pages 120-121.
PALATINE, The Elector.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1125-1152;
and PALATINATE OF THE RHINE.
PALATINE, The English Counties.
"The policy of the Norman kings stripped the earls of their
official character. They ceased to have local jurisdiction or
authority. Their dignity was of a personal nature, and they
must be regarded rather as the foremost of the barons, and as
their peers, than as a distinct order in the state. … An
exception to the general policy of William [the Conqueror] as
to earldoms was made in those governments which, in the next
century, were called palatine. These were founded in Cheshire,
and perhaps in Shropshire, against the Welsh, and in the
bishopric of Durham both to oppose the Scots, and to restrain
the turbulence of the northern people, who slew Walcher, the
first earl bishop, for his ill government. An earl palatine
had royal jurisdiction within his earldom. So it was said of
Hugh, earl of Chester, that he held his earldom in right of
his sword, as the king held all England in right of his crown.
All tenants-in–chief held of him; he had his own courts, took
the whole proceeds of jurisdiction, and appointed his own
sheriff. The statement that Bishop Odo had palatine
jurisdiction in Kent may be explained by the functions which
he exercised as justiciary."
W. Hunt,
Norman Britain,
pages 118-119.
"The earldom of Chester has belonged to the eldest son of the
sovereign since 1396; the palatinate jurisdiction of Durham
was transferred to the crown in 1836 by act of Parliament, 6
Will. IV, c. 19."
W. Stubbs,
Constitutional History of England,
chapter 9,
section 98, footnote (volume 1).
See, also, PALATINE, THE IRISH COUNTIES.
PALATINE, The Hungarian.
See HUNGARY: A. D. 1301-1442.
PALATINE, The Irish Counties.
"The franchise of a county palatine gave a right of exclusive
civil and criminal jurisdiction; so that the king's writ
should not run, nor his judges come within it, though judgment
in its courts might be reversed by writ of error in the king's
bench. The lord might enfeoff tenants to hold by knights'
service of himself; he had almost all regalian rights; the
lands of those attainted for treason escheated to him; he
acted in every thing rather as one of the great feudatories of
France or Germany than a subject of the English crown. Such
had been the earl of Chester, and only Chester, in England;
but in Ireland this dangerous independence was permitted to
Strongbow in Leinster, to Lacy in Meath, and at a later time
to the Butlers and Geraldines in parts of Munster. Strongbow's
vast inheritance soon fell to five sisters, who took to their
shares, with the same palatine rights, the counties of Carlow,
Wexford, Kilkenny, Kildare, and the district of Leix, since
called the Queen's County. In all these palatinates, forming
by far the greater portion of the English territories, the
king's process had its course only within the lands belonging
to the church."
E. Hallam,
Constitutional History of England,
chapter 18 (volume 3).
PALATINE HILL, The.
The Palatine City.
The Seven Mounts.
"The town which in the course of centuries grew up as Rome, in
its original form embraced according to trustworthy testimony
only the Palatine, or 'square Rome' (Roma quadrata), as it was
called in later times from the irregularly quadrangular form
of the Palatine hill. The gates and walls that enclosed this
original city remained visible down to the period of the
empire. … Many traces indicate that this was the centre and
original seat of the urban settlement. … The 'festival of the
Seven Mounts' ('septimontium'), again, preserved the memory of
the more extended settlement which gradually formed round the
Palatine. Suburbs grew up one after another, each protected by
its own separate though weaker circumvallation and joined to
the original ring-wall of the Palatine. … The 'Seven Rings'
were, the Palatine itself; the cermalus, the slope of the
Palatine in the direction of the morass that in the earliest
times extended between it and the Capitoline (velabrum); the
Velia, the ridge which connected the Palatine with the
Esquiline, but in subsequent times was almost wholly
obliterated by the buildings of the empire; the Fagutal, the
Oppius, and the Cispius, the three summits of the Esquiline;
lastly, the Sucusa, or Subura, a fortress constructed outside
of the earthern rampart which protected the new town on the
Carinae, in the low ground between the Esquiline and the
Quirinal, beneath S. Pietro in Vincoli. These additions,
manifestly the results of a gradual growth, clearly reveal to
a certain extent the earliest history of the Palatine Rome. …
The Palatine city of the Seven Mounts may have had a history
of its own; no other tradition of it has survived than simply
that of its having once existed. But as the leaves of the
forest make room for the new growth of spring, although they
fall unseen by human eyes, so has this unknown city of the
Seven Mounts made room for the Rome of history."
T. Mommsen,
History of Rome,
book 1, chapter 4 (volume 1).
See, also, QUIRINAL;
and SEVEN HILLS OF ROME.
{2412}
PALATINES: A. D. 1709-1710.
Migration to Ireland and America.
"The citizens of London [England] were astonished to learn, in
May and June, 1709, that 5,000 men, women and children,
Germans from the Rhine, were under tents in the suburbs. By
October the number had increased to 13,000, and comprised
husbandmen, tradesmen, school teachers and ministers. These
emigrants had deserted the Palatinate, owing to French
oppression and the persecution by their prince, the elector
John William, of the House of Newburgh, who had become a
devoted Romanist, though his subjects were mainly Lutherans
and Calvinists. Professor Henry A. Homes, in a paper treating
of this emigration, read before the Albany Institute in 1871,
holds that the movement was due not altogether to unbearable
persecutions, but largely to suggestions made to the Palatines
in their own country by agents of companies who were anxious
to obtain settlers for the British colonies in America, and
thus give value to the company's lands. The emigrants were
certainly seized with the idea that by going to England its
government would transport them to the provinces of New York,
the Carolinas, and Pennsylvania. Of the latter province they
knew much, as many Germans were already there. … Great efforts
were made to prevent suffering among these poor people;
thousands of pounds were collected for their maintenance from
churches and individuals all over England; they were lodged in
warehouses, empty dwellings and in barns, and the Queen had a
thousand tents pitched for them back of Greenwich, on
Blackheath. … Notwithstanding the great efforts made by the
English people, very much distress followed this unhappy
hegira. … Numbers of the younger men enlisted in the British
army serving in Portugal, and some made their own way to
Pennsylvania. … The Lord Lieutenant of Ireland petitioned the
Queen that some of the people might be sent to him, and by
February, 1710, 3,800 had been located across the Irish Sea,
in the province of Munster, near Limerick. … Professor Homes
recites in his monograph that they 'now number about 12,000
souls, and, under the name of Palatinates, continue to impress
a peculiar character upon the whole district they inhabit.' …
According to 'Luttrell's Diary,' about one-tenth of the whole
number that reached England were returned by the Crown to
Germany." A Swiss land company, which had bought 10,000 acres
of land from the Lords Proprietors of Carolina, "covenanted
with the English authorities for the transfer of about 700 of
these poor Heidelberg refugees to the colony. Before the end
of the year they had arrived with them at a point in North
Carolina where the rivers Neuse and Trent join. Here they
established a town, calling it New-Berne, in honor of Berne,
Switzerland. … It has not been found possible to properly
account for all the 13,000 Palatines who reached England.
Queen Anne sent some of them to Virginia, settling them above
the falls of the Rappahanock, in Spottsylvania County, from
whence they spread into several adjoining counties, and into
North Carolina. … After the Irish transportation, the largest
number that was moved in one body, and probably the final one
under government auspices, was the fleet-load that in the
spring of 1710 was despatched to New York. … A fleet of ten
ships set sail with Governor Hunter in March, having on board,
as is variously estimated, between 3,000 and 4,000 Germans. …
The immigrants were encamped on Nut, now Governor's Island,
for about three months, when a tract of 6,000 acres of the
Livingston patent was purchased for them, 100 miles up the
Hudson, the locality now being embraced in Germantown,
Columbia County. Eight hundred acres were also acquired on the
opposite side of the river at the present location of
Saugerties, in Ulster County. To these two points most of the
immigrants were removed." But dissatisfaction with their
treatment and difficulties concerning land titles impelled
many of these Germans to move off, first into Schoharie
County, and afterwards to Palatine Bridge, Montgomery County
and German Flats, Herkimer County, New York, to both of which
places they have affixed the names. Others went into
Pennsylvania, which was for many years the favorite colony
among German immigrants.
A. D. Mellick, Jr.,
The Story of an Old Farm,
chapter 4.
ALSO IN:
C. B. Todd,
Robert Hunter and the Settlement of the Palatines
(Memorial History of the City of New York,
volume 2, chapter 4).
PALE, The English.
"That territory within which the English retreated and
fortified themselves when a reaction began to set in after
their first success [under Henry II.] in Ireland," acquired
the name of the Pale or the English Pale. But "that term did
not really come into use until about the beginning of the 16th
century. In earlier times this territory was called the
English Land. It is generally called Galldacht, or the
'foreigner's territory,' in the Irish annals, where the term
Galls comes to be applied to the descendants of the early
adventurers, and that of Saxons to Englishmen newly arrived.
The formation of the Pale is generally considered to date from
the reign of Edward I. About the period of which we are now
treating [reign of Henry IV.—beginning of 15th century] it
began to be limited to the four counties of Louth, Meath,
Kildare, and Dublin, which formed its utmost extent in the
reign of Henry VIII. Beyond this the authority of the king of
England was a nullity."
M. Haverty,
History of Ireland,
pages 313-314, foot-note.
See IRELAND: A. D. 1169-1175; and 1515.
PALE, The Jewish, in Russia.
See JEWS: A. D. 1727-1880, and 19TH CENTURY.
PALE FACES, The (Ku-Klux Klan).
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1866-1871.
PALENQUE, Ruins of.
See MEXICO, ANCIENT;
and AMERICAN ABORIGINES: MAYAS.
----------PALERMO: Start--------
PALERMO: Origin.
See PANORMUS;
also SICILY: EARLY INHABITANTS.
PALERMO: A. D. 1146.
Introduction of silk culture.
See BYZANTINE EMPIRE: A. D. 1146.
PALERMO: A. D. 1282.
The Sicilian Vespers.
See ITALY (SOUTHERN): A. D. 1282-1300.
PALERMO: A. D. 1848-1849.
Expulsion of the Neapolitan garrison.
Surrender to King "Bomba."
See ITALY: A. D. 1848-1849.
PALERMO: A. D. 1860.
Capture by Garibaldi and his volunteers.
Bombardment by the Neapolitans.
See ITALY: A. D. 1859-1861.
{2413}
----------PALESTINE: Start--------
PALESTINE:
Early inhabitants.
See
AMALEKITES;
AMMONITES;
AMORITES;
HITTITES;
JEWS: EARLY HEBREW HISTORY;
MOABITES; PHILISTINES; PHŒNICIANS.
PALESTINE:
Name.
After the suppression of the revolt of the Jews in A. D. 130,
by Hadrian, the name of their province was changed from Judæa
to Syria Palæstina, or Syria of the Philistines, as it had
been called by Herodotus six centuries before. Hence the
modern name, Palestine.
See JEWS: A. D. 130-134.
PALESTINE:
History.
See
EGYPT: about B. C. 1500-1400;
JEWS;
JERUSALEM;
SYRIA;
CHRISTIANITY;
MAHOMETAN CONQUEST AND EMPIRE;
CRUSADES.
----------PALESTINE: End--------
PALESTRO, Battle of (1859).
See ITALY: A. D. 1856-1859.
PALFREYS,
PALAFRENI.
See DESTRIERS.
PALI.
"The earlier form of the ancient spoken language [of the Aryan
race in India], called Pali or Magadhi, … was introduced into
Ceylon by Buddhist missionaries from Magadha when Buddhism
began to spread, and is now the sacred language of Ceylon and
Burmah, in which all their Buddhist literature is written."
The Pali language is thought to represent one of the stages in
the development of the Prakrit, or common speech of the
Hindus, as separated from the Sanskrit, or language of the
learned.
See SANSKRIT.
M. Williams,
Indian Wisdom,
introduction, pages xxix-xxx, foot-note.
PALILIA, Festival of the.
"The festival named Palilia [at Rome] was celebrated on the
Palatine every year on the 21st April, in honour of Pales, the
tutelary divinity of the shepherds, who dwelt on the Palatine.
This day was held sacred as an anniversary of the day on which
Romulus commenced the building of the city."
H. M. Westropp,
Early and Imperial Rome,
page 40.
PALLA, The.
See STOLA.
PALLADIUM, The.
"The Palladium, kept in the temple of Vesta at Rome, was a
small figure of Pallas, roughly carved out of wood, about
three feet high. Ilos, King of Troy, grandfather of Priam,
after building the city asked Zeus to give him a visible sign
that he would take it under his special protection. During the
night the Palladium fell down from heaven, and was found the
next morning outside his tent. The king built a temple for it,
and from that time the Trojans firmly believed that as long as
they could keep this figure their town would be safe; but if
at any time it should be lost or stolen, some dreadful
calamity would overtake them. The story further relates that,
at the siege of Troy, its whereabouts was betrayed to Diomed,
and he and the wily Ulysses climbed the wall at night and
carried it off. The Palladium, enraged at finding itself in
the Grecian camp, sprang three times in the air, its eyes
flashing wildly, while drops of sweat stood on its brow. The
Greeks, however, would not give it up, and Troy, robbed of her
guardian, was soon after conquered by the Greeks. But an
oracle having warned Diomed not to keep it, he, on landing in
Italy, gave it to one of Æneas' companions, by whom it was
brought into the neighbourhood of the future site of Rome.
Another legend relates that Æneas saved it after the
destruction of Troy, and fled with it to Italy, where it was
afterwards placed by his descendants in the Temple of Vesta,
in Rome. Here the inner and most sacred place in the Temple
was reserved for it, and no man, not even the chief priest,
was allowed to see it except when it was shown on the occasion
of any high festival. The Vestals had strict orders to guard
it carefully, and to save it in case of fire, as the welfare
of Rome depended on its preservation."
F. Nösselt,
Mythology, Greek and Roman,
page 3.
PALLESCHI, The.
See FLORENCE: A. D. 1498-1500.
PALLIUM, The.
"The pallium, or mantle of the Greeks, from its being less
cumbersome and trailing than the toga of the Romans, by
degrees superseded the latter in the country and in the camp.
When worn over armour, and fastened on the right shoulder with
a clasp or button, this cloak assumed the name of
paludamentum."
T. Hope,
Costume of the Ancients,
volume 1, p 37.
PALM, The Execution of.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1806 (JANUARY-AUGUST).
PALMERSTON MINISTRIES.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1855; 1858-1859.
PALMI.
See FOOT, THE ROMAN.
----------PALMYRA: Start--------
PALMYRA,
Earliest knowledge of.
"The outlying city of Palmyra—the name of which is first
mentioned during the wars of M. Antony in Syria [B. C. 41]—was
certainly at this period [of Augustus, B. C. 31-A. D. 14]
independent and preserved a position of neutrality between the
Romans and Parthians, while it carried on trade with both. It
does not appear however to have as yet risen to a place of
great importance, as its name is not mentioned by Strabo. The
period of its prosperity dates only from the time of Hadrian."
E. H. Bunbury,
History of Ancient Geography,
chapter 20, section 1 (volume 2).
PALMYRA:
Rise and fall.
"Amidst the barren deserts of Arabia a few cultivated spots
rise like islands out of the sandy ocean. Even the name of
Tadmor, or Palmyra, by its signification in the Syriac as well
as in the Latin language, denoted the multitude of palm-trees
which afforded shade and verdure to that temperate region. The
air was pure, and the soil, watered by some invaluable
springs, was capable of producing fruits as well as corn. A
place possessed of such singular advantages, and situated at a
convenient distance between the gulf of Persia and the
Mediterranean, was soon frequented by the caravans which
conveyed to the nations of Europe a considerable part of the
rich commodities of India. [It has been the opinion of some
writers that Tadmor was founded by Solomon as a commercial
station, but the opinion is little credited at present.]
Palmyra insensibly increased into an opulent and independent
city, and, connecting the Roman and the Parthian monarchies by
the mutual benefits of commerce, was suffered to observe an
humble neutrality, till at length, after the victories of
Trajan, the little republic sunk into the bosom of Rome, and
flourished more than one hundred and fifty years in the
subordinate though honourable rank of a colony." On the
occasion of the invasion of Syria by the Persian king, Sapor,
when the Emperor Valerian was defeated and taken prisoner (A.
D. 260-261), the only effectual resistance opposed to him was
organized and led by a wealthy senator of Palmyra, Odenathus
(some ancient writers call him a Saracen prince), who founded,
by his exploits at that time, a substantial military power.
{2414}
Aided and seconded by his famous wife, Zenobia, who is one of
the great heroines of history, he extended his authority over
the Roman East and defeated the Persian king in several
campaigns. On his death, by assassination, in 267, Zenobia
ascended the Palmyrenian throne and ruled with masculine
firmness of character. Her dominions were extended from the
Euphrates and the frontiers of Bithynia to Egypt, and are
said, with some doubtfulness, to have included even that rich
province, for a time. But the Romans, who had acquiesced in
the rule of Odenathus, and recognized it, in the day of their
weakness, now resented the presumption and the power of his
widowed queen. Perhaps they had reason to fear her ambition
and her success. Refusing to submit to the demands that were
made upon her, she boldly challenged the attack of the warlike
emperor, Aurelian, and suffered defeat in two great, battles,
fought A. D. 272 or 273, near Antioch and near Emesa. A vain
attempt to hold Palmyra against the besieging force of the
Roman, an unsuccessful flight and a capture by pursuing
horsemen, ended the political career of the brilliant 'Queen
of the East.' She saved her life somewhat ignobly by giving up
her counsellors to Aurelian's vengeance. The philosopher
Longinus was one who perished. Zenobia was sent to Rome and
figured among the captives in Aurelian's triumph. She was then
given for her residence a splendid villa at Tibur (Tivoli)
twenty miles from Rome, and lived quietly through the
remainder of her days, connecting herself, by the marriage of
her daughters, with the noble families of Rome. Palmyra, which
had been spared on its surrender, rashly rose in revolt
quickly after Aurelian had left its gates. The enraged emperor
returned and inflicted on the fated city a chastisement from
which it never rose."
E. Gibbon,
Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,
chapters 10-11.
----------PALMYRA: End--------
PALMYRÊNÉ, The.
"Palmyrêné, or the Syrian Desert—the tract lying between
Cœle-Syria on the one hand, and the valley of the middle
Euphrates on the other, and abutting towards the south on the
great Arabian Desert, to which it is sometimes regarded as
belonging. It is for the most part a hard sandy, or gravelly
plain, intersected by low rocky ranges, and either barren or
productive only of some sapless shrubs and of a low thin
grass. Occasionally, however, there are oases, where the
fertility is considerable. Such an oasis is the region about
Palmyra itself, which derived its name from the palm groves in
the vicinity; here the soil is good, and a large tract is even
now under cultivation. … Though large armies can never have
traversed the desert even in this upper region, where it is
comparatively narrow, trade in ancient times found it
expedient to avoid the long 'détour' by the Orontes valley,
Aleppo, and Bambuk and to proceed directly from Damascus by
way of Palmyra to Thapsacus on the Euphrates."
G. Rawlinson,
Five Great Monarchies: Babylonia,
chapter 1.
PALO ALTO, Battle of.
See MEXICO: A. D. 1846-1847.
PALSGRAVE.
An Anglicized form of Pfalzgraf.
See PALATINE COUNT.
PALUDAMENTUM, The.
"As soon as the [Roman] consul entered upon his military
career, he assumed certain symbols of command. The cloak of
scarlet or purple which the imperator threw over his corslet
was named the paludamentum, and this, which became in later
times the imperial robe, he never wore except on actual
service."
C. Merivale,
History of the Romans,
chapter 31.
See, also, PALLIUM.
PALUS MÆOTIS,
MÆOTIS PALUS.
The ancient Greek name of the Sea of Azov.
PAMLICOS.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
PAMPAS.
LLANOS.
"In the southern continent [of America], the regions which
correspond with the prairies of the United States are the
'pampas' of the La Plata and the 'llanos' of Columbia [both
'pampa' and 'llano' having in Spanish the signification of 'a
plain']. … The llanos of Venezuela and New Granada have an
area estimated at 154,000 square miles, nearly equal to that
of France. The Argentine pampas, which are situated at the
other extremity of the continent, have a much more
considerable extent, probably exceeding 500,000 square miles.
This great central plain … stretches its immense and nearly
horizontal surface over a length of at least 1,900 miles, from
the burning regions of tropical Brazil to the cold countries
of Patagonia."
E. Reclus,
The Earth,
chapter 15.
For an account of the Indian tribes of the Pampas.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: PAMPAS TRIBES.
PAMPELUNA: Siege by the French (1521).
See NAVARRE: A. D. 1442-1521.
PAMPTICOKES, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
PAN-AMERICAN CONGRESS, The.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1889-1890.
PAN-HANDLE, The.
See VIRGINIA: A. D. 1779-1786.
PAN-IONIC AMPHICTYONY.
See IONIC AMPHICTYONY.
----------PANAMA: Start--------
PANAMA: A. D. 1501-1502.
Discovery by Bastidas.
Coasted by Columbus.
See AMERICA: A. D. 1498-1505, and 1500.
PANAMA: A. D. 1509.
Creation of the Province of Castilla del Oro.
Settlement on the Gulf of Uraba.
See AMERICA: A. D. 1509-1511.
PANAMA: A. D. 1513-1517.
Vasco Nuñez de Balboa and the discovery of the Pacific.
The malignant rule of Pedrarias Davila.
See AMERICA: A. D. 1513-1517.
PANAMA: A. D. 1519.
Name and Origin of the city.
Originally, Panama was the native name of an Indian fishing
village, on the Pacific coast of the Isthmus, the word
signifying "a place where many fish are taken." In 1519 the
Spaniards founded there a city which they made their capital
and chief mart on the Pacific coast.
H. H. Bancroft,
History of the Pacific States,
volume 1, chapters 10-11 and 15.
PANAMA: A. D. 1671-1680.
Capture, destruction and recapture of the city of Panama
by the Buccaneers.
See AMERICA: A. D. 1639-1700.
PANAMA: A. D. 1688-1699.
The Scottish colony of Darien.
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1695-1699.
PANAMA: A. D. 1826.
The Congress of American States.
See COLOMBIAN STATES: A. D. 1826.
PANAMA: A. D. 1846-1855.
American right of transit secured by Treaty.
Building of the Panama Railroad.
See NICARAGUA: A. D. 1850.
PANAMA: A. D. 1855.
An independent state in the Colombian Confederation.
Opening of the Panama Railway.
See COLOMBIAN STATES: A. D. 1830-1886.
{2415}
PANAMA CANAL.
PANAMA SCANDAL.
"The commencement of an undertaking [projected by Count
Ferdinand de Lesseps, the builder of the Suez Canal] for
connecting the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, through the
Isthmus of Panama, was a natural result of the success
achieved by the Suez Canal. Various sites have been proposed
from time to time for the construction of a canal across the
Isthmus, the most northern being the Tehuantepec route, at a
comparatively broad part of the Isthmus, and the most southern
the Atrato route, following for some distance the course of
the Atrato River. The site eventually selected, in 1879, for
the construction of a canal was at the narrowest part of the
Isthmus, and where the central ridge is the lowest, known as
the Panama route, nearly following the course of the Panama
Rail way. It was the only scheme that did not necessarily
involve a tunnel or locks. The length of the route between
Colon on the Atlantic, and Panama on the Pacific, is 46 miles,
not quite half the length of the Suez Canal; but a tide-level
canal involved a cutting across the Cordilleras, at the
Culebra Pass, nearly 300 feet deep, mainly through rock. The
section of the canal was designed on the lines of the Suez
Canal, with a bottom width of 72 feet, and a depth of water of
27 feet, except in the central rock cutting, where the width
was to be increased to 78¾ feet on account of the nearly
vertical sides, and the depth to 29½ feet. … The work was
commenced in 1882. … The difficulties and expenses, however,
of the undertaking had been greatly under–estimated. The
climate proved exceptionally unhealthy, especially when the
soil began to be turned up by the excavations. The actual cost
of the excavation was much greater than originally estimated;
and the total amount of excavation required to form a level
canal, which had originally been estimated at 100 million
cubic yards, was subsequently computed, on more exact data, at
176½ million cubic yards. The preliminary works were also very
extensive and costly; and difficulties were experienced, after
a time, in raising the funds for carrying on the works, even
when shares were offered at a very great discount. Eventually,
in 1887, the capital at the disposal of the company had nearly
come to an end; whilst only a little more than one-fifth of
the excavation had been completed. … At that period it was
determined to expedite the work, and reduce the cost of
completing the canal, by introducing locks, and thus diminish
the remaining amount of excavation by 85 million cubic yards;
though the estimated cost, even with this modification, had
increased from £33,500,000 to £65,500,000. … The financial
embarrassments, however, of the company have prevented the
carrying out of this scheme for completing the canal; and the
works are at present [1891] at a standstill, in a very
unfinished state."
L. F. Vernon-Harcourt,
Achievements in Engineering,
chapter 14.
"It was on December 14, 1888, that the Panama Canal Company
stopped payments. Under the auspices of the French Government,
a parliamentary inquiry was started in the hope of finding
some means of saving the enterprise. Facts soon came to light,
which, in the opinion of many, justified a prosecution. The
indignation of the shareholders against the Count de Lesseps,
his son, and the other Directors, waxed loud. In addition to
ruinous miscalculations, these men were charged with corrupt
expenditure with a view to influence public opinion. … The
gathering storm finally burst on November 21 [1892], when the
interpellation in regard to the Canal question was brought
forward in the Chamber. M. Delahaye threw out suggestions of
corruption against a large number of persons, alleging that
3,000,000 francs had been used by the company to bribe 150
Senators and Deputies. Challenged to give their names, he
persisted in merely replying that if the Chamber wanted
details, they must vote an inquiry. … It was ultimately
agreed, by 311 to 243, to appoint a special Committee of 33
Members to conduct an investigation. The judicial summonses
against the accused Directors were issued the same day,
charging them with 'the use of fraudulent devices for creating
belief in the existence of a chimerical event, the spending of
sums accruing from issues handed to them for a fixed purpose,
and the swindling of all or part of the fortune of others.'
The case being called in the Court of Appeals, November 25,
when all of the defendants—M. Ferdinand de Lesseps; Charles,
his son; M. Marius Fontanes, Baron Cottu, and M. Eiffel—were
absent, it was adjourned to January 10, 1893. … On November
28, the Marquis de la Ferronaye, followed by M. Brisson, the
Chairman of the Committee of Inquiry, called the attention of
the Government to the rumors regarding the death of Baron
Reinach, and pressed the demand of the Committee that the body
be exhumed, and the theory of suicide be tested. But for his
sudden death, the Baron would have been included in the
prosecution. He was said to have received immense sums for
purposes of corruption; and his mysterious and sudden death on
the eve of the prosecution started the wildest rumors of
suicide and even murder. Public opinion demanded that full
light be thrown on the episode; but the Minister of Justice
said, that, as no formal charges of crime had been laid, the
Government had no power to exhume the body. M. Loubet would
make no concession in the matter; and, when M. Brisson moved a
resolution of regret that the Baron's papers had not been
sealed at his death, petulantly insisted that the order of the
day 'pure and simple' be passed. This the Chamber refused to
do by a vote of 304 to 219. The resignation of the Cabinet
immediately followed. … A few days' interregnum followed
during which M. Brisson and M. Casimir-Périer successively
tried in vain to form a Cabinet. M. Ribot, the Foreign
Minister, finally consented to try the task, and, on December
5, the new Ministry was announced. … The policy of the
Government regarding the scandal now changed. … In the course
of the investigation by the Committee, the most startling
evidence of corruption was revealed. It was discovered that
the principal Paris papers had received large amounts for
puffing the Canal scheme. M. Thierrée, a banker, asserted that
Baron Reinach had paid into his bank 3,390,000 francs in
Panama funds, and had drawn it out in 26 checks to bearer. …
On December 13, M. Rouvier, the Finance Minister, resigned,
because his name had been connected with the scandal. … In the
meantime, sufficient evidence had been gathered to cause the
Government, on December 16, to arrest M. Charles de Lesseps,
M. Fontane, and M. Sans-Leroy, Directors of the Canal Company,
on the charge, not, as before, of maladministration of the
company's affairs, but of corrupting public functionaries.
This was followed by the adoption of proceedings against five
Senators and five Deputies.
Quarterly Register of Current History,
March, 1893.
{2416}
"The trial of the De Lesseps, father and son, MM. Fontane,
Cottu, and Eiffel, began January 10, before the court of
appeals. MM. Fontane and Eiffel confessed, the latter to the
bribery of Hebrard, director of 'Le Temps,' a newspaper, with
1,750,000 francs. On February 14, sentence was pronounced
against Ferdinand and Charles De Lesseps, each being condemned
to spend five years in prison and to pay a fine of 3,000
francs; MM. Fontane and Cottu, two years and 3,000 francs
each; and M. Eiffel, two years and 20,000 francs. … On March
8, the trial of the younger de Lesseps, MM. Fontane, Baihaut,
Blondin, and ex-Minister Proust, Senator Beral, and others, on
charges of corruption, began before the assize court. … De
Lesseps, … with MM. Baihaut and Blondin, was found guilty
March 21, and sentenced to one year more of imprisonment. M.
Blondin received a two-year sentence; but M. Baihaut was
condemned to five years, a fine of 75,000 francs, and loss of
civil rights. The others were acquitted."
Cyclopedic Review of Current History,
volume 3, number 1 (1803).
"On June 15 the Court of Cassation quashed the judgment in the
first trial on the ground that the acts had been committed
more than three years before the institution of proceedings,
reversing the ruling of the trial court that a preliminary
investigation begun in 1891 suspended the three years'
prescription. Fontane and Eiffel were set at liberty, but
Charles de Lesseps had still to serve out the sentence for
corruption."
Appleton's Annual Cyclopædia, 1893,
page 321.
The enemies of the Republic had wished to establish the
venality of the popular representatives; "they succeeded only
in showing the resistance that had been made to a temptation
of which the public had not known before the strength and
frequency. Instead of proving that many votes had been sold,
they proved that many were found ready to buy them, which was
very different."
P. De Coubertin,
L'Evolution Frarçaise sous la Troisième Republique,
page 266.
PANATHENÆA, The Festival of the.
See PARTHENON AT ATHENS.
PANDECTS OF JUSTINIAN.
See CORPUS JURIS CIVILIS.
PANDES.
See CASTE SYSTEM OF INDIA.
PANDOURS.
See HUNGARY: A. D. 1567-1604.
PANICS OF 1837, 1857, 1873, 1893.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1835-1837, 1873, 1893-1894;
and TARIFF LEGISLATION (UNITED STATES): A. D. 1846-1861.
PANIPAT,
PANNIPUT, Battles of (1526, 1556, and 1761).
See INDIA: A. D. 1399-1605; and 1747-1761.
PANIUM, Battle of (B. C. 198).
See SELEUCIDÆ: B. C. 224-187.
PANJAB, The.
See PUNJAB.
PANNONIA AND NORICUM.
"The wide extent of territory which is included between the
Inn, the Danube, and the Save—Austria, Styria, Carinthia,
Carniola, the Lower Hungary, and Sclavonia—was known to the
ancients under the names of Noricum and Pannonia. In their
original state of independence their fierce inhabitants were
intimately connected. Under the Roman government they were
frequently united."
E. Gibbon,
Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,
chapter 1.
Pannonia embraced much the larger part of the territory
described above, covering the center and heart of the modern
Austro-Hungarian empire. It was separated from Noricum, lying
west and northwest of it, by Mons Cetius. For the settlement
of the Vandals in Pannonia, and its conquest by the Huns and
Goths:
See VANDALS: ORIGIN, &c.;
HUNS: A. D. 433-453, and 453;
and GOTHS: A. D. 473-474.
PANO, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ANDESIANS.
PANORMUS.
The modern city of Palermo was of very ancient origin, founded
by the Phœnicians and passing from them to the Carthaginians,
who made it one of their principal naval stations in Sicily.
Its Greek name, Panorma, signified a port always to be
depended upon.
PANORMUS, Battles at (B. C. 254-251).
See PUNIC WAR, THE FIRST.
PANTANO DE BARGAS, Battle of (1819).
See COLOMBIAN STATES: A. D. 1810-1819.
PANTHEON AT ROME, The.
"At the same time with his Thermæ, Agrippa [son-in-law and
friend of Augustus] built the famous dome, called by Pliny and
Dion Cassius, and in the inscription of Severus on the
architrave of the building itself, the Pantheon, and still
retaining that name, though now consecrated as a Christian
church under the name of S. Maria ad Martyres or dell a
Rotonda. This consecration, together with the colossal
thickness of the walls, has secured the building against the
attacks Of time, and the still more destructive attacks of the
barons of the Middle Ages. … The Pantheon was always be
reckoned among the masterpieces of architecture for solid
durability combined with beauty of interior effect. The Romans
prided themselves greatly upon it as one of the wonders of
their great capital, and no other dome of antiquity could
rival its colossal dimensions. … The inscription assigns its
completion to the year A. D. 27, the third consulship of
Agrippa. … The original name Pantheon, taken in connection
with the numerous niches for statues of the gods in the
interior, seems to contradict the idea that it was dedicated
to any peculiar deity or class of deities. The seven principal
niches may have been intended for the seven superior deities,
and the eight ædiculæ for the next in dignity, while the
twelve niches in the upper ring were occupied by the inferior
inhabitants of Olympus. Dion hints at this explanation when he
suggests that the name was taken from the resemblance of the
dome to the vault of heaven."
R. Burn,
Rome and the Campagna,
chapter 13, part 2.
"The world has nothing else like the Pantheon. … The rust and
dinginess that have dimmed the precious marble on the walls;
the pavement, with its great squares and rounds of porphyry
and granite, cracked crosswise and in a hundred directions,
showing how roughly the troublesome ages have trampled here;
the gray dome above, with its opening to the sky, as if heaven
were looking down into the interior of this place of worship,
left unimpeded for prayers to ascend the more freely: all
these things make an impression of solemnity, which Saint
Peter's itself fails to produce. 'I think,' said the sculptor,
'it is to the aperture in the dome—that great Eye, gazing
heavenward—that the Pantheon owes the peculiarity of its
effect.'"
N. Hawthorne,
The Marble Faun,
chapter 50.
{2417}
PANTIBIBLON, The exhumed Library of.
See LIBRARIES, ANCIENT: BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA.